Right to development

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1986 the United Nations declared the right to development to be an “inalienable human right”, “by virtue of which all people and peoples are entitled to economic, social, cultural and political development in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized to participate, contribute to and benefit from it. "

That declaration includes the rights and obligations of individuals, groups and states. The right to development is therefore not only an individual, but also a collective right. A list with specific criteria and indicators on the right to development was drawn up for implementation.

The emergence of the right to development

The three generation model

On December 10, 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was passed by the UN General Assembly. For the thirtieth anniversary in 1977 the then director of the Department for Human Rights and Peace of UNESCO , Karel Vasak, wrote an article in which he formulated the - not undisputed - idea of ​​the three generations of human rights. The first generation mainly describes civic and political freedom and participation rights (e.g. the right to life or freedom of religion and freedom of expression ). The second generation of human rights includes economic, social and cultural rights (e.g. the right to work or the right to social security). According to Vasak, a third category of collective rights should be proclaimed by societies or peoples based on solidarity. These solidarity rights should guarantee conditions among the peoples in order to be able to guarantee the already recognized rights of the first and second generation. Third generation human rights were subsequently declared human rights by the United Nations in the 1970s / 1980s, and in addition to the right to development, they also include the right to peace, a healthy environment and the right to a common human heritage. Third generation human rights are considered to be the collective rights of peoples; H. not only individuals but also collectives are recognized as legal subjects .

Historical context and development theories

Emergence of development policy

During the Cold War , the USA and the Soviet Union also fought for supremacy in development policy . The second inaugural address given by then President of the United States Harry S. Truman on January 20, 1949 is sometimes seen as the starting point for international development policy. President Truman declared that the “developed industrialized countries ” had to help the so-called “underdeveloped” areas to help the population through technical progress and investments from capital to development. In doing so, he introduced the term " underdevelopment, " and during the Cold War and decolonization era the concept gained in importance.

First development efforts of the UN; Modernization theory

In 1961 the UN General Assembly convened the first decade of development policy (1961–1970). Development has largely been equated with economic growth. Through targeted financial support and the so-called trickle-down effect , economic growth should develop all societies into modern industrial countries.

This first decade of development was shaped, among other things, by theories of modernization , which saw “underdevelopment” as a result of stagnation in outdated, unenlightened traditions, and which wanted to help such societies to achieve industrial progress through new technologies. Theories of modernization explain an inevitable evolutionary change from “underdeveloped” states to modern societies under the dictates of the powerful donor states. This legitimation of Western dominance was later heavily criticized.

Other development theories

Structuralist approaches, on the other hand, reject the view that the global economy can only function properly through specialization and division of labor. These theories are mainly based on the work of Raúl Prebisch , who sees the global economy not as a unified economy, but as a construct with a powerful center and a weak periphery. The "underdevelopment" is not caused by a bad local economy, but rather by the crippling global economic structures.

Based on structuralist theories, theories of dependence arose , which build on the center-periphery metaphor of structuralism. The representatives of the dependence theories share the view that the “underdevelopment” of certain states was historically created and sustained by capitalism. "Underdeveloped economies" are thus, as peripheries (as "developing states"), dependent on the powerful centers. The theorists' solution lies in decoupling the weak, national from the western, dominant economy.

The theories of institutionalism, in turn, assume that colonization has separated the “underdeveloped” economies into a modern and a traditional part. This weakening of the internal, national economy in the "developing countries" increases with the "powerless" position of the affected state in the global economic system, and this feedback leads to greater dependence of the "developing countries" and to "underdevelopment". It is demanded that the state be viewed holistically and that the historical emergence and change of the institutions of a state must also be considered, whereby it is emphasized that the national institutions must be strengthened so that this “elite” can then unite in the “underdeveloped” state Can bring about development.

In the late 1960s, among other things, in the context of civil rights movements in the USA, the criticism of the Vietnam War and the student movements in Europe, the Marxist theories of development or “underdevelopment” emerged. There are different interpretations of Marxist theories, but most saw monopoly capitalism as a trigger for "underdevelopment". Paul Baran wants z. B. promote development by withdrawing from the global economy, i.e. from capitalism. and André Gunder Frank, in turn, sees the problem solution in a socialist revolution from below.

