Here is a link to my recent working paper on citizenship and social justice:
In this paper, I focus on the ways that distribution of social resources is framed by particular citizenship policies and implicit views of justice in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia, the three successor states of the former socialist federation of Yugoslavia. I was motivated to know more about the nature of the relation between citizenship and social resource distributive policies, but I also wanted to assess their justifiability and grounding in moral and political norms. Basically, by looking at the overlapping citizenship regimes that characterize relations among these successor states, I tried to determine the ways in which they do or do not conform to particular principles of social justice.
This is a working paper version, hopefully to become a journal article soon. So, I'm interested in your comments on the piece.
Also, my interests are somewhat driven towards what I believe is a field of international relations, ethics and political science that has remained relatively under-researched - something I would call the comparative ethics of citizenship. Namely, I'm interested in comparing different citizenship regimes against norms of ethics (not only of membership, but also of distribution, participation, equality...etc.). While there has been some good theorizing on the topic, very few authors address the issue from a comparative and theoretical perspective at the same time, especially when it comes to under-researched citizenship regimes, such as those in the Balkans (that the team of researchers associated with the CITSEE project in Edinburgh tried to analyze).
Anybody else having similar thoughts? Any ideas? Do you think comparing different citizenship regimes in the context of a set of ethical principles is a good idea?