Resource Dividend Research Articles

Global Distributive Justice and the Taxation of Natural Resources — Who Should Pick Up the Tab?

Increasingly visible global distributive inequalities and famine pose considerable challenges for policy-makers and political philosophers alike. A recent proposal forwarded by Thomas Pogge has taken on the challenge of outlining a concept of global justice according to which redistribution is not merely predicated on the beneficiaries being in a state of need. The scheme, which he calls the Global Resources Dividend (GRD), aims to compensate people who are excluded from the benefits of the common stock of natural resources, by taxing those who unilaterally exploit it and by subsequently redistributing the revenues to the globally poor. This article assesses the GRD's moral standing once it is institutionalized in the real world. It analyses the causal link between a country's resource endowments and its economic prosperity and identifies the beneficiaries of, and contributors to, the monetary transfers under two possible tax-shifting scenarios. The article concludes that in order to offset the morally questionable results that Pogge's scheme produces, some moral demands need to be relaxed and the GRD scheme be divided into separate stages that operate with distinct moral rationales.

Eradicating Systemic Poverty: Brief for a global resources dividend

Article 25: Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care. Article 28: Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized. (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) In two earlier essays (Pogge, 1994, 1998a), I have sketched and defended the proposal of a global resources dividend. This proposal was meant to show that there are feasible alternative ways of organizing our global economic order, that the choice among these alternatives makes a substantial difference to how much severe poverty there is worldwide, and that there are weighty moral reasons to make this choice so as to minimize such poverty. My proposal has evoked some critical responses (Kesselring, 1997; Reichel, 1997; Crisp and Jamieson, 2000) and spirited defenses (Kreide, 1998; Mandle, 2000) in the academy. But if it is to help reduce severe poverty, the proposal must be convincing not only to academics, but also to the people in governments and international organizations who are practically involved in poverty eradication efforts. I am most grateful therefore for the opportunity to present a concise and improved version of the argument in this journal.

Globalization and Justice

In an era of globalization, basic institutional structures that shape our daily interactions transcend national boundaries. According to the institutional approach to social justice favored by John Rawls, we have a special obligation to ensure that the basic terms of these interactions are just. Two recent proposals would help accomplish this: a global resource dividend and a Tobin tax. Both of these proposals work within markets. Some have objected that globalization will lead to the homogenization of previously diverse cultures. However, although globalization will increase the pace of cultural and social change, the path of these developments is unpredictable.

Armut, Gerechtigkeit und Demokratie

Abstract In his article “A Global Resources Dividend” Thomas Pogge argues that all inhabitants of the world have an equal claim to use the world’s natural resources. Pogge suggests a Global Resource Dividend (GRD) which is tobe used for raising the minimum living standard of the world’s poorest people. Pogge’s proposal has been criticized on three different levels. First, it has been objected that from a normative point of view the moral justification of the GRD is not convincing. Second, he has been criticized for the empirical assumptions that underlie his analysis of worldwide poverty. And third, the proposal has been rejected, because of problems involved in the realization of the GRD. In this article all three objections are answered and it is argued for a democratic legitimation of the GRD.

Internationaler Handel, Tauschgerechtigkeit und die globale Rohstoffdividende

Abstract Pogge's proposal of a ,global resource dividend' (GRD) is intendend to compensate the poor, commodity-exporting countries of the developing world for terms of trade losses and unequal exchange in trade with the industrialized North. It can be shown that it is unlikely that Pogge’s GRD will be successful. On the one side, increased financial flows from the GRD funds may seriously inhibit the structural transformaton of an underdeveloped economy, whereas on the other side the internal distribution problem associated with GRD payments is not resolved.

Eine globale Rohstoffdividende

Abstract We live in a world of radical inequality: Hundreds of millions suffer severe, lifelong poverty. Many others are quite well off and affluent enough significantly to improve the lives of the global poor. Does this radical inequality constitute an injustice in which we are involved? An affirmative answer finds broad support in different strands of the Western moral tradition, which also support the same program of institutional reform. This reform centers around a Global Resources Dividend, or GRD. A GRD in the amount of one percent of the global social product would raise some $300 Billion a year. This amount is too small to lead to economic dislocation. But it is large enough to eradicate global poverty within one or two decades.