MSc thesis presentation by Morgane Thorens: From ‘cutting red tape’ to mandatory human rights due diligence legislations

You are hereby cordially invited to the MSc thesis presentation by Morgane Thorens on ‘From ‘cutting red tape’ to mandatory human rights due diligence legislations: how to legitimise this change?

Supervisors: Nadia Bernaz (LAW) and Otto Hospes (PAP)
Examinor: Katrien Termeer (PAP)
Date: 11 October 2021
Time: 13.00 hours
MS Teams link: Click here to join the meeting  

Title: From ‘cutting red tape’ to mandatory human rights due diligence legislations: how to legitimise this change? The Discursive Legitimation Strategies behind the Forthcoming European Legislation on Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence 

ABSTRACT
This research concerns the recent but growing trend of developing mandatory human rights due diligence legislations to counter the negative consequences of corporations’ activities in their transnational operations. For decades, states have created a permissive global environment allowing companies to thrive, and where at most voluntary measures were implemented to mitigate the harm caused by businesses. Although the creation of such legislations represents a fundamental change in a system used to facilitating business activities as well as in the way companies’ conduct is regulated, the processes through which they are legitimised have not been studied. By focusing on the forthcoming European legislation on mandatory human rights due diligence, this research aims to uncover what are the discursive legitimation strategies used by its proponents to legitimise its creation. To answer this question, seventeen interviews were conducted with political actors, businesses, and non-governmental and civil society organisations, and their content was qualitatively analysed. The framework of discursive legitimation strategies developed by Vaara et al. (2006) guided the analysis but was modified to better explain the case at hand. The analysis shows that to legitimise the creation of the aforementioned legislation its proponents resorted to six discursive legitimation strategies: (1) authorisation, (2) rationalisation, (3) moralisation, (4) narrativization, (5) normalisation, and (6) playing down, as well as to a sub-strategy of legitimation named ‘mimicry’. On a less theoretical level, the proponents legitimised the legislation by highlighting the necessity to correct the flaws of the global capitalist system and the duty of the European Union to act upon it so as to be coherent with its policies and its ambitions to be a global human rights leader. The economic benefits of the legislation were also emphasised, as well as the support of businesses, notably because of the neoliberal bias that influences decision-makers. In turn, this research contributes to the theory on discursive legitimation strategies and helps fill the knowledge gap on the legitimation processes behind the creation of mandatory human rights due diligence legislations. It also sheds lights on the stakes and dynamics behind the creation of this European legislation.