Business and Human Rights: Alternative Approaches to Transnational Regulation

Literature Cited

1. Al Faruque A 2010. Mapping the relationship between investment protection and human rights. J. World Invest. Trade 11:539–60
   [Google Scholar]
2. Amnesty Int 2014. Injustice Incorporated: Corporate Abuses and the Human Right to Remedy London: Amnesty Int.
3. Arnold DG. 2016. Corporations and human rights obligations. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 1:255–75
   [Google Scholar]
4. Ashman D. 2001. Civil society collaboration with business: bringing empowerment back in. World Dev 29:1097–113
   [Google Scholar]
5. Augenstein D, Dawson M, Thielbörger P. 2018. The UNGPs in the European Union: The open coordination of business and human rights?. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 3:1–22
   [Google Scholar]
6. Ayres I, Braithwaite J. 1992. Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate New York: Oxford Univ. Press
7. Backer LC. 2010. Governance without government: an overview and application of interactions between law-state and governance-corporate systems Work. Pap., Legal Stud. Res. 10–2010 Pa. State Univ. Philadelphia: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1568934
8. Backer LC. 2012. The structural characteristics of global law for the 21st century: fracture, fluidity, permeability, and polycentricity. Tilburg Law Rev 17:2177–99
   [Google Scholar]
9. Bakan J. 2004. The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power New York: Free
10. Baumann-Pauly D, Nolan J, Van Heerden A, Samway M 2017. Industry-specific multi-stakeholder initiatives that govern corporate human rights standards: legitimacy assessments of the Fair Labor Association and the Global Network Initiative. J. Bus. Ethics 143:771–87
    [Google Scholar]
11. Baxi U, Paul T. 1986. Mass Disasters and Multinational Liability: The Bhopal Case Bombay: NM Tripathi Pvt. Ltd.
12. Bebchuk L, Tallarita R. 2020.. “ Stakeholder” capitalism seems mostly for show. Wall Street Journal Aug. 6. https://www.wsj.com/articles/stakeholder-capitalism-seems-mostly-for-show-11596755220
    [Google Scholar]
13. Bernaz N. 2013. Enhancing corporate accountability for human rights violations: Is extraterritoriality the magic potion?. J. Bus. Ethics 117:493–511
    [Google Scholar]
14. Bernaz N. 2016. Business and Human Rights: History, Law and Policy—Bridging the Accountability Gap Abingdon, UK: Routledge
15. Bilchitz D. 2013. A chasm between “is” and “ought”? A critique of the normative foundations of the SRSG's Framework and the Guiding Principles. See Deva & Bilchitz 2013 107–37
16. Bilchitz D. 2016. The necessity for a business and human rights treaty. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 1:203–27
    [Google Scholar]
17. Birchall D. 2019. Human rights on the altar of the market: the Blackstone letters and the financialisation of housing. Transnatl. Legal Theory 10:446–71
    [Google Scholar]
18. Black J. 1997. Rules and Regulators Oxford, UK: Clarendon
19. Blumberg P. 1996. The increasing recognition of enterprise principles in determining parent and subsidiary corporation liabilities. Conn. Law Rev. 28:295–346
    [Google Scholar]
20. Blumberg P. 2002. Asserting human rights against multinational corporations under United States law: conceptual and procedural problems. Am. J. Comp. Law 50:493–529
    [Google Scholar]
21. Bonnitcha J, McCorquodale R. 2017. The concept of ‘due diligence’ in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Eur. J. Int. Law 28:899–919
    [Google Scholar]
22. Braithwaite J, Drahos P. 2000. Global Business Regulation Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
23. Brenkert GG. 2016. Business ethics and human rights: an overview. Bus. Hum. Rights J 1:277–306
    [Google Scholar]
24. Buhmann K. 2009. Regulating corporate social and human rights responsibilities at the UN plane: Institutionalising new forms of law and law-making approaches?. Nordic J. Int. Law 78:1–52
    [Google Scholar]
25. Buhta N 2016. The Frontiers of Human Rights. Extraterritoriality and Its Challenges Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
26. Business Roundtable 2019. Business Roundtable redefines the purpose of a corporation to promote “an economy that serves all Americans.”. Business Roundtable Aug. 19. https://www.businessroundtable.org/business-roundtable-redefines-the-purpose-of-a-corporation-to-promote-an-economy-that-serves-all-americans
    [Google Scholar]
27. Cantú Rivera H 2019. National action plans on business and human rights: Progress or mirage?. Bus. Hum. Rights J 4:213–37
    [Google Scholar]
28. Carraro V. 2019. Promoting compliance with human rights: the performance of the United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review and treaty bodies. Int. Stud. Q. 63:1079–93