From the failure of the first decade of development to the assertion of a human right to development

As early as the UN General Assembly of 1966, it became apparent that the first development decade would fail, and development strategies for the next decade were started. In 1968, at the International Conference on Human Rights in Tehran, a connection between the realization of human rights and development was recognized. The problem of human rights in “developing countries” was examined in more detail the following year in the so-called Ganji Report . This dealt with the problem of economic, social and cultural rights in developing countries . The Second Development Decade was proclaimed in 1970 and focused much more on initiative and cooperation between developing countries. By integrating the “developing countries” into the open world market, it should soon be possible for them to finance their economic growth independently. The individual was also given greater weight, and it was determined that human dignity must be guaranteed through social and economic progress. In 1974, in a special session of the Human Rights Commission, Keba M'Baye, a Senegalese judge and politician, mentioned and defended the “human right to development” for the first time:

[T] he responsibility for ensuring that everyone enjoyed human rights fell largely upon the rich countries. Such a responsibility was the price of international security. [...] They must realize that the right to development was the natural outcome of the international solidarity among States embodied in the Charter.

The formulation of a human right to development

With the publication of the first Waldheim study (1977), the right to development was recognized as a right by the 34th session of the UN General Assembly in 1979. A year later, the Third Decade of Development was proclaimed and soon afterwards the right to development was defined as the affirmation and continuation of the right to self-determination. This led to the establishment of a working group with the aim of formulating a declaration on the right to development, but the group was initially unable to agree on the content of the declaration.

In the beginning, this development policy was still successful, but soon most developing countries, especially countries in South America, faced large mountains of debt due to loans from industrialized nations. The excessive interference of the state in the economy was blamed in part for this global economic crisis in the 1970s and 1980s, from which the neoliberal theories arose. The advocates of neoliberal theories are united by the goal of a global, free and self-regulating economy, because state intervention in economies leads to “underdevelopment” in their view.

At the 1985 session of the Human Rights Commission, the working group was still unable to present a draft declaration, and the Yugoslav delegation then worked out its own proposals for the declaration on the right to development, on which large parts of the declaration were ultimately based. The constant failure of the respective development decades, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the theories of postmodernism that arose in the late 1980s and early 1990s correlated together to form a fundamental critique of development policy and of the concept of development in general. On December 4, 1986, after one year of negotiations, the UN General Assembly passed the declaration on the right to development with 146: 1 votes (against the USA) and eight abstentions from exclusively western countries (Finland, Iceland, Denmark, the FRG, Israel, Japan , Great Britain and Sweden).

Development policy since the Declaration on the Right to Development

After this declaration, the Fourth Decade of Development, 1990-2000 , was proclaimed. It has a strong focus on sustainable development and many conferences have been held on the issue of sustainability, for example the 1992 Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro.

In 2000, 189 UN member states signed the so-called Millennium Declaration at the UN General Assembly . A year later, the eight specific Millennium Development Goals (CET) were published. With the help of these goals, among other things, extreme poverty should be halved by the signatory states by 2015. The eight Millennium Development Goals call on states to act and present measurable steps for each goal. In 2007, the CET was supplemented by numerous other specific targets. Today they are internationally recognized as a humanitarian framework for global development policy, so they are considered guidelines for national and international development cooperation.

Contents of the declaration on the right to development

On December 4, 1986, the United Nations' Declaration on the Right to Development was recognized by the UN General Assembly and, despite many criticisms, the right to development was categorized as a human right. The declaration begins with a preamble , which among other things defines development as follows:

“Development [is] a comprehensive, economic, social, cultural and political process, which aims to continuously increase the well-being of the entire population and of all individuals on the basis of their active, free and meaningful participation in the development process and in the fair distribution and the resulting Aims at advantages. "

The preamble is followed by ten articles, each with one to three sub-articles, which are intended to form the cornerstones of the right to development according to the UN. These aim on the one hand at the rights and obligations of individuals and on the other hand at those of the states. The first article states that the right to development is an inalienable human right by which every single person and all peoples are entitled to actively participate in and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development (Article 1.1.). Development should put people at the center, and the right to it should help them to fully develop their self-determination, which includes complete sovereignty over natural wealth and resources (Articles 1.2. And 2.1.). It is the responsibility of every individual to exercise, individually and collectively, their human rights and their obligations towards the community (Article 2.2.).

