Human Rights @ Lund

Law in the Climate Emergency: Entangled Legal Orders in the Inter-American Court’s Advisory Opinion OC-32/25

Introduction

More than 600 actors contributed to shaping the Inter-American Court’s recent Advisory Opinion on the climate emergency, mobilizing a wide range of legal frameworks, including indigenous, national, regional, and international. This convergence underscores the need to examine how multiple normative orders interact beyond the nation-state and how they connect the local with the global. Today, this is explored through the lens of legal pluralism, which seeks to conceptualize these interactions and whose expressions are increasingly visible in transnational arenas. In this light, the Advisory Opinion is particularly significant, as it illustrates how a regional human rights court can bring diverse legal frameworks into dialogue, especially local ones, in responding to the climate emergency, a challenge of planetary scale.

Legal Pluralism and its Latin American Context

Legal pluralism questions the state-centered image of law as a single, unified system, highlighting instead the multiplicity of normative orders. As Antonio Wolkmer emphasizes, it rests on two dimensions: the coexistence of multiple legal orders that are activated by conflicts or consensuses within a given socio-political space, and the recognition that law does not emanate exclusively from the state apparatus.

Three main approaches can be identified. The first, the “classical” view, emerges from colonial and postcolonial contexts. The second shifts to non-colonial contexts and focuses on power relations within capitalist societies, showing how law operates through social, ethnic, and economic hierarchies. The third, postmodern legal pluralism, transcends the nation-state by incorporating infra-state dynamics (indigenous or community law) and supra-state dynamics (international human rights law). This third stage situates pluralism within transnational contexts.

Building on these typologies, John Griffiths distinguishes between “strong” legal pluralism, where non-state legal systems coexist with genuine autonomy, and “weak” legal pluralism, where the state recognizes other normative orders while preserving its primacy. The latter has predominated in Latin America, where state recognition of indigenous law is often subordinated to state structures. Nonetheless, Colombia, Ecuador, and Bolivia have incorporated pluralist dimensions to varying degrees, through multicultural, intercultural, and plurinational models, with the latter representing the most far-reaching form of recognition.

However, as Wolkmer points out, legal pluralism in Latin America is inscribed in a history marked by colonial legacies and persistent forms of authoritarianism, centralism, and dependency. Any pluralist proposal must address not only global and local structural transformations but also emerging “bottom-up” practices led by subjects and collectives in contexts of exclusion. Within this framework, it is essential to analyze how legal pluralism also manifests in its third stage in the region, particularly in connection with transnational contexts.

Global Legal Pluralism and Entangled Legalities

In its global dimension, legal pluralism has focused on analyzing the complexity of interactions among legal systems, particularly in transnational or supranational contexts. This highlights the dynamic ways in which different legal orders interact. In this scenario of normative multiplicity, the notion of entangled legalities developed by Nico Krisch offers a valuable lens. Krisch distances himself from traditional conceptions of law as a single, hierarchical, and coherent system. Instead, he proposes understanding law as a plural web in which norms from diverse origins, such as state, local, indigenous, religious, international, or transnational, interact and are mobilized simultaneously. This plurality, according to the author, is the “common state of legal affairs.”

In other words, this approach means that legal relations are not neatly organized but arise from real-life practices, disputes, compromises, and translations. Different legal systems shape each other and change through these encounters. From this perspective, people and institutions play a key role in driving processes of mutual influence, unequal recognition, and adaptation among different legal orders. These interactions depend on who is involved, the context in which they take place, and the narratives that give them meaning. The important point is that entanglement does not look the same everywhere. In some contexts, interaction among legal systems is intense, while in others it is weak or even blocked. These differences stem from historical developments, institutional paths, and existing power structures. These dynamics are especially visible in the Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 process, where diverse communities brought their own normative systems into dialogue with broader legal frameworks.

Community Submissions and Normative Entanglement

The consultation process of Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 brought together a wide range of actors. Some indigenous communities, in particular, drew on their local norms while also engaging strategically with national, regional, and international legal frameworks.

The submission by the Wiwa and Kankuamo Peoples of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta (Colombia) illustrates entanglement by combining their ancestral Law of Origin with constitutional rulings and international instruments such as ILO Convention No. 169 and the American Convention, thereby reinforcing territorial and climate claims. By contrast, in Honduras, where indigenous systems lack recognition, Lenca and Tolupán communities, together with COPINH, MADJ, and Women’s Link Worldwide, relied primarily on international human rights and environmental norms to legitimize their demands under the American Convention. A different approach appeared in the case of Mujeres Unidas en Defensa del Agua: Lago Titicaca (Peru–Bolivia), where communities mobilized the Bolivian Constitution and Law No. 71 on the Rights of Mother Earth, showing how recognition at the domestic level can ground claims mainly in national frameworks.

Taken together, these examples show how entanglement varies from complex webs linking local, national, and international frameworks, to strategies grounded primarily in domestic or international law depending on state recognition and political conditions.

The Court’s Reasoning and Entangled Legalities

Tracing the Court’s reasoning reveals the strengths and limitations of normative interaction at the regional level. To interpret the American Convention and the Protocol of San Salvador in the face of the climate emergency, the IACtHR drew on various sources of international law. Entanglement is evident in the use of norms that guide the IACtHR’s interpretation, such as Article 29 of the American Convention, the Vienna Convention’s interpretive rules, and the “constitutional trinity” of democracy, rule of law, and human rights, as well as in straddling practices that employ principles traversing multiple legal orders without being anchored in any one of them. A key example is the pro persona principle, which allows for the selection of the most protective norms across frameworks, a function especially relevant in the climate context.

The Court also reinterpreted human rights obligations, especially the duty of guarantee, in light of environmental law. Principles such as precaution, pro persona, and due diligence acted as bridges across regimes. Due diligence was redefined through dialogue with humanitarian law, the law of the sea, and environmental law, requiring “reinforced” diligence in the face of climate risks. Cooperation obligations were linked to principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities. One of the Opinion’s most innovative developments was recognizing nature as a subject of rights, a reference that, despite only briefly noting national precedents, suggests the influence of domestic experiences at the regional level. The Court also affirmed the obligation not to cause irreversible harm as a jus cogens norm, grounding its authority in effectiveness and general principles of law. Overall, while the Court addressed many community demands, including recognition of indigenous knowledge and the vulnerability of affected groups, its entanglement rests primarily on a transversal articulation of international legal regimes, with limited reference to other frameworks.

Conclusions

The IACtHR’s entanglement rests mainly on international frameworks, articulated through interpretive norms and principles that bridge systems, and thus occurs primarily within the international sphere. References to national frameworks in recognizing nature as a subject of rights reflect a form of bottom-up communication, though the Court did not further develop this. While the importance of local perspectives in addressing the climate emergency is widely acknowledged, convergence at regional and international levels remains hardly bottom-up, sustaining a hierarchical logic of law that hinders communication between the local and the global. Still, in states that have recognized pluralism, such as Colombia and Bolivia, communities have mobilized local norms more effectively in international arenas, reflecting greater capacity for normative mobilization where some degree of legal plurality has been accepted.

