human rights

The Relationship between Human Rights, Culture and Empire

by

Human rights are thought to encompass the rights to all of the basic needs required by the human. Natural law, which has been key to liberal thought and cosmopolitanism, dictates that a person is entitled to these rights simply because they are human (Kiely, 2005; Donnelly, 2007). However, it is a fact that most humans do not in fact enjoy the protections offered by human rights, but instead they are but a topic of discussion within the institutions which promote human rights (De Sousa Santos, 2013). This raises questions about the universality of human rights and the level of access one may have to them (Engle Merry, 2001; Heintz, 2018).

The formalisation of human rights occurred during a tumultuous period in the history of what can be categorised as ‘the West’. Due to civil unrest and  the new realities which emerged following the First and Second World Wars, this period was marked by the formal decolonisation, and ascension to independent status, of a number of States. It has been argued that while liberals were sceptical that imperial powers were capable of ushering in any further advancement into the world, they did not believe that former colonies were capable of managing themselves (Moyn, 2017).

This essay will look at the history of the State of Jamaica, which was a British colony until 1962, to analyse the functionality of human rights, the effects of development through conditional aid, and the implications of neoliberalism and globalisation. Through this, the aim of this essay is to discuss the position of human rights in the setting of a rapidly changing cultural climate, and to explore the boundaries of the theme of ‘empire’ as a dominant but obscure force.

Context

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was drafted in 1948 and adopted by the United Nations which was founded in 1945. Preceding this pivotal moment was the Brenton Woods Convention, officially known as the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference, which took place in 1944 and established the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. This convention took place to reach an agreement on rebuilding and restructuring following WWII and it is thought that the United States took this as an opportunity to secure its interests (Goldsmith, 2002). Whilst the 1948 Declaration was an important step because it showed that there was a shift in the way human life was valued, it is necessary to note that at the time that it was signed, many institutions remained highly sexist and racist, despite the claim that human rights would be in place for all (Douzinas, 2003; De Sousa Santos, 2013). In this way, a deep contradiction between what human rights advocated and the reality of the political climate can already be traced. Nevertheless, the institutionalisation of human rights was required to respond to the suffering which was witnessed and experienced following this period of war.

As noted by Levy and Sznaider (2010), atrocities committed against humanity exist within people’s memory and these memories are reinforced by a bombardment of images that reinvoke the need for human rights. For this reason, it has become necessary for States to be compliant with human rights law. It has been argued that this conformity adds legitimacy to the complying State on an international scale due to the superior status that has been attributed to human rights law, thus aiding the sovereignty of the State (Douzinas, 2003; Reus-Smit, 2001). The fact that the previous status quo of blatant exploitation was no longer tolerated, shows that colonial powers had to let go of the formal empire which they had built as its operations were no longer politically acceptable (Goldsmith, 2002). Knight (2005) asserts that it had not been easy for the British to control their colonies during imperial rule and therefore it made more sense for the empire to transform its power and exert it through a more indirect method.

The State of Jamaica, its people, and its relationship with foreign institutions, have been marked by this transition of such external powers which may be seen as a move towards ‘informal empire’. Whilst this term has been highly debated it has been employed to refer to the idea that the political influence of a sovereignty can be felt, even when it has no formal or legal control in a given state (Attard, 2023). Therefore, it has been thought that ‘informal empire’ operates outside the remits of the State, with its impact being moderated by a set of co-ordinating characters (Knight, 2005). This exertion of power can be seen through the enduring economic foundations established in Jamaica. Following a long history of colonisation and slavery,  the economy of the Caribbean island retained many similar characteristics, notably the importation of all products required domestically and for manufacturing, and the manufacturing and exportation of basic materials (Kirton, 1992). Along with this, grave inequalities persisted despite significant formal changes as seen through the socioeconomic position of slaves following emancipation in 1848. Most ex-slaves, for example, still worked on plantations for sustenance wages as they had no capital or land to rely on for survival (Kirton, 1992). Moreover, Jamaica remained primarily an agriculture-based society until the economy shifted to prioritise the exportation of mineral goods, particularly bauxite, and tourism in the 1940s (Bissessar, 2019). Upon independence in 1962, the State found itself ‘underdeveloped’ and trying to attract foreign investment creating a market which was “small, open, dependent, capitalist” (p. 12, Kirton, 1992). As Wallerstein (1989) argues, there is a historical aspect to capitalism which requires transformation. This transformation will be examined in the following sections.

Between Sovereignty and the Saviour

Whilst the assimilation of human rights law by States has been seen to be legitimising, there is also the view that sovereignty and human rights are counteracting (Reus-Smit, 2001). This may be due to the sentiment that human rights are a Western concept as they can be viewed to be grounded in European Enlightenment and liberalism (Donnelly, 2007; Kiely, 2005). For example, the focus of human rights on the freedoms of the individual, rather than on the rights of the community, can be jarring in many cultures that are community based (Ibhawoh, 2001). In fact the American Anthropological Association (AAA) had a sceptical view of human rights law in their statement issued in 1947 citing a culturally relativist argument (Engle, 2001). The Association’s stance shifted by 1990 when it embraced human rights law. However, this debate between the universality of human rights and cultural relativity has remained central in human rights scholarship (Engle, 2001).

The general conception is that human rights are universal and fixed since they protect the basic needs of the individual (Engle Merry, 2001). Contrary to this, a culturally relative approach focuses on local cultures which are in constant adaptation (Engle Merry, 2001). Donnelly (2007), however, focuses on the relative universality of human rights, elaborating that since culture is not fixed, there is nothing hindering a culture from adjusting to human rights. Furthermore, he claims that whilst compliance with human rights directives protects against ‘cultural imperialism’, due to past exploitation, there should be an element of sensitivity when promoting the universality of human rights (Donnelly, 2007). In contrast to Donnelly (2007), Mutua (2001) presents a bleaker view of human rights through the saviours-victims-savages concept which is a structure constructed by western human rights discourse which are posited to exhibit a “historical continuum of the Eurocentric colonial project” (p. 204). In this triangular relationship, the victims are impotent, the savage is the State, and the saviour is depicted as the white and western protagonist looking for self-redemption after contributing to centuries-long exploitation (Mutua, 2001). The role of the savage is attributed to the State because it is the State which either complies with or violates human rights, since human rights are in place to protect citizens from the oppression of the State. In this conception, the State is thought to be immoral when it does not allow for the proliferation of western universal thought (Mutua, 2001). Therefore, the “culture, and not the state, is the actual savage” (p. 221, Mutua, 2001). This formulation transposes to the case of post-independence Jamaica, where Jamaicans are seen as inferior, without agency, and the Jamaican government was looked upon with disdain for their resistance to the saviour, the IMF.

Despite being granted a loan from the IMF during its infancy in 1963, the Jamaican State did not make use of it, choosing to rely on foreign investment from the bauxite industry and the tourism sector (Clarke and Nelson, 2020). This reliance on capitalism was not ideal since surpluses typically did not remain in the country (Kirton, 1992). Jamaica, similar to all developing and oil-importing countries, experienced a significant economic crisis due to the surge in oil prices in the early 1970s (Weis, 2004). Prime Minister Manley, who rose to power in 1972, tried to restructure public funds and alleviate the economic injustices experienced by the Jamaican people. His resistance to capitalism and the IMF was not received well by delegates in the United States (Clarke and Nelson, 2020). Unfortunately, due to a number of subsequent economic hardships endured by the State, Jamaica  had to enter into talks with the IMF in 1976 and a Stand-By Agreement was signed in 1977 (Clarke and Nelson, 2020). This structural adjustment programme forced Jamaica to readjust its economic and public structures, making several sacrifices to meet targets, and devaluing the Jamaican dollar as required by IMF protocol (Clarke and Nelson, 2020). Despite these efforts, the IMF suspended their deal with the State in 1979 as Jamaica was not able to meet the targets proposed by the IMF. It had been argued that the IMF acted unjustly in the case of Jamaica as it did not take into consideration the fact that Jamaica was still a developing country that did not have the necessary resources required (Clarke and Nelson, 2020). This thrust Jamaica into deeper debt that saw the rates of poverty and unemployment spike. Manely’s term ended in 1980 when Prime Minister Seaga’s government was elected (Bissessar, 2019). The new government entered into even greater loans with the IMF, where the institution was notably more lenient, however these deals consistently created more debt for the State since the suggestions of the IMF, for example the privatisation of economic operations by offering many tax incentives to foreign investors, led to the country having so much debt that the indebted amount was greater than the economy generated by the country (Bissessar, 2019).

In Mutua’s (2001) s-v-s concept, the saviour’s role is to free the victims from the tyranny of a backward state and culture. This begs the question, how can one experience freedom if their existence is shrouded in debt and poverty? Bohoslavsky and Cantamutto (2022) relate that whilst human rights are based on the individual and the realisation of their freedoms it does not mean that every person has equal access or the possibility of social mobility as they may not have the necessary resources to act in an autonomous way and thus they cannot be deemed to be free. This creates the competition necessary for the capitalist agenda and there are those who believe that human rights violations are essential for the regeneration of wealth (Rajagopal, 2021). During the 1980s there were many debates over development theory and the response to ‘underdevelopment’ seems to have manifested in increased development projects (Rajagopal, 2021). It is interesting to note that it was in this decade that that sovereign debts, which put the interest of the people of the debtor nation in direct opposition to the rights of the creditor, in this case, the IMF, were implemented (Bohoslavsky and Catamutto, 2022). Rajagopal (2021) argued that economic growth would continue to ensue for as long as there are recourses to drive it. Through this, is seems that capitalism has reached a point which is geared towards destruction rather than creation (Rajagopal, 2021). Goldsmith (2002) argues that development can be seen as a form of colonialism through conditional aid programmes which propagate debt and generate a westernised class system. Apart from development, the 1970s saw the rise of neoliberalism, coupled with globalisation. The next section will discuss the effects that development, globalisation and neoliberalism had on culture.

‘Culture’ and global transformations

At any given moment, in any given region, there are a number of cultures that are occurring simultaneously (Clarke et al., 2006). The fluidity of culture cannot easy be captured, so much so, that the concept of the term ‘culture’ is not easily bound. Unless closely studied, the culture that is most represented and etched out, is that of the dominant class which is tied to a specific agenda (Clarke et al., 2006). This “bourgeois culture” (p. 7, Clarke et al., 2006) which reflects the values and norms of the middle class, does not however go untested. Rather, other acting cultures exist in relation to it, by reacting and struggling with it, ultimately adjusting to or revolutionising it (Clarke et al., 2006). This can be seen through the identity politics which are still at play in Jamaica as that which is associated to ‘blackness’  has been considered to be backward by some, including the black educated upper middle class (Thomas, 1999).  Conceiving cultural hegemony in this way allows one to understand the power dynamics at play but also grants agency of choice upon those which hegemony is acting upon. As Clarke and Nelson (2020) relate, the 1960s period, post-independence was a time of great civil unrest within Jamaica due to the deep social injustices that was being experienced by the locals. As an outlet against the violence that ensued, Jamaicans in the slums of Kingston turned to song, and reggae was created (Clarke and Nelson, 2020; Edwards, 1998). Whilst the genre of reggae covers a plethora of topics, it is widely known for its political commentary on slavery, racism, colonialism, and imperialism (Edwards, 1998). Edwards (1998) warns us, however, to not see this art as one based on victimhood but rather one that is full of hope for a future in which the people can experience freedom.

Colonialism and the economic functions within Jamaica heavily relied on the slave labour of Africans who were snatched from their countries and forced to resettle on a Caribbean island which had previously been populated by a native people (Lemonius, 2017). As exhibited in the text above, however, there is still a lot of division and hardship experienced by Jamaicans today, since the socioeconomic status of many has not changed. It may be argued that this is due to the fact that the economic situation in the country has not improved. Goldsmith (2002) relates that in cases of ‘development’ there is typically an increase in a certain export. Whilst this was previously sugar during colonialism, this market has been replaced by the export of bauxite (Weis, 2004). It is also typical to see a move away from rural areas where traditional practices are more likely to be preserved to urban areas due to increasing industrialisation (Goldsmith, 2002). In Jamaica the urban centre is Kingston, which is overpopulated, causing those who live there to be alienated from the previous traditional way of life causing the loss of skills and crafts. Williams (2004), for example, elaborates that the poor have suffered a great loss of skills due to the rise of the private sector in bauxite and tourism which required many labourers. Furthermore, the increase in urbanisation has led to a decrease in the levels of education of children (Williams, 2004). With regards to traditional crafts, there has been a reduction in crafts related to lace-bark due to deforestation and the increased use of this product to create pieces during industrialisation (Brennan et al., 2013). The extinction of this traditional craft was also exacerbated by the fact that by the 1960s there was no one to harvest the bark (Brennan et al., 2013). Goldsmith (2002) relays that development is similar to colonialism in that it systemically tries to destroy culture by dismantling the economy and the destructing local crafts. For the several reasons mentioned throughout this essay, Goldsmith (2002) contends that development is just another term for imperialism.

