DOI: https://doi.org/10.46502/issn.1856-7576/2025.19.01.8
Eduweb, 2025, enero-marzo, v.19, n.1. ISSN: 1856-7576
Cómo citar:
Hotsuliak, Y., Hartman, M., Batan, Y., Hryb, A., & Baadzhy, N. (2025). Generations of human rights and their implementation in modern legal systems: modern scientific research and implications for teaching. Revista Eduweb, 19(1), 120-133. https://doi.org/10.46502/issn.1856-7576/2025.19.01.8
Generaciones de derechos humanos y su implementación en los sistemas jurídicos modernos: investigación científica moderna e implicaciones para la enseñanza
Yurii Hotsuliak
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6765-4592
Doctor of Law, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Theory, History of State and Law and Philosophy of Law of Vasyl Stus Donetsk National University, Vinnytsia, Ukraine.
Mariana Hartman
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3894-1589
Docent, Candidate of law sciences, Department of theory and history of state and law, Uzhhorod national university, faculty of Law, Uzhhorod, Ukraine.
Yurii Batan
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4924-2054
Associate Professor at Constitutional Law Department, National University "Odesa Law Academy", Odessa, Ukraine.
Anna Hryb
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8464-9821
Associate Professor of the Department of International and European Law, National University “Odesa Law Academy", Odessa, Ukraine.
Nataliia Baadzhy
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9889-4879
Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of International Law and Comparative Law, International Humanities University, Odessa, Ukraine.
Recibido: 19/01/25
Aceptado: 28/03/25
Abstract
This article examines the development of the concept of human rights generations and their implementation in modern legal systems. In response to global challenges such as digitalization, climate change, and the rights of indigenous peoples, the study highlights the need to reassess the traditional three-generation classification proposed by Karel Vasak. Using legal policy analysis, comparative analysis, and empirical methods, the research explores how civil, political, economic, social, cultural, collective, and emerging rights—such as digital and bioethical rights—are addressed within international and national legal frameworks. Special attention is given to the indivisibility of rights and the growing relevance of a potential fourth generation of rights. Additionally, the article analyzes the teaching of this subject in law faculties worldwide, emphasizing interdisciplinary approaches, technological tools, and experiential learning through virtual simulations and case analysis. The findings suggest that existing legal mechanisms must adapt to contemporary realities by integrating new rights categories and ensuring more effective enforcement. The article concludes by recommending legal and educational reforms aimed at improving the protection of human rights and promoting sustainable development and social justice in an increasingly interconnected and complex global context.
Keywords: teaching, generations of rights, social justice, sustainable development, legal mechanisms, civil society.
Resumen
Este artículo analiza el desarrollo del concepto de generaciones de derechos humanos y su implementación en los sistemas jurídicos modernos. Frente a desafíos globales como la digitalización, el cambio climático y los derechos de los pueblos indígenas, se plantea la necesidad de revisar la clasificación tradicional de tres generaciones propuesta por Karel Vasak. A través del análisis de políticas jurídicas, métodos comparativos e investigación empírica, el estudio examina cómo se abordan los derechos civiles, políticos, económicos, sociales, culturales, colectivos y emergentes—como los derechos digitales y bioéticos—en los marcos jurídicos internacionales y nacionales. Se presta especial atención a la indivisibilidad de los derechos y a la creciente importancia de una posible cuarta generación. Además, se analiza la enseñanza de este tema en las facultades de Derecho, destacando enfoques interdisciplinarios, el uso de herramientas tecnológicas y metodologías activas como las simulaciones virtuales y el análisis de casos. Los resultados indican que los mecanismos legales actuales deben adaptarse a las nuevas realidades mediante la integración de nuevas categorías de derechos y el fortalecimiento de su aplicación. Se concluye con recomendaciones orientadas a reformar marcos jurídicos y educativos para mejorar la protección de los derechos humanos y promover el desarrollo sostenible y la justicia social.
Palabras clave: enseñanza, generaciones de derechos, justicia social, desarrollo sostenible, mecanismos legales, sociedad civil.
Introduction
The issue of human rights generations remains one of the key topics in modern legal science, as it reflects the evolution of approaches to ensuring fundamental rights and freedoms amid global transformations. The concept of three generations of rights, proposed by Karel Vasak in 1979 (EIFEC, 2024), has served as the foundation for numerous legal studies. However, contemporary realities necessitate a reassessment of this traditional classification and the integration of new categories of rights. One of the primary challenges remains the need to ensure the indivisibility of human rights, as confirmed by international documents and analytical studies.
