Negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights: The implementation of the UNGPs in the European Union

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    Abstract

    The article discusses the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in the European Union against the backdrop of perennial debates between proponents of ‘hard’ versus ‘soft’ law approaches to preventing and redressing corporate-related human rights violations. It argues that the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) – an EU governance instrument of transnational policy-making – could contribute to negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights by ensuring a more effective implementation of the UNGPs in the European legal space. Moreover, the European experience with open coordination calls for a reappraisal of the relationship between international law and global governance in addressing today’s business and human rights predicament. The first part of the article situates the debate between proponents of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ law approaches to business and human rights in the context of two UN-driven initiatives: the development of national action plans (NAPs) to implement the UNGPs; and the negotiation of an international business and human rights treaty. The second part of the article relates experiences with the existing NAP process in the European Union to the policy background and rationale of the Open Method of Coordination and discusses the conditions for its successful employment in the business and human rights domain.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)254-263
    Number of pages10
    JournalGlobal Policy
    Volume9
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2018

    Fingerprint

    human rights
    open method of coordination
    Law
    action plan
    UNO
    human rights violation
    global governance
    international law
    treaty
    experience
    EU
    governance

    Keywords

    • business and human rights
    • UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights
    • Business and Human Rights Treaty
    • European Union
    • Open Method of Coordination

    Cite this

    @article{19417b7787bd41fd81319ec57b27748d,
    title = "Negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights: The implementation of the UNGPs in the European Union",
    abstract = "The article discusses the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in the European Union against the backdrop of perennial debates between proponents of ‘hard’ versus ‘soft’ law approaches to preventing and redressing corporate-related human rights violations. It argues that the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) – an EU governance instrument of transnational policy-making – could contribute to negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights by ensuring a more effective implementation of the UNGPs in the European legal space. Moreover, the European experience with open coordination calls for a reappraisal of the relationship between international law and global governance in addressing today’s business and human rights predicament. The first part of the article situates the debate between proponents of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ law approaches to business and human rights in the context of two UN-driven initiatives: the development of national action plans (NAPs) to implement the UNGPs; and the negotiation of an international business and human rights treaty. The second part of the article relates experiences with the existing NAP process in the European Union to the policy background and rationale of the Open Method of Coordination and discusses the conditions for its successful employment in the business and human rights domain.",
    keywords = "business and human rights, UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Business and Human Rights Treaty, European Union, Open Method of Coordination",
    author = "Daniel Augenstein",
    year = "2018",
    doi = "10.1111/1758-5899.12530",
    language = "English",
    volume = "9",
    pages = "254--263",
    journal = "Global Policy",
    publisher = "Whiley & Sons",
    number = "2",

    }

    Negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights : The implementation of the UNGPs in the European Union. / Augenstein, Daniel.

    In: Global Policy, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2018, p. 254-263.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights

    T2 - The implementation of the UNGPs in the European Union

    AU - Augenstein, Daniel

    PY - 2018

    Y1 - 2018

    N2 - The article discusses the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in the European Union against the backdrop of perennial debates between proponents of ‘hard’ versus ‘soft’ law approaches to preventing and redressing corporate-related human rights violations. It argues that the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) – an EU governance instrument of transnational policy-making – could contribute to negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights by ensuring a more effective implementation of the UNGPs in the European legal space. Moreover, the European experience with open coordination calls for a reappraisal of the relationship between international law and global governance in addressing today’s business and human rights predicament. The first part of the article situates the debate between proponents of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ law approaches to business and human rights in the context of two UN-driven initiatives: the development of national action plans (NAPs) to implement the UNGPs; and the negotiation of an international business and human rights treaty. The second part of the article relates experiences with the existing NAP process in the European Union to the policy background and rationale of the Open Method of Coordination and discusses the conditions for its successful employment in the business and human rights domain.

    AB - The article discusses the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in the European Union against the backdrop of perennial debates between proponents of ‘hard’ versus ‘soft’ law approaches to preventing and redressing corporate-related human rights violations. It argues that the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) – an EU governance instrument of transnational policy-making – could contribute to negotiating the hard/soft law divide in business and human rights by ensuring a more effective implementation of the UNGPs in the European legal space. Moreover, the European experience with open coordination calls for a reappraisal of the relationship between international law and global governance in addressing today’s business and human rights predicament. The first part of the article situates the debate between proponents of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ law approaches to business and human rights in the context of two UN-driven initiatives: the development of national action plans (NAPs) to implement the UNGPs; and the negotiation of an international business and human rights treaty. The second part of the article relates experiences with the existing NAP process in the European Union to the policy background and rationale of the Open Method of Coordination and discusses the conditions for its successful employment in the business and human rights domain.

    KW - business and human rights

    KW - UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

    KW - Business and Human Rights Treaty

    KW - European Union

    KW - Open Method of Coordination

    U2 - 10.1111/1758-5899.12530

    DO - 10.1111/1758-5899.12530

    M3 - Article

    VL - 9

    SP - 254

    EP - 263

    JO - Global Policy

    JF - Global Policy

    IS - 2

    ER -