    [Google Scholar]
29. Cassel D. 2016. Outlining the case for a common law duty of care of business to exercise human rights due diligence. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 1:179–202
    [Google Scholar]
30. Cassel D. 2020. State jurisdiction over transnational business activity affecting human rights. See Deva & Birchall 2020 198–222
31. Černič LJ. 2018. Corporate Accountability Under Socio-Economic Rights Abingdon, UK: Routledge
32. Chandler v Cape PLC 2012. EWCA Civ. 525
33. Choc v. Hudbay Minerals Inc. ( 2013. ONSC 1414
34. Choudhury B. 2017. Spinning straw into gold: incorporating the business and human rights agenda into international investment agreements. Univ. Pa. J. Int. Law 38:425–81
    [Google Scholar]
35. Choudhury B. 2020. Investor obligations for human rights. ICSID Rev 2020:siaa002. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siaa002
    [Google Scholar]
36. Clapham A. 2006. Human Rights Obligations of Non-State Actors Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
37. Coleman J, Cordes KY, Johnson L 2020. Human rights law and the investment treaty regimes. See Deva & Birchall 2020 290–314
38. Coomans F, Kamminga M 2004. Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties Antwerp, Belg: Intersentia
39. Cossart S, Chaplier J, Beau De Lomenie T 2017. The French law on duty of care: a historic step towards making globalization work for all. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 2:317–23
    [Google Scholar]
40. Cranston C, Domingo Ramos R, Ivers C, García Esteban A, Patz C et al. 2020. What if? Case studies of human rights abuses and environmental harm linked to EU companies, and how EU due diligence laws could help protect people and the planet Rep. Eur. Coalit. Corp Justice, Brussels: http://corporatejustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/asi_eccj_report_final.pdf
41. Dalrymple W. 2019. The Anarchy: The East India Company, Corporate Violence and the Pillage of an Empire London: Bloomsbury Publ.
42. Darcy S. 2017.. “ The elephant in the room”: corporate tax avoidance & business and human rights. Bus. Hum. Rights J 2:1–30
    [Google Scholar]
43. Davitti D, Ho J, Vargiu P, Yilmaz Vastardis A 2020. COVID-19 and the precarity of international investment law. Medium May 6. https://medium.com/iel-collective/covid-19-and-the-precarity-of-international-investment-law-c9fc254b3878
    [Google Scholar]
44. De Schutter O. 2014. International Human Rights Law: Cases, Materials and Commentary Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
45. De Schutter O. 2015. Towards a new treaty on business and human rights. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 1:41–67
    [Google Scholar]
46. Desierto D. 2020. Human rights in the era of automation and artificial intelligence. EJIL:Talk! Feb. 26. https://www.ejiltalk.org/human-rights-in-the-era-of-automation-and-artificial-intelligence/
    [Google Scholar]
47. Deva S 2003. Human rights violations by multinational corporations and international law: Where from here?. Conn. J. Int. Law 19:1–57
    [Google Scholar]
48. Deva S 2004a. Acting extraterritorially to tame multinational corporations for human rights violations: Who should bell the cat?. Melb. J. Int. Law 5:37–65
    [Google Scholar]
49. Deva S 2004b. UN's human rights norms for transnational corporations and other business enterprises: An imperfect step in the right direction?. ILSA J. Int. Comp. Law 10:493–523
    [Google Scholar]
50. Deva S 2011. Sustainable development: What role for the company law?. Int. Comp. Corp. Law J 8:76–102
    [Google Scholar]
51. Deva S 2012a. Regulating Corporate Human Rights Violations: Humanizing Business Abingdon, UK: Routledge
52. Deva S 2012b. Corporate human rights violations: a case for extraterritorial regulation. Handbook of the Philosophical Foundations of Business Ethics C Luetge 1077–90 Dordrecht, Neth: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
53. Deva S 2012c. Socially responsible business in India: has the elephant finally woken up to the tunes of international trends?. Common Law World Rev 41:299–321
    [Google Scholar]
54. Deva S 2020. From “business or human rights” to “business and human rights”: What next?. See Deva & Birchall 2020 1–21
55. Deva S, Bilchitz D 2013. Human Rights Obligations of Business: Beyond the Corporate Responsibility to Respect? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
56. Deva S, Bilchitz D 2017. Building a Treaty on Business and Human Rights: Context and Contours Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
57. Deva S, Birchall D. 2020. Research Handbook on Human Rights and Business Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
58. Dine J. 2005. Companies, International Trade and Human Rights Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
59. Dodge WS. 2018. Corporate liability under the US Alien Tort Statute: a comment on Jesner v Arab Bank. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 4:131–37
    [Google Scholar]
60. Donaldson T. 1989. The Ethics of International Business New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
61. Esther Kiobel v Royal Dutch Shell PLC, [2019] ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:4233
62. ETO Consort 2011. Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights https://www.etoconsortium.org/nc/en/main-navigation/library/maastricht-principles/?tx_drblob_pi1%5BdownloadUid%5D=23
63. Eur. Coalit. Corp. Justice (ECCJ) 2018. Key features of mandatory human rights due diligence legislation Position Pap., Eur. Coalit. Corp Justice, Brussels:
64. Eur. Union Agency Fundam. Rights (FRA) 2017. Improving access to remedy in the area of business and human rights at the EU level: Opinion of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Opin 1/2017 FRA, Vienna:
65. Freeman B. 2020. Rethinking MSIs: Time to bury MSIs?—Not so fast. Human Rights@Harvard Law Blog Oct. 1. https://hrp.law.harvard.edu/corporate-accountability/rethinking-msis-time-to-bury-msis-not-so-fast/
    [Google Scholar]
66. Friedman M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Sept. 13. https://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.html
    [Google Scholar]
67. Gaeta P, Viñuales JE, Zappalá S. 2020. Cassese's International Law Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
68. George E, Thomas E 2018. Bringing human rights into bilateral investment treaties: South Africa and a different approach to international investment disputes. Transnatl. Law Contemp. Probl. 27:403–50
    [Google Scholar]
69. Gibney M, Skogly S. 2010. Universal Human Rights and Extraterritorial Obligations Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
70. Goodman R, Jinks D. 2003. Measuring the effects of human rights treaties. Eur. J. Int. Law 14:171–83
    [Google Scholar]
71. Gunningham N, Grabosky P, Sinclair D. 1998. Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy Oxford, UK: Clarendon
72. Haines F. 1997. Corporate Regulation: Beyond “Punish” or “Persuade.” Oxford, UK: Clarendon:
73. Hamdani K, Ruffing L 2015. The United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations: Corporate Conduct and the Public Interest Abingdon, UK: Routledge
74. Hindelang S, Krajewski M 2016. Shifting Paradigms in International Investment Law: More Balanced, Less Isolated, Increasingly Diversified Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
75. Hsieh N-h. 2015. Should business have human rights obligations?. J. Hum. Rights 14:2218–36
    [Google Scholar]
76. Int. Corp. Account. Roundtable (ICAR), Eur. Coalit. Corp. Justice (ECCJ), Dejusticia 2017. Assessments of existing national action plans (NAPs) on business and human rights Assess., ICAR, ECCJ Dejusticia: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/583f3fca725e25fcd45aa446/t/599c543ae9bfdf40b5b6f055/1503417406364/NAP+Assessment+Aug+2017+FINAL.pdf
77. Invest. Alliance Hum. Rights 2020. Human rights risks in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region: practical guidance for investors Publ., Invest. Alliance Hum. Rights. https://investorsforhumanrights.org/publications/cover-human-rights-risks-xinjiang-uyghur-autonomous-region-practical-guidance
78. Ireland P. 2010. Limited liability, shareholder rights and the problem of corporate irresponsibility. Cambridge J. Econ. 34:837–56
    [Google Scholar]
79. Kinley D, Chambers R. 2006. The UN Human Rights Norms for Corporations: the private implications of public international law. Hum. Rights Law Rev 6:447–97
    [Google Scholar]
80. Kinley D, Tadaki J. 2004. From talk to walk: the emergence of human rights responsibilities for corporations at international law. Va. J. Int. Law 44:931–1023
    [Google Scholar]
81. Kirkebo TL, Langford M. 2018. The commitment curve: global regulation of business and human rights. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 3:157–85
    [Google Scholar]
82. Knox JH. 2012. The Ruggie rules: applying human rights law to corporations. See Mares 2012 51–83
83. Krajewski M. 2020. A nightmare or a noble dream? Establishing investor obligations through treaty-making and treaty-application. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 5:105–29
    [Google Scholar]
84. Locke RM, Rissing BA, Palet T. 2013. Complements or substitutes? Private codes, state regulation and the enforcement of labour standards in global supply chains. Br. J. Ind. Relat. 51:519–52
    [Google Scholar]
85. Mares R. 2012. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Foundations and Implementation Leiden, Neth: Martinus Nijhoff Publ.
