Best Scholarly Article of 2022
Gender and Intersectionality in Business and Human Rights Scholarship
Authors: Melissa N Handl, PhD Candidate, Faculty of Common Law and member of the Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa, Canada
Sara L Seck, Associate Professor and Yogis and Keddy Chair in Human Rights Law, Schulich School of Law, Marine & Environmental Law Institute, Dalhousie University, Canada
Penelope Simons, Full Professor and Gordon Henderson Chair in Human Rights, Faculty of Common Law and member of the Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa, Canada
The article critically examines intersectionality as an analytical tool in business and human rights (BHR) scholarship. In their analysis of gender in BHR scholarship, the authors note that there is limited BHR literature that rely on intersectional analysis. They then turn to an insightful and critical analysis of four germane elements of intersectionality that challenge some core assumptions about BHR, explaining how each element can inform BHR scholarship. This excellent article elegantly weaves the concept of intersectionality with BHR. It is innovative and sophisticated in its analysis while being accessible to a reader without significant background in intersectional analysis. While grounded in a strong conceptual background, the article offers insights that could apply to many different areas of the BHR field. Its major contribution is in the insights and tools that it presents for future BHR scholarship. It has the potential to be a seminal article that significantly influences subsequent literature in the developing BHR field.
Selection Committee (all members of the Editorial Board)
Denis G Arnold, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Barnali Choudhury, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Canada
Ibironke Odumosu-Ayanu, University of Saskatchewan, Canada
****
Best Scholarly Article of 2021
Wages: An Overlooked Dimension of Business and Human Rights in Global Supply Chains
Author: Genevieve Lebaron, Professor of Politics at the University of Sheffield, UK
The article exemplifies outstanding empirical research on challenges in, and the importance of, paying a living wage and avoiding wage violations for eliminating forced labor in business and human rights. It is based on rigorous and diligent bottom-up qualitative and quantitative research methods, including interviews and surveys with over 1000 tea workers in India and coca workers in Ghana, as well as with businesses and civil society organizations. LeBaron’s findings demonstrate the challenges to eradicating forced labor in global supply chains, identify the need for more empirical research in business and human rights scholarship, and outlines gaps in the field where future research is needed. The selection of this article for the prize recognizes the importance of Lebaron’s research methodology for the academic study of business and human rights and for policy reform. Both depend on strong empirical foundations to draw meaningful connections between business practices and human rights impacts. We believe that scholars and practitioners will cite this article for both purposes, and it provides an excellent model to encourage other scholars to contribute to these efforts with similar research methodologies. We also appreciate how this type of empirical work provided a voice to those directly affected by corporate human rights practices in supply chains.
Selection Committee (all members of the Editorial Board)
David Hess, Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan, USA
Jernej Letnar Cernič, New University, Slovenia
Kish Parella, Washington and Lee University, USA
Best Developments in the Field Article of 2021
Author: Teresa Scassa, University of Ottawa, Canada
The article is well written, discusses a novel topic, and includes useful analysis. The piece drives home the message that the use of technology will continue to be a site of political debate. It is not neutral, but rather circumstantial and dependent on context. The committee especially appreciated the exploration of the (implicit) normative aspects built into GAEN: the potential for human rights abuse inherent in the society-wide collection of user location and health status data led to design choices that may have reduced the flexibility or even effectiveness of the system by assuaging the legitimate concerns of the public over government intrusion into the right to privacy. At the same time, it was private instead of public actors that got to decide that privacy prevailed over public health monitoring. The article gave the committee enough background to begin wrestling with other, thought-provoking questions, such as: to what extent did States and private sector use technological applications meant for monitoring and managing the Covid pandemic to consolidate control, maximize profit, and protect systems of oppression? What alternative systems were adopted by States (especially more authoritarian States), and how did these work out? Did Google and Apple take advantage of the pandemic to create a system that is tightly bound to the demands of the market and only increased their market power? And are there examples of well-functioning publicly and cooperatively owned alternatives to Google, Apple and other tech giants facilitated apps? Thus, this topic deserves more scholarship, which we hope to see in the next issues of the Journal.
