This chapter is organized under two main sections. The first discusses how the content requirements of HRIAs are conflated with the ethical requirements of the assessment itself. This, narrow and inadequate species of HRIA ethics is quite different from the extensive body of legal ethics. The second section provides a case study of a World Bank-related impact assessment, which gives rise to legal and non-legal ethical issues and which is meant to demonstrate that the absence of concrete human rights-centred ethical guidelines in HRIAs can, even with the best of intentions, lead to outcomes that effectively violate fundamental rights.

This chapter examines the emergence of a treaty regime at the UN on business and human rights. It examines the key provisions of the Zero Draft as well as the amendments addressed by the draft presented in August 2020. This is a welcome development and it is clear that the focus of the emerging treaty is not so much on the corporations themselves but on the necessary positive measures required of states in this field

MNCs have a central role, responsibility, and opportunity to foment change globally in fulfilling the rights of persons with disabilities. In addition to improving theiremployment practices, MNCs can leverage their economic power to fulfil other aspects of the human rights of persons with disabilities within their purview by: making physical and virtual environments accessible; ensuring that vendors, distributors and supply chains require equal employment opportunity for workers with a disability, produce accessible products and services, and take affirmative actions to employ and advance in employment workers with a disability; acknowledging the existence and value of customers with disabilities and their households and friends; marketing to such individuals; developing data accumulation and accountability instruments, including human rights impact assessments (HRIAs); and creating a general culture of diversity, equity, and inclusion of differences that includes disability. Acting in this manner would bolster rarely helpful corporate social responsibility (CSR) and diversity schemes, and position the business sector to become human rights change agents.

This chapter traces the development of American experimental theatre ensembles from the 1960s to the 2010s. It emphasizes how the values of the 1960s youth culture and Off-Off-Broadway, including egalitarianism and anticommercialism, informed the devising practices of groups such as the Open Theater, the Performance Group, and the San Francisco Mime Troupe. It also addresses how efforts to critique and expand on the work of 1960s ensembles have informed the work of such later groups as Spiderwoman, Split Britches, the SITI Company, Tectonic Theatre Project, Pig Iron Theatre, and the Nature Theatre of Oklahoma. It argues that developments in form and process by American devising ensembles reflect an evolving understanding of theatre’s relationship to the social sphere and to the practice of freedom.

The postwar years through to 1960 can be viewed as a Golden Age for American drama as distinctly American new plays, staging, and acting styles emerged. Changing social and political forces in the nation inspired dramatists to rewrite what was possible on an American stage, expanding themes, styles, and character types previously depicted. Women and minorities were finding their voices and making progress in writing, directing, and producing drama in mainstream theatres. Many of the period’s theatrical successes and innovations were fueled by groups of artists, whose collective vision helped bring new scripts, scores, and aesthetics to the American stage. During this period, Broadway established its primacy in musical and nonmusical theatre, but economic changes and artistic aspiration also fueled the growth of Off-Broadway, Off-Off-Broadway, and regional theatre helping create an even more vibrant American theatre.

This chapter discusses the gaps in the conceptual foundations of responsible supply chain management. It tends to be explained under various corporate social responsibility (CSR) theories that do not account for the territorial and ‘self-interested’ behaviours that exist inside large companies. We’ll then discuss how firms reconcile core business drivers like cost competitiveness versus normative goals like protecting human rights. Finally, the chapter addresses the ongoing tensions around managing supply chains in host countries where corruption is endemic and institutional capacity is weak and fragmented due to a confluence of political, economic and social factors.

This chapter describes the moral and psychological ‘dilemmas’ of politicians, legal practitioners (like WTO lawyers, investment arbitrators) and businesses, driven all too often by self-interested utility maximization rather than by ‘inclusive, public reason’ accepting moral responsibility for reconciling all public and private interests on the basis of mutually agreed ‘principles of justice’ and human rights. It further illustrates these dilemmas by the US Trump administration’s neo-liberal, business-driven assault on UN and WTO law. It argues that power-politics and interest-group-politics underlying both neo-liberal and state-capitalist regulatory approaches undermine protection of human rights in IEL. It further describes the pragmatic ‘judicial common law approaches’ in WTO jurisprudence and investment adjudication, which focus on governmental rights to protect PGs (like public health, indigenous peoples’ rights, public morality, public order) and on agreed ‘constitutional principles of justice’ rather than on human rights. It concludes that Europe’s multilevel constitutionalism has better succeeded in ‘constitutionalizing’ common market law, the European Union’s (EU) external relations law and economic adjudication by protecting civil, political, economic and social rights within a ‘social market economy’ (article 3 of the Treaty on European Union [TEU]) embedded into ‘multilevel democratic constitutionalism’ and multilevel human rights law and adjudication.

Business is an essential part of human society, and the right to livelihood is a fundamental human right. Business can impact human rights, for better or worse. Recognition of this has led to a legal regime focused on preventing business-related human rights violations. The impact of these violations depends partly on a person’s place in society. Several cases may be used to illustrate how business can have differentiated impacts based on gender. For example, while maternity protection has been recognised in international labour law since 1919, a century later both pregnancy and breastfeeding discrimination, and maternity and paternity inequalities continue. The many gender-differentiated impacts of business on human rights require a gender-responsive business and human rights (BHR) framework. This chapter begins by defining key terms and the theoretical underpinnings of a gender-responsive approach to BHR. Next, it outlines international human rights law (IHRL) and policy relevant to gender, business, and human rights. It concludes that the current BHR regime does not provide adequate protection to those suffering gender-based rights violations. Nevertheless, there are ample legal and related texts presently available with which to begin to remedy this problem.

A robust global legal regime holds business firms accountable for engaging in corruption. This chapter explicates that regime. This chapter also puts forth a business case for not engaging in corruption. Corruption imposes real costs on businesses, and degrades the quantity and quality of relationships into which they might enter. The chapter concludes with a discussion of measures that all businesses should take to mitigate the likelihood that persons associated with them will engage in corruption. Before discussing any of these topics, however, this chapter first discusses the definition of corruption and describes the harms corruption inflicts.

The Cambridge Companion to American Theatre since 1945 provides an overview and analysis of developments in the organization and practices of American theatre. It examines key demographic and geographical shifts post-1945 American theatre experienced in spectatorship and addresses the economic, social, and political challenges theatre artists have faced across cultural climates and geographical locations. Specifically, it explores artistic communities, collaborative practices, and theatre methodologies across mainstream, regional, and experimental theatre practices, forms, and expressions. As American theatre has embraced diversity in practice and representation, the volume examines the various creative voices, communities, and perspectives that prior to the 1940s had been mostly excluded from the theatrical landscape. This diversity has led to changing dramaturgical and theatrical languages that take us in to the twenty-first century; these shifting perspectives and evolving forms of theatrical expressions paved the ground for contemporary American theatrical innovation.

This chapter examines corporate responsibilities and accountability to anticipate and redress human rights violations relating to the environment in their spheres of operations. After this introduction, section 2 examines the drivers and contours of the growing recognition of corporate accountability relating to environmental damage. Section 3 unpacks the key scope and content of emerging human rights obligations of corporations to protect the environment. These obligations are as follows: participation, accountability, non-discrimination and equality, empowerment and legality (the PANEL principles). By implementing the PANEL principles in the design, approval, finance and implementation of their operations and projects, business enterprises can proactively anticipate and tackle environmental risks across their entire business value chain. Section 4 highlights practical challenges that must be addressed by national authorities and business enterprises in order to fully translate these norms to reality. Section 5 is the concluding section.

The chapter critically examines and classifies the main approaches to the relationship between WTO law and international human rights law (IHLR). In so doing, it shows why none of these can be considered able to adequately manage this relationship. Thereby, the chapter goes on to examine the rise and consequences of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and the affirmation of the MS principle in the international legal arena. And this is in order to develop in its last part a new alternative approach to the WTO-human rights relationship grounded on a combined use of the MS principle, the SDGs and their related targets.

This chapter explores the extent to which businesses have assimilated in their practice the internationally recognized standards of responsible business conduct and the SDGs framework in an integrated and mutually reinforcing way in an effort to contribute as partners to the realization of sustainable development. To this end, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) will be under focus for two reasons: first, they are cited in Agenda 2030; second, they constitute the most authoritative source among global standards of expected conduct by businesses to address and prevent the negative implications of their activities on the dignity and welfare of affected individuals and communities. Human rights pertain to all three aspects of development as put forward by the SDGs, whereas the latter are suffused with language that reflects clearly the substance and underlying norms of human rights law. Hence, the interplay between the two regimes, i.e. human rights and development, cannot be refuted. As such, the UNGPs are the predominant, until such time as the proposed Business and Human Rights Treaty is adopted, ‘normative’ roadmap for businesses to achieve the SDGs.