Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T12:32:43.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justice below the State: Civil Society as a Site of Justice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2015

Chiara Cordelli
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In response to growing economic and political interdependence at the international level, contemporary theories of justice have debated whether the demands of distributive justice extend beyond the nation-state. This article addresses the reverse question: whether and how the demands of justice arise below the state, at the level of civil society associations. This question becomes pressing in light of the increasing fragmentation of national governance, and the resulting institutional interdependence between political institutions and private associations. The article argues that the extent to which these associations are directly bound by egalitarian principles depends on a complex set of factors, including their structure and size, their role in the social provision of important goods, and their institutional relation with political institutions.

Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , October 2016 , pp. 915 - 936
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Politics, University of Exeter; University Center for Human Values, Princeton University (emails: [email protected]; [email protected]). The author wishes to thank Sandrine Blanc, Eamonn Callan, Bob Goodin, Sarah Hannan, Melissa Lane, Hugh Lazenby, Jonathan Levy, Kristi Olson, Woody Powell, Rob Reich and Debra Satz for providing helpful suggestions on how to improve this article. Thanks are also due for their comments to all the participants at the following meetings where previous drafts were presented: the Center for Ethics in Society at Stanford University, the University of Exeter, the 2014 meeting of the Ethics in Economics Network in Bad Homburg, and the Université Catholique de Louvain. Generous support from the Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society is also acknowledged.

References

List of References

Abizadeh, Arash. 2007. Cooperation, Pervasive Impact, and Coercion: On the Scope (not Site) of Distributive Justice. Philosophy & Public Affairs 35:318–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allard, Scott W. 2010. Nonprofit Helping Hands for the Working Poor: The New Realities of Today’s Safety Net. Pp. 187–213, in R. D. Plotnick, M. K. Meyers, J. Romich, and S. Rathgeb Smith, eds, Old Assumptions, New Realities. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Beitz, Charles. 1979. Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barry, Brian. 2001. Culture & Equality: An Egalitarian Critique of Multiculturalism. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Blake, Michael. 2001. Distributive Justice, State Coercion, and Autonomy. Philosophy & Public Affairs 30 (3):257–296.Google Scholar
Brodkin, Evelyn. 1997. Inside the Welfare Contract: Discretion and Accountability in State Welfare Administration. Social Service Review 71:1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, Courtney. 2007. Medicaid Funding for Nonprofit Healthcare Organizations. Presented at the Rockefeller Institute of Government for the Aspen Institute, Washington, D.C. accessed 28 June 2007.Google Scholar
Caney, Simon. 2005. Justice beyond Borders. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Caney, Simon. 2011. Humanity, Associations, and Global Justice: In Defence of Humanity-Centred. The Monist 94:506–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catholics for a Free Choice. 2005. The Facts about Catholic Health Care in the United States. Available from www.catholicsforchoice.org/.../healthcare/. Accessed 11 November 2014.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua, and Rogers, Joel. 1995. Associations and Democracy. New York and London: Verso.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua, and Sabel, Charles. 1997. Directly-Deliberative Polyarchy. European Law Journal 3:313–342.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua, and Sabel, Charles. 2006. Extra Rempublicam, Nulla Justitia? Philosophy and Public Affairs 34 (2):147–175.Google Scholar
Daniels, Norman, and Sabin, James. 1997. Limits to Health Care: Fair Procedures, Democratic Deliberation, and the Legitimacy Problem for Insurers. Philosophy and Public Affairs 36 (4):303–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnelly, Catherine. 2011. Privatization and Welfare: A Comparative Perspective. Law and Ethics of Human Rights 5 (2):337–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorfman, Avihay, and Harel, Alon. 2013. The Case against Privatization. Philosophy & Public Affairs 67–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, Jody. 2001. The Contracting State. Florida State University Law Review 28:155–214.Google Scholar
Freeman, Jody. 2003. Extending Public Law Norms through Privatization. Harvard Law Review 116:1285–1352.Google Scholar
Freeman, Jody, and Minow, Martha. eds. 2009. Government by Contract, Outsourcing, and American Democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, Samuel. 2007. Distributive Justice and the Law of Peoples. Pp. 297–321, in S. Freeman, ed., Justice and the Social Contract. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon, and Wright, Erik Olin. 2003. Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Goodin, Robert. 1988. Reasons for Welfare: The Political Theory of the Welfare State. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grande, Edgar, and Pauly, Louis. eds. 2005. Complex Sovereignty. Reconstituting Political Authority in the Twenty-First Century. Toronto: Toronto University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, Kieran. 2006. Last Best Gifts: Altruism and the Market for Human Blood and Organs. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Heretier, Adrienne, and Rhodes, Martin. eds. 2010. New Modes of Governance in Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hirst, Paul. 1993. Associative Democracy: New Forms of Economic and Social Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Kymlika, Will. 2002. Civil Society and Government: A Liberal Egalitarian Perspective. Pp. 79–110, in Civil Society and Government, edited by Nancy Rosenblum and Robert Post. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsky, Michael. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Lipsky, Michael. 1984. Bureaucratic Disentitlement in Social Welfare Programs. Social Service Review 58:3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, Gillian. 2003. Privatization as Delegation. Columbia Law Review 103:1367–1502.Google Scholar
Milward, Brinton H., and Provan, Keith. 2000. Governing the Hollow State. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10:359–379.Google Scholar
Nagel, Thomas. 2005. The Problem of Global Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2):113–147.Google Scholar
Pogge, Thomas. 1989. Realizing Rawls. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1993. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2001. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, edited by Erin Kelly. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenblum, Nancy. 1998. Membership and Morals: The Personal Uses of Pluralism in America. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salamon, Lester. 2002. The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Salamon, Lester, and Anheier, Helmut. 2006. The Nonprofit Sector Comparative Perspective. Pp. 89–114, in Woody Powell and Richard Steinberg, eds. The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook, 2nd edn., New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sandel, Michael. 1998. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sangiovanni, Andrea. 2007. Global Justice, Reciprocity, and the State. Philosophy & Public Affairs 35:3–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sangiovanni, Andrea. 2012. The Irrelevance of Coercion, Imposition, and Framing to Distributive Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 40 (2):79–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheffler, Samuel. 1994. The Rejection of Consequentialism: A Philosophical Investigation of the Considerations Underlying Rival Moral Conceptions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Seligman, Adam. 1992. The Idea of Civil Society. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University.Google Scholar
Smith, Rathgeb, and Lipsky, Michael. 1995. Nonprofits for Hire: The Welfare State in the Age of Contracting. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Steven Rathgeb. 2002. Social Services. Pp. 149–186, in Lester M. Salamon, ed., The State of Nonprofit America. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Stocker, Gerry. 1998. Governance as Theory: Five Propositions. International Social Science Journal 50:17–28.Google Scholar
Surrey, Stanley. 1970. Tax Incentives as a Device for Implementing Government Policy: A Comparison with Direct Government Expenditures. Harvard Law Review 83:705.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1995. Philosophical Arguments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Titmuss, Richard M. 1970. The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
The Urban Institute. 2010. Human Service Nonprofit-Government Contracting. Available from http://www.urban.org/nonprofitcontracting.cfm. Accessed 11 November 2014.Google Scholar
Winston, Pamela, Burwick, Andrew, McConnell, Sheena, and Roper, Richard. 2002. Privatization of Welfare Services: A Review of the Literature. Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research.Google Scholar