Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Proportionality

Proportionality is a core principle in ethics, law, and philosophy that mandates a rational balance between the means used to achieve a legitimate end and the burdens or harms imposed, ensuring that measures are not excessive relative to the objective pursued.^[1] Originating in Aristotelian notions of justice as a mean between extremes and elaborated in medieval canon law by thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, the principle evolved through Enlightenment social contract theory and Prussian administrative law in the 19th century before gaining prominence in 20th-century international and constitutional frameworks.^[2]^[3] In international humanitarian law and just war theory, proportionality operates in two distinct domains: jus ad bellum, where the overall harms of resorting to war must not outweigh the prospective goods such as restoring peace or rights, and jus in bello, where anticipated military advantages from attacks must not be outweighed by expected incidental civilian casualties or damage.^[4]^[5] This in bello rule, codified in Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, prohibits disproportionate attacks but does not demand symmetry between belligerents' losses or capabilities, focusing instead on concrete assessments of military necessity against humanitarian costs—a distinction often obscured in public discourse.^[6]^[7] In human rights and constitutional law, particularly under frameworks like the European Convention on Human Rights, proportionality entails a structured test evaluating suitability, necessity, and strict balance to justify rights limitations, serving as a bulwark against arbitrary state action.^[8] Notable applications include its role in regulating armed conflicts, where empirical analyses of targeting decisions hinge on verifiable intelligence and causal predictions of collateral effects, and in ethical resource allocation, as during pandemics, where interventions must align burdens with achievable benefits without undue sacrifice.^[9]^[10] Controversies arise from interpretive challenges, such as quantifying "excessiveness" amid incomplete information or asymmetric warfare, leading to debates over whether the principle unduly constrains self-defense or, conversely, fails to deter violations when enforcement relies on post-hoc judicial review by bodies prone to institutional biases.^[11]^[12] Despite these tensions, proportionality remains a linchpin for causal realism in decision-making, prioritizing evidence-based trade-offs over absolutist or punitive approaches.^[13]

In Mathematics

Core Concepts and Types

Direct proportionality describes a relationship between two variables x and y where y varies as a constant multiple of x, formally expressed as y = kx, with k being the constant of proportionality such that the ratio y/x = k remains invariant across values.^[14]^[15] This constancy arises from the multiplicative scaling: if x doubles, y doubles; if x triples, y triples, preserving the ratio.^[16] Inverse proportionality occurs when y varies such that the product xy = [k](/page/K) is constant, yielding y = [k](/page/K)/x.^[14]^[17] Here, as x increases, y decreases proportionally, and vice versa; for instance, doubling x halves y.^[18] The constant [k](/page/K) can be derived from first principles by rearranging the relation or empirically by selecting paired values where k = y \cdot x for inverse cases, or k = y / x for direct, ensuring consistency across multiple data points.^[19]^[20] To distinguish proportional relations from non-linear ones, verify if the ratio y/x (direct) or y \cdot x (inverse) is invariant; non-proportional relations exhibit varying ratios, as in quadratic forms like y = x^2 where ratios increase with x.^[14] Proportionality implies a linear graph through the origin (no y-intercept), whereas non-linear relations deviate from straight lines or constant ratios, provable algebraically: assume y = kx + b with b \neq 0 yields y/x = k + b/x, which varies with x.^[21]

x	Direct Proportional y = 2x	y/x	Non-Linear y = x^2	y/x
1	2	2	1	1
2	4	2	4	2
3	6	2	9	3

In the table above, constant y/x = 2 confirms direct proportionality, while varying ratios in y = x^2 indicate non-linearity.^[22]^[14]

Historical Foundations

The earliest evidence of proportional reasoning in mathematics appears in ancient Egyptian and Babylonian practices, rooted in empirical solutions to practical problems. The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, dating to approximately 1650 BCE during Egypt's Second Intermediate Period, includes problems requiring proportional division, such as apportioning loaves or measures of grain among varying numbers of recipients or based on shares, demonstrating an intuitive grasp of ratios for administrative and geometric tasks like land surveying.^[23] Similarly, Babylonian clay tablets from around 1800–1600 BCE reveal proportional calculations in sexagesimal notation, including reciprocal pairs for multiplication tables and ratios of triangle sides in right-angled figures, as seen in the Plimpton 322 tablet, which lists Pythagorean triples implying systematic proportional relations without explicit trigonometric functions.^[24] These applications prioritized causal utility in measurement and division over abstract theory, reflecting a proto-mathematical framework driven by observable regularities in quantities. Greek mathematicians advanced proportionality into a rigorous deductive system to address limitations in handling incommensurable magnitudes, such as irrational lengths arising from geometric constructions. Eudoxus of Cnidus (c. 408–355 BCE) formulated a theory of proportions treating ratios as relations between homogeneous magnitudes, using the method of exhaustion—iteratively comparing multiples to define equality without assuming common measures—to encompass irrationals, as preserved in later accounts.^[25] This innovation resolved paradoxes from earlier Pythagorean commensurability assumptions, enabling causal reasoning about continuous quantities. Euclid systematized Eudoxus's approach in Book V of the Elements (c. 300 BCE), defining proportional equality axiomatically: magnitudes A:B and C:D are equal if, for any integers m and n, mA > nB implies mC > nD (and equalities analogously), with propositions establishing properties like transitivity and alternation for geometric and arithmetic applications.^[26] During the Renaissance, proportional concepts evolved amid the recovery of classical texts and integration with emerging algebraic techniques, bridging ancient geometry toward modern analysis. Johannes Kepler (1571–1630), in works like Harmonices Mundi (1619), explored proportions in geometric figures, musical intervals, and polygonal constructions, deriving ratios from similarity principles to model harmonic structures, which underscored scalable relations independent of specific scales.^[27] This period's emphasis on proportional invariants facilitated causal insights into form and quantity, paving the way for 17th-century formalizations in coordinate geometry and calculus, where proportions underpin limits and derivatives without reliance on magnitude hierarchies.^[28]

In Science and Engineering

Applications in Physics

In classical mechanics, Newton's second law establishes that the net force F acting on an object is directly proportional to its acceleration a, with the constant of proportionality being the object's mass m, expressed as F = ma. This relation was empirically grounded in experiments predating Newton, such as Galileo's inclined plane investigations around 1604, where bronze balls rolling down inclines demonstrated uniform acceleration independent of mass, with distances covered proportional to the square of time, implying constant acceleration under gravity's influence. Hooke's law describes the restoring force F in elastic deformations, such as springs, as directly proportional to the displacement x from equilibrium, given by F = -kx, where k is the spring constant. Formulated by Robert Hooke in the 1660s through experiments on stretched wires and springs, this linear proportionality holds within the elastic limit, where stress is proportional to strain, as verified by measuring extensions under varying loads and confirming the absence of hysteresis in reversible deformations.^[29]^[30] In electricity, Ohm's law states that the voltage V across a conductor is directly proportional to the current I through it, with resistance R as the constant of proportionality: V = IR. This empirical relation, derived by Georg Simon Ohm in 1827 from experiments varying wire lengths, temperatures, and materials while measuring potential differences and currents, applies to ohmic conductors where current density is proportional to electric field strength, falsifiable by deviations in non-linear materials like semiconductors./University_Physics_II_-Thermodynamics_Electricity_and_Magnetism(OpenStax)/09%3A_Current_and_Resistance/9.05%3A_Ohm%27s_Law) Gravitational and electrostatic forces exemplify inverse proportionality, specifically the inverse square law. Newton's law of universal gravitation posits the attractive force F between masses m_1 and m_2 as F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}, where G = 6.67430 \times 10^{-11} m³ kg⁻¹ s⁻² is the gravitational constant from CODATA measurements, inversely proportional to the square of separation r, empirically confirmed by Cavendish's 1798 torsion balance experiment scaling forces with distance. Similarly, Coulomb's law for charges q_1 and q_2 gives F = k_e \frac{q_1 q_2}{r^2}, with k_e the Coulomb constant, derived from 1785 torsion experiments showing force inversely proportional to r^2, validated by field line divergence in three-dimensional space.^[31]^[32]

