|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910816800103321 |
|
|
Autore |
Knop Karen <1960-> |
|
|
Titolo |
Diversity and self-determination in international law / / Karen Knop |
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
Cambridge, UK ; ; New York, : Cambridge University Press, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
1-107-12048-9 |
1-280-42985-2 |
0-511-17637-6 |
0-511-04096-2 |
0-511-15714-2 |
0-511-32552-5 |
0-511-49402-5 |
0-511-04611-1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edizione |
[1st ed.] |
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (xxii, 434 pages) : digital, PDF file(s) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collana |
|
Cambridge studies in international and comparative law |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
Self-determination, National |
Women (International law) |
International law |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Note generali |
|
Title from publisher's bibliographic system (viewed on 05 Oct 2015). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di bibliografia |
|
Includes bibliographical references (p. 382-420) and index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
Part I. Self-determination in post-Cold War international legal literature -- 1. The question of norm-type -- 2. Interpretation and identity -- 3. Pandemonium, interpretation and participation -- Part II. Self-determination interpreted in practice: the challenge of culture -- 4. The canon of self-determination -- 5. Developing texts -- Part III. Self-determination interpreted in practice: the challenge of gender -- 6. Women and self-determination in Europe after World War I -- 7. Women and self-determination in United Nations trust territories -- 8. Indigenous women and self-determination. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
The emergence of new states and independence movements after the Cold War has intensified the long-standing disagreement among international lawyers over the right of self-determination, especially the right of secession. Knop shifts the discussion from the articulation of the right to its interpretation. She argues that the practice of |
|
|
|
|