abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Business and Human Rights Journal focuses on agribusiness, pesticides & accountability

"Editorial: Agribusiness and Accountability",  Aug 2019

This special thematic ‘Developments in the Field’ (DiF) section explores accountability initiatives in Argentina, India, Peru, the United States and at the European Union (EU) level that draw attention to human rights aspects of industrial agriculture and the due diligence expected of agribusinesses to avoid harmful impacts. In particular, the authors analyse past and ongoing litigation and legal liability arguments in a variety of forums – ranging from transnational tort claims to domestic administrative proceedings, public interest litigation and advocacy campaigns. In addition to legal aspects of these accountability efforts, such as the precautionary principle and the challenge of proving causation, the pieces also address strategic aspects, such as the organization of claimants, procedural hurdles to gain access to justice and relevant choices made in building cases. As the problems of agribusiness and challenges to accountability are highly similar across the world, the pieces in this special DiF issue should provide valuable lessons for movements, activists and lawyers everywhere...

The pieces presented in this special DiF issue all emphasize the importance of strong local groups and organizations in pushing for accountability...

...Because agribusiness operates transnationally, the challenges of holding corporate and governmental actors to account for the harm caused by their decisions share similarities across country contexts.