The Ethics of Carbon Sink Conservation: National Sovereignty over Natural Resources, Fairness and Duties of Justice
|
|
- Willa Hudson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 The Ethics of Carbon Sink Conservation: National Sovereignty over Natural Resources, Fairness and Duties of Justice Fabian Schuppert, Institute for Collaborative Research in the Humanities, Queen's University Belfast First draft. Unfortunately unfinished, hence very short. This truly is a work in progress and a sandpit full of half- baked ideas, so comments definitely needed and very welcome! Introduction In order to successfully tackle existing pressing problems such as environmental degeneration, anthropogenic climate change and increasing biodiversity loss we have to among other things govern and manage our available stock of natural resources differently. With regard to the dangers of climate change, it seems particularly important to conserve and protect major carbon sinks, such as for instance tropical rainforests. As the title of the paper suggests when we want to determine how carbon sinks should be conserved, philosophers working on the issue usually focus on two aspects, namely duties of justice (and other moral duties) relevant to the discussion and the fact that within the current system most natural resources are under the control of sovereign states. Recently, some philosophers have written on the issue of natural resource governance/carbon sink preservation focusing on the question of whether national sovereignty over natural resources is at all normatively justifiable, including papers by Chris Armstrong (forthcoming; n.d.1) and myself (Schuppert 2014). While there are many good reasons to question the idea of national sovereignty over natural resources, for the purposes of this paper, I will take the idea that states control most of the resources found in their territory in a (more or less) sovereign fashion for granted. 1 Instead of questioning one of the most basic parameters of the current system, i.e. the so- called national resource privilege, I want to focus on the question of whether states with significant terrestrial carbon sinks have a duty to conserve these sinks for people far away in other countries and in the future, and how the burdens of carrying out such conservation should be distributed. At this point, some readers might wonder whether this is indeed an exercise worth engaging in, considering that Chris Armstrong (n.d.1; n.d.2) has already discussed the issue and found a plausible solution; according to Chris (n.d.1: 10-11), even if we assume that states enjoy sovereign rights over their resources, we have good reasons to hold that forested states ought to conserve 1 By taking the national resource privilege for granted, some will fear that I have committed myself to a viewpoint which either has to take all state actions regarding their resources as legitimate, or I will have to arbitrarily distinguish between ways of interpreting and re- imagining the resource privilege which I deem to be politically realistic/feasible and normatively justified, and a realist interpretation of the resource privilege, which takes its bearing from past and present resource governance practices. Alas, there is some truth to this objection. However, since I firmly believe that normative analysis of competing claims under non- ideal circumstances is important, I take this objection not to be a deal- breaker. 1 P age
2 their resources and that benefitting states have duties of fairness to share the financial burden of doing so, at least if we assume that rainforest protection goes hand in hand with fewer opportunities for forested states. So is there anything this paper can add or challenge? My aim in this short paper is not so much to challenge Chris's argument in particular but rather to add a couple of wrinkles to and raise some potential issues for the general argument as such and to see whether taking some additional factors into consideration changes our overall assessment of the relevant duties and responsibilities involved. In so doing, I hope to show that the ethics of carbon sink conservation not only is a tricky issue, but also that our answer might need to be embedded in a wider analysis of what climate justice requires and how duties change (or not) under non- ideal circumstances. I. Setting the Scene Since I do not want to misrepresent Chris's arguments, let me briefly sketch the main contours of the general argument I want to further investigate. 2 The basic argument goes as follows: states with rainforest have a duty to protect these rainforest as part of the earth's carbon sinks. This duty is a duty not only towards the citizens of the state in question but a duty also to all other people on the planet. However, rainforest protection comes with costs, both direct (i.e. the actual costs of preserving the forests) and indirect (e.g. opportunity costs through not commercially exploiting the rainforests). Considering that citizens in the so- called developed world need large amounts of the absorptive capacity offered by rainforests and considering that forested states cannot exclude others from using their carbon sinks, there seems to exist a duty of fairness to share the costs of rainforest preservation. In short, developing forested states ought to preserve their rainforests but the costs of doing so should (at least to some significant degree) be taken up by benefitting developing states. This is the stage on which my arguments take place. Needless to say, the stage operates with some simplifications and abstractions, which are only intended to make the arguments involved clearer, even if reality might be more complex. For instance, I assume that the forested states in question are developing states with low to medium GHG footprint. For reasons of clarity and simplicity I will focus on two examples, Ecuador and Papua New Guinea, both of which have significant rainforest cover and low to medium GHG footprints. 3 Moreover, I assume (at least initially) that the biggest benefiters of carbon sink conservation are high emitting developed 2 For the remainder of the paper I will use this general argument as my starting point, rather than dealing in- depth with Chris's arguments. 3 Papua New Guinea's annual per capita emissions of CO 2 are around 0.6 metric tons, while Ecuador's annual per capita emissions of CO 2 are around 2.2 metric tons. 2 P age
3 countries. Using these assumptions as the background, I now want to discuss some possible challenges to and wrinkles of the original argument. II. Wrinkles, Twists and Challenges II.I. Historical Responsibility and Benefitting As stated above, normative arguments about who should compensate whom for climate injustice are based on abstractions. However, with regard to the argument presented above, namely that the developed countries benefit and thus should pay, there are some obvious issues: first, the people who will benefit from rainforest protection are first and foremost people who aren't even born, yet; second, the reason why we currently face anthropogenic climate change has a lot to do with historical emissions and long- standing practices of overconsumption, which raises the question if the reason why some should pay for rainforest protection is not their historical responsibility rather than that they benefit. Let me briefly expand on both these points. First, the problem with basing one's argument for carbon sink conservation on benefits from that very conservation is the obvious time- lag involved. If Ecuador and Papua New Guinea decide not to exploit their rainforests and to actively preserve them for the benefit of higher GHG absorption, it is rather questionable whether the main beneficiaries of this policy are currently living people from the global North. In fact, considering the fact that the effects of climate change are and will continue to be most severe for extremely vulnerable people in developing countries, one could argue that the people who will most benefit from carbon sink conservation are future people in the developing world in poor and vulnerable circumstances. If the argument for paying for Ecuador's and Papua New Guinea's efforts to maintain their carbon sinks and to forgo development opportunities is based on benefits, then, it seems odd to assume that currently living people in the global North are the obvious payees. Moreover, if we really focus only on the benefits from carbon sink preservation it looks as if quickly developing and highly populated countries such as China should shoulder more of the burden than countries with smaller populations and decreasing emissions, despite their historical responsibility. Again, this might seem odd. Second, as already implicitly alluded to above, one could think that what does the normative work here is the idea of historical responsibility rather than benefitting. 4 It is fairly uncontroversial to 4 Another alternative would be to base the argument on a country's ability to pay. This is an option I will not discuss here. The reason for this is that I take the most convincing forms of the ability to pay principle (APP) to be second order forms, meaning that the APP would operate on a lower level, for instance within the group of historically responsible states in order to determine which country has to pay how much. 3 P age
4 claim that anthropogenic climate change was largely caused by countries of the global North. 5 Hence, it would seem logical that if some countries, such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea, have to forgo certain benefits now and thus make sacrifices, that the countries which were largely responsible for bringing this situation about should pay. Why should the beneficiaries pay if the benefits they accrue are nor directly connected to a form of unjust enrichment or wrongful advantage? 6 One answer to this question is the idea of freeriding: we have an issue with somebody freeriding on somebody else's costly efforts, for instance, if the developed countries reap large part of the benefits of the developing countries' costly preservation measures. While this rings true, the issue I want to get at is that not all forms of freeriding on somebody else's costly efforts call for compensation or burden- sharing. Imagine you spend a lot of time and money on maintaining the flowerbeds in our inner courtyard. While I truly enjoy looking at the beautiful flowers and I even value your efforts, it seems that I don't owe you compensation for your work, since it was your free decision to maintain the flowerbeds. What seems different in the carbon sink protection case is that a) Ecuador and Papua New Guinea do not freely decide to maintain their sinks but they do so out of a sense of justice (let's assume that is true), and b) the only reason why Ecuador and Papua New Guinea at all have to preserve all these sinks is that the global North caused anthropogenic climate change. Thus, the issue here does not really seem to be the benefitting but the fact that developing states are historically responsible and that the benefits they will gain were not voluntarily or accidentally created but because actions by the developed countries imposed obligations of justice onto Ecuador and Papua New Guinea in a form they would not have had without these actions, which implies that any benefits for the developed countries without compensation could be considered cases of wrongful freeriding. In light of both these reasons it seems that we should change the justification for burden- sharing in the original argument: instead of benefitting it should either be historical responsibility or wrongful freeriding. Otherwise, if we were to focus on the beneficiaries only, we might end up with a paradoxical situation of the following kind: A caused climate change, B has to sacrifice development in favour of carbon sink conservation and the vulnerable and poor future people of populous country C have to pay for the costs incurred by B. 5 The statement regarding causation is indeed rather uncontroversial, whether normatively anything follows from such historical responsibility is much debated, since theorists disagree whether the responsibility in question is merely causal or a form of outcome responsibility or even moral responsibility. 6 See recent papers by Ed Page (2012) and Dan Butt (forthcoming) for defending the idea that the beneficiary pays principle is most convincing in cases in which the benefits stem from unjust enrichment or wrongful advantage. 4 P age
5 II.II. Isolationism and Buying- Out The second issue I want to raise is the argument's isolationism and its potential consequences for supporting a buy- out argument. In its original form the argument for carbon sink conservation in general and rainforest protection in particular seems somewhat isolationist, meaning that it focuses on analysing relevant principles of justice and fairness for a small(- ish) issue within a much broader context, to wit, global and intergenerational (climate) justice. While there are good reasons not to deal with the issue of global and intergenerational (climate) justice all in one go, the question arises of whether singling out the issue of rainforest protection and carbon sink conservation is not overly isolationist. Why might this be the case? The basic argument I introduced above holds that forested developing states have duties of justice to conserve their terrestrial carbon sinks, while benefitting developed states have a duty of fairness to pay for the costs incurred by the forested developing nations. This way of framing the argument, though, specifies two duties without taking the wider context into consideration. On the one hand, forested developing states are simply assumed to have duties of justice to countries which are both historically responsible for the precarious situation we're in and non- complying with regard to drastically lowering their GHG emissions. In a certain way, then, it seems as if the duty of states such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea is assumed to be independent of the overall context (a point I will return to in section II.III.), which does indeed strike me as being quite isolationist. Moreover, precisely because of this isolationism the original argument might even be considered to be a kind of buying- out argument for the developed high emitting nations of the global North. Let me explain. The original argument claims that Ecuador and Papua New Guinea have a duty to preserve their carbon sinks independently of what other states do. In exchange, because states like the US and the UK benefit from Ecuador's and Papua New Guinea's costly efforts, the US and the UK have to pay Ecuador and Papua New Guinea. One possible interpretation of this way of reasoning is with a slight ironic twist - that the US and the UK thus seem to have paid Ecuador and Papua New Guinea for conserving their carbon sinks so that the US and the UK do not have to mitigate themselves. While this condition is obviously not explicitly part of the argument, and while this interpretation might very much go against the intentions of the people who use the original argument, there is nothing to suggest in this isolationist argument that the US and the UK would have to take on any mitigation commitments as part of the deal. In that way, the original argument can due to its isolationism- be seen as an implicit buying- out argument, meaning that 5 P age