Anny Matamoros Pineda is a PhD candidate at the Faculty of Law, Lund University. Her PhD project aims to address the dearth of pluralism and social legitimacy in global constitutionalism. In particular, she seeks to explore whether applying constitutional principles within the international legal sphere can offer a more unified and coherent manner in addressing global emergencies. Through this approach, her research intends to enhance the effectivess and coherence of global responses to international issues, thereby contributing to the advancement of global governance and the protection of human rights.

19 September 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Blog posts

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Human Rights Lunch Online: External collaboration and course development in sexual and reproductive health and rights

Photo of a workshop on sexual and reproductive health and rights with people sitting in the background of the photo. Photo.

By Jack Palmieri and Tobias Herder, Faculty of Medicine

How can education in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) be strengthened through collaboration across institutions and disciplines?

In the Human Rights Lunch Online seminar on September 19th 2025, Jack Palmieri and Tobias Herder, both from the Division of Social Medicine and Global Health at the Faculty of Medicine, will share their experiences of developing and teaching courses in global health and SRHR. Their work spans over the Master of Public Health (MPH) programme, commissioned education, and free-standing collaborative courses, all of which highlight the importance of balancing external engagement for high-quality and relevant learning. The seminar will be moderated by Benedict Oppong Asamoah, associate professor in global health.

Drawing on several recent course development initiatives, Palmieri and Herder will illustrate how external collaboration can broaden perspectives, strengthen student learning, and connect academic training with real-world practice. At the same time, the seminar will address some of the institutional and structural challenges that accompany such collaborative approaches. Issues of transparency, role distribution, flexibility, and quality assurance are central when courses are designed together with external actors. The reliance on guest lecturers and external expertise also raises questions of sustainability and integration within curricula.

Collaboration is not only a practical tool for enhancing learning, but also a way of ensuring that education reflects diverse voices and experiences and prepares students to engage critically with global health challenges.

This Human Rights Lunch seminar will therefore be of particular interest to those working with education and training in global health and SRHR, but also more broadly to anyone concerned with curriculum development, pedagogical innovation, or higher education policy. It will provide both concrete experiences and critical reflections on how external collaboration can help shape courses that are academically rigorous, socially relevant, and firmly grounded in human rights values.

11 September 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Get to know our researchers Human Rights Lunch Online

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Objects of Justice: Exploring the Human Dimension at Lund’s Museum of International Law

Valenting Jeutner holding an object ot the museum. Photo. — Video of Valentin Jeutner showing three artefacts from the Museum of International Law: a deck of cards, a stamp and a large piece of the Berlin Wall.

Watch the video on Youtube: https://youtu.be/F2lgBdrU6Oo (new tab)

By Drishti Alagh, Master of Law Candidate at Lund University and museum team member

Objects have been at the heart of human civilisations since time immemorial. From the bronze sculptures carved during the Indus Valley Civilisation to the artworks sketched (often in secrecy) by prisoners held captive in Nazi Germany’s concentration camps, objects perform a rather unique retroactive function of teleporting one back in time and invoking within oneself a spectrum of perplexities, emotions and ponderances. (International) law, in its constant pursuit of objectivity, rationality and structure, often seems to be disconnected from the everyday lives of people and their lived experiences. It tends to leave behind the humanistic dimensions of law usually by silencing the emotional and sentimental realities of those it affects. The Museum of International Law, however, explicitly challenges these perceptions and attempts to approach and understand the black letter law through the lens of objects. Undertaking this exercise through objects and material culture not only assists in extracting out the emotional underpinnings underlying international treaties or the painful realities hiding behind colonial ventures, but also overarchingly helps develop international law as a rather vivid context-based discipline, swerving organically through time and space.

Stemming from these notions, therefore, the Museum of International Law (MOIL) is a first of its kind initiative that engages with objects, in a way accentuating the relation between objects and individuals, in order to unravel the human dimension of international law. The evocative collection of objects exhibited in the Museum, from a piece of the Berlin Wall to the vivacious Lotus Collection, could be seen as the physical manifestation of the abstract international legal framework, illustrating the stories of individuals whose lives have been entwined with pivotal events that not only shaped the development of international law but also influenced the broader course of history.

Our aim is to bring law to life by exhibiting objects and sharing stories that reverberate the shifting dynamics between international law and the lives of ordinary human beings all across the globe, thereby bringing a humanistic as well as a human rights dimension, spanning across theory and practice, to the discipline of international law. Rather than displaying or depicting international law as a mere myriad of treaties signed and regulations adopted in distant institutions, MOIL is an intellectual space wholeheartedly devoted to exhibiting international law by way of its ubiquitous presence in the everyday lives, struggles and resistances of individuals and communities all around the world. With an unambiguous yet compelling aim of the humanisation of international law, the Museum displays objects that in essence, embody the lived effects of international law-making processes on the lives, emotions and experiences of people. From the UN blue helmet worn by a soldier to an ashtray used by someone aboard the French steamer S.S. Lotus, the museum’s collection not just encapsulates mere objects but also offers evidence of the profound and personal stakes of international law that are felt at the grassroot levels of societies. The museum is not a static archive of objects but a dynamic living space that spans across reflection and action.

Alongside exhibiting objects showcasing the tangible impacts of international law, the museum serves as a space for critical engagement with objects and a platform for voicing the often-marginalised experiences in formal legal discourses. Therefore, with the primary aim to bridge the gap between the theoretical and practical notions of international law, the museum hosts regular events such as discussions on current affairs, seminars and workshops by survivors, scholars, activists, legal practitioners, visiting researchers and artists to speak about the law from the ground up. These initiatives aim to inspire reflections on the promises and limitations of the international legal frameworks by creating dialogue between legal professionals, artists, historians, and communities affected by international law as well as students and learners of law. Very recently, for instance, the museum hosted a conversation with two Lund residents who experienced the end of the second world war as children in Germany, thereby giving all the attendees the opportunity to reflect upon the actual lived experiences of the two children amidst a significant and imperative historical event that shaped the course of contemporary international law.

Furthermore, instead of establishing itself solely as a static and archival exhibit of objects, MOIL aims to constantly and consistently deal with the fundamental questions surrounding international law and navigating through ways to reshape the law. The museum, in this sense, grows, develops and nurtures everyday as an ongoing process, as does the international legal discipline. Moreover, by centring the stories of individuals behind international legal events and their lived experiences and realities evoked through these events, the museum helps reveal the profound moral and emotional dimensions of international law, that are evident in its capacity to heal, its potential for harm, and its indispensable role in the pursuit of dignity, accountability, and justice. The museum is in itself an organic entity where law meets life by way of the stories, emotions and most importantly, objects of those touched by international law, reminding us that behind every treaty signed by states or every legal principle adopted through a judicial decision is a person, a struggle, and a story worth telling, for law is inextricably etched in its own humanness.

Visiting the Museum of International Law

The Museum of International Law has already had a soft launch in the premises of the Raoul Wallenberg Institute in Lund. However, the plan is to open the museum in a more accessible and appropriate location at the Faculty of Law in the near future. For now, the museum is only open by appointment. To book, email: contact@internationallawmuseum.org.

