37/30 Question of the realization in all countries of economic, social and cultural rights - Report of the Secretary-General on the role of economic, social and cultural rights in building sustainable and resilient societies for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
Document Type: Final Report
Date: 2017 Dec
Session: 37th Regular Session (2018 Feb)
Agenda Item: Item2: Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and reports of the Office of the High Commissioner and the Secretary-General, Item3: Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development
GE.17-22718(E)
Human Rights Council Thirty-seventh session
26 February–23 March 2018
Agenda items 2 and 3
Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights and reports of the Office of the
High Commissioner and the Secretary-General
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil
political, economic, social and cultural rights,
including the right to development
Question of the realization in all countries of economic, social and cultural rights
Report of the Secretary-General on the role of economic, social and
cultural rights in building sustainable and resilient societies for the
implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
Summary
The present report is submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 34/4,
in which the Council requested the Secretary-General to prepare an annual report on the
question of the realization in all countries of economic, social and cultural rights, with a
special focus on the role of economic, social and cultural rights in the transformation
towards sustainable and resilient societies.
In the report the Secretary-General identifies linkages between economic, social and
cultural rights and hazards, disasters, crises and conflicts. He further discusses the concept
of resilience from a human rights perspective and outlines elements of a human rights-
based approach to building sustainable and resilient societies.
United Nations A/HRC/37/30
I. Introduction
1. The present report is submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 34/4,
in which the Council requested the Secretary-General to prepare an annual report on the
question of the realization in all countries of economic, social and cultural rights, with a
special focus on the role of economic, social and cultural rights in the transformation
towards sustainable and resilient societies.
2. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is unequivocally anchored in human
rights and has at its heart the commitment to leave no one behind and to reach the furthest
behind first. Member States have committed to reducing inequalities as a pathway towards
sustainable development. It aims to address the multidimensional causes of poverty,
inequality and discrimination, and reduce the vulnerabilities of the most marginalized
people, including women, refugees, internally displaced persons, migrants, minorities,
indigenous peoples, stateless persons and populations affected by conflict and natural
disasters.
3. Disasters undermine economic and social progress towards sustainable development
and full realization of human rights. The 2030 Agenda therefore aims to increase the
resilience of societies and ecosystems to man-made and natural hazards, shocks and
stresses; promote multisectoral, integrated approaches that harness the potential, assets and
capacities of institutions and communities to enhance human well-being, and reduce the
risks and vulnerabilities associated with natural hazards, climate change, violence, conflict,
political and social instability or economic volatility, and manage the change and
uncertainty of long-term trends. At the World Humanitarian Summit, global leaders
announced significant commitments to enhancing compliance with international human
rights and humanitarian law and to working together with all actors towards collective
outcomes that reduce need, vulnerability and risk, in support of national and local efforts, in
order to “reach the furthest behind first”.
4. There are strong links between sustainability and resilience and human rights,
including economic, social and cultural rights. Sudden onset events, such as earthquakes,
destroy lives, homes and livelihoods, and can set back the progress of development for
decades. Climate change is eroding enjoyment by many people of a broad range of human
rights, such as the right to food, water and sanitation, health and adequate housing. Other
disasters, either directly caused by or exacerbated by State actions and omissions, and
conflicts also undermine the full realization of economic, social and cultural rights.
5. Those “left furthest behind” are often the ones that bear the disproportionate impact
of such disasters. The fundamental human rights challenges of poverty, inequality and
discrimination, as well as unchecked urbanization, migration, conflicts and governance and
accountability deficits, all contribute to increased vulnerability and risks.
6. Increasing the resilience of societies, economies and the natural environment can
help countries, communities and those living in poverty to withstand shocks, embrace
uncertainty and manage risks. A human rights-based approach to building resilience is
value-based, building on the comprehensive legal framework based on the indivisibility and
interdependence of all human rights. It focuses on the rights holders and requires the
effective accountability of duty bearers.
II. Linkages between economic, social and cultural rights and crises, disasters and conflicts
A. Threat of climate change to the realization of economic, social and
cultural rights
7. Over the past decade, more than 700,000 people have lost their lives, over 1.4
million have been injured and approximately 23 million have been made homeless as a
result of disasters. Overall, more than 1.5 billion people have been affected by disasters.
