Can a compromise be fair?

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between compromise and fairness, and considers in particular why, if a fair outcome to a conflict is available, the conflict should still be subject to compromise. It sets out the defining features of compromise and explains how fair compromise differs from both principled and pragmatic compromise. The fairness relating to compromise can be of two types: procedural or end-state. It is the coherence of end-state fairness with compromise that proves the more puzzling case. We offer reasons why people should be allowed to resolve conflicting or competing claims through compromise, even if compromise comes at the expense of end-state fairness, but we resist the suggestion that the primary rationale for compromise is to be found in non-ideal circumstances.

What Does Morality Require When We Disagree?

“…Obviously, it will require a very precise understanding of the all affected principle to determine whether a compromise is fair at a micro level between two individuals, but as Jones and O'Flynn suggests "[…] there is nothing puzzling about subjecting a compromise to a test of pure procedural fairness […]." 28 In line with this suggestion I suggest a compromise to be fair iff it satisfy the all affected principle.…”

The Procedural Value of Compromise

“…A comparison between majoritarian democracies and consensus democracies also shows that the latter produces policies that are "kinder and gentler", on criteria such as social expenditure and incarceration rate (Lijphart 2008). 10 On compromise and fairness, see Wendt (2018) and Jones and O'Flynn (2013). On rotten compromises, see Margalit (2010).…”

The Political Theory of Modus Vivendi

“…For Horton, consent to, or acceptance of, a MV by the parties to it is crucial to its being a MV (2007, 52; 2010a, 438-9, 443; 2011a 124-5, 128). A MVembodies compromise and an arrangement is a compromise only if each of the parties to it concedes something and only if each agrees to it (Jones and O'Flynn 2013). That feature of MV raises the thorny question of what is to count as consent or acceptance or agreement.…”