Abstract
Radhika Balakrishnan, Diane Elson and Rajeev Patel propose a novel focus and methodology that allows us to evaluate macro-economic policies from the perspective of the progressive realization of the people's economic and social human rights, and the States’ compliance with their minimal, basic responsibilities to their people.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
See the full text complete with a detailed study of USA and Mexico at http://networkideas.org/featart/mar2009/MES2.pdf, accessed 9 November 2009.
Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights; Part II, para. 6. Maastricht, the Netherlands, 22–26 January 1997.
These principles are taken from ICESR and Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and several general comments on the covenant.
The CESCR calls on each state ‘to take steps … to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of … rights … by all appropriate means’. The CESCR has clarified that ‘such steps should be deliberate, concrete and targeted as clearly as possible’ and that ‘the phrase ‘to the maximum of its available resources’ was intended … to refer to both the resources existing within a State and those available from the international community’. Since it is impossible to take steps toward the progressive realization of human rights without resources, the maximum available resources obligation is ‘both a protect and fulfill-bound obligation’.
CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 10. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has clarified that this is a continuing obligation, requiring states with inadequate resources to strive to insure enjoyment of rights (General Comment 3, para. 11); however, even in times of severe resource constraints, states must insure that rights are fulfilled for vulnerable members of society through the adoption of relatively low-cost targeted programs (General Comment 3, para. 12; General Comment 12, para. 28; General Comment 14, para. 18; and General Comment 14, para. 48; General Comment 15, para. 40).
The Limburg Principles devote an entire section to clarifying the grounds of discrimination mentioned in Article 2(2) of the ICESCR, clarifying that “the grounds of discrimination mentioned [therein] are not exhaustive” and are therefore open to broader interpretation. CERD, CEDAW and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action all reinforce the importance of non-discrimination and equality in the enjoyment of human rights.
UN CESCR, 2001, para. 14. UN Doc. E/C. 12.2001/10. Numerous additional human rights documents, such as the Pact San Jose, CEDAW, and various General Comments on the CESCR have explored and elaborated upon the importance of transparency, accountability and participation to the realization of human rights.
References
Epstein, Gerald and Ilene Grabel (2007) ‘Financial Policy’, UNDP – International Poverty Centre – Research Programme on Economic Policies, MDGs and Poverty, Training Module No. 3.
Morsink, Johannes (2000) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, drafting, and intent, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Saad Filho, Alfredo (2007) ‘Monetary Policy’, UNDP – International Poverty Centre – Research Programme on Economic Policies, MDGs and Poverty, Training Module No. 2.
Weeks, John and Shruti Patel (2007) ‘Fiscal Policy’, UNDP – International Poverty Centre – Research Programme on Economic Policies, MDGs and Poverty, Training Module No. 1.
Additional information
Proposes how the human rights framework could hold economic policy accountable
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Balakrishnan, R., Elson, D. & Patel, R. Rethinking Macro Economic Strategies from a Human Rights Perspective. Development 53, 27–36 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2009.83
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2009.83