Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/288236 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2022
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] Regulation & Governance [ISSN:] 1748-5991 [Volume:] 17 [Issue:] 4 [Publisher:] John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd [Place:] Melbourne [Year:] 2022 [Pages:] 891-908
Verlag: 
John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd, Melbourne
Zusammenfassung: 
In the recent past, European states have adopted mandatory due diligence (MDD) laws for holding companies accountable for the environmental and human rights impacts of their supply chains. The institutionalization of the international due diligence norm into domestic legislation has, however, been highly contested. Our contribution analyzes the discursive struggles about the meaning of due diligence that have accompanied the institutionalization of MDD in Germany and France. Based on document analysis and legal analysis of laws and law proposals, we identify a state‐centric, a market‐based, and a polycentric‐governance discourse. These discourses are based on fundamentally different understandings of how the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights should be translated into hard law. By outlining these discourses and comparing the related policy preferences, we contribute with a better understanding of different ways in which MDD is institutionalized, with important consequences for the possibilities to enhance corporate accountability in global supply chains.
Schlagwörter: 
corporate accountability
discourse analysis
due diligence
public policy
supply chain
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Creative-Commons-Lizenz: 
cc-by Logo
Dokumentart: 
Article
Dokumentversion: 
Published Version

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
952.25 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.