Strengthening International Standards


The Copenhagen commitments

     The Copenhagen Summit emphasised the need to improve the acceptance and application of many existing standards* which have been agreed already at the international level. It referred specifically, for example, to the human rights agreements on economic, social and cultural rights, the rights of children, and discrimination on the basis of gender, race or disability. It also referred specifically to the International Labour Organisation’s international labour standards, especially the conventions on basic workers’ rights.

     The Summit also recognised the need to develop new standards on a wide range of economic and social issues. Specific reference was made, for example, to promotion by these means of fair competition and ethical conduct in business activities, equitable taxation, social protection, and prevention of corruption. It was recognised that in some instances the goal should be to establish standards which are legally-binding (often called conventions or rules) while in others the standards might be politically-binding or advisory (often called principles, declarations, guidelines etc).

Subsequent developments

     Three years after the Summit, the ILO adopted a Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work which focuses on a number of ILO core conventions about basic workers’ rights. They relate to matters such as rights of association and collective bargaining, removal of discrimination in employment, and elimination of forced, compulsory and child labour. The Declaration has the effect of giving special emphasis to these conventions among the large number which have been adopted by the ILO. It also increases the obligation on countries to observe the fundamental rights expressed in the core conventions even if they have not previously agreed to do so.

     The period since the Summit has also seen development of the World Trade Organisation’s regime of legally-binding and enforceable rules. The WTO system is substantially more enforceable than most other codes of international standards and, in consequence, can tend in effect to override such codes where there is a conflict. This factor has led some civil society organisations to seek inclusion in the WTO code of certain rules which are already in other, less enforceable international codes on matters such as labour standards and environmental protection. It has also led to demands that other codes are made more enforceable and/or appropriate processes for resolving conflicts between codes are established.

     Some progress has been made since the Summit in achieving wider ratification of key human rights agreements but little in strengthening their enforcement. The growing significance of regional groupings has seen an increase in the number of standards which have been adopted at that level. Most of them, except in the European Union, relate to trade and other economic issues. But examples in the social area include human rights agreements in several regions and also recent conventions adopted by the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation.

A proposed new code

     In 1998, the United Kingdom Government responded to the recent financial crises by calling for improved financial regulation, including through development of new international rules and standards. It also called for a “code of global best practice in social policy which will apply for every country, will set minimum standards and will ensure that when the IMF and World Bank help a country in trouble the agreed programme of reform will preserve investments in the social, education and employment programmes which are essential for growth.” The UK later suggested that the code could cover basic health and education, water and sanitation, shelter, social protection and core labour standards.

The initial proposal by the UK was that the code should be agreed by the World Bank in 1999. After much discussion, however, the Bank and the IMF agreed in that year that further development of what they called the “principles of good practice in social policy” should be pursued through the UN as part of follow-up to the Copenhagen Summit. The scope and nature of these “principles” remained somewhat vague and contentious, and many developing countries were concerned that they could be used to impose conditionalities for obtaining assistance from the Bank, Fund and donor countries.

Strengths and weaknesses of international standards

     International standards on economic and social issues can achieve major benefits by helping to disseminate ideas, experiences and aspirations between people in different countries. This can be of special value in those countries which have fewer resources to undertake their own research, analysis or implementation. The benefits can accrue to governments as well as to civil society, including advocates for economic or social development. International standards can also help to reduce damaging conflicts or competition between countries and provide some protection for governments from undue pressures exerted by multinational businesses. Their practical effect, therefore, can be to increase rather than decrease the degree of autonomy which can actually be exercised by individual governments and communities. In this sense, a measure of internationalisation in the form of agreed standards can help to counteract more intrusive and damaging forms of internationalisation by other means.

     On the other hand, some international standards can intrude unjustifiably and inappropriately without adequate regard to the rights, preferences and circumstances of individual countries and their citizens. The less powerful countries and citizens are especially at risk of such intrusion, whether it is deliberately intended to be damaging or stems largely from ignorance and insensitivity in relation to local circumstances. These countries may lack the power and resources to ensure that their interests are adequately taken into account in the drafting of standards and that standards which are of benefit to them are effectively enforced. Moreover, it is often difficult to draft standards which are specific enough to be useful yet flexible enough to reflect varying circumstances. Especially in the social sphere, many standards are so vague, little-known or unenforceable that they provide few benefits.

Applying existing standards

     One simple but valuable initiative would be to collate and categorise the principal international standards which have been agreed already on economic and social issues. A useful but limited initiative in this direction was published by the United Nations in 1997 but it also covers many standards in other fields such as space and disarmament while excluding standards which were agreed outside the UN or at regional level. Collation and categorisation would help to overcome the obscurity and lack of impact of many such standards, especially in the social field. This process would also help to promote interest in consolidation of overlapping or repetitious standards and in selection of those standards to which greatest attention should be given. The ILO’s recent adoption of the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work is an admirable example of selecting and emphasising priorities amongst a large body of standards.

     Another priority is to improve monitoring of key standards and to strengthen ratification and enforcement of those which are intended to be legally- or politically-binding. This applies especially, for example, to monitoring and enforcement of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights for which derisory resources have been provided to support the largely unpaid efforts of the official monitoring committee. It applies also to the ILO’s Declaration on Fundamental Principles and to some of the more specific social standards such as the Standard Rules on the Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. Many other social standards, however, are too vague and aspirational to offer many opportunities for enforcement.

     Some existing standards would be more credible and effective if they were supplemented by variations according to particular circumstances (such as a country’s stage of development) or by guidelines which are clearly advisory rather than binding. This latter approach has been used extensively by the ILO through the recommendations which, together with the legally-binding conventions, form the Code of International Labour Standards. It often enables a desirable degree of specificity and flexibility rather than relying unduly on standards which purport to be binding but are either so vague or so rigid as to be unenforceable in practice.

Developing new standards

     The highest priorities for new international standards relate to a number of aspects of economic policy which have major impact on social development. It is especially important to strengthen international standards and cooperation in relation to taxation policy and administration. Lack of such cooperation currently leads to unfair and economically damaging tax competition which, for example, commonly involves under-taxation of assets and financial speculation and comparative over-taxation of wage labour and consumption. This bias discriminates unfairly against less wealthy people, distorts economic activity and fuels excessive market volatility. It also deprives many governments of revenue which is desperately needed to promote economic and social development. Other major problems which call for urgent improvements in international tax standards and cooperation include tax havens, transfer pricing, internet taxation and protectionist tax measures which bypass WTO surveillance.

     It is also important to develop, in relation to unfair competition and misconduct in international business activity, the kinds of restraint which have been developed by many countries in the realm of national business activity. This applies, for example, to “anti-trust” standards aimed at preventing abuse of market power, akin to the US regime currently being applied in relation to Microsoft. It also applies to a code of international business conduct of the kind which was being negotiated within the UN system a decade or so ago but was aborted by pressure from multinational corporations.

     The recent financial crises have emphasised the need for more effective regulation of international financial markets. Despite some improvements in response to the crises, much more needs to be done in the way of improving disclosure, tightening controls and strengthening sanctions. The new Group of 20 and Financial Stability Forum may achieve some progress in these areas but strong pressure will be necessary to ensure further progress and the development of standards which are sufficiently comprehensive, transparent, up-to-date and enforceable. This is unlikely to occur if the process continues to be dominated by the wealthiest countries, excessively laissez faire ideologies and ruthless business interests.

     Social protection is another area in which further elaboration of international standards is necessary. In the area of social security, to which many international labour standards relate, there is scope for developing further standards which are more specific but are clearly intended to be guidelines rather than mandatory. The standards should give due attention to the informal sector and provide explicit variations according to the resources and needs of countries in differing stages of development. But in some areas of protection such as basic health and education programmes, the greatest need at present may be to concentrate on mobilising international and national resources for achievement of specifically defined outcomes. This approach is elaborated upon in the final section of this paper on strengthening targets and resources.

The way ahead

     There is much to be done in order to strengthen the effectiveness of existing international standards on economic and social issues and to develop new ones. It is important that this process is pursued in a balanced and coordinated way so that due regard is given to both economic and social considerations, and to the interests of all countries and powers rather than principally of those which are most powerful. Accordingly, the United Nations, especially its Economic and Social Council, should play the central role in coordinating development and enforcement of the standards.

     Impetus and focus for this process could be enhanced by establishing a UN Code of Economic and Social Standards consisting initially of a selection of existing standards which ECOSOC considers to be of special importance and utility. This would include, for example, the six core human rights treaties and the core conventions identified in the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. The Code could include both legally-binding and advisory documents, but their respective status should be made very clear. ECOSOC should seek to ensure that the UN and other relevant bodies, when allocating resources to monitoring and enforcement of standards, give priority to those standards which have been included in the Code.

     ECOSOC should also take the lead, as proposed earlier in this paper, in developing processes for avoiding or resolving conflicts between existing standards. For example, it could be the principal forum for deciding upon mechanisms to resolve conflicts between trade, labour and environmental standards. In some circumstances the mechanism might involve a substantial ongoing role for ECOSOC through, for example, providing an independent auspice and chair for negotiations between sectoral standard-setting bodies such as the WTO and ILO. It might also involve ultimate reference back to ECOSOC itself for final endorsement.

     The most important priority, however, is for ECOSOC to initiate the development of new international standards in several key areas which have been identified in the Copenhagen process. As proposed earlier, these include standards in relation to taxation, fair competition, financial regulation and corruption. A UN process is already under way in relation to corruption but in the other areas ECOSOC could request existing bodies, or independent Expert Advisory Panels, to develop draft standards for ultimate consideration and endorsement by ECOSOC itself. It would not be appropriate for development of these standards to be left entirely to bodies such as the OECD or G20 which lack a sufficient balance of perspectives and interests.

     These initiatives would help to implement and build on the proposal by the World Bank and IMF that the UN should develop principles for good practice as part of the follow up to the Copenhagen Summit, and on the broadly similar proposal which is in the draft agreement for consideration at the General Assembly’s five-year review of Copenhagen implementation. It is essential, however, that the standards provide appropriate scope, where necessary, for variation according to particular national circumstances. It is also essential that they are accompanied by an Anti-Poverty Pact of the kind proposed later in this paper which guarantees provision of resources and other practical support from wealthy countries in order to help developing countries to implement the standards.