Podcast appearances and mentions of nicole hassoun

Sharing is caring. Nicole Hassoun, professor of philosophy at Binghamton University, examines global health through the lens of fighting off the next contagious virus. Hassoun is the director of the Global Health Impact (GHI), which works to create positive change by evaluating pharmaceutical products' global health consequences and advocating for greater access to essential medicines. To learn more about this project […]

This episode focuses on a discussion of solidarity, a way we might reconceptualize our priorities and ethics when considering global health, a principle that takes its cues from sub-Saharan Africa. We talk about reframing COVID-19 as a “syndemic” instead of a pandemic, focusing on the convergence of social forces aside from simply the clinical aspects, as well as the African principles that inspire “solidarity ethics,” and what exactly that means.

After nearly two years of COVID, how is the pharmaceutical industry faring? In this episode, we explore where drug companies were before the arrival of COVID and how they performed financially during the pandemic. And we hear about the ongoing tensions between profits and equitable access to vaccines.Featuring, Ray Moynihan, assistant professor at the Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare at Bond University in Australia; Jérôme Caby, professor of corporate finance at Sorbonne Business School in Paris, France; Ana Santos Rutschman, assistant professor of law at Saint Louis University in the US; and Nicole Hassoun, professor of philosophy at Binghamton University, State University of New York in the US.And Ozayr Patel, digital editor at The Conversation in Johannesburg, South Africa, recommends some reading on the emergence of the Omicron variant of COVID-19. The Conversation Weekly is produced by Mend Mariwany and Gemma Ware, with sound design by Eloise Stevens. Our theme music is by Neeta Sarl. You can sign up to The Conversation's free daily email here. Full credits for this episode available here.Further reading:COVID vaccines offer the pharma industry a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reset its reputation. But it's after decades of big profits and scandals, by Ray Moynihan, Bond UniversityWhy Moderna won't share rights to the COVID-19 vaccine with the government that paid for its development, by Ana Santos Rutschman, Saint Louis UniversityThe US drug industry used to oppose patents – what changed? by Joseph M. Gabriel, Florida State UniversityThe hunt for coronavirus variants: how the new one was found and what we know so far, by a panel of experts in South AfricaOmicron is the new COVID kid on the block: five steps to avoid, ten to take immediately, by Shabir A. Madhi, University of the Witwatersrand See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Cocktail and tasting events are important aspects of many events. Now that we've been virtual for a year, what are the best practices for doing them online with attendees from all over the world? How can we ensure those who don't drink alcohol or have dietary needs are included. Join Tracy as she chats with Nicole Hassoun and Thy Parra, founders of Cocktail Curations, about how they have combined their mastery in mixology, culinary arts, spirits, and event planning to create safe, inclusive, delicious and fun virtual food and beverage experiences. Connect with Tracy: facebook.com/groups/EatingataMeeting thrivemeetings.com

Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Founder of the Global Health Impact Project

Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Founder of the Global Health Impact Project

