The UNGPs in the European Union

The open coordination of business and human rights

Daniel Augenstein, Mark Dawson, Pierre Thielbörger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The paper examines the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in the European Union via National Action Plans. We argue that some of the shortcomings currently observed in the implementation
process could effectively be addressed through the Open Method of Coordination – a governance instrument already used by the EU in other policy domains. The paper 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 discussing the conditions for employing the OMC in the business and human rights domain. The paper – building on a recent opinion of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency – concludes with a concrete proposal for developing an OMC on business and human rights.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-22
Number of pages22
JournalBusiness and Human Rights Journal
Volume3
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

open method of coordination
human rights
EU
governance
fundamental right
EU member state
global governance
action plan
UNO
experience

Keywords

  • United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Open Method of Coordination, National Action Plan, European Union

Cite this

@article{e7136c90a6384d1c98e8778cd207b8cb,
title = "The UNGPs in the European Union: The open coordination of business and human rights",
abstract = "The paper examines the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in the European Union via National Action Plans. We argue that some of the shortcomings currently observed in the implementationprocess could effectively be addressed through the Open Method of Coordination – a governance instrument already used by the EU in other policy domains. The paper 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 discussing the conditions for employing the OMC in the business and human rights domain. The paper – building on a recent opinion of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency – concludes with a concrete proposal for developing an OMC on business and human rights.",
keywords = "United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Open Method of Coordination, National Action Plan, European Union",
author = "Daniel Augenstein and Mark Dawson and Pierre Thielb{\"o}rger",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1017/bhj.2017.30",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
pages = "1--22",
journal = "Business and Human Rights Journal",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

The UNGPs in the European Union : The open coordination of business and human rights. / Augenstein, Daniel; Dawson, Mark; Thielbörger, Pierre.

In: Business and Human Rights Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2018, p. 1-22.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The UNGPs in the European Union

T2 - The open coordination of business and human rights

AU - Augenstein, Daniel

AU - Dawson, Mark

AU - Thielbörger, Pierre

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - The paper examines the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in the European Union via National Action Plans. We argue that some of the shortcomings currently observed in the implementationprocess could effectively be addressed through the Open Method of Coordination – a governance instrument already used by the EU in other policy domains. The paper 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 discussing the conditions for employing the OMC in the business and human rights domain. The paper – building on a recent opinion of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency – concludes with a concrete proposal for developing an OMC on business and human rights.

AB - The paper examines the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in the European Union via National Action Plans. We argue that some of the shortcomings currently observed in the implementationprocess could effectively be addressed through the Open Method of Coordination – a governance instrument already used by the EU in other policy domains. The paper 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 discussing the conditions for employing the OMC in the business and human rights domain. The paper – building on a recent opinion of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency – concludes with a concrete proposal for developing an OMC on business and human rights.

KW - United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Open Method of Coordination, National Action Plan, European Union

U2 - 10.1017/bhj.2017.30

DO - 10.1017/bhj.2017.30

M3 - Article

VL - 3

SP - 1

EP - 22

JO - Business and Human Rights Journal

JF - Business and Human Rights Journal

IS - 1

ER -