Resumen de Globalisation in a world of equals: a normative analysis of trade-related inequalities
International trade generates inequalities pervasively impacting citizens and the ability of domestic and international institutions to provide the conditions to promote equal treatment among their subjects. This thesis argues that a relational egalitarian perspective enables us to capture concerns with trade-related inequalities that go beyond the distributional accounts of the gains from trade. The thesis addresses this topic through three different parts. Part One, formed by chapters One and Two, describes the main economic models, empirical examples, and the values and theories governing the trade regime. Part Two, covering from Chapter Three to Five, examines the main normative responses to the socioeconomic challenges posed by international trade. It focuses on distributive and relational accounts and argues that unequal distributive outcomes condition relational equality. Part Three, involving chapters Six and Seven, concludes that unfair equality of opportunity erodes the institutional capacity to maintain the conditions of democratic liberty and equality.
MAIN ARGUMENTS Workers’ rights in developing countries, which are part of global supply chains and collaborate and work for their partners in developed countries, are pervasively harmed by the terms of this collaboration. Against this situation, one of the main arguments defended in this dissertation is a twofold claim: first, the terms of negotiation and bargaining power among trading partners are negatively determined by the difference in GDP and general economic inequalities between countries. One of the main reasons for this is that high differences in economic outcomes such as GDP in the case of countries, have a direct impact in relations among trading parties. In this case, significant economic inequalities between countries generate pervasive relational inequalities. In turn, these inequalities include highly different political influence, political inequality, and inequalities in political power. This situation not only generates situations of unequal opportunity among trading parties, in this case countries, but the erosion of the legitimacy of international institutions fostering the trade regime, e.g., the WTO.
Second, differences in bargaining power have a double impact within countries: first, regarding outcomes, and second, a political consequence. First, citizens living in countries with lower bargaining power suffer from lower wages, poverty, and false dichotomies such as the one between risking their health and life, on the one hand, and their work, on the other. In addition, this false dichotomy increases situations of vulnerability as workers who have bad health as a consequence of poor working conditions will eventually, be unable to work. Second, citizens living under these conditions not only suffer from extremely low wages and lack of wellbeing and minimum healthy working conditions, but the difference between those workers who are harmed by their participation in global supply chains and those who are benefited by it result in differences in social status and standing, differences in political influence and bargaining power, and, ultimately, political inequality.
The impact of trade-related inequalities within countries has not been restricted to developing countries. Lower wages have had a transnational impact affecting both citizens in developing and developed countries. The differences between workers who have been benefited and those who have been harmed by globalisation and international trade have generated political impact. In particular, inequalities in economic outcomes have an impact in the ability of citizens to develop a plan of life and what is more, to develop the ability to relate as equals. A high economic inequality among citizens might also have an impact in the ability of political institutions to achieve three main aims: first, provide their citizens with the background conditions to promote equal treatment among citizens, second, express equal treatment through institutional attitudes, such as the promotion of equality of opportunity, third, erode the conditions for a not justified but fair process of equality of opportunity. Against a background of inequality, the requirements established by equality of opportunity so understood, are especially important as they limit the concern with inequalities to access positions of advantage within key political and social institutions. In cases in which the requirements established by equality of opportunity are violated, the inequalities generated by the attainment of positions of power will neither be justified, nor just. Finally, the erosion of the requirements to make equality of opportunity fair within both transnational and domestic institutions will, in turn, redound to a loss of legitimacy of both institutions.
