• Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment, Sciences Po Law School Clinic, and the Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute (2014) Human Rights Impact Assessments of Large-Scale Foreign Investments: A Collaborative Reflection.

ABSTRACT: This document reflects the outcome of “a one-day roundtable focused on the opportunities and challenges presented by human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) of large-scale foreign investments. The roundtable, which was held in April 2014 at Columbia University, provided an opportunity for collaborative reflection on the development of HRIAs, as well as on ways to enhance HRIAs as a framework and tool for both human rights advocacy and human rights risk management in respect of foreign investments. By sharing the outcomes of the roundtable, this document aims to support HRIA practitioners, company officials, civil society representatives, and other stakeholders focused on human rights and foreign investment in further reflection on the objectives and methods of HRIAs. The roundtable examined the various practices comprising HRIAs, and the discussion underscored that many of the challenges associated with carrying out an HRIA are common to multiple stakeholders, albeit borne out in different ways. This outcome document describes some of the primary ways in which HRIAs are undertaken and outlines the salient issues and key challenges that practitioners have identified.”

• Columbia Center on Sustainable Development, Danish Institute for Human Rights, and the Sciences Po Law School Clinic (2017) A Collaborative Approach to Human Rights Impact Assessments.

ABSTRACT: “This paper suggests a new collaborative and participatory approach to human rights impact assessments (HRIAs). It was written for stakeholders—in particular, communities, workers, and other project-affected people; their representatives, including local and international civil society organizations; companies; and others—who seek more effective strategies for investigating the human rights impacts of business projects or operations, and who are willing to consider a collaborative assessment. For this audience, the paper provides a set of considerations relevant to such an undertaking. This paper may also be of interest to representatives of companies, project affected people, or civil society organizations who are not yet ready to undertake a fully collaborative assessment, but who wish to make their human rights impact assessments more inclusive and responsive, or who seek to encourage greater buy-in from other stakeholders. Such readers might be particularly interested in, for example, the sections on stakeholder involvement and meaningful participation (pp 28-36), the steering committee (pp 38-42), or transparency and disclosure (pp 72-74).”

• Danish Institute for Human Rights (2016) Human Rights Impact Assessment Workshop. 17 November 2016, Geneva – Summary Report. 

ABSTRACT: “On 17 November 2016, a group of 22 human rights and impact assessment practitioners – ranging from company representatives, company and community-led HRIA practitioners, financial institutions and multilateral organisations – came together to discuss the topic of human rights impact assessment (HRIA). The aim of the workshop was to discuss the state of play on HRIA, hear from practitioners about different approaches to working with human rights in impact assessment, and to discuss a future vision for the HRIA space and a HRIA ‘community of practice’.” This report presents a summarized account of the main themes and topics of discussion

• Danish Institute for Human Rights, DLA Piper (2017) Human Rights Impact Assessment and Legal Advisory Work: Frequently Asked Questions. 

ABSTRACT: “How can human rights impacts assessment (HRIA) assist businesses to meet the requirements of emerging governance and regulatory initiatives? How is HRIA relevant in the context of corporate transactions such as mergers and acquisitions (“M&A”)? What types of legal strategies can be used to contribute to the effective implementation of HRIA mitigation measures?… The FAQ note works through several common questions that HRIA practitioners and lawyers may have regarding HRIA, providing practical advice and insights into how such questions may be answered.

• Hamm B and Scheper C (2012) Human Rights Impact Assessments for Implementing Corporate Responsibility: Conceptual Challenges and Practical Approaches. INEF Research Paper Series.

ABSTRACT: “By endorsing the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in June 2011, the UN Human Rights Council emphasized a distinct corporate responsibility to respect human rights. However, both the normative reach and practical realization of this responsibility are still vague. Against this background, a debate has arisen about the possibilities of implementing human rights due diligence by, and within, companies. In terms of the procedures for so doing, the debate has focused on human rights impact assessments (HRIA). This paper addresses basic conceptual and practical issues with respect to such procedures. As challenging quality criteria for HRIA, the authors particularly examine the right of stakeholders to participate in business decisions and the need for organizational learning in companies. The paper categorizes existing HRIA approaches according to their way of approaching these challenges. It concludes with policy recommendations.