The total economic loss is more than $1.3 trillion.1
8. Each year, on average 42 million life years are lost in internationally reported
disasters. That represents a serious setback to social and economic development, and to the
progressive realization of economic, social and cultural rights. Economic losses from
disasters, such as cyclones and flooding, are now estimated at between $250 billion and
$300 billion. Future annual losses from disasters are estimated at $314 billion and expected
to increase to $415 billion by 2030. 2 If the risks from disasters are not reduced and
managed, and resilience strengthened, they will represent a significant opportunity cost, as
these resources, equivalent of the gross domestic product of countries such as Denmark or
Israel, could otherwise be invested for the realization of economic, social and cultural
rights, in social protection and in health and education, and towards building resilient and
sustainable societies.
9. Climate change threatens the full enjoyment of a wide range of human rights,
including economic, social and cultural rights such as the rights to life, health, food,
housing and water (see A/HRC/31/52 paras. 23–27). Climate change will exacerbate the
challenges of improving access to safe drinking water — as of 2015, 2.1 billion people
lacked safely managed drinking water services.3 Climate change is also likely to reduce the
availability of water in most dry subtropical regions and to increase the occurrence of
droughts, severely affecting the livelihoods and the right to food of populations living in
such areas. More broadly, climate change will jeopardize food security and therefore the
sustainable and progressive realization of the right to food. Climate change without
adaptation will have a negative impact on the production of major crops, such as wheat, rice
and maize, in both tropical and temperate regions, and is already impairing the ability of
some communities to feed themselves.4
10. Climate change is increasingly becoming one of the major causes of migration.
Although migration is usually triggered by a variety of complex factors, climate change and
associated impact on the livelihood has driven millions of people to move, not of their own
free will, but out of the need to escape conditions in which they cannot meet their basic
human rights. At a panel discussion on human rights, climate change, migrants and persons
displaced across international borders, convened by the Human Rights Council on 6
October 2017, pursuant to Council resolution 35/20, participants called for preventive
measures, such as improved early warning systems, disaster risk reduction and resilience-
building efforts, sustainable development and international cooperation, including on
transboundary water, in order to reduce negative impacts on human rights resulting from
climate change.5
B. Emerging risks of violence and conflict
11. The intensifying competition over dwindling natural resources, water, land and other
elements that are crucial for an adequate standard of living and the denial of economic and
social rights are increasingly at the centre of violence and social unrest. Violations of
economic, social and cultural rights are closely linked to and often at the root of the
emergence of violence, social unrest and conflict (E/2016/58). Financial and economic
crises, often accompanied by rigid austerity measures, have also undermined economic,
social and cultural rights and resulted in protests and social unrest.
1 United Nations Development Programme, Strengthening Disaster Risk Governance (2015).
2 United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk
Reduction (2015).
3 World Health Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund, Progress on Drinking Water,
Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines.
4 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and
Vulnerability, part A, ch. 7.
5 See A/HRC/37/35 (forthcoming).
12. Scarcity of water is a case in point. Water is a fundamental human right, but 2.1
billion people still lack access to safe drinking water. Most of them live in fragile, often
violent regions of the world where water is a matter of life and death.6 Shortage of water
has been an essential factor leading to conflict, violence and social unrest in many cases.
For example, researchers have found that the Syrian conflict that began in 2011, although
having its roots in issues including long-standing political, religious and social ideological
disputes, was exacerbated by severe water shortages in the region resulting from multi-year
droughts since the mid-2000s. That contributed to the displacement of large populations
from rural to urban centres, resulted in food insecurity for more than 1 million people,
increased unemployment, and contributed to political instability, violence and social
unrest.7
13. In several countries and regions in Africa, there have been disputes and conflicts
over the control of water sources and land for pasture and farming.8 In Latin America, poor
or inequitable management of water services has also caused social unrest (see E/2016/58,
paras. 21–22). Conflicts have also arisen from the overexploitation of groundwater for
agribusinesses or industrial purposes, depriving local communities and farmers of sufficient
and reliable water access. In 2015, small farmers in the town of Ocucaje in the Ica Valley,
Peru, clashed with workers laying the pipes that would pump water from three wells and
channel it to a farm eight miles away that produces table grapes for export. As a result of
pumping over the last two decades by companies in the Ica Valley, groundwater levels have
fallen throughout much of the area. The town is already struggling with serious water
shortages and villagers are concerned that the proposed pumping would further threaten
water supplies.9
14. Unchecked urbanization poses another risk to the enjoyment of economic, social and
cultural rights. Over the last decades, the world has experienced an unprecedented shift of
its population from rural to urban areas. Today, more than half the world’s population live
in cities and peri-urban areas. In many parts of the world, rapid rural to urban migration is
motivated by the prospect of greater employment opportunities and the hope of a better life
in cities. However, when such migration happens in an unplanned and unprepared manner,
and especially in the context of widespread poverty, it exacerbates many of the risks and
challenges already faced by cities and leads to further deterioration in the enjoyment of
human rights. The result is sprawling slums and informal settlements that are often built in
precarious and unsafe areas prone to degradation and natural disasters and a lack or
inadequate provision of basic services, including education, health and water and sanitation.
