Indirect Expropriation in Recent Investment Arbitration
In: Austrian review of international and European law: ARIEL, Volume 12, Issue 1, p. 83-102
ISSN: 1573-6512
21806 results
Sort by:
In: Austrian review of international and European law: ARIEL, Volume 12, Issue 1, p. 83-102
ISSN: 1573-6512
In: Postmodern culture, Volume 15, Issue 3
ISSN: 1053-1920
In: Critique communiste: revue mensuelle de la Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire (Section Française de la 4. Internationale), Issue 174, p. 102-106
ISSN: 0398-2068
In: Economic Analysis and Policy, Volume 29, Issue 1, p. 1-14
SSRN
In: Militaire spectator: MS ; maanblad ; waarin opgen. de officie͏̈le mededelingen van de Koninkl. Landmacht en de Koninkl. Luchtmacht, Volume 164, Issue 11, p. 519-523
ISSN: 0026-3869
In: Economics & politics, Volume 2, Issue 1, p. 83-108
ISSN: 1468-0343
In: Progress in nuclear energy: the international review journal covering all aspects of nuclear energy, Volume 23, Issue 2, p. 109-123
ISSN: 0149-1970
In: ICSID review: foreign investment law journal, Volume 1, Issue 1, p. 41-65
ISSN: 2049-1999
In: Journal of business communication: JBC, Volume 22, Issue 2, p. 5-8
ISSN: 1552-4582
In: Social philosophy & policy, Volume 1, Issue 2, p. 73-91
ISSN: 1471-6437
A TRADITIONAL VIEW OF UTILITY AND RIGHTSAccording to a conventional view, no project could be more hopelessly misconceived than the enterprise of attempting a utilitarian derivation of fundamental rights. We are all familiar – too familiar, perhaps – with the arguments that support this conventional view, but let us review them anyway. We may begin by recalling that, whereas the defining value of utilitarianism – pleasure, happiness or welfare – contains no mention of the dignity or autonomy of human beings, it is this value which utilitarianism in all its standard forms invokes as the criterion of right action. Worse, insofar as utilitarian policy must have as its goal the maximization of welfare conceived as an aggregate summed over the utilities of everyone affected, legal and political utilitarianism seems bound to have a collectivist bias, trading on the dangerous fiction of a social entity and ignoring the distinctness of separate selves with their several incommensurable claims.It seems that, if individuals can appear in the utilitarian calculus at all, it will only be as ciphers, abstract place-holders for units of welfare. For, as an aggregative value, utility must be indifferent to distribution, and insensitive to the preeminently distributive considerations marked by claims about rights. So, if whatever has utility can be broken down into units or elements which are subject to measurement or at least comparison by a common standard, then it will always be possible that a very great loss of welfare for one man or a few men can be justified if it produces a great many small increments of welfare for a vast multitude of men.
In: Asian Studies Association of Australia. Review, Volume 6, Issue 1, p. 1-3
In: The American economist: journal of the International Honor Society in Economics, Omicron Delta Epsilon, Volume 19, Issue 1, p. 32-37
ISSN: 2328-1235
In: The Economic Journal, Volume 58, Issue 232, p. 538