The following articles refer primarily to government obligations. It is pointed out, for example, that each state must develop appropriate national development strategies in order to achieve constant improvements in the well-being of the entire population (Article 2.3.). The creation of a national and international environment conducive to development is a central task of the state (Article 3.1.). Reference is also made to the respect of international law for peaceful relations (Article 3.2.) And cooperation between states (Article 3.3.) In order to enable each other to develop as quickly and efficiently as possible. States are called upon to use their rights and obligations to promote a new economic order based on "the basis of sovereign equality, interdependence, common interests and cooperation between all states, as well as the protection and realization of human rights" (Article 3.3. ).

In other articles reference is made to the obligations to prevent war and to avoid violations of human rights (Article 5), and the promotion of peace is recognized as decisive, which is associated with the specific demand for disarmament. The resources obtained from this should be used for development (preferably in developing countries) (Article 7). In order to minimize social inequality, states should give all residents equal opportunities in access to education, health services, food, housing, work and basic resources (Article 8).

Implementation of the right to development

The declaration on the right to development was criticized for the fact that the concept of development on which it is based is extremely diffuse and that a precise, general definition and concretization are still pending. This criticism was addressed by United Nations working groups attempting to specify the meanings and implications of law. The law was affirmed at the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna (1993), and an independent UN expert on law had been commissioned since 1998. The office was held by the Indian Arjun Sengupta until it was replaced in 2004 by the High-Level Task Force on the Implementation of the Right to Development . This created a list of specific criteria and indicators on the right to development in order to be able to offer the actors and decision-makers in the field of development policy tools and measuring instruments for realizing the right to development. The 2010 High-Level Task Force's final report on the implementation of the right to development was the result of five years of work.

The structure of the criteria has been revised several times and is based on practical experience. In addition, a wide variety of suggestions from national and international experts and member states were included in order to do justice to the three components of the right to development (understandable anthropocentric development, supportive structures, social justice and equality). Nevertheless, the criteria only serve as a guide, because in order to comply with the right to development, each state must also formulate appropriate laws and programs itself. The right to development is seen primarily as the right to a constant improvement in wellbeing with respect for the environment and human rights. The focus is on the state, which acts individually but also collectively in order to create suitable conditions for realizing this right.

The report comprises a list of 18 criteria, 68 sub-criteria and 149 indicators, which are assigned to three attributes of law. The criteria listed in the first column are considered to be the realizable objectives and tools to drive the development forward. They mainly concern topics such as technology, the environment, the social environment (education, health, safety etc.), finance, economy, peace and politics. The sub-criteria in the second column are considered to be the most important areas for measuring progress. This includes areas such as health, education, agricultural technologies, ratification of relevant international treaties, etc. The criteria are to be made measurable using the indicators in third place. The indicators are based on the three dimensions of structure, process and result. The indicators mentioned include information such as production figures, investment, child mortality rate , reach of the Internet, government spending for poor households and consumption .

Advocate of the right to development as a human right

Despite various points of contention, the right to development was adopted by the UN in 1986 in the form of the declaration on the right to development, which unequivocally declared it a human right, and was strengthened by the second UN World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993.

Can be derived from previous international human rights documents

The law finds its moral justification primarily in the idea of solidarity , in the idea of ​​a balance between colonial and neo-colonial exploitation and moral dependencies. The advocates of a human right to development based their legal arguments mainly on the fact that it could be derived from previous international human rights documents, the International Bill of Rights and the UN Charter. For example, reference is often made to Articles 55 and 56 of the UN Charter. Article 55 states:

"In order to bring about the state of stability and prosperity necessary for peaceful and amicable relations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples to exist between nations, the United Nations promotes: a) the improvement of the standard of living, full employment and the conditions for economic and social progress and advancement; b) solving international problems of an economic, social, health and allied nature and international cooperation in the fields of culture and education; c) the general respect and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all regardless of race, gender, language or religion. "

Article 56 addresses the obligation to international cooperation. Another document is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): Its 22nd article deals with the right to social security and the implementation of economic, social and cultural rights, which are inevitably related to human dignity and the free development of the person stand. Article 26 (2) also states that education should aim at personal development. Furthermore, the first article of the two international human rights pacts, which declares the right to self-determination, is used. Articles 2 and 11 of the international pact on economic, social and cultural rights are cited as legitimate sources. The first section of the 2nd article refers to the obligation to implement the rights already enumerated in the Covenant, and the 11th article refers to the right to an adequate standard of living. References to the European Social Charter as well as the American Declaration on Human Rights, the Declaration of Philadelphia and the UNESCO Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice are also given.

