This article aims to inventorize, discuss and analyze the normative output of the WHO, and aims to do so not in terms of ‘binding’ versus ‘non-binding’ instruments or ‘hard’ law versus ‘soft’ law, but in terms of the epistemic authority exercised by and through the WHO. This broader focus allows for a discussion not just of treaties and resolutions, but also of the normative effect of training courses produced by the WHO, or such documents as the World Health Reports. In the background resides the idea that there is a disjuncture between the authority exercised by international organizations, and the tools lawyers have readily available to evaluate such authority: the normative gap of the title. The article enjoins lawyers broaden their repertoire, as precisely lawyers would be well-equipped to address epistemic authority.

本文旨在对世界卫生组织的规范输出进行盘点，讨论和分析，其目的不是依据“有约束力”与“不具有约束力”的文书或“硬法”与“软法”，而是世卫组织并通过世卫组织行使的认识权威。这种更广泛的关注不仅可以讨论条约和决议，还可以讨论世界卫生组织编制的培训课程或《世界卫生报告》等文件的规范效果。在此背景下，存在这样一种思想，即国际组织行使的权力与律师所拥有的评估这种权力的工具之间存在脱节：称谓的规范性空白。这篇文章禁止律师扩大其工作范围，因为恰恰律师将有足够的能力来解决认识上的权威。