Global Justice and Territory

Nine, Cara

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199580217.003.0008

Cited by 17 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Lockean theories of territory draw on John Locke's classic natural law theory of property . The application of Locke to territory yields more than one result .…”

Section: How Are Sovereigns’ Rights Over Natural Resources Justified?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sovereignty over natural resources and its implications for climate justice

Banai

2016

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the current international system, sovereign states hold extensive rights over the natural resources in their territories. How are sovereign rights in natural resources justified? What are the implications of these rights for the demands of climate justice, which pertain to the use and management of natural resourcesfor example, rainforests? This article reviews five theories of territorial rights, in contemporary political and legal philosophy, and the justifications that they provide for territorial jurisdiction over natural resources. It is argued that insofar as the philosophical-normative perspectives justify sovereigns' jurisdiction over natural resources within their borders, they also give rise to limits on the legitimate and permissible exercise of the jurisdictional prerogative. This theoretical proposition is then illustrated in the case of international climate-justice obligations of rain-forest-rich countries.

show abstract

“…The Lockean theories of territory draw on John Locke's classic natural law theory of property . The application of Locke to territory yields more than one result .…”

Section: How Are Sovereigns’ Rights Over Natural Resources Justified?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sovereignty over natural resources and its implications for climate justice

Banai

2016

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nine claims that a collective such as a state may acquire territorial rights if the acquisition 'is necessary for the provision of members' basic needs [and] does not prevent others from meeting their basic needs.' 30 And giving a state rights over the natural resources within its territory is something that is necessary to ensure 'secure access to the objects of members' basic needs.' 31 But even accepting as plausible the claim that a state which secures its members' basic needs is (at least minimally) legitimate, the important question for our purposes is just which rights over which resources are necessary to meet citizens' basic needs.…”

Section: Citizens' Basic Rights and Permanent Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

Against ‘permanent sovereignty’ over natural resources

Armstrong

2014

Politics, Philosophy & Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…(2) For present purposes the ‘Lockean’ view is the view developed by Simmons (2001a). Nine (2012) offers a view on territorial rights that combines a natural-law approach to establishing why there could be territorial rights in general with a collectivized Lockean approach to establishing claims to particular territories. On that account it is not individuals but certain collectives that appropriate land.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For critical discussion see, e.g., Meisels (2005: ch 5) and Nine (2008). (4) Both Nine (2012) and Meisels (2005) think efficiency in using land has moral value. Proportionality captures an idea of efficiency at the global level.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Taking up space on earth: Theorizing territorial rights, the justification of states and immigration from a global standpoint

Risse

2015

Glob. Con.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The author’s 2012 book On Global Justice gives pride of place to the idea that humanity collectively owns the earth. Independently, there has been a flourishing literature on the justification of rights to territory. Central to this discussion are a Kantian and a Lockean approach. This paper recapitulates the author’s approach to humanity’s collective ownership of the earth and argues that, properly understood, both of those approaches should integrate the global standpoint constituted thereby. However, the goal here is not to amend the Kantian and Lockean approaches to territory, but to refute them. To that end the paper also argues that both approaches endorse an unacceptably strong view of the justifiability of states and should therefore be rejected. The view in On Global Justice emerges vindicated, according to which territorial rights, the justification of states and immigration all need to be theorized together, and need to be theorized from a genuinely global standpoint.

show abstract

Global Justice and Territory

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Sovereignty over natural resources and its implications for climate justice

Sovereignty over natural resources and its implications for climate justice

Against ‘permanent sovereignty’ over natural resources

Taking up space on earth: Theorizing territorial rights, the justification of states and immigration from a global standpoint

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About