research proposal human rights

Centre for Applied Human Rights

University | A to Z | Departments

Study with us
Doctoral research
Protective Fellowships
Masters level studies
Students in action
Chevening scholars
Publications
UNESCO Human Rights Defenders Hub
Generating Respect Hub
Human Rights City Hub
Sustaining activism and political space
Rethinking state and local power
Conflict and crisis: actors, norms, transformation
Art and the activist imagination
Global health rights and justice
Environment, nature and people
Researchers in action

Doctoral studies at CAHR

After studying the MA in Applied Human Rights, I was keen to continue in the Centre's PhD programme. The fieldwork experience I gained during the MA visit to Cape Town inspired my PhD's exploration of transitional justice, masculinities and male victimisation. Additionally, it gave me a head-start on the PhD by facilitating links with a network of practitioners. Lucy Harding, MA Student 2009/10; PhD awarded 2015

The Centre has an active research agenda and a growing number of PhD students. We are happy to entertain applications for doctoral studies on a wide range of topics in human rights, particularly on:

human rights defenders
human rights practice
human rights and development
legal empowerment
refugee law and policy
responsibility to protect
transitional justice

We particularly encourage applications from individuals with practical experience relating to the topic of their research. In keeping with the international nature of the Centre and its staff, we welcome applications from individuals from around the world. For current supervised topics, please see current PhD student profiles .

Research environment

The Centre, both independently and through its affiliations with the Department of Politics and International Relations and the York Law School , has an active programme of research and seeks to develop research communities on the topics noted above, including for example the inter-departmental Development and Conflict Working Group and York Law School’s Socio-Legal Research group. We regularly programme lectures, workshops and conferences on various human rights issues; we also host the Journal of Human Rights Practice (published by OUP). We view our doctoral students as key participants in the research activities of the Centre and the wider university and practitioner communities in which the Centre locates itself, including the Centre’s visiting human rights defenders . We would expect all of our doctoral students to actively contribute to the research environment of the Centre.

Supervision

For an indication of the range of potential areas of doctoral supervision available please see the research and staff pages of the Centre. For specific advice on applying and the possibility of supervision please contact the member of academic staff by which you would like to be supervised. Co-supervision is also available with academic staff in other departments and at other research centres.

Programme of study

Having decided to write my MA dissertation on land reform and the right to housing, I chose to pursue my research further by undertaking PhD study, with the rights of landless people in South Africa as the main case study. My supervisor has been very supportive in focusing my topic and in giving advice on the research process. Matthew Evans, MA Student 2009/10; PhD awarded 2013

In their first year of study, doctoral students will receive formal training in research methods conducted in conjunction with the Department of Politics and International Relations and the the York Law School. The training includes regular sessions during term on theory, ethics and methodology. In addition, doctoral students are invited to attend faculty research seminars and other academic events on campus.

The PhD programme does not include any formal course-work. Doctoral students are eligible to audit (or to formally enrol in) any of the postgraduate courses offered by the Centre as part of its MA in Applied Human Rights or its LLM in International Human Rights Law and Practice . Arrangements can also be made with other departments to audit (or enrol in) additional courses.

Progress, Dissertation and Examination

All PhD students are subject to formal reviews of progress. These formal reviews of progress take place at the end of the first year and at the end of the second year (or part-time equivalent).

Students meet regularly with their supervisor and attend a Thesis Advisory Panel twice a year. The purpose of these meetings is to discuss the student's progress, in particular with a view to ensuring that the student's thesis is completed on time.

After completing and submitting their thesis, the student must attend an oral examination. There are usually two examiners, at least one external to the University (in most cases a member of the academic staff of another higher education institution in the UK). If there is an internal examiner, he or she is normally a member of the academic staff of the University other than the candidate’s supervisor.

Full-time PhD students are expected to have completed and submitted their dissertation within 3 years of commencing studies. This deadline is extended to 6 years in the case of part-time students.

The Centre’s staff has consistently made time to talk with me about my work -- as well as any other concerns that arise. My supervisor has been fantastic. He helped me secure full funding for my PhD. He has also provided both academic opportunities and the chance to engage with, and contribute to, human rights practice. Lucy Harding, MA Student 2009/10; PhD awarded 2015

Only students who have applied to and have been accepted into the programme are eligible for consideration for financial assistance. Financial assistance is available both from the university and from external funders. Some opportunities for part-time employment as tutors or lecturers may also be available. We are happy to discuss potential scholarships and other assistance with individuals after an offer of admission has been made. Please be mindful that many scholarships have early application deadlines.

In recent years, the Centre has successfully nominated and advocated on behalf of prospective students for competitively awarded university and ESRC scholarship funding. This funding, in the case of UK students, can cover tuition and provide a basic stipend. Funding for international students through these routes is more limited and generally only covers a relatively small portion of their expenses (usually some of the tuition). In all cases, students seeking funding should apply early in the academic year. Most university and ESRC funding decisions are made by April so in order to be considered a complete application is recommended by the end of January. We are happy to support applications for external funding by prospective students, for example by providing letters of support for this purpose.

WRoCAH studentships The White Rose College of the Arts & Humanities (WRoCAH) is a Doctoral Training Partnership of the Universities of Leeds, Sheffield and York. It is responsible for the distribution of AHRC-funded studentships for these universities and for the coordination of a doctoral training programme. WRoCAH is able to offer over 50 AHRC studentships per year to candidates with a place for doctoral study at the Universities of Leeds, Sheffield or York. Applicants for an AHRC studentship must have applied for a place of study in an eligible School, Department or Centre and may only apply for funding at one of Leeds, Sheffield or York. The studentship application form and details of how to apply are only available from the WRoCAH website .

Applications and Further Information

We are happy to discuss your interest in doctoral studies with you. Please feel free to contact any of the staff of the Centre, particularly the person(s) who you would be interested in as a supervisor.

Find out more Current PhD students PhD Alumni Draft dissertation proposal (PDF , 153kb)

After having worked for several years in the protection of refugees and migrants with both NGOs and the UN, I had a desire to reflect and look more deeply into some of the issues encountered on the ground. The CAHR offered me the opportunity to conduct innovative and ethical academic research that considers above all the practical outcome for the people it aims to reach. I am particularly grateful for the support I receive from my supervisors regarding my interdisciplinary approach and the choice to apply a drama-based methodology in working with unaccompanied migrant children in South Africa. Lena Opfermann, PhD student

Centre for Applied Human Rights 6 Innovation Close , University of York , Heslington , York , YO10 5ZF , UK Tel: work +44 (0)1904 325830 | [email protected]

Unable to find any suggestions for your query...

The Essex website uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are consenting to their use. Please visit our cookie policy to find out which cookies we use and why. View cookie policy.

Human rights in postgrowth proposals and policies

Sustainable Transitions - Governance, Ecological Management and Society - Leverhulme Doctoral Training Programme 2024-25

Project area title: Human rights in postgrowth proposals and policies

Course: Applicants wanting to undertake this research project should apply for a PhD in Law

Funding: The University of Essex is offering six PhD research scholarships for students to participate in one of our Sustainable Transitions DTP projects.

This is an opportunity to conduct fully funded interdisciplinary research under the Sustainable Transitions Leverhulme Doctoral Training Programme at the University of Essex.

Amidst concern that the prevailing ‘green growth’ model advanced under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development will not avert climate, ecological and socioeconomic crises, increasing attention is being given to alternative post-growth and growth-agnostic policy approaches at a wide range of governmental and institutional levels. Research on the relationships between human rights and post- growth proposals such as degrowth or doughnut economics – in theory and practice - is in its infancy. This research project would develop the understanding of obstacles and opportunities to centre human rights in postgrowth approaches as a normative and legal foundation, to protect dignity and well-being and against the abuse of power.

Supervisory team

Secondary Discipline Supervisor

Interdisciplinary focus

International human rights law will provide a normative framing to analyse current shortcomings for human well-being in green transitions, and equally to analyse postgrowth proposals such as degrowth and doughnut economics and their contribution to social and environmental justice, and how this is advanced in local contexts. The project will incorporate political ecology (and human geography more broadly) approaches to analysing degrowth or doughnut economics as a series of proposals and programs that substantiate concrete alternatives within existing socio-economic arrangements and locations.

Political ecology, as the study of the intersection and relationship between politics, economics and the environment, will ensure a clear emphasis on social, economic and environmental processes as determinants of human rights. Political ecology focuses on mobilising critical social science approaches to these intersections, making use of a broad methodological approach incorporating qualitative methods such as ethnography, in-depth interviews and focus groups. Such methods can lead to an understanding of the way that postgrowth proposals may or may not produce socio-economic tensions and conflicts that bear upon human rights.

Training and support

You will be supported through the Sustainable Transitions training programme which provides initial training in interdisciplinary research methods, training in the secondary discipline within the project area, and ongoing training throughout the duration of the programme. All doctoral scholars benefit from the support of Proficio , which entitles you to £2,500 that can be used to purchase training courses either within or external to the University. Additionally, all scholars are entitled to an additional £10,000 that can be used to cover research costs and further training. Doctoral scholars are encouraged to audit/attend University masters and degree level courses where appropriate. You will also have the support of the Sustainable Transitions management team as well as your own supervisory team. All Sustainable Transitions scholars will become part of the University of Essex Centre for Environment and Society through which ongoing events and networking opportunities are available.

Person specification

The successful applicant will have a postgraduate taught degree (e.g. international law, international development, political ecology, environmental studies, human geography, human rights, gender studies) that includes a focus on human rights.

They will also have an interest in developing interdisciplinary research drawing on social science based approaches.

Research proposal

The project area is broadly defined, leaving scope for the applicant to develop their own specific research proposal as part of the application. The successful candidate will further develop their proposal in close consultation with the supervisory team.

Supervision

The primary discipline supervisor takes the lead responsibility for supervising the project. For further detail relating to supervision see the Guidance for Applicants (.pdf) document.

Additional background information

As governments and key institutions increasingly adopt pro-environmental policies and measures, a series of strong critiques extending into the heart of international climate processes has emerged around the compatibility of economic growth and action on key environmental issues such as climate change. In particular there is a conflict between the hegemonic framing of the issue as one where environmental issues are not only compatible with continued economic growth but will be solved through ‘green’ growth, and a series of critiques setting out how economic growth is incompatible and antagonistic to resolving the broad set of environmental crises we collectively face.

While debate continues over what constitute growth, and whether economic growth broadly understood necessarily includes increasing material and energy usage or is necessary for developing human well- being or flourishing, there has been a recent proliferation in postgrowth policy statements, frameworks and visions.

The social and environmental shortcomings of green growth approaches have resulted in increased attention to other pathways to secure human and environmental well-being under approaches like postgrowth, degrowth and doughnut economics. The human rights implications of these approaches remain underexplored, yet scholars are starting to identify broad synergies as well as potential tensions. Also, whilst increasingly addressing climate change as a human rights issue, and whilst human rights abuses have been arising in green transition contexts, the human rights community has given scant attention to what it would look like to live within planetary boundaries whilst actively protecting human rights and may learn valuable insights from engagement with postgrowth scholarship. While some work has started to be done to explore whether or not human well-being and flourishing is actually possible within planetary boundaries, under-explored is the question of how any transition to such a postgrowth state will impact human rights.

As socio-economic programs and policy developments have emerged as alternative approaches to social provisioning and economic production, including doughnut economies, circular economy, the commons, a renewed cooperativism and social economy, including at formal EU and national policy levels, there is thus an urgency to analyse the impacts of these developments, including the interest and engagement with degrowth and post-growth policies, on human rights and well-being.

Supervisory team references

Bueno De Mesquita, J. (2024). Re-interpreting human rights in the climate crisis: moving beyond economic growth and (un)sustainable development to a future with degrowth. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights
Beuret, N., (2021). Containing climate change: The new governmental strategies of catastrophic environments . Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space. 4 (3), 818-837
Beuret, Nicholas and Bettini, Giovanni and Turhan, Ethemcan (2021) On the Frontlines of Fear Migration and Climate Change in the Local Context of Sardinia, Italy . Acme: an international e-journal for critical geographies, 20 (3). pp. 322-340.
Bueno de Mesquita, J., Ohdedar, B., Chirwa, D., Fyock, C., Madhav, R (forthcoming, 2025), Law for a Post-growth Era: Global Perspectives on Environmental, Human Rights and Economic Law (Edward Elgar)
Bueno De Mesquita, J. and Forman, L., (2023). Normative Frameworks: Human Rights and Social Justice in Global Health. In: Global Health Law & Policy: Ensuring Justice for a Healthier World. Editors: Gostin, L. and Meier, BM (Oxford University Press)

Course Finder
Undergraduate study
Postgraduate study
Short courses and CPD
International students
Study online
Apprenticeships
Summer Schools
Essex living
Essex Sport
Colchester Campus
Southend Campus
Loughton Campus
Student facilities
Student services
Research excellence
Research showcase
Media requests
Research Excellence Framework (REF)
Research institutes and centres
Departments
How to pay your fees
General - [email protected]
Undergraduate - [email protected]
Postgraduate - [email protected]
+44 (0) 1206 873333
University of Essex
Wivenhoe Park
Colchester CO4 3SQ

Accessibility
Our privacy statements
Our transparency return
Modern slavery and human trafficking

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
v.9(10); 2012 Oct

Human Rights Research and Ethics Review: Protecting Individuals or Protecting the State?

Joseph j. amon.

1 Health and Human Rights Division, Human Rights Watch, New York, New York, United States of America

2 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America

Stefan D. Baral

3 Center for Public Health and Human Rights, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America

Chris Beyrer

4 Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America

Wrote the first draft of the manuscript: JJA. Contributed to the writing of the manuscript: JJA SDB CB NK. ICMJE criteria for authorship read and met: JJA SDB CB NK. Agree with manuscript results and conclusions: JJA SDB CB NK.

Joseph Amon and colleagues discuss the challenges of conducting human rights research in settings where local research ethics committees may favor the interests of the state over the interests of research participants.

Summary Points

Recently there has been a dramatic expansion in research conducted in low- and middle-income countries, as well as research ethics committees (RECs) in these countries.
RECs in low- and middle-income countries have little experience overseeing human rights research and may be subject to government control or influence that may favor the interests of the state over the interests of individual research participants.
Many human rights investigators are trained in disciplines with ethical codes and professional norms, but do not typically engage RECs nor see human rights documentation as research, and they tend to view REC approval as counterproductive to the protection of research participants.
Case studies of human rights research can provide important lessons on navigating conflicts of interest posed by some local (i.e., in country) RECs.
Expanding the use of community engagement and developing strong ethical operating principles can help ensure that individuals and researchers are protected in human rights research and investigations.

