This chapter explores the activities of two key transnational advocacy networks concerned with holding economic actors accountable for human rights violations and massive environmental degradation. Over the past decade, the Global Campaign to Dismantle Corporate Power and Stop Impunity and the International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have become important actors in the ongoing drafting of a UN Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights, as well as in engaging in political and legal activism and transnational cooperation to improve corporate accountability. The chapter argues that these two networks maintain important differences in terms of historical and political culture, membership, and funding, which affect their strategies for corporate accountability. It underlines their points of convergence, but also their divergent constitutive visions of resistance to the capitalist mode of production and, consequently, their different solutions for the alleviation of the consequences of corporate wrongdoing. It also highlights how the fragmentation of the global corporate accountability cause offers a fresh angle to explore the limitations of civil society advocacy at the international level.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

“A World Where There Are Many Worlds.” Fragmentation of Civil Society Advocacy for a UN Business and Human Rights Treaty

  • Andru Chiorean

摘要

This chapter explores the activities of two key transnational advocacy networks concerned with holding economic actors accountable for human rights violations and massive environmental degradation. Over the past decade, the Global Campaign to Dismantle Corporate Power and Stop Impunity and the International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have become important actors in the ongoing drafting of a UN Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights, as well as in engaging in political and legal activism and transnational cooperation to improve corporate accountability. The chapter argues that these two networks maintain important differences in terms of historical and political culture, membership, and funding, which affect their strategies for corporate accountability. It underlines their points of convergence, but also their divergent constitutive visions of resistance to the capitalist mode of production and, consequently, their different solutions for the alleviation of the consequences of corporate wrongdoing. It also highlights how the fragmentation of the global corporate accountability cause offers a fresh angle to explore the limitations of civil society advocacy at the international level.