Challenging Indifference to Extreme Poverty: Considering Southern Perspectives on Global Citizenship and Change

Canadian universities are expanding opportunities for students to travel, study, volunteer and work abroad for academic credit, especially in regions of the global south often called “developing countries.” It is widely assumed that exposure to extreme poverty through shortterm placements overseas will make young Canadians and other Northerners into “global citizens” who would by definition be incapable of indifference to the lack of freedom that accompanies extreme poverty. This paper asks whether it is warranted for Northerners to attain a claim to global citizenship via this mechanism, especially in light of the burdens falling upon Southern organizations that host young people from Canada and elsewhere.

The Gaia Commission: Climate Change and Moral Responsibility

Travail créatif / Creative Work

Directed Technical Change and International Trade

Recent changes in comparative advantage in the largest OECD economies differ significantly from the predictions of Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek theory. Japan's rising share of OECD machinery exports and the improvement in the comparative advantage of the USA and Germany in heavy industry were accompanied by growing scarcities of the factors used intensively in the favored sector of each country. Here we examine Acemoglu's (1998, 2002) hypothesis that technical change may be directed toward raising the marginal productivity of abundant factors. Testing this hypothesis with 1970-1992 export data from 14 OECD countries, we find evidence that international comparative advantage was reshaped by innovation biased toward the abundant factors in the largest economies.

Pogge -vs- Sen on Global Poverty and Human Rights

This Paper is part of a broader project examining the ways in which Amartya Sen’s “capability approach” provides a framework for thinking about global poverty as a denial or a violation of basic human rights. The Paper compares the “capability approach” as a basis for thinking about global poverty and human rights with the alternative framework developed by Thomas Pogge. Both the “capability approach” and Pogge’s theory of “severe poverty as a violation of negative duties” support the idea of “freedom from severe poverty as a basic human right”. However, there are important differences. The Paper examines the limitations of Pogge’s “apparent minimalism” and establishes the ways in which Sen’s treatment of the “capability approach” and human rights moves beyond a “minimalist normative position” whilst avoiding Pogge’s charge of “implausibility”.