Scaling Laws and Similarity Principles

Scaling laws and similarity principles underpin the prediction of system behavior across different sizes in science and engineering, relying on dimensionless quantities to ensure physical analogies hold. These principles emerge from dimensional analysis, which identifies invariant ratios unaffected by absolute scale, allowing models to replicate prototype dynamics. Central to this is the Buckingham π theorem, formulated by Edgar Buckingham in 1914, stating that a physical relation involving n variables expressible in m fundamental dimensions (mass, length, time, etc.) can be reduced to a function of n - m independent dimensionless groups, denoted as π terms. This theorem formalizes earlier intuitive methods, such as those by Lord Rayleigh, enabling engineers to derive scaling relations without full theoretical solutions.^[33] In fluid dynamics, similarity principles dictate that flows are dynamically analogous if key dimensionless numbers match between model and full-scale systems. The Reynolds number, Re = ρ v L / μ (where ρ is fluid density, v velocity, L characteristic length, and μ dynamic viscosity), quantifies the ratio of inertial to viscous forces, determining transition from laminar to turbulent flow regimes.^[34] For instance, ship hull testing in towing tanks requires scaling velocities and lengths to preserve Re, ensuring drag coefficients align; mismatches lead to erroneous predictions, as viscous effects dominate at low Re (< 2000) while inertia prevails at high Re (> 10^5).^[35] Other numbers like the Froude number (Fr = v / √(g L)) complement Re for free-surface flows, such as waves around marine structures, highlighting how proportionality in scaling preserves causal flow physics.^[36] Biological allometry applies these principles to organismal scaling, revealing how traits vary non-linearly with body size due to geometric and physiological constraints. Kleiber's law, derived empirically by Max Kleiber in 1932 from basal metabolic rate (BMR) data across mammalian species ranging from mice to whales, posits BMR ∝ M^3/4, where M is body mass, rather than the surface-area prediction of ∝ M^2/3.^[37] This 3/4 exponent arises from network theory in vascular and respiratory systems, where resource distribution efficiency favors fractal-like branching, empirically validated across taxa though debated for unicellular organisms.^[38] In locomotion, stride frequency scales inversely with leg length (∝ L^-1/2), conserving energy via pendular dynamics, as seen in gait transitions from walking to running at comparable Froude numbers (~0.5) across animals.^[39] Engineering examples illustrate scaling pitfalls when similarity is neglected, particularly in structures where strength grows with cross-sectional area (∝ L²) but weight with volume (∝ L³), yielding stress ∝ 1/L. The Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse on November 7, 1940, exemplifies dynamic scaling failures: the slender deck, optimized for static loads, resonated with wind-induced aeroelastic flutter at low amplitudes, amplifying to torsional oscillations exceeding design limits due to unmodeled vortex shedding and insufficient damping.^[40] Post-failure investigations emphasized sectional model testing in wind tunnels to match Strouhal numbers (St = f L / v, linking frequency f to vortex shedding), informing redesigns like the 1950 replacement with deeper, stiffened girders.^[41] Such cases underscore causal realism: empirical scaling validation prevents over-reliance on linearized theories, as larger spans amplify nonlinear instabilities.

In Philosophy and Ethics

Moral and Ethical Frameworks

In moral philosophy, proportionality serves as a foundational principle for achieving ethical balance, positing that virtuous actions and responses must align appropriately with circumstances, avoiding extremes of excess or deficiency. Aristotle articulated this in his Nicomachean Ethics (circa 350 BCE), where moral virtue constitutes a mean relative to the individual and situation, situated between vices of deficiency and excess—for instance, courage as the midpoint between rashness and cowardice.^[42] This doctrine underscores that ethical conduct requires calibrated judgment, calibrated to empirical realities of human nature and context, rather than abstract absolutes or unchecked impulses.^[43] Immanuel Kant's deontological framework further embeds proportionality by prohibiting actions that treat rational beings merely as means to ends, as delineated in his categorical imperative: one must act only according to maxims that can be universalized and respect humanity's intrinsic dignity.^[44] Disproportionate measures, such as sacrificing innocents for purported greater goods, violate this imperative by instrumentalizing persons, thereby undermining the moral autonomy essential to rational agency.^[45] Kant's emphasis on duty-bound limits critiques consequentialist allowances for imbalance, insisting that moral worth derives from adherence to rules that preclude escalatory harms disproportionate to the agent's intent and the act's inherent wrongness. Utilitarian ethics, by contrast, dilutes proportionality through its aggregate utility calculus, potentially endorsing disproportionate acts—like punishing the innocent to deter crime—if they maximize overall happiness.^[46] Critics argue this framework erodes individual rights and moral constraints, as empirical scenarios reveal its endorsement of injustices, such as exploiting minorities for majority benefit, which fail to respect desert or causal accountability.^[47] Retributivist approaches restore balance by demanding responses calibrated to the offense's gravity, where punishment or restitution mirrors the wrong's moral weight, ensuring neither underreaction permits impunity nor overreaction breeds vengeance.^[48] Moral relativism, often normalized in contemporary discourse, faces empirical challenges when prioritizing subjective feelings over causally verifiable harms; cross-cultural studies indicate persistent convergence on core prohibitions against unprovoked violence or betrayal, suggesting objective constraints rooted in human flourishing rather than cultural whim.^[49] Ethical assessment thus favors causal realism—evaluating actions by their demonstrable effects on well-being and order—over relativistic dilutions that obscure disproportionate impacts, such as equating minor infractions with severe violations based on affective narratives alone. This retributive equilibrium in moral calculus upholds proportionality as essential to justice, grounding ethics in reasoned reciprocity rather than expedient relativization.^[50]

Proportionality in Justice Systems

The principle of proportionality in punishment, often encapsulated in the maxim "an eye for an eye," originated in ancient legal codes as a mechanism to impose retribution calibrated to the harm inflicted, thereby deterring crime through predictable costs exceeding potential gains. Hammurabi's Code, inscribed around 1750 BCE, applied this lex talionis to cases such as assault, mandating equivalent injury to the offender unless social status mitigated the penalty, aiming to curb vigilante excess and enforce social order via certain retaliation.^[51] Similarly, biblical texts in Exodus 21:23-25 and Leviticus 24:19-20 prescribed matching retaliation for bodily harm, interpreting the rule not as literal mutilation but as a proportional limit on revenge to promote judicial equity and general deterrence.^[52]^[53] In contemporary justice systems, proportionality manifests in sentencing guidelines that scale penalties to offense severity, informed by deterrence theory positing that rational actors weigh expected sanctions against criminal benefits. Empirical analyses, however, indicate that punishment severity yields marginal reductions in recidivism, with meta-reviews of over 300,000 offenders across 50 studies finding no consistent inverse correlation between longer incarceration and reoffending rates; longer terms often correlate with slightly higher recidivism due to institutionalization effects.^[54]^[55] U.S. three-strikes laws, enacted starting with California's Proposition 184 in 1994, exemplify attempts at escalated proportionality for repeat offenders, imposing life sentences for third felonies and contributing to a 25-30% prison population surge by 2000, yet longitudinal data reveal limited efficacy in curbing recidivism beyond initial incapacitation, with annual costs exceeding $50,000 per inmate and negligible long-term crime drops attributable to severity alone.^[55] Evidence prioritizes swiftness and certainty over raw severity for deterrence, as demonstrated by Lawrence Sherman's 1990 review of 18 police crackdown cases, where intensified enforcement produced initial deterrent effects in 15 instances by raising apprehension risks, though residual impacts faded without sustained measures.^[56]^[57] This aligns with broader findings that non-legal factors like employment and social bonds more strongly predict recidivism than sentence length, challenging rehabilitative paradigms lacking empirical support for reducing reoffense rates below those achieved by proportional, reliably enforced sanctions.^[58]^[59] Critiques of disproportionate regimes, such as three-strikes applications to non-violent offenses, highlight fiscal burdens—totaling billions annually—without proportional recidivism gains, underscoring the need for empirically calibrated proportionality that avoids both leniency undermining certainty and excess severity yielding diminishing returns.^[55]^[60]

