The response of both developed and developing countries to global developments has been first, to shift the tax burden from (mobile) capital to (less mobile) labour, and second, when further increased taxation of labour becomes politically and economically difficult, to cut government services. Thus, globalization and tax competition lead to a fiscal crisis for countries that wish to continue to provide those government services to their citizens, at the same time that demographic factors and increased income inequality, job insecurity and income volatility that result from globalization render such services more necessary. This chapter argues that if government service programs are to be maintained in the face of globalization, and if developing countries are to raise the funds needed to achieve the SDGs, it is necessary to cut the intermediate link by limiting tax competition. However, from both practical and normative considerations, any limits set to tax competition should be congruent with maintaining the ability of democratic states to determine the desirable size of their government.

The focus of this chapter is the use of international arbitration for BHR disputes. The first part sets out the theoretical framework. It places arbitration within the context of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (“UNGPs”) and the barriers to individuals securing remedies. The merits and limitations of arbitration as an existing mechanism for resolving BHR disputes are discussed. The authors also consider how international arbitration, with appropriate modifications, may be complementary to, and operate in parallel with, both existing state-based judicial mechanisms as well as possible multilateral institutions for resolution of BHR disputes in the future. The second part of the chapter considers the pragmatic angle of arbitration of BHR disputes through: (i) the prism of the experience of the Bangladesh Accord Arbitrations; (ii) the formulation of BHR-specific arbitral procedures in the form of the Hague Rules; and (iii) the potential embrace of BHR arbitration in a range of specific industries, namely fast fashion, mega-sporting events, and commerce at sea.

A decentralization of power in new play development and production reflects the rebellion and unrest that swept American society in the 1960s and 1970s. US dramaturgy began to reflect a diversity of voices from a wider range of racial and cultural backgrounds, genders, and sexual orientations. Productions resulting from the collaborations discussed in this chapter, such as between August Wilson and Llyod Richards, unearth and confront uncomfortable American histories or grapple with an increasingly diverse fabric of family and society. For playwright Suzan-Lori Parks, content dictated stylistically ambitious form, though productions of her plays directed by Liz Diamond have tended toward a traditional division of labor. Meanwhile, writer/director Maria Irene Fornes aligned stagings of her highly visual feminist plays closely with designers. For playwright Paula Vogel and director Rebecca Taichman, inclusive, unconventional collaborative processes fostered work that engages difficult subjects. The nuances of the collaborative relationships and processes that moved new plays from page to stage in post-1960 America are as varied as the diverse backgrounds of the artists themselves.

This chapter explores the role of consumers in pushing for sustainable business. It finds that although consumers increasingly care about sustainability, there are significant limitations to how able and willing they are to prioritise sustainably-sourced products through their purchasing decisions. Faced with limitations on individual consumer ability and agency to incentivise sustainable business through purchasing decisions, we have seen the mobilisation of consumers by civil society groups focused on tarnishing company reputations; these have been effective in some instances, but are unable to lead to meaningful change at scale.

As of 2019, thirty-five of the past thirty-eight Pulitzer Prize-winning plays premiered in US regional theatres, where many artists maintain lifelong careers. Yet more than half of the nation’s regional theatres regularly borrow funds to meet daily operating expenses. This disconnect between creative success and economic viability is part of a false narrative that has led to systemic problems, leaving many regional theatres vulnerable, and also shaped the historical narrative of the regional movement. This chapter employs an economically centered, historiographical approach to disrupt the standard narrative of the rise of regional theatre, which revolves around a rejection of Broadway’s commercialism and a desire for a decentralized, avant-garde theatre. The reality was much more complex, as demonstrated by case studies of Theatre ’47, the Alley Theatre, and Arena Stage. The Guthrie Theatre serves as a model for a new generation of highly professional, nonprofit theatres that emerged as the movement gained momentum. The chapter concludes with an exploration of the social and cultural forces that inform contemporary theatre economics, and the reminder that budgets reflect values.

