NOT JUST FOR KIDS: A POLITICAL THEORY OF CHILDHOOD AND CHILDREN'S RIGHTS
Under contract for the British Academy Monograph series with Oxford University Press.
Brando, N. and Schweiger, G. (eds.) (2019). Philosophy and Child Poverty. Reflections on the Ethics and Politics of Poor Children and their Families. Dordrecht: Springer.
Lundy, L., Byrne, B., Lloyd, K., Templeton, M., Brando, N., Corr, M-L., Heard, E., Holland, L., MacDonald, M., Marshall, G., McAlister, S., McNamee, C., Orr, K., Schubotz, D., Symington, E., Walsh, C., Hope, K., Singh, P., Neill, G. and Wright, L. (2021). ‘Life Under Coronavirus: Children’s Views on their Experiences of their Human Rights.’ International Journal of Children’s Rights 29 (2): 261-285.
Brando, N. (2020). 'Children's Abilities, Freedom, and the Process of Capability-Formation' Journal of Capabilities and Human Development 21(3): 249-262.
Using the capability approach (CA) as a method to conceptualise what is owed to individuals, this article shows that the justifiability of restricting freedom to “unable” individuals is not as straightforward as assumed. Understanding the role that abilities play in justifiably limiting freedom requires an assessment of what being “(un)able” means, and how this “inability” may translate into particular privileges or restrictions. The article, thus, intends to give an answer to the following questions: first, how should the concept of “ability” be understood within the CA? And, second, how does ability bind our understanding of the legitimate restriction of freedom and agency?
Brando, N. (2019). ‘Universalism, Embeddedness and Domination: An Analysis of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.’ Journal of Global Ethics 15(3): 270-286.
This article takes the International Convention on the Rights of the Child as a starting point to analyse a fundamental philosophical conflict between universalist and embedded approaches to global justice. It explores the diverging interpretations of and critiques to the universalist and embedded commitments in the Convention, and develops an in-depth analysis of the benefits and harms that both positions may have on the child population.
Brando, N., Boonen, C., Cogolati, S., Hagen, R., Vanstappen, N. and Wouters, J. (2019). ‘Governing as commons or as global public goods: Two tales of power.’ International Journal of the Commons 13(1): 553–577.
Commons and global public goods have become popular concepts in academic debates on governance. Moreover, these concepts are no longer the exclusive domain of economists. Different disciplines (such as legal and political theory) have appropriated them in their own specific ways. The result of this popularity, however, is that they are often confused or used in ways that muddle their distinct characteristics. In this article we propose some distinctions to clarify the use of these concepts.
Brando, N. and Morales-Gálvez, S. (2019). ‘The Right to Secession: Remedial or Primary?’ Ethnopolitics 18(2): 107-118.
This article compares remedial and primary right approaches to a right to secession, looking at their meeting points and discrepancies. Although the literature emphasises their differences, this article explores their convergence points, arguing that certain core oppositions derive from an imprecise distinction between ‘self-determination’ and ‘secession.’
Hart, C.S. and Brando, N. (2018). ‘A capability approach to children's well‐being, agency and participatory rights in education.’ European Journal of Education 53 (3): 292-309.
This article applies a capability approach to examine how children's agency, well‐being and participation rights can be developed and supported in educational settings. We aim to broaden the evaluative space for assessing what constitutes quality in children's education. We conclude with some reflections on implications for policy and practice going forward.
Brando, N. (2017). ‘Between Equality and Freedom of Choice: Educational Opportunities for the Least Advantaged.’ International Journal of Educational Development 53: 71-79.
Analyses the debate between Egalitarians and Libertarians in educational policy. Argues against market mechanisms improving the education of the least advantaged. Consider abolition of elite education insufficient in non-ideal circumstances. Defends progressive redistribution as a potential solution.
Marx, A., Brando, N. and Lein, B. (2017). ‘Strengthening Labour Rights Provisions in Bilateral Trade Agreements: Making the Case for Voluntary Sustainability Standards.’ Global Policy 8 (Sup. 3): 78-88.
Based on experiences captured in a case‐study on the functioning of the 2013 EU‐Colombia Trade Agreement, we argue that linking VSS to labour provisions in trade agreements could significantly contribute to rendering these provisions more effective. Linking labour provisions to the monitoring and auditing mechanisms of accredited but independent VSS, we argue, could help close a regulatory gap, add credibility to the provisions and help overcome capacity challenges in the implementing countries.
