2012
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2083477
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implications for Companies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite the above positive developments in the regulatory context of CCR, in my opinion the situation still allows too many loose interpretations of CCR questions in practice. Deva's (2012) article critically examines the implications of the Ruggie GP principles. It concludes that although GPs do not offer any ready-made solutions for human rights violations by corporations, they offer some guidance to certain companies, especially those with "good intentions," on how to run their businesses responsibly.…”
Section: Tablementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the above positive developments in the regulatory context of CCR, in my opinion the situation still allows too many loose interpretations of CCR questions in practice. Deva's (2012) article critically examines the implications of the Ruggie GP principles. It concludes that although GPs do not offer any ready-made solutions for human rights violations by corporations, they offer some guidance to certain companies, especially those with "good intentions," on how to run their businesses responsibly.…”
Section: Tablementioning
confidence: 99%
“…11 Furthermore, home states may also reap some economic benefits, such as tax income, from corporations who reside in the country. 12 As such, the home government may not be eager to place an extra burden upon corporations registered in its own territory, by improving regulatory requirements, since such corporations may prove beneficial for its economy (Deva, 2012). Therefore, as the research of Ruggie (2007) has pointed out, "governments often support the preferences of corporations domiciled in [its country]"(p. 822).…”
Section: Economic Benefitsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A consequence of the above has meant, on the one hand, a host state may not be so eager to improve corporate regulations since the host state, paying undivided attention to aggregate economic interests, is likely to avoid direct government regulation because of the competition with other countries in terms of attracting foreign companies (Westfield, 2002). On the other hand, host states may also be reluctant to play a role in the enforcement of regulations formed by a foreign state (Deva, 2012). Indeed, in both scenarios, the mobility of corporation and the ability to move from one host country to another may place pressure on developing host states not to enforce strict regulatory requirements (Stiglitz, 2007).…”
Section: Economic Interestsmentioning
confidence: 99%