Search results

The ILO Minimum Age Conventions, adopted from 1919 - 1973, got their form in the post World War I context of industrialization, urbanization, social instability and a growing trade union movement, and were modelled on the late 19th century European labour legislation. It was a time of heavy unemployment, and the workers perceived child labourers as competitors on the labour market. Ethiopia is one of the poorest countries of the world with a population of 90 million and a median age of 17.5 years. Primary education has been expanded and now reaches about 75% of the relevant age-group, while only 15% continue into secondary education. The contribution of the younger generation to productivity is essential and child labour is the prevailing norm. In the Ethiopian Constitution adopted 1995, the rights of children were addressed: the right to life, to education and to protection from labour exploitation. Ethiopia is signatory to the ILOConvention 138 and its national law has set the age-limit to 14 years. Ethiopia is a beneficiary of the World Bank's lending program to strengthen market economy, which has implications for children's employment and working conditions. During 2012 we did a study interviewing children working in the agricultural sector to discern how the globalisation of economy and human rights norms affect their lives. The situation for child agricultural workers in Ethiopia is an illustration of how child workers as agents are finding ways to manage within the legal and economic structures based on experiences from the West.

A growing number of jurisdictions have recently granted rights to nature. This article places the potential disruptions generated by this legal development in historical, comparative perspective. The questions that scholars are asking about rights of nature (RoN) are similar to many of those asked by historians and legal scholars about human rightsholders. These questions arise from some of the tensions within liberalism. Placing these tensions in comparative context offers a framework with which to interpret RoN developments. Doing so demonstrates, first, the capacity of the existing liberal order to incorporate challenges into already functioning structures and, second, that such efforts to manage the claims of new subjects of rights nonetheless can transform relations. In our conclusion, we argue that a comparative perspective may allay the tendency to exoticise rights of nature by examining the extent to which their development in sometime contentious and sometimes complementary relationship with democratic institutions is reflected in historical efforts to define and make meaningful the rights of human rightsholders.

A growing number of jurisdictions have recently granted rights to nature. This article places the potential disruptions generated by this legal development in historical, comparative perspective. The questions that scholars are asking about rights of nature (RoN) are similar to many of those asked by historians and legal scholars about human rightsholders. These questions arise from some of the tensions within liberalism. Placing these tensions in comparative context offers a framework with which to interpret RoN developments. Doing so demonstrates, first, the capacity of the existing liberal order to incorporate challenges into already functioning structures and, second, that such efforts to manage the claims of new subjects of rights nonetheless can transform relations. In our conclusion, we argue that a comparative perspective may allay the tendency to exoticise rights of nature by examining the extent to which their development in sometime contentious and sometimes complementary relationship with democratic institutions is reflected in historical efforts to define and make meaningful the rights of human rightsholders.