The Political Morality of Associational Life

What are the political obligations of apparently non-political associations and groups? Political theorists generally address such questions by either appealing to the private nature of associations and the normative importance of securing their autonomy, or the public qualities of associations and the normative importance of making them more accountable to demands of justice or democracy. Both approaches often under-appreciate the normative and practical significance of the meso-level systems in which such associations are embedded. Therefore, we must also consider the heteronomy of associations: those motivated and governed both by parochial concerns and systemic imperatives, making them difficult to locate on the private-public spectrum of institutions. This paper introduces the concept of “playing fields” as a way of making sense of this phenomenon. In playing fields many associations take on various public-facing responsibilities, despite their private status, by virtue of their systemic function. This is illustrated through discussion of business firms and universities. However, and on the other hand, the existence of justified playing fields also means it is sometimes undesirable to render various state and non-state institutions directly accountable to public norms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Political Research Quarterly
Published
2025-09-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129251376020
Primary Topic
Political Philosophy and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Political Morality of Associational Life

Abraham Singer
Political Research Quarterly
Political Philosophy and Ethics
article

The Political Morality of Associational Life

Abraham Singer
article en

Abstract

What are the political obligations of apparently non-political associations and groups? Political theorists generally address such questions by either appealing to the private nature of associations and the normative importance of securing their autonomy, or the public qualities of associations and the normative importance of making them more accountable to demands of justice or democracy. Both approaches often under-appreciate the normative and practical significance of the meso-level systems in which such associations are embedded. Therefore, we must also consider the heteronomy of associations: those motivated and governed both by parochial concerns and systemic imperatives, making them difficult to locate on the private-public spectrum of institutions. This paper introduces the concept of “playing fields” as a way of making sense of this phenomenon. In playing fields many associations take on various public-facing responsibilities, despite their private status, by virtue of their systemic function. This is illustrated through discussion of business firms and universities. However, and on the other hand, the existence of justified playing fields also means it is sometimes undesirable to render various state and non-state institutions directly accountable to public norms.

Political Research QuarterlyVol. 79(1)
Loyola University Chicago (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Political Philosophy and Ethics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.