Andreas Føllesdal

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The Significance of State Consent for the Legitimate Authority of Customary International Law. In Merkouris, Panos; kammerhofer, Jörg & Arajärvi, Noora (Ed.), The Theory, Practice, and Interpretation of Customary International Law. Cambridge University Press. ISSN 9781009025416. p. 105–136. doi: https%3A/doi.org/10.1017/9781009025416.007. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Current contributions of the natural law tradition to international law. In Dunoff, Jeffrey L. & Pollack, Mark A (Ed.), International Legal Theory: Foundations and Frontiers. Cambridge University Press. ISSN 9781108551878. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Hessler, Kristen (2021). Gender imbalance on the international bench: is normative legitimacy at stake. Journal of Social Philosophy. ISSN 0047-2786. 52(4), p. 430–435. doi: 10.1111/josp.12453. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). How International Courts can Help Secure Global Public Goods Worth Having: Pure Public Goods and Beyond. In Zyberi, Gentian (Eds.), Protecting Community Interests through International Law. Intersentia. ISSN 9781839701122. p. 31–59. Full text in Research Archive
• Follesdal, Andreas (2021). In defense of deference: International human rights as standards of review. Journal of Social Philosophy. ISSN 0047-2786. doi: 10.1111/josp.12449. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). How many women judges are enough on international courts? Journal of Social Philosophy. ISSN 0047-2786. p. 1–23. doi: 10.1111/josp.12399. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). A just yet unequal European Union: a defense of moderate economic inequality. Review of social economy. ISSN 0034-6764. doi: 10.1080/00346764.2021.1967433. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  What does justice require concerning socio-economic distribution among citizens of the European Union? The EU should reduce cross-national economic inequalities among inhabitants of different member states, but full economic distributive equality or a European ‘Difference Principle,' may not be required. Individuals' claim to more political influence over matters controlled by their own state in the quasi-federal EU may permit some economic inequality. Section 1 orients this contribution relative to arguments for a European universal income. Section 2 provides relevant features of the EU. Section 3 considers contractualist arguments against certain forms of economic inequality, while section 4 identifies a further argument in favour of equal shares of benefits of social cooperation, based on an interpretation of ‘social primary goods' consistent with Rawls' theory. Section 5 argues that these reasons for economic distributive equality must be weighed against more political influence over matters controlled by the individual’s sub-unit.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). Stability and trust in federations with ethnic territories and a secession clause - Challenges and opportunities for Ethiopia. International Journal on Minority and Group Rights. ISSN 1385-4879. 28(5), p. 927–943. doi: 10.1163/15718115-bja10031.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). International human rights courts and the (international) rule of law: Part of the solution, part of the problem, or both? Global Constitutionalism. ISSN 2045-3817. 10(1), p. 118–138. doi: 10.1017/S2045381719000364. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Religion and the State: the ‘Lautsi’ Case of the European Court of Human Rights About Crucifixes in Italian Class Rooms. In Ehlers, Dirk & Glaser, Henning (Ed.), State and Religion: Between Conflict and Cooperation. Nomos. ISSN 978-3-8487-8000-6. p. 315–330. doi: https%3A/doi.org/10.5771/9783748923923-315.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Add international courts to The Idea of Human Rights and stir … on Beitz’ The Idea of Human Rights after 10 years. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (CRISPP). ISSN 1369-8230. doi: 10.1080/13698230.2020.1859223. Full text in Research Archive
• Ulfstein, Geir; Ruud, Morten & Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). The European Convention on Human Rights and other parts of international law. International Journal of Human Rights. ISSN 1364-2987. 24(7), p. 913–916. doi: 10.1080/13642987.2020.1810477.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Survey Article: The Legitimacy of International Courts. Journal of Political Philosophy. ISSN 0963-8016. 0(0), p. 1–24. doi: 10.1111/jopp.12213. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Legitimacy Criticisms of International Courts: Not only Fuzzy Rhetoric? In Sadurski, Wojciech; Sevel, Michael & Walton, Kevin (Ed.), Legitimacy. The State and Beyond. Oxford University Press. ISSN 9780198825265. p. 223–237. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198825265.003.0012.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). A Better Signpost, Not a Better Walking Stick: How to Evaluate the European Consensus Doctrine. In Tzevelekos, Vassilis P. & Kapotas, Panos (Ed.), Building Consensus on European Consensus. Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights in Europe and Beyond. Cambridge University Press. ISSN 9781108564779. p. 189–209. doi: https%3A/doi.org/10.1017/9781108564779.010.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). More than meets the eye – and less: Comments on The Internationalists. Global Constitutionalism. ISSN 2045-3817. 7(3), p. 330–341. doi: 10.1017/S2045381718000187. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in Cristin

• Ryssevik, Jostein; Føllesdal, Andreas; Thorsen, Dag Einar & Aubert, Axel (2018). Fokus: Politikk og menneskerettar. Aschehoug & Co. ISBN 9788203403729. 440 p.

