HUMAN RIGHTS EXPERIMENTALISM

被引:55
作者
de Burca, Grainne [1 ]
机构
[1] NYU, Law Sch, Law, New York, NY 10003 USA
关键词
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN-RIGHTS; NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS; CONVENTION; TREATIES; CEDAW; LAW; ARCHITECTURE; DIFFERENCE; COURT; NGOS;
D O I
10.1017/ajil.2016.16
中图分类号
D81 [国际关系];
学科分类号
030207 ;
摘要
Human rights in general and the international human rights system in particular have come under increasing attack in recent years. Quite apart from the domestic and global political events since 2016, including an apparent retreat from international institutions, the human rights system has in recent times come in for severe criticism from academic scholars. Amongst the various criticisms levelled have been: (1) the ineffectiveness and lack of impact of international human rights regimes, (2) the ambiguity and lack of specificity of human rights standards, (3) the weakness of international human rights enforcement mechanisms, and (4) the claim to universalism of human rights standards coupled with the hegemonic imposition of these standards on diverse parts of the world. This article responds to several of those criticisms by introducing the idea of experimentalist governance, interpreting key aspects of the functioning of certain international human rights treaties from the perspective of experimentalist governance theory, and surveying a body of recent scholarship on the effectiveness of such treaties. Contrary to the depiction of international human rights regimes as both ineffective and top-down, the article argues that they function at their best as dynamic, participatory, and iterative systems. Experimentalist governance offers a theory of the causal effectiveness of human rights treaties, brings to light a set of features and interactions that are routinely overlooked in many accounts, and suggests possible avenues for reform of other human rights treaty regimes with a view to making them more effective in practice.
引用
收藏
页码:277 / 316
页数:40
相关论文
共 132 条
[91]   Framing issues and seizing opportunities: The UN, NGOs, and women's rights [J].
Joachim, J .
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES QUARTERLY, 2003, 47 (02) :247-274
[92]  
Keck MargaretE., 1998, ACTIVISTS BORDERS AD
[93]   The United Nations international covenant on civil and political rights: Does it make a difference in human rights behavior? [J].
Keith, LC .
JOURNAL OF PEACE RESEARCH, 1999, 36 (01) :95-118
[94]  
Kennedy D, 2004, DARK SIDES OF VIRTUE: REASSESSING INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIANISM, P1
[95]   Human Rights Mainstreaming as a Strategy for Institutional Power [J].
Koskenniemi, Martti .
HUMANITY-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS HUMANITARIANISM AND DEVELOPMENT, 2010, 1 (01) :47-58
[96]   The Open Architecture of European Human Rights Law [J].
Krisch, Nico .
MODERN LAW REVIEW, 2008, 71 (02) :183-216
[97]  
Krommendijk J., 2014, The domestic impact and effectiveness of the process of state reporting under UN human rights treaties in the Netherlands, New Zealand and Finland: paper-pushing or policy promoting? Cambridge
[98]   Vernacularization on the ground: local uses of global women's rights in Peru, China, India and the United States [J].
Levitt, Peggy ;
Merry, Sally .
GLOBAL NETWORKS-A JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL AFFAIRS, 2009, 9 (04) :441-461
[99]   Gender Equality Oversimplified: Using CEDAW to Counter the Measurement Obsession [J].
Liebowitz, Debra J. ;
Zwingel, Susanne .
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES REVIEW, 2014, 16 (03) :362-389
[100]  
Linos Katerina., 2013, DEMOCRATIC FDN POLIC