86. Mares R. 2017. Legalizing human rights due diligence and the separation of entities principle. See Deva & Bilchitz 2017 266–96
87. Mares R. 2018. Corporate transparency laws: A hollow victory?. Neth. Q. Hum. Rights 36:189–213
    [Google Scholar]
88. Martin J. 2020. The use of disclosure-based regulation to advance the state duty to protect. See Deva & Burchall 2020 176–97
89. Martin J, Martin J, Van Ho TL 2020. When Business Harms Human Rights: Affected Communities that Are Dying to Be Heard New York: Anthem
90. Martin-Ortega O, O'Brien CM. 2019. Public Procurement and Human Rights: Opportunities, Risks and Dilemmas for the State as Buyer Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
91. McCorquodale R, Simons P. 2007. Responsibility beyond borders: state responsibility for extraterritorial violations by corporations of international human rights law. Mod. Law Rev. 70:598–625
    [Google Scholar]
92. Melish TJ. 2017. Putting “human rights” back into the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: shifting frames and embedding participation rights. See Rodríguez-Garavito 2017a 76–96
93. Melish TJ, Meidinger E. 2012. Protect, respect, remedy and participate: “new governance” lessons for the Ruggie framework. See Mares 2012 303–36
94. Meyersfeld B. 2017. Empty promises and the myth of mining: Does mining lead to pro-poor development?. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 2:31–53
    [Google Scholar]
95. Monshipouri M, Welch C, Kennedy E 2003. Multinational corporations and the ethics of global responsibility: problems and possibilities. Hum. Rights Q. 25:965–89
    [Google Scholar]
96. Moran TH. 2009. The United Nations and transnational corporations: a review and a perspective. Transnatl. Corp. 18:91–112
    [Google Scholar]
97. MSI Integr 2020. Not Fit-for-Purpose: The Grand Experiment of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives in Corporate Accountability, Human Rights and Global Governance Berkeley, CA: MSI Integr https://www.traffickingmatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/MSI_Not_Fit_For_Purpose_FORWEBSITE.FINAL_.pdf
98. Muchlinski P. 2010. Limited liability and multinational enterprises: A case for reform?. Cambridge J. Econ 34:915–28
    [Google Scholar]
99. Muchlinski P. 2012. Implementing the new UN Corporate Human Rights Framework: implications for corporate law, governance and regulation. J. Bus. Ethics 22:145–77
    [Google Scholar]
100. Muchlinski P. 2017. The impact of a business and human rights treaty on investment law and arbitration. See Deva & Bilchitz 2017 346–74
101. Muchlinski P 2021. Multinational Enterprises and the Law Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
102. Narula S. 2013. International financial institutions, transnational corporations and duties of states. In Global Justice, State Duties: The Extraterritorial Scope of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in International Law, ed. Langford M, Vandenhole W, Scheinin M, Van Genugten W114–50 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
103. Nestor P, Drimmer J. 2019. How companies should respond to the Vedanta ruling. BSR Blog April 30. https://www.bsr.org/en/our-insights/blog-view/how-companies-should-respond-to-the-vedanta-ruling
     [Google Scholar]
104. Nevsun Resources Ltd. v Araya, ( 2020. SCC 5
105. Nolan J, Boersma M. 2019. Addressing Modern Slavery Sydney: UNSW Press
106. O'Brien CM. 2018. The home state duty to regulate the human rights impacts of TNCs abroad: a rebuttal. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 3:47–73
     [Google Scholar]
107. O'Brien CM, Mehra A, Blackwell S, Poulsen-Hansen CB. 2016. National action plans: current status and future prospects for a new business and human rights governance tool. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 1:117–26
     [Google Scholar]
108. Okpabi v Royal Dutch Shell Plc [2021] UKSC 3
109. Orts EW. 2013. Business Persons: A Legal Theory of the Firm Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
110. Oxfam Int 2020. Power, Profits and the Pandemic: From Corporate Extraction for the Few to an Economy that Works for All London, UK: Oxfam Int.