The goal of this chapter is to elucidate the role and responsibility of the business sector for safeguarding these two rights by clarifying the origins, legal nature, scope and enforcement of obligations placed upon corporate actors. Specifically, the chapter examines whether and how the status of a duty-bearer affects the ambit of the two rights and obligations they give rise to. In other words, what are the differences between the role of businesses and that of states in securing the rights to work and just and favourable conditions of work? While the traditional (positivist) paradigm of human rights protection sees states as ultimately responsible for ensuring that rights are respected by everyone within their respective jurisdictions, certain aspects of the two rights may be fulfilled only by states. In that sense, the scope of duties arising out of the rights to work and just and favourable conditions of work which businesses can in theory be responsible for is materially different.

Rosenthal provides a critical history and analysis of the connections between mainstream and experimental theatre in New York, from the 1960s to 2020, with a focus on Broadway. She argues that Broadway and mainstream theatre underwent multiple and significant transformations during the 1960s and in the decades that followed. Rosenthal analyzes the work of playwrights, directors, composers, choreographers, and designers who made art both downtown in experimental theatres and uptown on Broadway. The concept of the “mainstream experimental” is used as a descriptor for Broadway throughout the following half century, as commercial theatre continued to push and shape US society and culture at large. Alongside artists, pathbreaking producers off and on Broadway are the focus of this chapter, along with the prominence of ensemble-based musicals and dramatic works and the success of solo performances on Broadway. The contributions and legacies of LGBTQ artists such as Tony Kushner, Larry Kramer, and Lisa Kron, and Black artists including August Wilson, George C. Wolfe, Ntozake Shange, Anna Deavere Smith, and Jeremy O. Harris, are central to Rosenthal’s argument and critique.

This chapter examines how a variety of twentieth-century popular forms – circus, Las Vegas spectacles, the modern pop/rock concert, living history museums, and theme parks – created new languages of performance and expanded the realm, scale, and scope of spectacle by borrowing and reshaping past forms and methodologies. These new languages of popular entertainment performance engage most directly with threads of technology, narrative, authenticity, and audience engagement. These threads in turn come to characterize the popular and influence contemporary traditional theatre practice, both nationally and internationally.

The relationship between business activity and human rights in the context of intellectual property (IP) is unique. First, it is an example of how national efforts to control the human rights impact of business activities can be frustrated by international agreements. Thus, the obligation under the Guiding Principles for states to maintain sufficient national policy space to address human rights impacts is particularly important in this area. Corporations also have a responsibility not to push for changes in domestic and international law that would enable them to maximize profits at the expense of human rights. Second, the case of human rights and IP provides an example of corporations taking advantage of legal rules that allow them to extract profits at the expense of human rights. These legal rules are directed toward a legitimate purpose, but they can also be abused in ways that harm human rights. Thus, the relationship between IP and human rights demonstrates that corporations may have a responsibility not to take maximal advantage of opportunities to make a profit where doing so would violate human rights. It also indicates that human rights law may constrain states in the choices they make about how to incentivize innovation.

Play development in the American regional theatre is a collaborative relationship between artistic directors, dramaturgs, literary managers, playwrights, directors, actors, and designers. Within this system artistic directors commission work and provide a “magic garden” where playwrights develop material from workshop through theatrical production; this is exemplified by Lauren Gunderson, who writes traditional plays appealing to America’s heartland; avant-garde director/playwrights Carey Perloff and Joanne Akalaitis, who develop challenging work from classic and contemporary sources; and Latinx playwright Elaine Romero, who has navigated this network for more than twenty years as a resident playwright. New York City is no longer the major incubator of new work; instead collaborative play development programs of regional theatre organizations as the Arena Stage, the American Conservatory Theatre, the Goodman Theatre, the Eugene O’Neill Theatre Center, and Chicago Dramatists dominate. Despite the harsh economic realities faced by playwrights, the regional theatre culture of commissions, residencies, development, and foundation support provides salaries, health care, and benefits to artists.

