The Canadian Country Visit of the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) unanimously endorsed the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework” (UNGPs) in 2011. In May 2017, members of the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights will conduct a country visit to Canada. This paper will introduce the UNGPs, examine the experience of other countries visited by the working group, including the United States, which was visited in 2013, and consider what to expect during the visit to Canada. It is likely that the working group will consider implementation of the state duty to protect human rights in terms of its application both to businesses operating within Canada and to Canadian companies operating internationally. Given Canada’s prominence in global mining and ongoing contestation over respect for Indigenous rights within Canada, especially in the oil and gas sector, it is also likely that the working group will pay careful attention to implementation of law and policy in natural resource development. Following the country visit, the working group is likely to recommend that Canada develop a national action plan (NAP) for the implementation of the UNGPs. This presents an opportunity for Canada to play a leading role in clarifying the link between business and human rights, Indigenous rights and climate change. HRC in 2011,2 and then consider what to expect from the country visit based upon previous experiences, most notably a visit to the United States in 2013.3 The paper will briefly examine implementation of the UNGPs in Canadian law and policy, including the federal government’s promotion of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy for extractive companies operating abroad,4 and identify possible issues that the working group might examine during its visit. The conclusions recommend that Canada develop an NAP for the implementation of the UNGPs, as other countries have done, and suggest that this could provide an opportunity to clarify the linkage between business and human rights, Indigenous rights, and the environment and climate change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".