15. That fuels social instability, urban violence and social unrest. Unemployment among
youth and dissatisfaction over future prospects are linked with social unrest and often
associated with extremism (see E/2016/58, para. 14). Widening inequality, competition
over scarce resources such as land, impunity and weak city governance increase the risk of
violence and potential breakdowns in law and order.
16. Rapid urbanization inevitably results in increased demand for housing units and had
led to unregulated real estate and land speculation, predatory mortgage lending and
commodification of housing. The shortage of affordable housing not only contributes to
social exclusion, it also threatens to destabilize the wider economy if housing price
increases fuel property bubbles, coupled with mortgage crises and deregulated global flows
of capital, as was seen in the 2007 mortgage crises in many countries, which had
devastating effects on low-income households and households living in poverty (see
A/71/310, para. 22).
6 See Global High-level Panel on Water and Peace, A Matter of Survival (2017), pp. 11–14.
7 See Peter H. Gleick, “Water, drought, climate change, and conflict in Syria”, Weather, Climate, and
Society, vol. 6, No. 3 (July 2014).
8 See the Pacific Institute database on water conflict for more examples from around the world,
available from http://worldwater.org/water-conflict/.
9 See Desert Sun, “The costs of Peru’s farming boom: thriving agribusiness, declining aquifers and
conflicts over water”, available at www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2015/12/10/costs-
perus-farming-boom/76605530/.
III. Understanding resilience from a human rights perspective
A. International agreements related to resilience
17. The concept of resilience features prominently in the Sustainable Development
Goals and recent policy frameworks on climate change and humanitarian actions. The
present section explores how the human rights framework can contribute to that debate.
18. In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change defined resilience as “the
ability of a social or ecological system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same
basic structure and ways of functioning, the capacity for self-organization, and the capacity
to adapt to stress and change”.10 That understanding of resilience is anchored in the context
of climate change adaptation focused on social or ecological systems rather than on people
themselves.
19. In 2009, the United Nations International Office for Disaster Reduction defined the
term as: “The ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist,
absorb, accommodate, adapt to, transform and recover from the effects of a hazard in a
timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its
essential basic structures and functions through risk management”.11
20. The intergovernmental discussions and agreements on sustainable development,
environmental and climate change, disaster risk reduction and humanitarian assistance have
been built on the two definitions of resilience referred to above. However, there is a need
for a much wider and more coherent understanding of what resilience is and the measures
needed to strengthen resilience towards building sustainable societies and the full
realization of all human rights.
1. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
21. Resilience is explicitly mentioned in two goals and eight targets of the Sustainable
Development Goals related to poverty, food security, infrastructure and human settlements,
agricultural production, climate-related hazards and natural disasters and marine and coastal
ecosystems. That represents a marked shift from the 2000 Millennium Declaration and the
Millennium Development Goals, which were void of any reference to resilience or related
concepts.
22. Resilience features prominently in the preamble to resolution 70/1, in which
Member States committed “to take the bold and transformative steps … to shift the world
on to a sustainable and resilient path”, pledged that no one would be left behind, and set a
vision for a “world where human habitats are safe, resilient and sustainable”. Goal 1 on
ending poverty includes a target to build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable
situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and
other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters (target 1.5). Goal 2 on
ending hunger includes a target to ensure sustainable food production systems and
implement resilient agricultural production (target 2.4). Goal 9 on infrastructure and
sustainable industrialization includes targets to develop and facilitate sustainable and
resilient infrastructure (targets 9.1 and 9.a). Goal 11 on cities and human settlements
includes targets to increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and
implementing integrated policies and plans towards resilience to disasters (target 11.b) and
support least developed countries in building sustainable and resilient buildings (target
11.c).
10 See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, fourth assessment report. Climate Change 2007:
Synthesis Report, annex II.
11 See United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, “2009 UNISDR terminology on disaster risk
reduction”.
2. Paris Agreement on Climate Change
23. The concept of resilience has gained increased prominence in the intergovernmental
discussions on climate change since 2010. The Paris Agreement on Climate Change,
adopted in 2015 at the twenty-first annual Conference of the Parties to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, refers to resilience in several areas related to
building adaptive capacity and reducing vulnerabilities to the adverse effects of climate
change. For example, article 7 stipulates that “Parties hereby establish the global goal on
adaptation of enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing
vulnerability to climate change”.
3. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030
24. Building on the achievements and lessons from the Hyogo Framework for Action
2005–2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters, at the World
Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, held in Sendai, Japan, in March 2015, Member
States adopted the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. As in its
predecessor, the concept of resilience remains a central theme in the Sendai Framework. In
the preamble, Member States committed to addressing disaster reduction and the building
of resilience to disasters with a renewed sense of urgency within the context of sustainable
development and poverty eradication, to integrating both disaster risk reduction and the
building of resilience into policies, plans, programmes and budgets at all levels and to
considering both within relevant frameworks. Among its global targets and priorities for
action, the Sendai Framework includes a commitment to substantially reducing disaster
damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services, among them health and
educational facilities, including developing their resilience by 2030.
4. World Humanitarian Summit
25. The World Humanitarian Summit was held in Istanbul on 23–24 May 2016 at the
initiative of the Secretary-General, in order to reinvigorate a commitment to humanity and
to initiate a set of concrete actions and commitments aimed at enabling countries and
communities to better prepare for and respond to crises and be resilient to shocks. As stated
in the Chair’s summary, the Summit was a unique opportunity for the global community to
take responsibility to place people first: to secure their safety, to uphold their dignity and to
provide opportunity for a better future. The concept of resilience permeated the Agenda for
Humanity presented by the Secretary-General to the Summit (A/70/709, annex) and
throughout the extensive consultations in the lead-up to the Summit. It was included in
three of the five core responsibilities developed in the agenda: core responsibility 3 on
leaving no one behind focuses on reducing the vulnerability and increasing the self-reliance
of refugees and internally displaced persons; core responsibility 4 on changing people’s
lives from delivering aid to ending need emphasizes the importance of building
community-level resilience to respond to natural disasters and the impacts of climate
change; and core responsibility 5 on investing in humanity underscores the need to
strengthen preparedness and economic resilience and invest in basic infrastructure such as
education and health systems.
B. International human rights framework
26. Human rights are universal legal guarantees protecting individuals and groups
against actions and omissions that interfere with fundamental freedoms, entitlements and
human dignity. As universal and inalienable rights, human rights are applicable everywhere
and under any circumstances, including in times of crisis and disaster. All States have
positive human rights obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights.
27. International human rights treaties do not include specific reference to resilience as
such. Limited references to natural disasters can be found in article 11 of the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which stipulates that States parties should take all
necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in
situations of risk, including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies and the
occurrence of natural disasters. Article 23 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare
of the Child stipulates that States should take all appropriate measures to ensure that
internally displaced children, including those displaced through natural disaster, receive
appropriate protection and humanitarian assistance and article 25.2 states that they should
take all necessary measures to trace and reunite children with their parents or relatives,
including where separation took place due to natural disasters. The African Union
Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa also
recognizes the obligations of States parties to prevent internal displacement, and protect and
provide assistance to internally displaced persons (art. 2). It also requires States parties to
promote self-reliance and sustainable livelihoods amongst internally displaced persons (art.
3 (1) (k)).
28. Notwithstanding the lack of specific references in human rights law, disaster risk
reduction and mitigation of the negative impacts of climate change and other crises have
received increased attention by human rights mechanisms in recent years. A significant
body of work exists under the treaty bodies, including the Committee on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights, and under the special procedures mandates relating to the environment,
internally displaced persons, the right to adequate housing, the right to water and sanitation
and the human rights of indigenous peoples. Under the universal periodic review
mechanism, several recent recommendations have been put forward calling on States to
adopt a human rights-based approach in disaster prevention and emergency responses to
build national capacity and resilience to natural disasters (see A/HRC/34/14, para.
115.166); develop a national resilience strategy for natural disasters in order to guarantee
the economic and social rights of the population (see A/HRC/32/6, para. 128.157); and
continue efforts on democracy, good governance, legislative reform and capacity-building
for national human rights mechanisms, with more focus on employment for youth,
education, health care, social welfare and preparedness and resilience in response to climate
change (see A/HRC/26/9, para. 99.109).
C. State obligations under human rights law
29. The realization of human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights,
implies specific obligations and responsibilities for all actors involved. Under international
human rights law, the primary responsibility rests with States as duty bearers. The
obligation to respect means that States must refrain from interfering with or curtailing the
enjoyment of human rights. The obligation to protect requires States to protect individuals
and groups against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil entails States undertaking
positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.
30. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provides that
States are obligated to work progressively to fully realize those rights for everyone. The
principle of progressive realization does not mean that the implementation of Covenant
rights can be indefinitely postponed; rather, States must take steps and to the maximum of
available resources and by all appropriate means work progressively towards the full
realization of those rights for everyone. States also have obligations of an immediate nature,
including the obligation to eliminate discrimination, to meet minimum essential levels of
each of the rights and to ensure non-retrogression.
31. Those principles imply that, even in the event of disaster or crisis, States are
obligated to ensure that the population affected has access to the basic services and
resources necessary, without discrimination. Moreover, they must ensure that people’s
enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights do not deteriorate, by taking preventative
steps in anticipation of disasters and the foreseeable adverse effects of climate change.
Human rights obligations therefore apply not only to direct protection measures, but also to
the mitigation and adaptation measures that are aimed at protecting people’s enjoyment of
these rights.
32. States have several obligations to protect against environmental harm that impairs
the enjoyment of human rights (A/HRC/25/53). Such obligations include procedural and
substantive ones as well as those in relation to vulnerable groups. Procedural obligations
require States to (a) assess environmental impacts and make environmental information
public; (b) facilitate the meaningful participation of rights holders in environmental
decision-making; and (c) provide access to remedies where those rights are violated.
Substantive obligations, which may vary from one right to another, generally require States
to adopt legal and institutional frameworks that protect against environmental harm that
interferes with the enjoyment of human rights, including harm caused by private actors.
Additionally, in accordance with the human rights principle of equality and non-
discrimination, States may have additional obligations to populations that are particularly
vulnerable to environmental harm.
33. Under international human rights treaties, States are clearly obligated to mitigate the
risks of hazards and disasters, including those arising from the impacts of climate change.
Those obligations also extend to protection against negative impacts on human rights from
activities of non-State actors. Principle 1 of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human
Rights stipulates that States must protect against human rights abuse within their territory
and/or jurisdiction by third parties, including business enterprises. That requires taking
appropriate steps to prevent, investigate, punish and redress such abuse through effective
policies, legislation, regulations and adjudication (see A/HRC/17/31, annex).
34. In its general comment No. 24 (2017) on State obligations under the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the context of business activities, the
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights indicated that:
“States parties should also consider the use of administrative sanctions to discourage
conduct by business entities that leads, or may lead, to violations of the rights under
the Covenant. For instance, in their public procurement regimes, States could deny
the awarding of public contracts to companies that have not provided information on
the social or environmental impacts of their activities or that have not put in place
measures to ensure that they act with due diligence to avoid or mitigate any negative
impacts on the rights under the Covenant.”
35. In recent years, the jurisprudence of regional human rights mechanisms has also
helped to clarify the obligations of States with regard to prevention and mitigation, as well
as remedies. An illustrative example can be found from the European Court of Human
Rights in the case of Budayeva and others v. Russia, in which it considered whether and
when deaths caused by a man-made or natural disaster can amount to a human rights
violation by the State.
36. In July 2000, a mudslide triggered by the Gerhozhansu river swept through Tyrnauz,
a town in the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria in the north Caucasus, Russian Federation,
killing eight people and destroying many buildings. The mud retention dams protecting
Tyrnauz had been damaged by heavy mudslides in the previous year, but had never been
repaired, as the State meteorological institute had advised. Shortly before the incident took
place, the institute had warned the local Ministry for Disaster Relief about the imminent
danger, given the recent heavy rainfall, and had requested the local authorities to take the
necessary measures and to prepare to issue an emergency warning if necessary. The
authorities failed to act on those recommendations. The day before the disaster, when a
smaller mudflow hit the town and flooded some residential areas, the local authorities
ordered the evacuation of the affected parts of the town. However, they did not prevent
evacuees from returning to their homes on the following day when the mud level had
subsided.
37. Claims for compensation made by the relatives of the victims were rejected by
domestic courts on the ground that the victims died of natural causes that could not have
been foreseen or prevented by the State. The appeal was then brought to the European
Court of Human Rights, which found that the State was in violation of its duty to protect
life, since it had not acted on the requests for the clear, preventive measures necessary to
protect its population.
38. The ruling by the European Court recognized the State obligation to protect life
against the consequences of disasters by reaffirming that the right to life “does not solely
concern deaths resulting from the use of force by agents of the State but also … lays down
a positive obligation on States to take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those
within their jurisdiction”. The Court further stressed that “this positive obligation entails
above all a primary duty on the State to put in place a legislative and administrative
framework designed to provide effective deterrence against threats to the right to life”.12
While States have considerable flexibility in implementing this obligation in terms of
policy and operational options, the Court clarified the liability of a State for deaths if they
have occurred because the authorities neglected their duty to take preventive measures
when a natural hazard had been clearly identifiable and effective means to mitigate the risk
were available to them.
