Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

The evolution of international humanitarian law and the continuous dissension over the interpretation of the legal rules: an anthropological perspective

Lookup NU author(s): Dr Tanya Krupiy


Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.


The article uses Douglas's and Wildavsky’s cultural theory of risk from the field of anthropology, in order to provide a new explanation regarding what factors influenced the evolution of international humanitarian law in general, and the rules of targeting in particular. The starting point of the analysis is that the attitudes of states to risk, and the strategies states employ to manage risk influence their conduct on the international arena. Another facet of the discussion is an examination of whether the cultural theory of risk may be used to explain the motives of states and non-state actors for violating the rules of international humanitarian law. Building on the proposition that the attitudes of states to how risk should be managed may shape the content of the law, as well as whether the law is obeyed, the article additionally considers whether the disagreement between scholars, regarding how the legal rules are to be interpreted, may be explained by reference to attitudes individual scholars hold towards risk. The academic discussion regarding the legality of the employment of lethal autonomous robots on the battlefield is used as a case study to test this hypothesis.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Krupiy T

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Legal Issues Journal

Year: 2014

Volume: 2

Issue: 2

Pages: 24-45

Print publication date: 01/07/2014

Acceptance date: 01/11/2013

Publisher: United Kingdom Law & Society Association