Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:21:22.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Equality Analysis in a Global Context: A Relational Approach1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Christine M. Koggel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Samantha Brennan notes in her survey article, “Recent Works in Feminist Ethics,” that “the reshaping of moral concepts in light of feminist critiques of individualism and feminist development of relational alternatives represents significant progress in feminist ethics, indeed in ethics at large.” Two suggestions in this claim serve as a starting point for my application of a relational approach to inequalities in a global context. First, equality is a moral concept that has been and continues to be central to Western liberal theory. The global context reveals liberalism's dominance on the world scene as well as increases in inequalities of wealth both within and across borders. I claim that this context calls for renewed vigilance in the “reshaping of moral concepts” that are central to liberal theory. To clarify, I do not argue that feminists must work with these concepts. Rather I hold that some concepts, one of them being equality, have enduring moral value and this makes continued feminist analyses of them important, particularly in the contemporary global context.

Type
IV. Political Implications of Feminist Relational Approaches
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume , Volume 28: Feminist Moral Philosophy , 2002 , pp. 246 - 272
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2002

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

1

A Bryn Mawr College Research Grant in International Studies and a sabbatical in Fall 2002 allowed me to present earlier versions of this paper at conferences and institutions, where I got valuable feedback from a number of people. In particular, I want to thank Elisabeth Boetzkes, Sue Campbell, Steve Ferzacca, Virginia McGowan, Kai Nielsen, Christine Overall, Susan Sherwin, Bob Ware, and Karen Wendling. I also want to thank Samantha Brennan, whose interest in and critical comments on my relational approach to equality have been important to the development of it. Jerry Cohen's work has been an important influence. I owe him special thanks for reading and providing comments on the penultimate version. As always, I am grateful to Andrew Brook's unfailing support and keen critical eye for problems.

References

2 Samantha, Brennan, “Recent Work in Feminist Ethics,” Ethics 109 (1999): 890.Google Scholar

3 Sue, Campbell, “Dependence in Client-Therapist Relationships: A Relational Reading of O'Connor and Mills,” in Personal Relationships of Dependence and Interdependence in Law, ed. Law Commission of Canada (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2002), 3–37;Google ScholarLorraine, Code, What Can She Know: Feminist Theory and the Construction of Knowledge (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991);Google ScholarMartha, Minow, Making all the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion and American Law (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1990);Google ScholarJennifer, Nedelsky, “Reconceiving Autonomy: Sources, Thoughts, and Possibilities,” Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 1 (1989): 7–36;Google Scholar and Susan, Sherwin, “A Relational Approach to Autonomy in Health Care,” in The Politics ofWomen's Health: Exploring Agency and Autonomy, ed. The Feminist Health Care Ethics Research Network (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1998), 19–47.Google Scholar

4 Christine, Koggel, Perspectives on Equality: Constructing a Relational Theory (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998).Google Scholar

5 Andrew, Hurrell and Ngaire, Woods, eds., Inequality, Globalization, and World Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 1.Google Scholar

6 United Nations, We the Peoples: The Role of the United Nations in the 21st Century (New York: Department of Public Information, 2000), 19Google Scholar. The UN millennium report then calls on the international community to “adopt the target of halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty, so lifting more than 1 billion people out of it, by 2015.” Ibid., 20.

7 Nancy, Birdsall, “Life is Unfair: Inequality in the World,” in Annual Editions, Developing World 01/02, ed. R. J., Griffiths (Guilford, CT: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2001), 8.Google Scholar

8 United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 1999 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 3.

9 United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2001 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 16.

10 Pierre, Sané, “Amnesty's Report Card from Hell,” The Globe and Mail (Dec. 10, 1993): A21.Google Scholar

11 United Nations Children's Fund, Child Poverty Across Industrialized Nations (Florence: UNICEF, 1999); and A League Table of Child Poverty in Rich Nations (Florence: UNICEF, 2000).

12 United Nations Population Fund, The State of World Population 2000 (UNPF, 2000).

13 Amartya Sen has done extensive work on gender inequality. In his recent work Development as Freedom, after providing a litany of ways in which women's inequalities are manifested in Third World countries he concludes: “the extensive reach of women's agency is one of the more neglected areas of development studies, and most urgently in need of correction. Nothing, arguably, is as important today in the political economy of development as an adequate recognition of political, economic and social participation and leadership of women. This is indeed a crucial aspect of’ development as freedom'.” Amartya, Sen, Development as Freedom (New York: Anchor Books, 1999), 203.Google Scholar

14 United Nations Population Fund, The State of World Population 2000 (UNPF, 2000), 1.

15 John, Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971).Google Scholar

16 G. A., Cohen, If You're an Egalitarian, How Come You're So Rich? (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), 2.Google Scholar

17 Ibid., 162.

18 Koggel, , Perspectives on Equality, 163.Google Scholar

19 Jean Harvey provides a good, thorough account of speaking, protesting, being heard, and being considered as relational rights owed to those who are powerless. Jean, Harvey, Civilized Oppression (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2001).Google Scholar

20 G. A., Cohen, “Where the Action Is: On the Site of Distributive Justice,” Philosophy & Public Affairs 26 (1997): 26.Google Scholar

21 Ibid., 28.

22 G.A., Cohen, “Incentives, Inequality, and Community,” in Equal Freedom: Selected Tanner Lectures on Human Values, ed. Stephen, Darwall (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995), 331-97.Google Scholar

23 Elisabeth, Boetzkes, “Book Review: If You're an Egalitarian, How Come You're so Rich?” Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review/Revue canadienne de philosophie 41 (2002): 387.Google Scholar

24 John, Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), 282-83.Google Scholar

25 Cohen, , If You're an Egalitarian, 149.Google Scholar

26 Some examples of this work are contained in: M. Jaqui, Alexander and Chandra, Mohanty, eds., Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures (New York: Routledge, 1997);Google Scholar and Narayan, , Uma, , and Sandra, Harding, eds., Decentering the Center: Philosophy for a Multicultural, Postcolonial, and Feminist World (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000).Google Scholar

27 Christine M., Koggel, “Globalization and Women's Paid Work: Expanding Freedom?” Feminist Economics, Special Issue on the Ideas and Work of Amartya Sen (2003).Google Scholar

28 Chandra, Mohanty, “Women Workers and Capitalist Scripts: Ideologies of Domination, Common Interests, and the Politics of Solidarity,” in Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures, 7, her emphasis.Google Scholar

29 Chandra, Mohanty, “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses.” Feminist Review 30 (1988): 61–88.Google Scholar

30 Elisabeth, Fussell, “Making Labor Flexible: The Recomposition of Tijuana's Maquiladora Female Labor Force,” Feminist Economics 6 (2000): 60.Google Scholar

31 Ibid., 64.

32 Ibid., 60.

33 I thank Kai Nielsen and Ver6nica Vazquez Garcia for alerting me to these recent changes in the workforce composition of maquiladoras.

34 Marfa, Fernandez-Kelly, “Maquiladoras: The View from Inside,” in The Women, Gender and Development Reader, ed. N., Vasvanathan et al. (London: Zed Books, 1997), 215.Google Scholar

35 An important source of information on the negative effects of economic globalization as well as on anti-globalization protest and movements is Robin, Broad, ed., Global Backlash: Citizen Initiatives for a Just World Economy (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002).Google Scholar