According to the analytical report At a Glance (European Parliament, 2018), the issue of the indivisibility of human rights is one of the key concerns in the context of unifying the two main international covenants: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. Despite their shared principles, the implementation of these rights within national legal systems remains uneven, creating barriers to their effective enforcement. Similarly, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2023) emphasizes that economic, social, and cultural rights are often perceived as less significant compared to civil and political rights, complicating their full realization.
Modern international discussions highlight the necessity of a comprehensive approach to human rights. EU Priorities for UN Human Rights Fora in 2025 (European Union, 2025) states that the European Union actively promotes the strengthening of human rights protection on a global scale, particularly by improving mechanisms for their implementation and monitoring. At the same time, the United Nations Human Rights Appeal 2025 (Office of high commissioner, 2025) underscores the growing importance of collective rights in response to global challenges such as climate change, migration, and digital transformation.
Another important aspect is the interrelation between human rights and business. According to Top Ten Business and Human Rights Issues in 2025 (IHRB, 2024), corporate responsibility, the ethical use of technology, and the enforcement of social standards are becoming an integral part of modern legal discourse. This demonstrates the need to adapt legal systems to new realities and to integrate the fourth generation of rights, which includes digital, environmental, and bioethical aspects.
The object of this study is the human rights system, its classification by generations, and the mechanisms for implementation in modern legal systems as well as the teaching process of the subject "Generations of Human Rights and Their Implementation in Modern Legal Systems" in law faculties worldwide, focusing on its unique features, methodologies, and challenges. The subject of the study is the legal regulation, implementation, and protection of different generations of human rights in international and national law, their interconnection, development trends, and contemporary challenges.
The research objectives are as follows:
One of the main research problems is the lack of a unified doctrinal position on the number and content of human rights generations. Despite the widely accepted concept of three generations, contemporary challenges related to technological development, globalization, and environmental issues necessitate a reconsideration of the traditional approach. The relationship between civil and political rights and socio-economic guarantees remains a subject of debate. Additionally, there is a gap between states' international human rights obligations and their actual implementation.
Thus, studying human rights generations in modern legal systems requires a comprehensive analysis that considers the concept of rights indivisibility, international trends, and emerging challenges. In this context, an essential task is to examine the mechanisms for implementing all generations of rights and to explore ways to ensure their effective protection in today's world.
Theoretical Framework or Literature Review
The analysis of scientific works allows for an assessment of modern approaches to this concept, its rethinking, and its impact on national and international legal systems (e.g. Ivankiv (2019), Reid (2019), Cornescu (2009), etc.).
Thus, in his work, Batan (2018) examines the issue of collective rights as a component of the third generation of human rights. The author emphasizes that collective rights, such as the right to development and environmental rights, are closely linked to individual rights but require different implementation mechanisms. Special attention is given to the legal recognition of these rights in the constitutional law of various countries. The study highlights the importance of expanding legal protection for collective rights and their implementation in national legislation.
Bratko (2017) focuses on analyzing the interconnection between human rights and the concept of sustainable development. The author examines international and European legal mechanisms for ensuring sustainable development, emphasizing the role of human rights as a tool for achieving a balance between social, economic, and environmental interests. In our opinion, the study confirms that the concept of third-generation human rights includes not only individual rights but also global issues of sustainable development and environmental security.
Magnovsky, Shevchuk, & Berezovenko (2024) explore the concept of humanity's rights, emphasizing their connection with the collective rights of the third generation. The authors point out that globalization and environmental challenges necessitate the expansion of legal protection at the level of all humanity and that modern threats, such as climate change and technological risks, require adaptation of existing legal mechanisms. Their research broadens the traditional concept of human rights, stressing the need to recognize humanity’s rights as a separate category.
At the same time, Tyryna (2011) criticizes the traditional three-generational model, pointing out its shortcomings in modern conditions. She proposes alternative approaches to the classification of human rights that consider new challenges, particularly the development of digital rights and artificial intelligence rights.