With the world’s attention on COVID-19 vaccines and treatments, you’ve probably heard about big pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson.But the Serum Institute of India is playing an outsized role in the pandemic, creating a lifeline of hundreds of millions of vaccine doses for COVID-19. “Serum pits them all by being the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer, both by number of doses and by what it sells worldwide."Dr. Bobby John, global health advocate“Serum [beats] them all by being the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer, both by number of doses and by what it sells worldwide,” said Dr. Bobby John, a global health advocate who spent years living near the institute, in Pune, India. Last year, Serum produced more than 1.6 billion vaccine doses — including for measles and whooping cough — distributed in more than 170 countries, according to Serum’s executive director, Dr. Suresh Jadhav. Now, the Serum Institute finds itself in the middle of an uphill battle to vaccinate the world against COVID-19. Related: As COVID-19 vaccines roll out, does the world face 'tragedy of the commons'?A horse farm becomes a labThe Serum Institute began not with pipettes and lab coats but with prized racing horses. Cyrus Poonawalla, owner of India’s largest horse farm, Poonawalla Stud Farms, would donate retired or unfit racehorses to a public lab, who’d use the serum (the liquid found in his retired horses’ blood) to make tetanus vaccines and antivenom for snakebites. At the time, India was experiencing major vaccine shortages, with most of its costly supply coming from Europe. Poonawalla decided to start his own lab on the farm, launching the Serum Institute in 1966. The first vaccine came out two years later. The little lab grew and expanded its vaccine types, eventually exporting vaccines to neighboring countries. By the 1990s, the company went global. Related: Could lifting patents speed up access to life-saving COVID-19 drugs?Jadhav oversaw Serum’s accreditation through the World Health Organization, and it became the go-to for affordable vaccines supplied to United Nations programs. Serum helped develop and manufacture a version of a meningitis A vaccine, which led to near elimination in northern Africa.These days, a majority of the world’s children have gotten a Serum shot. From the start, Serum found a way to make low-cost vaccines. The Indian government had set the global vaccine price at an in-country, not-for-profit level. “This is a different mindset,” Jadhav said. Their business model thrives on high-volume, low-cost production. Jadhav said the company scales up production through the use of large, stainless steel fermenters and quickly adopting new technologies. (Horse serum is no longer used in vaccines).The pandemic ups the stakesSerum is now co-developing vaccines for the coronavirus, running clinical trials and manufacturing vaccines developed by other companies. This includes the promising vaccine from US-based Novavax and UK company AstraZeneca, with whom they’ve worked for years, at Oxford, on a malaria vaccine. The institute is producing this vaccine specifically for low- and middle-income countries while it also tries to develop its own vaccine, which is expected to enter phase 3 trials in a matter of weeks, Jadhav said. Related: Discussion: Will people accept a COVID-19 vaccine?“I think the takeaway is that one has to be ready and go with the science, and I don’t know which vaccine will be most efficacious but most will have to be tested over a longer period of time."Dr. Suresh Jadhav, executive director, Serum Institute“I think the takeaway is that one has to be ready and go with the science, and I don’t know which vaccine will be most efficacious but most will have to be tested over a longer period of time,” Jadhav said.In recent months, Serum reached major agreements with Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and COVAX, the world’s main initiative to ensure fair, equitable distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. It will offer up to a billion doses of approved vaccines at a low cost this year. Related: A global initiative could ensure equitable access to a COVID-19 vaccine. Can it work?As richer countries vie for direct deals for vaccines, providing low-cost vaccines is critical. “I need to be blunt — the world is on a brink of a catastrophic moral failure,” stated WHO's director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, last month.“The price of those failures will be paid with lives and livelihoods in the world’s poorest countries,” he said. Beyond SerumWhy don’t more institutes like Serum exist to meet the high global demand for COVID-19 vaccinations?  Prashant Yadav, a senior fellow at the Center for Global Development who specializes in supply chains, says this is one of the most important questions. Several smaller companies are manufacturing vaccines, even in India, Yadav said, but vaccine production challenges stand in the way. Making vaccines is a specialty. Some new vaccines are based on new technologies, like ones produced by Pfizer and Moderna, and these private companies determine whether to share their know-how. It also depends on identifying capable manufacturers, which requires attention and work, Yadav said. Looking for partners “is largely an afterthought.” But the problem may run even deeper. A months-old WHO initiative aimed at improving access to technical know-how has yet to garner much interest. Tedros recently wrote that open-sourcing could enable labs across Latin America and Africa to better meet current and future vaccine demands. Nicole Hassoun, a philosophy professor at Binghamton University in New York, said the current incentive structure for developing and distributing drugs prioritizes communities with the most resources. That just doesn’t work well in a pandemic, she said."[I]t’s a lack of global imagination and cooperation that’s really the problem.” More demandSerum is experiencing high demand for its low-cost, COVID-19 vaccines. AstraZeneca recently fell short on its deal with European countries to keep up with its promised supply, and the company may be turning to Serum. “AstraZeneca is coming back to us requesting us to supply this product even in the developed world,” like Canada and the UK, Jadhav said.Half of Serum’s vaccine supply is set aside for domestic use, Jadhav said, and the Indian government also oversees exports to neighboring countries. The African Union, Morocco, South Africa, Saudi Arabia and Brazil are among others that have secured direct deals with Serum for vaccine doses.Serum has a stockpile of about 70 million doses, Jadhav said, and is now waiting for final approval from countries to start exporting.By April, the company aims to make 100 million doses monthly of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine. Currently, the monthly total ranges from 50 million to 60 million doses. It’s an anxious, high-stakes moment for vaccines. In recent weeks, a Serum facility under construction for a separate vaccine project caught fire, killing five people.That was “a traumatic experience for every one of us,” Jadhav said. Making vaccines, especially a new one, can be a complex process, and requires ensuring all the raw materials and other elements are in place.Jadhav said Serum is finding its rhythm with vaccine production and mastering the art and science of scaling up.