Proponents of the right to development

One of the first to call the right to development a human right was Kéba M'Baye , who represented Senegal in the 1972 Human Rights Commission. As one of the proponents of the human right to development, M'Baye argued that development is demanded through justice and that denial of it is not only injustice, but also a provocation that threatens violence and confrontation. He was of the opinion that in a developed society the right to adapt to “ reality ”. However, in a developing society, law should precede reality and change the way people think.

Another advocate was the French delegate named Soyer. He believed that, in accordance with the two human rights pacts, development constitutes the ideal of the free human being. This is promoted through the realization of its economic, social and cultural but also its civil and political rights. That is why he understood development as the sum of all human rights, whereby it was also referred to as "key human right" or "synthesis right". Soyer further argued that while the right to development belongs to the collective, it is still a human right because it is ultimately in the service of man. The ultimate legal entity, according to Soyer, is still the human being.

The discussion about the human rights synthesis was taken up by numerous delegates and understood above all in connection with economic, social and cultural human rights.

For most speakers, the right to development embodied all rights. The view was expressed by many participants, that the right to development was a synthesis of already defined human rights.

Russel Barsh, an American professor of economics and African studies, says in his article on the global debate about the realization of the right to development, "The Right to Development as a Human Right" , that human rights are both the conditions and the goal of Development. The historian Ramon Leemann further argued that, according to a broad view, the human right to development solidifies the connection between development and human rights. In this way, development becomes a global arrangement between national and international actors that avoids the possibility of a conflict between different claims based on human rights.

Leemann also refers to Arjun Sengupta , who highlights the difference between the right to development and the rights-based development process carried out in accordance with human rights standards. Sengupta points out that development is itself a human right and not just a process that respects and promotes human rights. He understands the declaration of the right to development as a document that is based on a common consensus. For him , human rights are rights that are neither granted by an authority nor arise from a divine or natural principle: In the ultimate analysis, human rights are those rights which are given by people to themselves. These rights are given the status of human right by the fact that they have been accepted as such by the community. As soon as they gain recognition through this consensus-building process, they become binding, at least for those who were involved in the acceptance process. In other words, for Sengupta, human rights, and thus the right to development, are rights that people have agreed on.

Criticism of the right to development

However, since the proclamation of the existence of a right to development by the former UN Commission on Human Rights (the Commission), the right to development has been controversial amongst States and scholars due to its lack of conceptual clarity.

Since it first appeared on the human rights arena in the early 1970s, the right to development has not only been advocated but also criticized. The focus of the criticism was and is the definition and effects of the right to development as a human right. Representatives of the post-development approaches, such as Arturo Escobar and James Ferguson, also criticized the idea and the concept of development. At issue is the concept of development itself, on which the right to development is based.

Criticism of the right to development as a human right

According to Jack Donnelly, it was never questioned whether the existence of a right to development could even be legitimized as a human right. In his 1985 article In Search of The Unicorn: The Jurisprudence and Politis of the Right to Development , he states from a decidedly legal-theoretical and legal-philosophical point of view that after the "abrupt entry" of the right to development into the human rights arena in 1977, no one questioned this idea have. According to Donnelly, every right must have a legitimate source, have a clearly defined legal content and address regulated parties and their rights and obligations. In addition, obligations of the legal addressees that correlate with the law must be clarified in a binding manner. Donnelly denies the right to development these properties, which is why, according to him, such a right cannot exist. He argues that there are neither moral nor legal foundations that would legitimize a right to development. A human right to development cannot be derived from any of the main legal sources of human rights (e.g. UN Charter, UDHR, international human rights pacts) that advocates of the law refer to. According to Donnelly, development is a goal to be achieved through the implementation of other human rights, but not a right in itself.

Development is one of the primary objectives of the human rights, but not a right itself.

