Untangling the authority of external experts in the corporate implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

References

• Abbott, K. W., Levi-Faur, D., & Snidal, D. (2017a). Theorizing regulatory intermediaries: The RIT Model. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 670(1), 14–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716216688272
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbott, K. W., Levi-Faur, D., & Snidal, D. (2017b). Enriching the RIT framework. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 670(1), 280–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716217694593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbott, K. W., Levi-Faur, D., & Snidal, D. (2017c). Introducing regulatory intermediaries. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 670(1), 6–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716217695519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (2005). The power of liberal international organiziations. In M. Barnett & R. Duvall (Eds.), Power in global governance (pp. 16–184). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Birchall, D. (2021). Corporate power over human rights: An analytical framework. Business and Human Rights Journal, 6(1), 42–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2020.23
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Brès, L., & Gond, J.-P. (2014). The visible hand of consultants in the construction of the markets for virtue: Translating issues, negotiating boundaries and enacting responsive regulations. Human Relations, 67(11), 1347–1382. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713519278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brès, L., Mena, S., & Salles-Djelic, M. L. (2019). Exploring the formal and informal roles of regulatory intermediaries in transnational multistake holder regulation. Regulation & Governance, 13(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broome, A., & Quirk, J. (2015). Governing the world at a distance: The practice of global benchmarking. Review of International Studies, 41(5), 819–841. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210515000340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burr, V. (1995). An Introduction to Social Constructionism. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Corporate Accountability Lab. (2021. November 2). CAL files suit against Hershey and Rainforest Alliance [Online]. https://corpaccountabilitylab.org/calblog/2021/11/2/cal-files-suit-against-hershey-and-rainforest-alliancenbsp [Accessed 7 December 2021].
   Google Scholar
• De Felice, D. (2015). Banks and human rights due diligence: A critical analysis of the Thun Group's discussion paper on the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. The International Journal of Human Rights, 19(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2015.1006884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deva, S. (2020). From “business or human rights” to “business and human rights”: What next? In S. Deva & D. Birchall (Eds.), Research handbook on human rights and business (pp. 1–22). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Durkee, M. J. (2021). Interpretive entrepreneurs. Virginia Law Review, 107(3), 431–493.
   Google Scholar
• European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights [ECCHR]. (2021). Human rights fitness of the auditing and certification industry: A cross-sector analysis of current challenges and possible responses. https://www.ecchr.eu/en/publication/human-rights-fitness-audits/ [Accessed 7 December 2021]
   Google Scholar
• European Coalition for Corporate Justice [ECCJ] (2021). Corporate due diligence laws and legislative proposals in Europe. [Online] Available: https://corporatejustice.org/publications/comparative-table-corporate-due-diligence-laws-and-legislative-proposals-in-europe-2/ [Accessed 7 December 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Eckert, J., & Knöpfel, L. (2021). Legal responsibility in an entangled world. Journal of Legal Anthropology, 4(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2020.040201
   Google Scholar
• Fasterling, B. (2017). Human rights due diligence as risk management: Social risk versus human rights risk. Business and Human Rights Journal, 2(2), 225–274. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2016.26.
   Google Scholar
• Fransen, L., & LeBaron, G. (2019). Big audit firms as regulatory intermediaries in transnational labour governance. Regulation & Governance, 13(2), 260–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, D. (2004). The role of business in global governance. In S. A. Schirm (Ed.), New rules for global markets: Public and (pp. 133–154). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, D. (2007). Business power in global governance. Lynne Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• Grama, B. (2022). Company-administered grievance processes for external stakeholders: A Means for effective remedy, community relations, or private power? Wisconsin International Law Journal, 73(1), 71–143.
   Google Scholar
• Götzmann, N. (2019). Handbook on Human rights impact assessment. Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, J. (2011). Human rights measurement: Reflections on the current practice and future potential of human rights impact assessment. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 3(2), 162–187. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/hur011
   Google Scholar
• Kemp, D., & Vanclay, F. (2013). Human rights and impact assessment: Clarifying the connections in practice. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 31(2), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2013.782978.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kourula, A., Paukku, M., Peterman, A., & Koria, M. (2019). Intermediary roles in regulatory programs: Toward a role-based framework. Regulation & Governance, 13(2), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A radical view (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan (Original work published 1974).
   Google Scholar
• Majekolagbe, A., Seck, S. L., & Simons, P. (2020). Human Rights and the Impact Assessment Act: Proponents and Human Rights and the Impact Assessment Act: Proponents and consultants as duty bearers. In M. Doelle & J. Sinclair (Eds.), The next generation of impact assessment: A critical review of the Canadian Impact Assessment Act (pp.443–465). Irwin Law.
   Google Scholar
• McCorquodale, R., & Nolan, J. (2021). The effectiveness of human rights due diligence for preventing business and human rights abuses. Netherlands International Law Review, 68(3), 455–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40802-021-00201-x.
   Google Scholar
• McVey, M., Ferguson, J., & Puyou, F.-R. (2022). “Traduttore, Traditore?” Translating human rights into the corporate context. Journal of Business Ethics, advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-05028-3.
   Google Scholar
• Mende, J. (2020). Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private. (WZB Discussion Paper, No. SP IV 2020-103). Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB), Berlin [Online] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350845138_Business_Authority_in_Global_Governance_Beyond_Public_and_Private. [Accessed 7 December 2021]
   Google Scholar
• Mende, J. (2021). Private actors, NGOs and civil society in multilevel governance. In A. Benz, J. Broschek, & M. Lederer (Eds.), A research agenda for multilevel governance (pp. 171–189). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Mende, J. (2022). Business authority in global governance: Companies beyond public and private roles. Journal of International Political Theory, advance online publication.
   Google Scholar
• Mende, J., & Hoff, A. (2022). The governance authority of non-state actors in the business and human rights regime. Journal of Human Rights, 21(5), 593–603. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508406068506
   Google Scholar
• Milne, M., Kearins, K., & Walton, S. (2006). Creating adventures in wonderland: The journey metaphor and environmental sustainability. Organization, 13(6), 801–839. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508406068506
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monciardini, D., Bernaz, N., & Andhov, A. (2021). The organizational dynamics of compliance with the UK Modern Slavery Act in the food and tobacco sector. Business & Society, 60(2), 288–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650319898195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Dochartaigh, A. (2019). No more fairytales: A quest for alternative narratives of sustainable business. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(5), 1384–1413. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2016-2796.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Obara, L., J. (2017). “What does this mean?”: How UK companies make sense of human rights. Business and Human Rights Journal, 2(2), 249–273. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2017.7.
   Google Scholar
• Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group. (2021). Legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises: Third revised draft – 17 August 2021 [Online] https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/WGTransCorp/Session6/LBI3rdDRAFT.pdf [Accessed 7 December 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2011). Guiding principles on business and human rights: Implementing the UN “protect, respect, remedy” framework [Online]. https://www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf [Accessed 7 December 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2012). The corporate responsibility to respect human rights an interpretive guide [Online]. Available: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/RtRInterpretativeGuide.pdf [Accessed 7 December 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Partiti, E. (2021). Polycentricity and polyphony in international law: Interpreting the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 70(1), 133–164. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589320000469.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Power, M. (2003). Auditing and the production of legitimacy. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(4), 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00047-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramasastry, A. (2021). Advisors or enablers? Bringing professional service firms into the guiding principles fold. Business and Human Rights Journal, 6(2), 293–311. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2021.28.
   Google Scholar
• Ruggie, J. G. (2006). “Promotion and protection of human rights”: Interim report of the special representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises (U.N. Doc E/CN.4/2006/97). UN Commission on Human Rights. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/569408?ln=en.
   Google Scholar
• Saage-Maaß, M., Zumbansen, P., Bader, M., & Shahab, P. (2021). Transnational legal activism in global value chains. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Santoro, M. (2015). Business and human rights in historical perspective. Journal of Human Rights, 14(2), 155–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2015.1025945.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarfaty, G. (2020). Translating modern slavery into management practice. Law & Social Inquiry, 45(4), 1027–1051. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2019.77.s
   Google Scholar
• Scheper, C., & Zajak, S. (2019). Human rights and transparency politics in global production networks. In M. Mullen, D. Polomski, T. Soares, J. Cassinerio, M. D’Cruz, & V. Hongsathavij (Eds.), Navigating a new era in business and human rights (pp. 33–39). Article 30.
   Google Scholar
• Scheper, C. (2015). From “naming and shaming” to “knowing and showing”: Human rights and the power of corporate practice. The International Journal of Human Rights, 19(6), 737–756. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2015.1009264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheper, C. (2019). Assessing human rights impacts in global value chains: Can HRIA go beyond social audits in the apparel industry? In N. Götzmann (Ed.), Handbook on human rights impact assessment (pp. 256–271). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Shamir, R. (2008). The age of responsibilization: On market-embedded morality. Economy and Society, 37(1), 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shift & Mazars. (2015). UN [Online]. https://shiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/UNGPReportingFramework_withguidance2017.pdf [Accessed 7 December 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Shift & Mazars. (2017). UN guiding principles reporting framework – guidance part II: Assurance of human rights performance and reporting [Online]. https://www.ungpreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/UNGPRF_AssuranceGuidance.pdf [Accessed 7 December 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Smit, L., Holly, G., McCorquodale, R., & Neely, S. (2020). Human rights due diligence in global supply chains: Evidence of corporate practices to inform a legal standard. The International Journal of Human Rights, 25(6), 945–973. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2020.1799196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, B. (2018). The Dutch Banking Sector agreement on human rights: An exercise in regulation, experimentation or advocacy? Utrecht Law Review, 14(2), 84–107. http://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.440
   Google Scholar
• Van Ho, T., & Terwindt, C. (2019). Assessing the duty of care for social auditors. European Review of Private Law, 27(2), 379–402. https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2019020.
   Google Scholar