SOCIETÀ ITALIANA DI DIRITTO ED ECONOMIA
Eirini Koutsoukou (Università degli Studi di Milano)
Abstract
The right to health, being both a fundamental human right and a global common good, is essential for human dignity the exercise of other rights. Enshrined in international legal frameworks, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, health is also central to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDG 3).
Moreover, being a global common, it transcends national boundaries and is vital to social stability, economic prosperity, and environmental resilience. Recognizing health as a human right implies that States, as primary subjects of international law, should promote the health of their populations. However, globalization and the growing influence of Transnational Corporations (TNCs) have increasingly implicated the private sector in the realization, or, violation of this right.
The emergence of Business& Human Rights (BHR) and the UNGPs clarified that Corporations are equally responsible for human rights. Our paper underscores that the intersection of health with business operations brings critical discussions in both the Business & Human Rights (BHR) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) domains. We argue that since health is an issue of social justice, intertwined with environmental resilience, it affects the well-being of various stakeholders.
Main Arguments
The Human Rights Council’s Resolution 48/13 acknowledged the human right to a healthy, clean and sustainable environment. This affirms our argument that health is a ‘multilayered’ concept: a human right per se and a global common, intrinsically linked with the environment. Drawing insights from contemporary case-studies in the BHR and CSR domains, we argue that health should be collectively prioritized by public and private actors.
Corporations exert significant influence on public health through their supply chains and operations. Their influence is not only positive, e.g. pharmaceuticals developing medicines, but also negative. Many cases illustrate that Corporations affect health through unsafe working conditions and disposal of harmful substances in the environment. Such practices violate not only their employees’ health but also pose a direct risk for the environment and public health.
Our paper uses as pertinent example the ongoing litigation in the United States concerning "Forever Chemicals". Scientifically known as per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), PFAS are synthetic chemicals, used in consumer and industrial products, including cosmetics, cleaning products and food packages. Their water- and grease-resistant properties are linked to severe and chronic diseases, including various types of cancer and fertility problems. Due to their extreme persistence in the environment and the human body, they are commonly referred to as “Forever Chemicals”.
Since 2021 more than thirty (30) US Attorney Generals have filed lawsuits against Corporations that use PFAS. The Respondents have a long history in human rights violations and environmental pollution. Our analysis uses the lawsuit filed by US Attorney General Tong against 3M, Chemours and DuPont, accusing them of knowingly endangering public health. Being aware for almost fifty years of the dangers related with PFAS, the Respondents have exposed their employees and local communities to severe health risks.
“Forever Chemicals” highlight the critical need for enforcing corporate accountability in safeguarding the right to health. In this context, we stress that health considerations should be integrated into CSR and BHR frameworks. CSR, mistakenly viewed as a voluntary corporate commitment, is increasingly being aligned with human rights obligations. This shift is evident in the growing adoption of due diligence instruments, e.g. the recent Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. Therefore, we claim that health can act as a powerful lens for businesses regarding the assessment of their CSR strategies and BHR responsibilities. For instance, by prioritizing health in corporate operations, Enterprises can contribute to the achievement of multiple SDGs, enhance their reputation, and mitigate legal and financial risks. Moreover, health-focused CSR initiatives can facilitate partnerships between the public and private sector and civil society, fostering collaborative efforts to address global health challenges and environmental health risks.
Furthermore, we stress that the significance of the right to health extends beyond individual well-being; it is intrinsically linked to the broader agenda of Sustainable Development. The SDGs explicitly recognize health as a central pillar, with Goal 3 aiming to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. Health is additionally a critical enabler of other SDGs, including those related to hunger, education, gender equality, and economic growth. Thus, we claim that health can serve as a unifying principle among the three pillars of Sustainable Development: economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental protection.
Conclusion
We highlight that health intersects with corporate operations in profound ways. As a global common, it is essential for the 2030 Agenda and social equity. The involvement of Enterprises in both promoting and undermining health emphasizes the need for robust CSR and BHR frameworks prioritizing health as a central concern. Recent legal developments, such as the “Forever Chemicals” lawsuits, illustrate the growing recognition of corporate accountability in this area. By using health as a unifying principle first between BHR and CSR and second among the three different dimensions of Sustainable Development, Enterprises can play a pivotal role in fulfilling their international responsibilities.