The UNGPs in the European Union: The Open Coordination of Business and Human Rights?

Abstract

The article examines the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in the European Union via National Action Plans (NAPs). We argue that some of the shortcomings currently observed in the implementation process could effectively be addressed through the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) -a governance instrument already used by the European Union (EU) in other policy domains. The article sketches out the polycentric global governance approach envisaged by the UNGPs and discusses the institutional and policy background of their implementation in the EU. It provides an assessment of EU member states' NAPs on business and human rights, as benchmarked against international NAP guidance, before relating experiences with the existing NAP process to the policy background and rationale of the OMC and considering the conditions for employing the OMC in the business and human rights domain. Building on a recent opinion of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency, the article concludes with a concrete proposal for developing an OMC on business and human rights in the EU.

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility Research

“…50 Augenstein et al discuss the implementation of the UNGPs within the European Union (EU) via so-called National Action Plans (NAPs). 51 EU member states were tasked with developing such NAPs to support the enactment of the UNGPs. Augenstein et al show that many NAPs do not yet provide a sufficient framework for implementing the UNGPs (e.g., because of a lack of indicators and local benchmarks).…”

The UN Guiding Principles’ Orbit and Other Regulatory Regimes in the Business and Human Rights Universe: Managing the Interface

“…68 For example, Augenstein et al note that 'there is an increasing recognition on both sides of the debate that "hard" and "soft" law approaches can play a complementary role'. 69 However, what does alignment of international legal norms with the UNGPs really mean in practice: should the text of treaty provisions generally (or in relation to HRDD specifically) be identical to that of the UNGPs, or will it suffice if the treaty calibrates appropriately the text of the UNGPs? Moreover, how could the BHR treaty complement the UNGPs?…”

Corporate Responsibility for Human Rights in Assam Tea Plantations: A Business and Human Rights Approach

“…BHR is a field of study "about how business may negatively impact human rights and the various ways in which such violations can be prevented and addressed, including how business can be held accountable" [17] (p. 3). Since the adoption of the UNGPs, numerous studies have focused on their impact and limitations [18][19][20][21], and on the current plans to develop a BHR treaty to ground the UNGPs in international law [22][23][24][25]. BHR also includes an emerging research agenda in management, particularly in the sub-field of social issues in management (SIM) [26,27].…”

“…The Sheffield report found evidence indicating that women and girls were trafficked from tea estates into domestic and sex work in major cities such as Mumbai and Delhi [38] (p. 19). According to a report published by Stop the Traffik, a UK based organisation, human traffickers pose as employment agents and entice young people living on the tea estates of Assam to migrate to cities or groom parents to send children to cities on the promise of a better life [42].…”