A Superimposed Economical Consensus in the Distributive Justice Debate

Abstract

The international distributive justice debate has traditionally focused on a normative discussion about the scope of the obligations of the citizens of the rich countries to the global poor. The various positions assume certain empirical economic notions when making judgments about the justice of the international economic order. Depending on the economic theory held as valid, the same normative position may justify diametrically opposed configurations of the international economic institutions. This article seeks to make explicit the empirical notions underlying normative positions, and proposes an overlapping economic consensus to reach a basis for the neutral justification of claims about the justice of the international economic order.