Donnelly argues that not everything that is good and right can also be reformulated into a right. He points out the difference between justice and law. According to Donnelly, thanks to human rights, people can live under conditions that allow development through their own efforts, but they cannot have the right to be developed. According to Donnelly, the human rights of the first and second generation in social, economic, political and cultural areas are already aimed at the development and development of every individual because they are based on the basic assumption of inalienable human dignity. The right to development, on the other hand, is based on solidarity between individuals and collectives and is part of the human rights of the so-called “third generation”, which, according to Donnelly, does not make it a real human right. According to him, rights based on solidarity cannot be human rights in the traditional sense because, contrary to the basic idea of ​​the unconditional dignity of the preceding rights, they require belonging to a group:

If they are a "third generation", they cannot rest on the principle of solidarity, while if they are "solidarity rights" they cannot be human rights.

Donnelly describes the categorization of human rights in generations as problematic, as this division suggests on the one hand that the newer generation is evolutionarily replacing the older one and thus the principle of indivisibility of human rights is threatened. On the other hand, the statement that the right to development is the synthesis of all human rights brings with it the risk that the other human rights will be neglected. While first and second generation human rights serve to protect the individual against a collective and the state, this is not the case with the right to development, which would undermine this protective function. States that violate human rights could nevertheless demand the right to development and thus violate other fundamental human rights in the name of a human right. It becomes particularly critical when a new international economic order or development is viewed as a condition for the realization of human rights. This would cover up human rights violations by national regimes even more.

Criticism of the concept of development

After development policy theories experienced their great boom in the post-war period, criticism of precisely these theories was increased in the 1980s. Especially representatives of the post-development approaches subjected the development theories to an in-depth criticism. Authors such as Arturo Escobar rejected the - and mostly failed - development programs that had been carried out until then, as well as the concept of development as such. In his 1992 article Imagining a Post-Development Era? Critical Thought, Development and Social Movements , Escobar does not call for alternative development theories (such as sustainable development), but for an alternative to development. He describes the concept of “development” and the resulting “underdevelopment” as an evaluative legitimation of a western hegemony over the developing countries.

Development has functioned as an all-powerfull mechanism for the production and management of the Third World.

The so-called “ Third World ” was only produced through the concept of development , and its inhabitants increasingly perceived themselves in this context as underdevelopment, while other perspectives and ways of acting were excluded. Escobar rejects the paradigm of the development concept and, as an alternative, points to the importance of social movements that could bring about the necessary change in the situation in countries previously known as developing countries. Only through such movements , called grassroots movements , can an alternative understanding of development be achieved and a social and cultural self-definition of one's own identity can be brought about in the countries categorized as “Third World”. Escobar's rejection of the development paradigm can be interpreted as a criticism of the right to development, which is based on the questioned concept of development. This is because the Eurocentric claim to rule over the developing countries postulated by Escobar is legitimized by the juridification of the right to development, since the implementation of development is now based on international legal bases. The legal system is based on two parties: the legal entities who have and can claim the right to development, and the legal addressees who are obliged to provide development support. Furthermore, the focus is more on socio-economic development in the western sense. It is questionable whether the right to self-determination will favor changes such as social movements called for by Escobar.

James Ferguson , another proponent of post-development approaches, shows in his book The Anti-Politics Machine , published in 1990 . "Development", Depoliticization and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho on how development agencies consciously present them in their reports on so-called Less Developed Countries (LDCs) in such a way that they represent objects suitable for the development policies offered. Based on the World Bank Report of 1975, Ferguson compares the academic and development policy discourse and shows that the latter has its own inherent logic that favors presentations that are beneficial for the development agencies and ignores others. Like Escobar, Ferguson sees the only possible solution not in the existing development concept, but in revolutionary social transformation. The criticism of the post-development representatives is not necessarily a criticism of the right to development per se. Enables or supports the implementation of the right to development the social movements and thus a revolutionary social transformation , it supports the demands of the post-development representatives.