Selection Committee (all members of the DiF Panel)
Felogene Anumo, Thousand Currents, Kenya
Jonathan Kaufman, Advocates for Community Alternatives, USA
Mariëtte van Huijstee, Rathenau Instituut, the Netherlands
****
Best Scholarly Article of 2020
Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights: A Business Ethical Assessment
Authors: Alexander Kriebitz, Research Associate at the Chair of Business Ethics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany and Christoph Lütge, Chair Holder and Full Professor at the Chair of Business Ethics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
The article examines the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) within the larger business and human rights debate. The analysis of ethical impacts offers a timely interdisciplinary assessment that the selection committee feels could have a significant impact on the field. In addition, the importance of the topic and the relative lack of engagement with these two issues – AI and business and human rights – stands out. The authors were able to draw on the theoretical foundations of human rights while still ensuring the topic was accessible to readers, allowing readers to engage with these important issues in new ways. In short, the article captures what the 21st century approach to business and human rights could be.
Selection Committee (all members of the Editorial Board)
Jena Martin, West Virginia University, USA
Ken McPhail, University of Manchester, UK
Humberto Cantú Rivera, Universidad de Monterrey, Mexico
Best Developments in the Field Article of 2020
The First International Standard on Violence and Harassment in the World of Work
Author: Makbule Sahan, Legal Director at the International Trade Union Confederation, Belgium
The article describes the first international labour standard defining violence and harassment in the workplace. (ILO Convention No. 190, Recommendation No. 206) Well-written and timely, the piece has the potential to raise awareness of the urgent, often overlooked, gender dimension of labour and other human rights standards. The author connects the features of the new ILO standard with efforts to implement the UN Guiding Principles, and highlights steps companies can take to combat violence and harassment throughout their operations and activities. By sending “a clear signal from the international community . . . acknowledging the pervasiveness and unacceptability of violence and harassment,” the new international standard can serve as the basis for further action by governments, businesses, and civil society.
Selection Committee (all members of the DiF Panel)
Anthony Ewing, Co-Director, Teaching Business and Human Rights Forum, Columbia University, USA
Juana Kweitel, Conectas Human Rights, Brazil
Ron Popper, Global Business Initiative on Human Rights, Switzerland
*****
Best Scholarly Article of 2019
Exploring Migrant Employees’ ‘Rights-Talk’ in the British Hospitality Sector
Author: Samentha Goethals, Assistant Professor of Business and Society, SKEMA Business School, Sophia Antipolis, France
This article by Samantha Goethals examines issues at the intersection of business and human rights from the perspective of migrant employees in the British hospitality sector. Goethals adopts an innovative and interdisciplinary lens to introduce readers to the concept of ‘rights-talk’ as an analytical tool to explore the use of human rights language in the workplace. This bottom-up perspective provides unique insights into the use and relevance of the language of rights in employment and will make a valuable contribution to business and human rights literature.
Selection Committee (all members of the Editorial Board)
Justine Nolan, University of New South Wales, USA
David Hess, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, USA
Björn Fasterling, EDHEC Business School, France
Best Developments in the Field Article of 2019
Authors: Joana Nabuco, Researcher at the Business and Human Rights Centre at FGV, formerly Development and Socio-Envirmmental Rights Officer, Conectas Human Rights (Brazil)
Leticia Aleixo, Supervising Attorney, Human Rights Clinic, Federal University of Minais Getais
This article examines an unexplored but crucial area of remedy related to administration and implementation of large-scale remediation programs. The article shows how securing a commitment to remedy is not the end of the road as there can be many challenges in the actual administration and implementation of compensation and other reparation measures. It is very useful for other cases of large-scale industrial/environmental disasters. The article is clear and strong as a case-study on the benefits of meaningful community consultation from which other companies with similar situations should be able to learn. It was important at the time of writing but also now as companies are grappling with how to address remediation in times of crisis
Selection Committee (all members of the DiF Panel)
Gabriela Quijano, Business and Human Rights Consultant, UK
Salil Tripathi, Institute for Human Rights and Business, UK
Vanessa Zimmerman, Pillar Two, Australia