Human capabilities and global justice

Abstract

In this paper, I stress the role of capabilities and well-being for an understanding of global justice. I focus on the distinction between the process and outcome aspects of justice. From this viewpoint, I review Sen’s and Nussbaum’s notion of capabilities and Rawls’ and Pogge’s understanding of international and global justice. Rawls’ insistence on the process aspect explains his conception of justice as fairness and his criticism of cosmopolitanism. Nussbaums’ bias toward outcomes and well-being explains her criticism of Rawls and allows characterizing her proposals as justice as benevolence. Pogge forcefully highlights, however, the outcome orientation of main tenets of Rawls’ theory and proves the importance of the international basic structure for global justice. I finally argue that, despite fully accepting Pogge’s main argument, capability and well-being deprivation are dramatic evidence for basic injustice and lack of opportunity for individuals on an international scale.