abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

4 Feb 2015

Menno T. Kamminga, Maastricht University - Faculty of Law

"Company Responses to Human Rights Reports: An Empirical Analysis"

How do companies respond to their critics? Are there significant differences in responsiveness between industrial sectors, between the countries in which companies are based and between the companies themselves? Do responses reflect the belief that companies have a responsibility to respect human rights? Do companies that participate in the UN Global Compact react more responsibly than those that don't? This paper attempts to answer these questions by examining company responses to civil society reports contained in the company responses database of the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. The analysis covers responses to 1877 requests made by the Resource Centre over the past nine years. [full report available for download, and refers to Gazprom, Gap, Shell, Chevron, Anglo Gold Ashanti, Barrick Gold, Wal-Mart, Goldcorp, Foxconn (part of Hon Hai), BHP Billiton, Microsoft, Newmont, Total, Apple, Banco Espirito Santo, China Power Investment Corporation, China National Petroleum Company, Endiama, Gilead Sciences, Golden Star Resources, Hindalco (part of Aditya Birla Group), Huawei Technologies, Myanmar Oil & Gas Enterprise, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation, Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation]