This paper contrasts conceptions of global distributive justice focused on natural resources with human rights–based approach. To emphasize the advantages of the latter, the paper analyzes three areas: (1) the methodology of normative theorizing about natural resources, (2) the category of natural resources, and (3) the view of the system of sovereignty over natural resources. Concerning the first, I argue that global justice conceptions misconstrue the claims made to natural resources and offer conceptions which are practically unfeasible. Concerning the second, I show that contemporary philosophy of justice downplays the plurality of meanings resources have for collectives and argue that conflicts over natural resources can best be accounted for using human rights. Finally, the paper looks at sovereignty over natural resources and argues that rather than dismissing it as unjustifiable on moral grounds, it should be reformed in line with valid principles of international law, most importantly with human rights.

本文将基于自然资源的全球分配正义概念与基于人权的方法进行了对比。为了强调后者的优势，本文分析了三个方面：（1）关于自然资源的规范化理论的方法；（2）自然资源的类别；（3）对自然资源的主权制度的观点。关于第一个问题，我认为全球正义概念错误地解释了对自然资源的主张，并提出了实际上不可行的概念。关于第二个问题，我表明当代正义哲学低估了资源对于集体的多重含义，并辩称与自然资源的冲突最好地归因于人权的使用。最后，