Imagine a game where the rules are meant to protect players, but the referee starts using those same rules to justify their own power moves. This research looks at how governments use human rights language to shield their decisions rather than protect people. It helps us spot when a country's legal claims are actually strategic political tools.
Companies struggle to navigate geopolitical risks when states use human rights language to justify actions that actually contradict individual protections. This creates legal uncertainty and ethical risks for businesses operating in volatile regions.
A theory of Human Rights Justification (HRJ) and a process for Systematic Ongoing Civil Society Engagement (ODCSE).
If you are a law firm dealing with contradictory human rights claims in India or Taiwan — this project developed a theory of Human Rights Justification (HRJ) that helps identify regulatory gaps in state behavior.
If you are a consultancy dealing with market entry in regions influenced by China or Russia — this project developed a mapping of state practices across 5 countries that reveals how governments use rights as governance tools.
If you are a company dealing with ethical sourcing in Ukraine or Finland — this project developed a process for Systematic Ongoing Civil Society Engagement (ODCSE) that ensures inclusive gender and intersectional perspectives.
Based on available project data, no pricing or cost structures are provided as this is a research-funded project.
The project focuses on developing a process for civil society engagement across 5 countries, but there is no mention of a commercial industrial scale version.
Based on available project data, no specific patents or licensing agreements are mentioned; the outputs are described as recommendations and theories.
The project identifies gaps in human rights regulations and provides recommendations to the EU to support a multinational human rights system.
The project period runs from 2023-03-01 to 2026-02-28.
The consortium is heavily academic, consisting of 13 universities and 1 research institution, with only 2 industry partners (12% ratio). This suggests the output is primarily theoretical and policy-oriented rather than a commercial product, though the inclusion of 17 partners across 9 countries provides a broad geopolitical data set.
Contact Goeteborgs Universitet regarding the HRJ theory and ODCSE process.
Contact SciTransfer to bridge the gap between this legal research and your corporate compliance strategy.
