One World: the Ethics of Globalization. Singer, P. 2002. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. 235 pp. $21.95. ISBN 0–300–09686–0. We live in an increasingly interconnected world, yet our ethical and governmental intuitions lag behind the reality that is rapidly coming into being through economic and technological change. “The thesis of this book,” philosopher Peter Singer writes, “is that how well we come through the era of globalization (perhaps whether we come through it at all) will depend on how we respond ethically to the idea that we live in one world. For the rich nations not to take a global ethical viewpoint has long been seriously morally wrong. Now it is also, in the long term, a danger to their security” (p. 13). After an introductory chapter, the bulk of One World is devoted to four key international issues, each treated in a chapter: global climate change, the World Trade Organization and economic globalization, criteria for state intervention to prevent genocide or other crimes against humanity, and the fair distribution of wealth, particularly as it relates to the poorest of the world's poor. In each case, Singer's discussions are clear and fair-minded. He uses up-to-date scientific and scholarly sources to establish the facts (e.g., the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, released in 2001, for summary data on global climate change), and he is not afraid to admit when factual matters are in doubt (“…no evidence that I have found enables me to form a clear view about the overall impact of economic globalization on the poor,” he writes, after a detailed exploration of this crucial issue [p. 89]). Singer's analyses of the ethical values at stake in these debates are always lucid and to the point, with the main ethical positions given careful consideration. Even readers who do not share Singer's utilitarianism are likely to find appeals to principles of justice they share. Finally, although he is in some sense an idealist calling readers to work for a more just world, Singer keeps his discussions well grounded in real-world alternatives. In all these ways, One World provides an excellent model for discussions of complex ethical and political issues. Readers of this journal will likely be particularly interested in Singer's chapter on the ethics of global climate change (“One Atmosphere”). After summarizing scientific discussions of how much global warming has occurred and is likely to occur over the next century and considering possible effects on human and natural communities, Singer tries to establish an equitable solution to the problem. He discusses this question with three main approaches: (1) the historical-polluter-pays principle, or “you broke it; now, you fix it; ” (2) an egalitarian approach in which the atmosphere's ability to buffer excess warming is shared out, either per capita or in terms of units of economic productivity; and (3) a utilitarian approach aimed at achieving “the greatest happiness for the greatest number.” Under any of these approaches, Singer shows, the developed nations are morally required to take the lead to address global warming. The United States thus comes in for some stinging criticism for its opposition to international mitigation efforts. As Singer summarizes, “[t]he fact that 178 nations, including every major industrial nation in the world except the United States, have now indicated their intention to ratify the Kyoto Protocol makes the position of the United States particularly odious from an ethical perspective” (p. 44). He concludes his chapter by speculating that countries whose lands are flooded by rising sea levels might press the United Nations for sanctions against the United States or other nations that fail to do their part to combat global warming. “Arguably,” he writes, “the case for sanctions against a nation that is causing harm, often fatal, to the citizens of other countries is even stronger than the case for sanctions against a country like South Africa under apartheid, since that government, iniquitous as its policies were, was not a threat to other countries” (p. 50). Singer's discussion of the World Trade Organization's (WTO) systematic undermining of environmental laws, in the chapter “One Economy,” will also interest readers of Conservation Biology. He shows how, in numerous cases, the WTO's secretive “dispute panels” have ignored a clear mandate, under section 20 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, empowering countries to legislate and enforce strong environmental laws. Singer's elegant analysis shows the specious rationalizations given for striking down environmental laws. In effect, the WTO has become the site for a power grab by an unaccountable clique of “trade specialists” intent on freeing powerful corporations and “the economy” generally from any moral or political limits. Singer is not completely opposed to the WTO, however. Here, as elsewhere, he looks for ways to harness “globalization” for the good of humanity, discussing how a properly reformed WTO could implement higher worldwide environmental and fair-labor standards. He compares the WTO to the European Union, which, while gradually admitting states from Eastern Europe, is holding them to the higher labor and environmental standards of the West, dangling the carrot of economic growth as an incentive for improvements. Similarly, Singer supports emissions trading as a potentially efficient tool, provided that it is part of wider efforts to reduce global warming in which the industrialized nations shoulder their fair share of the burden. This mix of pragmatism and high moral standards might be the book's greatest strength. Nondogmatic, well written, with vivid examples drawn from around the world, One World is that rare book that can help readers clarify their own views, even as it forcefully puts forth its own. I recommend it highly to anyone concerned about issues of global justice and international environmental politics. With its clear presentation of our new “globalized” reality and its ringing call to bring established norms of justice to bear on that reality, this book will make readers more knowledgeable and committed citizens of their own countries, and of the one world that we all share.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Philip Cafaro (2004) studied this question.