![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
Building on a previously proposed methodology for an index of economic and social rights fulfillment, this article presents country scores and rankings based on the Economic and Social Rights Fulfillment Index (ESRF Index). Unlike socioeconomic indicators, which are often used as proxies for the extent to which rights-holders enjoy economic and social rights, the ESRF Index incorporates the perspective of the duty-bearer as well as the rights-holder and takes into account the principle of progressive realization. The resulting scores and rankings provide important new information that complements other measures of economic and social rights fulfillment. The ESRF Index is an important conceptual and methodological breakthrough; although it still does not capture all key human rights principles, such as the rights to participation, nondiscrimination, and equality. The article also analyzes the results of the global ranking and outlines some priorities for further research.
Dr. Randolph's research addresses a broad range of issues in development economics, including poverty, inequality, food security, and economic rights and has been published in numerous refereed journals.
Her current work focuses on human rights and development policy as well as the norms guiding international development agendas. Sakiko was lead author and director of UNDP's Human Development Reports before joining the New School. Her numerous publications have addressed topics including poverty, gender, human rights, and technology for development.
Her research addresses economic development, natural resources, property rights, human rights, climate change, transnational corporations, and the relationship between de jure and de facto institutions. Ms. Lawson-Remer has directed projects for numerous NGOs in the fields of law and development.
Notes
1. We will explore the relationship between resources and human rights obligations in a follow-up article.
2. No internationally harmonized data exist on homelessness or other aspects of the right to housing relevant to high-income OECD countries. The absence of relevant internationally harmonized data also prevented us from taking into account the sixth substantive right, the right to social security, for either developing or high-income OECD countries.
3. We refer readers to our previous article (CitationFukuda-Parr et al. 2009) for a full discussion of the criteria-guiding indicator selection, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the selected indicators.
4. Our Achievement Possibilities Frontier (APF) is analogous to the economists’ single input, single output, production function. It shows the maximum level of output (achievement on the indicator of concern) feasible to produce (using best practices) for any specified level of the input (GDP per capita).
5. To guard against the use of unreliable data, observations from countries enduring major conflicts within the past ten years were excluded from the frontier plots. Countries enduring major conflicts were identified using the CitationUppsala Conflict Data Program (2007). In addition, because transitional countries’ per capita GDP plummeted during the 1990s yet their human capital and the physical infrastructure laid prior to the transition supporting ESR fulfillment did not deteriorate to the same degree, to ensure the AFPs reflect what is reasonably achievable by any country, transitional countries were assigned their pretransitional per capita GDP until their per capita GDP levels rebounded. See CitationFukuda-Parr et al. (2009) for further details.
6. The principle of non-retrogression requires that states neither withdraw support (legislation, policies, programs) or in other manner allow an economic, social, or cultural right's level of realization to decline. For further information see CitationOffice of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (1990).
7. Scatter plots of the percentage of babies that are above 2500 grams (that are “normal” birth weight) against per capita income indicate the percentage of normal birth weight babies initially rises with per capita income but subsequently falls with further gains in per capita GDP. The initial rise is likely due to improved nutrition and health care as per capita income rises from low- to middle-income levels. The subsequent decline is likely due to medical technology enabling premature infants that otherwise would be stillbirths to survive. Because we only use this indicator for high-income countries, we set the frontier at the highest value achieved by a high-income country as opposed to the highest value achieved by any country.
8. The primary data sources are the World Development Indicators Online (The CitationWorld Bank Group 2009c); EdStats Online (The CitationWorld Bank Group 2009a), HNPStats Online (The CitationWorld Bank Group 2009b ); PovCalNet Online (CitationWorld Bank 2009); Key Indicators of the Labor Market (KILM) Online (International Labour Office 2009), WHO Statistical Information System (WHOSIS) Online (CitationWorld Health Organization 2009b), WHO Global Infobase Online (CitationWorld Health Organization 2009a), International Programme for Student Assessment (PISA) Online (CitationOrganization for Economic Cooperation and Development 2009), LIS Key Figures Online (CitationLuxembourg Income Study 2009), and Millennium Development Goals Indicators Online (CitationUnited Nations Statistics Division 2009).
9. Economic and social rights obligations extend to the broader global community to be sure, as is explicitly stated in Articles 2 and 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (CitationUnited Nations 1966), Article 22 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (CitationUnited Nations 1948), and throughout the Declaration on the Right to Development (CitationUnited Nations 1986). Beyond the terms upon which aid is made available (policy constraints imposed as well as other terms), the quantity of aid made available to low-income countries can have an important influence on the enjoyment of economic and social rights in low-income countries. The individual and collective actions of other states also have an important influence on the realization of economic and social rights in any given State. However, our focus here is limited to a state's obligations to their own citizens.
10. Although among non-OECD high-income countries a positive correlation exists (top panel of Figure 9), the relationship is quite weak.
11. See, for example, the indicators proposed by the Office of the High Commission on Human Rights, OHCHR, for use in state monitoring in United Nations human rights processes for economic and social rights, or the indicators proposed by CitationBackman et al. (2008) to monitor the right to health.
12. Brazil has 26 states and one “autonomous sub-national entity,” the Distrito Federal, which includes the capital Brasília and its outskirts. However, Brazilian record-keeping accords the Distrito Federal the same status as a state.
13. See for example the Atlas do Desenvolvimento Humano no Brasil (Brazilian Atlas of Human Development) developed by UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (UNDP) Brazil.
14. See for example, the Office of the High Commission on Human Rights, OHCHR, “Report on Indicators for Promoting and Monitoring the Implementation of Human Rights’ International Human Rights Instrument” (2008).
15. See for example, CitationRoaf, Khalfan, and Langford (2005) for an example of the work being done by the Center on Housing Rights and Evictions, COHRE, and CitationRiedel (2006) for the work being done by FIAN International and the University of Mannheim.
16. See CitationBackman et al. (2008) for the right to health.
17. The eight contending penalty formulas were as follows: A. x* = x−(Y/Y p)β, for x < 100%, where x* = x for x = 100%; B. x* = x−[(Y−Y p)/Y p]β for x < 100%, where x* = x for x = 100%; C. x* = x−[(Y−Y p)/Y p]β for x<100%. x* = x for x = 100%; D. x* = 100−(100-x)(Y/Y p)β; E. x* = x (Y p/Y)β for x<100%. x* = x for x = 100%; F. x* = 100 (x/100)(Y/Y p); G. x* = x−[(Y—Y p)/Y p]β (100—x)γ. Here x is the raw value of the indicator, Y is per capita GDP, Yp is the per capita GDP level at which it is feasible to achieve 100% on the indicator value, β and γ are parameters, and x* is the value of the “penalty adjusted” indicator.
18. The eight criteria are as follows: (1) If the observed value of an indicator equals 100 percent, the adjusted score on the indicator equals 100 percent; (2) The adjusted score approaches the observed percent achievement as the observed percent achievement approaches the Y p value for the indicator concerned (Asymptotic equality); 3) As the country's GNP per capita level increases beyond Y p, so too does the penalty; (4) The penalty adjusts for the difficulty of achieving the right; (5) The penalty declines with higher values of the indicator; (6) The indicator has a meaningful range; (7) Simplicity: simple formulas are better than complex ones all else constant; (8) Flexibility: the formula allows one to impose alternative penalty rates.