The Intersection of Humanitarian Discourse and Corporate Sustainability in EU Policy

The Intersection of Humanitarian Discourse and Corporate Sustainability in EU Policy

Introduction:
In recent years, the European Union (EU) has grappled with two critical issues that have shaped policy discourse - human security at the Mediterranean borders and corporate sustainability. Both topics have become the focus of empirical research and have led to the emergence of unique discourses and debates. This article aims to explore the commonalities and connections between these two seemingly distinct areas of concern, shedding light on the intersection of humanitarian discourse and corporate responsibility in the EU periphery.

Humanitarian Discourse and Migrant Rights:
One of the key findings of empirical research is the emergence of a humanitarian discourse that advocates for the protection of migrants' rights, particularly their right to be free from inhuman treatment. The denial of a port of safety to the SeaWatch3 vessel in January 2019 by the Italian government sparked a discourse centered around the alleviation of migrants' physical and mental suffering. This humanitarian perspective clashed with the traditional security-focused debates surrounding EU politics and border control.

Securitization and Border Closures:
The mid-2010s witnessed a significant increase in arrivals of migrants in Europe through the Mediterranean, leading to heightened security threats and subsequent political discourse on border closures. Center-right political leaders, adopting exclusionary policies, often portrayed irregular migrants as criminals who should not be accepted within EU territory. Italy, located at the center of the Mediterranean, played a crucial role in securing the EU's borders. In 2018-2019, the Italian government implemented a "closed ports" approach, denying NGOs conducting search and rescue operations authorization to disembark rescued migrants.

The Link between Security and Borders:
The close intertwining of security and borders has been a recurring theme in both international relations literature and EU politics. While security concerns have historically dominated discussions, the politicization of migration in the mid-2010s brought the issue into the public arena. The securitization of migration encountered a humanitarian dimension in discourses and practices, highlighting the complexity of addressing both security threats and the protection of human rights.

Corporate Sustainability and Due Diligence:
Simultaneously, the EU has taken steps towards enhancing corporate sustainability through the proposed EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. This landmark agreement would require large companies to undertake human rights and environmental due diligence to identify, assess, cease or mitigate, and remedy harm caused in their value chains. Monetary sanctions and a network of authorities would be established to ensure compliance and receive complaints from rights holders. However, critics argue that the directive falls short in various aspects, such as limited coverage of the financial sector, weak duties on climate impacts, and a narrower downstream scope.

Connecting Humanitarian Discourse and Corporate Sustainability:
Despite their seemingly disparate nature, connections can be drawn between humanitarian discourse and corporate sustainability in EU policy. Both topics underscore the need for increased policy coherence and a comprehensive approach towards addressing human rights and environmental concerns. The directive's focus on due diligence aligns with the humanitarian discourse's emphasis on identifying and remedying harm caused to vulnerable populations. Additionally, the call for alignment with broader responsible business conduct initiatives, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, reflects the EU's recognition of the international normative framework surrounding corporate responsibility.

Actionable Advice:

1. Foster dialogue: Encourage open and constructive discussions between policymakers, civil society organizations, and businesses to bridge the gap between humanitarian discourse and corporate sustainability. Collaboration and shared understanding can lead to more comprehensive policies that address both security concerns and human rights protection.

2. Strengthen financial sector obligations: Ensure that financial institutions, such as banks, insurance companies, and asset managers, are held to the same standards of due diligence as other sectors. This will help create a more holistic approach to corporate sustainability and prevent any sector-specific loopholes.

3. Promote international alignment: Advocate for greater alignment between national and regional responsible business conduct initiatives and international guidelines, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. This alignment will provide a more robust normative framework for corporate responsibility and enhance policy coherence across borders.

Conclusion:
The intersection of humanitarian discourse and corporate sustainability in EU policy reveals the complex challenges faced by policymakers in addressing both security threats and the protection of human rights. By recognizing the interconnections between these two areas, fostering dialogue, strengthening financial sector obligations, and promoting international alignment, policymakers can work towards more comprehensive and coherent policies that address the diverse concerns of security, human rights, and corporate responsibility.