• Harrison J and Stephenson M (2010) Human Rights Impact Assessment: Review of Practice and Guidance for Future Assessments. Scottish Human Rights Commission.  

ABSTRACT: “This report provides an over view of existing practices in HRIA in the United Kingdom and internationally… The report concludes that there is considerable variation in the complexity and quality of both HRIA methodologies and the resulting assessments. With few exceptions HRIA methodologies in the UK have tended to be fairly simple and focus on legal compliance with the Human Rights Act. HRIAs in the UK have been carried out as part of combined Equality and Human Rights Impact Assessments. International experience has been more varied and has included some extremely detailed assessments, which have covered social, economic and cultural rights in addition to the civil and political rights considered in the UK. The report analyses existing practice and identifies an eight step methodology for carrying out

HRIAs: 1. A screening stage (performing a preliminary check on the proposed policy to determine whether or not a full-scale impact assessment is necessary); 2. A scoping stage (the initial questions that need to be asked once the decision to undertake a full HRIA has been undertaken); 3. Evidence gathering; 4. Consultation; 5. Analysis; 6. Conclusions and Recommendations; 7. Publication; 8. Monitoring and review. Successful methodologies are very context specific but the report makes a series of general recommendations for developing an effective methodology. It also makes recommendations for implementing HRIA methodologies and finally highlights some strategic questions for organizations introducing HRIAs.”

• OHCHR and FES (2014) Making the Right Impact? Workshop on evaluating HRIAs in Trade and Investment Regimes. 

ABSTRACT: “There is increasing recognition of the potential of human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) in trade and investment regimes. In principle, HRIAs can be an effective tool for identifying, quantifying and assessing the ways trade and investment impact upon the full spectrum of human rights. Their practice, however, is beset by challenges, relating to the form they take, how and when they are conducted, the actor undertaking the assessment, and the use that is made of their results. Despite the growing literature on HRIAs in the trade and investment context, there is a lack of established practice, and to date there has been no metaassessment of whether HRIAs work, or of which elements work and which do not. In order to examine this topic, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) Geneva office and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) hosted a workshop for twenty-four experts, practitioners and academics in the fields of HRIAs, trade and investment in Geneva from 17 to 18 September 2014. This report summarizes the discussions of the workshop, focusing on the issues facing HRIAs in trade and investment regimes and the role organisations, including non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the OHCHR, can play in improving the effectiveness of future HRIAs in trade and investment.”

• SHIFT (2014) Business and Human Rights Impacts: Identifying and Prioritizing Human Rights Risks. 

ABSTRACT: “This report reflects learning from a workshop with 12 Dutch companies together with expert stakeholders, hosted by the Social and Economic Rights Council of the Netherlands, about how companies can identify and prioritize human rights risks and test their findings through stakeholder engagement. The annex features examples of real company risks and prioritization exercises within a set of analysis tools. This workshop supported the process leading to the development of sectoral covenants in the Netherlands to address human rights risks in global supply chains.”

• Tromp D (2016) Assessing Business-Related Impacts on Human Rights. Indicators and Benchmarks in Standards and Practice, INEF-Report 110. 

ABSTRACT: “With a view to informing the policies and practices of states, business enterprises, and other stakeholders towards universal corporate respect for human rights, this study proposes principled and practical indicators to support the assessment of human rights impacts with which business enterprises may be involved. The study identifies a wide array of contexts in which application of the proposed indicators would help to strengthen state approaches to protecting rights-holders against business-related harm in terms of law, policy, regulation, adjudication and participation in multilateral, international and regional organizations. The study also presents a practical methodology for how the proposed indicators can strengthen current private sector approaches to implementing the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, particularly in terms of assessing the human rights risks and impacts that may be associated with core business operations and business relationships.”

Books

• Salcito K (2015) Rights Incorporated: Integrating Human Rights Impact Assessment into Global Business Practices. Dissertation. University of Basel. 