Museum website: https://internationallawmuseum.org/ (new tab)

Visit the museum´s digital Lotus exhibition: https://artspaces.kunstmatrix.com/en/exhibition/14304052/lotus-collection (new tab)

4 June 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Blog posts Get to know our researchers

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Human Rights Dialogue – Forming new research agendas for human rights in Sweden

Researchers and practitioners from different fields engaged in group discussions (Photo: Johan Persson).

By Lena Halldenius, Professor of Human Rights and Coordinator of the Human Rights Profile Area

On the 29 April 2025, the Human Rights Profile Area and the Swedish Institute for Human Rights organised a Human Rights Dialogue. Around 50 people from Lund University, the Institute for Human Rights, and the Raoul Wallenberg Institute met to discuss, reflect, and start forming new research agendas for pertinent human rights challenges in Sweden today and in the near future.

The Dialogue opened with a presentation of the newly launched Annual Report from the Institute for Human Rights, on how human rights are respected and realised – or not – in Sweden (https://mrinstitutet.se/rapporter/arsrapport-2025-om-manskliga-rattigheter/). The Report found that general support for human rights remains very strong in Sweden, with survey results suggesting that 82% believe that human rights are important to them and reflect their values. A reflection that persisted throughout our discussions was that it would be interesting and important to know more about what is behind those figures. What is the perception of human rights that inform these numbers? A potential research project is beginning to form itself already!

*Photo*: *Abigail Booth presenting the 2025 Annual Report from the Institute for Human Rights to the participants of the Human Rights Dialogue (Photo: Johan Persson)*.

Discussions continued in small groups around different themes: 1. Discrimination, racism, hate, and threats, 2. Economic,social, and cultural rights, 3. Rule of law and shrinking civil space, 4. Climate and environment, and 5. Methodological challenges for measuring human rights.

*Photo: Researchers and practitioners from different academic fields engaged in group discussions (Photo: Johan Persson)*.

Among the maaaany topics covered, we talked about how big societal transitions (like digitisation and the green transition) bring new challenges that the human rights framework has not been designed for. Do we need to rethink human rights when things we have taken for granted are in flux? In the wake of a weakening democracy and a harsher social climate, we were also alert to a new kind of talk about the alleged “social contract”, where rights are surreptitiously conditioned on duties to behave and blend in. We begin to see how human rights are used to justify – in the name of security – interventions that just recently were seen as obvious violations, like mass surveillance and frisking children without any suspicion of criminal activity. What is the relationship between the individual and the state today, and what is the role for civil society and activism, when democracy is put to the test in an increasingly authoritarian political culture?

Human rights are supposed to be instantiated in law and institutions, but they are also aspirational and normative ideals to strive towards. This is a delicate balance. Is there a risk that aspirations and ideals come at the risk of making formal protective institutions irrelevant? At the same time, rights are also affective and an aspirational framework could help foster a more resilient political culture of rights. We are currently witnessing persistent inequality between countries and growing inequality within countries. Whether economic inequalities in themselves can constitute rights violations is a hotly debated topics. But one thing that seems clear is that vast economic inequalities and wealth concentration in the hands of a few have seriously detrimental effects on democratic institutions and civic participation.

Sweden is often portrayed as a champion of economic and social rights. An international comparison would be valuable to assess whether this perception holds true. But how can large scale studies of the progressive realization of economic and social rights be done? What are the indicators and the relevant data? Dealing with such methodological challenges will be a crucial part of human rights research ahead. We are just getting started!

Photo: The Human Rights Dialogue offered ample opportunities to connect with other Profile Area members. The Human Rights Profile Area has increased substantially during the last year and now has more than 130 members from 6 faculties at Lund University *(Photo: Johan Persson).*

19 May 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Blog posts

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

The Right to a Fair Trial – Historical Foundations

Martin Sunnqvist, coordinator for the Advanced Study Group ”Oaths and Courts – from Forum to the Future” at Pufendorf Institute presented during the Human Rights Lunch Online on May 16th, 2025.

Watch the recording on Youtube:

By Martin Sunnqvist

Within the ASG ”Oaths and Courts – from Forum to the Future” at the Lund University Pufendorf Institute for Advanced Studies, a group of researchers working within law, history, legal history, ancient history, theology and languages (Latin and Greek) gather. The independence and impartiality of judges, and the ambition to find the truth through judicial proceedings, have been defined by different types of oaths from Antiquity and onwards. In the ASG, we discuss how we can understand these legal oaths today, what they mean and what role they play in finding the truth and for the independence and impartiality of judges. And what do the standards of independence and impartiality mean when AI becomes part of decision-making?

The right to a fair trial is a fundamental human right. It is not only a right on its own, but it also provides individuals with an avenue to enforce other human rights. The right to a fair trial is, for example, described in art. 6 ECHR as the right to a ‘fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.’ Art. 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides everyone with the right ‘to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal’. The right to a fair trial is also defined in many constitutions. The right has been further defined in many judgments from the European Court of Human Rights.

In ancient Greece, oaths of judges are known from the 4th century B.C. Judges then swore to vote in accordance with the laws and decrees of the Athenian people, to listen to both parties equally, and to judge with their most just judgment without favour or hostility. These are standards that we still recognise as part of the right to a fair trial. In the period from 1150 to 1250, when judges and lawyers were in a process of professionalisation, oaths were an important part of the transition. In the 1230s, oaths for lawyers were formulated in France, England and Sicily. Lawyers should swear that they should not present unjust cases and that they should be loyal to their clients. This was a development of the Roman calumny oath. Furthermore, oaths for judges were formulated in the same decade in the German empire and in Sicily. Judges should swear that they should not hand down wrongful judgments, neither because of love nor hate, prayer nor reward, fear nor favour. These phrases then spread all over Europe and traces can be seen in the historical development of oaths of judges in many jurisdictions, often still today.

During the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period, the correct behaviour of a judge was not only communicated through oaths but also with the help of images. In town halls, such as in Siena in Italy, in Monsaraz in Portugal, and in Gdansk in Poland, there are allegories from the 14^th -16^th centuries of good and bad government or the good and bad judge. Also in legal manuscripts, the good judge and the fair trial could be shown and contrasted to the deceitful judge. In this way, the desired behaviour was clarified.

Emperor Justinian surrounded by six virtues. — *Maître de 1346, Le tribunal de Justinien, Digestum vetus cum glossa Accursii, vers 1345. Copyright BnF, Manuscript Latin no. 14339.*

One example from a manuscript is from the mid-14^th century. Maria Alessandra Bilotta (Lisbon), art historian specialised in medieval legal manuscripts, explained during a seminar 7^th March 2025 how emperor Justinian as a judge is surrounded by six virtues, three on either side, representing caritas – charity (looking upwards and holding parchment scrolls, one upwards with the three first commandments and one downwards with the other seven commandments), temperantia – temperance (holding a locked castle where vices are kept), fortitude – strength (holding a lion in its jaws), prudentia – wisdom (holding a circle or mirror with a book, and symbols of day and night), fides – faith (holding a tree in which are hanging 15 medallions representing the declaration of confession) and spes – hope (holding an anchor). Justinian himself symbolises the virtue of justice. Below are people with gifts, and as the judge refuses bribery, justice is incorruptible. A soldier is cutting the head of someone as an exemplum for the people, also reminding us about the development in human rights as the prohibition of capital punishment was, for example, not even included in the original version of the European Convention of Human Rights but added later.

The seminar 7^th March 2025 was financed through seed money from the Human Rights profile area and the theme was The Right to a Fair Trial – Historical Foundations. Besides Maria Alessandra Bilotta’s contribution, Camilla Marangoni (Rome/Torino) presented her research on images from illuminated legal manuscripts, using the ICONCLASS taxonomy of iconography. A recurring motif in medieval manuscripts is that persons have taken off a glove and are holding it in the other hand. The detail is present in marriage scenes but also other contexts. What symbolic rule does such a detail have there? In some cases, it might symbolise oath taking.

As regards oaths, Vojtech Vladár (Bratislava) presented the development of oaths in the medieval romano-canonical procedure and related it to the ordeals, i.e. tests of guilt or innocence through interference by God. Also in oaths, God was invoked as a guarantor for truth-telling. Janko Paunovic (Vienna) presented various 12^th-14^th century oaths from Kotor in today’s Montenegro, showing that judges there had to swear not to help their friends or harm their enemies and that they should judge in good faith and without deceit. This aligns well with oaths in other jurisdictions and contributes to the understanding of the diffusion of ethical standards for judges in the Middle Ages. Raffaella Bianchi Riva (Milan) discussed the oaths of advocates in the Middle Ages, and how they handled the dual role of the legal profession: advocates want to win the case and have a duty of loyalty to their clients, but on the other hand, they may not promote injustice. Oath of advocates can also have a political function: as means of control which can hamper their independence.

Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde (Oslo) presented the four daughters of God referred to in Norwegian Medieval law as a means to solve the problem of corruption during the transmission from a kindred to a state society in Norway in the 13^th century. The four daughters of God were the four virtues mercy, verity, justice and peace, and against them stood the four bastards of the Devil, which were the vices fear, avarice, enmity and friendship. This illustrates – just as the oaths and the imagery in town halls and manuscripts – the ethical standard of judges.

Altogether, the seminar provided us with deepened knowledge about different aspects of the history of the right to a fair trial. It reinforced our view that the ethical standards of judges and advocates have long histories but are complex and difficult to apply, and therefore they are adapted and renegotiated as societies change. The core values, however, as the independence and impartiality in the judge’s mind, remains intact as an ideal over the centuries. This means that history is not only interesting in its own right but also provides us with examples useful here and now.

The seminar also formed a base for continued thinking of ways to develop our common interests centering around oaths and courts. The topic could be widened to analyse how oaths have functioned as means to safeguard good governance, something that could also be connected to historic images. On the other hand, the topic could be widened to comprise times of transitions – what role do oaths to the constitution and other oaths have when a society transitions from one type of regime to another. An ongoing discussion is also how ethical standards for judges and advocates are adapted to the use of AI technology for analysing and presenting evidence and assessing facts and law.

Martin Sunnqvist is a professor of legal history at the Faculty of Law, Lund University and a member of the Human Rights Profile Area. On the 16th of May 2025, Martin will give a presentation on the ASG during Human Rights Lunch Online. You can read more about Martin’s research on the research portal.

9 May 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Get to know our researchers Human Rights Lunch Online Recorded events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Human Rights Lunch Online: Human Rights in the Technological Age and in times of conflict

Human, DNA and molecules. Illustration by Julien Tromeur on Unsplash.

During the Human Rights Lunch Online on April 11, 2025 Jessica Almqvist and Alberto Rinaldi, both from Lund University Faculty of Law, focused on the normative foundations of human rights law in the light of modern technological developments that could have a detrimental impact on individuals, society, and humanity as a whole.

Watch the recording on Youtube:

By Jessica Almqvist and Alberto Rinaldi, Faculty of Law

In an era of rapid technological transformation, the foundational principles of human rights are being called into question in unprecedented ways. To foster critical interdisciplinary dialogue on this pressing issue, Alberto Rinaldi from the Faculty of Law has received seed funding from Lund University’s Profile Area for a workshop titled “(Re)examining Human Rights Foundations in the Technological Age.”

The workshop brought together scholars from law, philosophy, technology studies, and the social sciences to engage in a deep rethinking of key human rights concepts that risk being sidelined in contemporary debates. While much attention in recent years has justifiably centered on non-discrimination, privacy, and data protection, the workshop sought to broaden the scope of inquiry and revive neglected yet essential rights and concepts. In particular, the focus was placed on:

The Right to Freedom of Thought – a right that gains new significance in the context of neurotechnologies, algorithmic profiling, and affective computing, all of which have the potential to interfere with the inner realm of individuals’ cognitive life.
The Right to Science – an often-overlooked right that includes both access to scientific progress and participation in it, but which also raises thorny questions about responsibility, equitable distribution, and dual-use technologies.
The Concept of Human Dignity – a cornerstone of human rights law whose meaning is increasingly contested in light of developments in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and human enhancement.

These discussions are not only timely but essential, as technological innovation increasingly challenges the boundaries of the human person, autonomy, and vulnerability. By revisiting these foundational elements, the workshop aimed to stimulate a renewed normative reflection on what human rights mean and should mean in the face of emerging scientific and technological paradigms.

In the same spirit of interdisciplinary inquiry, Jessica Almqvist, Deputy Dean at the Faculty of Law, will present the Pufendorf Institute’s research theme “Greyzone Genomics.” This initiative investigates the ethical, legal, and societal implications of large-scale genetic technologies, particularly focusing on the ambiguous spaces—the “grey zones”—where these innovations test the limits of existing regulatory frameworks.

The theme addresses how advanced genomics and synthetic biology, though often heralded for their medical and scientific promise, can also be weaponized or misused in the context of international conflict and hybrid warfare. The research team explores novel interdisciplinary methods to assess the risks associated with such dual-use biotechnologies, aiming to develop scenario-based analyses and policy-relevant recommendations. This approach opens up a new research frontier at the intersection of medicine, law, and national security, asking difficult but necessary questions about how societies can anticipate, prevent, and respond to emerging biosecurity threats.

Together, these initiatives reflect a broader commitment at Lund University to advance critical, interdisciplinary research that addresses the most pressing human rights challenges of our time. By combining legal expertise with insights from the natural and social sciences, both projects underscore the need for new frameworks and fresh thinking to uphold human rights in an age of complexity and change.

Greyzone Genomics: Navigating the Risks of Genetic Technologies in a Shifting World

Genetic technologies are reshaping human health on an unprecedented scale. But as these breakthroughs unfold, the world is also facing growing geopolitical instability — giving rise to concerns about how advances in DNA sequencing and synthesis could be put to use outside the clinical context and be weaponized in global power struggles. Until now, discussions around the misuse of genetic technology have mainly focused on fear-driven scenarios like the development of “ethnic bioweapons.” Yet, the potential for misuse is broader and more complex, touching on critical issues related to human rights and human security. The international laws and regulations meant to safeguard us from such misusage are often outdated, scarce, and riddled with ambiguity.

Running as a Theme at the Pufendorf Institute during 2024/2025, Greyzone Genomics explores the many ways genetic technologies could be exploited in global conflict — and, importantly, how we can act to prevent it. We examine emerging risks like disinformation campaigns fueled by genetic data, defamation using synthetic DNA, psychological profiling of political leaders based on DNA sequences, weaponizing individuals as carriers of synthetic pathogens, and also mass theft of DNA data to power AI systems.

The project further delves into the human rights implications of these tactics and investigates whether international law and international institutions have the tools to counter them. Spoiler: often, existing treaties and regulations seem insufficient — but that’s part of what we seek to address and respond to in this Theme.

To tackle these challenges, Greyzone Genomics brings together a team of researchers from medicine, data analytics, intelligence studies, strategic communication, war studies, and international law. Together, we’re developing new multidisciplinary approaches to assess and counter the risks of emerging biotechnologies. Through evidence-based scenario building and focused studies of legal frameworks, we are not only analyzing the these risks — we’re aiming to find measures to mitigate these risks.

Beyond the academic world, Greyzone Genomics seeks to raise broader awareness among key stakeholders about the darker sides of gene technology in modern conflict. The Theme is a collaborative initiative with researchers from Lund University, the Swedish Defence University, and the Swedish Defence Research Agency.

Alberto Rinaldi is Postdoctoral Researcher at Lund University Faculty of Law, member of the Profile Area Human Rights and part of the Pufendorf theme Greyzone Genomics. Alberto holds a Master in Human Rights Law from the American University in Cairo (2012) and a PhD in International Law from Sciences Po Paris (2019).

Jessica Almqvist is Professor of International Law and Human Rights and Deputy Dean for Research at the Faculty of Law of Lund University. She is also the Deputy Coordinator of the Human Rights Profile Area and Coordinator of the Pufendorf theme Greyzone Genomics.

10 April 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Get to know our researchers Human Rights Lunch Online Recorded events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Work-related stress and ill health – on the relationship between special exposure to stress and ethnicity, skin color, and religion

Martin Wolgast, Lund University Department of Psychology

On the 28th of March, 2025 at 12:15-13:00 Martin Wolgast presented the report for the Swedish Agency for Work Environment Expertise on special exposure to work-related stress and ill health based on ethnicity, skin color, and religion. Martin shared insights from literature on this relationship in Sweden and internationally, discuss preventive measures, and highlight the knowledge and experience of relevant actors. Finally, he identified knowledge gaps and reflect on how systematic work environment efforts and preventive measures can minimize these risks.

Watch the recording on Youtube:

Sweden has long positioned itself as a champion of equality and social justice — a country with robust legal protections, progressive labor policies, and a self-image grounded in fairness. Yet beneath this image, a different reality persists for many individuals in the Swedish labor market. A new report from the Swedish Agency for Work Environment Expertise (Myndigheten för arbetsmiljökunskap) reveals the extent to which racialized and religious minorities in Sweden are exposed to unequal and often harmful working conditions. Drawing on an extensive review of international and Swedish research, a national survey, and interviews with stakeholders and civil society, the report exposes a pattern of systemic disadvantage that is both widespread and deeply normalized.

At the heart of the report is a concern that goes beyond individual acts of bias: the structures of the labor market themselves reproduce stress and ill-health among marginalized groups. Whether through insecure employment contracts, limited career mobility, or unequal access to workplace support, people who are racialized as non-white or who belong to minority religious communities face elevated levels of stress, anxiety, and exclusion. This is not merely a question of perceived inequality. The report documents clear correlations between perceived discrimination and actual health outcomes — including mental health issues, physical fatigue, burnout, and reduced recovery after work.

The Swedish data aligns with a growing body of international research showing that work-related stress is unequally distributed. In particular, the concept of minority stress — originally developed in the context of LGBTQ+ research — is used here to describe the chronic psychological burden that arises from being part of a stigmatized group. The report also discusses the notion of assimilation stress, highlighting the emotional toll of having to downplay or suppress cultural, religious, or ethnic identity in order to “fit in” at work. These stressors are compounded by workplace norms around emotional expression — what the report refers to as “racialized emotional norms” — where certain ways of being are considered more professional, more acceptable, or more ‘Swedish’ than others.

What emerges is a portrait of the workplace not simply as a site of economic activity, but as a microcosm of broader societal power relations. Access to secure employment, recognition, and psychological safety becomes a marker of inclusion, while others are pushed to the margins through more precarious contracts, overlooked qualifications, or heightened scrutiny. The report underscores that individuals with migrant backgrounds — particularly those from Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia — are disproportionately employed in positions below their education level, face slower career progression, and are more often subjected to bullying or harassment. The presence of discriminatory practices is not isolated to hiring, but permeates everyday interactions, evaluations, and power dynamics within organizations.

Importantly, the report also draws attention to invisibility as a form of harm. Many instances of racism or discrimination are not overt, but subtle and cumulative — expressed through microaggressions, exclusion from informal networks, or the silencing of diversity-related concerns. Individuals who attempt to address these issues may find themselves isolated or penalized, especially when support from management or trade unions is lacking. This dynamic — where raising issues of discrimination leads to further marginalization — points to a deeper cultural and structural resistance to confronting racism within Swedish institutions.

The human rights implications are clear. The right to work under fair, just, and safe conditions is enshrined in international human rights law, including instruments such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. These rights are not fulfilled simply by the absence of explicit discrimination; they require positive action to ensure that systemic barriers are dismantled. In this light, the report’s findings challenge us to think critically about how the Swedish labor market — and by extension, Swedish society — lives up to its human rights commitments.

The recommendations offered in the report are both practical and normatively grounded. They include fostering inclusive organizational cultures, implementing systematic and recurring training on anti-discrimination and unconscious bias, promoting leadership that is both active and relationally competent, and providing access to mentorship and support for employees from marginalized backgrounds. These are not only interventions for improved productivity or employee satisfaction, but essential measures to realize the right to dignity, equality, and health at work. Crucially, the report does not stop at identifying individual vulnerabilities, but calls for broader structural reforms to create a more equitable labor market — one grounded in strong protections for workers, regardless of background, and capable of addressing the systemic roots of discrimination and stress.

For scholars and practitioners in the field of human rights, the report offers a bridge between theory and practice. It invites us to reframe occupational health and workplace equity as core human rights concerns, and not merely as questions of policy or management. And it reminds us that rights are not only violated through explicit prohibitions, but also through silence, neglect, and systemic inertia.

Martin Wolgast is Senior lecturer and researcher at the Department of Psychology at Lund University and a member of the Human Rights Profile Area.

24 March 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Get to know our researchers Human Rights Lunch Online Recorded events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

China’s gender imbalance and its implications for human trafficking, social stability, and economic development

Photo: Brides dress by Jayden Seah on Unsplash.

By Ming Gao, Department of History, Lund University

China’s marriage rate has plummeted to its lowest level since records began in the 1980s. In 2024, marriage registrations across the country totalled 6.1 million, a decline from 7.7 million the year before. This decline has prompted a Chinese national political adviser to propose lowering the legal marriage age to 18. Currently, the legal marriage age in China is 22 for men and 20 for women, among the highest in the world.

Despite this historic decline, the number of foreign brides, mostly from Southeast Asia – including both trafficked women and those who enter China illegally for marriage – seems quietly rising. About two months ago, China’s top political advisory body, the CPPCC, held a meeting on strengthening the management of cross-border marriages, with a primary focus on the ‘illegal cross-border marriages.’

In addition, last March, China’s Ministry of Public Security launched a nationwide campaign against the transnational trafficking of women and children, calling for stronger international cooperation to eradicate such crimes.

Yet, addressing marriage solely through statistics and border enforcement overlooks deeper social issues. Behind these figures lie significant struggles for those who desire marriage but remain unable to achieve it, raising critical questions about the broader social and ethical consequences for China and the international community.

Understanding China’s marriage crash

This historic low in the marriage rate is driven by a combination of economic pressures, shifting gender expectations, evolving social attitudes toward marriage, and higher levels of education. In particular, urban women are increasingly pushing back against traditional gender roles, including expectations around reproduction, that prioritise domestic responsibilities over career aspirations. Meanwhile, rising living costs, especially soaring housing prices, have made marriage an unaffordable prospect for many young people.

This resistance is further exacerbated by China’s longstanding gender imbalance, a legacy of the sweeping one-child policy and a cultural preference for male children. This is particularly pronounced among those born in the 1980s – a generation I belong to – due to the widespread use of ultrasound technology from the mid-1980s onwards. The ability to determine a foetus’ sex as early as 14 to 16 weeks, combined with the drastic one-child policy and a deep-rooted preference for sons, offered parents the ability to terminate pregnancies if their child was female. This led to a sustained and severe gender imbalance. At its peak, China’s sex ratio at birth reached 121.2 boys for every 100 girls, with some provinces exceeding 130.

To put the number into context, China’s gender imbalance could persist until 2050, with projections suggesting that up to 50 million men may remain unmarried. Reluctantly, they have become part of the ‘Era of Leftover Men’ (shengnan shidai), an internet term loosely referring to the period from 2020 to 2050, when China is expected to have 30 to 50 million unmarried men, primarily from impoverished rural areas, who are unable to find wives. The conundrum is that most ‘leftover’ men want to marry but cannot find or afford a spouse. A widely used phrase in China, “difficulty in getting married” (jiehun nan), encapsulates this struggle.

The surge in ‘purchased’ foreign brides

With more men competing for a comparatively small pool of women, a phenomenon known as ‘marriage squeeze’ has emerged – where those with fewer resources are increasingly pushed out of this fierce competition driven by demographic imbalance.

So, who will these ‘leftover’ men marry? Probably no one knows the exact answer. As members of the generation born in the late 1980s, we came of age in a time when gender-based sex selection was largely unchecked. Personally, I know that some of my peers from primary and secondary school have been desperately searching for a wife but remain ‘leftover’ men.

Unable to find a domestic spouse, many turn to ‘purchasing’ (maihun) foreign brides. For many Chinese men, especially those in rural areas, transnational marriages seemingly offer a viable solution to the domestic spouse shortage. The growing demand for brides has led to a surge in illegal and trafficked marriages – including child brides – particularly involving women from Southeast Asia, such as Vietnam, Myanmar, and Laos.

Determining the extent of illegal cross-border marriages in China is challenging due to the clandestine nature of these activities. But the most recent data from the UK’s Home Office suggests that 75% of Vietnamese human-trafficking victims were smuggled to China, with women and children making up to 90% of cases.

For example, the award-winning documentary The Woman from Myanmar follows the story of a trafficked Myanmar woman who was sold into marriage in China. The film exposes the harsh realities faced by many trafficked brides. It captures not only the coercion and abuse these women endure but also their struggle for autonomy and survival in a system that treats them as commodities – valued primarily as reproductive tools rather than as individuals.

Often arranged through informal networks or commercial agencies—both illegal according to China’s State Council – these marriages raise ethical concerns about human trafficking, exploitation, and the commodification of women.

While years ago, China and other Southeast Asian countries rescued thousands of victims trafficked into China for marriage, such cases continue to surface today in news reports and police investigations. A few months ago, Chinese authorities prosecuted individuals involved in an illegal cross-border matchmaking scheme, in which men were lured into costly ‘marriage tours’ abroad with promises of affordable foreign wives.

In November 2024, for example, two people were prosecuted over their involvement in an illegal cross-border matchmaking scheme. This incident underscores the continued risks associated with the underground market for foreign brides, where fraudulent schemes and human trafficking remain rampant.

Indeed, illegal marriage networks are exploiting the eagerness of Chinese ‘leftover’ men, driving the rise of a black market. Police authorities constantly warn of scams involving undocumented foreign brides from Southeast Asia, who take advantage of the situation, sometimes disappearing with large sums of money before marriage arrangements are completed.

In one case, a Cambodian woman, Mao Sretpich, fled with a bride price of 180,000 yuan (approximately $25,000) just hours after the payment. She was arrested weeks later, sentenced to one year and eight months in prison, fined, and ordered deported by a Jiangxi court.

Shifting gender dynamics

Ironically, the practice of sex-selective abortion has led to a scarcity of women, increasing the relative value of those who unknowingly escaped this selection mechanism.

The marriage crisis and the rise of transnational marriages reflect deeper shifts in China’s gender dynamics. Traditional family expectations, which emphasize marriage and childbearing as essential life milestones, are increasingly at odds with the realities faced by young Chinese people. Women, in particular, are challenging these norms, seeking greater autonomy and equality in both personal and professional spheres.

At the same time, the growing demand for foreign brides highlights the persistence of patriarchal attitudes in some segments of Chinese society. Many men seeking transnational marriages still expect their wives to conform to traditional gender roles – just as Larry, the trafficked woman in the documentary, said: ‘Birthing babies [giving birth] was her true source of value’.

What China’s marriage crash means for the future
The marriage crisis and its associated trends have far-reaching implications for China’s demographic future. A shrinking and aging population, coupled with a growing number of unmarried men, poses significant challenges for the country’s economic growth and social stability.

Economically, a widely known saying is that China is ‘growing old before it gets rich’ due to its low birth rate and aging population. Even so, Beijing is resisting this characterisation, saying that constant technological innovations will continue to drive economic growth. The labour force is undoubtedly important when it comes to economic growth. But, according to Justin Lin Yifu, a member of the CPPCC, what matters more is effective labour, which is the product of both the quantity and quality of labour force. China has increased its investment in education significantly in anticipation of challenges surrounding its ageing population.

However, notwithstanding this, an even greater concern is the large number of ‘leftover’ men, which could pose a serious threat to social stability. Studies have shown a positive relationship between high male-to-female sex ratios and crime rates in both China and India – two of the countries with the highest numbers of ‘leftover’ men. Higher sex ratios are significantly linked to increased crimes, particularly against women.

For example, in China, distorted male sex ratios can account for up to 14% of the rise in crime, while in India, a 5.5% rise in the male sex ratio would increase the odds of unmarried women being harassed by more than 20%.

As the number of ‘leftover’ men continues to rise in China, Beijing faces a demographic time bomb with profound implications for social stability, economic development, and even geopolitical tensions. Ultimately, the question of who these soon-to-be – or already – 30 to 50 million ‘leftover’ men will marry has become a pressing issue for Beijing. The government’s response will likely shape the country’s future for decades to come.

Ming Gao is research scholar of East Asia at Lund University´s Department of History and member of the Profile Area Human Rights. Ming´s research intersects with cross-disciplinary studies of human rights by examining the historical dimensions of justice, accountability, and memory. Through this approach, he seeks to foster a broader dialogue that engages both academic and general audiences, bridging history with fields such as gender studies, international law, and human rights advocacy.

20 March 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Blog posts Get to know our researchers

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Human Rights Lunch Online 21/02/2025: “The Sovereign Human Being: Carl Schmitt, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Responsible Decision-Making”

Valentin Jeutner Faculty of Law, Lund University

On February 21st 2025, Valentin Jeutner talked during theHuman Rights Lunch Online seminar about the central themes in his book “The Sovereign Human Being: Carl Schmitt, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Responsible Decision-Making”.

Watch the recording on Youtube:

The book “The Sovereign Human Being: Carl Schmitt, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Responsible Decision-Making” argues that sovereign is anyone who makes decisions and that anyone who makes decisions is responsible for those decisions. The book develops these two arguments by comparing the theories of sovereignty of Carl Schmitt and Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Carl Schmitt was an influential jurist of Nazi Germany. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran priest hanged for his involvement in a plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler. In many ways, the two men could not be more different. But they both struggled with the question of how to maintain order and how to prevent violence at times of crisis. And they both agreed that order is established not by appealing to existing norms or general principles but by an individual’s sovereign decision. Ascribing sovereignty to individuals communicates that they always have a choice and that they are always responsible for these choices. Thus, it is not just powerful individuals who have the choice to bring wars to an end or who can combat climate change.

By making sovereign decisions, ordinary individuals, too, can work towards the peaceful resolution of conflicts or reduce their carbon footprint. Making such sovereign decisions is not easy for individuals who are taught to follow orders and norms. For this reason, the book supplements the comparative analysis of Schmitt and Bonhoeffer with an action-guiding decision-making framework. While the proposed framework departs from Schmitt’s and Bonhoeffer’s theses by recognizing the agency, responsibility, and sovereignty of all individuals, Jeutner argues that the acknowledgement of the universal sovereignty of individuals is the only way to bring about the orderly and peaceful world of which Schmitt and Bonhoeffer dream.

Valentin Jeutner is a researcher at the Faculty of Law at Lund University. He engages mainly in foundational research related to the nature and fundamental principles of (international) law. This includes exploring the relations between law and related fields like the natural sciences, art, philosophy, or theology.

5 March 2025

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Get to know our researchers Human Rights Lunch Online Recorded events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Learning from Down Under: Advancing Human Rights Research at Lund University

At Lund University, we are embarking on an ambitious journey to create a strong, influential, and globally recognized profile area dedicated to human rights research, education, and outreach. As one of the coordinators of this initiative, I recently had the opportunity to visit the Australian Human Rights Institute (AHRI) at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney. Supported by an Erasmus+ grant, this visit provided valuable insights into how a well-established human rights institute achieves excellence and impact on a global scale.

Why Compare Lund and UNSW?

UNSW is both larger and higher-ranked than Lund University and AHRI has had more time to mature than the LU Human Rights profile area. These circumstances, together with the significant similarities that our two institutions—and their national contexts—share, make this into a meaningful benchmarking exercise. Both universities operate in countries with high living standards, robust academic traditions, and a commitment to human rights. By examining AHRI’s approach, we can explore how Lund University might further develop its human rights profile to become a leading force for impactful research and collaboration.

The AHRI Model

AHRI has evolved from a small centre into a fully-fledged interdisciplinary research institute, achieving remarkable success since its formal establishment in 2018. With a mission to address human rights challenges and propose actionable solutions, AHRI combines rigorous research with strategic engagement across sectors.

A few key elements stand out in AHRI’s success story:

Stable Funding and Autonomy: Base funding from UNSW provides financial stability, enabling AHRI to actively participate in and lead human rights discussions in Australia.
Robust Administration: A well-built and efficient administrative team oversees communications, project management, partnerships, and events, ensuring smooth and responsive operations.
Support for Research and Students: AHRI nurtures over 200 affiliated researchers across UNSW, provides seed funding promising projects and offering paid internships for students at human rights organizations across Australasia.
A Trusted Authority: AHRI has established itself as the go-to resource for journalists, policymakers, and funders seeking expert advice on human rights issues.

Lessons for Lund University

While Lund University’s organizational structure differs from UNSW’s, AHRI’s approach offers several lessons that can inspire and guide our efforts:

Impact-oriented Research: AHRI excels in translating research into real-world applications. Lund can strengthen its ability to bridge the gap between academic work and societal challenges.
Strategic Partnerships: AHRI’s strategic engagement with government, business, and civil society amplify its reach and influence. Lund should expand its partnerships to achieve similar outcomes.
Raising Visibility: AHRI has mastered the art of engaging with media and policymakers, significantly enhancing its public profile. Adopting similar strategies could elevate Lund’s presence and reputation.
Empowering Students: AHRI’s internship programs equip students with practical experience in human rights, cultivating future leaders and reinforcing the institute’s mission. Lund could create similar opportunities to benefit students and strengthen its impact.

Charting the Path Forward

Picture of Martin Andersson. — Fotograf: Johan Persson

With consistent university support, strategic partnerships, heightened visibility, and a steadfast commitment to real-world impact, AHRI has established itself as a pivotal force in advancing human rights discussion in Australia. With similar foundations in place, Lund University’s human rights profile area has the potential to achieve comparable success in the years ahead.

Martin Andersson is a senior lecturer and associate professor at the Department of Economic History at Lund University. He is also assistant coordinator in the Human Rights Profile Area.

13 December 2024

Human Rights Profile Area

This entry was posted in

Blog posts

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Kontanternas värde

Fattigdom och utanförskap i Sveriges digitala ekonomi

Lena Halldenius och Moa Petersén

Nu finns nummer två av Lund Human Rights Reports and Working Papers: Det är en rapport från forskningsprojektet Cash. Mänskliga rättigheter och social hållbarhet i övergången till ett kontantlöst samhälle. Projektet har genomförts av oss, Lena Halldenius och Moa Petersén, med finansiering av forskningsrådet Formas.

Användningen av kontanta pengar minskar och allt fler betalningar görs digitalt. Detta är en global förändring, men den är ovanligt tydlig just i Sverige. Det blir allt vanligare att kollektivtrafiken, affärer och andra serviceställen inte tar emot kontanter som betalningsmedel. Möjligheten att betala räkningar med kontanter över disk är högst begränsad; i stora delar av Sverige finns den inte alls.

Frågan som har undersökts i det här projektet är hur Sveriges digitaliserade ekonomi påverkar de personer som av olika skäl och i varierande grad är beroende av kontanter för att kunna sköta sina betalningar.

Med fokus på Sverige – som har en i hög grad digitaliserad ekonomi – har denna studie syftat till att utforska och lära av de erfarenheter som kontantberoende personer har. Vårt fokus har varit på personer i ekonomisk och social utsatthet, eftersom internationell forskning har identifierat fattigdom som den främsta anledningen till att personer i utvecklade länder som Sverige inte är en del av den digitala ekonomin. Även faktorer som ålder, funktionsnedsättning och osäker migrationsstatus ökar sannolikheten för att man är beroende av att kunna betala kontant.

Under 2022 och 2023 genomförde vi en intervjustudie i Malmö med personer som av socioekonomiska skäl har behov av att kunna betala med kontanter, samt med volontärer och personal vid organisationer som i sin verksamhet kommer i kontakt med personer som är kontantberoende. Deltagarna i studien har delat med sig av sina erfarenheter av hur deras vardag och upplevelser av samhället påverkas av att betalningsmarknaden digitaliseras. I studien betraktas ofrivilligt kontantberoende som en aspekt av digitalt utanförskap och som en rättighetsfråga. Att samhällets grundläggande funktioner – som betalningsmarknaden – digitaliseras på ett sätt som gör att redan utsatta grupper ställs utanför skapar en ny form av ekonomisk orättvisa.

Ur analysen av vårt intervjumaterial framträder tre teman.

Inlåsningseffekt: Personer i kontantberoende riskerar att bli utelåsta från den officiella digitala ekonomin. Men samtidigt blir de instängda i en krympande bubbla av lågprisbutiker och serviceställen som tar emot kontanter, men där många grundläggande ekonomiska transaktioner inte är möjliga att göra. I denna sfär fungerar kontanter närmast som en lokal valuta, separat från samhällets ekonomiska infrastruktur. Detta skapar beroende och integritetsförluster.
Tid och planering: Digitaliseringen påverkar upplevelsen av tid och normaliserar snabbhet och att göra flera saker samtidigt. Personer i kontantberoende och digitalt utanförskap upplever att de inte är synkroniserade i förhållande till samhällets takt och tempo och att deras behov uppfattas som ineffektiva utifrån sociala normer. Utanförskapet gör också att de kortsiktiga strategier som behövs för att klara sig från dag till dag, motverkar de mer långsiktiga strategier (och det risktagande) som krävs för att försöka ta sig ut ur sin situation och försöka bli en del av den officiella ekonomin.
Maktlöshet och konstruerad inkompetens: Ingen av våra kontantberoende deltagare visade någon förväntan om att saker och ting skulle bli lättare eller bättre för dem. De berättar om ångest och stress, om att känna sig dumma och generade. De uttrycker ilska och vanmakt inför banker, myndigheter och andra ansiktslösa krafter som inte verkar bry sig om dem. Deras erfarenhet är också att värdet av val som är viktiga för dem inte erkänns. De finns också en sorg över vad de ser som en förlust av gemenskap och mänsklig kontakt.

Svårigheterna med att betala digitalt är en del av ett större främlingskap inför det digitaliserade samhället i stort och upplevs som en skamlig och nedbrytande social exkludering. Ett viktigt resultat är att kontantberoende är en socialt påtvingad position och en konstruerad inkompetens, till följd av en politiskt och kommersiellt motiverad infrastrukturomvandling. Människor som är beroende av kontanta pengar hamnar i behov av särskilt stöd, inte för att de har förändrats utan för att samhället har förändrats runt omkring dem utan att deras omständigheter, kunskaper och erfarenheter har beaktats.

Den kontantlösa ekonomin är inte en tekniskt betingad företeelse, utan ett politiskt och kommersiellt val. För att politiken på ekonomin och digitaliseringens område inte ytterligare ska missgynna de som redan är utsatta är erfarenheterna av hur det är att leva i kontantberoende i en digitaliserad ekonomi en avgörande kunskapsbas.

Tack till projektets ovärderliga medhjälpare Nanna Malmborg Rasmussen, Elinn Leo Sandberg, Hedvig Halldenius och Amy Kerplunk Mughames.

Läs hela rapporten:

Lund Human Rights Reports and Working Papers

3 December 2024

ulrikekrantz

This entry was posted in

Blog posts Lund Human Rights Reports and Working Papers

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Human Rights Lunch Online 06/12/2024: Human Rights and Socio-economic Inequality

Emelie Rohne Till, Department of Economic History, Lund University

On December 6th, 2024 Emelie Rohne Till presented during the Human Rights Lunch Online. Watch the recording of the seminar on Youtube:

The big question that all economic historians engage with at one level or another is “why are some countries rich and others still poor”? In search of this answer, the discipline has developed a lot of knowledge on, and methods for exploring, large-scale, long-term, societal-level change over time. Within the Human Rights Profile area, our research group at the Department of Economic History wishes to bring these research questions and methods to the field of human rights.

There is much fertile ground for research in the intersection of economic development, inequality and poverty, with issues of human rights – questions how to ensure that everyone can live in dignity, on food security, on how fruits of growth and transformation are distributed in a society, and on how to guarantee economic rights, etc. Specifically, we are interested in understanding the relationship between socio-economic inequality and human rights. Key questions that we are interested in are whether there are any trade-offs between equality and respect for human rights in certain cases and certain phases; and if so, what these trade-offs and links look like; and also, what can be learnt from this going forward.

The project is currently at an early stage. Through receiving a Seed money-grant from the Human Rights Profile Area (LU) in the fall of 2023, we have made some initial progress. With the seed money, we were able to hire two Master’s Students from the Department of Economic History to produce reviews on the existing knowledge in the intersection of the fields of socio-economic inequality and human rights: Lisa Lehane and Louis Louw. During the spring of 2024, Lisa and Louis produced two excellent reviews on the subject, one literature review of the field, and one review of existing databases on quantitative elements of human rights.

The literature review sets out to map the existing literature in the intersection of human rights and socio-economic inequality. The literature that applies an interdisciplinary approach is rather small, and generally human rights have been a peripheral concern in economic analysis. Some of the key concerns that are highlighted in the review are that part of the difficulty lies in that indicators of socio-economic inequality and human rights are imperfectly conceptualized; and that economists/economic historians and human rights scholars emphasize different aspects of socio-economic inequality.

The quantitative review maps ten existing databases on human rights and socio-economic inequality. Two of these are selected for more in-depth review of their methodologies: analysis into their respective methodologies: the Human Rights Measurement Initiative and the UNU WIDER World Income Inequality database. Some key points to emerge from the quantitative review are that human rights are measured in different ways depending on the rights being analyzed, that only five countries have ratified all 18 human rights treaties, and that individuals living in low socio-economic conditions often are found to be at greater risk of human rights violations. It also specifies many of the challenges of measuring and assessing human rights.

Together, the preparatory studies show that there is ample scope for more research that builds on and clarifies the existing knowledge on the relationship between human rights and inequality. The aim going forward will be to use these two high-quality reviews as a foundation for a grant application. Our hope is that this will lead to the building up of a large database of quantitative indicators for both inequality and human rights, that can contribute to our understanding of this relationship.

Emelie Rohne Till is a researcher at Lund University. Her main research areas concern development economics, approached from an economic history perspective. Within this she focuses on the role of structural transformations and of the agricultural sector in economic development, primarily in sub-Saharan Africa.