Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-685pp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-04T09:32:52.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Taking Finance Seriously

Understanding the Financial Risks of Unsustainability

from Part I - Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2025

By
Beate Sjåfjell
Edited by
Kern Alexander ,
Matteo Gargantini  and
Michele Siri
Kern Alexander
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
Matteo Gargantini
Affiliation:
University of Genoa
Michele Siri
Affiliation:
University of Genoa
Get access

Summary

Finance that does not take sustainability seriously is finance that does not take finance seriously. The financial risks of continued unsustainabilities bring sustainability issues into the heart of any well-founded financial decision, whatever view one might have on the role of finance and business in society. In this chapter, the relationship between finance and sustainability is explored through a broadening of the approach to understanding financial risks of unsustainability. This goes beyond the established recognition of the financial risks of climate change – and the emerging recognition of financial risks of biodiversity loss. The analysis presents new risk categories, including the risk of business model change, societal risk and global catastrophic risks. The chapter also exemplifies new categories of unsustainability that should be encompassed in such a broader and systemic approach, including ‘novel entities’ and tax evasion. The chapter concludes with brief reflections on the necessity of and the legal basis for implementing a research-based approach to risks of unsustainability in law and policy reforms and in practice.

Keywords

enlightened shareholder valuestakeholder theoryshared value approachcorporate social responsibilityradical shareholder valuestakeholderismsocial valuecorporate governanceorganizational theory
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of EU Sustainable Finance
Regulation, Supervision and Governance
 , pp. 22 - 48
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acosta, C. M. (2023), ‘Where are the key Panama Papers figures, seven years later?’ International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, 3 April, available at: https://bit.ly/4aKwrKb.Google Scholar
Ahlström, H. and Sjåfjell, B. (2022), ‘Complexity and uncertainty in sustainable finance: An analysis of the EU taxonomy’ in Cadman, T. and Sarker, T. (eds.), De Gruyter Handbook of Sustainable Development and Finance (Berlin: De Gruyter), 15–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonso‐Almeida, M. D. M. and Llach, J. (2019), ‘Socially responsible companies: Are they the best workplace for millennials? A cross-national analysis’ 26 Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 238–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andhov, M., Caranta, R., Stoffel, T. et al. (2020), Sustainability through Public Procurement: The Way Forward – Reform Proposals, SMART Report, available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=3559393.Google Scholar
Avin, S., Wintle, B. C., Weitzdörfer, J. et al. (2018), ‘Classifying global catastrophic risks’ 102 Futures, 20–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (2020), ‘Basel Committee meets to review vulnerabilities and emerging risks, advance supervisory initiatives and promote Basel III implementation’, 27 February, available at: www.bis.org/press/p200227.htm.Google Scholar
Baum, S. D. and Handoh, I. C. (2014), ‘Integrating the planetary boundaries and global catastrophic risk paradigms’ 107 Ecological Economics, 13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjørnbet, M. M. and Vildåsen, S. S. (2021), ‘Life cycle assessment to ensure sustainability of circular business models in manufacturing’ 13 Sustainability, 11014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, M. and Wiseman, D. (2020), ‘Finance actors and climate-related disclosure regulation: Logic, limits, and emerging accountability’ in Holley, C., Phelan, L. and Shearing, C. (eds.), Criminology and Climate (London: Routledge), 153–78.Google Scholar
Burns, A. (2022), ‘Commission bends to lobby on Sustainable Corporate Governance’, Finance Watch, 23 February, available at: https://bit.ly/3wglZLV.Google Scholar
Business and Human Rights Resource Centre (n.d.), ‘Legal case map’, available at: www.business-humanrights.org/en/corporate-legal-accountability.Google Scholar
Cadwalladr, C. and Graham-Harrison, E. (2018), ‘Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach’, The Guardian, 17 March.Google Scholar
Carvajal, R., Cabra, M., Ortiz, Á., and Blat, F. (2017), ‘Explore the Panama Papers Key Figures’, International Consortium of Investigative Journalists’ website, 31 January.Google Scholar
Christensen, G. (2019), ‘What does it mean to be sustainable? Regulating the relationship between corporations and Indigenous peoples’ in Sjåfjell, B. and Bruner, C. M. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Corporate Law, Corporate Governance and Sustainability (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 416–30.Google Scholar