ABSTRACT: “Four specific objectives were pursued in this PhD thesis: (i) to develop and advance tools and methods for human rights due diligence and, specifically, human rights impact assessment (HRIA) with the intention that these tools can be readily adapted to a variety of industries and contexts; (ii) to validate these tools at investment projects around the globe; (iii) to draw from existing environmental, social and health impact assessments and build on best practices while avoiding redundancy with environmental, social and health impact assessments; and (iv) to synthesise the experiences of HRIA practitioners, find commonalities and consider next steps.”

Articles and Chapters

• Boele R, Crispin C (2013) What Direction for Human Rights Impact Assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 31, 2: 128-134. 

ABSTRACT: “This article contributes to the development of a standard of good practice for Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA). It charts the design, delivery and refinement of a methodology for identifying and assessing the human rights impacts of an existing mining operation. The methodology was designed to fulfil the requirements of an internal corporate standard, as well as the due diligence requirements of the United Nations Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights. The HRIA model emphasizes the identification of human rights impacts and the assessment of the effectiveness of responses to such impacts. Four elements are central: (1) building a shared understanding of the historical and current human rights context of the operation; (2) identifying the current and potential areas of human rights impacts and prioritizing them; (3) reviewing the management systems in place to address human rights impacts; and (4) facilitating significant human rights capacity building for operational personnel responsible for managing human rights-related areas. We also consider the question: where is the most natural home for this emerging field of practice? The fields of social impact assessment, corporate accountability and risk assessment are considered. The authors conclude with key questions that require answers before the full potential of HRIA’s role in the business and human rights agenda can be realized.

• Coumans C (2017) Do no harm? Mining industry responses to the responsibility to respect human rights. Canadian Journal of Development Studies 38, 2: 272-290. 

ABSTRACT: “This article examines responses of mining industry associations and companies to increasing pressure on the sector to ensure that its activities respect human rights, defined as “do no harm”. Examples illuminate key moments in an evolving industry response starting in the mid-2000s with scepticism that human rights should, or could, provide operationalisable standards for the sector, to subsumption of human rights under voluntary corporate social responsibility approaches already practised by the industry. Also examined is the strategic use by mining companies of emerging human rights tools such as Human Rights Impact Assessment and Operational-Level Grievance Mechanisms.

• DeBeco G (2009) Human Rights Impact Assessment. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights. 27, 2: 139-66.

ABSTRACT: “In this article human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) will be discussed. After examining their background, including their history and the different kinds of human rights impact, the various purposes of HRIAs, namely compliance, policymaking, accountability and empowerment will be examined. Questions relating to the development of HRIAs will also be analysed. It will be examined whether HRIAs should be incorporated into other kinds of impact assessments and how impact on human rights can be determined. In the article, the three phases in carrying out HRIAs, namely the analytical process, the deliberative process, and the monitoring and evaluation, will be subsequently analysed, dividing them into different steps. Finally, the various actors taking part in HRIAs will be dealt with. These are policy-makers, human rights experts, civil society organisations, national human rights institutions, and affected people.”

• Hanna P, Vanclay F (2013) Human Rights, Indigenous Peoples and the Concept of Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Impact Assessment & Project Appraisal 31,2: 146-157. 

ABSTRACT: “The human right to self-determination is enacted in various international treaties and conventions. In order to facilitate self-determination, it is necessary to provide Indigenous peoples with opportunities to participate in decision-making and project development. The obligation for governments and companies to engage impacted communities is recognized in international law, especially with the principle of ‘Free, Prior and Informed Consent’, which is outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and in the International Labour Organization Convention 169. The encounter between human rights, Indigenous peoples and mining and other extractive industries is discussed, especially as it is has played out in Brazil. We recommend that companies should fully endorse and respect these internationally recognized human rights, including self-determination, even where not required by national or local legislation. We also discuss the relationship between Free, Prior and Informed Consent and Impacts and Benefits Agreements.”

• Harrison J (2013) Establishing a meaningful human rights due diligence process for corporations: learning from experience of human rights impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 31, 2: 107-117. (Earlier version available as a University of Warwick Law School Research Paper No. 2012-18)

ABSTRACT: “The United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Business and Human Rights, Professor John Ruggie, has constructed a new international framework, which is set to become the cornerstone for all action on human rights and business at the international level. The principle of human rights due diligence (HRDD) is the central component of the corporate duty to respect human rights within that framework. This article argues that Ruggie’s HRDD principle contains the majority of the core procedural elements that a reasonable human rights impact assessment (HRIA) process should incorporate. It is likely that the majority of corporations will adopt HRIA as a mechanism for meeting their due diligence responsibilities. However, in the context of the contentious debate around corporate human rights performance, the current state of the art in HRIA gives rise to concerns about the credibility and robustness of likely practice. Additional requirements are therefore essential if HRDD is to have a significant impact on corporate human rights performance – requirements in relation to transparency; external participation and verification; and independent monitoring and review.”

• Harrison J (2011) Human Rights Measurement: Reflections on the Current Practice and Future Potential of Human Rights Impact Assessment. Journal of Human Rights Practice 3,2: 162-187. (Earlier version available as a University of Warwick Law School Research Paper No. 2010-26)

ABSTRACT: “This article critically evaluates the current practice and future potential of human rights impact assessment (HRIA) as a tool of human rights measurement. The article first explores the origins and purposes of HRIAs and the claims made by commentators about what HRIAs can achieve. It goes on to provide an overview of existing practice in HRIA in a wide variety of different fields including health, business, trade, child rights, and development. It then argues that poor practice, particularly among governmental and business actors, highlights the need for greater scrutiny of what the HRIA process should entail. The central part of the article sets out eight core elements that should be included in an HRIA in any field and highlights good and bad practice with regard to each element. This analysis provides the starting point for a better shared conception of what the HRIA process should involve. Three further suggestions are then made to improve future practice: enhancement of collective understanding of key methodological aspects of the HRIA process; more effective and practical support and guidance for those undertaking assessments; and the monitoring of HRIAs in order to highlight and publicize both good and bad practice. On the basis of this, the article concludes by arguing that HRIAs should not be rejected as tools for human rights measurement, but rather strengthened and enhanced.

• Maassarani T et al (2007) Extracting Corporate Responsibility: Towards a Human Rights Impact Assessment. Cornell International Law Journal 40, 1: 136-169. 

ABSTRACT: “This paper sets out to bridge the legitimacy gap between ineffective voluntary mechanisms and prospective, albeit currently unfeasible, compulsory regimes by presenting a model for a human rights impact assessment (HRIA) in the overseas hydrocarbon industry, an industry plagued by allegations of human rights abuse. Part 1 sets out the background of our case study: the billion-dollar Yadana Pipeline Project in Burma (Myanmar), the first large international pipeline in Southeast Asia. The Paper then canvasses the relationship between human rights and private extractive industries and describes the need for human rights concepts, as well as attention to environmental concerns and corruption, within the corporate “sphere of influence”— typically its core operations, business partnerships, host communities, and relations with policy-makers. Part 2 assesses the limitations of extant mechanisms, such as voluntary codes of conduct, in regulating corporate human rights compliance, and introduces the HRIA as a stepping stone to more effective regulation. Part 3 outlines the basic history, principles, and processes of environmental and social impact assessment regimes with a view towards developing a model for an HRIA. Part 4 presents the conceptual, legal, and business case for such an HRIA. Part 5 applies this model to the case study and then concludes with several general comments and specific recommendations for creating a viable HRIA regime.”

• Salcito K et al (2013) Assessing human rights impacts in corporate development projects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 42: 39-50. 