Human rights violations play an important role as determinants of, or structural barriers to, health [1] – [6] . Research, investigation, and documentation focused on human rights have led to the development of rights-based interventions [7] , [8] and the promotion of human rights in the core strategies of international health organizations [9] , [10] .

At the same time, health and human rights investigations raise complex ethical and methodological challenges [11] . Key questions have emerged about the roles of ethical review and research ethics committees (RECs) when criminalized or marginalized populations are part of research or program efforts [12] , [13] . Human rights researchers may also follow ethical codes and professional norms such as those of journalists or lawyers, for example, but these do not typically engage RECs and may in fact define their work differently than biomedical or epidemiologic definitions of “research” [14] – [16] . Furthermore, members of local (i.e., in country) RECs may have conflicts of interest when state actors have a role in or supervision over RECs and can exert their influence to limit the scope of or impede investigations into human rights abuses.

In some circumstances, interests other than ensuring the sound protection of research participants may come to dominate the decisions that RECs make, including whether they agree to review the research and/or allow the research to be conducted at all. Researchers aware of these decision-making processes may “self censor” the focus of their research or choose to conduct research elsewhere. As increasing amounts of research are conducted on the impact of human rights on health, more attention is needed on the roles of RECs and researchers to ensure genuine protection of the individuals involved in human rights investigations.

Here we present examples of how human rights researchers can address complex ethical challenges by building the capacity of community-based organizations representing vulnerable populations and by adopting ethical operating principles. We illustrate our policy proposals using case studies of research involving men who have sex with men (MSM) in Africa, ethnic minorities in Myanmar, and individuals in compulsory drug treatment centers in Asia.

Human Participant Protections

The protection of participants in health-related research has evolved into a well-articulated international framework supported by normative documents, conventions, and, in growing numbers of jurisdictions, laws. Key among these are the World Medical Association's 1964 Declaration of Helsinki [17] , the US Department of Health and Human Services Belmont Report and regulations for the protection of research participants [18] , [19] , the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences international ethical guidelines [20] , and the International Conference of Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use ( http://www.ich.org/ ). All of these guidelines require prior review of research by an REC before research can be implemented. More recently, the World Health Organization published standards for such committees outlining key requirements for their structure, governance, and review standards [21] .

Over the last ten years, there has been extraordinary growth in the numbers of RECs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). As new committees in LMICs have emerged, many countries have adopted a structure whereby local committees, affiliated with specific research institutions or organizations, are supported by a national committee. The national committee is in charge of creating policies, providing oversight, and, in some cases, performing an additional, final review.

Unfortunately, the methodology and intent of human rights research has not been fully considered in existing standards and guidelines on the ethical conduct of research. Similarly, RECs have traditionally been orientated to biomedical and epidemiologic research and have rarely considered human rights research. While principles such as autonomy, beneficence, non-malevolence, and justice are common to ethical codes in diverse disciplines [14] – [16] , [18] , [22] , the definition of “research” and the requirement for REC review are not universal across different types of research.

Defining “Research”

The definition of research and the difference between health research (typically requiring ethics review) and monitoring, evaluation, or practice (typically exempt from review) are not straightforward [23] . For individuals engaged in rights research and RECs considering their jurisdiction over such research, the determination of whether a human rights investigation constitutes research can be contentious and may reflect differences in disciplinary training and professional norms.

Health and human rights investigations can often be considered “non-research” under the US Department of Health and Human Services and international definitions that define research as developing “generalizable knowledge” [19] , [20] . Documentation of particular human rights abuses, factors that contribute to particular cases of human rights abuse, or human rights protections in particular situations are not usually considered “generalizable.” While broader surveys determining the prevalence of abuses may be considered research, in some cases they may be considered monitoring, which, again, is commonly exempt from review. In addition, individuals who provide testimony or evidence of human rights abuses are not traditional research participants. Instead, these individuals have an important motivation for engagement in human rights investigations, that is, for seeing such investigations as perhaps their only means of achieving justice for themselves and their communities. Thus, their view of the balance of “risk” versus “benefit” may be substantially different from the view held by biomedical researchers or REC members.

Conducting Research on MSM and HIV in Africa

Recently identified HIV outbreaks among MSM in several African countries have revealed many neglected or hidden human rights abuses. These abuses include discrimination in access to HIV prevention and treatment, lack of access to justice, police abuse, arbitrary arrest and detention, and ill-treatment and torture. In nearly all African countries in which research has been conducted, HIV infection rates have been markedly higher among MSM than among other men of reproductive age [24] – [29] . These epidemics are occurring among largely hidden, stigmatized, and—in many countries—criminalized MSM communities, challenging research and service provision [30] .

In some countries, police have specifically targeted outreach workers providing information and condoms to MSM [31] , [32] , and health-care workers have been complicit in efforts to “prove” homosexuality with forced anal exams [33] – [35] . In Uganda, conducting research on MSM, including investigations of possible human rights abuses, has become difficult or impossible. Reasons for this difficulty include proposed legislation to make sodomy a capital offense and to criminalize the failure to report individuals suspected of engaging in homosexual behaviors, and targeted violence against individuals identified as MSM, including murder [36] , [37] .

Nevertheless, MSM health service providers and gay service and rights organizations and activists in many African countries have been enthusiastic partners in HIV-related programs, including research, even though governments have been reluctant to support research on MSM. In several cases, governments have actively opposed research that would lend credence to the reality that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons exist in their countries, and to the fact that MSM are at elevated risk for HIV infection [37] , [38] .

At one site of a multi-country study being conducted by two of the authors of this article (S. D. B. and C. B.), the head of the only university-based REC informed the research team that, since homosexuality was criminalized in the country, no research protocols related to MSM would be accepted for review. The REC chair told the researchers that the role of the REC included the protection of social and cultural values of the country. While RECs may legitimately reference social and cultural values in considering what constitutes risk to individual human participants, the REC in this case defined its role well beyond protection of human welfare to instead reinforce a political position of the state.

In response, researchers engaged community-based organizations serving MSM in the country to gauge the level of support for the study, and trained community leaders on research ethics [39] . The study protocol was then reviewed by community leaders, who suggested protocol changes based on further community consultation. At the same time, the protocols were also reviewed by a REC in the US that was informed that the in-country REC had refused to review the protocol. After approval by the US REC, the researchers decided that the final decision to proceed should be made by the community-based organizations in country based upon their assessment of the risks and benefits of the research. Community members also participated in validating research findings, and members of the community presented the results to their peers and in domestic and international forums.

Investigating Health and Human Rights in Myanmar

In democratic societies where government legitimacy has broad acceptance, and where ministries of health are seen as working to advance the health and well-being of the population, researchers rarely question whether academic or state entities have the right to form and oversee RECs. In contrast, in repressive societies, and where an REC is seen as not representative of, or legitimately protecting the interests of, a particular vulnerable group (e.g., prisoners, women, or an ethnic or religious minority), RECs may be understood as agents of the state: prioritizing the protection of state interests over those of research participants.

In the case of Myanmar, decades of civil and ethnic conflict have left large areas of the country under contested political control. Several major ethnic nationalities, including the Karen, Kachin, Chin, Shan, Mon, and Wa, have been in open armed conflict with the ruling military-backed regime or have cease-fire agreements that allow them considerable autonomy. Most of these ethnic groups do not have formal relationships with the ruling government.

In working with ethnic populations in border zones since 1992, we (as well as collaborators from the University of California, Los Angeles, and other entities) have struggled with the question of who most legitimately represents these populations and specifically who should safeguard their rights and interests if researchers or investigators want to collect data. For individuals with no formal communication with the regime they are fighting, the concept that this regime could make decisions for their health and well-being is both absurd and offensive. However, popular support for the government in exile is strong among most of Myamnar's ethnic national organizations, and this exiled government has a well-established health and welfare committee. Consequently, we have helped to establish and build the capacity of an REC composed of Myanmar physicians and nurses in exile, community health workers, community members, and faith-based leaders. This group has now had several years of experience functioning as an REC and reviewing proposals, and their authority has been accepted by RECs at US institutions [40] – [42] .

Documenting Abuses in Compulsory Drug Treatment Centers

Between July 2007 and September 2011, Human Rights Watch conducted investigations of compulsory detention of drug users in China [43] , [44] , Cambodia [45] , Viet Nam [46] , and the Lao People's Democratic Republic [47] . In these countries, drug use is legal but drug users are subject to extrajudicial administrative detention for the purpose of compulsory treatment of drug dependency. The investigations conducted by Human Rights Watch included interviews with individuals recently detained in drug detention centers; key informant interviews with non-government organizations, funding entities, and, in some cases, government officials; review of relevant government laws and policies; and review of international donor policies and programs in drug detention centers. The investigators found that individuals in drug detention centers were routinely held without clinical determination of drug dependency or due process, and once detained were denied evidence-based drug treatment as well as other basic health services. Drug users were often forced to perform arduous physical exercise, military drills, or forced labor, and were subject to physical and sexual abuse.

While research on drug addiction, HIV virology, HIV prevalence, and HIV prevention has been routinely conducted inside detention centers with the approval of government-affiliated RECs and the authorization of the government-controlled detention centers, the specific ethical concerns of conducting research in institutions that violate due process protections have not been addressed. At a minimum, researchers should be expected to accurately characterize the research setting and status of participants. Yet, researchers have often ignored the conditions within and lack of judicial oversight of such centers, presenting them as legitimate treatment facilities [48] , [49] . Researchers rarely report on the availability of evidence-based drug dependency treatment [48] , [50] – [55] and have obscured the status of research participants (e.g., referring to detainees as “patients” [48] or vaguely alluding to their “complex legal needs” [55] ). Published papers also often omit mention of the challenges of conducting independent research [48] , [50] – [55] . One study acknowledged using detention center staff to witness consent [55] , potentially increasing the risk of coercion. Researchers who do not have full, independent, or ongoing access to detention centers may be unable to assess negative consequences for research participants, and detainees who do not have access to legal counsel or the right to free speech may be unable to file a complaint alleging abusive research.

In response to these challenges, we chose to conduct research with individuals in the community who had been recently released from detention centers. However, human rights monitoring by independent international organizations is not allowed in China, Viet Nam, or the Lao People's Democratic Republic, and we did not feel that local RECs would approve research related to torture and ill-treatment. Therefore, a decision was made to proceed without local REC approval in order to protect both research participants and researchers, who we feared could be targeted by the state for proposing research that is viewed as sensitive to state security or disruptive of government goals of “social harmony.” In place of local REC approval, and because we felt that there was no defined community of recently released drug users to formally consult with (and that community engagement in the context of ongoing persecution would not be safe regardless), researchers developed and followed specific ethical operating principles. In contrast to the typical approach of RECs, where review is limited to the research protocol, every step of the research, from the protocol review to implementation to dissemination of results to scientific, diplomatic, and media audiences included internal ethics review by technical and legal experts.

Mitigating Risks in Human Rights Investigations

To address the possible conflicts investigators may face in protecting participants in the course of health and human rights investigations, local RECs are needed that can be considered truly independent. In addition, two distinct and complementary strategies—community-based review and the development of strong ethical operating principles—can help protect investigators and participants in health-related human rights research.

In the context of governments that persecute specific populations, actively limit free speech, and routinely punish criticism of the state, RECs are unlikely to be independent. Under these circumstances, using local RECs to safeguard the rights and interests of research participants may be counterproductive, putting both investigators and participants at risk. In these settings, researchers may need to actively engage communities and follow clear ethical operating principles in place of local REC review.

Community-based review and participatory research have a long history and were developed to address community members' concerns about neglect by and communities' mistrust of researchers, health-care systems, and government [56] , [57] . Conducted correctly, community-based participatory research (including financial and technical support for community engagement and leadership) creates bridges between policy-makers, scientists, and communities; facilitates reciprocal learning; assists in the development of culturally appropriate measurement instruments and interventions; and establishes a level of trust that enhances both the quantity and the quality of data collected and programs delivered [39] , [57] – [61] . While there is a well-established body of literature on engagement of marginalized populations in high-income settings and on some vulnerable populations in LMICs [57] , [58] , the issues faced by criminalized and violently stigmatized populations have less often been addressed.

One challenge of community-based review is that in many settings the “community” is not homogenous, organized, or able to participate in extensive consultation and review of proposed research. Research with migrants, prisoners, drug users, and criminalized populations is often conducted without a representative advocacy group. In other settings, it may not be clear who legitimately speaks for marginalized populations. In all settings, community-based review can be time-consuming and resource intensive.

In conducting human rights research, particularly in settings where safety may be of particular concern, a critical first step is to have standing procedures on investigator and participant protection. All Human Rights Watch staff who conduct interviews, for example, undergo security training and training on participants' protection and data safety. Researchers can also receive specialized training on how to sensitively interview people in such a way as to minimize risk of re-traumatization, including training on interviewing victims of sexual violence, children, persons in extreme pain, prisoners, and the mentally disabled. All researchers must participate in a security meeting prior to a research mission that establishes chains of communication so that security emergencies can be identified and handled once the mission is in progress. Post-mission meetings are held if security concerns arise, and the security of participants stemming from contact with researchers is monitored. Prior to publication of any findings from research (in the form of reports, journal articles, press releases, opinion pieces, photography, or other media), legal review is required and provides further assessment of research participant protection.

For individuals who experience human rights abuses, the consequences of reporting that abuse are often uncertain. Yet even when the risk of retaliation is judged to be high, many individuals may be willing to take such a risk in order to press for justice, despite the fact that justice may take years or even decades to be served. Individuals who are a part of communities that are systematically discriminated against, stigmatized, or criminalized may experience high levels of ongoing harm, and see participation in a human rights investigation as one of few means of challenging those abuses or demanding redress.

In the decade to come, RECs in LMICs will likely acquire increasing jurisdiction, resources, and authority over local research. These changes will offer a promise of greater protection for research participants who in the past have faced abuses with little opportunity for redress. But RECs may have little experience in evaluating the inherent risks faced by individuals vulnerable to human rights abuses as well as the risks and benefits from participation in a human rights investigation. RECs, which primarily review pre-research protocols, may also be poorly suited to the review of dynamic investigations using open-ended research methodologies where the risk to participants is less a result of research processes (e.g., questionnaires) than from post-research products (e.g., reports, legal processes, and media coverage).

