European Duties of Social Justice: A Kantian Framework

Claassen, Rutger

doi:10.1111/jcms.12813

Cited by 19 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Procedurally just measures may result in distributional injustice when contexts are ignored (Zeitoun, 2013). Contexts include the ethical, normative, technical, temporal (Düwell et al, 2018), spatial and scalar realties within which relationships are nestled (Earth System Governance Project, 2018) at national and international scales (Francis, 2015), that influence citizens’ rights (Claassen, 2019) and inclusive and participatory sustainability pathways (Bennett, 2018). National legal instruments that ignore or do not explicitly recognize the economic, political, historical and social contexts are unlikely to remove enduring inequalities (Bullard, 1990).…”

Section: Environmental Justice Framework For Preamblesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treaty Preambles and The Environmental Justice Gap

Scobie

2021

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global environmental architectures have the potential to reduce inequalities, however, legal, and political procedures and structures may also increase injustices and disempowerment. Multilateral environmental agreements create large regimes over some of the most expansive planetary systems. Contracting states list the purposes, motivations and considerations that led them to conclude legally binding agreements in treaty preambles that are an interpretive tool, a declaration of context, motivation, and intent of the contracting states or parties. This study produces an environmental justice conceptual framework that references the scholarship on environmental justice and environmental governance, outlines the elements required to introduce environmental justice debates into treaty preambles, and gives an example of its application to determine whether the preambles include justice concepts. The preambles selected are from treaties with broad geographic and subject matter scope: they regulate oceans, climate, and biodiversity, the transport of waste, mercury pollution, migratory and endangered species, and wetlands. Using the environmental justice conceptual framework, the study found a justice gap between how justice is addressed in justice debates and literatures and the stated intent of the contracting parties in the preambles. The conclusions support the literature that argues that multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) are ahistorical as regards the moral responsibility that lies at the heart of the definitions of justice.

show abstract

Section: Environmental Justice Framework For Preamblesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treaty Preambles and The Environmental Justice Gap

Scobie

2021

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sangiovanni provides a “reactive” theory of justice between EU member states: rather than justifying an initial scheme of cooperation, it sets constraints. Claassen correctly criticizes this “two‐step methodology” because it “can criticize unbalanced packages of cooperation (some parties facing high risks of co‐operation while others do not), it cannot deal with choices between existing and other possible balanced packages of cooperation” (Claassen, 2019, p. 48).…”

Section: Fairness In Distributing the Risks Of Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The EU's role in income redistribution and insurance: Support, norm‐setter or provider? A review of justice‐based arguments

Vandenbroucke¹

2021

European J of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Income redistribution and insurance are core functions of welfare states. What role should the EU play in this domain? I examine the purchase of normative theorizing on social justice on this question, focusing on the contrast between three models of EU involvement: the EU as Support, which implies the sharing of resources through intergovernmental transfers; the EU as Provider, which implies EU cross-border transfers towards individual citizens; the EU as Norm-setter, which implies that the EU formulates normative policy ideals. I review different accounts of justice for the EU and how they bear on the choice between these models of EU involvement. Conceptions of "background justice" have some purchase in a debate on the EU's role, but that purchase is limited. They need to be complemented by shared conceptions of domestic justice and a degree of moral cosmopolitanism. I argue that a "European Social Union" should be a Support and Norm-setter in the realm of insurance and redistribution. Through the establishment of interstate insurance, it would be a true "insurance union." It would engage in interstate redistribution, but there are no compelling reasons of justice for it to become a direct Provider of insurance or redistribution towards individual citizens.Frank Vandenbroucke was formerly in University of Amsterdam.

show abstract

“…32 32 Claassen conceptualises these as claims to Kantian “freedom as independence.” The advantages of universal welfare policies in terms of enhancing autonomy and non‐domination outlined in Section 2 are congenial to such a Kantian conception. Both this conception and its application to the EU are inspired by Kleingeld's work on Kant and international justice; Claassen (2019, p. 50). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…35 35 Claassen (2019, p. 56). Claassen also recognises independent general duties of assistance, but these are of the minimal sufficiency kind typically endorsed by internationalists; see Section 3.2.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16 16 It is hotly contested whether a cosmopolitan approach, according to which the scope of principles of social justice is global, could ever justify the project of EU integration, and thus also whether it can deliver fine‐grained, nuanced proposals for reforming it. Critics contend that, from a cosmopolitan point of view, a project of social and economic integration between wealthy and medium‐income countries is altogether “the wrong kind of priority,” Claassen (2019, p. 46). Others argue that the EU is nevertheless a valuable testing ground for deep institutional cooperation and integration between different states, so that insights gained can be used for eventually building the morally required global schemes; van Parijs (2019, pp.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Union shall promote social justice

Schemmel

2022

European J of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What would it take for the European Union (EU) to be in the service of social justice as much as it can be required to be?This paper argues that the EU has a duty to further social justice within its member states, and that its main avenue for discharging this duty should be to incentivise and facilitate the adoption, extension, and maintenance of just welfare policies, which, so it suggests, consist of universal and egalitarian such policies. This proposals contrasts both with a more integrationist approach, according to which welfare policies within the EU should be, to a significant extent, supranationalised; and with an internationalist proposal, according to which the EU should mainly preserve, and extend, member states' freedom to act in a globalised world economy, and generate economic benefits which these states might, or might not, employ to further

show abstract

European Duties of Social Justice: A Kantian Framework

Cited by 19 publications

References 40 publications

Treaty Preambles and The Environmental Justice Gap

Treaty Preambles and The Environmental Justice Gap

The EU's role in income redistribution and insurance: Support, norm‐setter or provider? A review of justice‐based arguments

The Union shall promote social justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About