In Domestic Law

Origins in Administrative and Constitutional Law

The principle of proportionality emerged in 19th-century German administrative law, rooted in Prussian judicial practice where courts developed the doctrine of necessity to constrain excessive police and administrative interventions, evolving into the Übermaßverbot—a prohibition against measures exceeding what was required to achieve public ends.^[61] This framework addressed the administrative state's expansion by requiring actions to align means with legitimate goals, preventing arbitrary overreach in areas like public health and order, as seen in early rulings limiting discretionary powers under the Prussian Allgemeines Landrecht of 1794.^[61] Empirical application focused on factual assessment of administrative burdens versus benefits, reflecting a causal emphasis on evidence-based limits rather than formalistic deference. By the early 20th century, the concept influenced neighboring systems: Swiss federal courts incorporated proportionality-like reviews in administrative disputes, mandating that discretionary acts avoid undue hardship, as evidenced in pre-World War II jurisprudence upholding necessity in zoning and licensing cases. In France, the Conseil d'État applied analogous checks against excès de pouvoir (excess of power), evaluating administrative decisions for disproportionality in pre-1939 rulings on expropriations and regulations, though without the structured German test.^[62] These developments causally stemmed from shared European needs to balance bureaucratic efficiency with individual protections amid industrialization, predating explicit constitutional codification. Post-World War II, Germany's Basic Law of 1949 implicitly embedded proportionality via the Rechtsstaat principle and Article 19(2), which guards against impairing the essence of rights, but the Federal Constitutional Court formalized its constitutional role in the 1950s.^[63] Landmark was the Apothekenurteil (Pharmacy Judgment) of July 16, 1958 (BVerfGE 7, 377), invalidating pharmacy licensing restrictions under Article 9 (freedom of occupation) for failing the emerging tripartite test: measures must be geeignet (suitable) for their aim, erforderlich (necessary, with no milder alternative), and angemessen (proportionate in balancing interests).^[64] This ruling shifted review from mere legality to substantive evaluation, citing 377 licensed pharmacies in a district as evidence of overregulation stifling competition without proportional public health gains.^[65] The test's adoption reflected causal realism in judicial empiricism, prioritizing verifiable impacts over deference, and influenced post-1945 constitutional designs by exporting administrative restraint to rights adjudication.^[63]

Proportionality Tests and Judicial Review

The proportionality test serves as a structured framework in judicial review for assessing whether government actions infringing on constitutional rights or administrative law constraints are justified, prioritizing empirical evidence of efficacy and alternatives over uncritical deference to executive claims of urgency or expertise.^[66] Courts applying this test demand verifiable data on the measure's impacts, causal links to stated goals, and comparative assessment of less burdensome options, thereby constraining overreach in contexts like regulatory restrictions or emergency powers.^[64] This approach, rooted in administrative law traditions from late 19th-century German jurisprudence, has spread to common law systems, enabling judges to invalidate measures lacking rigorous substantiation.^[67] The test comprises four sequential prongs: first, the action must pursue a legitimate constitutional aim, such as public health or safety; second, it must demonstrate suitability through a rational connection to achieving that aim, supported by causal evidence; third, necessity requires proof that no less restrictive alternative exists, with the government bearing the evidentiary burden; and fourth, strict proportionality mandates balancing the anticipated benefits against the measure's harms, weighing severity of rights deprivation against incremental gains.^[68] Failure at any prong renders the action unlawful, as seen in reviews of regulatory schemes where empirical gaps in the necessity stage—such as unproven superiority over targeted interventions—lead to invalidation.^[69] In the United States, where the full four-prong test is not standard, analogous elements appear in strict scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment, requiring a compelling state interest, narrow tailoring, and application of the least restrictive means, though without routine explicit balancing of harms and benefits.^[70] Pre-2022 substantive due process cases, including the Roe v. Wade (1973) framework for abortion restrictions, incorporated de facto proportionality by evaluating state interests against privacy rights via trimester-based balancing, demanding evidence of health risks or fetal viability thresholds.^[71] The 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling critiqued such judicial balancing as policy-laden and unmoored from text, favoring historical tradition and democratic processes, which reduced reliance on empirical harm assessments in favor of categorical limits. Empirical critiques highlight proportionality's role in curbing overreach, as in COVID-19 lockdowns from 2020 to 2022, where measures like business closures and movement bans often failed the necessity prong due to meta-analyses showing no significant mortality reduction—excess deaths correlated more with demographics and healthcare access than restrictions—while imposing verifiable harms including 20-30% GDP contractions in affected economies and surges in non-COVID mortality from delayed care.^[72] A 2023 systematic review of 24 studies across jurisdictions found lockdowns reduced case growth by at most 10-15% short-term but at costs exceeding benefits when accounting for secondary effects like educational losses and mental health declines, underscoring failures in evidence-based judicial scrutiny.^[73] In proportionality-adopting courts, such data prompted strikes against prolonged restrictions, rejecting state deference absent causal proof of net harm prevention.^[74]

In International Law

Human Rights Adjudication

In treaty-based human rights systems, proportionality serves as a core criterion for evaluating state interferences with qualified rights, requiring that any limitation pursue a legitimate aim, be necessary, and impose no greater restriction than required to achieve that aim.^[75] The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) applies this test rigorously under Articles 8-11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, often balancing it with the margin of appreciation doctrine, which affords states deference based on cultural, moral, or national security contexts.^[76] In the landmark Handyside v. United Kingdom (1976), the ECtHR upheld a British ban on distributing a book deemed obscene to minors, deeming it proportionate within the UK's wide margin for protecting morals, as the interference was prescribed by law and pursued a pressing social need without unduly stifling expression.^[77] This doctrine tempers judicial intervention, recognizing states' primary responsibility for balancing rights against public interests, though the margin narrows on core Convention values or where European consensus exists.^[78] The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) employs a similar proportionality analysis but with narrower deference to states, emphasizing a strict balancing of rights against restrictions under the American Convention, often without an explicit margin of appreciation equivalent.^[79] For instance, the IACtHR requires measures to closely adhere to the pursued interest and mandates empirical weighing of impacts, as seen in cases restricting expression for national security, where courts prioritize victim rights over state claims.^[80] Empirical studies indicate compliance rates with IACtHR judgments average around 60-70% for structural reforms, lower than ECtHR averages, attributed to the court's demanding standards in politically sensitive areas like transitional justice.^[81] The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights similarly invokes proportionality to scrutinize restrictions under the African Charter, assessing rationality and minimal impairment, though its jurisprudence remains nascent with fewer binding rulings; compliance data is sparse but suggests challenges in implementation amid weak enforcement mechanisms.^[82] Across systems, higher violation repeat rates—up to 50% non-execution for ECtHR in resistant states—highlight tensions when courts demand changes exceeding national capacities.^[83] Critiques of these courts' proportionality applications center on expansive interpretations that encroach on state sovereignty, particularly through evolutive readings imposing positive obligations beyond textual limits, thereby sidestepping democratic accountability.^[84] In the 2024 KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland ruling, the ECtHR deemed inadequate national climate policies a violation of Article 8, narrowing the margin of appreciation due to scientific consensus and mandating robust mitigation frameworks, a move decried for conflating judicial review with policy prescription and attributing diffuse causal harms like emissions to specific states.^[85] Such rulings, influenced by internationalist judicial benches often aligned with academic consensus on global threats, normalize restrictions on sovereign choices in areas like environmental regulation, fostering resistance from states viewing them as undemocratic overreach rather than neutral rights enforcement.^[86] Empirical non-compliance patterns in sovereignty-sensitive domains underscore causal disconnects, where courts' elite-driven expansions prioritize supranational norms over localized empirical trade-offs.^[83]