Brando, N. (2016). ‘Distributing educational opportunities: positionality, equality and responsibility.’ International Journal of Children’s Rights 24 (3): 575-598.
This paper looks at the tension between two philosophical approaches to the value of education (individual and positional values), looking for a common ground where to support a more just and efficient distribution of educational opportunities for the world’s most vulnerable children.
Marx, A., Lein, B. and Brando, N. (2016). ‘The Protection of Labour Rights in Trade Agreements. The Case of the EU-Colombia Agreement.’ Journal of World Trade 50 (4): 587-610.
Based on extensive desk research and a series of interviews in Brussels and Bogotá, the present article aims to provide insights into how the practical application of labour provisions and monitoring mechanisms plays out in a particular country context. Our findings identify significant shortcomings in both the design and application of the current sustainability chapters, affecting not only their effectiveness but also the credibility of the EU as a normative actor as a whole.
Boonen, C. and Brando, N. (2016). 'Revisiting the Common Ownership of the Earth: A Democratic Critique of Global Distributive Justice Theories.' Global Justice: Theory, Practice and Rhetoric 9 (2): 134-154.
Imposing limits and distributive obligations on private and public property arrangements may be the best mechanism for governing common ownership. We present a critique of the assumption that this issue can be solved within the private–public property regime,
arguing that the boundaries of this regime should not be taken for granted and that the growing literature on the democratic commons movement suggests how this can be accomplished.
PEER REVIEWED BOOK CHAPTERS
Child Soldiers as Victims or as Perpetrators?
In G. Tonon (ed.) Social Justice for Children in the South. Dordrecht: Springer.
Co-authored by Alexandra Echeverry.
Education and Child Labour: A Global Perspective.
In R. Curren (ed.) Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Education. New York: Routledge.
Assessing the impact of school closures on children
In F. Niker and A. Bhattacharya (eds.) Political Philosophy in a Pandemic. London: Bloomsbury.
Co-authored with Katarina Pitasse.
AGENCY AND THE RELATIONAL DIMENSION OF POVERTY: TESTING UNIVERSAL MULTIDIMENSIONAL INDEXES
In V. Beck et al. (eds.) Dimensions of Poverty. Dordrecht: Springer.
Co-authored by Katarina Pitasse.
PHILOSOPHY AND POVERTY OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
In N. Brando and G. Schweiger (eds.) Philosophy and Child Poverty. Dordrecht: Springer.
Co-authored with Gottfried Schweiger.
In S. Cogolati and J. Wouters (eds.) The Commons and a New Global Governance: Democratic, Institutional and Legal Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 37-56.
Co-authored with Helder De Schutter.
GLOSARIO – NOTA DE TRADUCTOR
In Casal, P., Pogge, T. & Steiner, H. Un reparto más justo del planeta. Madrid: Trotta, pp. 17-22.
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF CHILDHOOD AND CHILDREN
Journal of Applied Philosophy. 37(1): 158-161.
SHAPING THE CAPABILITY APPROACH: ROBEYNS’ MODULAR VIEW
Global Justice: Theory, Practice and Rhetoric 11(2): 90-95.
EQUIDAD, PROTECCIÓN Y AUTONOMÍA: TRES PILARES DE LA JUSTICIA PARA EL DESARROLLO INFANTIL
BRIAN MILNE’S RIGHTS OF THE CHILD: 25 YEARS AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE UN CONVENTION
Political Studies Review 15 (2): 283-284.
BAUMAN AND OBIREK’S OF GOD AND MAN AND OF THE WORLD AND OURSELVES
Political Studies Review 14 (4): 556-557.
JONATHAN BOWMAN’S COSMOIPOLITAN JUSTICE. THE AXIAL AGE, MULTIPLE MODERNITIES, AND THE POSTSECULAR TURN
Political Studies Review 14 (3): 413.
GEOFFREY HINCHLIFFE’S LIBERTY AND EDUCATION: A CIVIC REPUBLICAN APPROACH
Political Studies Review 14 (1): 69-70.
FINEMAN AND GREARS’S VULNERABILITY: REFLECTIONS ON A NEW ETHICAL FOUNDATION FOR LAW AND POLITICS
Political Studies Review 13 (4): 566.