The Struggle for Legitimacy in Business and Human Rights Regulation-a Consideration of the Processes Leading to the UN Guiding Principles and an International Treaty.

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW
Human Rights Review Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-01-05 DOI:10.1007/s12142-020-00612-y
Brigitte Hamm
{"title":"The Struggle for Legitimacy in Business and Human Rights Regulation-a Consideration of the Processes Leading to the UN Guiding Principles and an International Treaty.","authors":"Brigitte Hamm","doi":"10.1007/s12142-020-00612-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>After the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) were adopted in 2011, an international treaty has been being negotiated since 2014. The two instruments reveal similarities and also conflicts regarding the adequate organization of the global economy based on human rights. The focus in this article will be on the processes leading to these instruments, because they themselves mirror different understandings of governance in the field of business and human rights as well as the struggle over the power of definition and legitimacy. The UNGPs were developed on the basis of global multi-stakeholder consultations, underlining legitimacy through broad inclusion. There are varying judgements as to the success of this approach. The process towards the treaty follows the traditional path of negotiations at UN level. These negotiations reveal a struggle for recognition of the legitimacy of the process itself. Both procedures have shortcomings with regard to legitimacy and show the need for a revision concerning the inclusion of stakeholders. The complementarity of a soft and hard law instrument may enhance the creation of a level playing field in the global economy, thereby strengthening human rights.</p>","PeriodicalId":45171,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7783498/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-020-00612-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

After the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) were adopted in 2011, an international treaty has been being negotiated since 2014. The two instruments reveal similarities and also conflicts regarding the adequate organization of the global economy based on human rights. The focus in this article will be on the processes leading to these instruments, because they themselves mirror different understandings of governance in the field of business and human rights as well as the struggle over the power of definition and legitimacy. The UNGPs were developed on the basis of global multi-stakeholder consultations, underlining legitimacy through broad inclusion. There are varying judgements as to the success of this approach. The process towards the treaty follows the traditional path of negotiations at UN level. These negotiations reveal a struggle for recognition of the legitimacy of the process itself. Both procedures have shortcomings with regard to legitimacy and show the need for a revision concerning the inclusion of stakeholders. The complementarity of a soft and hard law instrument may enhance the creation of a level playing field in the global economy, thereby strengthening human rights.

企业与人权监管的合法性之争--对《联合国指导原则》和一项国际条约制定过程的思考》。
在 2011 年通过《联合国工商业与人权指导原则》(UNGPs)之后,自 2014 年以来一直在就一项国际条约进行谈判。这两项文书揭示了以人权为基础充分组织全球经济方面的相似之处和冲突。本文的重点是这些文书的制定过程,因为它们本身就反映了对商业和人权领域治理的不同理解,以及对定义权和合法性的争夺。联合国全球契约是在全球多方利益相关者磋商的基础上制定的,通过广泛的包容性强调合法性。对于这种方法是否成功,人们有不同的判断。条约的制定过程遵循了联合国层面谈判的传统路径。这些谈判揭示了为使进程本身的合法性得到承认而进行的斗争。这两种程序在合法性方面都存在缺陷,表明有必要对利益相关方的参与进行修订。软性和硬性法律文书的互补性可以促进在全球经济中创造公平的竞争环境,从而加强人权。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Human Rights Review is an interdisciplinary journal which provides a scholarly forum in which human rights issues and their underlying empirical, theoretical and philosophical foundations are explored. The journal seeks to place human rights practices and policies within a theoretical perspective in order to link empirical research to broader human rights issues. Human Rights Review welcomes submissions from all academic areas in order to foster a wide-ranging dialogue on issues of concern to both the academic and the policy-making communities. The journal is receptive to submissions drawing from diverse methodologies and approaches including case studies, quantitative analysis, legal scholarship and philosophical discourse in order to provide a comprehensive discussion concerning human rights issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信