Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Basic Human Rights (basic + human_right)
Selected AbstractsThe Economic Effects of Human RightsKYKLOS INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, Issue 4 2007Lorenz Blume SUMMARY There are three positions concerning the economic effects of human rights discussed among economists. Some economists argue that only property rights matter for economic growth and basic human rights can even make the legal system less efficient. Others argue that negative rights are generally welfare increasing while positive rights tend to reduce income and growth over time. Yet a third group of economists argues that elements of all groups of human rights are a precondition for making productive use of one's resources and are thus efficiency-enhancing. Based on a cross-country analysis, the effects of different groups of human rights on economic growth are estimated in this paper. The transmission channels through which the different rights affect growth are identified by estimating their effects on investment and overall productivity. Basic human rights have indeed a positive effect on investment, but do not seem to contribute to productivity. Social rights, in turn, are not conducive to investment in physical capital but do contribute to productivity improvements. None of the four groups of rights covered in this analysis ever has a significant negative effect on any of the economic variables included. [source] Ethical issues related to epilepsy care in the developing worldEPILEPSIA, Issue 5 2009Chong-Tin Tan Summary There are three major issues of ethical concern related to epilepsy care in the developing world. First, is it ethical for a developing country to channel its limited resources from direct epilepsy care to research? The main considerations in addressing this question are the particular research questions to be addressed and whether such research will bring direct benefits to the local community. Second, in a country with limited resources, when does ignoring the high treatment gap become an ethical issue? This question is of particular concern when the community has enough resources to afford treatment for its poor, yet is not providing such care because of gross wastage and misallocation of the national resources. Third, do countries with plentiful resources have an ethical responsibility to help relieve the high epilepsy treatment gap of poor countries? Indeed, we believe that reasonable health care is a basic human right, and that human rights transcend national boundaries. Although health care is usually the responsibility of the nation-state, many modern states in the developing world are arbitrary creations of colonization. There is often a long process from the establishment of a political-legal state to a mature functional nation. During the long process of nation building, help from neighboring countries is often required. [source] The High Cost of Human TraffickingJOURNAL OF FORENSIC NURSING, Issue 2 2006Barbara A. Moynihan Human trafficking is a horrific violation of basic human rights. The forensic nurse has a key role in assessing and identifying cases and can be a crucial link to victims' freedom. [source] Poverty, Development, and Women: Why Should We Care?JOURNAL OF OBSTETRIC, GYNECOLOGIC & NEONATAL NURSING, Issue 6 2007Joyce E. (Beebe) Thompson Healthy, prosperous nations require healthy women and newborns. Young girls and women in resource-poor nations suffer the greatest ill-health consequences from low status, denial of basic human rights, and poverty. Poverty and poor health result in poor economic development. The Millennium Development Goals call for immediate efforts to reduce poverty, improve health, especially of girls and women, and foster development in the world's poorest nations. JOGNN, 36, 523-530; 2007. DOI: 10.1111/J.1552-6909.2007.00184.x [source] The Economic Effects of Human RightsKYKLOS INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, Issue 4 2007Lorenz Blume SUMMARY There are three positions concerning the economic effects of human rights discussed among economists. Some economists argue that only property rights matter for economic growth and basic human rights can even make the legal system less efficient. Others argue that negative rights are generally welfare increasing while positive rights tend to reduce income and growth over time. Yet a third group of economists argues that elements of all groups of human rights are a precondition for making productive use of one's resources and are thus efficiency-enhancing. Based on a cross-country analysis, the effects of different groups of human rights on economic growth are estimated in this paper. The transmission channels through which the different rights affect growth are identified by estimating their effects on investment and overall productivity. Basic human rights have indeed a positive effect on investment, but do not seem to contribute to productivity. Social rights, in turn, are not conducive to investment in physical capital but do contribute to productivity improvements. None of the four groups of rights covered in this analysis ever has a significant negative effect on any of the economic variables included. [source] STRUCTURING GLOBAL DEMOCRACY: POLITICAL COMMUNITIES, UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND TRANSNATIONAL REPRESENTATIONMETAPHILOSOPHY, Issue 1 2009CAROL C. GOULD Abstract: The emergence of cross-border communities and transnational associations requires new ways of thinking about the norms involved in democracy in a globalized world. Given the significance of human rights fulfillment, including social and economic rights, I argue here for giving weight to the claims of political communities while also recognizing the need for input by distant others into the decisions of global governance institutions that affect them. I develop two criteria for addressing the scope of democratization in transnational contexts,common activities and impact on basic human rights,and argue for their compatibility. I then consider some practical implications for institutional transformation and design, including new forms of transnational representation. [source] Justice and Culture: Rawls, Sen, Nussbaum and O'NeillPOLITICAL STUDIES REVIEW, Issue 1 2003Cécile Fabre Is it possible, in a multicultural world, to hold all societies to a common standard of decency that is both high enough to protect basic human interests, and yet not biased in the direction of particular cultural values? We examine the recent work of four liberals , John Rawls, Amartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum and Onora O'Neill , to see whether any of them has given a successful answer to this question. For Rawls, the decency standard is set by reference to an idea of basic human rights that we argue offers too little protection to members of non-liberal societies. Sen and Nussbaum both employ the idea of human capabilities, but in interestingly different ways: for Sen the problems are how to weight different capabilities, and how to decide which are basic, whereas for Nussbaum the difficulty is that her favoured list of capabilities depends on an appeal to autonomy that is unlikely to be acceptable to non-liberal cultures. O'Neill rejects a rights-based approach in favour of a neo-Kantian position that asks which principles of action people everywhere could consent to, but this also may be too weak in the face of cultural diversity. We conclude that liberals need to argue both for a minimum decency standard and for the full set of liberal rights as the best guarantors of that standard over time. [source] Civil Rights and Political Human Rights: Contesting Human Rights Failures within the Minimally Democratic StatePOLITICS, Issue 1 2009Michael Allen Allen Buchanan argues that democracy ought to be added to the list of basic human rights, but he limits the conception of democracy to a minimum of electoral representation within the nation state, effectively collapsing human rights into civil rights. This, however, leaves him unable to address the problem of human rights failures occurring within established states that meet his standard of minimal democratic representation. In order to address this problem, I appeal to James Bohman's conception of the political human rights of all members of humanity, as opposed to the civil rights of the citizens of particular states. I argue that while this provides the basis on which to address the problem of human rights failures within minimally democratic states, Bohman's conception also entails the potential for deep tensions to arise between the different claims of civil and human rights. [source] PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE: Planning for the 2040s: everybody's businessBRITISH JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION, Issue 1 2008Peter Mittler As we mark the publication of the 35th issue of the British Journal of Special Education, Peter Mittler, Emeritus Professor of Special Needs Education at the University of Manchester, looks into the future and asks a series of challenging questions: What kind of a future do we want to see for a baby born with a significant disability today? What changes will be needed in society and in our schools both for the child and for the family? What reforms might this year's newly qualified staff bring about in our schools and services and in society as a whole by the time they retire in the 2040s? Professor Mittler proposes that the time is ripe to take advantage of new international and national opportunities to lay the foundations for a society that fully includes disabled people and safeguards their basic human rights. He argues that each one of us can help to determine the values and priorities of the society in which today's baby will grow up and suggests that the Make Poverty History movement has provided powerful evidence that the voice of ordinary citizens can shape policies and set priorities. He encourages us all to think globally and to act locally on a host of issues, including supporting families, planning for transition, promoting quality of life, professional development and challenging inequality. [source] | |||||||||||||