Fix my Research-arguementative essay and use only the peer reviewed sources given. MUST BE HIGH QUALITY.

Reassessing Needs-Based Justice in a Globalized Context

Introduction

Needs -based justice offers a compelling vision for a more equal world by prioritizing the satisfaction of basic human needs as the cornerstone of a just society. However, given the stark differences in wealth, opportunity, and resources that characterize this globalization era, the question of how to implement this theory globally becomes more challenging. This essay argues that although a needs-based theory of justice offers a convincing framework for tackling global disparities, issues with national sovereignty, structural global injustices, and the requirement to develop individual skills make it difficult to put into practice. The essay will first discuss the theoretical foundations of needs-based justice, then examine its application in global contexts, and finally address the practical challenges and criticisms.

Fundamental Concepts of Needs-Based Justice

At the heart of needs-based justice lies the idea that all individuals have certain fundamental needs that must be met for them to live a decent life. These needs encompass not only material necessities like food, shelter, and healthcare but also social and psychological needs such as education, meaningful work, and political participation. John Rawls, in his seminal work "A Theory of Justice" (1971), emphasizes the importance of meeting basic needs as a prerequisite for individuals to effectively exercise their rights and liberties (Rawls, 1971).

Rawls's theory, while primarily focused on domestic justice, provides a framework for extending the concept of needs-based justice to the global arena. His " difference principle," which allows for inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society, can be interpreted as a call for prioritizing the needs of the most vulnerable populations globally. This interpretation is supported by John Tons, who argues in "John Rawls and Environmental Justice" (2022) that Rawls's theory can be applied to address global environmental injustices and promote sustainable development (Tons, 2022).

Stefan Traub and Bernhard Kittel, in their edited volume "Need-Based Distributive Justice: An Interdisciplinary Perspective" (2020), further explore the theoretical foundations of needs-based justice, drawing upon insights from various disciplines such as philosophy, economics, and sociology. They argue that a needs-based approach offers a more comprehensive and ethically grounded framework for addressing global inequalities than traditional distributive justice theories that focus solely on resources or capabilities (Traub & Kittel, 2020).

Martha Nussbaum's seminal work, "Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach," aligns with Amartya Sen's perspective, emphasizing the centrality of capabilities in achieving justice. Nussbaum's insights underscore the significance of expanding individual freedoms and capabilities as fundamental elements of needs-based justice (Nussbaum, 2000). By focusing on enhancing people's abilities to lead lives they have reason to value, Nussbaum's framework provides a robust foundation for understanding the intricacies of justice in a globalizing world.

Potential Applications in a Globalizing World

The increasing interconnectedness of our world has led to unprecedented levels of global trade, migration, and cultural exchange. While globalization has brought about significant economic growth and technological advancements, it has also exacerbated existing inequalities and created new challenges for social justice. A needs-based theory of justice can provide a valuable framework for addressing these issues by prioritizing the fulfillment of basic human needs across borders.

One potential application of needs-based justice in the global context is in the realm of international development. By focusing on the needs of the most disadvantaged populations, development policies can be tailored to address the root causes of poverty, inequality, and social exclusion. This approach can lead to more sustainable and equitable outcomes than traditional development models that prioritize economic growth without considering its distributive effects.

Another area where needs-based justice can be applied is in the realm of global health. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the stark disparities in access to healthcare and vaccines between developed and developing countries. A needs-based approach would prioritize the equitable distribution of healthcare resources based on the needs of the most vulnerable populations, regardless of their nationality or socioeconomic status (Jecker, Atuire, & Bull, 2023). Thomas Pogge, in "World Poverty and Human Rights" (2002), advocates for a cosmopolitan approach to global justice, arguing that affluent nations have a moral duty to assist those in need, regardless of nationality (Pogge, 2002).

A needs-based theory of justice can inform global environmental policies by prioritizing the needs of present and future generations to live in a healthy and sustainable environment. This approach can guide efforts to mitigate climate change, conserve biodiversity, and promote sustainable resource management. Gillian Brock, in "Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Account" (2009), emphasizes the moral obligations of wealthy nations toward the less fortunate, arguing that national borders should not limit our ethical responsibilities (Brock, 2009). Furthermore, G. A. Cohen's "Rescuing Justice and Equality" offers a penetrating analysis of the ethical dimensions of justice and equality, enriching the discourse on needs-based justice. Cohen's exploration prompts us to consider the delicate balance between national responsibilities and global obligations (Cohen, 2008). His critique challenges simplistic understandings of justice, urging us to confront the complexities inherent in addressing the needs of individuals within and across borders. By engaging with Cohen's arguments, we can deepen our understanding of the ethical imperatives underlying the pursuit of justice in an increasingly interconnected world.