6 states such as the UK and the US simply buy their way out of mitigation obligations by paying states like Ecuador and Papua New Guinea for their conservation efforts. 7 In order to avoid such a conclusion, it seems that the original argument needs to be contextualised within a wider discussion of duties of climate justice. Instead of focusing on sharing the costs of the discharging of one particular duty, we should rather see how this duty stands in relation to other duties and what kind of commitments other states must make in order to fulfil the conditions of fairness. II.III. Which Duties? Whose Duties? And Who Owes Whom What? Following on from the conclusion of the previous paragraph, I briefly want to highlight some potential issues with regard to contextualizing the argument. In particular, I want to flag up some questions concerning the different duties, duty bearers and duty addressees which frame the original argument. From the viewpoint of states such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea the question is what the relevant duties in the case of carbon sink preservation are. One relevant duty is, at least if one follows recent functionalist accounts of state legitimacy, every state's duty to meet its citizens basic needs and to realise its citizens' fundamental interests (Stilz 2009). On top of that, in order to claim legitimacy for their territorial possessions we could, following Lea (Ypi forthcoming), argue that states have a duty to advance globally just reciprocal relations. In addition, we could argue for global and intergenerational duties of (climate) justice, for instance, that states and individuals should aim to avoid significant future harm if doing so is not overly costly. While it is due to issues of uncertainty and fragmentation of cause and effect certainly difficult to precisely specify what kinds of actions are ruled out by one's global and intergenerational duties of (climate) justice, even such a vague formulation will give us a useful normative yardstick to operate with. 8 What is interesting to notice is that all three of these duties obviously also apply to states like the US and the UK. So how does the developing states' duty to conserve their carbon sinks follow from this set of duties and which aspects might have been missing from the original argument? 7 To be fair, there is no indication in the original argument that paying states like Ecuador and Papua New Guinea should be seen as sufficient commitment, or as a way of buying themselves out, by states like the UK and the US. However, the isolationism of the original argument does seem to raise that worry. 8 This is not to say that such a vague formulation would be without controversy, not at all. However, for the purpose of this paper I want to assume that certain duties of global and intergenerational (climate) justice exist and that they rule out certain trivial well- being gains in light of the risk of future suffering, even though such assessments across time and space are notoriously difficult to make. In other words, what I want to avoid is moving this discussion into the direction of global and intergenerational justice scepticism. My aim here is not to challenge the underlying justice discourse but to point out potential flaws in too quickly reaching wide- ranging conclusions. 6 P age
7 Again, from the viewpoint of states such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea the obvious place to start is the duty to meet their citizens' needs and realise their fundamental interests. This obviously implies providing a safe and sustainable environment, which in turn includes carbon sink preservation. However, if it were only about the citizens of Ecuador and Papua New Guinea, neither state would need to conserve all of their terrestrial carbon sinks, as long as their GHG footprints stay within reasonable limits. In fact, Papua New Guinea's annual per capita GHG footprint is so small that the state could easily be carbon neutral and still exploit the majority of its rainforest resources. The only reason why this is not the case is that other countries have a) emitted too much in the past, b) continue to emit too much and c) that Ecuador and Papua New Guinea have neither a way of excluding others from using their carbon sinks, nor a away of protecting themselves against the negative consequences of climate change (which was caused by others). 9 Thus, in order to protect their citizens as well as they can, Ecuador and Papua New Guinea might have indeed strong reasons to maintain all their carbon sinks. At the same time this conclusion seems deeply unfair and it only seems to come about because other states fail to discharge all three of their abovementioned duties: i) state like the US and UK fail to adequately protect their citizens' needs and interests by advancing utterly unsustainable policies, ii) states like the UK and the US undermine the idea of globally just reciprocal relations by overconsuming and imposing severe risks on other people, as well as by forcing states such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea to adopt policies they would not have otherwise had to adopt; iii) states like the UK and the US obviously also jeopardise future people's survival and well- being, even though not doing so would in many cases not be overly costly. Even if we were to hold that states like the US do possibly fulfil the first duty (i.e. meet their citizens' basic needs and fundamental interests), it seems that there is something normatively quite objectionable about Ecuador and Papua New Guinea having to discharge a certain duty (i.e. carbon sink conservation) and incur some costs because the UK and the US fail to adequately discharge their duties. In this particular case it seems that Ecuador and Papua New Guinea are forced to take up the slack because of the US and the UK (and other nations) not doing their part. However, this obviously raises the question of whether states such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea do indeed have an obligation to take up the slack, considering that a) other states are non- complying and b) the only reason why we are in the current situation is other states' overconsumption (Hohl and Roser 2011). On top of that the states mentioned in sub- clause a) and b) are largely the same states (though not necessarily so), meaning that the one's responsible for the mess are also the one's who do not help 9 To this you can add d) that Papua New Guinea might want to raise its emissions, as part of its further development. Still, even if Papua New Guinea tripled its annual GHG emissions, it could easily use large parts of its terrestrial carbon sinks for other purposes. 7 P age
8 to clean it up (or at least they do not help as much as they should). It does seem to be a perfectly feasible response by forested developing countries to call for major mitigation commitments by the historically responsible and thus far non- complying developed countries, before committing to any sort of costly carbon sink conservation program. The reason why such a position would also not necessarily conflict with developed states' duty to care for their own citizens is that in the current regime, states like Ecuador and Papua New Guinea are simply unable to protect their citizens adequately. If the global North causes runaway climate change, it might be for countries like Ecuador and Papua New Guinea much wiser to exploit part of their resources and preserve only parts of their carbon sinks, since the additional funds can be used to advance adaptation measures and reduce overall vulnerability to climate change induced harms. If these arguments are sound, it seems clear that a scheme which simply offers financial compensation for the incurred costs is inadequate. Instead of truly addressing the question of who has which duties of justice and what fairness requires, it takes one global duty for granted (namely the duty of developing states to protect their carbon sinks) and introduces a less than adequate fairness mechanism (namely that benefitting states should share the costs of carbon sink protection). In the absence of globally reciprocal duties of justice, though, it seems at least questionable that Ecuador and Papua New Guinea have duties vis à vis people in other countries to protect their carbon sinks, and even if such duties exist their extent might be limited. In the first place it seems each and every state's responsibility to take care of its own citizens. Then it is every state's duty to advance globally just reciprocal relations. Considering only these two duties the onus clearly seems to lie on non- complying developed states and not on forested developing states. On top of that the question of global and intergenerational justice also seems to call for fair burden sharing and compliance in mitigation efforts by all affected parties. Again, it is unclear that in its absence developing states have a duty to others to conserve their carbon sinks. Possibly they do, especially to future generations, but we need further arguments to properly establish this case. In addition to the arguments just rehearsed, there is another important consideration which seems to play an important role for Ecuador's and Papua New Guinea's ability to discharge duty one and two (i.e. providing for their citizens and advance global just reciprocity), namely, self- determination. 10 As I have argued elsewhere, both in order to provide for their citizens and in order to be free from unhealthy forms of global domination states do seem to require a right to self- determination (Schuppert 2013). 10 This is obviously an en- vogue topic, see the papers at this workshop as well as the recent symposium in International Theory (2014). 8 P age
9 This right to self- determination might, under non- ideal circumstances, provide us with a further reason to assume that under conditions of non- compliance, that is, in situations in which developed countries fail to commit to substantial mitigation commitments, Ecuador and Papua New Guinea do not have a duty of justice to others to conserve their carbon sinks (but they probably owe conservation to their own citizens, present and future). However, one could also argue that 'unilaterally' imposed climate change (i.e. climate change caused by developed states but affecting all states) undermines the right to self- determination of developing countries and that this is another strong reason why first the developed states have to do their fair share (i.e. mitigate radically and work towards fulfilling their three aforementioned duties) before states like Ecuador and Papua New Guinea have to make any sacrifices or incur any costs. On such a reading, tacking up the slack would be out of the question. Overall then, the duties involved in settling the issue of carbon sink conservation might be more complex and diverse than first anticipated. Considering the fact that many developed states seem to be not only historically responsible but also non- complying and thus imposing burdens on others, raises the question of whether we should not start by asking the question of what these states owe others as a duty of justice, prior to moving onto the question whether self- determining states such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea owe others the conservation of their carbon sinks. This is not to say that such duties do not exist at all, but to start with these duties seems somewhat premature. III. Summary While there is obviously a lot one can add, I think the discussion thus far has already shown that the duties the original argument alluded to are not as clear cut as initially assumed. In fact, I think I have given several (hopefully good) reasons why we might want to further contextualise our analysis of the ethics of carbon sink conservation, even if that does not make the analysis any easier. Whether states such as Ecuador and Papua New Guinea really do have a duty of justice towards people in the developed world to protect their terrestrial carbon sinks is questionable, and so is the extent of these duties of justice (if they exist). Moreover the assumption that fairness simply demands that benefitting states share the burden of carbon sink conservation is also questionable. Bibliography Armstrong, Chris (forthcoming): 'Against "Permanent Sovereignty" over natural resources', Politics, Philosophy & Economics. 9 P age
10 Armstrong, Chris (n.d.1): 'Climate justice and territorial rights', Unpublished Manuscript. Available at: (accessed 23 March 2014). Armstrong, Chris (n.d.2): 'Sharing the costs of rainforest protection', Unpublished Manuscript. Butt Daniel (forthcoming): 'A doctrine quite new and altogether untenable : defending the beneficiary pays principle', Journal of Applied Philosophy. Hohl, Sabine and Dominic Roser (2011): 'Stepping in for the polluters? Climate justice under partial compliance', Analyse & Kritik 33 (2): Page, Edward (2012): 'Give it up for climate change: a defence of the beneficiary pays principle', International Theory 4 (2): Schuppert, Fabian (2013): 'Collective agency and global non- domination', In: Cosmopolitanism versus non- cosmopolitanism: critiques, defenses, reconceptualizations, ed. by Gillian Brock (Oxford: Oxford University Press), Schuppert, Fabian (2014): 'Beyond the national resource privilege: towards an International Court of the Environment', International Theory 6 (1): Stilz, Anna (2009): 'Why do states have territorial rights?', International Theory 1(2): Ypi, Lea (forthcoming): 'A permissive theory of territorial rights', European Journal of Philosophy doi: /j x 10 P age
Introduction: Justice, Climate Change, and the Distribution of Natural Resources
Res Publica (2016) 22:3 8 DOI 10.1007/s11158-015-9307-9 Introduction: Justice, Climate Change, and the Distribution of Natural Resources Fabian Schuppert 1 Published online: 9 December 2015 Springer Science+Business
More informationAn appealing and original aspect of Mathias Risse s book On Global
BOOK SYMPOSIUM: ON GLOBAL JUSTICE On Collective Ownership of the Earth Anna Stilz An appealing and original aspect of Mathias Risse s book On Global Justice is his argument for humanity s collective ownership
More informationWhat Is Unfair about Unequal Brute Luck? An Intergenerational Puzzle
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-018-00053-5 What Is Unfair about Unequal Brute Luck? An Intergenerational Puzzle Simon Beard 1 Received: 16 November 2017 /Revised: 29 May 2018 /Accepted: 27 December 2018
More informationHarry Ridgewell: So how have islands in the South Pacific been affected by rising sea levels in the last 10 years?
So how have islands in the South Pacific been affected by rising sea levels in the last 10 years? Well, in most places the maximum sea level rise has been about 0.7 millimetres a year. So most places that's
More informationCommentary on Idil Boran, The Problem of Exogeneity in Debates on Global Justice
Commentary on Idil Boran, The Problem of Exogeneity in Debates on Global Justice Bryan Smyth, University of Memphis 2011 APA Central Division Meeting // Session V-I: Global Justice // 2. April 2011 I am
More informationPOLITICAL AUTHORITY AND PERFECTIONISM: A RESPONSE TO QUONG
SYMPOSIUM POLITICAL LIBERALISM VS. LIBERAL PERFECTIONISM POLITICAL AUTHORITY AND PERFECTIONISM: A RESPONSE TO QUONG JOSEPH CHAN 2012 Philosophy and Public Issues (New Series), Vol. 2, No. 1 (2012): pp.
More informationControversy Liberalism, Democracy and the Ethics of Votingponl_
, 223 227 Controversy Liberalism, Democracy and the Ethics of Votingponl_1359 223..227 Annabelle Lever London School of Economics This article summarises objections to compulsory voting developed in my
More informationCONTEXTUALISM AND GLOBAL JUSTICE
CONTEXTUALISM AND GLOBAL JUSTICE 1. Introduction There are two sets of questions that have featured prominently in recent debates about distributive justice. One of these debates is that between universalism
More informationComments from ACCA June 2011
ISAE 3410 ASSURANCE ENGAGEMENTS ON GREENHOUSE GAS STATEMENTS A proposed International Standard on Assurance Engagements issued for comment by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Comments
More informationHuman Rights Council Interactive Debate on Human Rights and Climate Change 18 June 2009
Human Rights Council Interactive Debate on Human Rights and Climate Change 18 June 2009 Dalindyebo Shabalala, Managing Attorney, Geneva Office of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) Introduction
More informationRepublicanism: Midway to Achieve Global Justice?
Republicanism: Midway to Achieve Global Justice? (Binfan Wang, University of Toronto) (Paper presented to CPSA Annual Conference 2016) Abstract In his recent studies, Philip Pettit develops his theory
More informationIntroduction. Cambridge University Press Global Distributive Justice Chris Armstrong Excerpt More information
Introduction Protests in favour of global justice are becoming a familiar part of the political landscape. Placards demanding a more just, fair or equal world present a colourful accompaniment to every
More informationPolitics between Philosophy and Democracy
Leopold Hess Politics between Philosophy and Democracy In the present paper I would like to make some comments on a classic essay of Michael Walzer Philosophy and Democracy. The main purpose of Walzer
More informationPhil 108, April 24, 2014 Climate Change
Phil 108, April 24, 2014 Climate Change The problem of inefficiency: Emissions of greenhouse gases involve a (negative) externality. Roughly: a harm or cost that isn t paid for. For example, when I pay
More informationBusiness Ethics Journal Review
Business Ethics Journal Review SCHOLARLY COMMENTS ON ACADEMIC BUSINESS ETHICS businessethicsjournalreview.com Do I Think Corporations Should Be Able to Vote Now? Kenneth Silver 1 A COMMENTARY ON John Hasnas
More informationInstitutional Cosmopolitanism and the Duties that Human. Rights Impose on Individuals
Institutional Cosmopolitanism and the Duties that Human Ievgenii Strygul Rights Impose on Individuals Date: 18-06-2012 Bachelor Thesis Subject: Political Philosophy Docent: Rutger Claassen Student Number:
More informationGlobal Justice and Two Kinds of Liberalism
Global Justice and Two Kinds of Liberalism Christopher Lowry Dept. of Philosophy, Queen s University christopher.r.lowry@gmail.com Paper prepared for CPSA, June 2008 In a recent article, Nagel (2005) distinguishes
More informationPolitical Obligation 3
Political Obligation 3 Dr Simon Beard Sjb316@cam.ac.uk Centre for the Study of Existential Risk Summary of this lecture How John Rawls argues that we have an obligation to obey the law, whether or not
More informationDisclaimer: All translations of official Ecuadorian documents were made by personnel of the Defensoría del Pueblo del Ecuador.
Disclaimer: All translations of official Ecuadorian documents were made by personnel of the Defensoría del Pueblo del Ecuador. 1.Please describe, in your view, the relationship between climate change and
More informationTo cite this article: Anna Stilz (2011): ON THE RELATION BETWEEN DEMOCRACY AND RIGHTS, Representation, 47:1, 9-17
This article was downloaded by: [Princeton University] On: 31 January 2013, At: 09:54 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
More informationWhy do we need voluntary commitments?
Why do we need voluntary commitments? In current regime, non-annex 1 countries wishing to take commitments face rather lengthy procedure full of obstacles and uncertainties In the future regime, voluntary
More informationPriorities for Nairobi: Charting the course for a safe climate post-2012
Priorities for Nairobi: Charting the course for a safe climate post-2012 WWF Position Paper November 2006 At this UN meeting on climate change governments can open a new chapter in the history of the planet.
More informationComments on David Miller, Territorial Rights: Concept and Justification 1 Colleen Murphy
Comments on David Miller, Territorial Rights: Concept and Justification 1 Colleen Murphy In his article Territorial Rights: Concept and Justification, David Miller provides a thoughtful and sophisticated
More informationBefore I may do so, allow me to paraphrase a passage from the Genesis chapter 1, verse 26 of the Bible where it states that our
MINISTRY FOR ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION AND CLIMATE CHANGE PARLIAMENTARY STATEMENT BY HON. JOHN PUNDARI, CMG, MP 22 March 2016 I thank you for giving me the floor to speak. For the benefit of all you
More informationLanguage and climate action conceptions and expressions of responsibility and obligation
DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES Language and climate action conceptions and expressions of responsibility and obligation Professor Kjersti Fløttum 23.01.2018 EnergyLab/DIGSSCORE meeting Introduction Research
More informationWe recommend you cite the published version. The publisher s URL is:
Cole, P. (2015) At the borders of political theory: Carens and the ethics of immigration. European Journal of Political Theory, 14 (4). pp. 501-510. ISSN 1474-8851 Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/27940
More informationThe limits of background justice. Thomas Porter. Social Philosophy & Policy volume 30, issues 1 2. Cambridge University Press
The limits of background justice Thomas Porter Social Philosophy & Policy volume 30, issues 1 2 Cambridge University Press Abstract The argument from background justice is that conformity to Lockean principles
More informationThe limits of background justice. Thomas Porter. Rawls says that the primary subject of justice is what he calls the basic structure of
The limits of background justice Thomas Porter Rawls says that the primary subject of justice is what he calls the basic structure of society. The basic structure is, roughly speaking, the way in which
More informationQuong on Proportionality in Self-defense and the Stringency Principle
Uwe Steinhoff 2016 Uwe Steinhoff Quong on Proportionality in Self-defense and the Stringency Principle Jonathan Quong endorses a strict proportionality criterion for justified self-defense, that is, one
More informationThe Republican Tragedy of the Commons: The Inefficiency of Democracy in the Light of Climate Change. by Ivo Wallimann Helmer 1
The Republican Tragedy of the Commons: The Inefficiency of Democracy in the Light of Climate Change by Ivo Wallimann Helmer 1 Abstract This paper argues that an analysis of the dissatisfactory outcomes
More informationAndrew Blowers There is basically then, from what you re saying, a fairly well defined scientific method?
Earth in crisis: environmental policy in an international context The Impact of Science AUDIO MONTAGE: Headlines on climate change science and policy The problem of climate change is both scientific and
More informationA Few Contributions of Economic Theory to Social Welfare Policy Analysis
The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare Volume 25 Issue 4 December Article 9 December 1998 A Few Contributions of Economic Theory to Social Welfare Policy Analysis Michael A. Lewis State University of
More informationWhat Cancun can deliver for the climate
What Cancun can deliver for the climate Greenpeace briefing Greenpeace on-call phone in Cancun: +(52 1) 998 202 6181 Cindy Baxter: +52 1 998 216 1099 Over the course of 2010 we've seen international climate
More informationInput to Phase 3 Consultation: World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguard Framework
Oslo, March 11th 2016 Input to Phase 3 Consultation: World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguard Framework As a follow up to our inputs during the Brussels consultation in late January, we hereby submit
More informationINTRODUCTION: Responsibility in International Political Philosophy
INTRODUCTION: Responsibility in International Political Philosophy International political philosophy is concerned with questions of justice at the global level. Four fields of enquiry are particularly
More informationCriminal Justice Without Moral Responsibility: Addressing Problems with Consequentialism Dane Shade Hannum
51 Criminal Justice Without Moral Responsibility: Addressing Problems with Consequentialism Dane Shade Hannum Abstract: This paper grants the hard determinist position that moral responsibility is not
More informationHeikki Patomäki Professor of World Politics Department of Political and Economic Studies University of Helsinki
Heikki Patomäki Professor of World Politics Department of Political and Economic Studies University of Helsinki » Reflexive self-regulation consciously aiming at planetary homeostasis there is no automatic
More informationNGO and CSO Closing Statement Climate Action Pacific Partnerships (CAPP) Event, Grand Pacific Hotel, Suva, Fiji 04 July 2017
NGO and CSO Closing Statement Climate Action Pacific Partnerships (CAPP) Event, Grand Pacific Hotel, Suva, Fiji 04 July 2017 Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentleman My name is Genevieve Jiva from the,
More information2. Tovey and Share argue: In effect, all sociologies are national sociologies Do you agree?
1.Do Tovey and Share provide an adequate understanding of contemporary Irish society? (How does their work compare with previous attempts at a sociological overview of Irish Society?) Tovey and Share provide
More information-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.
Citation: 101 Va. L. Rev. 1105 2015 Provided by: University of Virginia Law Library Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Mon Jul 11 15:53:46 2016 -- Your use of this HeinOnline
More informationJoint NGO Response to the Draft Copenhagen Declaration
Introduction Joint NGO Response to the Draft Copenhagen Declaration 13 February 2018 The AIRE Centre, Amnesty International, the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre, the European Implementation Network,
More information1100 Ethics July 2016
1100 Ethics July 2016 perhaps, those recommended by Brock. His insight that this creates an irresolvable moral tragedy, given current global economic circumstances, is apt. Blake does not ask, however,
More informationWe the Stakeholders: The Power of Representation beyond Borders? Clara Brandi
REVIEW Clara Brandi We the Stakeholders: The Power of Representation beyond Borders? Terry Macdonald, Global Stakeholder Democracy. Power and Representation Beyond Liberal States, Oxford, Oxford University
More informationSubmission to the Independent Media Inquiry
Submission to the Independent Media Inquiry Chris Berg Research Fellow, Institute of Public Affairs October 2011 1 Introduction The Independent Inquiry into Media and Media Regulation raises troubling
More informationThe public vs. private value of health, and their relationship. (Review of Daniel Hausman s Valuing Health: Well-Being, Freedom, and Suffering)
The public vs. private value of health, and their relationship (Review of Daniel Hausman s Valuing Health: Well-Being, Freedom, and Suffering) S. Andrew Schroeder Department of Philosophy, Claremont McKenna
More informationLast time we discussed a stylized version of the realist view of global society.
Political Philosophy, Spring 2003, 1 The Terrain of a Global Normative Order 1. Realism and Normative Order Last time we discussed a stylized version of the realist view of global society. According to
More informationBetween Equality and Freedom of Choice: Educational Policy for the Least Advantaged
Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain Annual Conference New College, Oxford 1-3 April 2016 Between Equality and Freedom of Choice: Educational Policy for the Least Advantaged Mr Nico Brando
More informationComment on Andrew Walton The Basic Structure Objection and the Institutions of a Property-Owning Democracy
Analyse & Kritik 01/2013 ( Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart) S. 187192 Carina Fourie Comment on Andrew Walton The Basic Structure Objection and the Institutions of a Property-Owning Democracy Abstract: Andrew
More informationEuropean Environmental Law: After Lisbon, 4th edn
222 BOOKS European Environmental Law: After Lisbon, 4th edn Jan H Jans and Hans H B Vedder Europa Law Publishing, 2012; v xvi + 560 pages; 52, $90 (softback); ISBN 978 9 089 52106 4. Despite the ongoing
More informationBradley v. American Smelting & Refining Co.,
Bradley v. American Smelting & Refining Co., 709 P. 2d 782 (Wash. 1984) Case Analysis Questions CA Q. 1 What court decided this case? The Washington Supreme Court. CA Q. 2 Is this an appeal from a lower
More informationJOURNALISM AND MASS COMMUNICATION Vol. II - Communicating A Politics of Sustainable Development - John Barry
COMMUNICATING A POLITICS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT John Barry Reader, School of Politics, The Queen s University of Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK Keywords: sustainable development, democracy, development
More informationReply to Arneson. Russel Keat. 1. The (Supposed) Non Sequitur
Analyse & Kritik 01/2009 ( c Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart) p. 153157 Russel Keat Reply to Arneson Abstract: Arneson says that he disagrees both with the main claims of Arneson (1987) and with my criticisms
More informationEach copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.
Comment on Steiner's Liberal Theory of Exploitation Author(s): Steven Walt Source: Ethics, Vol. 94, No. 2 (Jan., 1984), pp. 242-247 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2380514.
More information-Capitalism, Exploitation and Injustice-
UPF - MA Political Philosophy Modern Political Philosophy Elisabet Puigdollers Mas -Capitalism, Exploitation and Injustice- Introduction Although Marx fiercely criticized the theories of justice and some
More informationCHAPTER 1 PROLOGUE: VALUES AND PERSPECTIVES
CHAPTER 1 PROLOGUE: VALUES AND PERSPECTIVES Final draft July 2009 This Book revolves around three broad kinds of questions: $ What kind of society is this? $ How does it really work? Why is it the way
More informationSPECIAL ISSUE ON TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE
Founded in June 1950 R I A UDK 327 ISSN 0486-6096 THE REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS BELGRADE, VOL. LXI, No. 1138 1139, APRIL SEPTEMBER 2010 SPECIAL ISSUE ON TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE Dragan Simeunović Judith
More informationSamaritanism and Political Obligation: A Response to Christopher Wellman s Liberal Theory of Political Obligation *
DISCUSSION Samaritanism and Political Obligation: A Response to Christopher Wellman s Liberal Theory of Political Obligation * George Klosko In a recent article, Christopher Wellman formulates a theory
More informationPlaying Fair and Following the Rules
JOURNAL OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY brill.com/jmp Playing Fair and Following the Rules Justin Tosi Department of Philosophy, University of Michigan jtosi@umich.edu Abstract In his paper Fairness, Political Obligation,
More informationLIBERTY, FAIRNESS, AND THE CONTRIBUTION MODEL FOR NONMEDICAL VACCINE EXEMPTION POLICIES: A REPLY TO NAVIN AND LARGENT
LIBERTY, FAIRNESS, AND THE CONTRIBUTION MODEL FOR NONMEDICAL VACCINE EXEMPTION POLICIES: A REPLY TO NAVIN AND LARGENT Alberto Giubilini, Thomas Douglas, Julian Savulescu [This is a pre-publication version.
More informationThe WTO and Climate Change: What Are the Options? Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jisun Kim
The WTO and Climate Change: What Are the Options? Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jisun Kim PIIE/WRI Event on Climate Change and Trade Policy September 14, 2009 UNFCCC Approach to Trade Issues The climate regime
More informationGoverning Climate Change: General Principles and the Paris Agreement
+ Governing Climate Change: General Principles and the Paris Agreement Jolene Lin Associate Professor, NUS Law Director, Asia-Pacific Centre for Environmental Law (APCEL) Jolene.lin@nus.edu.sg + Outline
More informationPolitical Norms and Moral Values
Penultimate version - Forthcoming in Journal of Philosophical Research (2015) Political Norms and Moral Values Robert Jubb University of Leicester rj138@leicester.ac.uk Department of Politics & International
More informationDemocracy, and the Evolution of International. to Eyal Benvenisti and George Downs. Tom Ginsburg* ... National Courts, Domestic
The European Journal of International Law Vol. 20 no. 4 EJIL 2010; all rights reserved... National Courts, Domestic Democracy, and the Evolution of International Law: A Reply to Eyal Benvenisti and George
More informationCo-national Obligations & Cosmopolitan Obligations towards Foreigners
Co-national Obligations & Cosmopolitan Obligations towards Foreigners Ambrose Y. K. Lee (The definitive version is available at www.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ponl) This paper targets a very specific
More informationSkepticism about Beneficiary Pays: A Critique
1 Skepticism about Beneficiary Pays: A Critique Some moral theorists argue that being an innocent beneficiary of significant harms inflicted by others may be sufficient to ground special duties to address
More informationVeranstalter: Die Kommission Klima und Luftqualität der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Konferenz: IPCC Sachstandsbericht 2014
Lukas H. Meyer Veranstalter: Die Kommission Klima und Luftqualität der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Konferenz: IPCC Sachstandsbericht 2014 Beiträge der österreichischen Klimaforschung Referat:
More informationTowards Sustainable Economy and Society Under Current Globalization Trends and Within Planetary Boundaries: A Tribute to Hirofumi Uzawa
Towards Sustainable Economy and Society Under Current Globalization Trends and Within Planetary Boundaries: A Tribute to Hirofumi Uzawa Joseph E. Stiglitz Tokyo March 2016 Harsh reality: We are living
More informationJustifying Punishment: A Response to Douglas Husak
DOI 10.1007/s11572-008-9046-5 ORIGINAL PAPER Justifying Punishment: A Response to Douglas Husak Kimberley Brownlee Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008 Abstract In Why Criminal Law: A Question of
More informationTwo Pictures of the Global-justice Debate: A Reply to Tan*
219 Two Pictures of the Global-justice Debate: A Reply to Tan* Laura Valentini London School of Economics and Political Science 1. Introduction Kok-Chor Tan s review essay offers an internal critique of
More informationDEMOCRACY AND EQUALITY
The Philosophical Quarterly 2007 ISSN 0031 8094 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.495.x DEMOCRACY AND EQUALITY BY STEVEN WALL Many writers claim that democratic government rests on a principled commitment
More informationThe Return of the Region:
The Return of the Region: Addressing Global Challenges and Tackling Social Issues through Regional Collaborative Governance Martijn Groenleer, Professor of Regional Law and Governance, Tilburg Center for
More informationCan asylum seekers appeal to their human rights as a form of nonviolent
Can asylum seekers appeal to their human rights as a form of nonviolent resistance? Rationale Asylum seekers have arisen as one of the central issues in the politics of liberal democratic states over the
More informationCHAPTER 4, On Liberty. Does Mill Qualify the Liberty Principle to Death? Dick Arneson For PHILOSOPHY 166 FALL, 2006
1 CHAPTER 4, On Liberty. Does Mill Qualify the Liberty Principle to Death? Dick Arneson For PHILOSOPHY 166 FALL, 2006 In chapter 1, Mill proposes "one very simple principle, as entitled to govern absolutely
More informationLegal Reasoning, the Rule of Law, and Legal Theory: Comments on Gerald Postema, Positivism and the Separation of the Realists from their Skepticism
Legal Reasoning, the Rule of Law, and Legal Theory: Comments on Gerald Postema, Positivism and the Separation of the Realists from their Skepticism Introduction In his incisive paper, Positivism and the
More informationEUROBAROMETER SPECIAL BUREAUX (2002) Executive Summary. Survey carried out for the European Commission s Representation in Germany
EUROBAROMETER SPECIAL BUREAUX (2002) Executive Summary Survey carried out for the European Commission s Representation in Germany «This document does not reflect the views of the European Commission. Any
More informationAMY GUTMANN: THE CONSTRUCTIVE POTENTIAL OF COMMUNITARIAN VALUES DOES GUTMANN SUCCEED IN SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTIVE POTENTIAL OF COMMUNITARIAN VALUES?
AMY GUTMANN: THE CONSTRUCTIVE POTENTIAL OF COMMUNITARIAN VALUES DOES GUTMANN SUCCEED IN SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTIVE POTENTIAL OF COMMUNITARIAN VALUES? 1 The view of Amy Gutmann is that communitarians have
More informationThom Brooks University of Newcastle, UK
Equality and democracy: the problem of minimal competency * Thom Brooks University of Newcastle, UK ABSTRACT. In a recent article, Thomas Christiano defends the intrinsic justice of democracy grounded
More informationIna Schmidt: Book Review: Alina Polyakova The Dark Side of European Integration.