ABSTRACT: “Human rights impact assessment (HRIA) is a process for systematically identifying, predicting and responding to the potential impact on human rights of a business operation, capital project, government policy or trade agreement. Traditionally, it has been conducted as a desktop exercise to predict the effects of trade agreements and government policies on individuals and communities. In line with a growing call for multinational corporations to ensure they do not violate human rights in their activities, HRIA is increasingly incorporated into the standard suite of corporate development project impact assessments. In this context, the policy world’s non-structured, desk-based approaches to HRIA are insufficient. Although a number of corporations have commissioned and conducted HRIA, no broadly accepted and validated assessment tool is currently available. The lack of standardisation has complicated efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of HRIA as a risk mitigation tool, and has caused confusion in the corporate world regarding company duties. Hence, clarification is needed. The objectives of this paper are (i) to describe an HRIA methodology, (ii) to provide a rationale for its components and design, and (iii) to illustrate implementation of HRIA using the methodology in two selected corporate development projects—a uranium mine in Malawi and a tree farm in Tanzania. We found that as a prognostic tool, HRIA could examine potential positive and negative human rights impacts and provide effective recommendations for mitigation. However, longer-term monitoring revealed that recommendations were unevenly implemented, dependent on market conditions and personnel movements. This instability in the approach to human rights suggests a need for on-going monitoring and surveillance.”

• Salcito K (2014) Lessons Learned: A decade of corporate human rights impact assessment: strategic advances and lessons learned. (See: Rights Incorporated, above)

ABSTRACT: A decade ago, the first executive summary of the first corporate human rights impact assessment (HRIA) was published, describing foreseen human rights risks associated with an extractive sector project.  The summary was heralded as the first step in a burgeoning era of corporate respect for human rights. Since then, a governance framework has been established to incorporate multinational corporations into the human rights regime, and HRIA has become established as a core component of corporate responsibility. HRIAs, where conducted systematically and holistically, have identified risks not foreseen in other assessments and established remedial mechanisms that have been both cost effective and rights-respectful. However, standardization of the HRIA process has not met expectations. There is still a high level of confusion among corporations as to what components of HRIA are necessary to ensure that they have conducted “due diligence” to foresee and manage human rights risks. However, leading practitioners share an increasingly coherent understanding of what makes and HRIA adequate. Here, we describe the development and evolution of HRIA as a corporate tool and analyze the role that it is having on corporate practices and operations.

• Tamir I, Zoen, S (2017) Human Rights Impact Assessments in a Brazil Land Conflict: Towards a Hybrid Approach. Business and Human Rights Journal 1-7. 

ABSTRACT: “In recent years there has been a surge in both community- and company-led human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) thanks in part to the due diligence requirements of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Community-based HRIAs, by nature, analyse impacts from the perspective of a local community… Companies have also developed tools and processes to assess the potential impact of their projects; however, they often fail to seek out the expectations or assertions of the very people whose rights they may be adversely impacting… In any given investment project, either a company-led or a community-based HRIA may have been conducted. In Brazil, however, these two processes recently occurred in parallel providing a unique opportunity for comparison. In viewing these two processes, this piece suggests that company and communities work together, when possible, in a hybrid approach to assess human rights in order to create a shared understanding of impacts, solutions and remedies.” This article is based on a case study of community- and company-led HRIAs (undertaken by Coca Cola and Pepsi Co) conducted on sugar mills in Brazil.

• Watson G et al (2013) Human rights impact assessment in practice: Oxfam’s application of a community-based approach. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 31, 2: 118-127.

ABSTRACT: “From 2010 to 2012, Oxfam America (Oxfam) supported two partner organizations to conduct pilots of a community-based human rights impact assessment tool, Getting it Right, Human Rights Impact Assessment Guide, to assess the effects of private investments. The tool generates a norm-based interview protocol based on human rights concerns identified with community members. The pilots were carried out in contexts where companies and government agencies had failed to respond to repeated human rights concerns. One of the two pilots, documenting migrant tobacco farmworker conditions in North Carolina, is detailed. The pilots generated three primary outcomes: (1) increased human rights knowledge and vehicles for effective claim-making among community members and support organizations; (2) increased engagement between community support organizations and companies; and (3) responsive action by companies. The final report’s actionable recommendations, amplified through subsequent public outreach through media, internet and active citizenry, generated heightened response and significant initial actions by companies. Areas of future application are suggested, including more frequent application of independent community-based human rights impact assessments for significant private investments.”

• Lacuna Magazine (2017) Taking human rights and business seriously: An Interview with Kendyl Salcito.

