Reliance and Obligation

Abstract.  The fact that A has relied on B to do something is often taken to be a relevant factor in judging that B has a moral or legal obligation to do that thing. This paper investigates the relation between reliance and obligation. Specifically, the question is whether reliance and moral obligation are connected by some relation of conditionality. I consider four such relations—necessary condition, sufficient condition, necessary part of a sufficient condition, and independent necessary part of a sufficient condition. I argue that only the third one connects reliance and moral obligation, and that it does so in a trivial way. There are nevertheless two justifications for the prominence given to reliance in morality and law. First, reliance appears to be a sufficient condition of states of affairs involving concepts related to obligation. Second, reliance is a fairly reliable indicator of obligation.     

Breaking with tradition? South Africa–UK relations

Just over twenty years into its new era of democracy, South African foreign policy appears to be undergoing important changes in orientation and global positioning. Indeed, post-apartheid South African foreign policy has been steadily shifting away from a preoccupation with more traditional partnerships to developing alliances and coalitions with emerging economies and actors seeking to reform the global governance order. The paper seeks to understand the implications of this shift for South Africa's relationship with its most pivotal and enduring traditional ‘partner' – the United Kingdom. Thus, the paper proposes that this relationship can be best understood by considering it on different and at least partially contradictory levels, reflecting South Africa's own ambiguous identity as an emerging middle power.     

Driving Priorities in Risk‐based Regulation: What's the Problem?

Both risk‐based and problem‐centred regulatory techniques emphasize giving priority to matters that are serious and important. In the case of both risks and problems, however, issues of identification, selection, and prioritization involve inescapably normative and political choices. It is important, therefore, to understand why regulators target the risks and problems that they do; which factors drive such choices; and how regulation is affected when these factors pull in similar or opposite directions. Such an understanding provides a fresh framework for thinking about the challenges of both risk‐based and problem‐centred regulation. The analysis presented here does not oppose either risk‐based or problem‐centred regulation, but it illustrates why neither is as straightforward as simple calls for ‘better regulation’ may suggest, and it proposes ways in which key aspects of those challenges may be addressed.     

Fictions of Humanitarian Responsibility: Narrating Microfinance

This article explores competing narratives of humanitarian responsibility that emerge in the digital life writings of Westerners who seek to mitigate global poverty through the American microfinance website Kiva. Using word maps to identify dominant rhetorical gestures, data analysis to detect emergent patterns, and close readings to interpret individual tone and genre, I look at a range of ways in which individuals on Kiva narrate their understanding of humanitarian motivation. In addition to conventions of an ethics of care, norms of reciprocity, and perceptions of worldliness, these digital life writings include an increasing emphasis on the responsible lender as the antiheroic, perverse subject who impersonates a responsible citizen without fully claiming or accepting full responsibility for humanitarian actions. These different modes not only work to articulate connections between givers and receivers of aid but also to seek to recalibrate the grounds of what aid givers consider their own community. These different modes offer a window into what I call the fictionalization of humanitarianism, or the way in which humanitarian responsibility constitutes a layered anthology of collaborative and competing stories.     

The Rituals of Public Meetings

Public meetings are often referred to as “rituals” to denote a largely symbolic activity with little concrete meaning. This essay explores how public meeting rituals may produce very real impacts on participants and pragmatic outcomes. Whereas tangible outputs of rituals are not always evident, ritual theory suggests that participants can derive latent meaning and significant comfort from their application. Although rituals serve to reify certain norms or control behaviors, they may also reaffirm civic values and encourage group cohesion. A deeper appreciation of public meeting rituals will enable participants and officials to respond more effectively to restructured or nontraditional formats as well as better deal with the challenges of maintaining participation when rituals lose their meaning.