Andreas Føllesdal

• Follesdal, Andreas & Langford, Malcolm (2026). Trustworthy AI in courts: A legitimacy analysis. Cambridge Forum on AI: Law and Governance. 2(2). doi: 10.1017/cfl.2026.10061. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The use of AI in courts is highly contested, with positions ranging from outright opposition to unmitigated enthusiasm. However, normative assessments of its deployment often rely on standards or analogies that are unclear in their pedigree, coherence and scope conditions. This article explores how theories of legitimate authority can offer some guidance. Legitimacy theories serve to assess institutions and how they use their authority. The framework allows us to identify central issues and dilemmas, order different normative standards and identify relevant differences and similarities across time and jurisdictions. To undertake such a legitimacy analysis of AI in courts, we identify six forms of delegation to AI in courts (servant, interlocutor, advisor, partner, agent and trustee) and analyse the legitimacy implications for six aspects of adjudication (legal process, inventorising, problem-solving, reasoned judgment, legitimation and discretion). In some areas, AI may enhance both the efficiency and quality of the judicial process, while we argue that the delegation of judicial power to AI in aspects which require extensive human discretion and human presence is difficult to justify.

• Marschall, Benjamin & Føllesdal, Andreas (2026). Raising, Discussing, and Settling One Problem After Another for Four Days. The 1986 Stanford Conversation Between Quine, Davidson, Dreben, and Føllesdal. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy. 16(2), p. 1–12. doi: 10.15173/jhap.v16i2.7201. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2026). Quine's Quandaries. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy. 16(2), p. 429–453. doi: 10.15173/jhap.v16i2.5793. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The Transcript of the 1986 Stanford Conversation records how Quine grapples with the inconsistencies he seeks and finds in his own views. Why was Quine so reluctant and ambivalent concerning propositional attitudes— “the mental”—including the propositional attitudes of empathy? The hypothesis explored in this article is that Quine’s acceptance of the mental effected central, deep changes to his theory, so that we witness him being torn between simplicity and conservation as he continued to improve on his web of belief. Quine’s pragmatism and commitment to the hypothetico-deductive method required him to adjust his existing web of belief in light of new findings and systematic thinking, including the aims of science construed—“Wissenschaft”, the epistemic virtues, the role of prediction, and his preference for physical objects. Section 2 considers Quine’s acceptance of mental notions; Section 3 focuses on the propositional attitudes of empathy in particular. Section 4 sketches some of the ramifications of this change for the aims of science broadly construed—“Wissenschaft”—and hence of epistemic virtues, and for the role of prediction.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2026). The European Court of Human Rights against Authoritarian Populism: Why? And How? European Convention on Human Rights Law Review (ECLR). ISSN 2666-3228. 7(1-2). doi: 10.1163/26663236-bja10146. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas; Petrov, Jan & Zysset, Alain Fabio (2026). The European Court of Human Rights Versus Illiberal and Authoritarian Practices: Challenges and Responses. European Convention on Human Rights Law Review (ECLR). ISSN 2666-3228. 6(1), p. 1–8. doi: 10.1163/26663236-bja10152. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Can the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or the Court) fulfil its function effectively in the face of rising illiberalism and authoritarianism? Ongoing democratic backsliding, a tide of authoritarian populism, and the spread of illiberal practices in Europe, in many places exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, have given rise to a growing sense of urgency.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2025). The Contested Claims of Convention Refugees: Grotius to the Rescue. Grotiana. ISSN 0167-3831. 46(1), p. 111–129. doi: 10.1163/18760759-46010008. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The 1951 UN Refugee Convention protects a very small set of individuals, namely those who are persecuted by state authorities due to their race, religion or membership of a particular social group. Critics charge that this definition is unduly narrow. Arguments inspired by Grotius on the one hand help explain the special claims of such Convention refugees, and hence fill a gap in recent “state system legitimacy” defenses of the Refugee Convention. The Convention compensates for a normative “construction flaw” of the system of sovereign nation states. Other inhabitants of the Earth and their governments contribute to injury to Convention refugees by leaving them no state free place to go. States’ immunity also allows them to perpetrate such particularly wicked ab-uses of state power, in violation of the rule of law. On the other hand, Grotius’s arguments also help us justify a broader interpretation of which “particular social groups” to include among the Convention refugees, beyond those whose international human rights are violated.