Who should pay for humanitarian intervention

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6259784
AutoresFredrik D Hjorthen (0000-0002-8774-6889, University of Gothenburg, autor de correspondencia)
Año2020
Volumen19
Número3
Páginas334-353
Fecha de publicación2020-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaEuropean Journal of Political Theory (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1474-8851 • E-ISSN: 1741-2730
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1474885117697468
OpenAlexW2595402752
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas3
Referencias citadas52

While some suggestions have been made as to how the duty to undertake humanitarian intervention should be assigned to specific states, the question of how to assign the duty to carry the economic and material costs remains underexplored. In this paper, I argue that the most plausible answer to this question is found in a pluralist approach. First, we should look to the Contribution to Problem Principle, according to which the costs are shared based on the historical responsibility of states for the occurrence of atrocities. For the many cases where this principle does not apply or needs to be supplemented, I suggest a novel alternative in the Entitlement-adjusted Ability Principle, according to which costs should be distributed based on states' levels of resources that have been tainted by historical rights violations

Duty · Economics · Entitlement (fair division · Human rights · Humanitarian intervention · Intervention (counseling · Law and economics · Microeconomics · Political science · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Law · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Psychology · War, Ethics, and Justification