National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights: Progress or Mirage?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

As of October 2018, 21 states have adopted National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights (NAPs), with several more in different phases of development. This is an important political step to raise awareness of the importance of intragovernmental policy coherence and of the need to move forward to prevent human rights abuses linked to business activity. However, despite the global intergovernmental support to such policy strategies, the actual effectiveness of NAPs needs to be called into question: do they represent progress, or are they a mirage to block possible avenues of development? Currently existing NAPs have done little (yet) to ensure more effective protection in key policy areas, including trade and investment, state-owned enterprises, and particularly in relation to legislative developments and access to remedy. This contribution seeks to analyse the merits of developing NAPs, the importance of ensuring they become only the very first step towards a more effective protection of human rights, and to question whether their importance needs to be adjusted to what they really are: policy tools with limited effects and with a politically linked time frame.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-25
Number of pages25
JournalBusiness and Human Rights Journal
Volume4
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2019

Fingerprint

action plan
human rights
policy area
remedies
abuse
Human rights
Effective protection

Cite this

@article{2d091fe4f86e4616997323ccb994cf0e,
title = "National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights: Progress or Mirage?",
abstract = "As of October 2018, 21 states have adopted National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights (NAPs), with several more in different phases of development. This is an important political step to raise awareness of the importance of intragovernmental policy coherence and of the need to move forward to prevent human rights abuses linked to business activity. However, despite the global intergovernmental support to such policy strategies, the actual effectiveness of NAPs needs to be called into question: do they represent progress, or are they a mirage to block possible avenues of development? Currently existing NAPs have done little (yet) to ensure more effective protection in key policy areas, including trade and investment, state-owned enterprises, and particularly in relation to legislative developments and access to remedy. This contribution seeks to analyse the merits of developing NAPs, the importance of ensuring they become only the very first step towards a more effective protection of human rights, and to question whether their importance needs to be adjusted to what they really are: policy tools with limited effects and with a politically linked time frame.",
author = "{Cant{\'u} Rivera}, {Humberto Fernando}",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/bhj.2018.33",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "1--25",
journal = "Business and Human Rights Journal",
issn = "2057-0198",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights: Progress or Mirage? / Cantú Rivera, Humberto Fernando.

In: Business and Human Rights Journal, Vol. 4, No. 2, 01.02.2019, p. 1-25.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights: Progress or Mirage?

AU - Cantú Rivera, Humberto Fernando

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - As of October 2018, 21 states have adopted National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights (NAPs), with several more in different phases of development. This is an important political step to raise awareness of the importance of intragovernmental policy coherence and of the need to move forward to prevent human rights abuses linked to business activity. However, despite the global intergovernmental support to such policy strategies, the actual effectiveness of NAPs needs to be called into question: do they represent progress, or are they a mirage to block possible avenues of development? Currently existing NAPs have done little (yet) to ensure more effective protection in key policy areas, including trade and investment, state-owned enterprises, and particularly in relation to legislative developments and access to remedy. This contribution seeks to analyse the merits of developing NAPs, the importance of ensuring they become only the very first step towards a more effective protection of human rights, and to question whether their importance needs to be adjusted to what they really are: policy tools with limited effects and with a politically linked time frame.

AB - As of October 2018, 21 states have adopted National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights (NAPs), with several more in different phases of development. This is an important political step to raise awareness of the importance of intragovernmental policy coherence and of the need to move forward to prevent human rights abuses linked to business activity. However, despite the global intergovernmental support to such policy strategies, the actual effectiveness of NAPs needs to be called into question: do they represent progress, or are they a mirage to block possible avenues of development? Currently existing NAPs have done little (yet) to ensure more effective protection in key policy areas, including trade and investment, state-owned enterprises, and particularly in relation to legislative developments and access to remedy. This contribution seeks to analyse the merits of developing NAPs, the importance of ensuring they become only the very first step towards a more effective protection of human rights, and to question whether their importance needs to be adjusted to what they really are: policy tools with limited effects and with a politically linked time frame.

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/national-action-plans-business-human-rights-progress-mirage

U2 - 10.1017/bhj.2018.33

DO - 10.1017/bhj.2018.33

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 1

EP - 25

JO - Business and Human Rights Journal

JF - Business and Human Rights Journal

SN - 2057-0198

IS - 2

ER -