A similar perspective is developed by Jensen (2018), who explores modern critical approaches to the concept of human rights generations, emphasizing its conditionality and proposing alternative models of understanding human rights based on historical context and legal institutions. Jensen questions the relevance of Karel Vasak’s concept, arguing that the division of rights into three generations is arbitrary and does not reflect the real dynamics of human rights development. He also stresses that human rights cannot be strictly classified by historical periods, as many economic and social rights evolved alongside civil and political rights. Moreover, he argues that the generational theory contributes to a hierarchy of rights, which may create an imbalance in their protection. Instead of a three-generational division, he suggests a more flexible approach that acknowledges the interconnection of all categories of rights and their simultaneous evolution in different contexts.
Fredman (2006) analyzes the role of states’ positive obligations in the realization of human rights, criticizing the traditional division into "negative" rights (which limit state interference) and "positive" rights (which require active state involvement). The author argues that all human rights demand both negative and positive obligations and that the generational division of rights may be artificial in light of this interdependence. Fredman emphasizes that instead of a mechanical distribution of rights, they should be viewed through the lens of state obligations concerning equality, social justice, and effective human rights policy.
Domaradzki, Khvostova, & Pupovac (2019) analyze Karel Vasak’s contribution to human rights theory and the modern interpretation of his concept. They note that the three-generational model has significantly influenced international law, particularly through the activities of the UN and the European Union, but also has several shortcomings. In particular, the researchers highlight problems in implementing collective rights of the third generation, which often remain declarative and lack sufficient enforcement mechanisms. They also emphasize that the modern human rights discourse extends beyond the three-generational concept, considering digital rights, artificial intelligence rights, and environmental rights as separate legal categories that do not fit into Vasak’s traditional classification.
Fantin (2022) explores the evolution of the human rights system and its relationship with the concept of generations of rights. The author agrees that the three-generational model is an important historical stage in the development of human rights but emphasizes that modern challenges, such as digitalization, the environmental crisis, and globalization, require a rethinking of the human rights protection system. She suggests considering human rights dynamically, recognizing their ability to transform in response to new social realities.
The analysis of scientific works allows for several important conclusions regarding the implementation of the concept of generations of human rights in modern legal systems. The legal protection of third-generation human rights remains underdeveloped, as collective rights, such as the right to development or environmental rights, do not have the same legal force in different countries. There is a need to rethink the traditional three-generational model, as some authors propose alternative approaches that include new categories of rights, such as digital rights or humanity’s rights. Ensuring sustainable development requires expanding international legal mechanisms, highlighting the necessity of strengthening international cooperation for the realization of third-generation rights.
Criticism of the traditional concept indicates its shortcomings, as modern global challenges call its universality into question. National legal systems adapt this concept differently: in some countries, collective rights have constitutional status, while in others, they remain merely declarative.
Many researchers point to the conditional nature of dividing human rights into three generations, as civil, political, socio-economic, and collective rights develop in parallel and do not have clear historical boundaries. They propose more dynamic models that recognize the interconnection of all rights and their joint evolution. Furthermore, instead of treating different generations of rights as separate categories, modern scientific approaches emphasize their unity. Human rights cannot exist in isolation: the realization of civil and political rights is impossible without socio-economic guarantees, and the protection of collective rights depends on the security of individual rights.
Contemporary scholars actively study new groups of rights that do not fit into the traditional three-generational concept, including:
Researchers increasingly focus on the role of the state in ensuring human rights. The traditional division into "negative" (limiting state interference) and "positive" (requiring active state involvement) rights is becoming outdated. Instead, concepts of comprehensive obligations are proposed, including active protection mechanisms at all levels of state governance.
Studies show that while third-generation rights (the right to development, environmental rights, the rights of peoples) have gained international recognition, they remain insufficiently protected in practice. Scholars analyze the problems of their legal recognition and possible mechanisms for effective implementation.
Among the prospects for further research, the need to integrate digital rights into the concept of generations of human rights, analyze the role of artificial intelligence and technology in expanding human rights, and further develop legal mechanisms for ensuring collective rights should be highlighted.
Overall, the concept of generations of human rights continues to evolve, and scientific discussions about its effectiveness and relevance are crucial for the future of modern legal systems.
Methodology
The study is based on a comprehensive approach to analyzing the evolution of the concept of human rights generations and their implementation in modern legal systems. The research methods used ensured the scientific validity of the conclusions and allowed for an assessment of the effectiveness of existing legal mechanisms for human rights protection.
The method of legal policy analysis played a key role in identifying trends in the development of human rights at both the international and national levels. A systematic analysis was conducted on foundational documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN General Assembly, 1948), which laid the groundwork for the subsequent classification of rights by generations, as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (UN General Assembly, 1966a) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (UN General Assembly, 1966b), which contributed to distinguishing between the first and second generations of human rights. The analysis of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Organization of African Unity, 1982) and the UN Declaration on the Right to Development (UN General Assembly, 1986) enabled an evaluation of the development of third-generation rights. Through this method, it was established that national legal systems integrate the concept of human rights generations unevenly. For instance, in EU countries, social and economic rights enjoy a higher level of protection, whereas in the Global South, the concept of collective rights is actively evolving.
The comparative method was applied to assess different approaches to classifying human rights. The study examined the classical concept of three generations of human rights, which divides rights into civil-political, socio-economic, and collective categories. A comparison of this concept with the critical perspectives of other scholars, who advocate for revising the three-tier model in response to contemporary challenges and question the clear separation of generations, revealed that while the three-generational concept remains significant, it requires updating. Notably, there is a growing trend toward recognizing a fourth generation of human rights, related to digital technologies and the rights of future generations.
The empirical research method was used to analyze the actual implementation of human rights in modern legal systems. Primary sources for this analysis included UN reports reflecting progress in social and economic rights, EU documents on human rights—particularly regarding priorities in climate justice and digital rights—as well as studies on the impact of business on human rights. This analysis led to the conclusion that different legal systems are adapting to evolving understandings of human rights, and the international community is increasingly focusing on issues of environmental security and technological development.
The combination of legal policy analysis, comparative analysis, and empirical research provided a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of human rights generations and their implementation in modern legal systems. This confirmed the need to reassess the classical theory of human rights generations and adapt it to contemporary global challenges.
Results and Discussion
Basic grounds
The concept of generations of human rights is a key approach to understanding the development of international human rights discourse. The concept of human rights divides them into three main generations: the first generation includes civil and political rights, the second encompasses socio-economic and cultural rights, and the third consists of collective and environmental rights. Contemporary research also discusses the possibility of a fourth generation of rights, which includes digital rights, rights in the field of biotechnology, data protection, and rights related to the development of artificial intelligence.
The concept of human rights is a fundamental element of modern international law and policy. It is based on the aspiration to ensure equality, freedom, and dignity for every person, regardless of race, nationality, gender, or social status. At the same time, the historical development of this institution reflects the complex process of forming a system of human rights that continuously evolves under the influence of social, political, and economic factors (Domaradzki et al., 2019).
The generational approach to human rights allows for an understanding of their evolution and interconnection. Although the traditional division into three generations is widely accepted, modern challenges, such as digital rights and ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, indicate the necessity of expanding this concept.
In international practice, there is growing awareness that the realization of civil and political rights is impossible without socio-economic well-being, and collective rights are essential for maintaining global stability. Thus, modern legal systems must adapt to new challenges, ensuring a comprehensive approach to human rights protection.
The first generation includes fundamental freedoms related to personal autonomy and protection from state interference. It is based on the ideas of natural law and legal humanism that emerged during the Enlightenment.
These documents became the basis for the further development of the international human rights law system, ensuring their implementation through national and international protection mechanisms.
This generation includes rights that guarantee personal autonomy, including:
The second generation of rights is associated with the development of the welfare state and the concept of social justice:
It is based on the need to guarantee economic equality and access to basic social benefits.
Unlike civil and political rights, economic and social rights require an active role of the state and appropriate financial mechanisms for their implementation, which creates challenges for their full realization.
The third generation of rights emerged in the second half of the 20th century in response to global challenges such as the environmental crisis, decolonization, and the struggle for the rights of Indigenous peoples.
These rights include:
The third generation of rights is aimed at protecting group interests, making them difficult to implement legally, as they do not always align with classical legal mechanisms.
In modern conditions, technological advancements necessitate a reassessment of legal approaches to human rights protection. The fourth generation of rights includes:
The right to personal data protection and digital security – regulated by the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Bioethical rights – concerning the protection of human rights in the context of genetic developments, artificial intelligence, and medical technologies.
The Paris Agreement (Law 1469-VIII, 2016) – dedicated to climate change and emphasizing the interconnection between environmental and social rights, which are part of the new generation of human rights.
An analysis of international legal documents demonstrates the gradual evolution of the human rights concept. As noted by the European Parliament (2018): “Ensuring economic, social, and cultural rights is impossible without the observance of civil and political rights,” highlighting their indivisibility and universality. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (2023) emphasizes the need for a comprehensive approach to human rights implementation, particularly in the context of sustainable development.
Implications for teaching the subject
Teaching the subject "Generations of Human Rights and Their Implementation in Modern Legal Systems" in law faculties worldwide has several unique features that distinguish it from other legal disciplines. This course requires an interdisciplinary approach, combining legal theory, history, political science, and international relations (Baxi, 2012; Donnelly, 2013). Given the evolving nature of human rights, the curriculum must be flexible and continuously updated to reflect contemporary challenges such as digital rights, climate justice, and emerging ethical dilemmas related to artificial intelligence and biotechnology (Klabbers, 2017; De Feyter, 2011).
One of the key features of this subject is the emphasis on the historical evolution of human rights. Law students must understand the theoretical foundation of Karel Vasak’s concept of three generations of rights and how they have expanded over time (Vasak, 1977). The inclusion of a possible fourth generation of rights, encompassing digital and bioethical issues, requires a critical analysis of legal frameworks and international treaties that govern these emerging areas. This historical perspective helps students see how human rights norms have adapted to political, economic, and technological shifts (Freeman, 2011).
A distinctive characteristic of teaching this subject is the comparative approach to legal systems and their role in human rights protection. Students analyze different regional and national mechanisms, comparing, for example, the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and domestic constitutional frameworks (O’Connell, 2017). This comparative analysis enables future legal professionals to appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of various enforcement models and how geopolitical factors influence the effectiveness of human rights protections.
Another important aspect of teaching this course is the integration of case law and practical applications. Students study landmark human rights cases to understand how courts interpret and enforce different generations of rights. Special attention is given to cases concerning socio-economic rights, collective rights, and contemporary legal disputes involving digital privacy, climate change litigation, and indigenous rights (Smith, 2019). Moot courts and legal clinics focusing on human rights advocacy provide students with hands-on experience in legal reasoning and argumentation.
Pedagogical Strategies and Technological Innovations
To ensure effective teaching and learning, law faculties are increasingly incorporating modern pedagogical approaches and digital tools into the curriculum. Problem-based learning (PBL) has emerged as a valuable strategy, encouraging students to analyze real-world human rights scenarios and propose legal solutions (Barrows, 1986). Gamification techniques, such as interactive quizzes and virtual court simulations, foster student engagement and practical skill development (Deterding et al., 2011).
Additionally, competency-based approaches ensure that students not only gain theoretical knowledge but also acquire practical competencies crucial for modern legal practice. For instance, legal simulators enable students to practice drafting human rights complaints and arguing cases in virtual courtrooms. Augmented reality (AR) applications can recreate historical human rights events, helping students to visualize and critically analyze the evolution of rights over time.
Digital tools, such as artificial intelligence-based legal research platforms, streamline access to human rights case law and treaty databases (Ashley, 2017). Online learning platforms facilitate collaboration between students from different countries, allowing for comparative legal analyses and discussions with international experts (Laurillard, 2012). Furthermore, virtual guest lectures provide valuable perspectives on human rights implementation from various jurisdictions (Keppell et al., 2013).
Application of Technological Resources in Teaching Practices
Specific examples of technological integration include the use of platforms like LexisNexis and Westlaw for comprehensive legal research, alongside AI-powered tools that analyze large volumes of case law to identify patterns and emerging trends in human rights jurisprudence. Virtual moot court competitions, hosted through platforms like Zoom and Microsoft Teams, simulate real-life litigation scenarios, preparing students for professional practice.
Augmented reality applications, like those developed by educational technology companies, provide immersive experiences where students can explore the historical contexts of landmark human rights decisions (Bower et al., 2014). This interactive approach makes abstract concepts more tangible and facilitates deeper understanding.
Incorporating these contemporary pedagogical models and technological tools not only enhances student engagement but also prepares future legal professionals to navigate the complexities of human rights advocacy in a technologically advanced world.