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2025). Subsidiarity and Public Reason: Two Cheers Are Quite Enough. Journal of Social Philosophy. ISSN 0047-2786. doi: 10.1111/josp.12607. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  A principle of subsidiarity states a rebuttable presumption for more local authority, unless a larger unit better achieves given objectives. Some argue that this principle may bolster ‘public reason’ - public and more stringent justifications of political or legal power, agnostic regarding contested conceptions of the good life. They may be correct that origin is not destiny: the pedigree of subsidiarity in theological traditions is not a decisive objection. A related aspect does restrict the contribution of subsidiarity: it may cloak contested value choices. Subsidiarity gives no guidance without specifying which objectives to pursue and standards of relative effectiveness and efficiency. So important issues are who should have the authority to determine the objectives, and to apply the principle itself. Similar limits also hold for ‘horizontal’ concepts of subsidiarity, which claim to address relations among authorities equally ‘distant’ from the individual. These constraints on the contribution of subsidiarity are visible in two examples in international law: tensions between the two European regional courts: the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Court of Human Rights; and how the World Trade Organization should accommodate international human rights obligations.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2025). A democracy–if we can keep it: citizenship for nonliberals and terrorists? Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (CRISPP). ISSN 1369-8230. doi: 10.1080/13698230.2025.2512273. Full text in Research Archive
• Johansen, Stian Øby; Ulfstein, Geir; Føllesdal, Andreas & Wessel, Ramses A. (2024). The Revised Draft Agreement on the Accession of the EU to the ECHR: Third Time's a Charm? European Papers (EP). 9(2), p. 641–646. doi: 10.15166/2499-8249/774. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  A revised Draft Agreement on the Accession of the EU to the ECHR (revised DAA) was agreed upon in Mach 2023, after three years of (re-)negotiations in the shadow of Opinion 2/13. The contributors to this Special Section of European Papers analyse and assess the revised DAA. Once the EU side has finalised the EU-internal rules that will interface with the accession agreement, the CJEU will for a third time give its opinion on whether an envisaged accession to the ECHR is compatible with the EU treaties. This Special Section opens with an analysis of the immediate context of the negotiations and the accession process: the case law of the CJEU and the ECtHR since Opinion 2/13. Then, some of the key negotiators analyse the negotiations leading up to the revised DAA. Thereafter, three key aspects of the revised DAA are assessed: the co-respondent mechanism, the effect of Opinion 1/17 on the revised agreement, and the yet unresolved Common Foreign and Security Policy issue. The final contribution concludes by interrogating the overarching issues of trust and mistrust, which permeated Opinion 2/13, the accession (re-)negotiations, and the final text of the revised DAA alike.

• Janmyr, Maja & Føllesdal, Andreas (2024). Om Nansenpasset og flyktningsituasjonen i Europa – da og nå. In Havelin, Gro (Eds.), DET NORSKE VIDENSKAPS-AKADEMI ÅRBOK 2022. Novus Forlag. ISSN 9788270999439. Full text in Research Archive
• 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: 10.1017/9781009025416.007. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Sovereign States are under a legal obligation to comply with customary international law even though they have not explicitly consented to these norms. How should international courts accommodate both such non-consent-based CIL and a commitment to state sovereignty? The article outlines one strategy that avoids or helps address challenges wrought against other attempts to create more consistency and coherence between CIL and the other sources of international law – whilst securing a central role for state consent. A plausible account of why states have an obligation to honour treaties they consent to also contributes to justify their obligation to honour CIL norms. The shared normative basis for both sorts of obligations may be a ‘Principle of Non-manipulation’, a norm to not violate intentionally created rightful expectations. The account draws much on Scanlon, MacCormick and Hart.

• 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. doi: 10.1017/9781108551878.002. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Many elements of current positive public international law (PIL) originated in theories of natural law, including both rules – of the law of the sea and of war, of refugee and asylum law – and constitutive conceptions of sovereignty. Several scholars argue that PIL has improved upon and replaced those origins, leaving the old natural law theories dead. PIL has come of age – indeed, laments about the need for natural law to fill its lacunae are replaced by frustrations about PIL’s ungoverned growth and fragmentation. Some say it is time for PIL to kick the ladder of natural law away.* This chapter seeks to give voice to the other side. Proclamations of the death of natural law theories are premature. More plausible versions of natural law theory may still contribute as PIL continues to evolve, by treaty agreements and interpretations. To be sure, many historical natural law theories are implausible by our standards.

• 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 & 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
• 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 Show summary

  The African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR) made history on August 27, 2018. The majority of its judges were female—six of 11, and the first among international courts and tribunals (ICs) to secure sex parity—that is, numerical equality.1 This achievement is even more remarkable given that only 23% of the judges and arbitrators of the ICs are women.2 The milestone also prompts us to consider more closely what considerations of legitimacy entail about the proportion of women international judges. The present composition of ICs is clearly under legal, social, and political control, and ICs have profound effects. The persistent underrepresentation of women is especially striking since not only civil society groups, but also the states who nominate and establish election procedures have agreed several treaties that require or urge a balance of gender representation.3 So it would seem that the parity achieved by the ACtHPR should be applauded. However, that IC may now be even more gender equal than we may have reason to require of a legitimate IC—or so this article argues. A less egalitarian composition within a “parity zone” of approximately 40% of either of the main sexes seems to suffice. The present reflections considers various possible arguments offered concerning the impact of gender inequality on the international bench, drawing in part on studies of domestic judiciaries, as well as on available research and reflections by practitioners and women international judges.4 Several arguments support calls to increase the proportion of female international judges—but how far? Section 2 addresses some background issues: first concerning the terms “feminism,” “sex,” and “gender,” then, the tasks of ICs that should lead us to question the present sex inequality on the international bench.

• 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). 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. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  <p>How might Ethiopia maintain its federal structure and its territory? ‘Constitutional contestation’ in Ethiopia is fuelled by two factors: regions and political parties follow ethnic line; and the Ethiopian Constitution has a secession clause. <p>A central challenge is to secure sufficient political trust. The public must be assured that authorities and individuals across regional borders generally comply with the law. This requires authoritative, independent ways to settle disagreements and monitor compliance, including carefully designed multi-level checks and balances, representatives of regions in central decision making bodies, and a ‘competence police’. So we should welcome the prohibition of the 2019 Election Law against ethnically based political parties. Strong and credible human rights constraints together with free media and functioning opposition parties may also foster trusts,. This is one further reason why Ethiopia should grant the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR) jurisdiction to hear cases from ngo s and individuals.

• 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 Show summary

  Abstract Critics challenge international courts for their interference with domestic democratic processes and alleged violations of rule of law standards: they claim that these guardians of the rule of law are not well guarded themselves. These concerns should not be dismissed too quickly as mere disgruntled venting by populist politicians. This article focuses on regional human rights courts and argues that the same interests and values that justify rule of law standards of impartiality, independence and accountability domestically also justify similar standards for international courts. Focusing on the European Court of Human Rights and its doctrine of the margin of appreciation, the article demonstrates how this doctrine may contribute to fulfilling the rule of law but at the same time may also endanger it. This requires changes to the doctrine to ensure that the core rule of law standards of predictability and protection against arbitrary discretion are respected.

• 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 Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. ISSN 9783848780006. p. 315–330. doi: 10.5771/9783748923923-315. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2025). Subsidiarity. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108993685. doi: 10.1017/9781108993685. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  'Subsidiarity' is vague and contested, yet popular in scholarship about international law due to its role in the European Union (EU). Which conceptions of subsidiarity are more justifiable, and how might they contribute to international law? A principle of subsidiarity concerns how to establish, allocate, or use authority within a social or legal order, stating a rebuttable presumption for the local. Various historical patterns, practices, principles, and justifications offer different recommendations. Seven normative theories vary in how immunity protecting or person promoting they are. The latter appear more justifiable and withstand criticism often raised against subsidiarity. Some conceptions of person promoting subsidiarity serve as a structuring principle for international law and fullfills several criteria of a general principle of law. It can harmonize domestic and international law but is not sufficient to reduce fragmentation among sectors with different objectives.