111. Palazzo G, Morhart F, Schremph-Stirling J 2016. Shopping for a better world: how consumer decisions can help to promote sustainability and human rights. Business and Human Rights: From Principles to Practice D Baumann-Pauly, J Nolan 200–9 Abingdon, UK: Routledge
     [Google Scholar]
112. Parker C. 2002. The Open Corporation: Effective Self-Regulation and Democracy Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
113. Parker C, Howe J. 2012. Ruggie's diplomacy project and its missing regulatory infrastructure. See Mares 2012 273–301
114. Pauwelyn J, Wessel RA, Wouters J. 2014. When structures become shackles: stagnation and dynamics in international lawmaking. Eur. J. Int. Law 25:733–63
     [Google Scholar]
115. Princ. Responsible Invest. (PRI) 2006. What are the Principles for Responsible Investment? https://www.unpri.org/pri/what-are-the-principles-for-responsible-investment
116. Ramasastry A. 2015. Corporate social responsibility versus business and human rights: bridging the gap between responsibility and accountability. J. Hum. Rights 14:237–59
     [Google Scholar]
117. Ratner SR. 2001. Corporations and human rights: a theory of legal responsibility. Yale Law J 111:443–545
     [Google Scholar]
118. Reinisch A. 2005. The changing international legal framework for dealing with non-state actors. Non-State Actors and Human Rights P Alston 37–89 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
119. Risse M. 2018. Human rights and artificial intelligence: an urgently needed agenda Pap., Carr Cent. Hum. Rights Policy, Harvard Kennedy Sch Cambridge, MA: https://carrcenter.hks.harvard.edu/files/cchr/files/humanrightsai_designed.pdf
120. Rodríguez-Garavito C 2017a. Business and Human Rights: Beyond the End of the Beginning Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
121. Rodríguez-Garavito C. 2017b. Introduction: a dialogue across divides in the business and human rights field. See Rodríguez-Garavito 2017a 1–45
122. Ruggie JG. 2007. Business and human rights: the evolving international agenda. Am. J. Int. Law 101:819–40
     [Google Scholar]
123. Ruggie JG. 2010. The “protect, respect and remedy framework”: implications for the ILO Remarks, Int. Labour Conf. Geneva: June 3. https://media.business-humanrights.org/media/documents/files/reports-and-materials/Ruggie-presentation-to-ILO-conference-3-Jun-2010.pdf
124. Ruggie JG. 2013. Just Business: Multinational Corporations and Human Rights New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
125. Ruggie JG. 2014. Global governance and “new governance theory”: lessons from business and human rights. Glob. Gov. 20:5–17
     [Google Scholar]
126. Ruggie JG. 2020. The social construction of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. See Deva & Burchall 2020 63–86
127. Ruggie JG, Sherman JF III 2017. The concept of ‘due diligence’ in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: a reply to Jonathan Bonnitcha and Robert McCorquodale. Eur. J. Int. Law 28:921–28
     [Google Scholar]
128. Sauvant KP. 2015. The negotiations of the United Nations Code of Conduct on Transnational Corporations: experience and lessons learned. J. World Invest. Trade 16:11
     [Google Scholar]
129. Scheper C. 2015. From naming and shaming to knowing and showing: human rights and the power of corporate practice. Int. J. Hum. Rights 19:737–56
     [Google Scholar]
130. Schrempf-Stirling J, Wettstein F. 2017. Beyond guilty verdicts: human rights litigation and its impact on corporations’ human rights policies. J. Bus. Ethics 145:545–62
     [Google Scholar]
131. Seck SL. 2017. Business responsibilities for human rights and climate change—a contribution to the work of the Study Group on Business and Human Rights of the International Law Association Work Pap Dalhousie Univ. Halifax, Can: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2974768
132. Seif I 2020. Business and human rights in international investment law: empirical evidence. Handbook of International Investment Law and Policy J Chaisse, L Choukroune, S Jusoh Singapore: Springer
     [Google Scholar]
133. Simons P, Macklin A. 2014. The Governance Gap: Extractive Industries, Human Rights, and the Home State Advantage Abingdon, UK: Routledge
134. Sjåfjell B. 2020. How company law has failed human rights—and what to do about it. Bus. Hum. Rights J. 5:179–99
     [Google Scholar]
