Striving for Fairness: A Critical Examination of the ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Capabilities’ Principle in International Health Law

Ludovica Di Lullo
{"title":"Striving for Fairness: A Critical Examination of the ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Capabilities’ Principle in International Health Law","authors":"Ludovica Di Lullo","doi":"10.1163/18719732-bja10121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities’ (‘<span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">CBDRC</span>’) is a traditional yet rather controversial principle of International Law. It stems from the need to establish an equitable approach to global concerns through non-reciprocal obligations. Despite the quasi-universal acceptance of the principle since its first appearance in the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, certain legal challenges persist regarding its formal status, the rationale for the differentiation of legal obligations, and its implementation. The <span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">CBDRC</span>s principle continues to play a crucial role in the ongoing post-pandemic negotiations aimed at reshaping the international health legal architecture. This article argues that translating the principle of <span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">CBDRC</span>s into operational tools for a comprehensive system of pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, could address inequalities between the Global North and the Global South, thus changing the narrative on fairness in international health law.</p>","PeriodicalId":43487,"journal":{"name":"International Community Law Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Community Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-bja10121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities’ (‘CBDRC’) is a traditional yet rather controversial principle of International Law. It stems from the need to establish an equitable approach to global concerns through non-reciprocal obligations. Despite the quasi-universal acceptance of the principle since its first appearance in the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, certain legal challenges persist regarding its formal status, the rationale for the differentiation of legal obligations, and its implementation. The CBDRCs principle continues to play a crucial role in the ongoing post-pandemic negotiations aimed at reshaping the international health legal architecture. This article argues that translating the principle of CBDRCs into operational tools for a comprehensive system of pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, could address inequalities between the Global North and the Global South, thus changing the narrative on fairness in international health law.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
争取公平:对国际卫生法中 "共同但有区别的责任和能力 "原则的批判性审视
共同但有区别的责任和各自的能力"("CBDRC")是国际法的一项传统原则,但却颇具争议。它源于通过非互惠义务建立公平方法解决全球关切的需要。尽管自 1992 年《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》首次提出该原则以来,该原则已得到近乎普遍的接受,但在其正式地位、区分法律义务的理由及其实施方面仍存在某些法律挑战。CBDRCs 原则在当前旨在重塑国际卫生法律架构的大流行后谈判中继续发挥着至关重要的作用。本文认为,将 CBDRCs 原则转化为大流行病预防、准备和应对综合系统的操作工具,可以解决全球北方和全球南方之间的不平等问题,从而改变国际卫生法中有关公平性的叙述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Journal aims to explore the implications of various traditions of international law, as well as more current perceived hegemonic trends for the idea of an international community. The Journal will also look at the ways and means in which the international community uses and adapts international law to deal with new and emerging challenges. Non-state actors , intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, individuals, peoples, transnational corporations and civil society as a whole - have changed our outlook on contemporary international law. In addition to States and intergovernmental organizations, they now play an important role.
期刊最新文献
Reflections on the Role of Fairness for the Sources of International Law The Imbalanced Geography of the Law on Use of Force in Self-Defence Government Recognition and the Dispute over the Venezuelan Gold Reserves in the Bank of England The Role of General Assembly Resolutions in the Identification of Customary International Law and the Chagos Archipelago Advisory Opinion An Indigenous Cosmovision for Earth-Centric Governance: Deconstructing the Normative Structure of International Law?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1