Wallerstein (2005) offers an interesting trajectory of the phases that have surpassed since the end of formal empire and colonialism. He posits that from the 1940s to the 1970s the rational of developmentalism that advocated for import-substitution was at its peak, but due to the failure of this system, it was globalisation aided by the rise of neoliberalism which prevailed after the 1970s due to the opening of the markets and rise in exports (Wallerstein, 2005). Kiely (2005) relates that through globalisation and Americanisation there has been a constructed process of “cultural standardisation” (p. 120). It has been postulated that the media has acted as an instrument for cultural imperialism as it delivered selected messages that have influenced cultures towards a consumer lifestyle (Keily, 2005). Whilst it is known that globalisation has been an ongoing fact of civilisation, the mass communication services and increase in industrialisation have brought markets together like never before and at rapid speed (Knight, 2005).

Weis (2004) is critical of the agricultural reform in Jamaica that was brought about by neoliberalism and globalisation. The rate at which importation occurred due to the open markets, championed by neoliberal practices, has contributed to spiralling food prices since there is a lot of competition with local products, which are often more expensive than foreign product and thus cannot compete (Weis, 2004). In reference to the dairy industry in Jamaica, Weis (2004) reinserts the image of milk being drained since it was unlikely to be sold as it could not compete with foreign, cheaper milk powder. Many dairy cows were in fact sent for slaughter and their meat was used for consumption. The rise of this incidence led to the ‘meatification’ and alteration in the Jamaican diet which can be linked to globalisation due to the commercial chains that promote such a diet (Weis, 2004). This has had an adverse effect on the health of the Jamaican population which was already at high risk (Weis, 2004). The neoliberal practices adopted to facilitate the flow of capital have further destabilised the market and led to a deterioration to the economy (Bohoslaveky and Canamutto, 2022). This has had a deteriorating effect on all the spheres of the lives of those most vulnerable within the Jamaican community.

Stephanie Black’s 2001 documentary, titled ‘Life and Debt’ captures the deep economic crises experienced by Jamaicans and Jamaica’s relationship with the IMF and World Bank which has further exacerbated poverty and unemployment. Interestingly her informants point to globalisation as one of the main issues that have altered Jamaica (Black, 2001). Whilst tourists are sold the island life, locals in Kingston struggle to survive due to the open markets which have overrun and overwhelmed their small economy. Thomas (2005) relays that culture is also a product that can be commodified. This reality makes one ponder about the ways in which one’s existence can be packaged and repackaged to be sold.  At face value, it may be perceived that the advent of neoliberalism and globalisation may be have transformed the ways in which all humans live their lives, however, in cases similar to that of Jamaica, it can be argued that for those who have lived their life in poverty, not much has changed due to the ongoing injustices they must endure. For this reason, it may seem that ‘empire’ has never really ended and rather a recapitalization of it is being enforced.

Human rights, poverty and debt

Bohoslavsky and Cantamutto (2022) state that “debt and human rights are intrinsically tangled” (p. 762). The IMF is seemingly disinterested in human rights as it has no issue with leaving countries to struggle in debt. Moreover, the economic regulations endorsed by the IMF have severe and prolonged effects which have deepened inequalities on a local and global scale (Bohoslaveky and Canamutto, 2022). The failure of these structural adjustment programs, rapid urbanisation and economic growth, as well as the loss of valuable life skills have led to the further deterioration of families within Jamaica (Williams, 2004).

Pogge (2007) holds that poverty, which has persisted due to the global order, is a “human rights violation—arguably the largest such violation ever committed in human history” (p. 52). Economic growth is not regarded as a means to reach a better quality of life – it is now the ultimate goal (Pogge, 2007). Goldsmith (2002) shares that ‘poverty’ is framed by western elites to be a consequence of underdevelopment. Pogge (2007), however, places the blame on the states who hold greater influence, for the gross amount of poverty that is experienced. However, it seems that the global order has strived towards this point since analysing the historical legacy of capitalism it can be seen that increased globalisation and decreased regulation has led to greater poverty but also greater wealth (Wallerstein, 1989). If human rights are characteristically indivisible and interrelated, as they are advocated to be, it follows then that the lack of realisation for one right propagates a system where other rights cannot be fully realised (Fakuda-Parr, 2016). This explains the issue of debt and human rights in Jamaica very well since the lack of resources not only obliterates the possibility of equal access but also exacerbates inequalities. As Freeman (2011) remarks, the most challenging situations in which to implement human rights, is where they are most required.  Bob Marley’s reggae song titled ‘War’ captures this significant sentiment that can extend beyond the situation in Jamaica:

“
That until there are no longer
First-class and second-class citizens of any nation
Until the colour of a man’s skin
Is of no more significance than the colour of his eyes
Me say war

That until the basic human rights
Are equally guaranteed to all
Without regard to race
Dis a war
” (Verses 2-3, Bob Marley & The Wailers, 1976)

Conclusion
Through the above examination of human rights, culture, and empire, the theme which emerges most clearly is the divide that has been constructed between those who control the means of production to generate more wealth and advancement, and those who have been subject to a stagnant life, rife with poverty and exclusion. In the case of Jamaica, this can clearly be seen since a large portion of its population continues to suffer as it does not have the resources required to gain access to opportunities which may garner wealth. This makes one wonder, if development processes, the efforts of neoliberalism, and the modernity of globalisation have been triggered to aid developing countries or to satisfy the drive of the elites in the developed world. The truly disturbing deduction is, however, the rhetoric of human rights that has been employed during this historical legacy of greed, leading one to wonder if formal empire ever came to an end.

Reference List

Attard, B., 2023. Informal Empire: The Origin and Significance of a Key Term. Modern Intellectual History, 20, pp. 1219–1250.

Bissessar, A., 2019. Whose Governance? IMF Austerities and Diversification in a Small Island State: The Case of Jamaica. In: A. M. Bissessar, ed. Development, Political, and Economic Difficulties in the Caribbean.  Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland, pp. 197-214.

Bob Marley and the Wailers, 1976. War, Rastaman Vibration. Available at: Spotify (Accessed 07 December 2024).

Bohoslavsky, J.P. and Cantamutto, F., 2022. Not Even with a Pandemic: The IMF, Human Rights, and Rational Choices Under Power Relations. Human Rights Quarterly, 44(4), pp. 759 -783.

Brennan, E., Harris, L. & Nesbitt, M., 2013. Object Lesson Jamaican Lace-Bark: Its History and Uncertain Future. Textile History, 44(2), pp. 235-253.

Clarke, C. and Nelson, C., 2020. A Clash of Ideologies: Jamaica and the International Monetary Fund. In: C. Clarke and C. Nelson, eds. Contextualizing Jamaica’s Relationship with the IMF. London: Palgrave Macmillan Cham, pp. 123-168.

Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T. and Roberts, B., 2006. Subcultures, cultures and class. In: S. Hall and Jefferson, T., eds. Resistance Through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-War Britain. 2nd Edn. USA: Routledge, pp. 3-59.

De Sousa Santos, B., 2013. Human Rights: A fragile hegemony. In: F. Crépeau & C. Shappard, eds. Human Rights and Diverse Societies: Challenges and Possibilities. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp.17-27.

Donnelly, J., 2007. The Relative Universality of Human Rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 29, pp. 281-306.

Douzinas, C., 2003. Humanity, military humanism and the new moral order. Economy and Society, 32(2), pp. 159-183.

Edwards, N., 1998. Tates Of Emergency: Reggae Representations of the Jamaican Nation State. Social and Economic Studies, 48(1), pp. 21-32.

Engle Merry, S. 2001. Changing Rights, Changing Culture. In: J. Cowan, M. Dembour and R. Wilson, eds. Culture and Rights: Anthropological Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 31-55.

Engle, K., 2001. From Skepticism to Embrace: Human Rights and the American Anthropological Association from 1947-1999. Human Rights Quarterly, 23(3), pp. 536-559.

Freeman, M., 2011. The Role of the Social Sciences. In: Human Rights: An Interdisciplinary Approach. 2nd Edn. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 89-118.

Fukuda-Parr, S. 2016. Human Rights and Politics in Development. In: M. Goodhart, ed. Human Rights: politics and practice.3rd Edn.Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 198-215.

Goldsmith, E., 2002. Development As Colonialism. World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues, 6(2), pp. 18-36.

Heintz, J., 2018. Inequality, Neoliberalism, and Human Rights. In: G. MacNaughton and D.F. Frey, eds. Economic and Social Rights in a Neoliberal World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 27-40.

Ibhawoh, B., 2001. Cultural Relativism and Human Rights: Reconsidering the Africanist Discourse. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 19 (1), pp. 43-62.

Kiely, R. 2005. Globalisation, Culture and Rights: Liberal Internationalism, Imperialism and Universalism. In: Empire in the Age of Globalisation: US hegemony and neo-liberal disorder. London: Pluto Press, pp. 120-153.

Kirton, C., 1992. An Overview of the economy of Jamaica. In: Jamaica: debt and poverty. Oxford: Oxfam, p. 9-42.

Knight, A., 2005. Empire, Hegemony and Globalization in the Americas. NACLA Report on the Americas, 39(2), pp. 8-12.

Lemonius, M., 2017. “Deviously Ingenious”: British Colonialism in Jamaica. Peace Research, 49(2), pp. 79-103.

Levy, D. and Sznaider, N., 2010. The Post-Cold War Period, Globalization and the Cosmopolitan Turn. In: Human Rights and Memory. Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press, pp. 90-102.

Life and Debt, 2001. Documentary. Directed by Stephanie Black. New York: Tuff Gong Pictures.

Moyn, S. 2017. Human Rights and the Crisis of Liberalism. In: S. Hopgood, J. Snyder, L. Vinjamuri, eds. Human Rights Futures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 261-281.

Mutua, M., 2001. Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights. Harvard International Law Journal, 42 (1), pp. 201-245.

Pogge, T., 2007. Severe Poverty as a Human Rights Violation. In: T. Pogge, ed. Freedom from Poverty as a Human Right: Who Owes What to the Very Poor?. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 11-55.

Rajagopal, B., 2021. Development theories, old and new and their implications for human rights. In: S.P. Marks and B. Rajagopal, eds. Critical Issues in Human Rights and Development.  London: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 10-20.

Reus-Smit, C., 2001. Human rights and the social construction of sovereignty. Review of International Studies, 27, pp. 519-538.

Thomas, D. A., 1999. Emancipating the nation (again): Notes on nationalism, “modernization,” and other dilemmas in post‐colonial Jamaica. Identities, 5(4), pp. 501-542.

Thomas, D. A., 2005. Development, “Culture,” and the Promise of Modern Progress. Social and Economic Studies, 54(3), pp. 97-125.

Wallerstein, I., 1989. Culture as the Ideological Battleground Of The Modern World-System. Hitotsubashi Journal of Social Studies, 21, pp. 5-22.

Wallerstein, I., 2005. After Developmentalism and Globalization, What?. Social Forces, 83(3), pp. 1263-1278.

Weis, T., 2004. Restructuring and Redundancy: The impacts and Illogic of neoliberal agricultural reforms in Jamaica. Journal of Agrarian Change, 4(4), pp. 461-491.

Williams, S., 2004. The Effects of Structural Adjustment Programs on the Lives of Children in Jamaica Sian Williams. In: N. H. Kaufman and I. Rizzini, eds. Globalization and Children Exploring Potentials for Enhancing Opportunities in the Lives of Children and Youth. 2nd Edn. US: Springer, pp. 151-160.