IV. Human rights-based approach to building sustainable and resilient societies
39. Many disasters are also the result of unsustainable development planning and
activities. Natural hazards, such as floods, earthquakes and storms, become disasters owing
to human and societal factors which can be addressed by decisive policies, actions and
active participation.13 The human rights framework offers guidance for strengthening the
resilience and protection of people at risk from disasters and crises.
A. Putting people at the centre
40. Human rights belong to people; the human person is the central subject of the
development process as both the main participant and beneficiary of development, as
proclaimed in the Declaration on the Right to Development. From a human rights
perspective, working towards resilient and sustainable societies requires a focus on people,
moving beyond the traditional focus on social and ecological systems to the need for
individuals to be resilient. A human rights-based approach views affected persons as rights
holders and not just objects or beneficiaries of development and humanitarian activities.
That contributes to better awareness and clarity in terms of relevant standards and
entitlements under national and international laws, such as, for example, the right to
adequate housing, water and sanitation and health for those living in informal settlements.
Such awareness will enable them to assess their own situation, identify their claims and
better negotiate with the authorities, which will strengthen the overall resilience capacity of
people and communities to prepare, adapt and cope with crises.
41. Moreover, human rights law provides certain procedural rights that empower people
to improve resilience. The right to freedom of expression provided under the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (art. 19) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (art. 19) includes the freedom “to seek, receive and impart information”. The right to
information is essential for disaster preparedness and protection from environmental harm,
as well as for the exercise of other rights. Human rights bodies have repeatedly emphasized
the importance of this right in the context of environmental impacts on human rights. For
example, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its general comment
No. 15 (2002) on the right to water, stated that individuals should be given full and equal
access to information concerning water and the environment (para. 48).
42. The right to public participation in decision-making is a core human rights principle
and recognized under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (art. 21) and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art. 25). Article 6 (a) of the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change requires its parties to promote and
facilitate public participation and in its resolution 67/210, the General Assembly recognized
“the need to engage a broad range of stakeholders at the global, regional, national and local
levels, including national, subnational and local governments, private businesses and civil
society, and including youth and persons with disabilities, and that gender equality and the
effective participation of women and indigenous peoples are important for effective action
12 Budayeva and others v. Russia, judgment of 20 March 2008, paras. 128–129.
13 See Chengdu Declaration for Action from the Second World Cities Scientific Development Forum
and the First Mayors’ Summit on Disaster Risk Reduction, 11–13 August 2011.
on all aspects of climate change”. In the context of disaster risk reduction, the Sendai
Framework encourages States to assign, as appropriate, clear roles and tasks to community
representatives within disaster risk management institutions and processes and decision-
making through relevant legal frameworks, and undertake comprehensive public and
community consultations during the development of such laws and regulations to support
their implementation (para. 27 (f)).
43. Active, free and meaningful participation of rights holders, especially those who are
marginalized and discriminated against, can foster critical consciousness and active civic
engagement for more informed decision-making. Experience shows that people, when
empowered to take part in decisions that affect them, are more likely to take their lives into
their own hands and are thus more resilient to shocks.
B. Addressing the root causes of vulnerabilities
44. Human rights can help to gain a deeper understanding of the root causes of
vulnerabilities and the requirements of resilience-building. The promise of the 2030
Agenda to leave no one behind not only entails reaching the poorest and the most
vulnerable, but also seeks to address discrimination and growing inequality within and
between countries and their root causes. Human rights standards, including the principles of
participation, accountability, equality and non-discrimination, can help to guide such
efforts.
45. Climate hazards and inequalities are intimately linked.14 Climate hazards aggravate
the pre-existing inequalities that are at the root of poverty, marginalization and exclusion.
Because of structural inequalities, groups and communities that are marginalized and
discriminated against are more likely to be exposed to climate hazards and less likely to
have adequate resources and capacity for coping and recovery.
46. Exposure to climate and environmental hazards is often determined by where people
live and work, which in turn is often determined by the socioeconomic status of those
people and groups. Low-income groups and those discriminated against on the basis of
race, ethnicity and other grounds, tend to live in marginal areas with poor infrastructure,
often in precarious environments with higher levels of exposure to climate hazards and
other extremities. Even when the level of exposure is the same, those groups are more
susceptible to damage because they lack the assets and resources to cope, adapt and
recover, as well as suffering from poor health, and a lack of education and knowledge.
