Analyse & Kritik

Journal of Philosophy and Social Theory


"Thomas W. Pogge"

Titel: "Armenhilfe" ins Ausland
Autor: Thomas W. Pogge
Seite: 220-247

Abstract: We citizens of the affluent countries tend to discuss our obligations toward the distant needy in terms of donations and transfers, assistance and redistribution. This way of conceiving the problem is a serious moral error, and a very costly one for the global poor. It depends on the false belief that the causes of the persistence of severe poverty are indigenous to the countries in which it occurs. There are indeed national and local factors that contribute to persistent poverty in developing countries. But global institutional rules also play an important role in its reproduction, in part by sustaining the national and local factors that affluent Westerners most like to blame for the problem. Since these rules are shaped by our governments, in our name, we bear moral responsibility not merely by assisting the distant poor too little, but also, and more significantly, by harming them too much.

Zur Ausgabe →

Titel: Armut, Gerechtigkeit und Demokratie. Kommentar zu Thomas W. Pogges "Eine globale Rohstoffdividende" (Analyse & Kritik 17, 183-208)
Autor: Regina Kreide
Seite: 245-262

Abstract: n his article "A Global Resources Dividend" Thomas Pogge argues that all inhabitants of the world have an equal claim to use the world's natural resources. Pogge suggests a Global Resource Dividend (GRD) which is to be used for raising the minimum living standard of the world's poorest people. Pogge's proposal has been criticized on three different levels. First, it has been objected that from a normative point of view the moral justification of the GRD is not convincing. Second, he has been criticized for the empirical assumptions that underlie his analysis of worldwide poverty. And third, the proposal has been rejected, because of problems involved in the realization of the GRD. In this article all three objections are answered and it is argued for a democratic legitimation of the GRD.

Zur Ausgabe →

Titel: Internationaler Handel, Tauschgerechtigkeit und die globale Rohstoffdividende. Kommentar zu Thomas W. Pogges "Eine globale Rohstoffdividende" (ANALYSE & KRITIK 17, 183-208)
Autor: Richard Reichel
Seite: 229-241

Abstract: Pogge's proposal of a 'global resource dividend' (GRD) is intendend to compensate the poor, commodity-exporting countries of the developing world for terms of trade losses and unequal exchange in trade with the industrialized North. It can be shown that it is unlikely that Pogge's GRD will be successful. On the one side, increased financial flows from the GRD funds may seriously inhibit the structural transformaton of an underdeveloped economy, whereas on the other side the internal distribution problem associated with GRD payments is not resolved.

Zur Ausgabe →

Titel: Weltarmut und Ressourcen-Zugang. Kommentar zu Thomas W. Pogges "Eine globale Rohstoffdividende" (ANALYSE & KRITIK 17, 183-208)
Autor: Thomas Kesselring
Seite: 242-254

Abstract: Thomas Pogge suggests that world poverty should be fighted against with the help of a global dividend on resources (GRD). In the first part of this comment Pogge's moral argumentation is reviewed. In the second part the coherence of the GRD proposal is discussed critically. It is argued that GRD should be spent primarily for ecological purposes.

Zur Ausgabe →

Titel: Eine globale Rohstoffdividende
Autor: Thomas W. Pogge
Seite: 183-208

Abstract: We live in a world of radical inequality: Hundreds of millions suffer severe, lifelong poverty. Many others are quite well off and affluent enough significally to improve the lives of the global poor. Does this radical inequality constitute an injustice which we are involved? An affirmative answer finds broad support in different strands of the Western moral tradition, which also support the same program of institutional reform. This reform centers around a Global Resources Dividend, or GRD. A GRD in the amount of one percent of the global social product would raise some $300 Billion a year. This amount is too small to lead to economic dislocation. But it is large enough to eradicate global poverty within one or two decades.

Zur Ausgabe →