Three Images of Trade: On the Place of Trade in a Theory of Global Justice

Abstract

Economic theory teaches that it is in every country’s interest to trade. Trade is a voluntary activity among consenting parties. On this view, considerations of justice have little bearing on trade, and political philosophers concerned with global justice should stay largely silent on trade. According to a very different view that has recently gained prominence, international trade can only occur before the background of an international market reliance practice shaped by states. Trade is a shared activity among states, and all participating states have in principle equal claims to gains from trade. Trade then becomes a central topic for political philosophers. Both views are problematic. A third view about the role of trade in a theory of global justice is then presented, which gives pride of place to a (non-Marxian) notion of exploitation. The other two views should be abandoned.

Exploitation: A primer

“…Exploitation theory has recently received interesting treatments in applied ethics. Risse and Wollner () apply exploitation concepts to international trade agreements and trade justice. Wertheimer () and Wenner () discuss exploitation in clinical research.…”

Justice and International Trade

“…In his more recent work with Wollner, Risse has emphasized that the idea of non‐exploitation central to his account can be applied to the actions of individuals, corporations and others, alongside states (‘Three Images’ ). This is a promising development, insofar as it suggests that Risse might also be open to extending it to negotiations between WTO members.…”

“…Part of his answer is that the current multilateral trading regime is sufficiently different from earlier forms of international trade to constitute a new social practice. James argues that Risse and Wollner's claim that earlier forms of trade have pervasively affected nations’ trade capacities therefore doesn't undermine his claim that the current system has produced a distinct set of fruits from cooperation that ought to be equally shared (196).…”

On Where We Differ: Sites Versus Grounds of Justice, and Some Other Reflections on Michael Blake’s Justice and Foreign Policy

“…I am mostly concerned with the book, but will also mention the main points of the article so that readers can see the breadth of his response. After introducing his views, I articulate some objections driven by the views I defend in On Global Justice (Risse (2012)). 3 The book conveys a straightforward directive: the foreign policy of liberal states should be guided and constrained by the goal of helping other states to become liberal democracies as well.…”