PANEL 5 /// EUROPEAN UNION
CONVENOR: PEDRO SILVA
All inquiries about the panel should be sent to [email protected]
The surge in interest from political and legal philosophers in the European Union should be welcomed, but theory should pay closer attention to the institution’s specific challenges such as the climate emergency and mitigation of inflation’s effects among many others. This panel has a very broad scope in that it will seek to theorise about the EU’s responses to several challenges but it will also entertain more abstract discussions about familiar concerns such as justice and legitimacy of the supra-national institution.
What conception of justice should animate the ECB’s decision-making? Can it, alternatively, support Member States in fulfilling each local conception of justice? Is the ECB’s current toolbox and is its latest strategy review consistent with liberal egalitarian principles? It is possible that the European Central Bank (ECB) is waging a fight against current inflation in a way that makes greater inflationary shocks likelier in the future. Energy efficiency and adaptation and clean energy production require large upfront investments that are made harder by steep increases in interest rates that are being used to combat current inflation. This panel seeks to shed light on how the ECB may better realise economic and environmental justice.
Migration within the EU is another area in which questions of justice currently arise. Freedom of movement is one of the key pillars of the EU yet many Member States currently restrict access to goods and services on the part of newly arrived mobile individuals from fellow countries on the grounds that they have not yet contributed enough to the shared social networks that generates this moral claim. It is questionable, however, why duties of justice are triggered by this. Some appeal to norms of international reciprocity in order to justify this. It is questionable, however, whether this appeal is successful. Perhaps a richer understanding of reciprocity that accords equal respect supports lifting such restriction. On the other hand, restriction of access to “welfare rights” could encourage social dumping on the part of employers in the most-advantaged Member States and may, therefore, be objectionable for other reasons that are independent of reciprocity.
The panel welcomes contributions related (but not limited) to the following questions:
1) Is the ECB's current toolbox an adequate instrument for socio-economic justice?
2) Should Member States be allowed to temporarily restrict access to “welfare rights” on the part of individuals from other EU countries?
3) What policies should the EU adopt on migration from third countries?
4) Do transnational electoral lists enhance the EU’s legitimacy?
All inquiries about the panel should be sent to [email protected]
The surge in interest from political and legal philosophers in the European Union should be welcomed, but theory should pay closer attention to the institution’s specific challenges such as the climate emergency and mitigation of inflation’s effects among many others. This panel has a very broad scope in that it will seek to theorise about the EU’s responses to several challenges but it will also entertain more abstract discussions about familiar concerns such as justice and legitimacy of the supra-national institution.
What conception of justice should animate the ECB’s decision-making? Can it, alternatively, support Member States in fulfilling each local conception of justice? Is the ECB’s current toolbox and is its latest strategy review consistent with liberal egalitarian principles? It is possible that the European Central Bank (ECB) is waging a fight against current inflation in a way that makes greater inflationary shocks likelier in the future. Energy efficiency and adaptation and clean energy production require large upfront investments that are made harder by steep increases in interest rates that are being used to combat current inflation. This panel seeks to shed light on how the ECB may better realise economic and environmental justice.
Migration within the EU is another area in which questions of justice currently arise. Freedom of movement is one of the key pillars of the EU yet many Member States currently restrict access to goods and services on the part of newly arrived mobile individuals from fellow countries on the grounds that they have not yet contributed enough to the shared social networks that generates this moral claim. It is questionable, however, why duties of justice are triggered by this. Some appeal to norms of international reciprocity in order to justify this. It is questionable, however, whether this appeal is successful. Perhaps a richer understanding of reciprocity that accords equal respect supports lifting such restriction. On the other hand, restriction of access to “welfare rights” could encourage social dumping on the part of employers in the most-advantaged Member States and may, therefore, be objectionable for other reasons that are independent of reciprocity.
The panel welcomes contributions related (but not limited) to the following questions:
1) Is the ECB's current toolbox an adequate instrument for socio-economic justice?
2) Should Member States be allowed to temporarily restrict access to “welfare rights” on the part of individuals from other EU countries?
3) What policies should the EU adopt on migration from third countries?
4) Do transnational electoral lists enhance the EU’s legitimacy?