Relevance and Practical Outcomes
The study of "Generations of Human Rights and Their Implementation in Modern Legal Systems" prepares students not only for careers in law but also for work in international organizations, NGOs, and governmental institutions. By engaging in debates, legal drafting, and policy analysis, students develop critical thinking skills essential for addressing contemporary human rights challenges in an increasingly complex and interconnected world (Tibbitts, 2002).
The generational framework of human rights, introduced by Karel Vasak, remains a useful tool for structuring discussions on human rights, though this concept has faced some criticism over time. It provides a clear distinction between rights that emerged in different historical periods in response to changes in political and social conditions. Modern legal systems, considering the impact of globalization, technological progress, and new challenges, must adapt these categories of rights to ensure their effective implementation (Sen, 2004).
Therefore, in contemporary conditions, legal systems must adapt to emerging challenges related to digital transformation, climate change, and ethical issues arising from technological advancements. Consequently, the concept of human rights generations remains open to further development and revision, as human rights continue to expand in response to societal and scientific progress.
Conclusions
Further scientific research on the generations of human rights and their implementation in modern legal systems should focus on several key areas. First and foremost, it is necessary to study the impact of globalization on the development of human rights, particularly the interdependence between economic processes and social standards. Another important area is the analysis of challenges related to technological progress, particularly concerning the legal regulation of artificial intelligence, digital human rights, and cybersecurity. The environmental dimension of human rights also requires further research, especially in the context of climate change and its impact on fundamental rights such as the right to life, health, and a clean environment. Additionally, attention should be given to mechanisms for adapting human rights institutions to contemporary crises, such as armed conflicts, pandemics, and migration processes. Another crucial task is improving international law in the field of collective rights protection and the rights of vulnerable groups, such as indigenous peoples, women, children, and persons with disabilities. Future research should not only analyze existing problems but also develop practical recommendations for their resolution, considering the legal, social, and political realities of the modern world.
Bibliographic references
Ashley, K. D. (2017). Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analytics: New Tools for Law Practice in the Digital Age. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/sjjLIv
Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20(6), 481–486. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1986.tb01386.x
Batan, Yu. D. (2018). The Problem of Collective Rights. Problems of Modern Constitutionalism. Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/TrpDAK
Baxi, U. (2012). The Future of Human Rights (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://pure.jgu.edu.in/id/eprint/3153/1/43953657.pdf
Bill of Rights. (1791). United States Bill of Rights. Retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/files/legislative/resources/education/bill-of-rights/images/handout-3.pdf
Bower, M., Howe, C., McCredie, N., Robinson, A., & Grover, D. (2014). Augmented Reality in education—cases, places and potentials. Educational Media International, 51(1), 1–15. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2014.889400
Bratko, I. V. (2017). Human rights in the context of sustainable development. European and international approaches to the protection of human rights, 1, 89–94. Retrieved from https://elibrary.kubg.edu.ua/id/eprint/19762/1/I_Bratko_Konf_07_04_2017_FPMV.pdf
Cornescu, A.V. (2009). The Generations of human’s rights. Brno: Masaryk University. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/9ebHjC
Council of Europe. (2018). The Right of Older Persons to Dignity and Autonomy in Care. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/the-right-of-older-persons-to-dignity-and-autonomy-in-care
De Feyter, K. (2011). Human Rights: Social Justice in the Age of the Market. Zed Books. Retrieved from https://www.bloomsbury.com/in/human-rights-9781848131446/
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification". In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (pp. 9–15). ACM. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
Domaradzki, S., Khvostova, M., & Pupovac, D. (2019). Karel Vasak’s Generations of Rights and the Contemporary Human Rights Discourse. Human Rights Review, 20, 423–443. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-019-00565-x
Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice (3rd ed.). Cornell University Press. Retrieved from https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9780801477706/universal-human-rights-in-theory-and-practice/
EIFEC. (2024). Export Controls Laws converging towards more attention to the protection of Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.eifec.org/human-rights-compliance
European Parliament. (2018). Indivisibility of human rights: Unifying the two Human Rights Covenants? Retrieved from Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_ATA(2018)628296
European Union. (2025). Priorities for UN Human Rights Fora in 2025. Retrieved from https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-geneva/eu-priorities-un-human-rights-fora-2025_en
Fantin, N. (2022). The Human Rights System Series: Generations of Rights - The Route to the System. Arcadia. Retrieved from https://www.byarcadia.org/post/the-human-rights-system-101-generations-of-rights-the-route-to-the-system
