Expertise in economics is something few progressive international lawyers possess. Yet this expertise is routinely applied against efforts to reimagine an international legal order with a more equitable distribution of the gains and losses of globalisation, with a visible measure of social and economic justice, and with hope for empowering the disempowered. If countries don’t sacrifice their regulatory autonomy under investment treaties, we are told that they will not access the foreign investment needed for development; if we don’t tolerate sweatshops, displacement of indigenous peoples, and environmental degradation, the growth needed to reduce poverty will not happen; if indebted, poor countries don’t repay their debt in full (despite devastating social consequences), they will never regain access to the capital markets. Austerity (often hitting the least advantaged first and hardest) is needed to push down wages, make exports competitive, restore financial market and investor confidence, and bring about a return to growth. As David Kennedy suggests, ‘[e]xpert rule mobilizes knowledge as power. The knowledge part combines common-sense assumptions about the world

中文翻译：

---

进步国际律师的经济学：一篇评论文章

经济学方面的专业知识是很少有进步的国际律师拥有的。然而，这种专业知识经常被用来反对重新构想国际法律秩序的努力，该秩序更公平地分配全球化的得失，社会和经济正义的可见措施，并希望赋予被剥夺权力的人。如果各国不牺牲投资条约规定的监管自主权，我们就会被告知，它们将无法获得发展所需的外国投资；如果我们不容忍血汗工厂、土著人民流离失所和环境退化，那么减少贫困所需的增长就不会发生；如果负债累累，穷国不能全额偿还债务（尽管造成了毁灭性的社会后果），它们将永远无法重新进入资本市场。需要采取紧缩措施（通常首先打击最弱势的群体）以压低工资、提高出口竞争力、恢复金融市场和投资者信心并恢复增长。正如大卫·肯尼迪所说，'[e] 专家规则将知识动员为力量。知识部分结合了关于世界的常识性假设