Business Strategy as Human Rights Risk: the Case of Private Equity.

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW Human Rights Review Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1007/s12142-023-00680-w
David Birchall, Nadia Bernaz
{"title":"Business Strategy as Human Rights Risk: the Case of Private Equity.","authors":"David Birchall,&nbsp;Nadia Bernaz","doi":"10.1007/s12142-023-00680-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, we apply the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to the private equity (PE) business model. PE firms often adopt a controversial, 'value extractive', business model based on high debt and extreme cost-cutting to generate investor returns. PE firms own large numbers of companies, including in many rights-related sectors. The model is linked to increased human rights risks to workers, housing tenants, and in privatized health and social care. We map these risks and analyse the human rights responsibilities of PE firms. Our analysis has major implications for understandings of human rights responsibility. We argue that value extractive methods are the root cause of eventual harm to human rights, even though they may not harm rights directly. To respect human rights, PE firms must mitigate the risks of these value extractive methods. We define how human rights due diligence (HRDD) could achieve this and argue that given the extent of harm and the lack of a business case for adopting such a view of human rights responsibility, business strategy level HRDD should be a core component of forthcoming HRDD laws.</p>","PeriodicalId":45171,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Review","volume":"24 1","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10034887/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-023-00680-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, we apply the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to the private equity (PE) business model. PE firms often adopt a controversial, 'value extractive', business model based on high debt and extreme cost-cutting to generate investor returns. PE firms own large numbers of companies, including in many rights-related sectors. The model is linked to increased human rights risks to workers, housing tenants, and in privatized health and social care. We map these risks and analyse the human rights responsibilities of PE firms. Our analysis has major implications for understandings of human rights responsibility. We argue that value extractive methods are the root cause of eventual harm to human rights, even though they may not harm rights directly. To respect human rights, PE firms must mitigate the risks of these value extractive methods. We define how human rights due diligence (HRDD) could achieve this and argue that given the extent of harm and the lack of a business case for adopting such a view of human rights responsibility, business strategy level HRDD should be a core component of forthcoming HRDD laws.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为人权风险的商业战略:私募股权案例。
在本文中,我们将《联合国商业与人权指导原则》应用于私募股权(PE)的商业模式。私募股权公司通常采用一种有争议的“价值提取”商业模式,这种模式基于高负债和极度削减成本,以产生投资者回报。私募股权公司拥有大量公司,包括许多与股权相关的行业。这种模式与工人、住房租户以及私有化的保健和社会保健面临的人权风险增加有关。我们绘制了这些风险,并分析了私募股权公司的人权责任。我们的分析对理解人权责任具有重大意义。我们认为,价值榨取方法是最终损害人权的根本原因,尽管它们可能不会直接损害人权。为了尊重人权,私募股权公司必须降低这些价值提取方法的风险。我们定义了人权尽职调查(HRDD)如何实现这一目标,并认为,鉴于危害的程度和缺乏采用这种人权责任观点的商业案例,商业战略层面的HRDD应成为即将出台的HRDD法律的核心组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Human Rights Review is an interdisciplinary journal which provides a scholarly forum in which human rights issues and their underlying empirical, theoretical and philosophical foundations are explored. The journal seeks to place human rights practices and policies within a theoretical perspective in order to link empirical research to broader human rights issues. Human Rights Review welcomes submissions from all academic areas in order to foster a wide-ranging dialogue on issues of concern to both the academic and the policy-making communities. The journal is receptive to submissions drawing from diverse methodologies and approaches including case studies, quantitative analysis, legal scholarship and philosophical discourse in order to provide a comprehensive discussion concerning human rights issues.
期刊最新文献
Manifestation of Women’s Rights in School Textbooks? Evidence from Social Science Textbooks in India Making Tangible the Long-Term Harm Linked to the Chilling Effects of AI-enabled Surveillance: Can Human Flourishing Inform Human Rights? Freedom of Religion and Non-discrimination Based on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation in Ukraine: Corporate Policy Commitments in Situations of Conflicting Social Expectations The Venezuelan Migrant Population’s Right to Health in the Bucaramanga Metropolitan Area A step in the right direction, or more of the same? A systematic review of the impact of human rights due diligence legislation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1