Trade Justice: An Argument for Integrationist, not Internal, Principles

Integrationism, practice-dependence and global justice

“…In a recent article on trade justice, Andrew Walton (2020) echoes this general statement. 3 ‘The essence of the integrationist approach’, he tells us, ‘is that judgments about… actor's claims to a share of the gains and losses of trade must be sensitive to their advantages and burdens in other domains’ (Walton, 2020: 54). From these brief remarks, we can state integrationism in its most general form: Integrationism : an agent’s claim to a benefit, or responsibility for a burden, in one global domain should be sensitive to broader concerns of distributive justice.…”

“…2 He defines integrationism as the approach which treats climate responsibilities 'in light of' or in 'conjunction with' broader concerns about global justice (Caney, 2012: 259). In a recent article on trade justice, Andrew Walton (2020) echoes this general statement. 3 'The essence of the integrationist approach', he tells us, 'is that judgments about… actor's claims to a share of the gains and losses of trade must be sensitive to their advantages and burdens in other domains' (Walton, 2020: 54).…”

“…In addition, because the new arrangements lead to restructuring domestic economies, some individuals in Country A have more income than before while some individuals in Country B have less than before. (Walton, 2020: 57)…”

“…Walton’s claim is that we cannot come to a plausible judgement about this case without further information. Specifically, it makes a difference whether the relative losers (in Country B) are ‘wealthy farmers previously supported by agricultural subsidies’ or ‘workers in fledgling industries in developing countries’ (Walton, 2020: 58). If it is the latter, the exchange appears problematic; but it is not clear that we should object if the wealthy farmers are set to lose out from the trading arrangement, despite the significantly unequal outcome.…”

“…Integrationism does not shed light on debates about global justice, so I will suggest we ought to reject it. Second, I will develop an alternative diagnosis of the disagreement between integrationism and the view against which it is counterposed, sometimes labelled 'the internal approach' (Walton, 2020) or, as I will refer to it, 'isolationism' (Caney, 2012;2018a). Importantly, my rejection of integrationism does not signal an affinity with isolationism; it is rather a rejection of the way in which the two views have been distinguished.…”