What Do We Owe Each Other in the Global Economic Order?: Constructivist and Contractualist Accounts
What Do We Owe Each Other in the Global Economic Order?: Constructivist and Contractualist Accounts
复制标题
在全球经济秩序中我们彼此欠什么？：建构主义和契约主义的解释
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Linarelli
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Linarelli
没有一个值得继续支持的法律的制度，如果没有一个适当的正义理论，就不可能存在。如果没有一个明确的正义概念作为共识的基础，世界贸易宪法就不可能合理地存在。本文考察了罗尔斯和斯坎伦在道德哲学中对公平的两种解释。罗尔斯的正义理论为法律的学者所熟知。斯坎伦的契约主义者账户可能不那么出名。本文的目的是开始讨论如何利用公平理论来开发审查国际经济政策和制度的工具。在详细阐述了罗尔斯和斯坎隆账户的基础知识之后，本文概述了如何利用这些账户来进一步理解世界贸易组织政策和机构的公平性。特别是，它使用罗尔斯和斯坎隆的帐户，以评估是否与贸易有关的知识产权协议是公平的，它如何处理低收入国家的人获得负担得起的药品。
No legal system deserving of continued support can exist without an adequate theory of justice. A world trade constitution cannot credibly exist without a clear notion of justice upon which to base a consensus. This paper examines two accounts of fairness found in moral philosophy, those of John Rawls and Tim Scanlon. The Rawlsian theory of justice is well-known to legal scholars. Scanlon's contractualist account may be less well-known. The aim of the paper is to start the discussion as to how fairness theories can be used to develop the tools for examining international economic policies and institutions. After elaborating the basics of the Rawlsian and Scanlonian accounts, the paper sketches how those accounts might be used to further our understanding of the fairness of World Trade Organization policies and institutions. In particular, it uses Rawlsian and Scanlonian accounts to assess whether the TRIPS Agreement is fair in how it deals with access to affordable medicines by persons in low-income countries.