View all works in Cristin

• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ulfstein, Geir (2022). Grunnforskning kan ikke settes på vent. Aftenposten.
• Ulfstein, Geir & Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Russland er ute – hva så? . Klassekampen. ISSN 0805-3839.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Humaniora som risikosport. Khrono.no. ISSN 1894-8995.
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ulfstein, Geir (2021). PluriCourts Lunch Seminar: Independence and Accountability.
• Føllesdal, Andreas; Ulfstein, Geir & Kanestrøm, Jorunn (2021). Hvilken relevans har internasjonale domstoler for deg og meg - og for demokratiet vårt? [Radio]. Universitetsplassen. Show summary

  Mange som bor i Norge har opplevd å få saker belyst av en norsk domstol. Men hvorfor skal vi bry oss med internasjonale domstoler? Barnevernsakene hvor Norge er dømt av Den europeiske menneskerettsdomstolen for å ha lagt for lite vekt på familiegjenforening er gode eksempler på hvordan en internasjonale domstol kan bidra til økt rettssikkerhet for både barn og familier. I denne podkastepisoden kan du høre om barnevernsakene og om internasjonale domstolers rolle og betydning for velfungerende demokratier. I podkasten deltar professor i filosofi Andreas Føllesdal og professor i jus Geir Ulfstein. Begge er direktører for PluriCourts som studerer internasjonale domstolers legitimitet. Begge ble også nylig tildelt forskningsprisen ved UiO. Programleder er Jorunn Kanestrøm.

• Ulfstein, Geir; Føllesdal, Andreas & Toft, Martin (2021). Vinnarane av UiOs forskingspris 2021: –Legitimiteten til dei internasjonale domstolane er ikkje blitt mindre viktig. [Newspaper]. Uniform.
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ratner, Steven R. (2021). Blogspot at EJIL:talk!: Introducing David Lefkowitz’s Philosophy and International Law.
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ratner, Steven R. (2021). Blogspot at EJIL:talk!: A Moral Defense of Robust International Law: Introducing the Review Symposium on Carmen Pavel’s Law Beyond the State.
• Føllesdal, Andreas; Lindberg, Maren Falch; Neupane, Sudan; Østbakken, Kjersti Misje; Harstad, Stine & Shah, Feroz Mehmood [Show all 9 contributors for this article] (2021). Fulbrightprogrammet fyller 75 år. Khrono.no. ISSN 1894-8995.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). Også dyr har krav på rettferdighet. Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.). ISSN 0804-3116. p. 26–27.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). Om Forskningsrådets skrøpelige søknadsregime: Symptomer, diagnoser og resepter. Khrono.no. ISSN 1894-8995.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Global Public Goods – what role for international courts?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Polar Public Goods and beyond: How legitimate international courts can help secure Global Public Goods worth having.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Når lovbrot er politisk nødbrems. [Newspaper]. Nationen. Show summary

  Ein vindkraftmotstandar set bilen i vegen for å hindre anleggsmaskiner, og andre okkuperer ferja for å hindre frakt av sprengstoff. Naturvernarar kjempar mot gruvedeponi, og andre krev meir merksemd om klimaet. – Sivil ulydnad er ein nødbrems i demokratiet, seier professor.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Nå har Motvind flere medlemmer enn Frp og SV. [Internet]. E24.
• Ulfstein, Geir & Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Foreword. In Pérez León Acevedo, Juan Pablo & Nicholson, Joanna (Ed.), Defendants and Victims in International Criminal Justice Ensuring and Balancing Their Rights. Routledge. ISSN 9780367253950.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Støtter anbefalinger om Sentre for fremragende forskning (SFF). Khrono.no. ISSN 1894-8995.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Om Stølens kommentar om Eiendomsavdelingen. Uniforum. ISSN 1891-5825.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Lokalbefolkninga stoppa ferje for å hindre vindkraftutbyggarar. [Internet]. NRK.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). En seier for Eiendomsavdelingen - og kanskje for UiO? . Uniforum. ISSN 1891-5825.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Ingen ERC-milliarder til Norge: Før vi stiller diagnoser og lager resepter. Khrono.no. ISSN 1894-8995.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Uviten om åpent landskap. Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.). ISSN 0804-3116. Show summary

