Economic Participation Rights and the All-Affected Principle

Annette Zimmermann

doi:10.21248/gjn.10.2.144

Economic Participation Rights and the All-Affected Principle

Annette Zimmermann

Philosophy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

The democratic boundary problem raises the question of who has democratic participation rights in a given polity and why. One possible solution to this problem is the all-affected principle (AAP), according to which a polity ought to enfranchise all persons whose interests are affected by the polity’s decisions in a morally significant way. While AAP offers a plausible principle of democratic enfranchisement, its supporters have so far not paid sufficient attention to economic participation rights. I argue that if one commits oneself to AAP, one must also commit oneself to the view that political participation rights are not necessarily the only, and not necessarily the best, way to protect morally weighty interests. I also argue that economic participation rights raise important worries about democratic accountability, which is why their exercise must be constrained by a number of moral duties.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-21
Journal	Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric
Volume	10
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.21248/gjn.10.2.144
Publication status	Published - 24 Sept 2018

Bibliographical note

Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

Access to Document

10.21248/gjn.10.2.144

Annette Zimmermann, "Economic Participation Rights and the All-Affected Principle," Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric 10, no. 2 (2017): 1-21.
Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details
Final published version, 253 KB

Cite this

@article{54b5a46a6cd542158cecd38f269d7318,

title = "Economic Participation Rights and the All-Affected Principle",

abstract = "The democratic boundary problem raises the question of who has democratic participation rights in a given polity and why. One possible solution to this problem is the all-affected principle (AAP), according to which a polity ought to enfranchise all persons whose interests are affected by the polity{\textquoteright}s decisions in a morally significant way. While AAP offers a plausible principle of democratic enfranchisement, its supporters have so far not paid sufficient attention to economic participation rights. I argue that if one commits oneself to AAP, one must also commit oneself to the view that political participation rights are not necessarily the only, and not necessarily the best, way to protect morally weighty interests. I also argue that economic participation rights raise important worries about democratic accountability, which is why their exercise must be constrained by a number of moral duties.",

author = "Annette Zimmermann",

note = "Uploaded in accordance with the publisher{\textquoteright}s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details ",

year = "2018",

month = sep,

day = "24",

doi = "10.21248/gjn.10.2.144",

language = "English",

volume = "10",

pages = "1--21",

journal = "Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric",

issn = "1835-6842",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Economic Participation Rights and the All-Affected Principle

AU - Zimmermann, Annette

N1 - Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

PY - 2018/9/24

Y1 - 2018/9/24

N2 - The democratic boundary problem raises the question of who has democratic participation rights in a given polity and why. One possible solution to this problem is the all-affected principle (AAP), according to which a polity ought to enfranchise all persons whose interests are affected by the polity’s decisions in a morally significant way. While AAP offers a plausible principle of democratic enfranchisement, its supporters have so far not paid sufficient attention to economic participation rights. I argue that if one commits oneself to AAP, one must also commit oneself to the view that political participation rights are not necessarily the only, and not necessarily the best, way to protect morally weighty interests. I also argue that economic participation rights raise important worries about democratic accountability, which is why their exercise must be constrained by a number of moral duties.

AB - The democratic boundary problem raises the question of who has democratic participation rights in a given polity and why. One possible solution to this problem is the all-affected principle (AAP), according to which a polity ought to enfranchise all persons whose interests are affected by the polity’s decisions in a morally significant way. While AAP offers a plausible principle of democratic enfranchisement, its supporters have so far not paid sufficient attention to economic participation rights. I argue that if one commits oneself to AAP, one must also commit oneself to the view that political participation rights are not necessarily the only, and not necessarily the best, way to protect morally weighty interests. I also argue that economic participation rights raise important worries about democratic accountability, which is why their exercise must be constrained by a number of moral duties.

U2 - 10.21248/gjn.10.2.144

DO - 10.21248/gjn.10.2.144

M3 - Article

SN - 1835-6842

VL - 10

SP - 1

EP - 21

JO - Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric

JF - Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric

IS - 2

ER -