Do We Have a Negative Duty Towards the Global Poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice

  • Roland Pierik


Who has the duty to guarantee that basic human rights are fulfilled globally? This is one of the central questions in the current global justice debate. The answer to this question must be based on some principle of justice that distributes rights and duties in the global sphere. This paper analyses Thomas Pogge’s answer to this question, which does not rest on notions of charity, benevolence, or supererogatory duties, but on the negative duty not to harm the global poor. His central claim is that “we, the citizens and governments of the affluent societies, in collusion with the ruling elites of many poor countries, are harming the global poor by imposing an unjust institutional order upon them” (Pogge. 2005a. Journal of Ethics 9: 33).

Although I am very sympathetic to Pogge’s project, my discussion of it is mainly critical of his negative duty argument. Section 48.2 discusses Pogge’s explanatory globalism arguing that global poverty is caused by a global institutional order, and that affluent societies, by setting up this global institutional order in an unjust way, are responsible for global poverty. Section 48.3 describes and discusses Pogge’s argument that we, the citizens and governments of affluent societies, have a negative duty not to cause global poverty. Although Pogge’s explanatory globalism is convincing, his negative-duty argument cannot be sustained. The main problem in his argument is the unspecified “we” that have a duty: does it refer to governments of affluent societies, their citizens, or both?


Distributive Justice Child Labor Corrective Justice Global Justice Positive Duty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Abdel-Nour, Farid. 2003. National responsibility. Political Theory 31: 693–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barry, Christian. 2005. Applying the contribution principle. Metaphilosophy 36(1): 210–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beitz, Charles. 2001. Does global inequality matter? In Global justice, ed. T. Pogge, 106–122. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Buchanan, Allen. 2004. Justice, legitimacy, and self-determination: Moral foundations for international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Follesdal, Andreas, and Thomas Pogge. 2005. Introduction. In Real world justice. Grounds, principles, human rights, and social institutions, ed. A. Follesda and T. Pogge, 265–284. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Fullinwinder, Robert K. 2000. The case for reparations. Philosophy and Public Policy Quarterly 20(2/3): 1–27.Google Scholar
  7. Kutz, Christopher. 2004. Justice in reparations: The cost of memory and the value of talk. Philosophy and Public Affairs 32(3): 277–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Miller, David. 2001. Distributing responsibilities. The Journal of Political Philosophy 9(4): 453–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, state and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  10. Patten, Alan. 2005. Should we stop thinking about poverty in terms of helping the poor? Ethics and International Affairs 19(1): 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pierik, Roland. 2004. Review of Thomas Pogge’s world poverty and human rights: Cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. The Leiden Journal of International Law 17: 631–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pierik, Roland, and Mijke S. Houwerzijl. 2006. Western policies on child labor abroad. Ethics & International Affairs 20(2): 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pogge, Thomas. 1989. Realizing Rawls. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Pogge, Thomas. 1994. An egalitarian law of peoples. Philosophy and Public Affairs 23(3): 195–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pogge, Thomas. 2001a. Priorities of global justice. In Global justice, ed. T. Pogge, 6–23. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Pogge, Thomas. 2001b. Rawls on international justice. The Philosophical Quarterly 51(203): 246–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pogge, Thomas. 2002. World poverty and human rights. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Pogge, Thomas. 2004. Severe poverty as human rights violation. Manuscript Columbia University. Department of Philosophy (March, 25 2004).Google Scholar
  19. Pogge, Thomas. 2005a. Real world justice. Journal of Ethics 9: 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pogge, Thomas. 2005b. Severe poverty as a violation of negative duties. Ethics and International Affairs 19(1): 55–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pogge, Thomas. 2005c. Symposium on world poverty and human rights. Ethics and International Affairs 19(1): 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rawls, John. 1971. A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Rawls, John. 1993. The law of peoples. In On human rights: The Oxford amnesty lectures, ed. S. Schute and S. Hurley, 41–82. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  24. Rawls, John. 1999. The law of peoples. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Risse, Mathias. 2005. What we owe to the global poor. The Journal of Ethics 9(1/2): 81–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Satz, Debra. 2005. What do we owe the global poor? Ethics & International Affairs 19(1): 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Singer, Peter. 1972. Famine, affluence, and morality. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1(3): 229–243.Google Scholar
  28. Singer, Peter. 2002. One world: The ethics of globalization. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Tan, Kok-Chor. 2004. Colonialism reparations and global justice. Manuscript Department of Philosophy. University of Pennsylvania (January 23, 2004).Google Scholar
  30. Unger, Peter. 1996. Living high and letting die: Our illusion of innocence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Young, Iris Marion. 2005. Responsibility and global justice. Journal of Political Philosophy 12(4): 365–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Paul Scholten CenterAmsterdam University Law SchoolAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations