Exploring a More Holistic Approach to the Realization of Socio-Economic Rights in Third World States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current approaches to the realization of socio-economic rights tend to exist in relative silos, and are as such all limited in their effectiveness. Many such approaches exist, but the ones focused on in this paper are the “mainstream”, “Critical Legal Studies” (CLS), “Third World Approaches to International Law” (TWAIL), and “Political Economy” (PE) approaches. By “mainstream”, I refer to a perspective that is based on a strict and formal interpretation of international law as it is currently couched in the recognized sources of international law, and a similar understanding of the international and domestic legal orders. By “CLS”, I refer to a Western “Critical Legal Studies” perspective that criticizes legal language as a false discourse that helps perpetuate hierarchies. By “TWAIL”, I refer to the perspective of a school of thought referred to as “Third World Approaches to International Law” that is unified by historical and contemporary concerns regarding the position of Third World peoples in the global political and economic structure, particularly within international law. By “PE”, I refer to an approach that tries to understand the historical and current links between the economy and political power and how they influence each other.Thus far, each of these schools of thought has developed its own approach to rights discourse/action in general, and socio-economic rights discourse/action in particular. There has been little attempt to combine the differing approaches to these questions, so as to produce a much more holistic and effective harmonized approach to the problem of generating the kind of ideas that can lead to the significant amelioration of socio-economic rights violations in the Third World. The value of synergizing these differing approaches is illustrated, among others, by the fact that in order to better understand the (legal, political, and economic) structural and other factors that stand in the way of the greater global re-distribution of socio-economic resources (thereby ameliorating Third World socio-economic hardships), TWAIL and PE insights must be taken into much greater account by mainstream socio-economic rights scholarship. And even CLS-style socio-economic rights scholarship will profit from this kind of engagement with TWAIL and PE approaches. There is thus an obvious necessity for a more holistic approach to the question of the production of ideas concerning the realization of socio-economic rights in the Third World; one that is much more synergistic and integrated than has otherwise been the case.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".