2017 Measuring Compliance 671 short to medium term. Again, the measure of maximum available resources therefore needs to encapsulate a measure of the human resources that in principle are available. That is, a measure of the long-run potential of the duty-bearer’s ability to fulfill the welfare basket. In operationalizing maximum available resources there are many other resources beyond those of a financial and human kind that may influence a duty-bearer’s capacity to fulfill the welfare basket, some over which it has little to no control. The nature and density of the population, the political situation of neighboring countries, favorability of the physical environment to the delivery of social services, to name but a few. If, for instance, countries with highly dispersed populations are revealed to have systematically worse social outcomes than would be expected given their respective levels of financial and human resources, the inclusion of a variable that captures a country’s relative population would condition what is expected of these countries on their geodemographic context. However, with an explanation of maximum available resources down to its atomic level comes some obvious practical difficulties. If the measure is to include everything that could potentially provide a reason for not doing better, the list of explanatory factors would be tediously long. It is, therefore, practically necessary to limit the number of explanatory variables to those which are most significant. This could be determined theoretically, empirically, or both. V. TURNING TO ECONOMICS The foregoing discussion is primarily occupied with dealing with the first part of the central dilemma: How can the content of social rights be determined if resource conditionality allows for it to differ across resource contexts? In response, I have argued that the content of these rights is determined with reference to a substantively defined basket of social welfare-type goods, the precise attainment of which is determined with reference to a duty-bearer’s available financial resources, human resources, and other relevant considerations that are proven theoretically and/or empirically significant. I have also argued, however, that the cogency of this scheme is dependent on the availability of a valid test for determining whether maximum available resources actually are sufficient to secure the welfare basket and if not to what extent. Turning to economics can provide a stylized way of configuring such a test. A. Methodological Provenance In giving specificity to the level of social welfare duty-bearers owe so that ultimately it is possible to assess how well duty-bearers are doing with respect