135. Skinner G, McCorquodale R, De Schutter O. 2013. The third pillar: access to judicial remedies for human rights violations by transnational business Publ., Int. Corp. Account. Roundtable Washington, DC:
136. Skogly S. 2004. Beyond National Borders: States’ Human Rights Obligations in International Cooperation Antwerp, Belg: Intersentia
137. Stephens B. 2020. The rise and fall of the Alien Tort Statute. See Deva & Burchall 2020 46–62
138. Sustain. Stock Exch. (SSE) Initiat., World Fed. Exch. (WFE) 2019. How exchanges can embed sustainability within their operations: A blueprint to advance action Rep., SSE Initiat., WFE Geneva: https://sseinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/SSE-WFE-Embedding-Sustainability-Report.pdf
139. Teubner G. 1983. Substantive and reflexive elements in modern law. Law Soc. Rev. 17:239–86
     [Google Scholar]
140. Thompson RB. 1991. Piercing the corporate veil: an empirical study. Cornell Law Rev 76:1036–74
     [Google Scholar]
141. UN Comm. Econ. Soc. Cult. Rights (UNCESCR) 2017. General comment No. 24 on state obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the context of business activities Aug. 10. UN Doc. E/C. 12/GC/24
142. UN Conf. Trade Dev. (UNCTAD) 2018. UNCTAD's Reform Package for the International Investment Regime Geneva: UNCTAD
143. UN Conf. Trade Dev. (UNCTAD) 2020. The changing IIA landscape: new treaties and recent policy developments. IAA Issues Note July. https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/diaepcbinf2020d4.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
144. UN Hum. Rights Counc. (UNHRC) 2014. Elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/26/9. https://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/26/9
145. UN Hum. Rights Off. High Commissioner (OHCHR) 2011. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework (UNGPs) UN Doc. A/HRC/17/31
146. UN Work. Group Bus. Hum. Rights (UNWG) 2013. State national action plans on Business and Human Rights https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/NationalActionPlans.aspx
147. UN Work. Group Bus. Hum. Rights (UNWG) 2018. The report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises: corporate human rights due diligence—emerging practices, challenges and ways forward UN Doc. A/73/163
148. Van Ho T. 2020. Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v. Lungowe and Others. Am. J. Int. Law 114:110–16
     [Google Scholar]
149. van Tulder R. 2012. Foreword: the necessity of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Multistakeholder Initiatives: A Strategic Guide for Civil Society Organizations, M van Huijstee8–9 Amsterdam: SOMO
     [Google Scholar]
150. Vedanta Resources PLC v Lungowe, [2019] UKSC 20
151. Ward B, Bufalari V. 2020. COVID-19 and inequality: a test of corporate purpose Rep., KKS Advis., Test Corp. Purpose London: https://c6a26163-5098-4e74-89da-9f6c9cc2e20c.filesusr.com/ugd/f64551_63f016a989db4dfeaa636d5a659d691a.pdf
152. Weissbrodt D, Kruger M. 2003. Norms of the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights. Am. J. Int. Law 97:901–22
     [Google Scholar]
153. Wettstein F. 2009. Multinational Corporations and Global Justice: Human Rights Obligations of a Quasi-Governmental Institution Stanford, CA: Stanford Bus. Books
154. Wilson AJ. 2006. Beyond Unocal: conceptual problems in using international norms to hold transnational corporations liable under the Alien Tort Claims Act. Transnational Corporations and Human Rights O De Schutter 43–72 Oxford, UK: Hart Publ.
     [Google Scholar]
155. Winston A. 2019. Is the business roundtable statement just empty rhetoric?. Harvard Business Review Aug. 30. https://hbr.org/2019/08/is-the-business-roundtable-statement-just-empty-rhetoric
     [Google Scholar]
156. World Benchmarking Alliance 2019. Corporate Human Rights Benchmark: 2019 key findings Rep., World Benchmarking Alliance Amsterdam: https://www.corporatebenchmark.org/sites/default/files/2019-11/CHRB2019KeyFindingsReport.pdf
157. World Benchmarking Alliance 2020. Corporate Human Rights Benchmark: 2020 key findings Rep., World Benchmarking Alliance Amsterdam: https://assets.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/app/uploads/2020/11/WBA-2020-CHRB-Key-Findings-Report.pdf
158. Zerk JA. 2006. Multinational and Corporate Social Responsibility: Limitations and Opportunities in International Law Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press