Clapp, C. et al. (2017), Shades of Climate Risk: Categorizing Climate Risk for Investors, Report 2017:01 CICERO Center for International Climate and Environmental Research, available at: http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2430660.Google Scholar
Collins, L. M. (2018), ‘Sustainable Development Goals and human rights: Challenges and opportunities’ in French, D. and Kotzé, L. J. (eds.), Sustainable Development Goals: Law, Theory and Implementation (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), 66–90.Google Scholar
Countouris, N. (2019), Defining and Regulating Work Relations for the Future of Work (Geneva: International Labour Office).Google Scholar
Crona, B., Folke, C., and Galaz, V. (2021), ‘The Anthropocene reality of financial risk’ 4 One Earth, 618–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullen, J., Mähönen, J., and Nilsen, H. R. (2020), ‘Financing the transition to sustainability: SMART reform proposals’, University of Oslo Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2020-10, 6 May, Nordic & European Company Law Working Paper No. 20-09, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3594433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cushman, J. H. (2017), ‘Harvard study finds Exxon misled public about climate change’, Inside Climate News, 22 August, available at: https://bit.ly/3SW7GF7.Google Scholar
Deutsch, A. and Jessop, S. (2022), ‘Activists behind Shell climate verdict target 30 multinationals’, Reuters, 13 January, available at: https://reut.rs/3OFe4hq.Google Scholar
European Coalition for Corporate Justice (2021), ‘Suing Goliath: An analysis of civil cases against EU companies for overseas human rights and environmental abuses’, ECCJ, 28 September, available at: https://corporatejustice.org/publications/suing-goliath/.Google Scholar
European Commission (2020), ‘Communication from The Commission to The European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and The Committee of The Regions A New Circular Economy Action Plan For a cleaner and more competitive Europe’, COM/2020/98 final, available at: https://bit.ly/456ECiE.Google Scholar
European Commission (n.d.), ‘Overview of Sustainable Finance’, available at: https://bit.ly/49w6UnV.Google Scholar
European Parliament and Council (2022), ‘Decision (EU) 2022/591 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 April 2022 on a General Union Environment Action Programme to 2030’, available at: https://bit.ly/3KsQfXK.Google Scholar
Galaz, V., Österblom, H., Bodin, Ö., and Crona, B. (2016), ‘Global networks and global change-induced tipping points’ 16 International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 189–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gammage, C. and Novitz, T. (2019), ‘Trade, investment and corporate sustainability’ in Sjåfjell, B. and Bruner, C. M. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Corporate Law, Corporate Governance, and Sustainability (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 15–28.Google Scholar
Gordon, K. (2008), ‘Investment guarantees and political risk insurance: Institutions, incentives and development’ OECD Investment Policy Perspectives, 92.Google Scholar
Greep, H. (2022), ‘Latest draft shows that TNFD’s reputation “as the next frontier in corporate greenwashing on nature” remains solidly intact’, BankTrack, 7 November, available at: https://bit.ly/3X8rWpE.Google Scholar
Hickel, J. (2017), The Divide: A Brief Guide to Global Inequality and Its Solutions (London: Penguin Random House).Google Scholar
Hickel, J. (2020), ‘The sustainable development index: Measuring the ecological efficiency of human development in the Anthropocene’ 167 Ecological Economics, 106331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.05.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ILO (International Labour Organization) (2008), ‘ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization’, 10 June, available at https://bit.ly/3Rabj9c.Google Scholar
ILO (International Labour Organization) (2019a), ‘ILO Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work 2019’, 21 June, available at https://bit.ly/3X2HFXi.Google Scholar
ILO (International Labour Organization) (2019b), ‘Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190)’, 21 June, available at https://bit.ly/3R8jC5q.Google Scholar
ILO (International Labour Organization) (2019c), ‘International Labour Organization Global Commission on the Future of Work: Work for a brighter future’, 22 January, available at https://bit.ly/3X6AxZQ.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. and Norris, P. (2017), ‘Trump and the populist authoritarian parties: The silent revolution in reverse’ 15(2) Perspectives on Politics, 443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Institute for Sustainable Development (2020), ‘Sustainable investing: Shaping the future of finance’, February, available at: https://bit.ly/3HUuuit.Google Scholar
