Publication: The Minimum Core Obligations of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: The Rights to Health and Education
Loading...
Date
2017-10
ISSN
Published
2017-10
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
Economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR), such as the right to education and the right to health, comprise one of the two principal pillars of the United Nation (UN) human rights framework - the other pillar of which is constituted of civil and political rights (CPR); together with the UDHR, these two groups of rights comprise the international bill of rights. ESCR also overlap substantially with development activities, in that they share significant subject matter coverage. Put differently, development activities now occupy many areas governed by ESCR. ESCR are also central to conflicts over resource allocation which increasingly arise in both developed and developing countries as a result of crises stemming from climate change, violent conflict, and war and displacement. In such resource, constrained contexts, ESCR, and minimum core doctrine (MCD) in particular, provide a potential means to prioritize resource allocation through the identification of minimum core obligations (MCOs).
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Shields, Kirsteen. 2017. The Minimum Core Obligations of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: The Rights to Health and Education. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/29145 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Minimum Core Obligations(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2017-10)The doctrine of the ‘minimum core’ (MCD) has in recent decades achieved prominence within international human rights law (IHRL) and practice. This enhanced profile is largely attributable to the activities of the United Nation’s Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (henceforth, ‘the Committee’). As this origin indicates, the MCD has been articulated in relation to the sub-set of human rights, usually denominated as ‘economic, social and cultural rights’, that are set out in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (henceforth, ‘the Covenant’). In addition, some regional and domestic legal regimes, notably in Africa and South America, have recognized some version of the MCD in relation to constitutional or legal rights. However, this report will almost exclusively concentrate on the nature and value of the MCD as it has developed within international law and practice. This Report proceeds in the following manner: (i) introduction; (ii) In section 2, an account is offered of the formative point of IHRL in general; (iii) In section 3, the concept of minimum core obligations of human rights is explored, i.e. what it is that marks out such obligations among other human rights standards; (iv) Section 4 contends that the main gist of the MCD is given by interpretation; (v) In section 5, it is argued that interpretation (a), standing alone, offers the best account of the MCD; (vi) Section 6 addresses the difficult question of how to determine the content of such obligations; (vii) Section 7 responds to two major challenges confronting the MCD; and (viii) Finally, Section 8 briefly examines how indicators and benchmarks are statistical tools that can help monitor and enhance compliance with minimum core obligations.Publication The Minimum Core of the Human Right to Health(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2017-10)This Report offers a critical interpretation of the idea of ‘minimum core obligations’ associated with the right to health in international, regional and domestic law and practice. Two important methodological complexities affecting this project need to be highlighted from the very outset. First, it cannot be assumed that all uses of expressions such as ‘the human right to health’, ‘the right to health’, or ‘minimum core obligations’ bear the same meaning. Second, in seeking to identify the role played by the idea of minimum core obligations in the law and practice relating to the right to health in various jurisdictions, we must distinguish the concept of such obligations from the use of the words ‘minimum core obligations’. The structure of this report is as follows. In Part II the idea of minimum core obligations corresponding to the right to health is examined as it manifests itself in international law and practice. Parts II and III consider how the same doctrine manifests itself in the context of regional legal orders (II) and state law and practice (III). Given the enormous volume of material potentially relevant here, these latter two parts are necessarily highly selective, with a focus on some of the most fertile cases for grasping the bearing on the minimum core doctrine on the right to health. Finally, in Part IV, the potential role of the minimum core obligations with respect to the right to health are highlighted with respect to development, focusing in particular on their bearing on the Sustainable Development Goals, priority-setting more generally, and the use of indicators.Publication Minimum Core and the Right to Education(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2017-10)Minimum core is a concept introduced by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (“Committee”) with the aim of ensuring “the satisfaction of, at the very least, minimum essential levels of each of the rights is incumbent upon every State party.” The minimum core concept aims to set a quantitative and qualitative floor of socio-economic and cultural rights that must be immediately realized by the state as a matter of top priority. The promise of the minimum core approach is “to give the notion of progressive realization a clearer direction and to evaluate the steps states have taken towards the progressive realization of particular rights”. Yet, the Committee itself has been inconsistent in defining the content and scope of the “minimum core” concept for different rights. Although the original definition—focused on minimum essential levels—seems narrowly constructed, in more recent General Comments, the Committee has given the “minimum core” a far more expansive interpretation.Further complicating the query is the fact thatstates rarely use “minimum core” terminology in State Reports to the Committee. Where national courts have referred to the “minimum core” concept—a rare reference—their interpretation has not always been consistent with that of the Committee. In academic literature, too, disagreements remain about the content, scope and even utility of the “minimum core” concept. Without taking a position on which interpretation of the “minimum core” is normatively desirable, this paper aims to provide a descriptive account of how different actors define the content and scope of “minimum core” of the right to education.The paper begins by providing a summary of academic engagement with the concept of “minimum core”, highlighting different features of the concept that have been identified in the literature. In Part two, the paper examines how the concept of “minimum core” is featured in the international legal framework. In Part three, the paper considers whether, and if so how, the concept of “minimum core” features in national laws and jurisprudence by sampling a few states. In Part four, the paper discusses the use of indicators and other quantitative measures in relation to the content of “minimum core”. The paper concludes by suggesting how development banks might use the concept of “minimum core” to guide their work.Publication Social Rights and Economics : Claims to Health Care and Education in Developing Countries(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-03)The author analyzes contemporary rights-based and economic approaches to health care and education in developing countries. He assesses the foundations and uses of social rights in development, outlines an economic approach to improving health and education services, and then highlights the differences, similarities, and the hard questions that the economic critique poses for rights. The author argues that the policy consequences of rights overlap considerably with a modern economic approach. Both the rights-based and the economic approaches are skeptical that electoral politics and de facto market rules provide sufficient accountability for the effective and equitable provision of health and education services, and that further intrasectoral reforms in governance, particularly those that strengthen the hand of service recipients, are needed. There remain differences between the two approaches. Whether procedures for service delivery are ends in themselves, the degree of disaggregation at which outcomes should be assessed, the consequences of long-term deprivation, metrics used for making tradeoffs, and the behavioral distortions that result from subsidies are all areas where the approaches diverge. Even here, however, the differences are not irreconcilable, and advocates of the approaches need not regard each other as antagonists.Publication The Law’s Majestic Equality? The Distributive Impact of Litigating Social and Economic Rights(2012-03-01)Optimism about the use of laws, constitutions, and rights to achieve social change has never been higher among practitioners. But the academic literature is skeptical that courts can direct resources toward the poor. This paper develops a nuanced account in which not all courts are the same. Countries and policy areas characterized by judicial decisions with broader applicability tend to avoid the potential anti-poor bias of courts, whereas areas dominated by individual litigation and individualized effects are less likely to have pro-poor outcomes. Using data on social and economic rights cases in five countries, the authors estimate the potential distributive impact of litigation by examining whether the poor are over or under-represented among the beneficiaries of litigation, relative to their share of the population. They find that the impact of courts varies considerably across the cases, but is positive and pro-poor in two of the five countries (India and South Africa), distribution-neutral in two others (Indonesia and Brazil), and sharply anti-poor in Nigeria. Overall, the results of litigation are much more positive for the poor than conventional wisdom would suggest.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication The Container Port Performance Index 2023(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024-07-18)The Container Port Performance Index (CPPI) measures the time container ships spend in port, making it an important point of reference for stakeholders in the global economy. These stakeholders include port authorities and operators, national governments, supranational organizations, development agencies, and other public and private players in trade and logistics. The index highlights where vessel time in container ports could be improved. Streamlining these processes would benefit all parties involved, including shipping lines, national governments, and consumers. This fourth edition of the CPPI relies on data from 405 container ports with at least 24 container ship port calls in the calendar year 2023. As in earlier editions of the CPPI, the ranking employs two different methodological approaches: an administrative (technical) approach and a statistical approach (using matrix factorization). Combining these two approaches ensures that the overall ranking of container ports reflects actual port performance as closely as possible while also being statistically robust. The CPPI methodology assesses the sequential steps of a container ship port call. ‘Total port hours’ refers to the total time elapsed from the moment a ship arrives at the port until the vessel leaves the berth after completing its cargo operations. The CPPI uses time as an indicator because time is very important to shipping lines, ports, and the entire logistics chain. However, time, as captured by the CPPI, is not the only way to measure port efficiency, so it does not tell the entire story of a port’s performance. Factors that can influence the time vessels spend in ports can be location-specific and under the port’s control (endogenous) or external and beyond the control of the port (exogenous). The CPPI measures time spent in container ports, strictly based on quantitative data only, which do not reveal the underlying factors or root causes of extended port times. A detailed port-specific diagnostic would be required to assess the contribution of underlying factors to the time a vessel spends in port. A very low ranking or a significant change in ranking may warrant special attention, for which the World Bank generally recommends a