Search results

Draghici contends that the advent of assisted reproductive technologies has given rise to new fundamental, albeit not unqualified, rights. They include the right to use medically assisted procreation (e.g. artificial insemination, in vitro fertilisation, potentially gamete donation, posthumous conception or surrogacy) in order to become a parent (typically where natural procreation is hindered by infertility, sexual orientation, relationship status or adverse life events), the recognition of intention-based parenthood in relation to donor-conceived children jointly planned and raised with the genetic parent, and the right to pursue the conception of a healthy child (e.g. through recourse to preimplantation genetic diagnosis and embryo selection to avoid severe illness in future offspring). To substantiate this claim, the book relies on a comprehensive analysis of international case-law on procreative autonomy, contextualised by a discussion of highly divisive bioethical controversies, from the status of embryos to the morality of genetic screening and third-party reproduction.

Résumé Cet article traite de l'influence et des limites des diasporas dans les relations internationales, en mettant l'accent sur le cas arménien. La diaspora arménienne, une des diasporas « classiques », est largement une conséquence du génocide de 1915. Depuis les années 1960, elle a été largement mobilisée pour une reconnaissance internationale contre le négationnisme turc. Avec l'émergence d'une Arménie indépendante en 1991, la diaspora est devenue un acteur des relations internationales en développant son influence politique en Arménie et en exerçant son action de lobbying dans les grandes capitales comme Washington. Cependant, comme le récent rapprochement arméno-turc l'a montré, le poids de la diaspora est efficace quand il marche la main dans la main avec l'orientation politique d'Erevan, mais pas contre elle.

Shipping list no.: 95-0195-P. ; Distributed to some depository libraries in microfiche. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Modern theoretical approaches to interpretations of the concepts "multilaterality", "multipolarity", "multi-vector foreign policy" are investigated. Features of multi-vector foreign policy are considered in the countries of the post-Soviet space.Aim. Determine the basic theoretical and consider practical approaches to multilateralism in international relations.Tasks. To identify the main differences in the interpretations of the concept of "multi-line" at the present stage. Determine the ratios between multilaterality and multipolarity. Formulate the main differences in views on the versatility between Western and developing countries. Consider the main manifestations of the multi-vector's external policy of the countries of the post-Soviet space, paying attention to the EAEU countries.Methods. The main place in the study was taken by the comparison method. Multilateity was seen as the principle of conducting international affairs and making decisions by the state; In other words, the foreign policy process. For this, the model of R. Patema was used, in which foreign policy decisions are made in the logic of a two-level game, with the domestic political and foreign policy levels. Multilateity is the factor of the second level. The factor of the first level is the manifestation of the socio-economic policy of the state.Results. Modern theoretical and practical approaches to multilateralism have been investigated.Conclusions. There are no uniform interpretations of the concept of multilaterality. The main differences are associated with a place that occupies the concept of "values". Whether the values are the basis of multilaterality or vice versa — the versatility of the process of coming to common values. This is a fairly fundamental issue for multipolarity. Multipolarity can exist without multilateralism.The centuries-old foreign policy in the conditions of the post-Soviet space contributes to the instability of states and leads to economic and political crises in these states.

Welcome to the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), in Hotel Pullman, Redwood City, USA. In last 30 years, SEKE has established itself as a major international forum to foster, among academia, industry, and government agencies, discussion and exchange of ideas, research results and experience in software engineering and knowledge engineering. The SEKE community has grown to become a very important and influential source of ideas and innovations on the interplays between software engineering and knowledge engineering, and its impact on the knowledge economy has been felt worldwide. On behalf of the Program Committee, it is my great pleasure to invite you to participate, not only in the technical program of SEKE 2018 and its rich assortment of activities, but also in enjoying the beautiful San Francisco Bay Area. This year, we received 214 submissions from 32 countries. Through a rigorous review process where a majority (90 percent) of the submitted papers received three reviews, and the rest with two reviews, we were able to select 75 full papers for the general conference (35 percent), 72 short papers (34 percent), 35 posters (16 percent) and 32 (15 percent) reject. Out of that, 15 papers have been accepted for the 3 special sessions (SESE 4 papers, DISA 7 papers and LATTICE 4 papers), and 132 papers are scheduled for presentation in thirty five sessions during the conference. In addition, the technical program includes three excellent keynote speeches, as well as the special sessions on Semantic Enabled Software Engineering (SESE), Data Intensive Servicebased Applications (DISA) and Conceptual Lattices for Software Systems Engineering (LATTICE). The high quality of the SEKE 2018 technical program would not have been possible without the tireless effort and hard work of many individuals. First of all, we would like to express our sincere appreciation to all the authors whose technical contributions have made the final technical program possible. We are very ...

Depledge, J.: From Kyoto to Buenos Aires and beyond. - S. 7-16. Campbell, L. B.: The role of the private sector and other non-state actors in implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. - S. 17-41. Redgwell, C.: Non-compliance procedures and the climate change convention. - S. 43-67. Sampson, G. P.: WTO rules and climate change. - S. 69-85. Chambers, W. B.: International trade law and the Kyoto Protocol: potential incompatibilities. - S. 87-118. Zhong Xiang Zhang: Greenhouse-gas emissions trading and the world trading system. - S. 119-151. Werksman, J.: Greenhouse-gas emissions trading and the WTO. - S. 153-190. Werksman, J.; Santoro, C.: Investing in sustainable development. The potential interaction between the Kyoto Protocol and the Multilateral Agreement on Investment. - S. 191-213. Worika, I. L.; Brown, M.; Vinogradov, S.: Contractual aspects of implementing the clean development mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol. - S. 215-246. Appendix: Summary explanation of a standardized agreement for a clean development mechanism (CDM) project. - S. 247-259

Le moment est bien choisi pour réfléchir à notre situation en matière de compétence universelle. La plus haute juridiction du système judiciaire français, la Cour de cassation, a décidé le 12 mai 2023 que les affaires d'atrocités internationales pouvaient continuer à être jugées par les tribunaux français sur la base du principe de la compétence universelle. Cette question s'est posée après que la Cour a décidé, en novembre 2021, qu'un suspect syrien ne pouvait être jugé pour « complicité de crimes contre l'humanité » au motif que la loi syrienne ne prévoit pas cette incrimination exacte. Cette décision a été un désastre pour les acteurs du dossier syrien et, plus généralement, pour tous ceux qui sont engagés dans la lutte contre l'impunité. La Cour de cassation vient de clarifier cette interprétation et de revenir sur sa décision, au grand soulagement des acteurs de la société civile impliqués dans le dossier, au premier rang desquels les collègues syriens.

Given the diversity of opinions about whether, how, and towards which end Western societies should defend Ukraine against the ongoing Russian aggression, it would be desirable to spell out clear moral principles and apply them in a contextually adequate way to the situation. This is what Hans-Herbert Kögler tries to do in his contribution to this issue. However, his reasoning remains unclear about the relation between moral philosophy and empirical and historical knowledge about the context of moral action. Furthermore, while he proposes critical-hermeneutic reconstruction as a means to understand the participants in the conflicts, he applies this approach in an asymmetric and insufficiently nuanced way. His view of the conflict as a struggle between democracy and dictatorship about a future world-order is too dichotomic and ignores the history of international law as a practical moral philosophy dealing with situations for which there are no unambiguous principles that could guide action.

AbstractOverlap among international institutions affects the strategic options that are available to actors. Yet no existing approach fully explains who benefits from regime complexity. While some point to materially powerful actors, others highlight weaker challengers of the status quo. Drawing on historical institutionalism, I conceptualize two dimensions of complexity. I argue that depending on the mode of interaction among the institutions in and the degree of institutional fragmentation of a governance area, opportunity structures for weaker challengers are more open or closed. Shifts on these dimensions over time thus lead to an opening or a closure of opportunity structures for challengers. I assess this argument by focusing on such shifts in two areas intellectual property regulation. The article contributes to the overall topic of the special issue and advances the literature on regime complexity by highlighting the divergent effects of different forms of institutional complexity on different classes of actors.