The use of RECs to limit health and human rights research for political, cultural, or other considerations is a misuse of the legitimate functions of RECs. Careful attention must be paid when local committees assert that their views represent local cultural norms, or that human rights are an illegitimate focus of research as they express foreign values. A critical distinction for researchers is understanding the difference between respecting cultural traditions that are “matters of etiquette, ritual, or religion,” with little or no relation to ethics, from those cultural traditions with ethical (or human rights) implications, such as female genital mutilation or infanticide [62] . Cultural practices or government policies that either deliberately or incidentally serve to suppress or threaten the rights of certain people cannot be respected. RECs, charged specifically with upholding the rights and protection of individuals, should not use culture or “values” as a means to deny human rights.

Increasing attention to human rights as a determinant of health will result in increasing requests to RECs to review research that investigates the role and complicity of state actors, government laws and policies, and social or cultural norms as they relate to health. Stronger, independent RECs trained in human rights may be better equipped to more adequately review this research. When RECs are unable to do so, or where research on human rights or criminalized or marginalized populations is expressly prohibited, researchers may need to rely upon alternative strategies, including engaging communities and following ethical operating principles, to ensure that research participants are protected and that research is ethically conducted. While such innovations do not eliminate all risks, and may be costly in terms of time and resources, the alternatives, which may include acceding to censorship or not conducting investigations at all, are unacceptable limits.

Abbreviations

LMICs	low- and middle-income countries
MSM	men who have sex with men
REC	research ethics committee

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this article.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

The research proposal: Centre for Applied Human Rights 1

Related Papers

MASEREKA GILBERT

Langley, BC: Trinity Western University. …

Paul T P Wong

Emil Ilyasov

abasynuniv.edu.pk

Flora Maleki

Journal Academica, Volume 1, July 2010, p. 24-28 . [ISSN 2026 559X]

DAE HOON JANG

Faith Gatune

S M Mukarram Jahan

A research proposal is a serious statement that addresses a researcher’s intent to conduct a study on a phenomenon and a plan about how to perform the research. Students usually undertake research under the guidance of a supervisor from faculty in tandem with assistance and supervision of other faculty members. Thus, the proposal should be a clear statement of intent that aims at elucidating the plan of research to make it feasible and acceptable for all parties concerned. The most essential characteristic of a research proposal is that it should be sufficient to present the researcher’s idea or question and expected outcomes with clarity and definition (the what). It should also make a case for the reason the researcher’s focus of study is significant and the value that it will bring to the discipline under study (the why).

Holuphumiee Adegbaju

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

177 Human Rights Research Topics: Bright Ideas List 2023

Do you have a college research project or thesis on human rights and have been wondering how to prepare a good paper? You need a number of things, such as good research, analytical, and writing skills. However, the first step is getting the right topic. This is very challenging for most students, but we are here to help. This post provides a 177 human rights topics list that you can count on for the best grade. We will also tell you how to craft a great university human rights dissertation.

A Brief about Human Rights

Human rights are the basic freedoms and rights that belong to all persons in the globe, starting from birth to death. These rights apply irrespective of where you are, personal beliefs, or the way you decide to live your life. They cannot be taken away but can be restricted in some cases, such as if you break the law.

The basic rights are anchored on shared values, such as dignity, fairness, equality, independence, and respect. They are all protected by law. Because of their wide applications in areas such as the justice system and employment-related topics, you can expect to get many related school assignments and projects on it.

How to Write a Good Human Rights Thesis or Dissertation

Before we can look at the best human rights thesis topics, let’s look at the best process of writing it. This can be divided into six main steps:

Identify the study topic in line with your class teacher/professor’s recommendations. You can use our list of basic human rights topics that comes shortly after this guide.
Research the topic well to ensure it has ample resources. Then, identify the main points that will be covered during the study. It will be good to think about the entire dissertation right from the start because all parts are interconnected.
Develop a thesis statement. This is very important because it will be tested after analyzing the results.
Develop a good structure for the thesis. This is the outline that will guide you on what to include at what point. Carefully look at the current recommendation from your school. One of the best outlines you might want to consider include:

Introduction Literature review Methodology Results Analysis and discussion Conclusion Bibliography

Prepare the first draft.
Write the final draft by redefining the first draft. At this point, it will be a good idea to consider editing services from experts.

Next, we will highlight the main topics that you should consider in human rights. However, we’d like to remind that you can only pay for thesis and not waste your time over a tone of assignments.

Argumentative Human Rights Topics

Is violation of human rights allowed during times of war?
Circumcision of infants: Does it violate their human rights?
Should women and men have varying rights?
What is the link between human rights and traditions?
Capital punishment: Should it be considered a violation of human rights?
Right for freedom to education: Should it be made available for all?
Social media networking services: Should they guarantee privacy for all the clients.
Is the US policy on immigration discriminatory?
Interest of states: Should it take precedence over an individual’s human rights?
Developed countries have a duty to promote human rights in the developing states.
Pet ownership should be considered a universal human right.
Childhood concept differs from one culture to another: Should the notion of child labor also vary?
What are inappropriate ways of fighting for human rights?
Development of a country: Does it depend on the country’s defense of human rights?
From a human rights perspective, which is the most important amendment to the US constitution?
Comparing Apartheid and Holocaust: Has justice been done for the victims.
Human rights in the 21 st century: Is the globe doing enough to address the crisis in the Tigray Region of Ethiopia and Afghanistan?
What are the most important lessons on human rights from World War II?
Human rights violations in West Bank: Has the globe done enough?

International Human Rights Topics

What does the distribution of the COVID-19 vaccines tell us about human rights internationally?
A review of cases of human rights in the United States between the 1950 and 2000.
Analyze the impacts of discrimination based on color and race.
A thematic review of modern human rights movements.
Trace the evolution of human rights starting from the ancient times to the age of globalization.
What is the relationship between human rights and peace in a country? A case study of the Netherlands.
Disability in the UK is under attack: Discuss.
Who should people running away from human rights violations turn to?
Is it appropriate to deny human rights on the basis of religion and gender?
Violation of human rights in North Korea: How is the developed world preparing to tackle it?
Violation of human rights in Venezuela: Should the United States get involved?
The right to stay silent in a court of law: How is this likely to affect the accused person?
What are the best remedies for addressing violations of women’s rights in the Middle East?
Will the world ever get to a point where people will live without worrying about human rights violations?
What makes it so difficult to introduce gun control in the United States?
Who should be held responsible for cases of mass shootings in schools?

Controversial Human Rights Topics

What are the similarities and differences between human and civil rights?
Evaluate the violation of human rights in Syria in the 21 st century.
Police-related human rights violation: How can we prevent it?
Should prisoners have a right to vote?
Assisted euthanasia is a violation of human rights: Discuss.
Should persons who try to take their own lives be charged in a court of law?
What is the best way to punish states for violating human rights?
Countries arming themselves with nuclear weapons are readying to violate human rights.
How effective are laws on domestic violence in the UK?
All cases of human abuses in history should be tried and concluded.
Is the UN doing enough to protect human rights?
Holocaust: Is it possible for the world to heal completely?
Do you think that the Rwanda Genocide could have been avoided?
It is time to act: How do you think the global community should handle the problem of immigrants trying to cross from Africa into Europe?
The hidden danger of not addressing bullying in school.
Is disciplining a child a violation of human rights?
Are correctional facilities doing enough to correct the behavior of inmates?
Is imprisonment enough to punish murder criminals?
Making a case for life imprisonment and the death penalty for murder criminals.
Is abortion a violation of human rights?

Human Rights Discussion Topics

What is your view on the famous revolt of the Cockroach People?
Discuss the outcomes of the LGBT movements in the 20 th century.
A deeper look into civil rights movements from Malcolm X point of view.
Interaction between Japan and China during WWII: How did it impact human rights issues in the two states?
Discuss the biggest human rights violations in South Africa after Apartheid.
UN Refugee program: How does it help enhance refugees’ welfare across the globe?
French Revolution and human rights: A thematic review.
Human rights in medieval Europe.
Human Rights Act in New Zealand in 1993: What is its significance?
Which human rights did women across the globe find hard to access in the 20 th century?
Police brutality in Brazil: Are the efforts taken by the government enough?
Discuss transgender rights in Europe.
A review of transgender human rights issues in the United States.
Disability rights in the UK.
Comparing disability policies in the US and India.
Racial profiling by police.
What are the roots of racism in the United States?
Review the Trail of Broken Treaties.
A deeper look at the Chattel Slavery in the Colonial America.
Review the African-American male experience.
Reviewing the history of the Bill of Rights in the United States.
Analyzing the American Indian Movement: How does it compare with other human rights movements?
Human rights in modern cinema: How are whites and people of color-treated?

Interesting Civil Rights Topics

Black Power Movement: How did it impact the Black Lives Matter in 2020 and 2021?
Are the 20 th Century civil rights movements sustainable?
Comparing women rights movements in 2020 and the 20 th century.
How did Martin Luther influence the civil rights approaches that came after him?
Comparing the scientific Revolution, Reformation and Renaissance movements’ impacts on western thought.
Protestant Reformation: Discuss how Catholic Church’s corruption and crusaders of war contributed towards its formation.
A closer look at the human rights movements during the Industrial Revolution of between 1760 and 1840.
How did the teachings of the American Revolution help the secession movement and Civil War?
How did Teddy Roosevelt impact the progressive movement?
The impact of communism impacts world history.
The location of a civil movement is the most important thing in its success: Discuss.
What made people start nationalist movement in Prussia?
Discuss the results of anti-nationalist movements in New York.
Female and Islam oppression on the globe.
Reinventing a revolution: A closer look at the Zapatista Movement.
What is the link between music, protest, and justice?
Confederate Flag: Is it a symbol of oppression?
Review the voting rights of 1965.
The West Memphis Three.

Special Human Rights Debate Topics

Women rights in the first half and second half 20 th century.
Legalization of same sex marriage and its impact on global fights for human rights.
Human rights movements in the US and their impact on federal policies.
International human rights movements: How has it influenced the UK judicial policies?
Responsibility to protect: How is it related to the issue of human rights?
Suffrage rights in ancient Greek: A holistic review.
Human rights presentation in the philosophy of enlightenment.
Human rights violations during the First World War.
What are lessons did we learn from Hitler and Holocaust during WWII.
These five reasons are the main causes of human rights violations in the 21 st century.
The main causes of gender disparity in the US.
Comparing the state of human rights in the UK and Qatar.
Do you think the bible violates human rights?
Environmental racism: What are the main effects?
The importance of the judiciary in protecting human rights.
Women rights in the Roman Empire.
Segregation is a violation of human rights.
Discussing critical human rights issues in India.

Unique Human Rights Topics for Research

The collapse of the Soviet Union and Rise of Communism in Russia.
Comparing the Pan-African movement to the 20 th -century cultural nationalism of Latin America.
A review of the Hong Kong Umbrella Movement’s goals and methods.
Abolition of death penalty: Why it is a major human rights issue.
Popularity of social media and its impact on human rights. A closer review of Arab countries in North Africa.
International Calvinism: What was the impact on European Culture?
Why do other countries not intervene in North Korea where massive abuses of human rights have been reported?
A statistical review of human trafficking in the 20 th century.
How can a person as an individual help to promote human rights?
Utilitarianism contravenes human rights.
Human rights institutions and their efforts in protecting human rights in Africa.
Military actions to protect human rights: Does it make sense?
Black Lives Matter Movement protests: What does the movement say about human rights today?
Does the UK constitution comprehensively cover the issue of human rights?
Global manufacturing: How has it impacted the rights of workers?
Has the International Labor Organization done enough to protect the plight of workers on the globe?
How does poverty impact human rights in developing countries?

PhD Topics in Human Rights

A review of the parts of the globe with the worst cases of human rights violation.
How does the internet promote human trafficking? A thematic review.
A comprehensive review of factors that impact the outcome of different trials in a court of law.
Legitimate forms of the death penalty.
What factors prevent people from getting justice? A literature review.
A comprehensive review of the impacts of legalizing drug use.
What factors prevent equal representation of women in top leadership roles in the developing world?
What are the major problems faced by LGBT couples? Propose possible solutions.
Racial profiling by police: A case study of Mexico.
A comparative review of human rights policies of three countries of your choice in Europe.

Need Assistance in Writing Your Research Papers on Human Rights?

One thing we must indicate is that writing a dissertation is never easy. It is the last and biggest academic project before graduating. Therefore, it is very important to get it right. The best way to achieve this is by seeking the help of a dissertation writing service.

Our professionals are the most efficient among the best dissertation writing services . We work with skilled writers that you can count on for excellent work. The experts are educated in top universities and have a lot of experience preparing A-rated work. The writers are trustworthy online professionals and will only deliver 100% unique custom papers. Even if your dissertation has a very tight deadline, our writers are quick and will complete it on time. Our services are also affordable, and all that you need to do is ask us to “help with my thesis.”

As a startup, we rely on YOU to help us do our work. Consider donating today.

Publications.

The Disappearance of Native American Women in the U.S.

Turkey’s Human Rights Regime: A Blueprint for Despair?

The Ongoing Crisis Facing the Rohingya

“Education is the right of all citizens of Afghanistan”: The Reconstruction Period in Afghanistan (2001-2021) and the Beginning of the Second Taliban Takeover

Human Rights Research Paper

This sample human rights research paper features: 8300 words (approx. 27 pages), an outline, and a bibliography with 34 sources. Browse other research paper examples and check the list of political science research paper topics for more inspiration. If you need a research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Also, chech our custom research proposal writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

Introduction

Concepts of human rights, relationship between human rights and dignity, concepts of dignity, values of human rights and dignity, history of human rights, history of human dignity, contemporary concepts of human rights, contemporary concepts of dignity, animal rights versus human rights, human dignity versus transhuman and posthuman dignity.

Bibliography

Human rights and dignity are central normative notions of contemporary politics as well as political and ethical theories. However, they have not had this role for a long period of time, as the main development of these concepts began only during the Age of Enlightenment. During the previous 60 years, their influence can be said to be of global importance. On December 10, 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted and proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United Nations. Yet, there are traces of both notions in ancient and medieval thought, and this research paper will trace their roots and historical development and make inferences concerning potential future challenges concerning them.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

Article I of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”

Human rights are subjective rights of individual human beings. Subjective rights are different from objective rights. Objective rights refer to the completeness of regulations within a legal system. Objective rights grant subjective ones. Subjective rights imply that individual human beings have the authority to do certain things within the system. The concept of human rights implies that all human beings, because of their being human, have certain rights and freedoms that are universal, inalienable, and indivisible. According to a stricter sense of the concept of human rights, they can be contrasted with civil rights. Civil rights are held by all citizens of a state and include rights that are not human rights, like the right to vote. Human rights are held by all human beings. However, civil rights are included in the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

According to the Czech jurist Karel Vasak (as he originally proposed in 1979), there are three generations of human rights. The first generation deals with liberty, and the rights in this generation are particularly civil in nature. Human rights in the second generation are related to equality, and their nature is primarily social, whereas the third generation rights go beyond the civil and the social and are mostly expressed in soft law declarations of international law. Libertarians are usually skeptical concerning human rights of the second and third generation, as they presume that these rights contain concealed paternalistic political goals.

The term human rights came into existence at the beginning of the 19th century. However, as mentioned above, it was not until 1948 that human rights were generally proclaimed, by what was then a newly formed United Nations. The declaration was primarily motivated by the cruelties of World War II. Article I of this declaration states a close connection between the concept of dignity and that of rights. As a result of this declaration, both concepts, that of human rights and that of human dignity, became highly significant for many countries’ constitutions and the post-1945 world.

Both rights and dignity can be justified naturally or solely legally. Natural rights are valid at all times in all places. Solely legal rights are grounded in an actually existing legal system founded by decisions made by human beings. To enforce natural human rights, they also need to be integrated into a legal system, but they are regarded as valid even if they have not been acknowledged by anyone.

Analogously, one can talk about necessary and contingent human dignity. Necessary dignity is a quality that belongs to all human beings at all times and in all places, whereas contingent human dignity is dependent upon an institution that declares that human beings are bearers of dignity. The concepts of right and dignity imply a normative aspect. The concept of dignity often has also an ontological aspect, whereas the concept of right can, but does not have to have, an ontological aspect.

In the above case of the United Nations Declaration, both concepts have an ontological aspect, as Article I states that all human beings who are the bearers of dignity and rights “are endowed with reason and conscience.” Hence, the normative aspect of both concepts is based upon an ontological one. However, the relationship between the two concepts in question can be different than that shown in the last example; for example, in the case of the German basic law, some experts claim that the concept of human dignity is the foundation for all human rights. In this case, it can be seen that only the concept of human dignity has an ontological and normative aspect, whereas that of a human right merely includes normative implications.

The concept of dignity must not be mixed up with the word dignity. The word implies several concepts that can be divided into a sense and a reference. Dignity is a quality that a bearer can have necessarily or contingently. To distinguish between these two types of dignity, it would be best always to clarify which type one is referring to. For pragmatic reasons, the author will use the expressions necessary dignity and contingent dignity from now on.

Necessary dignity can either be inherent or dependent. Given that human beings necessarily have free will, and free will is the foundation for dignity, it is the case that all human beings have necessary, inherent human dignity. If it were the case that God attributed dignity to all human beings necessarily, then all human beings would have necessary, dependent dignity. However, both instances would be examples of necessary dignity.

Contingent dignity can also be connected to various qualities. Given that human beings reciprocally attribute dignity to one another, then we would have contingent, dependent dignity. If human beings, on the other hand, were bearers of dignity, because they have the quality to make logical inferences, and this capacity is a bodily capacity, then human beings would have contingent, inherent dignity, as the capacity here is not a necessary one. Both examples represent types of contingent dignity.

The terms necessary dignity and contingent dignity can be specified further. They can imply equality or inequality concerning the bearers of dignity. In our context, only the concept of dignity that implies equality among its bearers is relevant. This does not mean that the other concept is socially unimportant; for example, bishops and judges have dignity; however, their dignity is a hierarchical one that is irrelevant here.

The concept of dignity that is relevant here is a nongradual one that implies equality among its bearers and is connected to six characteristic features:

Dignity cannot exist independently, but is always connected to a bearing entity.
A bearer has the quality dignity if he possesses a nongradual quality X, wherein dignity is founded.
The relationship between the bearers of dignity is that of equality; that is, all bearers of dignity have a nongradual quality X, because of which their relationship can be specified as descriptive equality.
The descriptive equality of the bearers implies a normative one, whereby the norm is related to an ideal of the good and not to that of an evil; for example, dignity is only given if all its bearers are supposed to be treated equally well and not if they are supposed to be treated equally badly.
Bearers of dignity have a special status within the world; that is, they are categorically different from all other beings in the world and have a quality that cannot be verified empirically.
The concept of dignity will be named “dignity” or named with an equivalent word in a foreign language. (If this trait was not included, then the concept of dignity would refer to too many concepts; for example, most concepts of rights would then also count as concepts of dignity, which would be a questionable position.)

Each entity to which the six features just stated apply is a bearer of the quality dignity. Hence, the reference of the concept dignity is dependent upon the meaning. However, thereby we have not yet clarified the concept of human dignity, but only that of dignity. The concept human dignity is the result of the intersection of the set of references of the concepts of dignity and of being human. A being belongs to the set of bearers of dignity if it is the case that he has all the features demanded of a bearer of dignity. A being belongs to the set of human entities if it belongs to the human species, that is, if it potentially belongs to the human reproductive community. It is important to distinguish between human beings and human entities. Both human beings and human entities belong to the human species. However, it does not have to be the case that all human entities are human beings. It is clear that a fertilized egg belongs to the human species, but it is unclear whether a fertilized egg can be called a human being. However, it clearly is a human entity, as it belongs to the human species. There are five possibilities of how the set of bearers of dignity and that of human entities can intersect:

The set of human entities can be a subset of that of the bearers of dignity. In this case, someone who is a human entity necessarily is a bearer of dignity. However, it is not the case that all bearers of dignity are human entities. Here, it is the case that someone who belongs to the human species also has to bear dignity, as it would be according to Kant, if we read him as follows: The ability to have reason is actual within the human soul, which is unified with the human body from the moment egg and sperm get together. Dignity here is founded in a feature that can necessarily be found in all human entities. According to Kant, the actual ability for reason can be found in all human beings. However, not all human beings can express this ability, as the capacity to express it is connected to a bodily capacity that one needs to develop.
The sets of the bearers of dignity and that of human entities can be identical. If someone is a human entity, then he is a bearer of dignity. Each bearer of dignity necessarily is a human being. In this case, the quality on which dignity is founded is a quality that is being held only by human beings. As here the identity of the set human entities and that of bearers of dignity is a given, it is also the case that the quality on which dignity is founded is the same as the one on which it depends whether one belongs to the human species.
The sets of bearers of dignity and that of human entities can overlap. There are human entities that are bearers of dignity, and there are human entities that are not bearers of dignity in the same way as there are bearers of dignity that are human entities, and there are bearers of dignity that are not human entities. In this case, dignity is founded upon a quality that some but not all human entities have, and that some but not all nonhuman entities have. One can read Kant in such a way that his concept of dignity belongs to this group, but only if one assumes that actual reason is not a capacity of the soul but is only present when someone can speak. There are human entities that can talk and who therefore also have dignity. However, there are other human entities that are currently unable to talk and who henceforth do not have dignity. It cannot be excluded, and Kant definitely does not exclude the possibility that there are nonhuman beings that have reason together with this dignity.
The set of the bearers of dignity can be a subset of human entities. All bearers of dignity are necessarily human entities. However, there are human entities that are not bearers of dignity. A position which claims that, for a human entity to have dignity, the human needs to be born would be one that belongs to this group. It can be the case that, as in this case, the feature on which dignity is founded is also the feature that turns a human entity into a human being.
The set of bearers of human dignity and that of human entities do not overlap. The fifth and last option is not relevant for us, as with it we do not have bearers of human dignity.

Both human dignity and human rights are the foundation of many constitutions and can be found at a prominent place in the charter of the United Nations. There is no moral dilemma or moral challenge for which these concepts are irrelevant. As an example, for the relevance of human dignity, one is referred to a discussion in the field of medical ethics.

The notion of human dignity is a complex one that is not being used in a unified manner. In addition, it is often abused in order to stop an argument or to claim that the opposite opinion can only be held by a scoundrel or a protofascist. Hence, it is important always to reference facts and to clarify the concepts one deals with. In the field of medical ethics, arguments that deal with the beginning of human life are of particular importance. From which moment on can one claim that a human entity has human dignity or the right to live?

From the moment of fertilization
From the moment of fusion of the precells
From the moment at which the nidation in the uterus takes place
From 14 days after the fusion, as from that moment on, it is impossible that twins can come about (conjoined twins can still come into existence, however)
From the moment at which the embryo becomes a fetus (i.e., after 3 months, when the developmental process of all organs is finished)
From the moment of birth

It depends upon a governmental decision which of these various stages is regarded as decisive for a human being to have dignity or the right to live. Legal regulations concerning stem cell research, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), and abortion are based upon this decision. A particularly striking example can be given in the case of PGD. In contrast to the UK, PGD is forbidden in Germany. One reason for it being forbidden is that in the process of PGD, one or two totipotent cells are taken away from the fertilized cells and genetically analyzed, and they are destroyed in this process. As it is possible for a totipotent cell to develop into an independent human being, some regard totipotent cells as bearers of dignity, which therefore must not be destroyed.

Even though human rights, as we understand them today, were established only fairly recently, one can trace aspects of the concept back to antiquity. In ancient Athens, in the 6th century BCE, many government posts were given away by drawing lots, and thereby, any citizen could acquire the office in question. However, women or slaves did not have the right of citizenship. An important step in the development of human rights was the upcoming of Stoic philosophy and its concept of the humanitas, which implied that all humans, because of their being human, ought to be considered ethically. Yet, this duty was a lower-rank duty.

The proper beginning of the concept of human rights goes along with the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment. In the following paragraphs, the focus will be on the concepts of the most influential philosophers of rights: Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Immanuel Kant.

The first philosopher who was significant for the development of the concept of human rights was Hobbes. Fundamental to his understanding of rights is the fictional state of nature he presents, in which there is a war of all against all, and each person is the potential enemy of every other person— Homo homini lupus (“Man is a wolf to [his fellow] man”). Each person is fighting for his own survival and power. Then, each person is supposed to have the right to everything else in order to preserve himself. There is danger lurking in this state, as even the strongest can be killed during the night or by a group of weaker men who cooperate. No one is so much stronger than all the others to actually make sure that his safety can be guaranteed over a long period of time. Hence, there is a certain kind of equality among human beings, as we are all more or less equally strong, or to put it in a different manner: There is no one who is so much stronger than all the others over a long period of time that he could guarantee his own safety in a stable manner. Due to the given equality, this can come to a fictional contract between all human beings, in which all human beings agree to give their natural rights to the Leviathan, who from then on has the absolute power over his citizens. The individual citizens give away their sovereignty, and the political leader receives it.

A slightly less grim picture of human nature was presented by Locke. His ethics is closely connected with Christianity, as he makes clear that without afterworldly sanctions, there would be no reason for not living solely according to the pleasure principle. In the end, morality is based upon a God-given law. In a similar manner, he approaches his political ethics. He limits the power of the sovereign by putting forward that there are natural rights that are God given and valid universally. According to Locke, the natural law and the natural rights exist also in the state of nature. According to Hobbes, in that state everyone has a right to everything. According to Locke, on the other hand, the rights of a human being are limited by the rights of the others. And the most basic rights can be described as the right to the inviolability of a person and his property, which can be specified further by making a distinction between the right to life, health, liberty, and possession. As there are people in the state of nature who do not accept the natural law, there is a need to move from the natural state to a political system.

In contrast to Locke and Hobbes, Rousseau presents a more optimistic understanding of human behavior in the hypothetical state of nature. According to him, there are enough goods available for all human beings, they live separate from one another, and they are peaceful. Then human beings exist in a state of healthy self-love, which includes sympathy, which stops them from acting egoistically. The positively evaluated state of nature ends when someone develops the category of private property due to egoistic desires. Such an action leads to inequality and promotes further egoistic desires, so that one ends up in a system with richer and poorer people. The richer people force the poorer ones to accept a social contract whereby the poorer ones do not realize that they were being forced into the contract. Even though they claim that the social contract serves the common interest, it is supposed to be solely in the interest of the rich. However, there is also the possibility of an ideal social contract, which would be one in which all citizens realize that they are the general will. In that case, the political and moral freedom consists in sticking to the law that one has given oneself. Here, the general will would correspond with the individual one.

Autonomy, in a different sense from Rousseau’s, is central for Kant’s understanding of rights. Rights, according to Kant, are supposed to help individuals to live together so that they do not get into conflict with one another. Anyone is supposed to live such that his arbitrary will can coexist with the wishes of others. Kant also holds that a social contract is the basis of a state. He agrees with Locke that there are inviolable natural rights, with Rousseau that the highest norm concerning law giving ought to be the general will, and with Hobbes that in the state of nature there is the war of all against all. By transforming the particular individual wills into a general will, the state of nature changes into a constitutional state.

Early Greek philosophers did not hold a concept of dignity that can be compared to the one we have. In their case, dignity was always connected to a hierarchy. According to Aristotle, there are natural slaves, who of course have less dignity than citizens. Dignity today, however, implies the equality of its bearers. As said before, the concept of equality of all human beings is developed and becomes particularly influential in Stoic thought. As an outgrowth of Stoic philosophy, the first important concept of human dignity is put forward by Cicero. His thinking is reflected particularly in Renaissance philosophy. Pico della Mirandola and Manetti are two Renaissance philosophers who put forward paradigmatic theories of dignity. Another reader of the philosophy of Cicero was Kant, whose concept of dignity became particularly influential. In this section, first the paradigmatically most important theories of human dignity in historical order (Cicero, Manetti, Pico della Mirandola, and Kant) are presented, and these are followed specifically by the vehement criticism of the concept by Nietzsche, who provides us with a useful basis for reflections concerning the future of human dignity.

Cicero was the first great philosopher who put forward a concept of human dignity. He holds that all human beings, which implies all beings with ratio, have dignity. Concerning Cicero, the sets “members of the species human beings” and “beings with ratio” are identical concerning the extension, which means that if someone is a member of the one set, he also has to be a member of the other set, and it is impossible for a being to be a member of the one set without being a member of the other one. However, dignity is not the central concept within his ethics, as it often is today. The focus of his ethics lies on the highest good, which again is connected with the honorable, the honestum. Anyone who possesses the four cardinal virtues—justice, wisdom, bravery, and moderation—is honorable. Hence, the highest good is solely identified with the virtues. External goods are irrelevant concerning the highest good, which implies, however, a hierarchy of duties. The highest duties are the duties against the gods, followed by the duties against one’s political community and then the duties against one’s parents. We also have duties against other human beings who are bearers of dignity like us. However, these duties are of lower rank. This does not mean that they are irrelevant. These duties are of direct importance concerning our interaction with slaves and foreigners, who are also supposed to be treated in a just and dignified manner. Due to the high relevance of the duties against the political community, Cicero holds that the vita activa is more important than the vita contemplativa, even though the latter corresponds to our human nature.

Another paradigmatically important concept of dignity was put forward by the Renaissance humanist Manetti, whose views were ultimately founded in his faith in the Christian God. Faith is supposed to lead to appropriate actions and right thinking and also to the knowledge of God, human dignity, and the highest good. As in Cicero’s ethics, the concept of dignity is not the central one, which is the concept of the highest good. The highest good lies in a state of afterworldly bliss. To be able to reach this state, one has to be virtuous according to Manetti. The virtues piety, justice, and wisdom are of particular importance, according to him. Anyone who possesses these virtues reaches the highest good. Even though one reaches the correct understanding of these concepts only by means of contemplation, the main focus in life ought to be in the vita activa; with such a focus, one can fulfill ones duties against God and the other human beings in an appropriate manner. Due to the duty of justice, one ought to love all human beings as one’s brother and consider that love in one’s deeds. However, the possession of human dignity is independent of one’s deeds, as it is connected to the imago dei, the image of god, which we possess within our immortal souls. To act in accord with our dignity, we ought to stick to the duties that God has given all men and that are connected with the highest good. One of the duties is the duty of charity. Herein the consideration of other human beings, bearers of dignity, becomes directly relevant.

Another paradigmatically central foundation of human dignity was put forward by Pico della Mirandola. His concept is cited in many contemporary debates, even though current thinkers tend to receive his concept in a biased manner. According to him, human dignity lies in our free will, which lets human beings become a likeness of God and represents the signature of the creator upon his special creations. Human beings, according to Pico, participate in all layers of being, but, in contrast to other creations, they are not connected to one specific layer of being exclusively. Because of our free will, we have the chance to become who we wish to become. Of course, this does not mean that we can turn into fish or pigeons. However, it implies that we can choose our lifestyle according to our own fantasies, desires, or thoughts. It is this aspect which modern interpreters usually focus upon.

Yet, there is another side that can also be found in Pico’s philosophy. Even though we can choose to become who we apparently wish to become, there is supposed to be a real wish within all of us. We all wish to return to our origin, our creator, God, even though not all of us are conscious of this wish. The only way by which human beings are supposed to reach the highest good, which is the center also of Pico’s ethics, is by means of the unio mystica with God. This goal cannot be reached by conscious decisions. We depend upon the mercy of God to reach this state. However, we must first be prepared in order to be eligible for mercy. We must possess the political virtues within our character, which means that we ought to make peace, be just, have the virtue of love, and act in accord with it. On that fundamental level, the dignity of other human beings is considered, as here our duty to consider other human beings, bearers of duty, comes in, and we have the obligation to consider it in an appropriate manner. Our main duty concerning the highest good, however, is to go beyond our connection with the sensual world, to purify ourselves, and in the end God might grant us the chance to return to him and become one with him. The vita contemplativa, according to Pico, is much more relevant than the vita activa. If a human being does not consider the duties just stated, he does not lose his dignity, because his dignity is connected to his free will, which he cannot lose.

The most influential conception of human dignity was put forward by Kant. However, even according to him, the focal point of his ethics lies in the highest good. In contrast to the previous positions mentioned, the highest good, according to Kant in his Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten (“Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals”), does not enclose happiness, but it lies in the good will, which any being has who has will and reason and who acts out of respect for the moral law in accord with the moral law. Anyone who acts on maxims out of respect for the moral law, fulfils the moral law. This implies that his actions are based on maxims. To check whether a statement can be a maxim is to try to universalize the statement and check the reflections. If the reflections lead to contradictions, the statement cannot be a maxim. If the procedure does not lead to any challenges, the statement can serve as a maxim. The categorical imperative, which can be described in various ways, is a way of paraphrasing the moral law. One formulation of the categorical imperative includes the concept of human dignity, which is founded upon autonomy. The highest good and the moral law are valid for all beings with dignity, and dignity applies to autonomous beings only. One implication of the practical formulation of the categorical is that one must never treat humanity, neither in oneself nor in any other person, solely as a means. Any being with dignity must never be treated solely as a means. Hereby, it becomes clear that dignity is of some relevance in Kant’s philosophy; however, even according to him, the highest good is the central focus within his ethics. A further indication that human dignity does not have a foundational role within his ethics is that it turns up mainly within only one formulation of the categorical imperative.

The foundation of dignity, according to Kant, is the capacity of being autonomous, which is a necessary condition for acting in accord with the moral law. Autonomy must not be misunderstood as representing arbitrariness as freedom. Beings with dignity have the necessary duty to act in accord with duty. All acts that are in accord with the categorical imperative are in accord with duty.

In his Kritik der praktischen Vernunft (“Critique of Practical Reason”), Kant holds a similar position. Only his concept of the highest good changes slightly. It still encloses the moral law, but the person who acts out of duty in accord with duty not only deserves to become happy, according to Kant, but he can actually hope to receive happiness in proportional means to his acting morally. However, to act morally implies that one must not act in accord with the moral law while hoping to receive happiness in proportional means to his acting morally, even though one can hope that this will be the case. Only someone who acts morally out of respect for the moral law, without being motivated by his hope that he will be rewarded with happiness, acts morally. He can expect to be rewarded with happiness in an afterworld but not with a happy this-worldly life.

The most vehement criticism of human dignity was put forward by Nietzsche. Explicitly, he attacks solely necessary concepts of dignity, and all the concepts mentioned above have been necessary ones. Implicitly, however, his philosophy also goes against contingent concepts of human dignity. His argument against necessary human dignity goes as follows: The concept of necessary human dignity is founded upon four mistakes. Hence, it ought to be abandoned. The four mistakes he refers to are the following:

Human beings have an incomplete understanding of themselves.
Human beings attribute to themselves invented qualities.
Human beings regard themselves to be in the wrong relationship concerning animals and nature.
Human beings invent hierarchies of good, which they falsely regard as eternal and unconditional.

Concerning human dignity, these mistakes can be explained further by merely selecting some specific examples in order to support his argument:

Human beings correctly understand that they have reason. However, they have an incomplete understanding of themselves, as they do not realize that reason is not eternal and that it does not provide us with knowledge concerning the world but was developed in order to help us survive. Reason, according to Cicero, is the foundation of human dignity, but his concept is based on the wrong understanding of reason. Hence, it is not valid.
Human beings invented the concept of free will, which cannot even be thought of in a non–self-contradictory manner. Free will is the foundation of human dignity according to Pico. However, as free will does not exist, his concept of human dignity is invalid.
Human beings think that they were created in God’s image and that they have a special status in relation to animals and nature. According to Nietzsche, neither of these claims is correct. Human beings do not have a special status in nature, and they differ merely in degree from other animals. As the concept of God was merely invented, human beings also cannot be created in God’s image. According to Manetti, human dignity is founded on humans being created in the image of God, which is not correct. Hence, his concept of human dignity is invalid.
According to Nietzsche, all systems of morals, as well as all values and norms, were invented by a certain group that has common interests. There are no eternal values and norms. According to Kant, human dignity represents an eternal norm. Hence, his concept of dignity is invalid.

Against the concept of contingent human dignity, Nietzsche implicitly puts forward at least three separate arguments:

Nietzsche holds that human beings do not have special status in the world. However, such a special status is demanded by all concepts of human dignity, both necessary and contingent ones.
Nietzsche holds that there are no universally valid norms. However, necessary and contingent concepts imply that human dignity is a universally valid norm.
Nietzsche holds that all human beings are not equal, and that there are two groups of people that have to be evaluated differently. However, necessary and contingent concepts imply that human dignity demands the equality of all human beings.

Given these three last points, it is clear that Nietzsche attacks not only necessary concepts of human dignity but also contingent ones.

All concepts of human rights that will be presented in the following paragraphs stem from the Anglo-American tradition: Nozick, Rawls, Nussbaum, Taylor. All four political philosophers defend human rights, but they represent four diverse basic positions within the spectrum of possible communitarian and liberal attitudes. Liberal positions can be characterized as positions in which the right has priority over the good, whereas in communitarian positions, the good comes first and provides the basis for deriving a concept of the right. Nozick is a libertarian thinker and therefore the most liberal of them all. His work is a reaction to the theory of justice that was put forward by his colleague in the department of philosophy at Harvard University, John Rawls. Rawls’s position represents a classical liberal one. Taylor and Nussbaum represent two left-wing interpretations of communitarianism; Taylor puts forward a communist communitarianism and Nussbaum a socialdemocratic version of it.

Nozick’s political philosophy builds on a version of Locke’s natural rights position. The right to one’s own body and one’s property are fundamental, according to him. The best state is supposed to be a night watchman state, whereby the state secures the basic human rights but does not interfere with the free exchange among, and contracts between, consenting adults. Many philosophers criticized him for this system, as they regard the social consequences as not appealing.

According to Rawls, international human rights specify a limit to the internal autonomy of a regime, and any country that provides human rights to its citizens is entitled to tolerance. Hence, a desire to provide human rights entitles countries that see gravely unjust behavior in the internal practice of other countries to promote interventions in the countries in question. In contrast to the dominant lists of human rights, Rawls’s suggestion is more limited; he particularly stresses the rights to life, liberty, property, and equality. His suggestion takes into consideration that promulgation of human rights does not imply the risk of getting rejected as being too liberal or too closely related to the Western tradition. However, Rawls agrees with most human rights theorists by holding that the rights are universal, international, have a high priority, set minimal standards that should save people from the severest forms of unjust treatment, and are relevant primarily for governments.

In contrast to the liberal theories previously discussed, the political philosophies of the following two thinkers are based on a concept of the good that is supposed to be the basis for a concept of the right. Nussbaum’s concept of the good includes two separate lists, based on her intuition, which are supposed to describe (1) the conditio humana, which is relevant for all human beings, and (2) goods and capacities, which are supposed to be important within all human lives. The first list includes mortality, the human body, perception, early childhood development, practical reason, community with other human beings, relationship to animals and nature, humor and play, and individuality. In the second list, she mentions that it is good to live through all stages of life, to be healthy, to fulfill one’s sexual desires, to avoid pain, to have a concept of the good, and to live in a community in which solidarity exists. Hence, she puts forward a strong, but vague, concept of the good. It is strong, as it says something about all aspects of life, but it is vague, as it does not state in detail what ought to be done. Both lists serve as a basis for deriving rights.

Taylor’s concept of the good from which he derives the right, on the other hand, can be described as weak but detailed. It is weak, as it does not put forward anything about all the various aspects of life. Hence, he favors a pluralist ethics. On the other hand, he holds a detailed position concerning religion, as he interprets the world from a Roman Catholic perspective.

In contrast to the human rights tradition, the most prominent concepts of human dignity come from various traditions worldwide. This section will deal with those of Gewirth, Margalit, and Spaemann. The first two thinkers hold a contingent concept of dignity and the last one holds a necessary concept of dignity.

Gewirth holds that all human beings are “actual or prospective purposive agents.” If all beings who are able to actually or potentially act on purpose are bearers of dignity, and all human beings are such beings, then all human beings are bearers of dignity. He connects the rights to freedom and well-being with the concept of dignity. Hence, all bearers of dignity hold the rights to freedom and well-being. According to Gewirth, it is necessary for any agent to have these rights, as these rights are supposed to be necessary for any action, and an agent would be selfcontradictory if he denied having these rights. As morality is concerned with human action and being a human agent, Gewirth claims that human beings have dignity and the two human rights mentioned. The line of thought which he proposes implies some tacit assumptions:

Morality is concerned with action.
Human beings are “actual or prospective purposive agents.”
Person X is a human being.
Person X wishes to do action A.
In order for X to be an agent who seeks to fulfill his purpose A, it is necessary for X to assume having the right to act thus, and it would be self-contradictory not to do so, as he would reject what he needs as a purposive agent.
All human beings, all actual or future purposive actors, need to assume that they have the right to action.
Rights need to be granted by others.
Hence, there is a contract between all actual or future purposive actors that need the rights necessary for action.
All actual or future purposive actors grant the rights necessary for action, which are the rights to freedom and well-being, to all other actual or future purposive actors, so that the others grant oneself the same rights.
The rights to freedom and well-being are connected with dignity.
As all actual or future purposive actors grant one another the rights to freedom and well-being that are connected with dignity, and it is necessary for all actors to do so, it is also the case that all actual or future purposive actors grant one another dignity, and granting one another dignity is necessary.

With this line of thought, which, of course, is open to many criticisms, Gewirth argues for human dignity based on a theory of action combined with a contract theory.

Margalit’s argument in favor of dignity is a negative justification of the concept, as he does not state what dignity is but rather what one must not do to others, so that their dignity is recognized. His method can be described as appellative rather than a logical inference that shows the necessity of dignity. His negative justification is supposed to show that human dignity is attacked whenever a person is humiliated. He puts forward examples and reasons that are supposed to show that humiliation is bad, and avoiding humiliation is all that is needed for a decent society. A society that is nonhumiliating is a society that respects human dignity. This position implies that human beings are hurt not only by physical attacks but also by means of symbolic actions.

In contrast to these two this-worldly concepts of dignity, Spaemann’s position is metaphysical. According to him, the concept of human dignity refers to something sacred, the preciousness of human beings themselves, which, however, cannot be thought of without God. Dignity is a religious-metaphysical notion, and human beings have dignity just because they represent the Absolute. It is impossible, according to him, that any human being can be without a certain minimum of dignity. This does not imply that dignity is a gradual notion. The human dignity that is important for contemporary discussions and that does not have any gradations refers to the minimum amount of dignity that all human beings have to have and that they can never lose, according to Spaemann. On the basis of some transcendental-pragmatic reflections, he links dignity to a nonempirical substance, which again is connected with a personal soul. When egg and sperm come together, this soul is united with the body, as the soul is not part of nature. In addition, the dignity connected to the personal soul is not identical with human rights but represents the foundation of human rights.

Future Directions

Given the most recent scientific innovations and artistic creations, it is not a daring prophecy to claim that transhumanism and posthumanism are and will continue to be significant movements. They share the basic attitude that the special status of human beings has dissolved, which means that human beings do not have a special factor that separates them categorically from other forms of life: Human beings are merely gradually different from other forms of life. This conception can already be found in the reflections of Darwin and Nietzsche.

However, transhumanism and posthumanism must not be identified with one another. Their values differ significantly. Whereas transhumanism upholds humanist values, posthumanism sticks to antihumanist values. Humanist values are such that the Renaissance type counts as an ideal that is to be aspired to. Antihumanist values, on the other hand, are such that there is no absolute set of values—values depend upon perspectival interpretations, and it is up to the interpreter in question which values he sticks to. As the concepts of human rights and dignity are connected with humanist concepts like the affirmation of the special status of human beings, which both transhumanism and posthumanism reject, the future development of these movements is directly connected to the evolution of the concepts of rights and dignity. Concerning rights, the next battle will be one between animal and human rights, whereas concerning dignity, human dignity might have to evolve into a trans- or posthuman dignity.

One of the current and future developments concerning rights is related to the dissolution of the special status of human beings. Human rights apply only to human beings, and only humans ought to be considered in the moral realm, because they have a special ontological and normative status in the world. Given the dissolution of the special status of human beings, this position no longer holds. The most prominent defender of animal rights is Tom Regan. He argues that the fact of being a “subject-of-a-life” is a necessary and contingent condition for having rights. As there are nonhuman animals that also possess this quality, they also ought to possess rights, and one ought to alter the concept of human rights into one that includes humans and some nonhumans.

Another attack concerning our current attitude toward animals was put forward by Peter Singer. He compares the discrimination against animals just because they do not belong to the human species with sexism and racism. As an alternative, he proposes an ethics that considers an equal consideration of interests. Hence, two beings that have similar preferences ought to be morally considered equally, too. Both Regan and Singer take the dissolution of the special status of human beings seriously. Thereby, they show that the current concept of human rights ought to be revised, as it does not adequately represent the relationship between human beings and nonhuman beings.

The current and future developments concerning the concept of dignity are also related to the dissolution of the special status of human beings in the world. One of the qualities necessarily connected with human dignity is the special status of human beings in the world. Human beings are categorically different from nonhuman animals, according to this view. It can imply, as it does according to German law, that only a human being is a person and all other beings are things. To hurt an animal is to commit a damage to a property, a thing. Given the dissolution of the special status of human beings, this estimation becomes implausible, and as such, the categorical difference between human beings and animals vanishes. Hence, there is a need to revise the concept of human dignity to integrate the altered attitude concerning the status of human beings in the world. In that case, we might already be able to talk of a posthuman instead of a human dignity. Another option would be to completely get rid of the concept of human dignity, as the qualities related to it are no longer plausible, and given the origin of the concept, it has religious implications, which are also no longer held by a majority of people.

In addition, a further development has to be noted. Genetic engineering enables us to alter the genetic setup of humans significantly, and it can be expected that many further developments will take place in this respect. These developments are significant also for the concept of dignity. Two attitudes concerning human alteration have been developed within two movements. First, there is the transhumanist movement, and second, the posthumanist movement. Both accept the dissolution of the special status of human beings in the world and the integration of human beings in nature so that they are different only in degree from other animals. However, their views concerning the genetic alterations of human beings differ. In contrast to the transhumanists who uphold a humanist—a Renaissance—ideal of human beings, posthumanists uphold antihumanist values.

However, the transhumanist movement is not a unified one. Esfandiary distinguishes between the transhuman and the posthuman. A transhuman is a transitional human who represents the link to the posthumans but still belongs to the human species. A posthuman is a member of the posthuman species, which represents a further step in evolution. Bostrom, on the other hand, has a different notion of the posthuman. He regards a posthuman to be a member of the human species but with capacities that greatly exceed “the maximum attainable by any current human being without recourse to new technological means.” Both uphold a humanist ideal that implies that not all alterations count as enhancements. Only if the alterations stick to a certain ideal of the good, which is similar to the Renaissance ideal of human beings, do they count as enhancements.

The posthumanist movement, on the other hand, is more open concerning what counts as an enhancement. It does not uphold that there is only one moral ideal or that there is only one set of values and norms valid for everyone. There are various ideals that are valid for certain types of human beings. There is a group that upholds the Renaissance ideal, but there are other groups, too. There is also the group of the blind, which regards being blind as an ideal. Posthumanism, in contrast to transhumanism, does not claim that one group holds a mistaken ideal, as transhumanists would claim with respect to the group of the blind for example. Posthumanists have greater respect for the value of negative freedom, which this author regards as a cultural achievement that cannot be underestimated and that one must not sacrifice lightly. The genetically altered, from the perspective of posthumanism, can also be referred to as posthumans. However, there are also concepts of the posthuman within posthumanism that are not directly concerned with questions of genetic enhancement, like Hayles’s concept of the posthuman or Haraway’s concept of the cyborg, which put forward a new anthropology. Hence, posthumanism from their perspective is the attempt of putting forward a radically new picture of what the anthropos is.

There are various ways to understand and affirm genetically altered human beings. If one refers to members of the human species as bearers of human dignity, which one can continue to do, and if one revises the traditional concept by integrating the dissolution of the special status of human beings, then one should seriously consider what type of dignity applies to trans- and posthumans. Given the differences between them and current human beings, this ought to have an effect upon their moral status. Maybe they can be regarded as bearers of transhuman and posthuman dignity, respectively.

Bibliography:

Badmington, N. (2000). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
Bell, D. (1993). Communitarianism and its critics. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
Birx, H. J. (1984). Theories of evolution. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
Cicero, M. T. (1991). On duties. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Darwin, C. (1998). The descent of man. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. (Original work published 1871)
Esfandiary, F. M. (1977). Up-wingers. New York: Popular Library.
Evans, M. (Ed.). (2001). The Edinburgh companion to contemporary liberalism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Gewirth, A. (1981). Reason and morality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gordijn, B., & Chadwick, R. (Eds.). (2009). Medical enhancement and posthumanity. Berlin: Springer.
Haraway, D. (1991). A cyborg manifesto: Science, technology, and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. In D. Haraway, Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention of nature (pp. 149–181). New York: Routledge.
Hayles, N. K. (1999). How we became posthuman: Virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and informatics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hobbes, T. (1998). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1651)
Ishay, M. R. (2004). The history of human rights. From ancient times to the globalization era. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kant, I. (1991). Political writings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1785)
Knoepffler, N., Schipanski, D., & Sorgner, S. L. (Eds.). (2007). Human biotechnology as social challenge: An interdisciplinary introduction to bioethics. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Leiter, B. (2002). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Nietzsche on morality. London: Routledge Chapman & Hall.
Locke, J. (1988). Two treatises of government. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1689)
Margalit, A. (1998). The decent society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nietzsche, F. (1998). On the genealogy of morals: A polemic (5th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy,state,andutopia. NewYork: Basic Books.
Nussbaum, M. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in liberal education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pico della Mirandola, G. (1996). Oration on the Dignity of Man. Washington, DC: Regnery/Gateway. (Original work published 1486)
Rachels, J. (1991). Created from animals: Moral implications of Darwinism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. (2005). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
Regan, T. (2004). The case for animal rights (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Rousseau, J. J. (1997). “‘The social contract’”and other later political writings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Singer, P. (1999). Practical ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sorgner, S. L. (2006). Kant. In H. J. Birx (Ed.), Encyclopedia of anthropology (Vol. 3, pp. 1355–1358). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sorgner, S. L. (2009). Nietzsche, the overman and transhumanism. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 20 (1), 29–42.
Sorgner, S. L. (2009). Transhumanism. In H. J. Birx (Ed.), Encyclopedia of time (Vol. 3, pp. 1176–1375). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sorgner, S. L. (2010). Menschenwürde nach Nietzsche: Die Geschichte eines Begriffs. Darmstadt, Germany: WBG.
Sorgner, S. L., Birx, H. J., & Knoepffler, N. (2006). Eugenik und die Zukunft [ Eugenics and the future ]. Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany: Alber.
Taylor, C. (1992). The ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Research Proposal on Human Rights, Conflict and Security

Added on 2023-06-11

About this Document

Research Proposal on Human Rights, Conflict and Security_1

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Together Against Trafficking in Human Beings

Trafficking in human beings is a crime that should have no place in today’s society. It destroys individuals’ lives by depriving people of their dignity, freedom and fundamental rights. It is often a violent crime committed by organised crime networks.

Facts about trafficking in human beings

37% of the victims of trafficking in the EU are EU citizens, and a significant number of them are trafficked within their own country. However, non-EU victims have increased in recent years and they now outnumber victims with an EU citizenship. The majority of victims in the EU are women and girls who are mainly trafficked for sexual exploitation. The ratio of male victims has more than doubled in the last years.

Around 15% of victims of trafficking in the EU are children.

The most common forms of trafficking in the EU is sexual exploitation and labour exploitation . Both forms of exploitation amount to an equal share of victims. Most traffickers in the EU are EU citizens and often of the same nationality as their victims. More than three quarters of perpetrators are men.

Links with organised crime

This crime brings high profits to criminals and carries with it enormous human, social and economic costs. Trafficking in human beings is often linked with other forms of organised crime such as migrant smuggling, drug trafficking, extortion, money laundering, document fraud, payment card fraud, property crimes, cybercrime and other.

This complex criminal phenomenon continues to be systematically addressed in a wide range of EU policy areas and initiatives from security to migration, justice, equality, fundamental rights, research, development and cooperation, external action and employment to name a few.

Discover the 'End human trafficking. Break the invisible chain' campaign

Learn about EU Anti-trafficking actions

A comprehensive EU approach to fight trafficking in human beings is anchored in the EU Anti-trafficking Directive, and complemented by the EU Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings (2021-2025).

The EU Anti-Trafficking Coordinator is responsible for improving coordination and coherence among EU institutions, EU agencies, Member States and international actors, and for developing existing and new EU policies to address Trafficking in Human Beings.

Part of the mandate of the EU Anti-Trafficking Coordinator is to foster cooperation and policy coherence, including the EU Networks of the National Rapporteurs and Equivalent Mechanisms, the EU Civil Society Platform and the cooperation with the EU Agencies.

This section provides comprehensive information on how each EU country, tackles, prevents and identifies instances of trafficking in human beings.

Recent calls for proposals and EU projects and Funding for projects addressing trafficking in human beings are presented.

This section provides an overview of relevant publications and studies on EU anti-trafficking actions.

European approach to artificial intelligence

The EU’s approach to artificial intelligence centers on excellence and trust, aiming to boost research and industrial capacity while ensuring safety and fundamental rights.

The way we approach Artificial Intelligence (AI) will define the world we live in the future. To help building a resilient Europe for the Digital Decade , people and businesses should be able to enjoy the benefits of AI while feeling safe and protected.

The European AI Strategy aims at making the EU a world-class hub for AI and ensuring that AI is human-centric and trustworthy. Such an objective translates into the European approach to excellence and trust through concrete rules and actions.

In April 2021, the Commission presented its AI package, including:

its Communication on fostering a European approach to AI ;
a review of the Coordinated Plan on Artificial Intelligence (with EU Member States);
its Regulatory framework proposal on artificial intelligence and relevant Impact assessment .

In January 2024 The Commission launched the AI innovation package to support Artificial Intelligence startups and SMEs . The package includes several measures to support European startups and SMEs in the development of trustworthy AI that respects EU values and rules.

One key element of this package is the Communication on boosting startups and innovation in trustworthy artificial intelligence that sets out a strategic investment framework in trustworthy AI for the Union to capitalise on its assets, in particular its world-leading supercomputing infrastructure, and to foster an innovative European AI ecosystem.

The main landmark initiative of the Communication is “GenAI4EU” to stimulate the uptake of generative AI across the Union’s key strategic industrial ecosystems and that will encourage the development of large open innovation ecosystems that will foster collaboration between AI startups and deployers of AI in industry as well as the public sector.

An European approach to excellence in AI

Fostering excellence in AI will strengthen Europe’s potential to compete globally.

The EU will achieve this by:

enabling the development and uptake of AI in the EU
becoming the place where  AI thrives from the lab to the market
ensuring that AI works for people and is a force for good in society
building strategic leadership in high-impact sectors

The Commission and Member States agreed to boost excellence in AI by joining forces on policy and investments. The 2021 review of the Coordinated Plan on AI outlines a vision to accelerate, act, and align priorities with the current European and global AI landscape and bring AI strategy into action.

Maximising resources and coordinating investments is a critical component of AI excellence. Both the   Horizon Europe  and  Digital Europe  programmes will invest €1 billion per year in AI. The Commission will also mobilise additional investments from the private sector and the Member States in order to reach an annual investment volume of €20 billion over the course of the digital decade.

The Recovery and Resilience Facility makes €134 billion available for digital. This will be a game-changer, allowing Europe to amplify its ambitions and become a global leader in developing cutting-edge, trustworthy AI.

Access to high quality data is an essential factor in building high performance, robust AI systems. Initiatives such as the  EU Cybersecurity Strategy , the Data act  and the Data Governance Act  provide the right infrastructure for building such systems.

An European approach to trust in AI

Building trustworthy AI will create a safe and innovation-friendly environment for users, developers and deployers.

The Commission has proposed 3 inter-related legal initiatives that will contribute to building trustworthy AI:

a European legal framework for AI that upholds fundamental rights and addresses safety risks specific to the AI systems ;
a civil liability framework - adapting liability rules to the digital age and AI ;
a revision of sectoral safety legislation (e.g. Machinery Regulation , General Product Safety Directive ).

An European legal framework on AI

The Commission aims to address the risks generated by specific uses of AI through a set of complementary, proportionate and flexible rules. These rules also provide Europe with a leading role in setting the global gold standard.

This framework gives AI developers, deployers and users the clarity they need by intervening only in those cases that existing national and EU legislations do not cover. The AI Act , has a clear, easy to understand approach, based on four different levels of risk: minimal risk, high risk, unacceptable risk, and specific transparency risk. It also introduces dedicated rules for general purpose AI models.

Important milestones

February 2024 European AI Office
January 2024 AI innovation package to support Artificial Intelligence startups and SMEs
December 2023 Political agreement on the AI Act reached by the co-legislators
June 2023 European Parliament's negotiating position on AI Act
December 2022 General approach of the Council on AI Act
September 2022 Proposal for an AI liability directive
June 2022 Launch of first AI regulatory sandbox in Spain: Bringing the AI Regulation forward

European Central Bank, Opinion on the AI Act (.PDF)

High-Level Conference on AI: From Ambition to Action (3d European AI Alliance Assembly)

European Commission: Proposal for a Regulation on Product Safety

European Commission: updated coordinated plan on AI

European Commission: Impact assessment of an AI regulation

October 2020 2nd European AI Alliance Assembly
July 2020 Inception impact assessment: Ethical and legal requirements on AI High-Level Expert Group on AI: Final assessment list on trustworthy AI (ALTAI) High-Level Expert Group on AI: Sectorial recommendations of trustworthy AI
February 2020 European Commission: White paper on AI: a European approach to excellence and trust Public consultation on a European approach to excellence and trust in AI
December 2019 High-Level Expert Group on AI: Piloting of assessment list of trustworthy AI
June 2019 First European AI Alliance Assembly High-Level Expert Group on AI: Policy and investment recommendations of AI
April 2019 European Commission Communication: Building trust in human-centric artificial intelligence High-Level expert group on AI: Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI
December 2018 European Commission: Coordinated plan on AI European Commission (Press release): AI made in Europe European Commission Communication: AI made in Europe Stakeholder consultation on draft ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI
June 2018 Launch of the European AI alliance Set up of the high-level expert group on AI
April 2018 Press release: Artificial intelligence for Europe Communication: Artificial intelligence for Europe Staff working document: Liability for emerging digital technologies Declaration of cooperation on artificial intelligence
March 2018 Press release: AI expert group and European AI alliance

Latest News

On 12 June 2024, the European Union and Australia held their second Digital Dialogue virtually.

The Commission has unveiled the AI Office, established within the Commission.

The EU and Japan held their second Digital Partnership Council in Brussels.

The European Commission has launched calls for proposals under Horizon Europe's 2023-2024 digital, industrial and space work programme for research and innovation in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and quantum technologies.

European Data Governance Act

A European Data Governance Act, which is fully in line with EU values and principles, will bring...

Artificial intelligence in the DIGITAL Europe programme

The DIGITAL Europe programme will open up the use of artificial intelligence by businesses and...

Last update

28 May 2024

National Security
Environment
Special Investigations
More Ways to Donate
Impact & Reports
Join Newsletter
Become a Source

Leaked Grant Proposal Details High-Risk Coronavirus Research

The proposal, rejected by U.S. military research agency DARPA, describes the insertion of human-specific cleavage sites into SARS-related bat coronaviruses.

Share on Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Share on WhatsApp

A grant proposal written by the U.S.-based nonprofit the EcoHealth Alliance and submitted in 2018 to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, provides evidence that the group was working — or at least planning to work — on several risky areas of research. Among the scientific tasks the group described in its proposal, which was rejected by DARPA, was the creation of full-length infectious clones of bat SARS-related coronaviruses and the insertion of a tiny part of the virus known as a “proteolytic cleavage site” into bat coronaviruses. Of particular interest was a type of cleavage site able to interact with furin, an enzyme expressed in human cells.

The EcoHealth Alliance did not respond to inquiries about the document, despite having answered previous queries from The Intercept about the group’s government-funded coronavirus research. The group’s president, Peter Daszak, acknowledged the public discussion of an unfunded EcoHealth proposal in a tweet on Saturday. He did not dispute its authenticity.

Join Our Newsletter

Original reporting. fearless journalism. delivered to you..

Since the genetic code of the coronavirus that caused the pandemic was first sequenced, scientists have puzzled over the “furin cleavage site.” This strange feature on the spike protein of the virus had never been seen in SARS-related betacoronaviruses, the class to which SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, belongs.

The furin cleavage site enables the virus to more efficiently bind to and release its genetic material into a human cell and is one of the reasons that the virus is so easily transmissible and harmful. But scientists are divided over how this particular site wound up in the virus, and the cleavage site became a major focus of the heated debate over the origins of the pandemic.

Many who believe that the virus that caused the pandemic emerged from a laboratory have pointed out that it is unlikely that the particular sequence of amino acids that make up the furin cleavage site would have occurred naturally.

Adherents of the idea that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a natural spillover from animal hosts have argued that it could have evolved naturally from an as-yet undiscovered virus. Further, they argued, scientists were unlikely to have engineered the feature.

“There is no logical reason why an engineered virus would utilize such a suboptimal furin cleavage site, which would entail such an unusual and needlessly complex feat of genetic engineering,” 23 scientists wrote earlier this month in an article in the journal Cell. “There is no evidence of prior research at the [Wuhan Institute of Virology] involving the artificial insertion of complete furin cleavage sites into coronaviruses.”

But the proposal describes the process of looking for novel furin cleavage sites in bat coronaviruses the scientists had sampled and inserting them into the spikes of SARS-related viruses in the laboratory.

“We will introduce appropriate human-specific cleavage sites and evaluate growth potential in [a type of mammalian cell commonly used in microbiology] and HAE cultures,” referring to cells found in the lining of the human airway, the proposal states.

The new proposal, which also described a plan to mass vaccinate bats in caves, does not provide conclusive evidence that the virus that caused the pandemic emerged from a lab. And virus experts remain sharply divided over its origins. But several scientists who work with coronaviruses told The Intercept that they felt that the proposal shifted the terrain of the debate.

Tipping the Scales

“Some kind of threshold has been crossed,” said Alina Chan, a Boston-based scientist and co-author of the upcoming book “Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19.” Chan has been vocal about the need to thoroughly investigate the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a lab while remaining open to both possible theories of its development. For Chan, the revelation from the proposal was the description of the insertion of a novel furin cleavage site into bat coronaviruses — something people previously speculated, but had no evidence, may have happened.

“Let’s look at the big picture: A novel SARS coronavirus emerges in Wuhan with a novel cleavage site in it. We now have evidence that, in early 2018, they had pitched inserting novel cleavage sites into novel SARS-related viruses in their lab,” said Chan. “This definitely tips the scales for me. And I think it should do that for many other scientists too.”

Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University who has espoused the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated in a lab, agreed. “The relevance of this is that SARS Cov-2, the pandemic virus, is the only virus in its entire genus of SARS-related coronaviruses that contains a fully functional cleavage site at the S1, S2 junction,” said Ebright, referring to the place where two subunits of the spike protein meet. “And here is a proposal from the beginning of 2018, proposing explicitly to engineer that sequence at that position in chimeric lab-generated coronaviruses.”

“A possible transmission chain is now logically consistent — which it was not before I read the proposal.”

Martin Wikelski, a director at the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior in Germany, whose work tracking bats and other animals was referenced in the grant application without his knowledge, also said it made him more open to the idea that the pandemic may have its roots in a lab. “The information in the proposal certainly changes my thoughts about a possible origin of SARS-CoV-2,” Wikelski told The Intercept. “In fact, a possible transmission chain is now logically consistent — which it was not before I read the proposal.”

But others insisted that the research posed little or no threat and pointed out that the proposal called for most of the genetic engineering work to be done in North Carolina rather than China. “Given that the work wasn’t funded and wasn’t proposed to take place in Wuhan anyway it’s hard to assess any bearing on the origin of SARS-CoV-2,” Stephen Goldstein, a scientist who studies the evolution of viral genes at the University of Utah, and an author of the recent Cell article, wrote in an email to The Intercept.

Other scientists contacted by The Intercept noted that there is published evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was already engaged in some of the genetic engineering work described in the proposal and that viruses designed in North Carolina could easily be used in China. “The mail is filled with little envelopes with plasmid dried on to filter paper that scientists routinely send each other,” said Jack Nunberg, director of the Montana Biotechnology Center at the University of Montana.

NIH Documents Provide New Evidence U.S. Funded Gain-of-Function Research in Wuhan

Vincent Racaniello, a professor of microbiology and immunology at Columbia University, was adamant that the proposal did not change his opinion that the pandemic was caused by a natural spillover from animals to humans. “There are zero data to support a lab origin ‘notion,’” Racaniello wrote in an email. He said he believed that the research being proposed had the potential to fall in the category of gain-of-function research of concern, as did an experiment that was detailed in another grant proposal recently obtained by The Intercept. The government funds such research, in which scientists intentionally make viruses more pathogenic or transmissible in order to study them, only in a narrow range of circumstances . And DARPA rejected the proposal at least in part because of concerns that it involved such research.

While Racaniello acknowledged that the research in the DARPA proposal entailed some danger, he said “the benefits far, far outweigh the risk.” He also said the fact that the viruses described in the proposal were not known pathogens mitigated the concern. “This is not SARS,” he said, referring to SARS-CoV-1, the virus that caused a 2003 outbreak. “It’s SARS-related.”

But SARS-CoV-2 is not a direct descendant of that virus — it’s a relative.

In fact, the viruses described in the grant proposal, which was first posted online by the research group DRASTIC , were not known pathogens. And the authors of the grant proposal make the case that because the scientists would be using SARS-related bat viruses, as opposed to the SARS virus that was known to infect humans, the research was exempt from “gain-of-function concerns.” But according to several scientists interviewed by The Intercept, the viruses presented a threat nevertheless.

“The work describes generating full-length bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are thought to pose a risk of human spillover. And that’s the type of work that people could plausibly postulate could have led to a lab-associated origin of SARS-CoV-2,” said Jesse Bloom, a professor at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and director of the Bloom Lab, which studies the evolution of viruses. Bloom pointed out that the scientists acknowledge the risk to humans in their proposal. “It’s an explicit goal of the grant to identify the bat SARS-related coronaviruses that they think pose the highest risk.”

Stuart Newman, a professor of cell biology who directs the developmental biology laboratory at New York Medical College, also said the fact that the viruses weren’t known to be dangerous didn’t preclude the possibility that they might become so. “That’s really disingenuous,” Newman said of the argument. “The people that are claiming natural emergence say that it begins with a bat virus that evolved to be compatible with humans. If you use that logic, then this virus could be a threat because it could also make that transition.” Newman, a longtime critic of gain-of-function research and founder of the Council for Responsible Genetics, said that the proposal confirmed some of his worst fears. “This is not like slightly stepping over the line,” said Newman. “This is doing everything that people say is going to cause a pandemic if you do it.”

While the grant proposal does not provide the smoking gun that SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab, for some scientists it adds to the evidence that it might have. “Whether that particular study did or didn’t [lead to the pandemic], it certainly could have,” said Nunberg, of Montana Biotechnology Center. “Once you make an unnatural virus, you’re basically setting it up in an unstable evolutionary place. The virus is going to undergo a whole bunch of changes to try and cope with its imperfections. So who knows what will come of it.” The risks of such research are profound and irreversible, he said. “You can’t call back the virus once you release it into the environment.”

DARPA, a division of the Department of Defense, said regulations prevented it from confirming that it had reviewed the proposal. “Since EcoHealth Alliance may or may not be the direct source of the material in question, and we are precluded by Federal Acquisition Regulations from divulging bidders or any associated proposal details, we recommend that you reach out to them to confirm the document’s authenticity,” a DARPA spokesperson wrote in an email to The Intercept. The British Daily Telegraph reported that it had confirmed the document’s legitimacy with a former member of the Trump administration.

The Telegraph story erroneously reported that the scientists proposed to inoculate bats with live viruses. In fact, they hoped to inoculate them with chimeric S proteins, which were proposed to be developed through a subcontract in the grant in Ralph Baric’s lab at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, not in Wuhan. Baric did not respond to The Intercept’s request for comment.

Conflict of Interest

Many questions remain about the proposal, including whether any of the research described in it was completed. Even without the DARPA funding, there were many other potential ways to pay for the experiments. And scientists interviewed for this article agreed that often researchers do some of the science they describe in proposals before or after they submit them.

“This was a highly funded group of researchers that wouldn’t let one rejection halt their work,” said Chan, the “Viral” author.

Perhaps the most troubling question about the proposal is why, within the small group of scientists who have been searching for information that could shed light on the origins of the pandemic, there has apparently been so little awareness of the planned work until now. Peter Daszak and Linfa Wang, two of the researchers who submitted the proposal, did not previously acknowledge it.

Daszak, the EcoHealth Alliance president, has actively sought to quash interest in the idea that the novel coronavirus originated in a lab. In February 2020, as the pandemic began to grip major cities in the U.S., he began organizing scientists to write an open letter that was published in the Lancet addressing the origins of the virus. “The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins,” read the statement signed by Daszak and 26 co-authors. “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.”

Daszak directed and gathered signatures for the letter, all the while suggesting that he and his collaborators on the proposed DARPA project, Baric and Wang, distance themselves from the effort.

“I spoke with Linfa [Wang] last night about the statement we sent round. He thinks, and I agree with him, that you, me and him should not sign this statement, so it has some distance from us and therefore doesn’t work in a counterproductive way,” Daszak wrote to Baric in February 2020, just weeks before it appeared in the journal, according to an email surfaced a year later by public health investigative research group U.S. Right to Know. “We’ll then put it out in a way that doesn’t link it back to our collaboration so we maximize an independent voice.” Ultimately, Daszak did sign the letter.

“I also think this is a good decision,” Baric replied. “Otherwise it looks self-serving and we lose impact.”

Baric and Wang — a professor in the emerging infectious diseases program at Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore — did not respond to inquiries from The Intercept about their decision not to sign the letter in the Lancet.

Daszak was also a member of the joint team the World Health Organization sent to China in February 2020 to investigate the origins of the pandemic, which concluded that it was “extremely unlikely” that the virus had been released from a laboratory. (In March, WHO called for further investigation of the origins of the virus and stated that “all hypotheses remain open.”)

“I find it really disappointing that one of the members of the joint WHO-China team, which is essentially the group of scientists that were tasked as representatives of both the scientific community and the World Health Organization of investigating this, are actually on this proposal, knew that this line of research was at least under consideration, and didn’t mention it all,” said Bloom, of Fred Hutch. “Whatever information that relates to help people think about this just needs to be made transparently available and explained.”

Correction: September 24, 2021

A previous version of this article stated incorrectly that the EcoHealth Alliance proposal had been featured on Sky News Australia.

Correction: September 23, 2021, 3:30 p.m.

A previous version of this article stated incorrectly that Linfa Wang was a member of the WHO-China team.

Contact the author:

Additional credits:.

Additional Reporting: Mara Hvistendahl

A researcher works in a lab of Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in Wuhan in central China's Hubei province Thursday, Feb. 23, 2017. (FeatureChina via AP Images)

New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab

This photo taken on April 16, 2013 shows Ms. Shi (R), a doctor at the Beijing Center of Disease Control, gesturing to a colleague in their laboratory in Beijing. A seven-year-old girl who contracted the deadly H7N9 strain of bird flu was to leave a Beijing hospital on April 17, staff said, as the death toll from the virus in China remained at 16. CHINA OUT AFP PHOTO (Photo credit should read STR/AFP via Getty Images)

I Visited a Chinese Lab at the Center of a Biosafety Debate. What I Learned Helps Explain the Clash Over Covid-19’s Origins.

These “Tent Massacre” Survivors Couldn’t Afford to Leave Rafah. The Next Israeli Attack Nearly Wiped Their Family Out.

Shrouq Aila, Sharif Abdel Kouddous

“I felt helpless watching my family dying and not able to help them. It is a nightmare that I will never wake up from.”

WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 26: Trans man and abortion rights advocate Artemis Duffy of New England shows a box of mifepristone he is taking outside the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on March 26, 2024. (Photo by Shuran Huang for The Washington Post via Getty Images)

The End of Roe

GOP States Double Down on Fighting Medication Abortion After Supreme Court Keeps It Legal

Jordan Smith

From the jump, the lawsuit challenging the legality of mifepristone was a cynical, propagandistic endeavor. In a 9-0 opinion, the Supreme Court threw it out.

Intercepted Podcast

Medical Aid Worker Describes the Bloody Aftermath of Israel’s Hostage Rescue

Intercepted

“They attacked in the middle of the day. People were going to the market. They gave no warning.”

Newsletter Sign Up

Email Address

Your browser is outdated, it may not render this page properly, please upgrade .

Gazeta do Povo Event in Brasília: Jurists Analyze Decisions on Freedom of Expression

June 13, 2024

Key details

Key Details

Themes Academic Freedom, Content Regulation / Censorship, Defamation / Reputation, Digital Rights, Press Freedom

Brazilian newspaper Gazeta do Povo hosted a high-level debate on freedom of expression and relevant recent decisions of higher courts in Brazil on the matter. Renowned jurists, from Brazil and other countries, joined the discussion on September 27 and 28, 2023, in Brasília.

The list of conference participants included Jónatas Machado , Professor of Law at the University of Coimbra, Nadine Strossen , Professor of Law Emerita at New York Law School and former President of the American Civil Liberties Union (panels 2 and 3 below), and Todd Henderson , Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School, among many others. The speakers considered the current freedom of expression debate in Brazil and the most emblematic cases and court rulings on the subject from regional and international perspectives, including those of American and European approaches to speech regulation. The questions that the event’s six panels explored concerned restrictions on freedom of expression, fake news, hate speech, censorship, and its legitimacy.

The recordings of panel discussions (with the option to have English subtitles) are available on YouTube and below.

Content regulation / censorship, cyber security / cyber crime, digital rights.

June 09, 2022

LEXOTA—A New Tool to Track Government Responses to Online Disinformation Across Sub-Saharan Africa

disinformation

Digital Rights, Content Regulation / Censorship

February 17, 2021

I&JPN: Cross-Border Content Moderation Toolkit

Content Moderation, Internet Governance

Digital Rights, Political Expression, Press Freedom

July 08, 2022

Fake news law could shield 750,000 politicians and institutions

Content regulation / censorship, defamation / reputation, freedom of association and assembly / protests, political expression.

December 02, 2020

Proposal for an EU anti-SLAPP Directive

IMAGES

(PDF) The research proposal: Centre for Applied Human Rights 1
Human Rights in international law
Human Rights
Human Rights Research Project by Prairie and Pine
Project Proposal on Human Rights Awareness, NHRC
5. human rights research

VIDEO

Reacting to the Proposal of a Palestinian State alongside Israel
Labour Party: Taking Back Control Ending the Chaos at the Border #uk #labour #rishisunak
Belgium, Minister of Foreign Affairs, European Affairs and Foreign Trade, H.E. Ms. Hadja Lahbib
Commitment to Human Rights
Our Reaction to the European Commission Proposal on Social Rights
Syria, Perm. Rep. of the Syrian Arab Republic to the UN in Geneva, H.E. Ambassador Haydar Ali Ahmad

COMMENTS

PDF The research proposal: Law
The research proposal: Centre for Applied Human Rights1. Your research proposal will be carefully considered by the Centre's faculty. The main purposes of the proposal are (a) to allow the admissions team to check the feasibility and potential originality of the research; (b) to ensure that we are able to allocate each successful applicant to ...
Human Rights Research Proposal outline
Also the role of Western societies on child labour and their hypocrisy as making higher profit on one hand, and consolidating protection of human rights on the other hand is aimed to be given. Human Rights Research Proposal- Title: Child Labor in Solomon Islands- Case study of Honiara. (Unearthing the reality) Name: Steward Tonowane ID ...
PDF F a C U L T Y O F L a W
U N IV ER S IT Y O F C O PE N H A G EN F A C U L T Y O F L A W PhD Thesis Sébastien Lorion The institutional turn of international human
PDF Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
C. Human rights as social claims. Before they are written into legal texts, human rights often emerge from claims of people suffering injustice and thus are based on moral sentiment, culturally determined by contextualized moral and religious belief systems. Revolt against tyranny is an ancient tradition.
PDF Methodological Approaches to Human Rights Indicators
A. Ethical, statistical and human rights considerations in indicator selection. There are several methodological considerations that should guide the process of selecting indicators for use in human rights assessments. The collection, processing and dissemination of any statistical infor-mation have implications for the right to information ...
The global politics of human rights: From human rights to human dignity
Joe Renouard's Human Rights in American Foreign Policy (Renouard, 2015) is an empirically-rich, comprehensive and masterful survey of US foreign policy strategies starting from the Vietnam War period to the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s. Opposing the conventional belief that US human rights policy is built on hypocrisy, Renouard ...
Human Rights Education for All: a Proposal for The Post-2015
A Life of Dignity for All, he presented guidelines for a post-2015 agenda. based o n four building blocks: 1) a vision of the fut ure based firmly on. human rights and universally-accepted values ...
Centre for Applied Human Rights
The Centre has an active research agenda and a growing number of PhD students. We are happy to entertain applications for doctoral studies on a wide range of topics in human rights, particularly on: We particularly encourage applications from individuals with practical experience relating to the topic of their research.
PDF Human Rights: A Modest Proposal
The research in this paper was supported by a Fulbright Grant. Michael Byron 471 In their political conception, human rights help us understand and normalize legitimate relations between nation states and their citizens. The language ... Human Rights: A Modest Proposal 474 dispute is about rights and not the substance of rights per se, nothing ...
A Proposal for How to Realize Human Rights at the National and Regional
SMP, "to work for the protection of all human rights for all people [and] to help empower people to realize their rights," can be achieved,3 and (2) to 1. "Special procedures" is the generic title given to the mechanisms established by the Commission on Human Rights and assumed by the Human Rights Council to address
Human rights in postgrowth proposals and policies
Research on the relationships between human rights and post- growth proposals such as degrowth or doughnut economics - in theory and practice - is in its infancy. This research project would develop the understanding of obstacles and opportunities to centre human rights in postgrowth approaches as a normative and legal foundation, to protect ...
Why Human Subjects Research Protection Is Important
In the introduction to the report, the National Commission provides this understated assessment of the role of the IRB: "This review of proposed research by IRBs is the primary mechanism for assuring that the rights of human subjects are protected." 29 The document outlines the ideal responsibilities of the IRB in the oversight of research ...
An Example Sample Project Proposal on "The Role of International
The purpose of this project proposal is to outline a comprehensive research study on the role of international organizations in protecting human rights. The project aims to examine the effectiveness and challenges faced by international organizations in safeguarding human rights globally. The findings of this study will contribute to a better understanding of the role
Human Rights Research and Ethics Review: Protecting Individuals or
Background. Human rights violations play an important role as determinants of, or structural barriers to, health -.Research, investigation, and documentation focused on human rights have led to the development of rights-based interventions , and the promotion of human rights in the core strategies of international health organizations ,.. At the same time, health and human rights ...
The research proposal: Centre for Applied Human Rights 1
The research proposal: Centre for Applied Human Rights1 Your research proposal will be carefully considered by the Centre's faculty. The main purposes of the proposal are (a) to allow the admissions team to check the feasibility and potential originality of the research; (b) to ensure that we are able to allocate each successful applicant to an appropriate supervisor; (c) to indicate the ...
177 Human Rights Research Topics
Unique Human Rights Topics for Research. The collapse of the Soviet Union and Rise of Communism in Russia. Comparing the Pan-African movement to the 20 th -century cultural nationalism of Latin America. A review of the Hong Kong Umbrella Movement's goals and methods.
PDF Dissertation proposal LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa
I would also like to express my gratitude to the Centre for Human Rights and their partners for the opportunity to study for this degree. A special thanks to Professor Frans Viljoen and his superb interpersonal skills; and to Professor Hansungule who always had time to listen even as I was in Ghana. To the LLM Class of 2008 you guys are all superb.
Publications
Explore our publications on critical international human rights issues, authored by researchers from around the world. ... Human Rights Research Center. 1 day ago; The Ongoing Crisis Facing the Rohingya. ... MPH June 4, 2024 In January 2024, the University of California Board of Regents denied a proposal allowing... Human Rights Research Center ...
PDF Human Rights Proposal
OBJECTIVE 2.1 RESEARCH Facilitate research on the social and economic situations of the marginalised groups and the effectiveness of responses to these situations from different stakeholders in Uganda. Activity 2.1.1 Use expertise of staff, members and partners to facilitate and support research on the situation of marginalised groups in Uganda
Human Rights Research Paper
This sample human rights research paper features: 8300 words (approx. 27 pages), an outline, and a bibliography with 34 sources. Browse other research paper examples and check the list of political science research paper topics for more inspiration. If you need a research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help.
Dissertations
The role of the Peace and Security Council in protecting human rights in Africa: Prospects and challenges. Stephen Buabeng-Baidoo. Establishing a right 'to' 'public space': an appraisal of the 'privatisation of public space' and its impact on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly in South African cities.
How to write a Human Rights Project Proposal
Many NGOs working on human rights have often found proposal writing a challenging task. Although conceptualizing a project can be fairly easy by examining the ground situation in the target community, but writing down the same on paper can be difficult. Funding agencies also demand complicated information in their proposal formats which further discourage NGOs.
Research Proposal on Human Rights, Conflict and Security
This research proposal aims to investigate the interlink between human rights, conflict and security. The research will analyze the impact of security failure on human rights and recommend ways to better the current situation and resolve conflicts to preserve human rights.
Together Against Trafficking in Human Beings
Facts about trafficking in human beings. 37% of the victims of trafficking in the EU are EU citizens, and a significant number of them are trafficked within their own country. However, non-EU victims have increased in recent years and they now outnumber victims with an EU citizenship. The majority of victims in the EU are women and girls who ...
European approach to artificial intelligence
The way we approach Artificial Intelligence (AI) will define the world we live in the future. To help building a resilient Europe for the Digital Decade, people and businesses should be able to enjoy the benefits of AI while feeling safe and protected.. The European AI Strategy aims at making the EU a world-class hub for AI and ensuring that AI is human-centric and trustworthy.
Leaked Grant Proposal Details High-Risk Coronavirus Research
The proposal, rejected by U.S. military research agency DARPA, describes the insertion of human-specific cleavage sites into SARS-related bat coronaviruses. Sharon Lerner, Maia Hibbett. September ...
Global Freedom of Expression
Brazilian newspaper Gazeta do Povo hosted a high-level debate on freedom of expression and relevant recent decisions of higher courts in Brazil on the matter. Renowned jurists, from Brazil and other countries, joined the discussion on September 27 and 28, 2023, in Brasília. The list of conference participants included Jónatas Machado, Professor of Law at the University of Coimbra, Nadine ...

Doctoral studies at CAHR

Research environment

Supervision

Programme of study

Progress, Dissertation and Examination

Applications and Further Information

Human rights in postgrowth proposals and policies

Supervisory team

Interdisciplinary focus

Training and support

Person specification

Research proposal

Supervision

Additional background information

Supervisory team references

Human Rights Research and Ethics Review: Protecting Individuals or Protecting the State?

Stefan D. Baral

Chris Beyrer

Summary Points

Human Participant Protections

Defining “Research”

Conducting Research on MSM and HIV in Africa

Investigating Health and Human Rights in Myanmar

Documenting Abuses in Compulsory Drug Treatment Centers

Mitigating Risks in Human Rights Investigations

Abbreviations

Funding Statement

The research proposal: Centre for Applied Human Rights 1

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

177 Human Rights Research Topics: Bright Ideas List 2023

A Brief about Human Rights

How to Write a Good Human Rights Thesis or Dissertation

Top Human Rights Research Topics

Argumentative Human Rights Topics

International Human Rights Topics

Controversial Human Rights Topics

Human Rights Discussion Topics

Interesting Civil Rights Topics

Special Human Rights Debate Topics

Unique Human Rights Topics for Research

PhD Topics in Human Rights

Other Human Rights Research Paper Topics

Need Assistance in Writing Your Research Papers on Human Rights?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

As a startup, we rely on YOU to help us do our work. Consider donating today.

Human Rights Research Paper

Introduction

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Future Directions

Bibliography:

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Research Proposal on Human Rights, Conflict and Security

End of preview

Together Against Trafficking in Human Beings

Facts about trafficking in human beings

Links with organised crime

Learn about EU Anti-trafficking actions

European approach to artificial intelligence

An European approach to excellence in AI

An European approach to trust in AI

An European legal framework on AI

Important milestones

Latest News

Related Content

European Data Governance Act

Artificial intelligence in the DIGITAL Europe programme

Last update

Leaked Grant Proposal Details High-Risk Coronavirus Research

Join Our Newsletter

Tipping the Scales

NIH Documents Provide New Evidence U.S. Funded Gain-of-Function Research in Wuhan

Conflict of Interest

Contact the author:

New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab

I Visited a Chinese Lab at the Center of a Biosafety Debate. What I Learned Helps Explain the Clash Over Covid-19’s Origins.

These “Tent Massacre” Survivors Couldn’t Afford to Leave Rafah. The Next Israeli Attack Nearly Wiped Their Family Out.

GOP States Double Down on Fighting Medication Abortion After Supreme Court Keeps It Legal

Medical Aid Worker Describes the Bloody Aftermath of Israel’s Hostage Rescue

Newsletter Sign Up