literature

  • Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian and Johannes Thema (eds.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Publishing house for social sciences. 69-94.
  • Federal authorities of the Swiss Confederation 2006: Charter of the United Nations. In: Swiss Confederation. < http://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/20012770/index.html > May 16, 2014
  • Büschel, Hubertus 2010: History of Development Policy. In: Docupedia contemporary history. < http://docupedia.de/zg/Geschichte_der_Entwicklungspolitik >. May 18, 2014
  • Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 473-509.
  • Eilen, Carina 2008: Post-Development. The triggering of the concept of development. In: Paulofreiezentrum. Vienna. < http://www.pfz.at/article728.htm > May 21, 2014
  • Escobar, Arturo 1992: Imagining a Post-Development Era? Critical Thought, Development and Social Movements. Social Text 31 (32): 20-56.
  • Ferguson, James 1990: The Anti-politics Machine. Development, De-politicization and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Harry S. Truman Library and Museum: Truman's Inaugural Address. Kansas City: Harry S. Truman Library and Museum. < http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/50yr_archive/inagural20jan1949.htm >. May 18, 2014
  • Holtz, Uwe 2013: Contents of Development Policy. In: Ihne, Hartmut and Jürgen Willhelm (Ed.): Introduction to Development Policy. Münster: LIT Verlag. 41-65.
  • Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress.
  • Sengupta, Arjun 2001: Right to Development as a Human Right. Economic and Political Weekly 36 (27): 2527-2536.
  • Sukopp, Thomas 2003: Human Rights. Claim and Reality. Human dignity, natural law and human nature. Marburg: Tectum Verlag.
  • Pro Social Charter 2014: Facts on the revised European Social Charter. In: Pro Social Charter - Social human rights are rights of freedom. < http://www.sozialcharta.ch/home.php?n1=24&lang=de > June 3, 2014
  • United Nations, Department of Public Information. Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice. In United Nations. We the Peoples ... A stronger UN for a better world. < http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter9.shtml > May 20, 2014
  • UN 1986: Declaration on the Right to Development. < http://www.un.org/Depts/german/uebereinkommen/ar41128.pdf >. May 16, 2014
  • United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014
  • USLegal 2014: American Declaration on the Right and Duties of Man Law & Legal Definition. In: USLegal Definitions. < http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/american-declaration-on-the-right-and-duties-of-man/ > June 3, 2014
  • Vandenbogaerde, Arne 2013: The Right to Development in International Human Rights Law. A call for its dissolution. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 31 (2): 187-209. < http://www.nqhr.net/pdf_file/ITS/NQHR_31_02_0187.pdf >. May 21, 2014.
  • Ziai, Aram 2010: On the Critique of the Development Discourse. In: Federal Center for Political Education. < http://www.bpb.de/apuz/32908/zur-kritik-des-entwicklungsdiskurses?p=all >. May 18, 2014