detailed diagnostic.Publication Global Economic Prospects, January 2025(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2025-01-16)Global growth is expected to hold steady at 2.7 percent in 2025-26. However, the global economy appears to be settling at a low growth rate that will be insufficient to foster sustained economic development—with the possibility of further headwinds from heightened policy uncertainty and adverse trade policy shifts, geopolitical tensions, persistent inflation, and climate-related natural disasters. Against this backdrop, emerging market and developing economies are set to enter the second quarter of the twenty-first century with per capita incomes on a trajectory that implies substantially slower catch-up toward advanced-economy living standards than they previously experienced. Without course corrections, most low-income countries are unlikely to graduate to middle-income status by the middle of the century. Policy action at both global and national levels is needed to foster a more favorable external environment, enhance macroeconomic stability, reduce structural constraints, address the effects of climate change, and thus accelerate long-term growth and development.Publication Digital Progress and Trends Report 2023(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024-03-05)Digitalization is the transformational opportunity of our time. The digital sector has become a powerhouse of innovation, economic growth, and job creation. Value added in the IT services sector grew at 8 percent annually during 2000–22, nearly twice as fast as the global economy. Employment growth in IT services reached 7 percent annually, six times higher than total employment growth. The diffusion and adoption of digital technologies are just as critical as their invention. Digital uptake has accelerated since the COVID-19 pandemic, with 1.5 billion new internet users added from 2018 to 2022. The share of firms investing in digital solutions around the world has more than doubled from 2020 to 2022. Low-income countries, vulnerable populations, and small firms, however, have been falling behind, while transformative digital innovations such as artificial intelligence (AI) have been accelerating in higher-income countries. Although more than 90 percent of the population in high-income countries was online in 2022, only one in four people in low-income countries used the internet, and the speed of their connection was typically only a small fraction of that in wealthier countries. As businesses in technologically advanced countries integrate generative AI into their products and services, less than half of the businesses in many low- and middle-income countries have an internet connection. The growing digital divide is exacerbating the poverty and productivity gaps between richer and poorer economies. The Digital Progress and Trends Report series will track global digitalization progress and highlight policy trends, debates, and implications for low- and middle-income countries. The series adds to the global efforts to study the progress and trends of digitalization in two main ways: · By compiling, curating, and analyzing data from diverse sources to present a comprehensive picture of digitalization in low- and middle-income countries, including in-depth analyses on understudied topics. · By developing insights on policy opportunities, challenges, and debates and reflecting the perspectives of various stakeholders and the World Bank’s operational experiences. This report, the first in the series, aims to inform evidence-based policy making and motivate action among internal and external audiences and stakeholders. The report will bring global attention to high-performing countries that have valuable experience to share as well as to areas where efforts will need to be redoubled.Publication Global Economic Prospects, January 2024(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024-01-09)Note: Chart 1.2.B has been updated on January 18, 2024. Chart 2.2.3 B has been updated on January 14, 2024. Global growth is expected to slow further this year, reflecting the lagged and ongoing effects of tight monetary policy to rein in inflation, restrictive credit conditions, and anemic global trade and investment. Downside risks include an escalation of the recent conflict in the Middle East, financial stress, persistent inflation, weaker-than-expected activity in China, trade fragmentation, and climate-related disasters. Against this backdrop, policy makers face enormous challenges. In emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs), commodity exporters face the enduring challenges posed by fiscal policy procyclicality and volatility, which highlight the need for robust fiscal frameworks. Across EMDEs, previous episodes of investment growth acceleration underscore the critical importance of macroeconomic and structural policies and an enabling institutional environment in bolstering investment and long-term growth. At the global level, cooperation needs to be strengthened to provide debt relief, facilitate trade integration, tackle climate change, and alleviate food insecurity.Publication Global Economic Prospects, June 2025(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2025-06-10)The global economy is facing another substantial headwind, emanating largely from an increase in trade tensions and heightened global policy uncertainty. For emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs), the ability to boost job creation and reduce extreme poverty has declined. Key downside risks include a further escalation of trade barriers and continued policy uncertainty. These challenges are exacerbated by subdued foreign direct investment into EMDEs. Global cooperation is needed to restore a more stable international trade environment and scale up support for vulnerable countries grappling with conflict, debt burdens, and climate change. Domestic policy action is also critical to contain inflation risks and strengthen fiscal resilience. To accelerate job creation and long-term growth, structural reforms must focus on raising institutional quality, attracting private investment, and strengthening human capital and labor markets. Countries in fragile and conflict situations face daunting development challenges that will require tailored domestic policy reforms and well-coordinated multilateral support.