The Law’s Majestic Equality? The Distributive Impact of Litigating Social and Economic Rights
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Resumen
Descripción
Optimism about the use of laws,
constitutions, and rights to achieve social change has never
been higher among practitioners. But the academic literature
is skeptical that courts can direct resources toward the
poor. This paper develops a nuanced account in which not all
courts are the same. Countries and policy areas
characterized by judicial decisions with broader
applicability tend to avoid the potential anti-poor bias of
courts, whereas areas dominated by individual litigation and
individualized effects are less likely to have pro-poor
outcomes. Using data on social and economic rights cases in
five countries, the authors estimate the potential
distributive impact of litigation by examining whether the
poor are over or under-represented among the beneficiaries
of litigation, relative to their share of the population.
They find that the impact of courts varies considerably
across the cases, but is positive and pro-poor in two of the
five countries (India and South Africa),
distribution-neutral in two others (Indonesia and Brazil),
and sharply anti-poor in Nigeria. Overall, the results of
litigation are much more positive for the poor than
conventional wisdom would suggest.
Palabras clave
ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE, ACCESS TO JUSTICE, AGGRESSIVE, AIDS PATIENTS, ASYLUM, ASYLUM SEEKER, ATTORNEYS, BAIL, BASIC HEALTH CARE, BASIC NEEDS, CANCER, CHILD LABOR, CITIZEN, CITIZENS, CITIZENSHIP, CIVIL LAW, CIVIL LAW SYSTEMS, CLASS ACTIONS, COLLECTIVE ACTION, CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CORRUPTION, COUNSEL, COURT, COURT DECISIONS, COURTS, CRIMINAL, CRIMINAL LAW, DEMOCRACY, DETAINEES, DEVELOPMENT POLICY, DIABETES, DISABILITY, DISEASES, DRUGS, ECONOMIC RIGHTS, ECONOMIC STATUS, ECONOMICS, EMPOWERMENT, EQUALITY, FAMILIES, FAMILY INCOME, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, GAYS, GIRLS IN SCHOOL, HEALTH CARE, HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS, HEALTH INSURANCE, HEALTH POLICY, HEALTH SERVICES, HEALTH SYSTEM, HIV, HIV INFECTIONS, HOSPITAL, HOSPITALS, HOUSEHOLD INCOME, HUMAN CAPITAL, HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, HUMAN LIFE, HUMAN RIGHTS, HYPERTENSION, ILLNESS, ILLNESSES, IMPORTANT POLICY, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, INEQUALITIES, INEQUALITY, JUDGES, JUDGMENTS, JUDICIAL DECISIONS, JUDICIAL REVIEW, JUDICIAL SYSTEMS, JUDICIARY, JURISDICTION, JURISPRUDENCE, LACK OF FOOD, LAWS, LEGAL CHANGE, LEGAL SYSTEMS, LEGISLATORS, LITIGATION, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS, MEDICAL CARE, MIGRANT, MIGRANT WORKERS, MINIMUM WAGE, MINORITY, MORBIDITY, MORTALITY, NATIONAL DRUG, NATIONAL LEVEL, NUMBER OF PEOPLE, NUTRITION, OFFENSE, PATIENT, PATIENTS, PHYSICIANS, POLICY DISCUSSIONS, POLICY RESEARCH, POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER, POLIO, POLIO VACCINE, POLITICAL POWER, POLLUTION, POOR HEALTH, POPULATION DISTRIBUTION, PRACTITIONERS, PREGNANT WOMEN, PRIMARY EDUCATION, PRIMARY HEALTH CARE, PRISON, PRISONER, PRISONERS, PROGRESS, PUBLIC HEALTH, PUBLIC HOSPITALS, PUBLIC POLICY, PUBLIC SERVICES, QUALITY CARE, REFUGEES, RIGHT TO EDUCATION, RIGHT TO STRIKE, SCHOOL AGE, SCHOOL ATTENDANCE, SCHOOL CHILDREN, SCHOOL STUDENTS, SECONDARY EDUCATION, SERVICE PROVISION, SMOKING, SOCIAL BENEFITS, SOCIAL CHANGE, SOCIAL CLASS, SOCIAL CLASSES, SOCIAL JUSTICE, SOCIAL MOBILIZATION, SOCIAL MOVEMENTS, SOCIAL POLICIES, SOCIAL POLICY, SOCIAL RESEARCH, SOCIAL SECURITY, SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, SPILLOVER, TERTIARY EDUCATION, URBAN CENTERS, VICTIMS, WILL, WORKERS