Index
Abrahamsen, R. 24absolute vs. relative costs 109abstract collective goods 125, 135, 155abstract objects 7, 70accidents, Vale railway 25accountability 22, 48–49, 75, 155
see also assigning responsibilityact-utilitarianism 105–6action, agent-neutral reasons for 67–69,
68 (Table 2), 79–80action, agent-relative reasons for 42, 53,
67–69, 68 (Table 2)activism 25, 29activists
Alien Tort Claims Act 152anti-oil operations 24and contemporary policy 32environmental 19, 25European jurisdictions 55risks facing 107Shell 19Vale Brazil 25
see also protesters; Shi Tao caseactors see non-state actors; public
actors; state vs. non-state actorsAdams v. Cape 49–52, 56Afghanistan 109agent-centred errors (type-1 errors)
111–14acceptability and desirability 141autonomy 142roles and responsibilities 149, 157unjustifiable responsibility 6,
111–12vs. victim-centred 116, 150
agent-neutral reasons for action 67–69,68 (Table 2), 79–80
agent-relative reasons for action 42, 53,67–69, 68 (Table 2)
agential costs 108–9absolute vs. relative costs 109Afghanistan 109assigning responsibility 110autonomy and roles 139de facto political authority 149definition 108justifiability and TNCs 149respecting human rights 109–10responsibility types 111, 115TNCs vs. individuals 107
agents of responsibility see moralagents; responsibility-bearers
agents, public, identifying 6agreement method, to locate human
rights practices 77aid projects 64Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) 17–18,
56, 152Alien Tort Statute (ATS) 20
see also Alien Tort Claims Act(ATCA)
Alston, Philip 64Amazon rainforest 26, 123Amazon region 127, 132
of Brazil 123, 125–27, 132–33Amnesty International 17, 21–22, 90, 160anarchist perspective 42–43anarchy 12, 41, 44Annan, Kofi 31anti-globalisation protesters 24appeal-court justice decisions (US) 29,
153–54see also Breyer, Justice; Roberts,
Chief Justice
177
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
arbitrary detention 75Arendt, H. 78, 142arrests 107asbestos, Adams v. Cape 49–52assault 21, 24, 87assigning blame 26
see also blame responsibilityassigning responsibility
errors in 6to individuals 46–47starting point 155
see also accountability; agent-centred errors; victim-centrederrors
ATCA (Alien Tort Claims Act) 17–18,56
ATCA-style legislation 22, 152ATS (Alien Tort Statute) 20
see also ATCAAustralia, mining companies 55authority, knowledge based 43
see also political authorityautonomy 76, 108, 136, 138–42
‘bad norms’, diffusion of 23Barry, C. 111Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and
US Foreign Policy (Shue, H.) 78Basques 160Berlin Wall, Germany 137–38best interests of the public 128, 133Bhopal, India, Union Carbide gas leak
21–22blame, assigning 26blame responsibility 110–13, 156bloggers 23, 38borders, freedom of movement 125,
127Brazil
Amazon region 123, 125–27, 132–33Carajás 25, 127gangs 160government 149virgin rainforest 26
see also Vale BrazilBreyer, Justice, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch
Petroleum Co. 20, 51brute costs 104–8, 110brute luck individuals 67 (Table 1)
Bull, H. 41burdened societies 46, 124–25Burma (Myanmar) 21, 127business and human rights, vs.
corporate social responsibility52–55
business and human rights policy 4,16–17, 35
ATCA-style legislation 152current status 1–2delinquent states, conflicting
authorities 37first wave (1970s) 30–31future analysis and research 91, 136,
154, 160–61non-state actors 26, 37responses 30–34second wave (1990s–present) 31–34TNC-specific policy 84TNC vs. state 3universalist position 63
Canadaactivism 25international law 55
capacitiesmainstream assumptions 92–94non-state actors 1TNCs 47–48
capacity approach 3, 5–6, 94–99, 156agential costs 108–9assessment of 114–15biggest mistake of 114brute costs 104–8costs 103drowning child analogy 94–95,
104–5epistemology of responsibility
109–14vs. publicness approach 114–15, 118,
150, 158role-based capacity 99–103strengths 5–6, 102, 114, 159TNCs vs. individuals 47–48universalist account 63, 114weaknesses 5–6, 103–4, 159
see also ideal-theory mode; moralphilosophy; non-ideal theorymode
178 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
capacity principleagential costs 108balancing costs 113brute costs 104–6defence, in the case of invasion
108drowning child analogy 94–95,
104–6excessive costs 106general form 89non-ideal theory 156parental roles 100–1publicness approach 158state–non-state actors 99type-1/type-2 errors 113utilitarianism 104–6, 113
Cape 49–52, 56Carajás, Brazil 25, 127Carr, E.H. 92Catholic Church 144, 160causal questions, definition 12causality 74–77Center for Constitutional Rights 18charity 64Chevron 24
threats to 18China
arrests 17collective goods 125freedom of expression 123, 125internet access 147Tiananmen Square uprising 17, 133
see also Yahoo China; ‘YeehawChina’
choice theories of rights 54church 136–37
see also Catholic Churchcitizenship responsibilities 67 (Table 1)civil-political rights see liberty rightscivil-society organisations 22, 118, 131,
160–61civilisation, standard of 122‘civilised’ states 123Cold War 137–38collective goods
concept 148political communities 125–28publicness approach 117sovereignty and TNCs 120–22
see also abstract collective goods;empirical collective goods;public goods
collective public resistance 133–34see also political responsiveness;
protesterscollective responsibility 1, 129–30colonialism 41, 122–23, 154common good, common conception
of 128communitarians 108communities
forced relocation 21, 25, 127legal obligations 25–26mining companies 24–26political, membership in 117,
125–28representing organisations 132rural 24–26, 133
Companhia Vale do Rio Doce see ValeBrazil
companies 50see also corporations;
transnational corporationscompany employees
indigenous rural communities 24–26local youths 24responsibilities 86TNC spheres of influence 133
company law 50, 139compliance, regulatory 32complicity, of TNCs with the state
4, 22–24, 31, 129, 132conceptual responsibilities framework
63, 65, 69–70, 81 (Table 3)future analysis and research 160–61general/special and universal/specific
67 (Table 1)reasons for action 67–69, 68
(Table 2)theoretical combinations 67
conflation of responsibilities (politicalphilosophy)
costs to victims and agents 115political philosophy 111
conflation of responsibilities (UNGP)153
of refraining from harming andrespect 64, 82, 84–85
