Global Production, CSR and Human Rights: The Courts of Public Opinion and the Social License to Operate

This paper takes at its starting point the responsibility placed upon corporations by the United Nations’ Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework as elaborated upon by the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to respect human rights. The overt pragmatism and knowledge of the complex business relationships that are embedded in global production led John Ruggie, the author of the Framework, to adopt a structure for the relationship between human rights and business that built on the existing practices of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). His intention was that these practices should be developed to embrace respect for human rights by exhorting corporations to move from “the era of declaratory CSR” to showing a demonstrable policy commitment to respect for human rights. The prime motivation for corporations to do this was, according to Ruggie, because the responsibility to respect was one that would be guarded and judged by the “courts of public opinion” as part of the social expectations imposed upon corporations or to put it another way as a condition of a corporation’s social license to operate.
This article sets out the background context to the Framework and examines the structures that it puts forward. In its third and final section the article looks at how the Framework requires a corporation’s social license to be assembled and how and by whom that social license will be judged. The success or failure of the Framework in persuading corporations to respect human rights is tied to whether “the courts of public opinion” can use their “naming and shaming power” effectively.

Evaluation of the Q-method as a method of public participation in the selection of sustainable development indicators

The complexity of sustainable development means that it is often difficult to evaluate and communicate the concept effectively. One standard method to reduce complexity and improve Communication, while maintaining scientific objectivity, is to use selected indicators. The aim of this paper is to describe and evaluate a process Of public participation in the selection of sustainable development indicators that utilised the Q-method for discourse analysis. The Q-method was Utilised to combine public opinion with technical expertise to create a list of technically robust indicators that would be relevant to the public, The method comprises statement collection, statement analysis, Q-sorts and Q-sort analysis. The results of the Q-method generated a list of statements for which a preliminary list of indicators was then developed by a team of experts from the fields of environmental science, sustainable development and Psychology. Subsequently members of the public evaluated the preliminary list of indicators, to select a final list of indicators that were both technically sound and incorporated the views of the public. The Utilisation of the Q-method in this process was evaluated using previously published criteria. The application of the Q-method in this context needs to be considered not only by the quality of the indicators developed, but also from the perspective of the benefit of the process to the participants. it was concluded that the Q-method provided an effective framework for public participation in the selection of indicators as it allowed the public to discuss Sustainable development in familiar language and in the context of their daily lives. By combining this information with expert input, a list of technically robust indicators that resonate with the public was developed. The results demonstrated that many citizens are not aware Of Sustainable development, and if it is to be successfully communicated to them, then indicators and policy need to be couched in terms familiar and relevant to citizen and communities. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.