Rights of Culture, Rights of Conscience
Between Cosmopolitan Ideals and State Sovereignty, Page: 109-119
2006
- 46Usage
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage46
- Downloads30
- Abstract Views16
- Captures1
- Readers1
Book Chapter Description
In this contribution I take up a particularly troubling issue in the theory of human rights. It is the issue of intervention to defend or uphold — or re-assert and re-establish — human rights. The issue is a troubling one because intervention in the affairs of others is always something we should be wary of, not least because history is full of unhappy episodes of intervention, from the Spanish in the Americas to the Chinese in Tibet. Indeed, so difficult and complex are the issues raised that one might be tempted in a discussion of human rights simply to separate the two matters — intervention and rights — and deal with them as distinct problems. To the extent that we deal with both, it might be argued, we should first work out what human rights are, and then turn to the very separate question of when and how we might intervene to support them. My contention in this contribution, however, is that the theory of human rights ought to incorporate a theory of intervention; and a part of the purpose of this contribution is to explain how this should be done.
Bibliographic Details
http://link.springer.com/10.1057/9780230288928_10; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057/9780230288928_10; http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230288928_10; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/2989; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4246&context=soss_research; https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230288928_10; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230288928_10
Springer Nature
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know