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ UN 1986: Declaration on the right to development. < Http://www.un.org/Depts/german/uebereinkommen/ar41128.pdf >. May 16, 2014
  2. ^ United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014
  3. ↑ Sukopp, Thomas 2003: Menschenrechte. Claim and Reality. Human dignity, natural law and human nature. Marburg: Tectum Verlag, p. 25f.
  4. ↑ Sukopp, Thomas 2003: Menschenrechte. Claim and Reality. Human dignity, natural law and human nature. Marburg: Tectum Verlag. P. 27
  5. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian and Johannes Thema (eds.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 69–71.
  6. ↑ Büschel, Hubertus 2010: History of Development Policy. In: Docupedia contemporary history. < http://docupedia.de/zg/Geschichte_der_Entwicklungspolitik >. May 18, 2014
  7. ↑ Ziai, Aram 2010: On the Critique of the Development Discourse. In: Federal Center for Political Education. < http://www.bpb.de/apuz/32908/zur-kritik-des-entwicklungsdiskurses?p=all >. May 18, 2014.
  8. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, pp. 278-279.
  9. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian and Johannes Thema (eds.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, p. 74.
  10. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian and Johannes Thema (eds.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 73–75.
  11. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian u. Johannes Thema (Ed.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 76–78.
  12. ↑ Cf. Frank, Andre Gunder 1967: Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America. New York: Monthly Review Press
  13. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian u. Johannes Thema (Ed.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 79–80.
  14. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian u. Johannes Thema (Ed.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 80–82.
  15. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian u. Johannes Thema (Ed.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, p. 82.
  16. ↑ Akude 2011: 83
  17. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 280
  18. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, pp. 294-296.
  19. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 286
  20. ↑ UN 1974 quoted from Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 309.
  21. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 357.
  22. ↑ Leemann 2013: 369-373.
  23. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian and Johannes Thema (eds.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, p. 70.
  24. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian u. Johannes Thema (Ed.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 84–86.
  25. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 236.
  26. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian and Johannes Thema (eds.): Sustainability in development cooperation. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, p. 70.
  27. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, pp. 449–456
  28. ↑ Akude, John Emeka 2011: Theories of Development Policy. An overview. In: König, Julian and Johannes Thema (eds.): Sustainability in development cooperation . Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, p. 89.
  29. ↑ Holtz, Uwe 2013: Contents of Development Policy. In: Ihne, Hartmut and Jürgen Willhelm (Ed.): Introduction to Development Policy. Münster: LIT Verlag, p. 41.
  30. ↑ Holtz, Uwe 2013: Contents of Development Policy. In: Ihne, Hartmut and Jürgen Willhelm (Ed.): Introduction to Development Policy. Münster: LIT Verlag, pp. 42-44.
  31. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, pp. 449–456.
  32. ^ UN 1986: Declaration on the Right to Development. < http://www.un.org/Depts/german/uebereinkommen/ar41128.pdf >. May 16, 2014.
  33. ^ United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014, p. 2.
  34. ^ United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014, pp. 3–4.
  35. ^ United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014, p. 6.
  36. ^ United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014, p. 3.
  37. ^ United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014, p. 6.
  38. ^ United Nations 2010: Right to Development. Report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session. Addendum: Right to Development Criteria and Operational Sub-Criteria. < Http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HLTFSession6th.aspx >. May 10, 2014, p. 5.
  39. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 86.
  40. ↑ United Nations Charter 1945. https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf . June 25, 2014.
  41. ↑ Art. 55 United Nations Charter 1945. https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf . June 25, 2014.
  42. ↑ United Nations Charter 1945. https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf . June 25, 2014.
  43. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 479.
  44. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 275.
  45. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 478 f.
  46. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 376.
  47. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 377.
  48. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 77.
  49. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 481.
  50. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 78.
  51. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 79.
  52. ↑ Leemann, Ramon 2013: Development as Self-Determination. The human rights formulation of self-determination and development in the UN. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, p. 83.
  53. ↑ Sengupta, Arjung 2001: Right to Development as a Human Right. Economic and Political Weekly 36 (27): 2529.
  54. ↑ Sengupta, Arjung 2001: Right to Development as a Human Right. Economic and Political Weekly 36 (27): 2531.
  55. ↑ Sengupta, Arjung 2001: Right to Development as a Human Right. Economic and Political Weekly 36 (27): 2531
  56. ↑ Sengupta, Arjung 2001: Right to Development as a Human Right. Economic and Political Weekly 36 (27): 2529.
  57. ^ Vandenbogaerde, Arne 2013: The Right to Development in International Human Rights Law. A call for its dissolution. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 31 (2): 187-209. < Archived copy ( memento of the original from March 4, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. >. May 21, 2014, p. 188. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.nqhr.net
  58. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 475.
  59. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 482.
  60. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 483.
  61. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 484.
  62. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 490.
  63. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 493.
  64. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 492.
  65. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 504.
  66. ↑ Donnelly, Jack 1985: In Search of the Unicorn. The Jurisprudence and Politics of the Right to Development. California Western International Law Journal 15: 506.
  67. ^ Escobar, Arturo 1992: Imagining a Post-Development Era? Critical Thought, Development and Social Movements. Social Text 31 (32): 23.
  68. ^ Escobar, Arturo 1992: Imagining a Post-Development Era? Critical Thought, Development and Social Movements. Social Text 31 (32): 24.
  69. ^ Escobar, Arturo 1992: Imagining a Post-Development Era? Critical Thought, Development and Social Movements. Social Text 31 (32): 22.
  70. ^ Escobar, Arturo 1992: Imagining a Post-Development Era? Critical Thought, Development and Social Movements. Social Text 31 (32): 27.
  71. ^ Ferguson, James 1990: The Anti-politics Machine. Development, De-politicization and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 69.