• Fortuna, Marina; Gorobets, Kostia; Merkouris, Panos; Føllesdal, Andreas; Ulfstein, Geir & Westerman, Pauline (2024). Customary International Law and Its Interpretation by International Courts: Theories, Methods and Interactions. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781009541329. doi: 10.1017/9781009541312. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA

• Føllesdal, Andreas & Marschall, Benjamin (2026). Vol. 16 No. 2 (2026): The 1986 Stanford Conversation between Quine, Davidson, Dreben, and Føllesdal | Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy. doi: https:/jhaponline.org/issue/view/618. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2026). Federalism and Democracy in South and Southeast Asia - Lessons. Foreword to anthology. In Tandon, Vishnu Kumari; Gillot-Assayag, Laure & Forster, Christine (Ed.), Federal Theories and Practices. Palgrave Macmillan. ISSN 9783032199584. p. v–viii. doi: https:/link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm:978-3-032-19959-1/1. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  This book bridges theory and practice to rethink the contested relationship between federalism and democracy, with a focus on South and Southeast Asia. Bringing together philosophy, law, political science, and area studies, it offers a fresh interdisciplinary perspective on power sharing, democratic governance, and federal design. The first part develops key concepts by examining the intellectual history of federalism and democracy, the normative role of participation, cooperative power sharing, and the rule of law. The second part turns to practice, analyzing federal country cases including India, Nepal, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Myanmar. These chapters address minority rights, subnational autonomy, citizen’s participation, and the tensions between federalism, democratization, and authoritarianism. By highlighting both opportunities and challenges, the book provides fresh insights into how federal systems can shape or undermine democratic representation, accountability, and innovative governance in diverse societies.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2026). Skeives rettigheter under press i Norge: Her er to ressurser. doi: https:/www.stk.uio.no/forskning/stks-temasider/pride/skeives-rettigheter-under-press-i-norge-her-er-to-.html. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Vollan, Kåre (2026). Notes on Reforming Nepal’s Electoral System. doi: https:/commons-nepal.com/notes-on-reforming-nepals-electoral-system/. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2025). How to better Limit and Guide the Executive’s Discretionary Space regarding Treaty Obligations? Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  About the challenges of the increased power of the executive

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2025). Hinsides handlingsrommet: Hemmelighold av illojalitet mot folkeretten. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Seminarinnlegg om 'handlingsrommet'

• Føllesdal, Andreas & Vollan, Kåre (2025). Towards a more successful federation. doi: https:/kathmandupost.com/columns/2025/12/07/towards-a-more-successful-federation. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Vollan, Kåre (2025). Electoral systems, parties and goverment structure. doi: https:/kathmandupost.com/columns/2025/11/27/electoral-systems-parties-and-govt-structure. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Berg, Kjersti Gravelsæter (2025). (Con)federal lessons for paths toward just peace in the Middle East  | Centre on Law and Social Transformation. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  We witness yet another chapter in the long history of conflict in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine. Proposals of one state and two state solutions both seem to have run their course. The presentation starts to explore a third range of options which merit more attention: (con)federal futures. These paths shift the focus from territorial and national sovereignty, be it of one or two states, to regard sovereignty as a bundle of powers and immunities, resources and protections which should be shared or divided in ways that secure the central interests of both Israelis and Palestinians. The main objective of these reflections is modest. It is certainly not to provide a sketch of a workable (con)federal constitution. Rather, the presentation starts to gather lessons from previous attempts to unbundle sovereignty and allocate political authority to enable intermingled national groups to generate and maintain both unity and diversity, with sufficient domains of self determination in the form of self rule and joint rule and non-domination by other groups. This is not new – the 1947 Partition Plan called for an ‘economic union.’ Among the cases to draw lessons from are the post World War II European Union, the 1995 ‘Dayton agreement’ for Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the 1998 ‘Good Friday Agreement’ for Northern Ireland. Further lessons from further cases are welcome, such as the experiences from Ethiopia and Nepal. The lessons range from pre-negotiation issues of bringing parties to the table, include limiting inequality, to securing sufficient trust, and the roles and risks of international involvement. Join us for this presentation by Andreas Føllesdal (Professor of Political Philosophy, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo) The following panel is moderated by Sofia Rolim (PhD candidate, Department of Government at UiB and FGV São Paulo) with Kjersti G. Berg (Associate Professor of Intercultural Studies, NLA) Siri Gloppen (Professor of Political Science, Department of Government at UiB and Director of LawTransform) 🗓 Tuesday 28 October at 14:30–15:30 📍 Babelstuen, Faculty of Humanities Library, University of Bergen 🎟 Free, open to all!