As the race for COVID–19 vaccines enters its next stage, we are faced with broad ethical challenges. How should countries plan for distribution and allocation? What can and should be done to bolster trust in the vaccines? Public health experts Ruth Faden, Nicole Hassoun, Clive Meanwell, and Reed Tuckson discuss these questions in this webinar moderated by Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics.

As the race for COVID–19 vaccines enters its next stage, we are faced with broad ethical challenges, along with specific questions of principle and practice. How should countries and the global community plan for distribution and allocation? What can and should be done to bolster trust in the vaccines? Public health experts Ruth Faden, Nicole Hassoun, Clive Meanwell, and Reed Tuckson discuss these questions and much more in this webinar moderated by Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics.

As the race for COVID–19 vaccines enters its next stage, we are faced with broad ethical challenges, along with specific questions of principle and practice. How should countries and the global community plan for distribution and allocation? What can and should be done to bolster trust in the vaccines? Public health experts Ruth Faden, Nicole Hassoun, Clive Meanwell, and Reed Tuckson discuss these questions and much more in this webinar moderated by Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics.

The WHO is working with China to try and pinpoint the source of SARS- COV-2. Sian Griffiths, Emeritus Professor of Public Health at the Chinese University of Hong Kong says there are lessons we can learn from the investigation she led into the original SARS outbreak back in 2003. That inquiry revealed how SARS had spread from bats to humans via civet cats. A Covid-19 vaccine claims to be 90% effective. It uses genetic material, messenger RNA. Daniel Anderson of Harvard MIT Health Science tells us about the huge potential of mRNA to provide treatments for many medical conditions. However, rolling out such a vaccine globally faces a huge range of economic and practical obstacles as ethicist Nicole Hassoun of Binghamton University explains. And a unique experiment shows despite a vast range of precautions including being isolated US Marines have contracted Covid -19. Stuart Sealfon, Professor of Neurology at Mount Sinai Hospitals says this study shows we need testing to be integrated more thoroughly into everyday life and that many of the precautions we currently use may not be enough to prevent transmission. We all feel pain on a regular basis; when we stub a toe, break a bone or even experience heartbreak. Bebeto from Cameroon wants to know how to cope with a pain in his wrist that just won’t go away. Does a positive mindset help? Or perhaps meditation? Marnie Chesterton speaks to psychologists and neuroscientists to find the answers. We hear from two people with very different experiences of pain. Lucy has fibromyalgia and experiences pain all over her body every day. While Stephen has a rare genetic condition which means he doesn’t feel physical pain at all. But they both argue that pain shouldn’t always be unwanted. Perhaps we need to embrace and accept our pain in order to beat it. (Image: Credit: Getty Images)

The WHO is working with China to try and pinpoint the source of SARS- COV-2. Sian Griffiths, Emeritus Professor of Public Health at the Chinese University of Hong Kong says there are lessons we can learn from the investigation she led into the original SARS outbreak back in 2003. That inquiry revealed how SARS had spread from bats to humans via civet cats. A Covid-19 vaccine claims to be 90% effective. It uses genetic material, messenger RNA. Daniel Anderson of Harvard MIT Health Science tells us about the huge potential of mRNA to provide treatments for many medical conditions. However, rolling out such a vaccine globally faces a huge range of economic and practical obstacles as ethicist Nicole Hassoun of Binghamton University explains. And a unique experiment shows despite a vast range of precautions including being isolated US Marines have contracted Covid -19. Stuart Sealfon, Professor of Neurology at Mount Sinai Hospitals says this study shows we need testing to be integrated more thoroughly into everyday life and that many of the precautions we currently use may not be enough to prevent transmission. (Image: Credit: Getty Images) Presenter: Roland Pease Producer: Julian Siddle

Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Founder of the Global Health Impact Project