Challenges and Criticisms of Needs-Based Justice

Despite its potential benefits, a needs-based theory of justice faces several challenges and criticisms. One major challenge is the difficulty of defining and measuring needs objectively. Needs are often subjective and can vary across cultures and individuals. This raises the question of who should determine what constitutes a need and how to prioritize competing needs.

David Miller, in "National Responsibility and Global Justice" (2007), challenges the cosmopolitan view that prioritizes global needs over national ones. He contends that nations have a primary responsibility towards their own citizens and that a purely global needs-based system could undermine national sovereignty and social cohesion. Miller's perspective raises important questions about the feasibility and desirability of a global system that prioritizes needs irrespective of national borders. Should affluent nations be obligated to prioritize the needs of individuals in impoverished countries over those of their own citizens? How can we reconcile the competing claims of national autonomy and global solidarity? Miller's emphasis on national responsibility reminds us that a global needs-based system must consider the unique social, cultural, and political contexts of different nations (Miller, 2007).

Moreover, Nancy Fraser's "Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World" offers invaluable insights into the challenges of implementing needs-based justice in a global context. Fraser's analysis highlights the intricate interplay between political and social justice on a global scale, shedding light on the complexities that arise from disparities and interconnectedness (Fraser, 2009). By grappling with Fraser's examination, we gain a nuanced understanding of the multifaceted nature of justice in our globalizing world, recognizing the necessity of addressing diverse needs while navigating complex power dynamics and structural inequalities.

Another challenge is the potential conflict between individual needs and collective interests. While meeting basic needs is essential for individual well-being, it may sometimes conflict with broader societal goals such as economic growth or national security. Balancing these competing interests requires careful consideration and may involve trade-offs that are difficult to justify. Critics argue that a needs-based approach may be overly paternalistic and undermine individual autonomy. By focusing on fulfilling needs, it may neglect other important values such as liberty and self-determination. Striking a balance between meeting needs and respecting individual choices is a crucial challenge for any needs-based theory of justice.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the topic of needs-based justice raises several issues for our more globalized world in addition to offering a compelling vision. The insights of Martha Nussbaum highlight the significance of enhancing individual liberties and capacities as essential components of needs-based justice. The ethical challenges that arise when using a needs-based approach are highlighted by G. A. Cohen's critical analysis, especially when it comes to international development and global health programs. Furthermore, Nancy Fraser's analysis sheds insight on the practical difficulties of implementing needs-based justice in a society characterized by large inequities and interconnection by highlighting the complex interactions between political and social justice on a global scale.

Although needs-based justice presents a viable paradigm for tackling global inequality, its effective implementation necessitates considering several aspects, such as identifying and quantifying requirements, striking a balance between individual and group interests, and upholding national sovereignty. Despite these obstacles, the perspectives offered by academics such as Nussbaum, Cohen, and Fraser deepen our grasp of the nuances of needs-based justice and offer insightful advice for creating fairer and just policies globally. To improve the theoretical underpinnings of needs-based justice and transform them into practical tactics that advance social justice and human flourishing globally, more study and multidisciplinary cooperation are imperative.

References:

1. Brock, G. (2009). Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Account. Oxford University Press.

2. Miller, D. (2007). National Responsibility and Global Justice. Oxford University Press.

3. Pogge, T. (2002). World Poverty and Human Rights. Polity Press.

4. Jecker, N. S., Atuire, C. A., & Bull, S. J. (2023). Towards a new model of global health justice: The case of COVID-19 vaccines.

5. Rawls, John. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.

6. Traub, Stefan, and Bernhard Kittel. (Eds.) (2020). Need-based distributive justice: An interdisciplinary perspective. Hamburg: Springer.

7. Tons, John. (2022). John Rawls and environmental justice: Implementing a

sustainable and socially just future. New York: Routledge.

Thank you for submitting this paper, overall, it was a good try at attempting a research paper! I believe by incorporating the feedback I gave you, that you will have a strong finished product. Your biggest opportunity is to work on clarity and flow of the paper. I noted several areas especially in your introduction and conclusion where this could be greatly improved. I also noted the lack of research throughout the paper. It is not enough at this stage to give me a bibliography and a few in-text citations. I need to see each time you reference something that did not come from your own mind. Please consider this feedback before submitting your next paper.

Thanks!

Essay Total Grade – 20%

Argument content, structure and flow – 10 possible points out of 20

ACTUAL: 6/10

Depth, breadth, and originality of the analysis – 5 possible points out of 20

ACTUAL: 3.5/5

Research and resources – 3 possible points out of 20

ACTUAL: 1.5/3

Style, spelling, grammar – 2 possible points out of 20

ACTUAL: 1.75 /2

TOTAL GRADE: 12.75/20 = 63.75%