47. Ensuring the human rights principle of equality and non-discrimination is therefore
critical to reducing vulnerability and building resilience, and is a cornerstone of a human
rights-based approach. The principles of equality and non-discrimination are enshrined in
all core human rights treaties adopted since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in
which article 2 states that everyone is entitled to all rights and freedoms set forth in the
Declaration, without distinctions of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.15
48. The United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination recently
adopted a system-wide framework to put the imperatives of addressing inequality and
discrimination at the heart of the support of the system for the implementation of the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development.16 In the framework, the need to ensure progress for
14 See, for example, World Economic and Social Survey 2016. Climate Change Resilience: an
Opportunity for Reducing Inequalities (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.16.II.C.1), ch. II.
15 See also, for example, arts. 2 (2) and 3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights; arts. 2 (1) and 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; arts. 1, 2
and 3 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; arts. 1
and 2 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; art. 2
(1) and (2) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child; and art. 1 of the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities.
16 See United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination, “Leaving no one behind:
equality and non-discrimination at the heart of sustainable development” (2017).
all population groups through supporting legal, policy, institutional and other measures
aimed at promoting equality and non-discrimination in accordance with international
human rights is emphasized. That will require, inter alia, (a) disaggregating data to identify
who is being excluded or discriminated against, how and why, and who is experiencing
multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and inequality; (b) identifying patterns of
discrimination in law, policies and practices, and addressing entrenched structural barriers
and unequal power relations that generate and perpetuate inequality over generations; and
(c) supporting the free, active and meaningful participation of all stakeholders, particularly
the most marginalized, in the implementation of those policy and other measures so as to
ensure accountability, recourse and remedies to all.
C. Accountability and remedies
49. The international human rights framework provides guidance for appropriate action
by States in building resilience and working towards sustainable societies. In the area of
disaster risk reduction, existing human rights obligations and standards and jurisprudence,
such as the Budayeva case, point to a set of actions that the relevant authorities must take,
including (a) enacting and implementing laws dealing with all relevant aspects of disaster
risk mitigation and setting up the necessary mechanisms and procedures; (b) taking the
necessary administrative measures, including supervising potentially dangerous situations;
(c) informing the population about possible dangers and risks; (d) evacuating potentially
affected populations; (e) conducting criminal investigations and prosecuting those
responsible for neglecting their duties in the case of deaths caused by a disaster; (f)
compensating the surviving relatives of victims killed as a consequence of those duties
being neglected.17
50. A particularly useful feature of a human rights-based approach is the emphasis on
effective remedies for violations of human rights. The Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, in its general comment No. 7 (1997) on forced evictions, stated that “legal
remedies or procedures should be provided to those who are affected by eviction orders”
and that “all the individuals concerned have a right to adequate compensation for any
property, both personal and real, which is affected”. The Committee further noted in its
general comment No. 15 (2002) on the right to water, that “any persons or groups who have
been denied their right to water should have access to effective judicial or other appropriate
remedies at both national and international levels” and “all victims of violations of the right
to water should be entitled to adequate reparation, including restitution, compensation,
satisfaction or guarantees of non-repetition”. Recognizing the important role of national
human rights institutions in strengthening accountability and providing remedies, the
Committee also noted that they should be permitted to address violations of the right to
water. Special procedures mandate holders, including those on the right to adequate
housing, on the right to education, on the rights of internally displaced persons and on
hazardous substances and wastes, and other United Nations mechanisms have also
emphasized the importance of access to remedies within the scope of their mandates and
issued guidelines which provide further guidance.18
17 See Walter Kälin and Claudine Haenni Dale, “Disaster risk mitigation — why human rights matter”,
Forced Migration Review, issue No. 31 (October 2008).
18 See for example: the basic principles and guidelines on development-based evictions and
displacement issued by the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an
adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context (A/HRC/4/18,
annex) and the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims
of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International
Humanitarian Law (General Assembly resolution 60/147, annex).
D. Integrating economic, social and cultural rights in early warning and
risk analysis
51. There is increasing evidence that violations of economic, social and cultural rights
are causes, consequences and often even predictors of an escalation in human rights
violations, violence and conflict. Despite the obvious connection between economic, social
and cultural rights and social unrest, existing early warning mechanisms tend to overlook
those linkages.
52. In his report to the Economic and Social Council on early warning and economic,
social and cultural rights (E/2016/58), the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights illustrated the links between economic, social and cultural rights and violence, social
unrest and conflict through concrete cases from across the globe. He further highlighted the
crucial elements of a human rights analysis that should inform early warning and conflict
prevention efforts in the United Nations system and beyond.