Every year nine million people are diagnosed with tuberculosis, every day over 13,400 people are infected with AIDs, and every thirty seconds malaria kills a child. For most of the world, critical medications that treat these deadly diseases are scarce, costly, and growing obsolete, as access to first-line drugs remains out of reach and resistance rates rise. Rather than focusing research and development on creating affordable medicines for these deadly global diseases, pharmaceutical companies instead invest in commercially lucrative products for more affluent customers. Nicole Hassoun argues that everyone has a human right to health and to access to essential medicines, and she proposes the Global Health Impact (global-health-impact.org/new) system as a means to guarantee those rights. Her proposal directly addresses the pharmaceutical industry's role: it rates pharmaceutical companies based on their medicines' impact on improving global health, rewarding highly-rated medicines with a Global Health Impact label. Global Health Impact: Expanding Access to Essential Medicines (Oxford University Press, 2020) has three parts. The first makes the case for a human right to health and specifically access to essential medicines. Hassoun defends the argument against recent criticism of these proposed rights. The second section develops the Global Health Impact proposal in detail. The final section explores the proposal's potential applications and effects, considering the empirical evidence that supports it and comparing it to similar ethical labels. Through a thoughtful and interdisciplinary approach to creating new labeling, investment, and licensing strategies, Global Health Impact demands an unwavering commitment to global justice and corporate responsibility. Nicole Hassoun is Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Visiting Scholar at Cornell University. Claire Clark is a medical educator, historian of medicine, and associate professor in the University of Kentucky's College of Medicine. She teaches and writes about health behavior in historical context.

Every year nine million people are diagnosed with tuberculosis, every day over 13,400 people are infected with AIDs, and every thirty seconds malaria kills a child. For most of the world, critical medications that treat these deadly diseases are scarce, costly, and growing obsolete, as access to first-line drugs remains out of reach and resistance rates rise. Rather than focusing research and development on creating affordable medicines for these deadly global diseases, pharmaceutical companies instead invest in commercially lucrative products for more affluent customers. Nicole Hassoun argues that everyone has a human right to health and to access to essential medicines, and she proposes the Global Health Impact (global-health-impact.org/new) system as a means to guarantee those rights. Her proposal directly addresses the pharmaceutical industry's role: it rates pharmaceutical companies based on their medicines' impact on improving global health, rewarding highly-rated medicines with a Global Health Impact label. Global Health Impact: Expanding Access to Essential Medicines (Oxford University Press, 2020) has three parts. The first makes the case for a human right to health and specifically access to essential medicines. Hassoun defends the argument against recent criticism of these proposed rights. The second section develops the Global Health Impact proposal in detail. The final section explores the proposal's potential applications and effects, considering the empirical evidence that supports it and comparing it to similar ethical labels. Through a thoughtful and interdisciplinary approach to creating new labeling, investment, and licensing strategies, Global Health Impact demands an unwavering commitment to global justice and corporate responsibility. Nicole Hassoun is Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Visiting Scholar at Cornell University. Claire Clark is a medical educator, historian of medicine, and associate professor in the University of Kentucky’s College of Medicine. She teaches and writes about health behavior in historical context. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Every year nine million people are diagnosed with tuberculosis, every day over 13,400 people are infected with AIDs, and every thirty seconds malaria kills a child. For most of the world, critical medications that treat these deadly diseases are scarce, costly, and growing obsolete, as access to first-line drugs remains out of reach and resistance rates rise. Rather than focusing research and development on creating affordable medicines for these deadly global diseases, pharmaceutical companies instead invest in commercially lucrative products for more affluent customers. Nicole Hassoun argues that everyone has a human right to health and to access to essential medicines, and she proposes the Global Health Impact (global-health-impact.org/new) system as a means to guarantee those rights. Her proposal directly addresses the pharmaceutical industry's role: it rates pharmaceutical companies based on their medicines' impact on improving global health, rewarding highly-rated medicines with a Global Health Impact label. Global Health Impact: Expanding Access to Essential Medicines (Oxford University Press, 2020) has three parts. The first makes the case for a human right to health and specifically access to essential medicines. Hassoun defends the argument against recent criticism of these proposed rights. The second section develops the Global Health Impact proposal in detail. The final section explores the proposal's potential applications and effects, considering the empirical evidence that supports it and comparing it to similar ethical labels. Through a thoughtful and interdisciplinary approach to creating new labeling, investment, and licensing strategies, Global Health Impact demands an unwavering commitment to global justice and corporate responsibility. Nicole Hassoun is Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Visiting Scholar at Cornell University. Claire Clark is a medical educator, historian of medicine, and associate professor in the University of Kentucky's College of Medicine. She teaches and writes about health behavior in historical context. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/medicine

