Editorial

TL;DR: The editorial reflects on the first decade of the Journal of Global Ethics and announces changes in the editorial team. It also calls for submissions on the future of global ethics, inviting discussion on the shifting foci and events that spark the conversation.

Abstract: In April 2014, the Editorial for the first issue of the tenth year of Journal of Global Ethics presented a reflection upon the first decade of publication. At that time, the Journal announced the introduction of a new editor, the first to be engaged since it was conceived as an initiative of the University of Birmingham’s Center for the Study of Global Ethics by Donna Dickenson and the trio who would edit the journal, Sirkku Hellsten, Christien van den Anker, and Heather Widdows. That editor, Eric Palmer, will step away following this issue, completing ten years at the journal. Another long standing member of our editorial collective, Christine Koggel, expects to complete her service of more than five years with the upcoming December issue. Even if just a bit early, the moment seems right for another decade’s reflection as the editorial team changes and the journal approaches its third decade. The brief commentary of this editorial is also intended to prompt readers towards similar and more detailed conversation on the current state of global ethics, in response to a call for submissions that is announced further below. Has the subject area of global ethics shifted? One might indeed expect change – and tracking and contributing to such change should indicate the relevance of this journal and of the work that is pursued within its pages. One can hope for shifts that reflect improved analysis that marks progress in both the interdisciplinary work and the more traditional fields of study that the journal promotes. So, are the foci of ten years ago still familiar, are the events that spark the conversation similar, and are the contours of inquiry and the demands of the field much as they were a decade ago? Such discussion could proceed into great detail, and we wish to encourage that discussion through the call for submissions. Here we provide a mere illustration that looks to the past decade for comparison, taking our cue by drawing from the twenty-one responses that the journal received to our open call for a Forum on the future of global ethics that were published within the three issues for 2014. In those reflections we find some specific foci for discussion that have since receded, perhaps in light of political developments – the example of cosmopolitanism is suggested below. Other concerns have become more prominent, as new theoretical approaches have come into their own – such as the introduction of decolonial approaches to global ethics, presenting a proposed marked change, and perhaps a significant challenge, to the whole enterprise. The contributions by Nigel Dower and Jay Drydyk that opened the 2014 forum provided representative theoretical reflections upon the idea of global ethics itself. These authors inquired as to whether a universal ‘global ethic’ should be sought, or whether at least universal points of agreement on standards should be sought. Such an ideal of a global ethic may be contrasted with recognizing a plurality of ‘global ethics’ that may be viewed as providing varied, distinct standards and ideals, yet not necessarily inharmonious ones. In his contribution, ‘Why global justice matters’, Kok-Chor Tan indicated the advantages of universality, claiming that ‘a theory of global justice is needed for identifying what counts as legitimate problems of justice’, and is needed for tying these to duties, since ‘we cannot know