Index 179
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
conscripted militaries 108considered judgments 14, 90constitutive questions, definition 12constructivism 11, 137consumerism 141context-sensitivity 114, 146contextual method, to locate human
rights practices 77contractors 23–24, 98contracts
Cape 51companies 50legality 44residency 51responsibility category 67 (Table 1)
control theories of rights 54corporate agents 9, 143corporate entities vs. individual
persons, international humanrights law 49
corporate liability 153corporate moral agency 8–11, 85corporate person 85Corporate Responsibility Coalition
(CORE) 22corporate responsibility to respect
human rights (UNGP) 62conflation of responsibilities 153conflation of refraining from harming
and respect 64, 82, 84–85corporate social responsibility (CSR)
53, 159vs. business and human rights 52–55Escola que Vale programme 25moral principles 140Vale Brazil 133withdrawal from 146, 148, 157
corporationsUN Guiding Principles 4
see also companies; incorporation;transnational corporations
corporations vs. states, UNGP view of4, 33
costsabsolute vs. relative costs 109acceptable-cost-to-responsibility-
bearer threshold 112agents vs. victims, balancing 115–16,
149–50
excessive 106–9to self 110
see also agential costs; brute costscrimes against humanity, accountability
26criminal law 26, 49criminal negligence 25, 27criminal offences, human rights
violations 27criminal responsibility 87, 159
agent-centred (type-1 errors) 112–13vs. human rights responsibilities
110–11public vs. private agents 138victim-centred (type-2 errors) 112
CSR see corporate social responsibility
de facto political authority 28–29conflicting authorities 37conflicts of judgement 58justifiability and TNCs 149political agents, flexibility of 143political-sociological perspective
144primary political roles 150rule of law problem 40, 45, 61, 154socio-political context 144state–non-state assemblages 24term 6, 50TNC agential costs 149transforming into 147
see also legitimate authority;political authority
De Schutter, O. 30deaths 18, 21, 25, 107‘decent peoples’ 128decision-making agents 54–55
complexity 60insider/outsider status 125–26
see also discretionaryduties; duty-bearers; non-discretionary duties
defence, in the case of invasions,agential costs 108–9
delinquent companies 55–59delinquent states 4, 37, 154
capacity to act 107legality levels 45–46public representatives 129
180 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
Rawls’ theory 46refraining from harm 155‘Yeehaw’ 38–40
see also imperfect states;quasi-states; weak states
democracy 17, 130descriptive sovereignty 46detention, arbitrary 75diplomatic situations, political
responsiveness 128discretionary choice 80, 147discretionary duties 10, 40, 53–55
analytical and normative perspective54
definition 86humanitarianism 159vs. non-discretionary 45, 53–54private moral agents 42respect/agential cost 109–10responsibility to respect 146theories of rights 54–55transnationality 52–54
dislocation, forced 21, 25, 127dissidents see activists; protestersdoctors’ responsibilities 67 (Table 1)Doe v. Unocal 21domestic criminal law, corporate entities
vs. individual persons 49domestic politics 30, 41domestic sovereignty 41, 121domestic/foreign duality see insider/
outsider statusDoobee, Saturday 18due diligence 5, 34, 83, 152duties
moral agents 47negative/positive distinctions
65, 75to protect human rights 7, 33to respect human rights 77
see also discretionary duties;non-discretionary duties
duty-bearersdiscretion 54multiple 132–34
see also responsibility-bearers
e-mails 17, 23, 38, 147EarthRights International 18, 21
economic actors 41, 133–34, 145–46see also companies; corporations;
TNCseconomic agenda, neo-liberal 93economic costs 107
see also brute costseconomic migrants 84, 96, 125economic power 25, 90economic rights 25–26, 73economic role, TNCs 145–46Eichmann, Adolf 129, 142Eide, Asbjørn 64electronic communications
bloggers 23, 38e-mails 17, 23, 38, 147surveillance 23, 39
Elf 24empirical collective goods 117, 122–25,
148empirical sovereignty, vs. juridical
sovereignty 123employees, company
indigenous rural communities24–26
local youths 24responsibilities 86TNC spheres of influence 133
empowerment, levels of 26,28–29
England and Wales 27Enlightenment era see ‘What is
Enlightenment?’ 85Enquiry Concerning the Principles of
Morals (Hume, D.) 85environmental activists 19, 24–25environmental interests 132, 134environmentalism 160epistemology of responsibility 109–14,
141moral responsibilities 114protect and provide 110respect/agential cost 109–10statistical language 111value pluralism 160
see also agent-centred errors;conflation of responsibilities;victim-centred errors
errors, agent-centred see agent-centrederrors
Index 181
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
errors, victim-centred see victim-centred errors
Erskine, T. 8, 85, 93ethics
capacity approach 6, 159discussions 7frameworks 80, 88global governance 1globalisation 41inner and outer spheres of morality
85–86practices 159special/general responsibilities 66TNCs 85value pluralism/monoism 160
see also moral philosophyethics, discussions
and human rights 7inner and outer spheres of morality
85–86special responsibilities 66
EU (European Union) 160European jurisdictions 123
ATCA-style legislation 22, 152human rights activists 55NGO campaigns 22
evolution, of state-centred authority144
excessive costs to responsibility-bearers106–9
executions 18exploited groups 67 (Table 1)expression, freedom of 123, 125,
161extraterritorial jurisdictions 25extraterritorial law
delinquent states 50, 59global rule of law 55non-discretionary duties 53‘Yeehaw’ 55–59
extraterritorialityactivists 55ATCA-style legislation 22delinquent states 37, 45, 59Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
51policy 59UN Global Compact 31UN Norms 31
US legal mechanisms 31see also international human
rights law; jurisdictions; ruleof law problem
fallibilist perspectives 111false convictions 18feminist perspectives 118–19filial responsibilities 67 (Table 1)food, prisoners without 74–77forced labour 17, 21, 107forces see military forcesfreedom from arbitrary detention
75Freedom from Extreme Poverty
as a Human Right(Pogge, T.) 90
freedom from poverty 74–75, 90freedom of expression 123, 125,
161see also Yahoo; ‘Yeehaw China’
freedom of movement 125, 127French, P. 8, 85Fuller, L.L. 44future analysis and research 91, 136,
154, 160–61
G4S 98gas, natural, Doe v. Unocal 21Gbokoo, Daniel 18General Comment 12 of the UN
Committee on Social,Economic and Cultural Rightsin 1999 64
general publicbest interests of 133collective responsibility 129–30common conception of good 128dissidents/activists 107institutions 130revolts 107
general responsibility 66–67, 67 (Table 1),70, 129–30
general/special responsibility 66–67(Table 1)
genocidal mobs 9, 140Germany, Berlin Wall
137–38Germany, HR principles 27
182 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
Germany, Nazi 47–48see also Holocaust
global governanceethics 1public and private literature 118
global institutions, non-staterepresentatives 130
global resource extraction 134global rule of law 37, 55, 57, 60globalisation
Amnesty International 90violence, monopolising 144
good of society 128, 133Good Samaritans 76–77Goodin, R.E. 99goods see collective goods; empirical
collective goods; objects,abstract and material; publicgoods
Google 2, 147governance
global 1, 118public and private literature 118respecting human rights 129state–non-state assemblages 24
see also institutions of authority;regulation
governmentsBrazil 149as bureaucratic committees 131limiting regulation 29role in violations 23
Griffin, J. 70–71Grudge Informers 46–47
accountability 48agent-relative reasons for action 53Grudge-Informer-type intervention
47individual capacity 48responsibility to refrain from
harming 78, 129Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises (OECD) 30Guiding Principles see UN Guiding
Principles on Human RightsGuinea 25
Habermas, J. 131Habermasian model 134
harm, responsibility to refrain fromsee responsibilities to refrainfrom harming
harming human rights see violatinghuman rights
Hart, H.L.A. 44higher-order principles and values
140–41Holocaust 16, 23, 78horizontalism 27host communities see communitieshostage-taking 25house-arrest 24human rights
and human rights responsibilities62–63, 148
and international law 26, 49vs. normative rights 7–8, 70
human rights discussions, nature of 8human rights activists
Europe 55Shell 19Vale Brazil 25
human rights law, international 26, 49human rights policy see business and
human rights policyhuman rights practice 63–77, 160
list of current practices 159methods to locate 77‘What is Enlightenment?’ 142–43
human rights principles, applicationmethods 27
human rights responsibilities 71vs. general responsibility 70vs. legal duties 54–55vs. other types of responsibility
110–11starting point for discussions about 22
see also conflation ofresponsibilities
human rights responsibilities theory,necessary criteria 6, 91
Human Rights USA 17human rights violations
criminal offences 27governments’ roles 23human rights advocates policy/
action guidance 52responsibilities 63
Index 183
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
human rights violations (cont.)state and non-state actors 24victims 115–16, 149–50
human rights vs. human rightsresponsibilities 1, 7
humanitarianism 64, 159Hume, D. 85hunger strikes 76Hurd, I. 41
ICC (International Criminal Court) 12,26, 111
ICISS (International Commission onIntervention and StateSovereignty), Responsibility toProtect 46, 123
ideal states 46, 92–93ideal-theory mode 5ideal-theory mode (capacity approach)
91, 156and non-ideal 91–94, 101, 114, 156sovereignty 123
see also non-ideal theory modeideal-theory mode (publicness
approach) 118, 149identity/identities 8–9
abandoning 136, 139company, nature of 84constructivism 11disclosure of 38–39individual, separation from 139insider identity 126–27moral agents 136, 139multiple 136political 80political, shared 66vs. roles 8–9salient 137social 84vs. social roles 135
see also insider/outsider statusimperfect states 13
Rawls’ theories 46rules to cater for 45–46
see also burdened societies;delinquent states; non-idealstates; outlaw states;quasi-states; states; weak states
incorporation 50
India, Bhopal, Union Carbide gas leak21–22
indigenous people 24–26, 130, 132individual-like transnational
corporations, vs. state-like47–49, 60–61, 154
individualists, methodological 141individuals 27, 136–37
agential costs 108–9autonomy 108, 137–38monarchs 114, 144multiple identities 136non-natural persons 85political responsiveness 130public vs. private agents 138publicness 136, 139role abandonment 137–38self (individual self) 8, 85, 140–41stateless 126–27
see also public leaders; TNCs asindividuals
individuals vs. corporate entities 49,60–61, 139
individuals vs. state, human rightsstandards 60–61
information-technology companies 161freedom of expression 123
see also Google; Lavabit; Yahooinner/outer spheres of ethical life 85insider/outsider status
delinquent states 59of individuals 117, 125–26rule of law problem 59state decisions on 125–26TNC decisions on 125–28of TNCs 47, 49, 52, 154
institutional capacity 94institutionalism, liberal 11institutionalist theories of rights 54institutions of authority
as corporate agents 143delivering outcomes 72fallibility 111mainstream assumptions about 58non-state representatives 130objects needed 72political institutions 111, 143political responsiveness 128respecting human rights 129
184 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
inter-governmental organisations160
interest theories of rights 54internal sovereignty 41International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights 26International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights 26International Criminal Court (ICC) 12,
26, 111international criminal law 26, 49
corporate entities vs. individualpersons 49
international human rights, currentpurpose 79
international human rights law 26, 49,55, 59
academic analyses 1, 26–30, 152ATCA-style legislation 22, 152corporate entities vs. individual
persons 49global rules 37, 55, 57, 60philosophy 1policy perspective 4, 31, 59Ruggie, J. 65TNCs and human rights 4
see also extraterritorialityinternational-interventionism 47International Labour Organization
(ILO) 30international political theory 1,
11–15typical definitions 11–12working definition 12–15
international public policy, ATCA-stylelegislation 22, 152
international relations, bindingagreements with TNCs 93
internet companiesdelinquent states 107–8freedom of expression 123, 125,
161responsibilities 161surveillance roles 39