This essay revisits the case of the earthquake that shook Port-au-Prince, Haiti—which completed ten years in January 2020—to discuss the enduring, and often unaccounted for, colonial links between representation and contemporary humanitarian practices that are present in different ways in both North-South (in this case, between US and Haiti) and South-South relations (Brazil-Haiti). Unlike conventional approaches to natural disasters, which tend to focus their object of study in one particular place and time, I would like to propose an approach that instead engages multiple spaces, temporalities and agencies. In the context of this critical approach, and as a background question, I invite us to ask: what does international solidarity mean? The result is a more complex lens with which to look at events that are likely to become more frequent, and to affect the socio-economically disadvantaged in disproportional numbers in the near future due to the climate crisis.

AbstractThis paper investigates the effects of international migration on the schooling and labour outcomes of left‐behind children in rural Tajikistan. Using three‐wave panel survey data, I rely on an instrumental variable strategy to address the non‐random selection into migration. I identify important and gender‐differenced schooling and labour supply responses. My findings suggest that boys living in migrant households are less likely to lag behind at school or work. At the intensive margin, they also report fewer hours of work per week. On the other hand, left‐behind teenage females undertake a higher number of domestic chores. They appear to marry earlier as well. The migration impact on boys appears to be driven by remittances and the improved financial situation of households. The absence of any positive influence on the education of left‐behind girls is likely to be explained by Tajikistan's cultural norms and institutions.

During the past three decades national human rights institutions (NHRIs) have spread to more than one hundred United Nations (UN) member states and become key to human rights enforcement and democratic accountability. Given that NHRIs can take on a life of their own even under adverse conditions, why do governments in the developing world create permanent, independent national bodies with statutory powers to promote and protect human rights? Human rights international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) are crucial for global diffusion. They empower local actors and influence governments in favor of NHRI adoption by mediating the human rights and NHRI discourses and mobilizing shame internationally. An event history analysis offers robust evidence that controlling for the UN, regional organizations, and other rival factors, human rights INGOs have systematic positive effects on diffusion. The case studies of South Korea and Malaysia provide process-tracing evidence that the hypothesized causal mechanisms are operative.

Do knowledge and information about foreign countries affect people's evaluation of domestic situations? Using unique survey and experimental data, this research finds that Chinese citizens with more positive perceptions and especially overestimation of foreign socioeconomic conditions have more negative evaluations of China and the Chinese government. Moreover, correcting socioeconomic misinformation about foreign countries improves one's evaluations of China, indicating that the causal direction is at least partly from rosier estimation of foreign conditions to lower domestic evaluations. The relationship between domestic evaluations and international political knowledge, as measured by familiarity with political affairs and figures in foreign countries, is typically not significant, although awareness of political instability in other countries can increase satisfaction with one's own country. These results contribute both substantively and conceptually to the study of politically relevant knowledge and information, and shed new light on the nuances of information flow and opinion formation in changing societies.

During the past three decades national human rights institutions (NHRIs) have spread to more than one hundred United Nations (UN) member states and become key to human rights enforcement and democratic accountability. Given that NHRIs can take on a life of their own even under adverse conditions, why do governments in the developing world create permanent, independent national bodies with statutory powers to promote and protect human rights? Human rights international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) are crucial for global diffusion. They empower local actors and influence governments in favor of NHRI adoption by mediating the human rights and NHRI discourses and mobilizing shame internationally. An event history analysis offers robust evidence that controlling for the UN, regional organizations, and other rival factors, human rights INGOs have systematic positive effects on diffusion. The case studies of South Korea and Malaysia provide process-tracing evidence that the hypothesized causal mechanisms are operative.