De-contextualized Corporate Human Rights Benchmarks

Whose Perspective Counts? See Disclaimer

Bibliographic Data

ID13019442
AuthorsRajiv Maher (0000-0001-9721-0626, Trinity College Dublin, corresponding author)
Year2019
Volume5
Issue1
Pages156-163
Publication date2019-09-19
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueBusiness and Human Rights Journal (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2057-0198 • E-ISSN: 2057-0201
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/bhj.2019.19
OpenAlexW2974834339
LanguageEN
Citations received12
References cited1

In this piece I examine the recent trend of corporate benchmarks in the business and human rights (BHR) field. The most well-known benchmarking initiative is the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark (CHRB), which I discuss along with the Responsible Mining Index (RMI).\n\nI argue that these initiatives, managerialistic in nature, fall short of including the voices of those whose rights are impacted by the corporations that they rank highly. In short, the benchmarks appear to be de-contextualized and ahistorical. Therefore, caution should be exercised when considering these benchmarks, because ranking certain corporations implies human rights performance despite disclaimers that mention their reliance on self-reported corporate data on human rights and, to a much lesser extent, information\n\nfrom select secondary sources, namely the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC). In short, I argue that the benchmarks are misleading in terms of human rights and corporate responsibility when considered from a rights holder perspective.\n\nTo illustrate the shortcomings of these benchmarks, I use empirical secondary data from socio-environmental conflicts in which some extractives companies with high rankings on these benchmarks allegedly harm human rights. I also discuss the implications in relation to the growing interest in socially responsible or environmental social and governance (ESG) investing.1 I recommend that these benchmarks should be re-named to reflect more accurately their content and what they actually measure: corporate-reported human rights ‘inputs’

Business · Content (measure theory · Disclaimer · Human rights · Internet privacy · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Computer Science · Corporate Law and Human Rights · Global trade, sustainability, and social impact · Law · Mathematics · Regulation and Compliance Studies · Artificial Intelligence

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access