see also Google; Lavabit; Yahoo;Yahoo China; ‘Yeehaw China’
internet surveillance 23, 39see also Yahoo; ‘Yeehaw China’
invasions 108–9, 129
investment agreementsneo-liberalism 28, 93TNCs (transnational corporations) 93
Iraq, invasion of 129Ireland, non-state actors 27
Jackson, R. 93, 122, 131juridical sovereignty
definition 123vs. empirical sovereignty 123international law 123not providing empirical collective
goods 124protect and provide 123
jurisdictionseffect on legal assignments 27jurisdiction levels 25positive law 27sovereign 50TNC mobility 28–29TNC structures 45and transnationality 49–52
Justiça nos Trilhos 132justice, social, corporate functions
29
Kant, I. 45, 78, 136–43Kantian constructivism 137kidnappings 18, 24Kiobel, Barinem 18Kiobel, Esther 19Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
19–21, 29, 51, 153–54Kolstad, I. 90Kpuinen, John 18Krasner, S.D. 41Kuper, A. 129–30
labour standardsforced labour 17, 21, 107International Labour Organization 30Southeast Asia 29sweatshops 29Vale Brazil 25
Lavabit 23, 147law
benefits of 44and economic power 25international criminal law 49
Index 185
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
see also company law;extraterritorial law;international human rights law;rule of law; rule of law problem;tort responsibility
law of nations 18, 20, 153see also Alien Tort Claims Act
legal duties, vs. human rightsresponsibilities 54–55
legal institutions, fallibility 111legal obligations
jurisdiction levels 25rural communities 25–26
legal personalities, transnational 50legal-positivist approach, mainstream
view on states 2, 92legal precedents, accountability 22legal systems
vs. non-legal political rule 44territorial 51
see also international humanrights law; jurisdictions
legal theory 1, 3legalistic theory 3legality 44legislation, ATCA-style 22, 152legitimate authority 58–59, 128, 137–39
political–sociological perspectives143–44
see also de facto political authority;political authority
legitimate migrations 125liability, limited 139liberal-democratic ideal, political
responsiveness 133–34liberal institutionalism 11liberty rights 73–74
arbitrary detention 75protect and provide 73–74refraining from harm 74universal duties 75vs. welfare rights 74
limited liability 139living standards, raising 123loss of human life 18, 21, 25, 107lower-level rules, practices and
decision-making procedures140
Luban, D. 63
Marxist perspectives 131see also neo-Marxist perspectives
material objects see objects, abstractand material
media companies 161methodological individualists 141methods to locate human rights
practice(s) 77migrant workers 84, 96, 125military forces
conscript military vs. volunteermilitary 108–9
invasion defence 108–9mainstream assumptions 24militias 132
see also policing; private securityoperations
military regimes 19, 21Miller, D. 106, 128mining companies 24–26, 55, 127
see also Adams v. Cape; Vale BrazilMobil, threats to 18monarchs 114, 131, 144money see settlementsmonism (values) 160moral agency
changing thresholds 64corporate 8–11, 85higher thresholds 10, 64, 82, 85Kantian standard 140–41
moral agency, minimal thresholds10–11
criteria 64discretionary duties 10protect and provide 11responsibilities 63
moral agentsagent-neutral reasons for action
67–69, 68 (Table 2), 79–80,agent-relative reasons for action 42,
53, 67–69, 68 (Table 2)anarchist perspective 42breaching responsibilities 79, 81, 85duties 47higher-order/lower-order attributes
140–41individual residents 46–47multiple 132–34, 149non-physical agents 23, 107
186 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
role-independent 136, 144–45roles and autonomy 138–42roles and identities 139–40social stigma 112sovereign agents 101state vs. non-state actors 22TNCs as 47, 69, 141TNCs vs. states as 3
see also agential costs; duty-bearers; responsibility-bearers
moral judgements, quality of 146moral philosophy 155
agential costs 108–9corporate social responsibility
(CSR) 140‘do no harm’ discussion 78, 82human rights vs. human rights
responsibilities 1material and abstract objects 7moral importance 104–6objects, abstract and material 8responsibility to respect 64universality, of human rights 62–63views on military 108
see also ethicsmoral responsibilities
capacity approach 114and objects of fundamental moral
importance 7public vs. private agents 138
Movement for the Emancipation of theNiger Delta 132
Movement for the Survival of theOgoni People 132
movement, freedom of 125, 127Mozambique, Vale Brazil 25multiple identities, individuals with 136multiple moral agents 132–34, 149Myanmar (Burma) 21, 127
NAAC (North American AsbestosCorporation) 49–52
NATO 109, 160natural gas, Doe v. Unocal 21Nazi Germany 47–48
see also Holocaustnegative duties 65, 75, 83neo-liberalism, investment agreements
28, 93
neo-Marxist perspectives, politicalresponsiveness 131, 134
New York courts 18–19news reports, BBC 2, 19, 23
Tiananmen Square uprising 17NGOs see non-governmental
organisationsNickel, J.W. 64Niger Delta oil companies
brute costs 107collective goods 123–25insider/outsider status 127political responsiveness 130,
132political roles 145–46private security operations 18–21, 24,
124senior management 24TNC sponsorships 127, 133universal responsibilities 87
see also Kiobel v. Royal DutchPetroleum Co.; Shell; Wiwa v.Royal Dutch PetroleumCompany
Nigerian governmentKiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
153publicness threshold 149
Nigerian military 19political responsiveness 132Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum
Company (Shell) 131Nigerian society, political
responsiveness 132Nigerian state
bureaucracy 24criminal law 27political responsiveness 132
non-discretionary duties 10, 40complexity 60delinquency 56vs. discretionary 45, 53–54moral choice 53point of 58vs. profit motives 113role-holders as role-holders 138rule of law 56transnationality 55universality/specificity 65
Index 187
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
non-governmental organisations (NGOs)Amnesty International 160ATCA-style legislation 22, 152European campaigns 22perspectives 64political responsiveness 131–32Shi Tao case (China) 17UN Norms 32
see also civil-society organisationsnon-ideal states 46, 92–93
see also delinquent states;imperfect states; weak states
non-ideal theory mode, definition 5non-ideal theory mode (capacity