ABSTRACT: Kendyl Salcito is co-founder and executive director of NomoGaia. NomoGaia is a non-profit research and policy organization where Kendyl has spent the last 9 years undertaking fieldwork on business and human rights. In his recent Lacuna article, James Harrison suggested that she is the leading pioneer in her field, and the business and human rights communities could learn a great deal from her insight. Below, James talks to Kendyl about her investigations; from gold mines in Indonesia to oil fields in Uganda. She explains what doing good human rights work entails, and why she is concerned that such work is the exception rather than the rule in the ‘human rights and business’ world.”

• UN Global Compact and DIHR webinar (2014) Exploring Human Rights Impact Assessment. 

ABSTRACT: “As a result of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, businesses regardless of sector are paying greater attention to the actual and potential human rights impacts of their operations and business relationships on stakeholders. This webinar co-hosted by the UN Global Compact and the Danish Institute for Human Rights explored the various types of Human Rights Impact Assessments, including company, community and sector-based, analyzing both the impetus behind the assessments as well as lessons learned.”

• Wielga M (2016) Human Rights Impact Assessment. Teaching Business and Human Rights Handbook. Columbia University.

ABSTRACT: This Teaching Note from Columbia University’s Teaching Business and Human Rights Handbook provides background on the origins of HRIA, places HRIA within human rights due diligence, and discusses HRIA methodology. Various approaches for teaching HRIA are detailed and key questions and teaching resources provided.

• DIHR, Oxfam, NomoGaia, twentyfifty and BSR (2017) Webinar Series: Human Rights in Impact Assessment. Flyer

 ABSTRACT: Three-part webinar series on HRIA.

Part 1: HRIA Case Studies

Part 2: Capacity Building and Stakeholder Engagement in HRIA

Part 3: Integrating Human Rights into Social and Environmental Impact Assessment

General – HRIA’s relationship to other areas of IA

• Esteves AM et al (2017) Adapting Social Impact Assessment to Address a Project’s Human Rights Impacts and Risks. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 67: 73–87.

ABSTRACT: We address the weaknesses inherent in the social risk assessments undertaken for business, especially in the extractive industries. In contrast to the conventional approach that considers consequence to the company rather than to impacted communities, conformance with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights requires that consequence to affected communities has precedence. In order for social risks to be properly assessed, we consider that: companies need to know and understand the human rights impacts of their activities; contemporary approaches to project impact and risk assessment need to be adapted to consider human rights; and environmental impact assessment (EIA) and social impact assessment (SIA) methods need to be adapted to give greater attention to impacts on human rights. Using an example from the mining, oil and gas sector, we provide a method that differentiates social risks from business risks, and we position impact assessment as an instrument that actively facilitates the improved identification, analysis and management of social risks. Practical adaptations to SIA activities and risk assessment processes are provided. Taking human rights impacts into account and using the dimensions of gravity, extent, vulnerability and remediability, we nominate criteria to assess the significance of negative social impacts.

• Götzmann N et al (2015) Social and Human Rights Impact Assessments: What Can They Learn from Each Other. Journal of Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 34, 1: 14-23. 

ABSTRACT: “We examine key commonalities and differences between social impact assessment (SIA) and human rights impact assessment (HRIA) conducted for private sector projects to consider what these two fields might learn from each other. As HRIA is an emerging practice, current approaches are diverse and there is a lack of a robust understanding about how HRIA and SIA relate to each other. We suggest that the two fields have much in common in terms of: their objective to identify and address adverse impacts; their focus on process as well as outcomes; and their consideration of how to ensure the meaningful inclusion of vulnerable individuals and groups. However, there is also significant divergence in terms of: the standards applied; the relevance of project benefits; and the recognition of stakeholders as rights-holders and duty-bearers. We suggest that the further exploration of these areas of difference has the potential to create valuable cross-learning between SIA and HRIA, as well as the potential to open up spaces for joint initiatives where the two fields might address current shortcomings together.”

• Graetz G and Franks D (2013) Incorporating Human Rights into the Corporate Domain: Due Diligence, Impact Assessment and Integrated Risk Management. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 31, 2: 97-106.

