One of the most fascinating developments in the domain of international law in the last few decades is the astonishing proliferation of non-binding legal instruments, generally referred to as soft law. The forms and origins of various nonbinding legal instruments are quite varied, but what they have in common is the promulgation of norms, commitments, or directives, explicitly avoiding the imposition of legal obligations on the relevant parties. The legal status of soft law is debated in the literature, but my concern in this essay is different: I aim to provide an account of the rationale of soft law from the perspective of the practical reasons that can rationalize such instruments. The argument is focused on analyzing the idea of authoritative advice, suggesting that when authorities advise their putative subjects, they purport to give the subject what I call presumptive reasons for action. I explain here what presumptive reasons are and what their rationale is, suggesting it as a model for the practical reasons in play when soft law operates vertically, in cases of nonbinding directives of international authorities. Horizontal soft law, that normally comes in the form of international treaties, is also explained by employing the idea of presumptive reasons, coupled with the mutual accountability relations that such agreements invariably constitute.

中文翻译：

---

软法、权威建议和非约束性协议

过去几十年国际法领域最引人入胜的发展之一是不具约束力的法律文书（通常称为软法）的惊人激增。各种不具有约束力的法律文书的形式和起源各不相同，但它们的共同点是颁布规范、承诺或指令，明确避免对相关方施加法律义务。软法的法律地位在文献中存在争议，但我在本文中的关注点有所不同：我的目的是从可以使这些工具合理化的实际理由的角度来解释软法的基本原理。该论点的重点是分析权威建议的想法，表明当权威建议他们假定的主体时，他们声称要为这个主题提供我所说的推定的行动理由。我在这里解释了推定原因是什么以及它们的基本原理是什么，并建议将其作为软法垂直运作的实际原因的模型，在国际当局的不具有约束力的指令的情况下。横向软法通常以国际条约的形式出现，也可以通过采用推定理由的概念以及此类协议总是构成的相互问责关系来解释。