Overlapping Questions: Globalization and Distributive Justice

Proponents and critics of globalization find little common ground for discourse. Even looking for an analytical framework with which to assess the claims and counterclaims of both sides of the debate is a highly contentious task. The two dominant questions of contemporary economic ethics are: (1) should globalization be reined in or even halted and then reversed altogether, and (2) what criterion ought we use for distributive justice? This chapter argues that these two seemingly separate issues overlap. On the one hand, most of the criticisms directed against global economic integration have been about the inequitable distribution of its burdens and benefits. On the other hand, advocates of unfettered market operations laud the enormous gains reaped from allocative efficiency. Thus, the debate on globalization can be framed in terms of the long-standing debate on the right principle to use for distributive justice. In what follows, I briefly sketch the arguments for and against globalization, summarize the contrasting canons of distributive justice, and then present a framework for analyzing these two overlapping issues.