ABSTRACT: “Business and human rights are often thought to be antithetical, but as societal expectations on companies have grown, it has become increasingly important for businesses to understand and act upon their legal and moral obligations to respect human rights. The authors of this paper begin by charting the evolution of the rights paradigm and its incorporation into the corporate sphere of influence. Second, the concept of human rights due diligence is examined, owing to its prominence in John Ruggie’s ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ framework. Human Rights Impact Assessments, as an emerging due diligence tool, warrant further attention, theorization and critique. Finally, it is suggested that human rights due diligence could be consolidated within existing corporate risk management systems. Reframing human rights in the context of social and business risks may provide a path for companies to understand the need for human rights due diligence by linking rights considerations with business concerns.”

• Kemp D and Vanclay F (2013) Human Rights and Impact Assessment: Clarifying the Connections in Practice. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 31:2, 86-96.

ABSTRACT: “Historically, impact assessment practice has not explicitly considered human rights. That human rights are relevant to business has been confirmed through the United Nations Human Rights Council’s endorsement of the ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’. Special Representative to the Secretary-General on business and human rights, Professor John Ruggie, advocated awareness of ‘rights-holders’ and ‘duty-bearers’ and a shift from third parties “naming and shaming” companies as a way of addressing human rights harms to companies also “knowing and showing” how they are taking responsibility for their human rights impacts and managing their human rights risks. Consideration of human rights should therefore be central to impact assessment for private sector projects, especially those affecting livelihoods, environment, health, safety and security, land and property, culture and gender dynamics. We provide an introduction to the business and human rights debate, discuss the relevance of human rights to the field of impact assessment, and examine a range of challenges associated with integrating the fields of human rights and social impact assessment.”

• MacNaughton G, Hunt P (2011) A Human Rights-based Approach to Social Impact Assessment. In: Vanclay, F, Esteves, A (eds) New Directions in Social Impact Assessment. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, 355-368.

ABSTRACT: “In this chapter, we seek to introduce a human rights-based impact assessment to the SIA community. The chapter begins by reviewing the common core values of SIA and human rights. It then introduces the sources of human rights legal obligations, and follows by outlining the primary methodologies available to governments to ensure the realization of human rights for all. The chapter then focuses specifically on human rights impact assessment (HIRA) as a key method of implementation, and finally recommends integration of human rights law into SIA. In the end, the proposed methodology is a human rights-based approach to SIA.”

• MacNaughton G, Forman L (2014) The Value of Mainstreaming Human Rights into Health Impact Assessment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 11, 10: 10076-10090.

ABSTRACT: “Health impact assessment (HIA) is increasingly being used to predict the health and social impacts of domestic and global laws, policies and programs. In a comprehensive review of HIA practice in 2012, the authors indicated that, given the diverse range of HIA practice, there is an immediate need to reconsider the governing values and standards for HIA implementation. This article responds to this call for governing values and standards for HIA. It proposes that international human rights standards be integrated into HIA to provide a universal value system backed up by international and domestic laws and mechanisms of accountability. The idea of mainstreaming human rights into HIA is illustrated with the example of impact assessments that have been carried out to predict the potential effects of intellectual property rights in international trade agreements on the availability and affordability of medicines. The article concludes by recommending international human rights standards as a legal and ethical framework for HIA that will enhance the universal values of nondiscrimination, participation, transparency and accountability and bring legitimacy and coherence to HIA practice as well.”

• Sherman J (2011) Integrating Human Rights Impact Assessments into Enterprise Risk Management Systems. Conference remarks Engaging Business, Atlanta, GA.

ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the integration of human rights impact assessment into an enterprise risk management system in companies. This model takes into account all major risks to the company’s internal and external stakeholders. Integration of HRIA into the enterprise risk management system of companies will be beneficial due to the main challenge of embedding HRIA into a company’s DNA. The paper focuses on two interrelated features of HRIA. First, the lens through which HRIA is viewed and second, how companies prioritize results of assessment in order to determine appropriate responses. Finally, the paper shows how enterprise risk management systems can accommodate these features.