G lobal justice theorists often seek to combat poverty throughmonetary transfers that redistribute wealth from rich countries to poor ones. Such proposals rely on global financial institutions, including intergovernmental bodies and multinational businesses, to mediate the transfers. However, what if these proposals strengthen the very institutions that sustain and abet poverty in the first place? Moreover, are mere monetary transfers adequate to fulfill the material needs of the global poor? InGlobal Justice and Finance, TimHayward raises these questions to problematize long-standing assumptions in the global justice debate. He argues that scholars have been amiss in assuming that monetary transfers can adequately address global poverty. Insofar as their solution leaves our financialized economic paradigm unquestioned, it may even reinforce an unjust institutional order. Hayward exposes the normative commitments underlying this paradigm and, in the process, successfully recenters the global justice debate around finance. The book’s first few chapters are devoted to analyzing the international financial system that grounds Hayward’s critique of the global justice theorists. Among other things, he argues that the system is disadvantageous to the global poor because money does not reliably perform its function as a medium of exchange and store of value in most countries where they reside (22-23). Hayward identifies two reasons why the poor may be unable to exchange money for goods and services. First, the currency they receive may depreciate and thereby lead to difficulties in affording the required goods; in other words, its value may erode through exchange rate movements. Second, goods and services may be unavailable. Their availability requires a sustained investment in infrastructure and skills. Money will not improve somebody’s health if there are no roads to reach the doctor or, worse, if there are no doctors at all. Hayward concludes that monetary aid would have limited effectiveness at addressing the poor’s basic needs. Hayward’s skepticism about monetary aid’s efficacy leads him to challenge wellknown philosophical solutions to global poverty. In chapter 5, he takes aim at Peter Singer, who argues that individuals should make as much money as possible and then give it away to the most effective charity (the one that saves the most lives per unit of money).1 Some of Singer’s students followed their professor’s advice by finding jobs at Wall Street banks and hedge funds. Hayward criticizes Singer’s advice about giving money to the most effective charities because the latter’s economistic understanding of “effective” ignores the long-term needs of a community. For example, importing the cheapest bed nets from Asia may temporarily save

中文翻译：

---

全球司法和金融，蒂姆·海沃德（Tim Hayward）。牛津：牛津大学出版社，2019 年。240 页。

全球正义理论家经常寻求通过将财富从富国重新分配给穷国的货币转移来消除贫困。这些提议依赖于全球金融机构，包括政府间机构和跨国企业，来调解转移。然而，如果这些建议首先加强了维持和助长贫困的制度呢？此外，单纯的货币转移是否足以满足全球穷人的物质需求？在《全球正义与金融》中，蒂姆海沃德提出这些问题是为了对全球正义辩论中长期存在的假设进行质疑。他认为，学者们一直错误地假设货币转移可以充分解决全球贫困问题。只要他们的解决方案使我们的金融化经济范式毋庸置疑，它甚至可能强化不公正的制度秩序。海沃德揭示了这一范式背后的规范性承诺，并在此过程中成功地重新定位了围绕金融的全球正义辩论。这本书的前几章专门分析了海沃德对全球正义理论家的批评所依据的国际金融体系。除其他外，他认为该系统对全球穷人不利，因为在他们居住的大多数国家，货币不能可靠地发挥其作为交换和价值储存媒介的功能（22-23）。海沃德指出了穷人可能无法用金钱换取商品和服务的两个原因。首先，他们收到的货币可能会贬值，从而导致难以购买所需的商品；换句话说，它的价值可能会因汇率变动而受到侵蚀。其次，商品和服务可能无法获得。它们的可用性需要对基础设施和技能的持续投资。如果没有通往医生的道路，或者更糟糕的是，如果根本没有医生，金钱不会改善一个人的健康。海沃德的结论是，货币援助在满足穷人的基本需求方面效果有限。海沃德对货币援助的有效性持怀疑态度，这导致他挑战众所周知的全球贫困哲学解决方案。在第 5 章中，他瞄准了彼得·辛格（Peter Singer），他认为个人应该尽可能多地赚钱，然后将其捐给最有效的慈善机构（每单位金钱挽救最多生命的慈善机构）。1 Singer 的一些学生听从教授的建议，在华尔街银行和对冲基金找到工作。海沃德批评辛格关于向最有效的慈善机构捐款的建议，因为后者对“有效”的经济学理解忽略了社区的长期需求。例如，从亚洲进口最便宜的蚊帐可能会暂时节省