Trade and Regulatory Contexts

In the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework, proportionality manifests through the necessity test under GATT Article XX, which permits temporary derogations from trade obligations for measures protecting public morals, animal life, or exhaustible resources, provided they impose the least restrictive trade barrier reasonably available to achieve the policy objective.^[87] This test requires empirical demonstration that no less trade-distortive alternatives exist, balancing non-economic aims against free trade principles to prevent protectionist abuse.^[88] The 1991 GATT panel in the United States—Restrictions on Imports of Tuna (Tuna-Dolphin I) exemplifies this application, ruling that the U.S. embargo on tuna caught via purse-seine methods harming dolphins violated GATT Articles III and XI and failed Article XX(g)'s necessity requirement, as multilateral cooperation or labeling could protect dolphins without banning imports.^[87] The panel emphasized that the measure's extraterritorial process-and-production scope exceeded proportionality by unnecessarily restricting trade from compliant foreign producers.^[87] Within the European Union's internal market, proportionality limits national regulatory measures hindering free movement of goods, services, capital, or persons, ensuring they are suitable, necessary, and not excessively burdensome relative to objectives like public health or consumer protection.^[89] The 1979 Court of Justice ruling in Rewe-Zentral AG v. Bundesmonopolverwaltung für Branntwein (Cassis de Dijon) established that Germany's minimum 20% alcohol content rule for liqueurs disproportionately impeded imports of lower-strength French crème de cassis (17-20% alcohol), as milder French standards posed no verified threat justifying the barrier, favoring mutual recognition over unilateral restrictions.^[89] Empirical analyses indicate that stringent WTO and EU proportionality requirements induce regulatory chill, where governments delay or dilute health and environmental standards to evade disputes or compliance costs, with trade-exposed sectors showing up to 20-30% reduced adoption rates of new nutrition or product rules in affected jurisdictions.^[90] ^[91] This effect stems from causal incentives: fear of top-up liabilities or retaliatory tariffs prioritizes trade flows over optimal domestic regulation, as evidenced in EU cases where mutual recognition halved non-tariff barriers but correlated with stalled updates to food safety thresholds.^[91] Recent developments, such as the OECD's Pillar Two global minimum corporate tax (15% effective rate for multinationals with €750 million+ revenue), implemented via domestic laws from December 2023 onward in over 140 jurisdictions including the EU by 2024-2025, illustrate disproportionate regulatory overreach by overriding tax sovereignty and ignoring local investment incentives.^[92] ^[93] Critics argue this uniform floor disrupts causal investment allocation, reducing foreign direct investment to low-tax economies by 5-10% through top-up taxes that penalize efficiency-driven competition rather than evasion, without evidence of net revenue gains offsetting capital flight.^[94]

In Warfare and International Humanitarian Law

Jus ad Bellum Proportionality

Jus ad bellum proportionality evaluates whether the overall resort to war is justified by ensuring that the anticipated harms and costs of the conflict do not exceed the goods it secures, such as halting aggression or protecting vital interests.^[5] In traditional just war theory, this criterion demands a net positive outcome, where the evils prevented—measured in terms of lives saved, sovereignty restored, or threats neutralized—outweigh the destruction inflicted, without presuming against war absent such calculus.^[11] Thomas Aquinas, in the 13th century, framed it as requiring that the good pursued surpass the inherent evils of warfare, emphasizing proportionality as a restraint on trivial or excessive causes.^[95] This first-principles assessment prioritizes causal efficacy over moral absolutism, rejecting anti-war defaults that ignore empirical prevention of greater harms. Modern formulations, such as Michael Walzer's in Just and Unjust Wars (1977), refine this by balancing anticipated destruction against the moral stakes, like defending democratic sovereignty or averting totalitarian expansion, while acknowledging the inherent uncertainties in wartime forecasting.^[96] In international law, the principle integrates into the UN Charter's framework under Article 51 (1945), which preserves the inherent right of self-defense against armed attack, interpreted to mandate responses proportional to the threat's scale and immediacy, drawing on customary norms to limit escalation beyond necessity.^[97] Unlike jus in bello rules governing conduct within war, ad bellum proportionality scrutinizes the decision to initiate or join conflict holistically, factoring strategic ends like deterrence of future invasions. The 1991 Gulf War illustrates calibrated proportionality: a U.S.-led coalition expelled Iraqi forces from Kuwait following Saddam Hussein's August 2, 1990, invasion, achieving liberation with 148 coalition fatalities against an estimated 20,000-50,000 Iraqi military deaths, while averting broader regional destabilization and oil supply disruptions that could have inflicted global economic harms exceeding the war's costs.^[98] Empirical data from the conflict, including rapid Iraqi collapse after 42 days of air and ground operations starting January 17, 1991, confirmed the response's restraint relative to the aggression's scope, which involved annexing a sovereign state and threatening Saudi Arabia.^[99] In World War II, Allied leaders' ad bellum proportionality rested on projections that defeating Axis powers would prevent indefinite subjugation and genocide-scale atrocities, with post-war analyses affirming strategic bombing's role in eroding German industrial output by up to 20-30% and hastening surrender by weakening resolve and logistics, despite high civilian tolls exceeding 500,000 in Europe.^[100] Revisionist accounts downplay these causal links, attributing Axis defeat primarily to ground campaigns, yet United States Strategic Bombing Survey findings (1945) evidenced bombing's contribution to morale collapse and resource denial, validating the net goods of total war against Nazi and Imperial Japanese threats that had already claimed tens of millions of lives by 1941.^[101] Such assessments underscore proportionality's reliance on verifiable outcomes over retrospective moralizing, prioritizing causal realism in weighing alternatives like negotiated peace, which historical evidence suggests would have prolonged fascist dominance.^[102]

Jus in Bello Proportionality

Jus in bello proportionality governs the conduct of hostilities in armed conflicts, requiring that anticipated incidental harm to civilians or civilian objects not be excessive relative to the concrete and direct military advantage expected from an attack. This principle, codified in Article 51(5)(b) of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (1977), prohibits attacks expected to cause such excessive collateral effects, distinguishing it from jus ad bellum assessments of overall war justification. The evaluation occurs from the attacker's perspective at the time of decision-making, based on reasonably available information, and focuses on the specific military objective's value rather than broader campaign goals.^[103] Interpretations differ between international organizations and state military doctrines. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) views proportionality as customary international humanitarian law, emphasizing a strict balancing where "excessive" harm includes long-term environmental or cultural impacts, and critiques attacks based on post-hoc casualty counts without accounting for attacker intent.^[104] In contrast, the U.S. Department of Defense Law of War Manual (2015, updated 2016) interprets "concrete and direct" military advantage narrowly to the attack's immediate effects, rejecting retrospective judgments or requirements to abort strikes solely due to uncertain civilian presence, provided feasible precautions were taken.^[103]^[12] These manuals prioritize verifiable intelligence and objective advantage, such as neutralizing command centers or weapon caches, over politicized metrics like raw civilian-to-combatant death ratios. Complications arise from tactics like human shielding, where adversaries embed military assets among civilians to deter strikes or manipulate proportionality claims, as addressed in Article 51(7) of Additional Protocol I, which denies immunity to areas due to civilian presence. In the 2023-2024 Gaza conflict, Hamas's documented placement of rocket launchers, tunnels, and command posts in hospitals, schools, and residential areas elevated incidental civilian risks during Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) operations targeting these sites, inflating perceived disproportion despite efforts like warnings and precision munitions.^[105]^[106] Such strategies shift causal responsibility for heightened harm toward the shielding party, as military manuals assess attacks lawful if the shielded objective's destruction yields direct advantage outweighing foreseeable collateral under constrained intelligence conditions.^[103] This underscores the principle's reliance on empirical threat assessment over biased narratives from conflicted parties.

Controversies, Criticisms, and Asymmetric Conflicts

In asymmetric conflicts, the principle of proportionality under international humanitarian law has faced criticism for being misinterpreted as requiring equivalent casualties between belligerents, rather than evaluating anticipated military advantage against expected incidental civilian harm. This misconception, often amplified in public discourse, equates the defender's response to the aggressor's initial attack, ignoring causal factors such as the aggressor's deliberate embedding of military assets in civilian areas. For instance, in the Israel-Hamas war initiated by Hamas's October 7, 2023, attack that killed approximately 1,200 Israelis and took over 250 hostages, proportionality assessments must account for Hamas's tactics that foreseeably increase civilian exposure to harm, shifting the moral and legal burden onto the initiator.^[107]^[108]^[109] Hamas's systematic use of human shields exemplifies how irregular actors exploit urban density to complicate adversary compliance with proportionality, as documented in analyses of the 2023-2024 Gaza operations. A 2025 report identifies ten distinct strategies, including positioning command centers under hospitals (e.g., Al-Shifa Hospital tunnels housing weapons and fighters), launching rockets from residential zones, and commandeering civilian infrastructure for military purposes, which empirically elevates the risk of collateral damage during targeting. These tactics do not negate the defender's obligation to minimize harm but causally inflate expected civilian casualties, rendering strict tit-for-tat equivalence an impractical and propagandistic standard that advantages non-state actors unbound by state-like restraints. Critics contend this dynamic is underrepresented in mainstream narratives, which often frame high civilian tolls as disproportionate without disaggregating combatant deaths or shield-induced risks.^[105]^[110]^[111] Academic disputes center on whether proportionality assessments should prioritize subjective commander judgments or objective benchmarks, with the Lieber Institute highlighting the principle's dual role as both a binding rule and a broader interpretive guide in fluid combat environments. A 2022 analysis argues that rigid rule-bound applications fail in asymmetric scenarios, where operational military advantage—such as degrading an enemy's command structure—must outweigh incidental harm, yet subjective elements invite hindsight bias from detached observers. This tension rejects media-driven moral equivalency, as empirical data from urban battles show irregular forces' perfidy (e.g., feigning civilian status) undermines objective evaluation, favoring instead contextual reasoning grounded in real-time intelligence.^[9]^[112] The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has addressed urban warfare challenges in recent reports, emphasizing distinction, proportionality, and precautions amid protracted conflicts, but without endorsing constraints that disproportionately burden technologically superior defenders against irregulars who instrumentalize civilians. The ICRC's 2024 Challenges Report notes rising civilian risks in densely populated areas due to tactics like human shielding, underscoring the need for adaptive application rather than blanket condemnations of defensive operations. Conservative ethicists, drawing from post-9/11 analyses of non-state threats, advocate broader proportionality allowances in existential conflicts, arguing that states facing survival-level aggression (e.g., repeated mass-casualty attacks) may justifiably prioritize threat elimination over minimized harm, as symmetric restraint invites escalation. This perspective counters equivalences that treat aggressors and defenders alike, prioritizing causal accountability over outcome parity.^[113]^[114]^[115]

Other Specialized Uses

In Art, Design, and Aesthetics

In classical architecture, proportionality was foundational to achieving aesthetic harmony, as articulated by the Roman architect Vitruvius in De Architectura (c. 20 BCE), where he prescribed that building elements derive from the modular proportions of the human body to ensure structural integrity and visual balance. Vitruvius detailed specific ratios, such as assigning widths in atria based on overall dimensions—for instance, dividing a 40- to 60-foot-wide space into five parts for proportional tablinum allocation—emphasizing relational symmetry over arbitrary scaling to evoke natural order. This anthropometric approach influenced subsequent design principles, prioritizing empirical mimicry of bodily ratios for perceived stability and beauty. During the Renaissance, these ideas culminated in Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man (c. 1490), a diagrammatic study superimposing human figures within geometric shapes to illustrate Vitruvian ideals of proportion, where the body's height equals its arm span and other modular relations align with circle and square enclosures.^[116] Artists like Leonardo and Raphael integrated the golden ratio (φ ≈ 1.618)—a geometric proportion where the ratio of the whole to the larger part equals the larger to the smaller—into compositions for enhanced visual appeal, as evidenced in Leonardo's compositional structuring and Raphael's spatial divisions in works like The School of Athens (1511).^[117] ^[118] Empirical investigations into perceptual preferences substantiate these historical practices; Gustav Fechner's 1876 experiments presented participants with rectangles of varying aspect ratios, revealing a peak preference (approximately 35%) for those approximating the golden ratio (e.g., 1:1.618), suggesting an innate human bias toward such proportions in two-dimensional forms.^[119] Subsequent studies in empirical aesthetics have replicated elements of this preference in viewing artworks and designs, linking proportional harmony to biometric indicators like reduced eye-tracking fixation times and elevated skin conductance responses indicative of positive affect, though results vary by context and challenge universal claims.^[120] In contrast, post-1950s Brutalist architecture, which often prioritized raw functionality and deviated from classical modular ratios in favor of monolithic scales, has elicited consistent viewer reports of unease, corroborated by surveys showing lower aesthetic ratings tied to perceptual overload from disproportional massing.^[121]

In Medicine, Economics, and Policy

In medicine, proportionality principles underpin drug dosing regimens, where therapeutic or toxic effects are calibrated to physiological variables such as body weight or surface area to ensure exposure scales predictably with patient size.^[122] This approach assumes pharmacokinetic parameters like clearance and volume of distribution increase proportionally, enabling safe and effective administration across diverse populations.^[123] Dose-response assessments, including lethal dose 50 (LD50) curves for toxicity, further enforce proportionality by quantifying exposure thresholds where harm escalates nonlinearly, guiding regulatory limits like those in FDA human equivalent dose calculations.^[124] Violations of such calibration contributed to the thalidomide tragedy of the late 1950s and early 1960s, when the sedative—marketed without proportional teratogenicity testing in pregnant models despite apparent safety at high animal doses—induced phocomelia and other defects in over 10,000 infants across 46 countries before bans in 1961-1962.^[125]^[126] In economics, proportionality informs marginal analysis through the law of diminishing returns, formalized by David Ricardo in his 1817 On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, which posits that successive increments of a variable input (e.g., labor on fixed land) yield progressively smaller output gains, necessitating balanced resource deployment to avoid inefficiency.^[127] This causal framework counters over-allocation by highlighting nonlinear benefits, as additional factors beyond optimal points impose rising costs with minimal returns, a principle applied in production functions to optimize proportionality between inputs and value created.^[128] Policy applications of proportionality emphasize evidence-calibrated interventions over rigid uniformity, as seen in the European Union's Solvency II framework for insurance regulation, where 2024-2025 revisions introduce a tiered proportionality module to modulate capital, reporting, and governance requirements based on firm size and risk profile, alleviating burdens on smaller insurers while preserving systemic stability.^[129]^[130] Critiques of disproportionality arise in cases like China's zero-COVID policy (2020-2022), which enforced blanket lockdowns yielding initial viral suppression but at escalating economic costs—estimated at trillions in GDP loss—and suppressed natural immunity, culminating in 1.87 million excess deaths among those over 30 in the two months post-December 2022 abrupt reversal due to Omicron surge on unexposed populations.^[131] Such outcomes illustrate how uncalibrated absolutism ignores marginal trade-offs, favoring targeted measures aligned with evolving epidemiological data over indefinite zero-risk pursuits.^[132]

References

[1]
The Principle of Proportionality in Modern Ius Gentium
Mar 11, 2021 · Proportionality is the principle of balancing interests for fair and optimal outcomes, reflecting the balance between necessities and equity.
[2]
The History of the General Principle of Proportionality: An Overview
Jul 9, 2009 · The theory of proportionality is traced to Aristotle, and the practice of proportionality jurisprudence, developed over several centuries as an ...
[3]
The historical origins of proportionality (Chapter 7)
Proportionality's origins include classical Greek justice, Roman law, the Magna Carta, St. Thomas Aquinas, and the Enlightenment's social contract.
[4]
Proportionality - Oxford Public International Law
EA Engle 'The History of the General Principle of Proportionality: An Overview' (7 July 2009) Willamette Journal of International Law and Dispute Resolution.
[5]
[PDF] Proportionality and Necessity in Jus in Bello - Oxford Handbooks
In the traditional theory of the just war, the requirements of proportionality and necessity appear twice, once among the principles governing the resort to war ...
[6]
Proportionality | How does law protect in war? - Online casebook
The principle of proportionality prohibits attacks against military objectives which are “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, ...
[7]
The Disproportionate Confusion About Proportionality - JINSA
Oct 26, 2023 · As noted, proportionality as a LOAC principle prohibits the attack only if the attacker concludes the incidental or collateral consequences ...
[8]
What is proportionality? | British Institute of Human Rights
Proportionality in human rights law means identifying the various options available and choosing the one which is least restrictive of a person's human rights.
[9]
Proportionality in International Humanitarian Law: A Principle and a ...
Oct 24, 2022 · Proportionality plays a key role in international humanitarian law (IHL). It is essential to regulating the conduct of hostilities.
[10]
The Principle of Proportionality: An Ethical Approach to Resource ...
Apr 1, 2020 · The principle of proportionality states that responses should be proportional to the good that can be achieved and the harm that may be caused.
[11]
Proportionality in War: Revising Revisionism* | Ethics: Vol 131, No 1
In this article I argue that revisionists in just war theory must further revise their proportionality principles.
[12]
The Principle of Proportionality in the DoD Law of War Manual
Jan 18, 2024 · International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is built upon certain core principles: military necessity, distinction, humanity, and proportionality. The ...
[13]
Proportionality in the Morality of War
Just war theory, the most widely accepted theory of the morality of war, contains two proportionality conditions that say a war or an act in war is justified ...Proportionality Conditions · II. Relevant Goods · IV. Weighing Goods and Evils...<|separator|>
[14]
Proportionality vs. Linearity - Department of Mathematics at UTSA
Oct 30, 2021 · If an object travels at a constant speed, then the distance traveled is directly proportional to the time spent traveling, with the speed being ...
[15]
[PDF] Understanding Student Thinking with Direct and Inverse Proportions
Lobato and Ellis defined direct proportion saying, “When two quantities are related proportionally, the ratio of one quantity to the other is invariant as ...
[16]
[PDF] Proportions.pdf
When speaking of direct proportions, they change in the same fashion. For instance, if you double one quantity , then the other will double as well.
[17]
3 Units, proportionality and mathematical modeling - Penn Math
🔗 To say is inversely proportional to means that is proportional to . 1 / B . If a quantity is proportional to both quantities and , which can vary ...
[18]
[PDF] Proportional And Inversely Proportional
Equations of direct and inverse proportion In this graph, and are directly proportional. This means that when doubles, also doubles, and when triples, so does .
[19]
Constant Of Proportionality With Example - Cuemath
To find the constant of proportionality, in the case of direct proportionality, we use k=y/x. Let us take y = 12 and x = 6, then k = 12/6 = 2.
[20]
Rates & proportional relationships FAQ (article) - Khan Academy
A constant of proportionality is a number that relates two quantities in a proportional relationship. For example, if we say that y ‍ ...
[21]
Difference Between Proportional & Linear Relationships - Sciencing
Mar 28, 2023 · The only difference is the addition of the b constant to the linear function. Indeed, a proportional relationship is just a linear relationship ...
[22]
[PDF] Linear Relationships: Proportional vs. Non-Proportional - ReidMath
How to tell the difference: A proportional table has a constant of proportionality in that y divided by x always equals the same value. A non-proportional table ...
[23]
Ancient Egyptian maths problems revealed - British Museum
Sep 1, 2025 · The fascinating maths problems found in the 3,500-year-old Rhind Mathematical Papyrus show how ancient Egyptian mathematics supported daily life ...
[24]
This ancient Babylonian tablet may contain the first evidence of ...
Aug 24, 2017 · The cuneiform inscriptions on Plimpton 322 suggest the Babylonians used a form of trigonometry based on the ratios of the sides of a triangle, ...
[25]
Eudoxus (408 BC - Biography - MacTutor History of Mathematics
Eudoxus made important contributions to the theory of proportion, where he made a definition allowing possibly irrational lengths to be compared in a similar ...
[26]
Euclid's Elements, Book V - Clay Mathematics Institute
May 8, 2008 · If a first magnitude have to a second the same ratio as a third has to a fourth, and the first be greater than the third, the second will also ...
[27]
This Month in Physics History | American Physical Society
Astronomer Johannes Kepler laid out a more literal music of the spheres in his 1619 treatise, Harmonices Mundi (The Harmony of the World).
[28]
Johannes Kepler - Biography - MacTutor - University of St Andrews
Biography. Johannes Kepler is now chiefly remembered for discovering the three laws of planetary motion that bear his name published in 1609 and 1619).
[29]
Spring force and Hooke's law (article) | Khan Academy
Learn about the force exerted by a spring. Model and predict spring forces using Hooke's law. Springs are found in many everyday devices.
[30]
Hookes Law Equation Experiment - BYJU'S
Sep 20, 2020 · Hooke's law states that the strain of the material is proportional to the applied stress within the elastic limit of that material. When the ...
[31]
Newtonian constant of gravitation - CODATA Value
Newtonian constant of gravitation $ G $. Numerical value, 6.674 30 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2. Standard uncertainty, 0.000 15 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2.
[32]
18.2 Coulomb's law - Physics | OpenStax
Mar 26, 2020 · The law says that the force is proportional to the amount of charge on each object and inversely proportional to the square of the distance ...
[33]
[PDF] The Buckingham Pi Theorem in Dimensional Analysis
The Buckingham Pi Theorem puts the 'method of dimensions' first proposed by Lord Rayleigh in his book “The Theory of Sound” (1877) on a solid theoretical basis ...
[34]
Reynolds Number
The Reynolds number expresses the ratio of inertial (resistant to change or motion) forces to viscous (heavy and gluey) forces.
[35]
What is Reynolds Number? - Ansys
Jan 3, 2023 · The Reynolds number (Re), which calculates the ratio of inertial force to viscous force in a flow. A low Reynolds number below a certain threshold is known to ...Missing: proportionality | Show results with:proportionality
[36]
Reynolds' Number - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
The Reynolds number is defined as the ratio of inertial forces to viscous forces in a fluid flow, serving as a predictor of whether the flow will be laminar ...Missing: proportionality | Show results with:proportionality
[37]
Metabolic scaling: consensus or controversy?
Nov 16, 2004 · In 1932, Kleiber published a paper in an obscure journal [1] showing that standard metabolic rates among mammals varied with the three-quarters ...
[38]
Mammalian basal metabolic rate is proportional to body mass2/3 - NIH
However, Max Kleiber's influential monograph (2), published in 1932, concluded that basal metabolic rate scaled not in proportion with surface area, but with ...
[39]
Allometry: revealing evolution's engineering principles
Dec 11, 2023 · In this Review, we provide a brief history of body size scaling in biology and identify apparent principles and insights that have emerged from these ...ABSTRACT · Allometry – scaling in biology · Are there general models for...
[40]
Tacoma Narrows Bridge history - Bridge - Lessons from failure
Failure of the 1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge revealed for the first time limitations of the Deflection Theory. Since the Tacoma disaster, aerodynamic stability ...
[41]
[PDF] Tacoma Narrows 50 years later—wind engineering investigations ...
The background on the scaling principles applicable to wind tunnel models of bridges, techniques of aeroelastic model design and construction, the role of the ...
[42]
Aristotle's Ethics - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
May 1, 2001 · This enables us to see how Aristotle's treatment of the intellectual virtues does give greater content and precision to the doctrine of the mean ...
[43]
Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle - The Internet Classics Archive
Hence in respect of its substance and the definition which states its essence virtue is a mean, with regard to what is best and right an extreme. But not every ...Missing: doctrine proportionality
[44]
Kant's moral philosophy
Feb 23, 2004 · Kant holds that the fundamental principle of our moral duties is a categorical imperative. It is an imperative because it is a command addressed ...
[45]
Kant's Categorical Imperative - Veritas Vincit Tenebram
May 19, 2010 · The categorical imperative is basically this: Always treat humanity as an end in itself, never as a mere means.
[46]
Calculating Consequences:The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics
Perhaps the greatest difficulty with utilitarianism is that it fails to take into account considerations of justice. We can imagine instances where a certain ...
[47]
Act and Rule Utilitarianism - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The most common argument against act utilitarianism is that it gives the wrong answers to moral questions. Critics say that it permits various actions that ...
[48]
Retributive Justice - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Jun 18, 2014 · 4.4 Proportionality Retributive justice holds that it would be unjust to punish a wrongdoer more than she deserves, where what she deserves ...Missing: calculus | Show results with:calculus
[49]
Moral Relativism - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Feb 19, 2004 · Most often it is associated with an empirical thesis that there are deep and widespread moral disagreements and a metaethical thesis that the ...
[50]
Ethical Realism, or Moral Realism - 1000-Word Philosophy
Nov 5, 2015 · Ethical realists say that ethical claims such as these are objectively true: their truth does not depend on anyone's particular opinions, beliefs, preferences, ...
[51]
https://www.ushistory.org/civ/4c.asp
[52]
What is the law of retribution? | GotQuestions.org
Jan 4, 2022 · The law of retribution, also called the law of retaliation or lex talionis, was part of the Old Testament Law given to Israel through Moses.Missing: origins deterrence
[53]
Lex Talionis and the Old Testament - CultureWatch
Feb 7, 2022 · It was calling for impartial judges to an equitable penalty that fit the crime, the principle of law known as lex talionis, a Latin phrase meaning “law of ...Missing: origins deterrence
[54]
The Effects of Prison Sentences on Recidivism
Fifty studies dating from 1958 involving 336,052 offenders produced 325 correlations between recidivism and (a) length of time in prison and recidivism or (b) ...
[55]
[PDF] Sentence Length and Recidivism: A Review of the Research
Data from the. U.S. Sentencing Commission has found that seriousness of offense is also linked to increase recidivism rates (Hunt & Easley, 2017; Hunt et al ...
[56]
Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence
Of eighteen case studies of crackdowns, fifteen appeared to demonstrate initial deterrent effects, including two examples of long-term effects. In most long- ...
[57]
[PDF] Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence
Lawrence W. Sherman is professor of criminology, University of Maryland, and president of the Crime Control Institute, Washington, D.C. Prepared in part under.
[58]
Five Things About Deterrence | National Institute of Justice
Jun 5, 2016 · Research shows clearly that the chance of being caught is a vastly more effective deterrent than even draconian punishment.Missing: proportional | Show results with:proportional
[59]
[PDF] An Examination of Deterrence Theory: Where Do We Stand?
Dec 3, 2016 · Overall, the empirical evidence points toward non-legal factors, such as marriage, employment, peers, morality, disapproval from loved ones ...
[60]
[PDF] How Much Do We Really Know about Criminal Deterrence
The empirical evidence leads to the conclusion that there is a marginal deterrent effect for legal sanctions, but this conclusion must be swallowed with a ...
[61]
[PDF] Proportionality - a German approach - SAS-Space
The origin of proportionality in German law can be traced back to the principle of necessity developed in the jurisprudence of Prussian administrative courts in ...Missing: Übermaßverbot | Show results with:Übermaßverbot
[62]
[PDF] The principle of "Proportionality" in French Administrative Law
Abstract: This study considers the test of proportionality as one of the levels of examining the reasons given to administrative decisions in. French law ...Missing: Swiss | Show results with:Swiss
[63]
Proportionality: Challenging the critics - Oxford Academic
The German Federal Constitutional Court ' s Pharmacy Judgment (“ Apothekenurteil”; BVerfGE 7, 377. [1958]) is generally considered to be its hour of birth in ...Missing: Apotheken Urteil
[64]
[PDF] 1 Proportionality Review in Administrative Law Jud Mathews
Proportionality means that when the government acts, the means should be well-adapted to achieve the ends it is pursuing.
[65]
German Case | Foreign Law Translations | Texas Law
Dec 1, 2005 · The case concerns the freedom of trade and the right to choose a vocation, with restrictions on the choice of vocation only for community ...Missing: 1950s | Show results with:1950s
[66]
Constitutional Law in an Age of Proportionality - The Yale Law Journal
Jun 8, 2015 · Proportionality, accepted as a general principle of constitutional law by many countries, requires that government intrusions on freedoms be justified.
[67]
Proportionality Review in Administrative Law by Jud Mathews - SSRN
Sep 12, 2016 · This piece suggest that we can understand the differences in how proportionality is used in the administrative law of different jurisdictions in ...
[68]
[PDF] U.S. Constitutional Law, Proportionality, and the Global Model
22 The proportionality test has four prongs. First, a policy interfering with a right must pursue a legitimate goal; second, it must be a suitable means of ...
[69]
Proportionality: Tried and Tested - Supreme Court Observer
Feb 19, 2024 · The conclusion was that the Scheme failed on three of four prongs of the proportionality test. Next, the Bench looked into the question of ...
[70]
strict scrutiny | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
Strict scrutiny is the highest standard of review that a court will use to evaluate the constitutionality of government action, the other two standards being ...
[71]
Proportionality, Strict Scrutiny, and the Substance of Religious Liberty
Proportionality and strict scrutiny are both capable of incorporating these three factors, but courts applying the two tests do not always do so. In this ...
[72]
Did lockdowns work? The verdict on Covid restrictions
Jun 5, 2023 · COVID-19 lockdowns were “a global policy failure of gigantic proportions,” according to this peer-reviewed new academic study. The draconian ...Missing: proportionality | Show results with:proportionality
[73]
Lockdowns were a costly failure, finds new IEA book
Jun 5, 2023 · A new systematic review and meta-analysis published by the Institute of Economic Affairs finds that Covid lockdowns failed to significantly reduce deaths.
[74]
Constitutional Courts and the Review of COVID-19 Regulations ...
Feb 15, 2024 · We first briefly sketch the problems surrounding proportionality review in empirically complex and dynamic situations to answer this question.
[75]
Margin of Appreciation doctrine - The Council of Europe
The Court held that restrictions on the right to vote are subject to the proportionality test and do not fall within an acceptable margin of appreciation when ...
[76]
Proportionality, the Margin of Appreciation and our Human Rights
Dec 7, 2017 · Proportionality means that the interference must be no more than is absolutely necessary to achieve one of the aims in the HRA/Convention.
[77]
CASE OF HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - HUDOC
The Handyside case was referred to the Court by the European Commission of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as "the Commission"). The case originated in an ...
[78]
Two Concepts of the Margin of Appreciation - Oxford Academic
The principle of proportionality is by far the most important and most demanding criterion for whether the limitation of a right was permissible under the ...
[79]
The Inter-American Legal Analysis - Necessary and Proportionate
The Principle of Proportionality requires weighing the legal right that serves as the legitimate aim against the restriction of the affected right. According to ...
[80]
[PDF] inter-american court of human rights
Jun 7, 2021 · 155 In this regard, this Court has indicated that the restriction must be proportional to the interest justifying it and closely adhere to ...
[81]
[PDF] Do States comply with the compulsory judgments of the Inter ...
This is a repository copy of Do States comply with the compulsory judgments of the. Inter-American Court of Human Rights? An empirical study of the compliance ...
[82]
Balancing Test: African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights ...
According to the principle of proportionality, a State's acts must be a rational and reasonable exercise of means towards achieving a permissible goal, without ...
[83]
Changing State Behaviour: Damages before the European Court of ...
Feb 14, 2019 · Given the poor compliance record of some states and the general 50 per cent failure to execute ECtHR judgments, it is evident that the current ...
[84]
[PDF] The Democratic Legitimacy of Evolutive Interpretation by the ...
Sep 20, 2019 · The European Court of Human Rights has been highly criticized for its lacking democratic legitimacy to amend human rights documents through.
[85]
Separation of Powers and KlimaSeniorinnen - Verfassungsblog
Apr 30, 2024 · The ECtHR decision directly addresses separation of powers and the role of the judiciary in adjudicating human rights, specifically in the context of climate ...
[86]
A tale of two Europes: How conflating the European Court of Human ...
Oct 8, 2021 · Claims that the Court has 'aggrandised its jurisdiction' and undermines British sovereignty have intensified noticeably since the mid-2000s ( ...
[87]
[PDF] United States - restrictions on imports of tuna
Sep 3, 1991 · 3.34 Mexico responded that the MMPA embargo was not "necessary" in the sense of Article XX, as the lives and health of dolphins could be ...
[88]
Mexico etc versus US: 'tuna-dolphin' - World Trade Organization
A case brought by Mexico and others against the US under GATT. The panel report was circulated in 1991, but not adopted, so it does not have the status of a ...Missing: necessity test
[89]
[PDF] Case 120/78 - EUR-Lex
action intends to import a consignment of "Cassis de Dijon" originating in. France for the purpose of marketing it in the Federal Republic of Germany. The ...