Every year nine million people are diagnosed with tuberculosis, every day over 13,400 people are infected with AIDs, and every thirty seconds malaria kills a child. For most of the world, critical medications that treat these deadly diseases are scarce, costly, and growing obsolete, as access to first-line drugs remains out of reach and resistance rates rise. Rather than focusing research and development on creating affordable medicines for these deadly global diseases, pharmaceutical companies instead invest in commercially lucrative products for more affluent customers. Nicole Hassoun argues that everyone has a human right to health and to access to essential medicines, and she proposes the Global Health Impact (global-health-impact.org/new) system as a means to guarantee those rights. Her proposal directly addresses the pharmaceutical industry's role: it rates pharmaceutical companies based on their medicines' impact on improving global health, rewarding highly-rated medicines with a Global Health Impact label. Global Health Impact: Expanding Access to Essential Medicines (Oxford University Press, 2020) has three parts. The first makes the case for a human right to health and specifically access to essential medicines. Hassoun defends the argument against recent criticism of these proposed rights. The second section develops the Global Health Impact proposal in detail. The final section explores the proposal's potential applications and effects, considering the empirical evidence that supports it and comparing it to similar ethical labels. Through a thoughtful and interdisciplinary approach to creating new labeling, investment, and licensing strategies, Global Health Impact demands an unwavering commitment to global justice and corporate responsibility. Nicole Hassoun is Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Visiting Scholar at Cornell University. Claire Clark is a medical educator, historian of medicine, and associate professor in the University of Kentucky’s College of Medicine. She teaches and writes about health behavior in historical context. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Every year nine million people are diagnosed with tuberculosis, every day over 13,400 people are infected with AIDs, and every thirty seconds malaria kills a child. For most of the world, critical medications that treat these deadly diseases are scarce, costly, and growing obsolete, as access to first-line drugs remains out of reach and resistance rates rise. Rather than focusing research and development on creating affordable medicines for these deadly global diseases, pharmaceutical companies instead invest in commercially lucrative products for more affluent customers. Nicole Hassoun argues that everyone has a human right to health and to access to essential medicines, and she proposes the Global Health Impact (global-health-impact.org/new) system as a means to guarantee those rights. Her proposal directly addresses the pharmaceutical industry's role: it rates pharmaceutical companies based on their medicines' impact on improving global health, rewarding highly-rated medicines with a Global Health Impact label. Global Health Impact: Expanding Access to Essential Medicines (Oxford University Press, 2020) has three parts. The first makes the case for a human right to health and specifically access to essential medicines. Hassoun defends the argument against recent criticism of these proposed rights. The second section develops the Global Health Impact proposal in detail. The final section explores the proposal's potential applications and effects, considering the empirical evidence that supports it and comparing it to similar ethical labels. Through a thoughtful and interdisciplinary approach to creating new labeling, investment, and licensing strategies, Global Health Impact demands an unwavering commitment to global justice and corporate responsibility. Nicole Hassoun is Professor of Philosophy at Binghamton University and Visiting Scholar at Cornell University. Claire Clark is a medical educator, historian of medicine, and associate professor in the University of Kentucky’s College of Medicine. She teaches and writes about health behavior in historical context. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

George and Greg are back with an interview with Dr. Nicole Hassoun.

Get the featured cocktail recipe: Hey There, Sailor From creating craft cocktails to distilling spirits as a managing partner at Jos A. Magnus & Co. Distillery, Designated Drinker, Nicole Hassoun's journey is rather inspiring. She continues to break barriers as she focuses her talents on producing vodka, award-winning gins, as well as other contract spirits. She continually looks for new projects that not only challenge her, but also champions the distilling industry. She is definitely a badass woman to watch! Want more tasty cocktail recipes and boozy banter, then subscribe, download and review. We'd love to hear from you!

Citizens of well-developed liberal democracies enjoy an unprecedented standard of living, while a staggering number of people worldwide live in unbelievable poverty. It seems obvious that the well-off have moral obligations to those who are impoverished. But there's a question regarding the nature and extent of these obligations. Some hold that well-off societies and their citizens own substantial duties of humanitarian assistance to the global poor. Others claim that our duties are stronger than this; they claim that our duties to the global poor are a matter of justice. In her new book, Globalization and Global Justice: Shrinking Distance, Expanding Obligations (Cambridge University Press, 2012), Nicole Hassoun proposes a new kind of argument for what she calls “serious moral duties to the global poor.” She claims that in our globalized world, people all over the globe are subject to the coercive power of international institutions. She then argues that these coercive institutions are legitimate only if they can win the consent of those subject to them. From this, she concludes that international institutions owe to the global poor whatever is required in order to enable them to exercise a kind of minimal autonomy; and this autonomy requires access to food, shelter, water, and education. Hassoun's argument, then, is that familiar minimal requirements for legitimate coercion entail more extensive positive duties to the global poor.