Cognizant of the risks of oversimplification and unavoidable omissions, Carpenter’s essay introduces major movements and advances within the African American and Latinx American dramatic canons from the era of the civil rights movement to the present. Referring to select playwrights (Amiri Baraka, Luis Valdez, Adrienne Kennedy, Maria Irene Fornes, Lynn Nottage, and Quiara Alegría Hudes) as exemplars for this exploration, Carpenter offers a progressive build in this historical account, closing by focusing on the most contemporary of these dramatists. These celebrated artists are mere “tips of the iceberg”; they are highlighted here to inspire readers to pursue research and gain a greater sense of familiarity with the rich history and proliferating presence of racially and culturally diverse in American theatre. Carpenter reminds us that utilizing expressions such as “diversity and inclusion” will fall flat as trendy phrases unless theatre practitioners and scholars recognize and actively address the fact America’s network of regional theatre still has much to accomplish when it comes to actualizing commitments to equity.

This chapter highlights the importance of the incorporation of international standards into national laws establishing ECAs. With this aim in mind, the global architecture would benefit from enhancing the commitments made through international standards so that adhering states shall be compelled to pass legislation mandating ECAs to conduct human rights due diligence. Furthermore, stakeholders should be properly consulted. Most important, efficient enforcement mechanisms are needed to ensure that a formal complaint process enables stakeholders to challenge loans granted by ECAs on the basis of human rights and environmental violations.

The American avant-garde theatre of the post-World War II era, with its underlying engagement with the betterment of society and a foregrounding of the body, either solo or collective, could be seen as an extension of the Romantic project. But by the 1990s, the ideas and impulses that fueled its artistic drive seemed to dissipate as it became subsumed by Postmodernism and also by popular culture. The avant-garde energies and impulses did not disappear, however, and increasingly they could be found in the theatre’s eager adoption and exploration of new technologies and digital media. By mediatizing live performance, the new technologies often became co-equal with, or dominant over, the human actors. Beginning with groups and individual artists such as Squat, The Wooster Group, and Laurie Anderson and continuing through The Builders Association, Big Art Group, and Annie Dorsen, among many others, a post-avant-garde has emerged that does not fetishize technology, but rather embraces it as a tool to alter consciousness—much as the historical avant-garde did—and to expand the possibilities and definitions of performance.

Reporting is an essential instrument for organizations to understand the impacts of their decisions and operations on people and the planet. Addressing the most serious corporate impacts on sustainability by means of reporting effectively creates an accountability mechanism that helps organizations embed critical issues such as human rights into their business practices and at the core of their strategy. Through the means of reporting, organizations identify their sustainability risks and impacts and are encouraged to be accountable for them. Reporting contributes to internal awareness and understanding of possible negative impacts, as well as the means to mitigate them while maximizing the positives. This accessibility of information enables informed decision-making by stakeholders, including civil society, investors, customers and regulators. Consequently, businesses are more inclined to avoid or limit negative impacts and hence strive to improve performance. Ultimately, effective reporting plays an important role in a company’s success, as it responds to its stakeholders’ needs for transparency and information. This chapter presents an overview of the sustainability reporting process, draws lessons from current practices on human rights reporting, and provides recommendations for (future) practitioners, presenting a snapshot of current challenges and practical thinking.

This chapter identifies the rise of a new paradigm of contracts within the modern global political economy: direct private contracts negotiated between companies and indigenous peoples (IPs) with a special socio-economic and cultural relationship to land.The above clause is taken from one such contract. These contracts are unique as IPs are one of the main negotiating parties and benefits for them are viewed as the main focus of negotiation. The contract cited above is special as it goes further than community development or social impact agreements, in order to translate indigenous rights to land by way of contract. These contracts effectively recognise indigenous rights on land and various forms of authority over said land, in addition, or in the absence of any formal title. They expose an emerging practice of formalizing free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) processes which may result (or not) in some procedural and substantive benefits for IPs. Consequently, we call this paradigm a contractualisation of indigenous land rights.