  Uviten om åpent landskap Redaktør Nina Kristiansen kritiserer forskerprotestene mot kontorlandskap for å mangle belegg. Kristiansens kritikk er uetterrettelig. Kristiansens kilde er en metastudie om kontorforskning av Gjerland, Søiland og Thuen («GST»). De avkrefter at én kontorløsning alltid er best. Men protestforskerne hevder bare at kontorlandskap er uegnet for deres arbeidsoppgaver. Samfunnsoppdraget krever uforstyrret arbeidsro for å forske, forberede undervisning, veilede og sensurere. GST nevner mye forskning som støtter dette. Ifølge Kristiansen finnes det «få studier på cellekontorer». Men GST utelot uttrykkelig mye forskning om «single office» (s. 10). Kristiansen hevder at det sterkeste resultatet ikke er «hvilken kontorløsning de innfører, mer om hvordan de gjør det.» Men GST avviser ikke arbeidsoppgavenes betydning (s. 2). Kristiansen trenger mer arbeidsro for å finne reelle eksempler på Uviten, for å lese litteratur og for å formidle mindre tendensiøst. Jeg anbefaler et cellekontor. Artikkelen til GST er verdt å lese grundig, av Statsbygg, av universitetenes eiendomsdirektører og av Kristiansen.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Challenges to legitimacy and the role of European courts”.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Rettsvitenskap og filosofi.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Gender inequity on the international bench.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). “the idea of human rights” @ 10 – on Beitz.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). International law and the natural law tradition.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). On applying for ERC grants.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Workshop on ERC application writing - startup.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Customary international law and consent.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). The Comparative Advantage of International Courts to Manage Global Public Goods: Tasks, Mechanisms, Alternatives, Scope Conditions.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Workshop on ERC Application writing.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). “Add international courts and stir… Reconstructing Human Rights Practices: Risks, Roles and Repercussions” On Beitz’ The Idea of Human Rights .
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Current contributions of the natural law tradition to international law.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Organized Panel on the Legitimacy of International Courts.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). A just yet inegalitarian European Union? A liberal contractualist defense of moderate inequality .
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). On the ASEAN Declaration on Human Rights.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Forholdet mellom EMD og nasjonale domstoler.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Better Cairns, not better Crutches: how to improve the consensus “doctrine” for Europe - and beyond.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Regional human rights systems: Protectors of human rights, or of national and regional identities – or both? .
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Majoritarian Populism versus Human Rights Protection – how might International Courts Respond?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Machiavellian Misgivings about International Judges: Create and Counsel, but always Curb.
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ulfstein, Geir (2019). Hva kan barnevernet lære av dommen i menneskerettighetsdomstolen? Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.). ISSN 0804-3116.
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Næss, Petter (2019). En konstruktiv USA-kritiker og programmet han skapte. Khrono.no. ISSN 1894-8995.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). uio.no- bare så enhetlig som nødvendig og for øvrig mangfold. Uniforum. ISSN 1891-5825.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Introduction: The European Research Council @ 10—What has it done to us? European Political Science. ISSN 1680-4333. p. 1–3. doi: 10.1057/s41304-018-0163-x.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Are concepts of legitimacy for international courts related, and how?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Improving the European Consensus Doctrine: A Better Signpost, Not a Better Walking Stick.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Subsidiarity as a general principle of international law?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Better signposts or better walking sticks? How to improve the “Emerging European Consensus” doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights – and Why?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Human rights in ‘other’ international courts – some issues of legitimacy.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). On PluriCourts’ Research plan.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Protecting and Promoting Universal, European or Western European Human Rights?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Why defer to a new MultiLateral Investment Court? – Three Themes.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). On The new legitimation challenges to international courts – and how they might respond.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). The Comparative advantage of International Courts for ‘Global Public Goods'.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). On the Margin of Appreciation doctrine –regional comparisons.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). On The Internationalists.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Majoritarian Populism Versus Minority Rights Protection – How Might International Courts Respond? Panel on Political Philosophy.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). “Comments on Peffer” Panel on Justice as fairness versus Justice as fair rights.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). “Insights of Populism” Panel on populist nationalism, current international institutions, world government, or global federalism?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Natural law theories and international law.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). The significance of state consent.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Majoritarian Populism Versus Minority Rights Protection – How Might International Courts Respond?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Current contributions of the natural law tradition to international law.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). International human rights in Norway: Impact, Pushback and Dialogue.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). The Significance of State Consent.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Forholdet mellom EMD og nasjonale domstoler.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). ERC-application workshops – experiences.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Natural law theories and international law.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). On authorship of joint publications – disciplines, hierarchy and gender.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Regional Human Rights Regimes: Human rights protection or respect for national and regional identities – or both.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). The comparative advantages of international courts for managing global public goods.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). “Majoritarian Populism versus Minority Rights Protection – how might international courts respond?” .
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). “Stability in ethnic territorial federations with a secession clause – challenges and opportunities in the case of Ethiopia”.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). "Om teori og praksis i humaniora: Utfordringsdrevet forskning – teoretisk motivasjon eller empirisk nysgjerrighet?".
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). “Toward an Ethiopian Economy of Trust: the Demands for and Under-Supply of Trust in the Ethiopian Federation”.
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). “Stability in ethnic territorial federations with a secession clause – challenges and opportunities in the case of Ethiopia” .
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Legal secession - part of the solution to enhance minorities’ interests? The case of Ethiopian federalism .
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Legal secession - part of the solution to enhance minorities’ interests? The case of Ethiopian federalism .
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Majoritarian Populism Versus Minority Rights Protection – How Might International Courts Respond?
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2018). Majoritarian Populism versus Minority Rights Protection – how might international courts respond?
• Skeie, Victoria; Ulfstein, Geir & Føllesdal, Andreas (2019). Does the European Court of Human Rights' margin of appreciation threaten the rule of law? University of Oslo.

View all works in Cristin