[90]
Do international trade and investment agreements generate ...
Sep 6, 2021 · Trade obligations were found to generate a significantly greater anticipatory-type chilling effect on nutrition and alcohol regulation than South Africa's ...
[91]
Tariff liberalization and product standards: Regulatory chill and race ...
Mar 6, 2020 · Regulatory chill is the dominant response in most countries, but countries in which producers can adapt to standards relatively cheaply appear to race to the ...
[92]
[PDF] Minimum Tax Implementation Handbook (Pillar Two) | OECD
The global minimum tax, based on GloBE rules, is the second pillar of a two-pillar solution to ensure multinational enterprises pay a minimum tax.Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
[93]
Pillar Two Country Tracker - PwC
Pillar Two sets a new global minimum Effective Tax Rate (ETR) of 15%, impacting multinational groups with revenues over €750 million. Scroll down to use the ...Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
[94]
Risks to the U.S. Tax Base from Pillar Two - Tax Foundation
Aug 30, 2023 · Experts analyze the risks to the US tax base from Pillar Two of the OECD global tax deal. Explore the global minimum tax US tax base impact.Background: Oecd And Us Tax... · Oecd Agreement Background · First Risk To Us Tax Base...<|control11|><|separator|>
[95]
Just War - Thomistic Philosophy Page
Proportionality: the good to be achieved outweighs the evil of war. a. One cannot war justly over a slight cause. (i. War is a last resort.) (ii. There must be ...
[96]
[PDF] Responsibility and Proportionality in State and Nonstate Wars
Mar 1, 2009 · 10. Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations (New York: Basic Books, 1977). 11.
[97]
[PDF] The Inherent Right to Self- Defence and Proportionality in Jus Ad ...
Self-defense force must be proportional, using the 'means-end' test, but there's disagreement on the legitimate ends, like halting or deterring future attacks.<|separator|>
[98]
[PDF] Desert Storm: A Just War Analysis
The first is war-decision law, traditionally known as the jus ad bellum, which sets the requirements that must be met to overcome the presumption against ...
[99]
[PDF] Revisiting ad bellum Proportionality: Challenging the Factors Used ...
International law related to war has two segments—jus ad bellum and jus in bello—each with its own proportionality requirement. The ad bellum rules refer to the ...
[100]
[PDF] Debates and silences about the aerial bombing of World War II
But what about the Allied air raids? Even if they were possibly as violent as the German attacks, they were often defended as a necessary means to a worthy end.
[101]
The Effects of Strategic Bombing in WWII on German Morale - AOAV
Jul 8, 2020 · Bombing appeared to depress every measure of morale examined. The main psychological effects found included “defeatism, depression, despair, fear, helplessness ...
[102]
[PDF] The End of Proportionality - USAWC Press
Mar 1, 2009 · If the bombing of Monte Cassino was disproportionate, so were the Allied bombings of Caen, St. Lo, and countless other Axis targets. Indeed, ...
[103]
[PDF] Department of Defense Law of War Manual - DoD OGC
May 31, 2016 · Minor changes to the discussion of the principle of proportionality, principally in § 2.4. a. Revised § 2.4.1.1 to be more precise and to be ...
[104]
[PDF] The principle of proportionality - ICRC
The principle of proportionality is codified in Article 51(5)(b) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, which reflects customary international law.
[105]
[PDF] Hamas's Human Shield Strategy in Gaza | Henry Jackson Society
May 4, 2025 · 73 The presence of civilians complicates the proportionality assessment, specifically whether the potential damage to civilians is ...
[106]
International Humanitarian Law in the Israeli-Gaza Conflict
Mar 13, 2024 · ... human shields complicates the assessment. The IDF asserts efforts to avoid civilian loss in its attempts to dismantle terrorist ...
[107]
Israel – Hamas 2024 Symposium - Ruminations on the Legal, Policy ...
Feb 9, 2024 · Many have raised proportionality concerns over Israeli military operations since late October & characterized the response as ...
[108]
Gaza and the Asymmetry Trap - Quillette
Dec 1, 2023 · But proportionality is a fool's game, more suited to propaganda than to reasoned judgement. Some number of people are killed in some military ...
[109]
Hamas's Human Shield Strategy in Gaza - Henry Jackson Society
May 4, 2025 · It provides a comprehensive analysis of Hamas's systematic use of human shield tactics during the 7 October Israel–Hamas war and the broader Gaza conflict.
[110]
Rethinking Proportionality of Civilian Harm in Gaza and Beyond
Aug 5, 2025 · Hamas's deliberate use of human shields is indeed a violation of international law. But even under the current legal standards for ...
[111]
Full article: Just war, human shields, and the 2023–24 Gaza War
Aug 21, 2024 · This article argues that the moral responsibility for the deaths of Palestinian non-combatants in the 2023–24 Gaza War rests with Hamas.
[112]
An Operational Perspective of Military Advantage and Proportionality
Jul 11, 2025 · This post seeks to identify some factors commanders and planners may consider when evaluating an attack's military advantage.
[113]
Urban warfare and violence | ICRC
The underlying principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution are critical in protecting civilians against the effects of hostilities in urban areas.The Impact Of Warfare And... · How Can We Reduce, Or Even... · Our Approach To Limiting The...
[114]
2024 ICRC IHL Challenges Report
Sep 26, 2024 · The Challenges Report provides an overview of some of the major challenges for IHL posed by contemporary armed conflicts.Missing: proportionality | Show results with:proportionality
[115]
[PDF] 'War on terror' - Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict
Israel has been and continues to be under existential threat. The Israeli ... But although the world was prepared to agree that the attacks of 9/11 were the.
[116]
Leonardo da Vinci, “Vitruvian Man” - Smarthistory
Oct 24, 2023 · Leonardo da Vinci, “Vitruvian Man,” c. 1490, pen and watercolor over metalpoint on paper, 34.4 x 24.5 cm (Gallerie dell'Accademia, Venice) ...
[117]
History of the Golden Ratio in Art - Artnet News
Oct 2, 2015 · During the Renaissance, painter and draftsman Leonardo Da Vinci used the proportions set forth by the Golden Ratio to construct his masterpieces ...
[118]
Raphael and the Golden Ratio in Renaissance Art
May 20, 2015 · Raphael's use of the golden ratio is not only clear and compelling, but quite brilliant in its execution.
[119]
The Divine Proportion: Origins and Usage in Plastic Surgery - PMC
Feb 22, 2021 · Fechner (1876) found that the golden ratio (1:1.618) was more aesthetically pleasing than any other proportion of rectangles. Recently ...
[120]
Architectural Proportion from an Empirical Standpoint - Proietti - 2022
Dec 22, 2021 · In study of architectural proportion, the empirical approach had two significant forerunners: The Russian architect Nikolai Ladovsky (1881–1941) ...Introduction And Background · Informal Empirical Studies... · Toward A Formal Study Of...
[121]
Scale and Proportion - The Architect's Domain
Aug 1, 2013 · Vitruvius described the human figure as being the principal source of proportion among the Classical orders of architecture. Le Corbusier - The ...
[122]
Drug dosing based on weight and body surface area - PubMed
Jun 18, 2012 · Dosing based on body weight or body surface area assumes that drug pharmacokinetic parameters increase in proportion with increasing body size.
[123]
Drug Dosing Based on Weight and Body Surface Area ...
Jun 18, 2012 · Dosing based on body weight or body surface area assumes that drug pharmacokinetic parameters increase in proportion with increasing body size.
[124]
[PDF] Guidance for Industry - FDA
Jul 6, 2005 · In this instance, the lowest saturating dose, not the highest (nontoxic) dose, should be used for calculating the HED.
[125]
Thalidomide: the tragedy of birth defects and the effective treatment ...
It became apparent in the 1960s that thalidomide treatment resulted in severe birth defects in thousands of children. Though the use of thalidomide was banned ...
[126]
The Tragedy of Thalidomide - Charles River Laboratories
Sep 13, 2017 · The drug caused over 10,000 cases of a limb reduction defect called phocomelia—from the Greek for seal fin—with only 50% of these babies ...Missing: errors | Show results with:errors
[127]
[PDF] Principles-of-Political-Economy-and-Taxation-1817.pdf
This edition of The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo is published by. Liberty Fund, Inc., under license from the Royal Economic Society. 10 09 08 07 06 ...
[128]
Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns: Definition, Example, Use in ...
The law of diminishing marginal returns states that there comes a point when an additional factor of production results in a lessening of output or impact.Missing: 1817 | Show results with:1817
[129]
Technical advice on the implementation of the new proportionality ...
Jan 30, 2025 · The review of the Solvency II Directive will introduce a new framework for proportionality in Solvency II Directive which represents a shift ...Missing: 2023-2025 | Show results with:2023-2025
[130]
The proportionality framework under Solvency II: Current knowledge ...
Jan 13, 2025 · This briefing note outlines the key provisions in the amended directive concerning proportionality and reflects the insights gathered during the consultation.Missing: principle 2023-2025
[131]
Excess All-Cause Mortality in China After Ending the Zero COVID ...
Aug 24, 2023 · An estimated 1.87 million excess deaths occurred among individuals 30 years and older during the first 2 months after the end of China's zero COVID policy.Missing: disproportionate | Show results with:disproportionate
[132]
estimating national excess mortality of China's sudden COVID-19 ...
Oct 1, 2025 · China's sudden lifting of zero-COVID controls in December 2022 triggered a nationwide mortality surge. Using verifiable death records of ...