Citizens of well-developed liberal democracies enjoy an unprecedented standard of living, while a staggering number of people worldwide live in unbelievable poverty. It seems obvious that the well-off have moral obligations to those who are impoverished. But there’s a question regarding the nature and extent of these obligations. Some hold that well-off societies and their citizens own substantial duties of humanitarian assistance to the global poor. Others claim that our duties are stronger than this; they claim that our duties to the global poor are a matter of justice. In her new book, Globalization and Global Justice: Shrinking Distance, Expanding Obligations (Cambridge University Press, 2012), Nicole Hassoun proposes a new kind of argument for what she calls “serious moral duties to the global poor.” She claims that in our globalized world, people all over the globe are subject to the coercive power of international institutions. She then argues that these coercive institutions are legitimate only if they can win the consent of those subject to them. From this, she concludes that international institutions owe to the global poor whatever is required in order to enable them to exercise a kind of minimal autonomy; and this autonomy requires access to food, shelter, water, and education. Hassoun’s argument, then, is that familiar minimal requirements for legitimate coercion entail more extensive positive duties to the global poor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Citizens of well-developed liberal democracies enjoy an unprecedented standard of living, while a staggering number of people worldwide live in unbelievable poverty. It seems obvious that the well-off have moral obligations to those who are impoverished. But there’s a question regarding the nature and extent of these obligations. Some hold that well-off societies and their citizens own substantial duties of humanitarian assistance to the global poor. Others claim that our duties are stronger than this; they claim that our duties to the global poor are a matter of justice. In her new book, Globalization and Global Justice: Shrinking Distance, Expanding Obligations (Cambridge University Press, 2012), Nicole Hassoun proposes a new kind of argument for what she calls “serious moral duties to the global poor.” She claims that in our globalized world, people all over the globe are subject to the coercive power of international institutions. She then argues that these coercive institutions are legitimate only if they can win the consent of those subject to them. From this, she concludes that international institutions owe to the global poor whatever is required in order to enable them to exercise a kind of minimal autonomy; and this autonomy requires access to food, shelter, water, and education. Hassoun’s argument, then, is that familiar minimal requirements for legitimate coercion entail more extensive positive duties to the global poor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Citizens of well-developed liberal democracies enjoy an unprecedented standard of living, while a staggering number of people worldwide live in unbelievable poverty. It seems obvious that the well-off have moral obligations to those who are impoverished. But there’s a question regarding the nature and extent of these obligations. Some hold that well-off societies and their citizens own substantial duties of humanitarian assistance to the global poor. Others claim that our duties are stronger than this; they claim that our duties to the global poor are a matter of justice. In her new book, Globalization and Global Justice: Shrinking Distance, Expanding Obligations (Cambridge University Press, 2012), Nicole Hassoun proposes a new kind of argument for what she calls “serious moral duties to the global poor.” She claims that in our globalized world, people all over the globe are subject to the coercive power of international institutions. She then argues that these coercive institutions are legitimate only if they can win the consent of those subject to them. From this, she concludes that international institutions owe to the global poor whatever is required in order to enable them to exercise a kind of minimal autonomy; and this autonomy requires access to food, shelter, water, and education. Hassoun’s argument, then, is that familiar minimal requirements for legitimate coercion entail more extensive positive duties to the global poor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Citizens of well-developed liberal democracies enjoy an unprecedented standard of living, while a staggering number of people worldwide live in unbelievable poverty. It seems obvious that the well-off have moral obligations to those who are impoverished. But there’s a question regarding the nature and extent of these obligations. Some hold that well-off societies and their citizens own substantial duties of humanitarian assistance to the global poor. Others claim that our duties are stronger than this; they claim that our duties to the global poor are a matter of justice. In her new book, Globalization and Global Justice: Shrinking Distance, Expanding Obligations (Cambridge University Press, 2012), Nicole Hassoun proposes a new kind of argument for what she calls “serious moral duties to the global poor.” She claims that in our globalized world, people all over the globe are subject to the coercive power of international institutions. She then argues that these coercive institutions are legitimate only if they can win the consent of those subject to them. From this, she concludes that international institutions owe to the global poor whatever is required in order to enable them to exercise a kind of minimal autonomy; and this autonomy requires access to food, shelter, water, and education. Hassoun’s argument, then, is that familiar minimal requirements for legitimate coercion entail more extensive positive duties to the global poor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices