7/29/2019 ws6

1/2

ECPR, Edinburgh 2003

Workshop 6

New Approaches to Rights, Freedom and Power

Directors: Keith Dowding and Martin Van Hees

words - 698

The workshop was designed to bring together analytic philosophers and formal

theorists to discuss different approaches to the conceptualisation and measurement of

rights, freedom and power. There were nineteen papers, ten basically formal and nine

basically analytic, though several papers combined both. Most of the papers formed a

very coherent set which stimulated much discussion and debate around a set of

common themes. Four papers were off the main themes in some regard, but all were

recognized to be interesting and strongly related to the workshop themes.

The papers can organized as follows (a = broadly analytic, f = broadly formal)

Rights - concept and measurement

1. Rowan Cruft, Rights: Beyond Interest Theory and Will Theory? (a)2. Ruvin Gekker, Rights, Games and Social Situations (f)3. Keith Dowding, Social Choice and the Grammar of Rights and Freedoms (a)Freedom - concept and measurement4. Sebastiano Bavetta (and Matthew Braham): Freedom in a Strategic Setting (f)5. Andreas Bergh, Freedom, Choice and Well-Being (f)6. M. DAgostino, V. Peragine (and V. Dardanoni), A Statistical Approach toFreedom (f)7. Martin van Hees (and Ruvin Gekker) Freedom, Opportunity and Uncertainty: A

Logical Approach (f)8. Matt Kramer On the Counterfactual Dimension of Negative Liberty (a)9. Antonio Romero-Medina (with Vito Peragine) On Preference, Freedom and

Diversity (f)

10.Hillel Steiner, Pikes and Minnows: The Quantity of Freedom (a)11.Stefano Vanucci, The Cardinality-based Ranking of Opportunity Sets in an

Interactive Setting: A Simple Characterization (f)

Sen's capabilities approach to freedom and rights12.Ian Carter Functionings, Capabilities and the Non-specific Value of Freedom (a)

7/29/2019 ws6

2/2

13.Paul Anand, Social Choice and the Integration of Claims (f)14.Serena Olsaretti Endorsement and Freedom in Amartya Sens capability

approach (a)

Power

15.Matthew Braham (and Sebastiano Bavetta) The Impossibility of a Preference-Based Power Index (f)16.Rolf Hoijer (and Patrick Dunleavy), Political Power and Political fragmentation

(a)

Rights in a Judicial Setting/Health Setting17.Jim Rogers How Judicial Enforcement of Rights Can Decrease Freedom (f)18.Maxim Rybakov Right to Healthcare as Example of a Right Requiring Use of

Scarce Resources (a)

Rights and Equality

19.Magnus Jedenheim A Unification of Self-Ownership and Joint Ownership (a)

The formal papers on the analysis and measurement of freedom all fitted togethernicely, examining the issues with a common approach though using different

assumptions. Van Hees and Gekker's paper (7) took a new line from previous formalapproaches suggesting a new direction for future work. The analytic philosophers

found the formal papers tough but learned what some of the issues in dispute areabout. The formal theorists discovered the nature of some of philosophical issues onthese same subjects.

Some of the papers formed nicely set themes and continued debates. Braham and

Bavetta (15) criticized the work of another participant (Carter) who was able torespond in his commentary. Kramer's paper (8) critiqued earlier work by Steiner andand Carter who were also enabled to respond, and the Steiner paper (10) answered

some criticisms developed by Kramer and work by the formal theorists. Braham andBavetta (15) examined issues in power covered work earlier by Dowding. Dowding's

paper (3) analytically criticized formal work, including work by van Hees. Cruft'spaper (1) took up issues which criticized the approach of Steiner (a choice rightstheorist) and Kramer (an interest rights theorist). Jedenheim's paper (19) took up

themes that Steiner has extensively published on.

Most of the papers were theoretical but Anand (13), Hoijer (16), and Rogers (17)combined theoretical work with empirical data or applications. There were othercommon themes picked out in the sessions, for example, Anand (13) and Rybakov

(18) were concerned with rights and healthcare, whilst the issue of the relationshipbetween preferences and freedom/power/rights were taken up by in papers (3, 4, 5, 12

and 15).

The sessions provided lively debate. Some sessions involved mostly the formal

theorists, and some the philosophers but most saw participants across the divide

debating the conceptual issues. All agreed that the workshop was a valuable sessionfrom which everyone learned a great deal.