The UNGPs and ISDS: Should Businesses Assess the Human Rights Impacts of Investor–State Arbitration?

Stephanie Triefus

Business and Human Rights Journal, 2023, vol. 8, issue 3, 329-351

Abstract: Investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) has been heavily criticized from the perspective of human rights. However, the potential adverse human rights impacts of ISDS and the responsibilities of businesses to avoid causing or contributing to those impacts under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights have yet to be spelled out. Although states are currently reforming ISDS, progress has been slow, and businesses have an independent responsibility to ensure that their operations do not harm human rights. Against this background, this article unpacks how businesses might contribute to three non-exhaustive examples of potential human rights impacts of ISDS: namely, the chilling effect on human rights regulation, crippling mega-awards and direct impacts on third-party rights. This article breaks new ground by exploring how human rights due diligence could be a useful tool for businesses to identify and address these impacts.

Date: 2023
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cup:buhurj:v:8:y:2023:i:3:p:329-351_2

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Business and Human Rights Journal from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kirk Stebbing ().