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2025). Bidrag og medvirkning | Klassekampen. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Oljefondet skal revurdere sine etiske forpliktelser. Kanskje må vi definere forståelsen av medvirkning på nytt?

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2024). Har flyktninger krav på mer fra oss enn andre migranter? Hvorfor, og hva? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2024). Von der Leyen's reforms: A cure or catnip for populism? Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The protection of Europe’s democracy tops European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen’s to-do list. She promised the European Parliament to enhance democratic legitimacy and proposed policies and even treaty changes. What are we to make of these promises? Promises are risky, especially since an overeager EU may fuel the growth of authoritarian populism. And the Commission cannot promise to reduce its own democratic deficit. ...

• Marina, Fortuna; Gorobets, Kostia; Merkouris, Panos; Ulfstein, Geir; Føllesdal, Andreas & Westerman, Pauline (2024). Preface, Customary International Law and Its Interpretation by International Courts: Theories, Methods and Interactions. Cambridge University Press. ISSN 9781009541329. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2024). Pensjonsfondet som samfunnskontrakt hinsides hakkebakkeskogen. Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift (NNT). ISSN 0800-336X. 41(3-4), p. 309–321. doi: 10.18261/nnt.41.3-4.10. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Er Statens pensjonsfond utland en «samfunnskontrakt»? Uttrykket brukes ofte for å vurdere hva som er rettferdige samfunnsordninger, ved å se på dem som en tenkt forpliktende avtale innbyggerne imellom. Denne måten å tenke på fondet på kan også hjelpe oss når vi spør oss hvem som bør nyte godt av det, og hvilke krav til bærekraft fondsforvaltningen må ivareta. Om vi mener at fondet bør forstås som del av en samfunnskontrakt, gir det sterke normative føringer om at framtidige generasjoner og mennesker utenfor Norges grenser bør være part i avtalen. Forvaltningen av fondet må også respektere disse partenes krav.