approach) 91, 102, 114, 156, 159brute costs 107and ideal theory 91–94, 101, 114, 156need for 91primary political roles 157–59and publicness approach 151, 157–58Shell 102Vale Brazil 102
see also ideal-theory modenon-ideal theory mode (publicness
approach) 118, 149–51, 157–58non-legal political rule 44non-natural persons 85non-physical agents 23, 107non-political roles, definition 150non-responsiveness, political
responsiveness 130non-state actors 26
analysis of responsibility 3capacities 1complicity with the state 23criminal offences 27dualities 161Ireland 27legal obligations 37mainstream assumptions 93mainstream capacity assumptions 93other than TNCs 161positive law 27roles 1
non-state authority 1non-state vs. state actors
capacity principle 99positive law 27–28
non-state vs. state functions 24, 29
normative questions 12–15normative responsibilities, associated
with normative rights 71normative rights
agent-neutrality 80vs. human rights 7–8, 70and human rights responsibilities 8multiple duty-bearers 134, 149vs. normative responsibilities 71responsibilities associated with
72, 74universalist theory/universalism
70–72see also objects, abstract and
materialnormative sovereignty 46normative standards, shifts in 123Nuate, Felix 18Nussbaum, M.C. 70
objects, abstract and material(of normative rights)
current view of 69delivering outcomes 72important 7, 155moral philosophy 8and moral responsibilities 7need for institutions 72‘ought to have’ list 70–72, 155universal duties 78
Ogoni peoplecollective responsibility for HR
violations against 130Movement for the Survival of 132
Olympic Games, 2012 98O’Neill, O. 7, 69, 72–73, 99order (collective goods) 121, 123Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development(OECD) 30
outlaw states 46
Palestinian Authority 160Pará see Carajás, Brazilparent companies
insiders/outsiders, political 52transnationality and jurisdiction 9,
22, 45, 49–52, 55see also Yahoo; ‘Yeehaw’
188 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
parental responsibilities 67 (Table 1),100–2, 150
persons, non-natural 85philosophical perspectives see moral
philosophy; political philosophyphilosophy of international law 1Pinochet, Augusto, President of Chile
138piracy 18, 20pluralism (values) 160Pogge, T. 47, 65, 69, 75, 77, 82, 90,
128–29, 142policing
G4S, 2012 Olympics 98Niger Delta 87, 102, 123–24private security operations 87, 123public policing 102public vs. private 124spy police 24
see also military forces;surveillance
policy agenda/projects see businessand human rights policy; futureanalysis and research
political authorityaccepting 145–47anarchist perspective 42–43blurring of boundaries 133delinquent states 60domestic politics 41erosion of sovereign authority 41evolution of state-centred 144gaps/unanswered questions 41vs. individual discretion 42institutional assumptions 58legitimate 58–59, 137–39non-state 1public vs. private agents 133quality of moral judgements 146Raz-based account 43–44and social contexts 43state-non-state assemblages 24TNCs in a weak state 145Waldron account 44–45
see also sovereign authoritypolitical community membership 30,
117, 125–28political identity see insider/outsider
status
political insiders 52, 59see also insider/outsider status
political institutionsas corporate agents 143fallibility 111
political membership 30, 117, 125–28political philosophy 2
conflation of responsibilities 111human rights vs. human rights
responsibilities 1legitimate authority 58–59role of 42views on military 108
political power, of TNCs 26, 28–29political representation
conflation of theories 130vs. political responsiveness 129–30public leaders 128public representatives 129
political responsiveness 117, 134–35collective goods 128–35environmental interests 134general responsibility vs. specific
responsibility 129–30ignoring host communities 133–34issues 130liberal-democratic ideal 133–34multiple moral agents 132–34Niger Delta oil companies 130non-responsiveness 130vs. political representation 129–30protestors 133–34punishing protestors 133spheres of influence 133
political roles 136, 142–48accepting political authority 145–48publicness 117responsibility to respect 146–47TNCs 145–46TNC sponsorship 125, 148weak states 145withdrawing from political authority
146–48, 150political rule, non-legal 44political–sociological perspectives,
legitimate authority 143–44politics (domestic), TNC involvement
30positive duties 65, 75
Index 189
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
positive lawcase for ignoring 47, 147jurisdictions 27state vs. non-state actors 27–28Yahoo China 96, 147‘Yeehaw’ 41
poverty, freedom from 74–75, 90power, economic 25, 90power of TNCs 26, 28–29Price, R. 23prima facie responsibilities 66–67, 89, 129primary political roles 143, 157
definition 150non-ideal theory 157–59political theory 99Shell in the Niger Delta 145state losing its 144withdrawal from role 145, 149
primary violators, mainstreamassumptions 22, 24
prisoners, autonomy 76prisoners, without food 74–77privacy rights 161private and public functions,
boundaries 29private owners vs. public corporations
139private security operations
G4S, 2012 Olympics 98Niger Delta oil companies 18–21, 24,
87, 123private vs. public agents 116–17, 161
Augusto Pinochet 138policing 124
private vs. public authority 118–20blurring of boundaries 133privatisation 29state–non-state assemblages 24
privatisation 29privileged groups 67 (Table 1)profit motives
CSR discourse 140ethical self 85foreign investment 29historical perspectives 28home-based companies 30imperfect political contexts 26vs. non-discretionary duties 113shareholders 53, 85, 140, 145
Shell 145tax jurisdictions 29TNC brute costs 107type-2 errors 113
promises 67 (Table 1)Protect, Respect and Remedy,
(Ruggie, J.) see Ruggie, J.;Ruggie reports on business andhuman rights
protect-respect-fulfil trichotomy 64protecting human rights
idea behind 63–64Protect, Respect and Remedy 33–34Rawls theory 46Responsibility to Protect (ICISS) 46UN Guiding Principles 4–5
see also responsibilities to protectand provide
protestersanti-globalisation 24collective public resistance 133–34costs borne by 107ignoring 133–34political responsiveness 133punishing 133Vale Brazil, railway accidents 25
see also activists; politicalresponsiveness
public actors 117public corporations vs. private owners
139Public Eye Awards, Vale Brazil 25the public (general public)
best interests of 133collective responsibility 129–30common conception of good 128dissidents/activists 107institutions 130revolts 107
public goods 120–21examples 120–21production 121protection 25provision 25–26, 121Vale, Brazil 25–26working definition 122
see also collective goods; empiricalcollective goods; objects,abstract and material
190 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
public governance structuressee institutions of authority
public interests 128, 133public leaders
Augusto Pinochet 138political representation 128role vs. private individual 138
public of private people 131, 134public policy, international, ATCA-
style legislation 22, 152public–private surveillance project 23public programmes, TNC taxation 29public resistance 133–34
see also political responsiveness;protesters; revolts; TiananmenSquare
public roles 149see also autonomy; political roles;
socially constructed rolespublic vs. private agents 116–17, 161
Augusto Pinochet 138policing 124
public vs. private authority 118–20blurring of boundaries 133privatisations 29state–non-state assemblages 24
public vs. private functions 29publicness approach 4, 6, 117–18,
156–58, 161and abstract collective goods 135assessment of 148–51vs. capacity approach 114–15, 118,
150, 158collective goods version 117empirical collective goods 117,
122–25, 148human rights regime 135ideal and non-ideal, distinguishing
135ideal-theory mode 118, 149non-ideal theory mode 118, 149–51,
157–58objections to 151, 158–60political membership 117, 125–28political roles 117, 142–48public actors 117public vs. private agents 116–17responsibility to respect 149–50role version 117, 135–38
short-term vs. long-term 158socially constructed roles 117,
135–38state-centrism 135strands of 117and TNCs 157
see also political responsivenesspunishing protestors 133punishing states financially 139purpose method, to locate human
rights practices 77
quasi-states 93, 122–23
railways, mining company 25rainforest 26, 123
see also Amazon regionrape 21Rawls, J. 14, 30, 46, 120, 128–29, 137Raz, J. 43–44, 58, 71–72, 132realism 11reasons for action, agent-neutral 67–69,
68 (Table 2), 79–80reasons for action, agent-relative 42, 53,
67–69, 68 (Table 2)reflective equilibrium 13–15refrain from harm, responsibility to
see responsibilities to refrainfrom harming
refraining from harm, internationalterminology 64
regulation(s)enforcement capacity 25home-based companies 30limiting 29post state/TNC agreements 93‘rational but not reasonable’ 30weaker levels 25
see also delinquent statesregulatory compliance, monitoring 32relative vs. absolute costs, agential costs
109relocation of communities, forced 21,
25, 127remedial responsibility
fallibility 111–12vs. human rights responsibilities
110–11type-2 errors 113
Index 191
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
remedy 34see also settlements
research, future 91, 136, 154, 160–61residency 50–51residents, individual, responsibilities
46–47resistance, collective public 133–34
see also political responsiveness;protesters; revolts; TiananmenSquare
resource extraction 134see also mining companies
respectduties to 77international terminology 64official disrespect 129responsibility 79–80
see also responsibilities to refrainfrom harming, vs. respect;responsibilities to respect
respecting human rights (UNGP) 4–5respecting normative rights
see responsibilities to respectresponsibilities, breaching 79, 81, 87responsibilities, conflation of
see conflation of responsibilitiesresponsibilities, forms of 110–11responsibilities, mainstream
assumptions about 65responsibilities to refrain from
harming, vs. respect 64‘do no harm’ discussion 78, 82to human rights 82–87inner and outer spheres of morality 86UN Guiding Principles 82–87
responsibilities to shareholderssee profit motives; shareholders
responsibility, assigning 6to individuals 46–47starting point 155
see also accountability; agent-centred errors; victim-centrederrors
responsibility-bearersaccepting public roles and
responsibility 150cost examinations 110determining 64, 89excessive costs 106–7mainstream assumptions 121
multiple 132–34, 149see also agential costs; duty-
bearers; moral agentsresponsibility, epistemology of
see epistemology ofresponsibility
responsibility for blame 110–13, 156responsibility to protect and provide
(for others’ normative rights)11, 88, 155
causality/causation 75–77juridical sovereignty 123liberty rights 73–74normative rights vs. duty 72Responsibility to Protect 123and responsibility to refrain from
harming 63–77, 87, 155specific responsibility 72–79, 81
(Table 3)TNCs 124–25UN Guiding Principles 65universal responsibility 73weak states 124–25welfare rights 73–74
see also protecting human rightsresponsibility to refrain from
harming (others’ normativerights) 88, 155
delinquent states 155importance to human rights
63–77liberty rights 74and responsibilities to protect and
provide 87TNCs 86, 155as universal responsibilities 70–72,
81 (Table 3), 87responsibility to respect human rights
(UNGP) 4–5responsibility to respect (others’
normative rights) 79, 81(Table 3), 85
agential costs 109–10breaching respect 85discretionary responsibilities 146moral agency 64political roles 146–47publicness approach 149–50specific vs. universal responsibilities
63, 81 (Table 3)
192 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
universal responsibility 81 (Table 3)see also responsibilities to refrain
from harming, vs. respectResponsibility to Protect (ICISS) 46, 123responsive actors 130responsiveness see political
responsivenessrevolts 107
see also public resistance;Tiananmen Square
right-holders, discretion 54right to food 64, 74–77right to freedom from arbitrary
detention 75right to freedom from poverty 74–75,
90right to freedom of expression 123, 125,
161right to freedom of movement 125, 127right to have rights 78, 125right to liberty see liberty rightsright to privacy 161Rights of Man 77risk management
cost levels 113–14fallibility of institutions 111–12UN Guiding Principles 34
see also agent-centred errors;victim-centred errors
risks facing activists 107Roberts, Chief Justice, Kiobel v. Royal
Dutch Petroleum Co. 20, 51role abandonment, by the individual
137–38role-based capacity 99–103role-holders as role-holders 137–39role-independent moral agents 136,
144–45role responsibility
Kantian constructivism 137term 137
roles (publicness approach) 117abandoning 136autonomy strand 136, 138–42vs. identities 8–9non-state actors 1and the publicness approach 135–38and responsibilities, International
Relations (IR) scholarship 135see also political roles
Royal Dutch Shell see Kiobel v. RoyalDutch Petroleum Co.; Shell;Wiwa v. Royal Dutch PetroleumCompany
Ruggie, J. (UN Representative) 1,33–34
14, Principle 12 8417, Principle 18 84official mandate 33, 65refrain from harm discussion
82–84state-centrism constraint 65UN Guiding Principles 152UN Human Rights Council 4, 33UN Norms 33–34unofficial mandate 33
Ruggie reports on business and humanrights 33
(2007) Mapping InternationalStandards 28, 32–33
(2008a) ‘Sphere of Influence’ and‘Complicity’ concepts 31,33–34, 133
(2008b) ‘Protect, Respect andRemedy’ Framework 1, 4,33–34, 62, 82, 124
(2011) ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’Framework implementation 4,33–34, 36, 62, 82–84, 86
(2013) ‘Just Business’ 1, 33, 84rule, non-legal political 44rule of law
benefits of 44, 46circumventing states 154global 55, 57jurisdictions 51public goods 120
rule of law problem 37, 56, 60delinquency 58legitimate authority 59, 137–39
see also international humanrights law; jurisdictions;transnationality
rules, legal character of 44–45rural areas/communities 24–26, 133
Saro-Wiwa, Ken 18, 87, 124, 130see also Wiwa v. Royal Dutch
Petroleum Co.Sassen, S. 24, 144
Index 193
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
Schneewind, J.B. 85schools
privately funded 124as public goods 120TNC sponsored 25, 126–27
secondary political agents 157–58TNCs as 146
secondary political roles 143,149–50
security (as collective good) 121, 123,125
public goods 122security measures
anti-terrorism 39–40Myanmar (Burmese) military 21policing 124surveillance 23
security provision 24see also policing
security threats, Niger Delta oilcompanies 18
self (individual self) 8higher-order/lower-order attributes
140–41TNCs 85
settlements (through legal action)Shell 19Unocal 21Yahoo 18–19
shareholdersbalancing shareholder interests 53,
113, 146corporate social responsibility
(CSR) 53operational decisions 10, 86profit motives 53, 85, 140, 145unwilling to sacrifice profit motives
146Shell
capacity approach 102lawsuits 2Nigerian military 131non-ideal theory 102political responsiveness 130political roles 145primary political roles 145profit motives 145responsibilities 87as a state-like TNC 154
threats to 18see also Kiobel v. Royal Dutch
Petroleum Co.; Niger Delta oilcompanies; Wiwa v. RoyalDutch Petroleum Company
Shell UK, cases against 18Shi Tao case (China) 2, 17short-term vs. long-term type-2 errors
151Shue, H. 64, 70, 72, 78, 99, 142Singer, P. 104Snowdon, Edward case (USA) 23social contexts, and authority 43social justice, corporate functions 29social responsibility see corporate social
responsibilitysocial rights 25–26social stigma 112socially constructed roles 117, 135–38society of societies 12society, the good of 128, 133socio-economic rights see welfare rightsSouth Africa, Adams v. Cape 49South East Asia, sweatshops 29South, global 131Southeast Asia, working conditions 29sovereign agents 101sovereign authority 25, 60, 93
blurred boundaries 24, 29erosion of 41ignoring for principled reasons
47–48, 52interventions in 46–48invasion by a foreign power 108–9, 129losing primary political role 144when to disregard 46–47
see also de facto political authority;political authority; weak states
sovereign rules 47, 60sovereign states see delinquent states;
imperfect states; state-centrism;states; weak states
sovereigntycollective goods 120–22colonialism 122–23, 154descriptive 45–46domestic sovereignty 121ideal-theory 123International Relations theory 41–42
194 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
jurisdictions 50normative 45–46political theory, international 1relationship with human rights 1shifts in meaning 122–25spheres of influence, TNCs 101unique rights 41
Soviet regime (1980s) 144special responsibility 66–67, 67 (Table 1)specific responsibility 67 (Table 1),
66, 69, 68 (Table 2), 81 (Table 3)vs. general responsibility 129–30
specific responsibility-bearers 129spheres of influence (TNCs)
complicity with the state 31political responsiveness 133–34sovereignty 101UN Global Compact 31UN Norms 32
sponsorships see TNC sponsorshipsspy police 24standard of civilisation 122standard of living, raising 123state-centric account 2
vs. universalist account 2–4state-centrism
capacity assumptions 92–93evolution of state-centred authority
144human rights regime 135institutional capacity, assumptions
94mainstream assumptions 22, 92–94,
121publicness approach 135
see also Habermasian model;liberal-democratic ideal;neo-Marxist perspectives;sovereignty; Weberianperspectives
state-controlled media 123state-like transnational corporations
37, 161choosing legal duties 28vs. individual-like 47–49, 60–61, 154vs. individuals 48, 60–61Shell 154
state–non-state assemblages 24state vs. individual 60–61
state vs. non-state actorscapacity principle 99positive law 27–28
statelessness 126–27states (territories) 13
abstract collective goods 125capacity to enforce regulations 25criminal offences 27duty to protect human rights 33ideal vs. non-ideal 46, 92–93vs. individuals 27, 60–61, 136–37insider/outsider status 125–26Kantian perspective 136modern 125–28responsibilities 29supra-states 43UN Guiding Principles 4UN Norms 32
see also burdened societies;delinquent states; imperfectstates; non-ideal states; outlawstates; quasi-states; weak states
states vs. corporations 48UNGP view of 4, 33
statistical language 111see also agent-centred errors;
victim-centred errorsSteinhardt, R.G. 30Stone, C.D. 139Strange, S. 41subsidiary companies
China 2delinquent states 107–8economic and political roles 145insiders/outsiders, political 52transnationality and jurisdiction
9, 22, 45, 49–52, 55see also Yahoo China; ‘Yeehaw
China’suicide 45
see also hunger strikessupra-states 43Supreme Court see US Supreme Courtsurveillance 23, 39
see also Yahoo; ‘Yeehaw China’sweatshops 29
Taliban 109Tamil Tigers 160
Index 195
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
taxation, TNC mobility 29Taylor, C. 10, 42territorial disputes (state level) 160territory, role of 128terrorist acts, fear of 39–40Texas courts, transnationality 49–52Thailand, Yadana gas pipeline 21theories of political representation,
conflation of 130Thomson, J.E. 144Tiananmen Square, China 17, 133Tibetans 160TNCs see transnational corporationstort responsibility 87
Alien Tort Claims Act 17–18, 56, 152Alien Tort Statute 20
see also Alien Tort Claims Acttorture
accountability 26non-physical agents 107risk of 107Shell, in the Niger Delta 87spy police 24Viza, Michael Temor 19Wang Xiaoning case (China) 17would-be torturers 53Yadana gas pipeline 21
Total 21transnational, term 28transnational corporations (TNCs)
circumstances for responsibility 154corporate and social functions 29dualities 47, 161duty to protect 33–34economic role 145–46higher-level values/lower-level rules
140–41higher-order, private selves 140individuals within 48–49investment agreements 93as non-state actors 27–30parents and subsidiaries 45standing up to the state 47state regulation 30UN Guiding Principles 4UN Norms 32war situations 49
TNC sponsorships 125–27, 145–46, 148Brazilian Amazon / Vale 126–27, 133
Niger Delta 127, 133political roles 125, 148schools 25, 126–27
TNCs as individual-like entities 154vs. state-like 49
TNCs as individuals 48–49, 60–61TNCs as state-like entities 37, 161
choosing legal duties 28vs. individual-like 47–49, 60–61, 154vs. individuals 48, 60–61Shell 154
TNCs capacity to intervene insovereign states’ affairs 47–48
TNCs vs. states, as moral agents 3transnational duties, states 3transnational legal personalities 50transnationality 28, 49, 52
and discretion, ‘Yeehaw’ 52–55and jurisdiction 49–52Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
51TNCs 37
see also extraterritoriality;international human rights law;jurisdictions; rule of law problem
Tripartite Declaration of PrinciplesConcerning MultinationalEnterprises and Social Policy(ILO) 30
type-1 errors see agent-centred errorstype-2 errors see victim-centred errors
UDHR (United Declaration of HumanRights) 26
UK (United Kingdom)Adams v. Cape 49–52Companies Act 22legal assignments 27Parliament, political roles 144–45private security operations 98Terrorism Acts 39transnationality and jurisdiction
49–52see also ‘Yeehaw’; ‘Yeehaw China’
UN (United Nations) 160UN Global Compact 31–32, 157UN Guiding Principles on Human
Rights (UNGP) 4, 82–87corporate responsibility 4–5, 82
196 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
duty to protect 65main weaknesses 152–53respect vs. not to harm 64, 82–87states vs. companies 33, 152–53
see also Ruggie, J.UN Human Rights Council
endorsements 33John Ruggie’s work 1, 4, 33, 152
UN Norms 31–33John Ruggie 33objections to 34, 41
UNGP see Ruggie, J.; UN GuidingPrinciples on Human Rights
Union Carbide, gas leak (1984),Amnesty International 21–22
United Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR) 26
United States of America (USA)as invader 109legal assignments 27private security operations 98
universal responsibilities 4–5, 66–72universalist account
definition 2vs. state-centric account 2–3
universalist theory/universalism 3,154–56
normative rights 70–72responsibilities vs. rights 62–63, 69TNCs 69
Unocal 21, 127uprisings, Tiananmen Square 17, 133US National Security Agency 23US Supreme Court
and ATCA 152Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
20, 51, 153utilitarianism 68, 78, 104–6 Table 2
capacity principle 113
Vale Brazil (Companhia Vale doRio Doce mining company)25, 127
CSR strategy 133non-ideal theory mode 102
value method, to locate human rightspractices 77
value pluralism/monism 160values 24, 109–10, 141
verticalism 27victim-centred errors (type-2 errors)
112acceptability and desirability 141vs. agent-centred errors 116, 150autonomy 142cost of not assigning responsibility
113definition 6, 112publicness 151, 158–60remedial responsibility 113roles and responsibilities 157short-term vs. long-term 151
victimsvs. agents 115–16, 149–50ATCA (Alien Tort Claims Act) 152
see also victim-centred errors;specific cases
vigilantes 24violating human rights
criminal offences 27sovereign authority 52state and non-state actors 23–24
see also responsibilities to refrainfrom harming; victim-centrederrors; victims
violators, primary, mainstreamassumptions 22
violence, monopolising 144virgin rainforest, Carajás, Brazil 26, 123Viza, Michael Temor 19voluntarism, effectiveness of 32volunteer militaries, vs. conscript
military 108
Waldron, J. 44–45, 47, 56, 79Wales, and England 27Walzer, M. 128Wang Xiaoning case (China) 17war crimes, accountability 26wars
TNC implications for 49see also invasions
weak states 152, 154Brazilian Amazon rain forest 123empirical collective goods 124–25political roles 145TNC profit motives 145TNCs and 124–25
Index 197
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information
weak states (cont.)Weberian perspectives 132–33
see also delinquent states;imperfect states; quasi-states
Weber, M. 121–22, 124, 131Weberian perspectives 134
challenges to 122, 131political responsiveness 131–33publicness threshold 149view of state 122, 134
welfare rights 73example 74vs. liberty rights 74poverty example 74–75protect and provide responsibility
74well-ordered societies 128Wenar, L. 90, 99–100, 106, 108Western vs. non-Western judgements,
fallibility 58‘What is Enlightenment?’ (Kant, I.
1784) 136–43will theories of rights 54Williams, M.C. 24Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
18–19, 131see also Saro-Wiwa, Ken
workforcesindigenous rural communities
24–26local youths 24responsibilities 86TNC spheres of influence 133
working conditionsforced labour 17, 21, 107sweatshops 29Vale Brazil 25
World Organization for Human Rights17
World Summit, 2005 123World War I/II, legal impacts 26, 45, 78World War II 127
Yahoo 17–18, 147Yahoo China
brute costs 23, 107business and human rights policy 1forced labour and torture 1positive law 96Shi Tao case 1, 17type-1/type-2 errors 111–12‘Yeehaw’ example 38–40
see also Shi Tao case; WangXiaoning case; ‘Yeehaw China’
‘Yeehaw’ 38–40‘Yeehaw China’ 38–40
delinquency 55–59discretion 40–41, 45, 52–54ignoring sovereign rules 53policy prescriptions 55role based capacity 103transnationality and discretion 52–55transnationality and jurisdiction 52
Young, I.M. 126young men, able-bodied 108–9youths, Niger Delta oil companies 24
198 Index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-1-107-03788-5 - Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporationsin Imperfect StatesDavid Jason KarpIndexMore information