53. While no single universal model can predict with certainty where and when unrest
and conflict will erupt in the absence of preventive measures, some core elements regarding
economic, social and cultural rights could effectively inform early warning analysis and
preventative efforts. Some risk factors are considered cross-cutting and apply to any
situation. They include severe inequality, lack of access to effective grievance mechanisms,
lack of meaningful consultation, lack of democratic space for an active civil society and
lack of media independence. Other risk factors are thematic and specific to certain contexts.
They include unequal access to natural resources, in particular land, degradation in social
services and unemployment.
54. For each of those risk factors, corresponding human rights indicators (structural,
process and outcome) could be developed to inform an early warning analysis. For
example, in relation to the cross-cutting risk factor for civil society space, the
criminalization of the activity of human rights defenders could well prepare the ground for
violence against them, possibly leading to social unrest. A useful indicator for such a risk
factor would be the number of verified cases of the killing, kidnapping, enforced
disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture of journalists, associated media personnel,
trade unionists and human rights advocates in the previous 12 months.19
55. Another example is the thematic risk factor for unequal access, control and
ownership over land and natural resources, and the failure to distribute fairly the benefits
deriving from investment or development projects, which have in many situations led to
violence, social unrest and conflict. Certain structural indicators could help assess the
existence of relevant legislation guaranteeing the rights to social security, health and
education. Process indicators could reveal the proportion of the budget allocated to health,
education and social security, while outcome indicators could provide information on the
coverage of social security and the number of persons entitled to benefits compared to those
in need, and whether particular groups are affected. Outcome indicators could also
comprise unemployment rates, including long-term unemployment (one year or more), in
the target population group and education level.
V. Conclusions and recommendations
56. Disasters, crises and conflicts, including those induced by climate change, pose
a significant threat to progress towards sustainable development and the realization of
all human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights. The present report
has shown that natural hazards are not disasters in and of themselves. They become
disasters depending on the multiple and complex interplay between the exposure,
vulnerability and resilience of individuals and communities. Economic, social and
cultural rights and other relevant human rights, such as the right to life, the right to
19 More information on human rights indicators can be found at
www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/HRIndicatorsIndex.aspx.
public participation and the right to information, contribute to efforts towards
building resilient and sustainable societies because of the close interlinkages that exist
between those rights and the impact and root causes of such events. The international
human rights framework offers normative standards and guidance for States and
others to take preventive action to reduce exposure and vulnerability and to enhance
resilience, as well as to provide effective mitigation.
57. A number of actions that need to be taken from a human rights perspective in
building the resilience of people and communities towards sustainable development,
have been identified in the present report, inter alia:
(a) To respect, protect and fulfil economic, social and cultural rights and
other relevant human rights at all times, which serves to strengthen the resilience of
people and communities in times of disasters and crises;
(b) To gain a broader understanding of resilience, not limited to natural or
scientific interpretations, but encompassing the full range of human rights, in order to
develop measures to address the complex interplay of cultural, economic,
environmental, political and social factors that are at the root of disasters and crises;
(c) To empower people affected by disasters and crises, so that they can
effectively participate and exercise their rights in planning and recovery processes;
(d) To address inequality and discrimination, which is critical in reaching
those who are left furthest behind first, who are typically most at risk and
disproportionally affected by disasters and crises. To disaggregate data to identify
who is being excluded or discriminated against, determine the root causes of
inequality and discrimination, address unequal power relations and enhance the
effective participation of people in decision-making processes that affect their lives, as
essential elements of a human rights-based approach;
(e) To fully integrate human rights in developing effective measures for
prevention, adaptation, mitigation and recovery, and be guided by the human rights
framework, which clarifies the obligations of States and the responsibilities of other
actors and helps to determine the content of their actions and the scope for
international cooperation and assistance;
(f) To ensure the provision of remedy in cases where rights are violated, in
accordance with international human rights law and strengthen the critical role
national human rights institutions and regional and international human rights
mechanisms play in monitoring violations of human rights.
(g) To fully integrate human rights and particularly economic, social and
cultural rights into early warning and prevention efforts. Despite the inextricable
linkages between economic, social and cultural rights and sustainable development,
disasters, crises and conflicts, more efforts towards full integration of those rights into
existing frameworks on disaster risk reduction and conflict prevention are needed;
(h) To honour and strengthen the climate change mitigation and adaptation
commitments made by States under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and
effectively implement the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.