全球公司与人权:澳大利亚的监管辩论

Dr.Patricia Ranald
{"title":"全球公司与人权:澳大利亚的监管辩论","authors":"Dr.Patricia Ranald","doi":"10.1016/S1066-7938(02)00057-X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Public opinion surveys consistently show that the majority of people in many countries believe that corporations should abide by recognised standards in business ethics, human rights, labour practices and environmental impacts. Reliance on voluntary codes has not been effective. The debate is now moving towards the development of more effective regulatory frameworks. This article argues for a multi-layered regulatory approach at national and international levels, using examples from the debate in Australia over three issues: the 1998 draft Multilateral Agreement on Investment; the experience in Australia of international and company voluntary codes; and the debate over a national regulatory initiative (the Corporate Code of Conduct Bill) introduced into the Australian Commonwealth Parliament in 2000–2001. This article is based on a paper presented at the Royal Institute of International Affairs Conference on the Legal Dimensions of Corporate Responsibility held at Chatham House, London, November 2001.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100335,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Environmental Strategy","volume":"9 3","pages":"Pages 243-250"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1066-7938(02)00057-X","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Global Corporations and Human Rights: The Regulatory Debate in Australia\",\"authors\":\"Dr.Patricia Ranald\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S1066-7938(02)00057-X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Public opinion surveys consistently show that the majority of people in many countries believe that corporations should abide by recognised standards in business ethics, human rights, labour practices and environmental impacts. Reliance on voluntary codes has not been effective. The debate is now moving towards the development of more effective regulatory frameworks. This article argues for a multi-layered regulatory approach at national and international levels, using examples from the debate in Australia over three issues: the 1998 draft Multilateral Agreement on Investment; the experience in Australia of international and company voluntary codes; and the debate over a national regulatory initiative (the Corporate Code of Conduct Bill) introduced into the Australian Commonwealth Parliament in 2000–2001. This article is based on a paper presented at the Royal Institute of International Affairs Conference on the Legal Dimensions of Corporate Responsibility held at Chatham House, London, November 2001.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100335,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Environmental Strategy\",\"volume\":\"9 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 243-250\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1066-7938(02)00057-X\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Environmental Strategy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S106679380200057X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Environmental Strategy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S106679380200057X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

民意调查一致显示,许多国家的大多数人认为企业应遵守公认的商业道德、人权、劳工做法和环境影响标准。对自愿准则的依赖并不有效。辩论现在正转向制定更有效的监管框架。本文主张在国家和国际层面采取多层次的监管方法,并以澳大利亚在三个问题上的辩论为例:1998年多边投资协定草案;澳大利亚在国际和公司自愿守则方面的经验;以及2000-2001年澳大利亚联邦议会提出的一项全国性监管倡议(《企业行为准则法案》)的辩论。本文基于2001年11月在伦敦查塔姆研究所举行的皇家国际事务研究所企业责任法律维度会议上发表的一篇论文。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Global Corporations and Human Rights: The Regulatory Debate in Australia

Public opinion surveys consistently show that the majority of people in many countries believe that corporations should abide by recognised standards in business ethics, human rights, labour practices and environmental impacts. Reliance on voluntary codes has not been effective. The debate is now moving towards the development of more effective regulatory frameworks. This article argues for a multi-layered regulatory approach at national and international levels, using examples from the debate in Australia over three issues: the 1998 draft Multilateral Agreement on Investment; the experience in Australia of international and company voluntary codes; and the debate over a national regulatory initiative (the Corporate Code of Conduct Bill) introduced into the Australian Commonwealth Parliament in 2000–2001. This article is based on a paper presented at the Royal Institute of International Affairs Conference on the Legal Dimensions of Corporate Responsibility held at Chatham House, London, November 2001.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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