Virtues and Capabilities

After a long dormancy in the modern era, virtue-based ethical thought has once again become a subject of serious consideration and debate in the field of philosophy. The normative orientation of most International Political Theory, however, still comes primarily from principles-based (deontological) or outcome-based (consequentialist) ethical systems. Virtue ethics differs from focus deontological and consequentialist ethics by emphasizing character, context, and way of life, rather than rule-governed action. This chapter reviews the emergence of contemporary virtue ethics as a challenge to overly abstract, language-based analysis of moral concepts, and its development into a broad and nuanced ethical theory. It then connects virtue ethics to the capabilities approach to human development, which is similarly focused.

Real-World Global Egalitarianism

This chapter notes that normative International Political Theory (IPT) developed over the past several decades in response to political, social, and economic events. These included the globalization of trade and finance, the increasing credibility of human-rights norms in foreign policy, and a growing awareness of a global ecological crisis. The emergence of normative IPT was not simply an effort to understand these events, but an attempt to offer accounts of what the responses to them should be. Normative IPT, then, was originally doubly responsive to the real world. Additionally, this chapter argues that there is a plausible account of global egalitarianism, which takes the justification of principles of egalitarian justice to depend crucially on features of the social and economic world. The account of global egalitarianism applies to the current circumstances in part because of features of those circumstances.

Global Distributive Justice

This chapter explores the relevance of facts and empirical enquiry for the normative project of enquiring what principles of distributive justice, if any, apply at the global level. Is empirical research needed for this kind of enquiry? And if so, how? Claims about global distributive justice often rest on factual assumptions. Seven different ways in which facts about national, regional and global politics (and hence empirical research into global politics) might inform accounts of global distributive justice are examined. A deep understanding of the nature of global politics and the world economy (and thus empirical research on it) is needed: to grasp the implications of principles of global distributive justice; to evaluate such principles for their attainability and political feasibility; to assess their desirability; and, first, to conceptualize the subject-matter of global distributive justice and to formulate the questions that accounts of global distributive justice need to answer.

Accountability in Global Economic Governance

Contemporary theoretical debates surrounding accountability in global economic governance have often adopted a problem-focused analytical lens—centred on real-world political controversies surrounding the accountability of global governing authorities. This chapter explores four distinctive problems of global accountability for which empirical inquiry has usefully informed normative analysis: first, the problem of unaccountable power within global governance processes; second, the problem of decentred political authority in global governance; third, problems establishing appropriate foundations of social power through which normatively desirable transnational accountabilities can be rendered practically effective at multiple scales; finally, problems associated with the need to traverse significant forms of social and cultural difference in negotiating appropriate normative terms of transnational accountability relationships. In relation to each, this chapter examines how systematic engagement between empirical and normative modes of analysis can both illuminate the theoretical problem and inform practical political strategies for strengthening accountability in global economic governance.

Minority Rights

It has often been noted that the political claims of minorities and indigenous peoples are marginalized within traditional state-centric international political theory; but perhaps more surprisingly, they are also marginalized within much contemporary cosmopolitan political theory. In this chapter, I will argue that neither cosmopolitanism nor statism as currently theorized is well equipped to evaluate the normative claims at stake in many minority rights issues. I begin by discussing how the “minority question” arose as an issue within international relations—that is, why minorities have been seen as a problem and a threat to international order—and how international actors have historically attempted to contain the problem, often in ways that were deeply unjust to minorities. I will then consider recent efforts to advance a pro-minority agenda at the international level, and how this agenda helps reveal some of the limits of both cosmopolitan and statist approaches to IPT.

The Contested Ethics of Democracy Promotion

This chapter explores the ethical justifications actors in international politics may have to promote democracy in other countries. Although ethical debates surrounding the promotion of democracy often remain rather implicit, this chapter seeks to show that it is not irrelevant for our understanding of the practice, or for the practitioners themselves, to think through more carefully the ethical underpinnings that actually and potentially frame this policy agenda. Paying attention to the ethics of democracy promotion is significant not least because we observe that a variety of differing, and contested, ethical assumptions and frameworks can be used to frame the activity by different actors, organizations, and political groups.

Global Governance in the “Anthropocene”

The concept of an Anthropocene is now widely used in a variety of contexts, communities, and connotations. This chapter explores the possible consequences of this paradigmatic turn for the field of International Political Theory (IPT), arguing that the notion of an Anthropocene is likely to change the way we understand political systems both analytically and normatively, from the village level up to the United Nations. This makes the Anthropocene one of the most demanding, and most interesting, research topics for the field of IPT. The chapter first lays out the manifold new challenges for IPT that have been brought about by the concept of the Anthropocene, and then illustrates these challenges with an example: the increasing need of governments to define and agree upon “desirable” futures for planetary evolution.

A Feminist Practical Ethics of Care

This chapter builds a picture of a critical, feminist ethics of care as a feminist practical ethics for international relations. It focuses on care ethics as a moral framework for addressing the challenges of humanitarianism—in a manner that foregrounds human needs while not depoliticizing or taking for granted the category of “human.” A care ethics approach furthers the transformative aims of feminism, while refusing to cast “women-and-children” as vulnerable victims in need of protection. The ethics of care also offers a substantive focus for policy and practice around diverse and competing needs for care. Far from confining women to their roles as carers, this approach exposes patterns of gender inequality in care practices, while retaining a focus on the contribution of the voice and labour of care—in multiple and diverse forms—for all social groups and communities.

The Ethical Limits of Global Democracy

This chapter discusses the ethical limits of global democracy, which are here understood as the conditions under which global democracy should be construed (formulated and justified) and promoted in real politics. The aim is not to develop and defend a substantive account of global democracy, but to bring up some basic concerns that are essential to address when analysing the limits of global democracy as well as to suggest some fruitful ways to approach them. The chapter focuses on two types of moral constraint on construing and promoting global democracy. The first type of constraint is set by empirical concerns, which highlights central methodological discussions of the role of ideal and non-ideal theorizing in International Political Theory (IPT). The second type of constraint is set by normative concerns, which highlights questions about the role of principles of democratic legitimacy and their applicability.

The Ethics of Recognition in International Political Theory

Studies on recognition in international politics deal with the (de-)legitimation of specific actors and the political dynamics of inclusion/exclusion in international society. Misrecognition, which actors experience as humiliation, disrespect, or false representations of their identity, is seen as a major cause of political resistance. This chapter first outlines the emerging body of literature on recognition in international relations. The following sections focus on three politicized issue areas in contemporary conflict settings: the struggles for (status) recognition by so-called “emerging powers”; the recognition processes that occur through negotiations with terrorist groups; and the recognition of individuals as victims in violent conflicts. The final section discusses the pitfalls of the normatively loaded concept of “recognition” in many of these studies. While (mis)recognition is certainly a key concept with which to understand the central dynamics of social and political conflicts, a generous politics of recognition cannot provide a panacea to all of these ills.