Fredman, S. (2006). Human Rights Transformed: Positive Duties and Positive Rights. Oxford: Oxford Legal Studies. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=923936
Freeman, M. (2011). Human Rights: An Interdisciplinary Approach (2nd ed.). Polity Press. Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com/Human-Rights-Interdisciplinary-Michael-Freeman/dp/0745639666
Hew, K. F., & Lo, C. K. (2018). Flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions education: a meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education, 18, 38. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1144-z
IHRB. (2024). Top Ten Business and Human Rights Issues in 2025. Retrieved from https://www.ihrb.org/latest/2025-top-10-business-and-human-rights-issues
Ivankiv, I. B. (2019). Human rights: state and prospects for their provision. (Degree thesis) National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Kyiv. Retrieved from https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/items/8e528109-90fb-4cbe-ad0f-c5b57e72279f
Jensen, S. L.V. (2018). Putting to rest the Three Generations Theory of human rights. Universal right group. Retrieved from https://www.universal-rights.org/putting-rest-three-generations-theory-human-rights/
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2016). NMC Horizon Report: 2016 Higher Education Edition. The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/resources/2016/2/2016-horizon-report
Keppell, M., Souter, K., & Riddle, M. (2012). Physical and Virtual Learning Spaces in Higher Education: Concepts for the Modern Learning Environment. IGI Global. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-114-0
Klabbers, J. (2017). International Law (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com/International-Law-2nd-Jan-Klabbers/dp/1316506606
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. Routledge. Retrieved from Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083
Law 1469-VIII. On the Ratification of Paris Agreement. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2016. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_l61#Text
Magnovsky, I. Y., Shevchuk, V. V., & Berezovenko, L. S. (2024). Human rights as third generation rights: challenges of the present. Legal system: theory and practice, 1, 75-83. Retrieved from http://sulj.oduvs.od.ua/archive/2024/1/14.pdf
National Assembly of France. (1789). Declaration of the Rights of Man. Retrieved from http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/rightsof.asp
O’Connell, M. E. (2017). International Law and the Use of Force: Cases and Materials. Foundation Press. ISBN: 9781647082444
Office of high commissioner. (2025). United Nation Human rights appeal. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/annualappeal/United-Nations-Human-Rights-Appeal-2025.pdf
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (2023). Key concepts on ESCRs - Are economic, social and cultural rights fundamentally different from civil and political rights? Available at: Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/human-rights/economic-social-cultural-rights/escr-vs-civil-political-rights
Organization of African Unity (OAU). (1982). African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights ("Banjul Charter"). Retrieved from https://www.refworld.org/legal/agreements/oau/1981/en/17306
Reid, L. (2019). The Generations of Human Rights – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog. Sites.uab.edu. Retrieved from https://sites.uab.edu/humanrights/2019/01/14/the-generations-of-human-rights/
Sen, A. (2004). Elements of a Theory of Human Rights. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 32(4), 315–356. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2004.00017.x
Smith, R. K. M. (2019). Textbook on International Human Rights. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198746210, 9780198746218
Tibbitts, F. (2002). Understanding What We Do: Emerging Models for Human Rights Education. International Review of Education, 48(3-4), 159–171. DOI: 10.1023/A:1020338300881
Tyryna, M. (2011). Generations of human rights: problems of modern classification. State and law, 52, 728–732. Retrieved from http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/34078/118-Tyrina.pdf?sequence=1
UN General Assembly. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 217 A (III). Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_217(III).pdf
UN General Assembly. (1966a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/ccpr.pdf
UN General Assembly. (1966b). International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/cescr.pdf
UN General Assembly. (1972). Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm Declaration). Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/conferences/environment/stockholm1972
UN General Assembly. (1986). Declaration on the Right to Development. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/declaration-right-development
UN General Assembly. (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/Qz9vOT
United Nations. (1993). Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action Adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna on 25 June 1993. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/vienna-declaration-and-programme-action
United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
Vasak, K. (1977). Human Rights: A Thirty-Year Struggle: the Sustained Efforts to Give Force of Law to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. UNESCO Courier, 30(11), 29–32. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000048063
Este artículo está bajo la licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0). Se permite la reproducción, distribución y comunicación pública de la obra, así como la creación de obras derivadas, siempre que se cite la fuente original.