• Føllesdal, Dagfinn Kåre & Føllesdal, Andreas (2024). Willard Van Orman Quine (1908-2000). Biographical Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences. -, p. -–-. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). UiO-rektor om debattkultur: «Å kalle folk idioter gir ingen mening». [Journal]. Khrono.no. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). Philosophically Legal: A Conversation with Dr. Andreas Føllesdal. [Journal]. Harvard Undergraduate Law Review. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). INTERVIEW: Chatting with Andreas Føllesdal. [Internet]. Völkerrechtsblog. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). Netto livslønn, ikke brutto årslønn. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). Comments on Patti Lenard: Democracy and Exclusion. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ulfstein, Geir (2023). Independence and Accountability of International Courts and Tribunals. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). Sources and Forms of Normativity in International Cooperation. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). On Weale: Modern Social Contract Theory. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). New International Legal Realism as Science. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). Toward a defensible rational reconstruction of the ECtHR’s practice – 5 themes. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). How Much Diversity Is Enough on International Courts? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). Opening: PluriCourts past and future. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). Some strategies of the ECtHR as vaccine against populism and authoritarian states. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). On Modern Social Contract Theory. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). On diversity on the international bench. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). On Multidisciplinarity. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). The significance of consent for (customary) international law. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2023). How should the ECtHR develop its Margin of Appreciation doctrine. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Subsidiarity - manuscript presentation at Conference on subsidiarity, Leiden/Zoom. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). On international courts and public goods - Groningen. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). About midterm evaluations. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The Empirical Turn in international legal studies. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The Empirical Turn. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). On the international financial architecture as a global public good. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The Empirical Turn. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas; Ruud, Morten & Kjeldgaard-Pedersen, Astrid (2022). Introduction to Special Issue in Honor of Geir Ulfstein. Nordic Journal of International Law. ISSN 0902-7351. 91(4), p. 541–543. doi: 10.1163/15718107-91040001. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Federalism. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). International rule of law – thick or thin? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). On the distinction between process/function and values/substance. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). How to improve on the margin of appreciation doctrine - perspectives from democratic theory. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Subsidiarity in International Law: “Person Centred” Rather than “State Centred”. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Om pensjonsfondet/Etikkrådet. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Comments on Postema lecture Rule of Law Beyond National Border. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Legitimacy/book workshop on Arthur Applbaum. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). How much diversity is enough on international courts? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The Principle of Subsidiarity as a Constitutional Principle in International Law. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Janmyr, Maja (2022). Dagens flyktningsituasjon: Hva kan vi lære av Nansen? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Beyond Geography and Gender: Representation at the International Bench for Adjudication and Law-Making. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Global Public Goods and ICs. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The empirical turn and Quine. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Applying to the ERC. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The ECtHR responding to populism. Full text in Research Archive
• Janmyr, Maja & Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Nansenforelesningen 2022: Om Nansenpasset og flyktningsituasjonen i Europa – da og nå. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Federalism. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). International rule of law as A global public good? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Hvis flerfaglig forskning er løsningen, hva er problemet? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Menneskerettighetsdomstolens og EU-domstolens proporsjonalitetstest i konflikt - en kamp om Europas sjel? - hva skal nasjonale domstoler gjøre? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). The ECtHR and deference – lessons for Indonesia? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Why refugees have special claims to integration – links to equality of opportunity. Full text in Research Archive
• Janmyr, Maja & Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Om Nansenpasset og flyktningsituasjonen i Europa – da og nå. Full text in Research Archive
• Ulfstein, Geir & Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Russland er ute – hva så? Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2022). Humaniora som risikosport. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ulfstein, Geir (2022). Grunnforskning kan ikke settes på vent. Full text in Research Archive
• Ulfstein, Geir; Føllesdal, Andreas & Toft, Martin (2021). Vinnarane av UiOs forskingspris 2021: –Legitimiteten til dei internasjonale domstolane er ikkje blitt mindre viktig. [Journal]. Uniform. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas; Ulfstein, Geir & Kanestrøm, Jorunn (2021). Hvilken relevans har internasjonale domstoler for deg og meg - og for demokratiet vårt? [Radio]. Universitetsplassen. Full text in Research Archive 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.

• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). Også dyr har krav på rettferdighet. p. 26–27. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2021). Om Forskningsrådets skrøpelige søknadsregime: Symptomer, diagnoser og resepter. Full text in Research Archive
• 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. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas & Ulfstein, Geir (2021). PluriCourts Lunch Seminar: Independence and Accountability. Full text in Research Archive
• Ulfstein, Geir & Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Foreword. In Acevedo, Juan Pablo Pérez León & Nicholson, Joanna (Ed.), Defendants and Victims in International Criminal Justice Ensuring and Balancing Their Rights. Routledge. ISSN 9780367253950. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Støtter anbefalinger om Sentre for fremragende forskning (SFF). Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Om Stølens kommentar om Eiendomsavdelingen. Uniforum. ISSN 1891-5825. Full text in Research Archive
• Føllesdal, Andreas (2020). Nå har Motvind flere medlemmer enn Frp og SV. [Internet]. E24. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA