There is an awakening of interest in links between geography and moral philosophy, or ethics. This paper reviews a range of issues where common ground might be found on this new disciplinary interface. These issues include the historical geography of moralities, the notion of moral geographies, inclusion and exclusion in the context of the bounding of spaces, and the moral significance of distance and proximity, as well as the more familiar concern with social justice. Environmental ethics provides a link with (...) the physical side of the subject. Some suggestions are made as to the possible contribution of geography to the understanding of moral issues. (shrink)

My principal objective in this paper is to examine what position liberal egalitarians should take regarding the issue of immigration. Given that liberal egalitarians grant central importance to individual autonomy and the moral equality of all persons, their rejection of restrictive immigration policies appears to follow from these central normative commitments. Liberal egalitarians such as Joseph Carens and Phillip Cole have argued that those who are committed to individual autonomy and moral equality should advocate for an open borders position in (...) immigration. I argue that it is a serious mistake for liberal egalitarians to advocate open national borders and that borders should instead be strategically regulated to reduce global economic inequalities through immigration policies systematically integrated into development programs for the poorest and most vulnerable countries. Open borders would create an open market for immigration slots to choice countries of destination, which out of practical necessity would have to delimit the number of new immigrants. It is well known in migration studies that those who are more educated, young, and have more resources are more likely to migrate than the very young, the elderly, the infirm, and the poorest individuals. Those left behind in developing countries suffer serious negative consequences from the emigration of the most highly educated, capable, and talented individuals in their society. I then argue that liberal egalitarians should grant particular moral consideration to the world’s poorest and most vulnerable and that immigration policies strategically designed to prioritize their needs are actually more consistent with the dual commitments of individual autonomy and moral equality than an open borders position. I propose three principles of global justice that are consistent with liberal egalitarianism that should guide transnational moral obligations. I end the paper by arguing that two of these principles can be used to justify restricted immigration policies that would enable developed countries to partially discharge some of their moral obligations to developing countries while enhancing the autonomy of the world’s most vulnerable people. (shrink)

There is an awakening of interest in links between geography and moral philosophy, or ethics. This paper reviews a range of issues where common ground might be found on this new disciplinary interface. These issues include the historical geography of moralities, the notion of moral geographies, inclusion and exclusion in the context of the bounding of spaces, and the moral significance of distance and proximity, as well as the more familiar concern with social justice. Environmental ethics provides a link with (...) the physical side of the subject. Some suggestions are made as to the possible contribution of geography to the understanding of moral issues. (shrink)

1. Among the most striking features of the political arrangements on this planet is its division into sovereign states.1 To be sure, in recent times, globalization has woven together the fates of communities and individuals in distant parts of the world in complex ways. It is partly for this reason that now hardly anyone champions a notion of sovereignty that would entirely discount a state’s liability the effects that its actions would have on foreign nationals. Still, state sovereignty persists as (...) a political fact. The number of states has increased enormously due to upheavals of the 20th century, and there is nothing in principle morally wrong with the existence of states - or so we will assume.2 What must be explored, then, are the limits of normatively plausible sovereignty. How bad does a government have to be for outsiders to be allowed to interfere? What responsibilities does a country incur because of its contribution to global warming? What obligations arise through trading? In this paper, we explore another pertinent question: to what extent is a country allowed to influence who lives on its territory by regulating immigration? The angle from which we approach this question continues to be neglected even now that questions of global justice are receiving much attention. Immigration amounts to a change in political relationships as immigrants alter their standing within one community and acquire a status elsewhere. Yet it also amounts to an alteration in physical relationship, since they acquire a relationship to a territory, making a life for themselves with the resources offered by a part of the earth.3 We base our exploration of.. (shrink)