Strengthening Global Governance for Human Rights through New-Era FTAs Beyond Trade-Related Aspects
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
How to bridge the gap between trade regimes and human rights regimes has long been hotly debated in the international law community. From the perspective of global governance for human rights, linking human rights obligations in FTAs, compared to “soft” human rights treaties, is believed to be a more effective way to achieve compliance with human rights norms. Especially, the evolution of labor provisions in the United States (hereinafter “U.S.”) FTAs and “essential elements clauses” in European Union (hereinafter “EU”) FTAs signify two prominent but entirely different approaches to promoting human rights through FTAs. However, the approaches adopted by the U.S. and EU in their recent FTAs become a bit unclear regarding their purposes and application. Especially, the U.S. approach to labor provisions seems to deviate from its original purpose and trade related nature while the EU approach establishes a double layered mechanism of human rights obligations and creates an image of insincere commitments to promoting human rights. These developments cast doubt on the feasibility of current U.S. and EU approaches to serve as ideal models for the growing number of FTAs in the contemporary era. Based on the lesson learned from the U.S. and EU experience, this article establishes a policy guideline for human rights obligations in new era FTAs, in which two kinds of human rights obligations would be considered legitimate to be linked in FTAs. The first one is the concrete obligations addressing specific human rights concerns arising from FTAs, which should be definitely trade related and narrowly tailored to the human rights concerns raised in the pursuit of free trade. The second one is the general obligations promoting overall human rights without necessary trade related aspects. It is primarily to provoke far reaching and lasting changes in the political and economic systems of trading partners. The approach adopted in the EU Canada SPA may serve as a preferred model for this kind of obligation in new era FTAs. The functions of the two kinds of obligations proposed by this article are mutually supported and should be supplemented by parallel mechanisms to ensure their compliance. The policy guideline proposed by the article is far from a comprehensive one regarding how to frame human rights obligations in future FTAs. Despite that, it is sure to shed light on the future discussion about the possible ways to bridge the gap between trade and human rights regimes through new era FTAs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».