Book Review: Alina Polyakova The Dark Side of European Integration. Social Foundation and Cultural Determinants of the Rise of Radical Right Movements in Contemporary Europe ISSN 2192-7448, ibidem-verlag
More informationRawls versus the Anarchist: Justice and Legitimacy
Rawls versus the Anarchist: Justice and Legitimacy Walter E. Schaller Texas Tech University APA Central Division April 2005 Section 1: The Anarchist s Argument In a recent article, Justification and Legitimacy,
More informationGetting a Handle on the Super PAC Problem. Bob Bauer. Stanford Law Symposium. February 5, 2016
Getting a Handle on the Super PAC Problem Bob Bauer Stanford Law Symposium February 5, 2016 The Super PACs are the bêtes noires of campaign finance reform, except for those who are quite keen on them,
More informationThe United Nations High-Level Panel's vision for ending poverty
From: Development Co-operation Report 2013 Ending Poverty Access the complete publication at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/dcr-2013-en The United Nations High-Level Panel's vision for ending poverty Homi
More information5 v. 11 Cv (JSR) 6 SONAR CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, et al., 7 Defendants x 9 February 17, :00 p.m.
Case 1:11-cv-09665-JSR Document 20 Filed 03/02/12 Page 1 of 20 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 2 ------------------------------x 3 SIDNEY GORDON, 4 Plaintiff, 5 v. 11 Cv.
More informationNew Directions for the Capability Approach: Deliberative Democracy and Republicanism
New Directions for the Capability Approach: Deliberative Democracy and Republicanism Rutger Claassen Published in: Res Publica 15(4)(2009): 421-428 Review essay on: John. M. Alexander, Capabilities and
More informationTHE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CLIMATE STABILIZATION ACT CAMBRIDGE DRY CLEANING V. UNITED STATES
THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CLIMATE STABILIZATION ACT CAMBRIDGE DRY CLEANING V. UNITED STATES John Halloran Constitutional Law: Structures of Power and Individual Rights March 10, 2013 1 Halloran 2 A
More informationRESPONSE TO JAMES GORDLEY'S "GOOD FAITH IN CONTRACT LAW: The Problem of Profit Maximization"
RESPONSE TO JAMES GORDLEY'S "GOOD FAITH IN CONTRACT LAW: The Problem of Profit Maximization" By MICHAEL AMBROSIO We have been given a wonderful example by Professor Gordley of a cogent, yet straightforward
More informationSustainability: A post-political perspective
Sustainability: A post-political perspective The Hon. Dr. Geoff Gallop Lecture SUSTSOOS Policy and Sustainability Sydney Law School 2 September 2014 Some might say sustainability is an idea whose time
More informationBook Reviews. Julian Culp, Global Justice and Development, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK, 2014, Pp. xi+215, ISBN:
Public Reason 6 (1-2): 83-89 2016 by Public Reason Julian Culp, Global Justice and Development, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK, 2014, Pp. xi+215, ISBN: 978-1-137-38992-3 In Global Justice and Development,
More informationThis is a repository copy of Territorial rights and open borders.
This is a repository copy of Territorial rights and open borders. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/104293/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Sandelind, C.
More informationDÓCHAS STRATEGY
DÓCHAS STRATEGY 2015-2020 2015-2020 Dóchas is the Irish Association of Non-Governmental Development Organisations. It is a meeting place and a leading voice for organisations that want Ireland to be a
More informationFrom Collected Works of Michał Kalecki Volume II (Jerzy Osiatinyński editor, Clarendon Press, Oxford: 1991)
From Collected Works of Michał Kalecki Volume II (Jerzy Osiatinyński editor, Clarendon Press, Oxford: 1991) The Problem of Effective Demand with Tugan-Baranovsky and Rosa Luxemburg (1967) In the discussions
More informationPhil 115, May 24, 2007 The threat of utilitarianism
Phil 115, May 24, 2007 The threat of utilitarianism Review: Alchemy v. System According to the alchemy interpretation, Rawls s project is to convince everyone, on the basis of assumptions that he expects
More informationLibertarianism and the Justice of a Basic Income. Peter Vallentyne, University of Missouri at Columbia
Libertarianism and the Justice of a Basic Income Peter Vallentyne, University of Missouri at Columbia Abstract Whether justice requires, or even permits, a basic income depends on two issues: (1) Does
More informationOutline. The No Growth Economy Practical Utopias Concluding Remarks
Outline Reading the Crisis: Competing Paradigms Economic vs Ecological Imaginaries Strategic Essentialism The Triple Crisis The [Global] Green New Deal Variants of the GND The No Growth Economy Practical
More informationBusiness Ethics Journal Review
Business Ethics Journal Review SCHOLARLY COMMENTS ON ACADEMIC BUSINESS ETHICS businessethicsjournalreview.com Why Justice Matters for Business Ethics 1 Jeffery Smith A COMMENTARY ON Abraham Singer (2016),
More informationSpeech to CAJ Conference on 11 June Evelyn Collins, Chief Executive. Equality Commission for Northern Ireland
Speech to CAJ Conference on 11 June 2013 Evelyn Collins, Chief Executive Equality Commission for Northern Ireland Thanks for the opportunity to respond today. The Commission welcomes engagement on the
More informationINDIGENOUS RIGHTS AND UNITED NATIONS STANDARDS: SELF- DETERMINATION, CULTURE AND LAND
BOOK REVIEW INDIGENOUS RIGHTS AND UNITED NATIONS STANDARDS: SELF- DETERMINATION, CULTURE AND LAND Alexandra Xanthaki Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 314 pp (incl index), 60, ISBN 978-0- 521-83574-9
More informationCOMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 13.9.2017 COM(2017) 492 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE
More informationTwo Sides of the Same Coin
Unpacking Rainer Forst s Basic Right to Justification Stefan Rummens In his forceful paper, Rainer Forst brings together many elements from his previous discourse-theoretical work for the purpose of explaining
More informationREDD+ Institutional Choices and their Implications for Local Democracy in the Kasigau Corridor, Kenya.
REDD+ Institutional Choices and their Implications for Local Democracy in the Kasigau Corridor, Kenya. NAME OF PRESENTER: Dr Susan Chomba NAMES OF AUTHORS: Dr Susan Chomba Problem statement 1/2 REDD+ aims
More informationConcluding Comments. Protection
6 Concluding Comments The introduction to this analysis raised four major concerns about WTO dispute settlement: it has led to more protection, it is ineffective in enforcing compliance, it has undermined
More information