ITUC (International Trade Union Confederation) (2016), ‘New ITUC report exposes hidden workforce of 116 million in global supply chains of fifty companies’, 18 January, available at: www.ituc-csi.org/new-ituc-report-exposes-hidden.Google Scholar
James, D. (2001), ‘Cooperation, competition, and the “science of pricing” in the political risk insurance marketplace’ in Moran, T. H. and West, G. T. (eds.), International Political Risk Management: Exploring New Frontiers (Washington, DC: The World Bank), 170–79.Google Scholar
Jaumotte, F. and Buitron, C. (2015), ‘IMF staff discussion note: Inequality and labor market institutions’, 1 July, available at: www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1514.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, B. A., Grace, D., Kock, R. et al. (2013), ‘Zoonosis emergence linked to agricultural intensification and environmental change’ 110 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 8399–404.Google ScholarPubMed
Karpoff, J., Lott, J. R. and Wehrly, E. W. (2005), ‘The reputational penalties for environmental violations: Empirical evidence’ 48 Journal of Law and Economics, 653–75.Google Scholar
Kenton, W. (2018), ‘Nationalization’, 30 March, available at: www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nationalization.asp.Google Scholar
Keys, P. W., Galaz, V., Dyer, M. et al. (2019), ‘Anthropocene risk’ 2 Nature Sustainability, 667–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchherr, J., Hekkert, M., Bour, R. et al. (2017), ‘Breaking the barriers to the circular economy’, Whitepaper, October, available at https://bit.ly/3V804iL.Google Scholar
Kotzé, L. J. (2019), ‘The Anthropocene, Earth system vulnerability and socio-ecological injustice in an age of human rights’ 10 Journal of Human Rights and the Environment, 62–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotzé, L. J. and Kim, R. E. (2019), ‘Earth system law: The juridical dimensions of earth system governance’ 1 Earth System Governance, 7–8.Google Scholar
Kreiss, D. and McGregor, S. C. (2018), ‘Technology firms shape political communication: The work of Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, and Google with campaigns during the 2016 US presidential cycle’ 35 Political Communication, 155–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leach, M., Raworth, K., and Rockström, J. (2013), ‘Between social and planetary boundaries: Navigating pathways in the safe and just space for humanity’ in World Social Science Report 2013 (Paris: UNESCO Publishing), 84–90.Google Scholar
Madden, R. and Coleman, C. (2018), ‘Visibility of indigenous peoples in sustainable development indicators’, Working paper presented at 16th Conference of the International Association of Official Statisticians (IAOS), September, OECD Headquarters, Paris, 19–21, available at: https://bit.ly/3OMigft.Google Scholar
Mähönen, J. (2020), ‘Comprehensive approach to relevant and reliable reporting in Europe: A dream impossible?’ 12 Sustainability, 5277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maitre-Ekern, E. (2021), ‘Re-thinking producer responsibility for a sustainable circular economy from extended producer responsibility to pre-market producer responsibility’ 286 Journal of Cleaner Production, 125454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maitre-Ekern, E. and Dalhammar, C. (2019), ‘Towards a hierarchy of consumption behaviour in the circular economy’ 26(3) Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 394–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malhi, Y. (2017), ‘The concept of the Anthropocene’ 42 Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 77–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manley, R. (2019), ‘Trade law and the capability approach’ 53(6) Journal of World Trade, 1041–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin-Ortega, O., Outhwaite, O. and Rook, W. (2015), ‘Buying power and human rights in the supply chain: Legal options for socially responsible public procurement of electronic goods’ 19 The International Journal of Human Rights, 341–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, B. (2022), ‘The duty of care of fossil-fuel producers for climate change mitigation: Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell District Court of The Hague (The Netherlands)’ 11 Transnational Environmental Law, 407–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monciardini, D., Mähönen, J. T. and Tsagas, G. (2020), ‘Rethinking non-financial reporting: A blueprint for structural regulatory changes’ 10 Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, vol. 10(2), 1–43.Google Scholar
Moyn, S. (2018), Not Enough: Human Rights in An Unequal World (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Nauman, B. (2019), ‘Sharp rise in number of investors dumping fossil fuel stocks’, Financial Times, 9 September, available at: https://on.ft.com/3HUuBdT.Google Scholar
Norris, P. and Inglehart, R. (2019), Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novitz, T. (2019a), ‘Supply chains and temporary migrant labour: The relevance of trade and sustainability frameworks’ in Ashiagbor, D. (ed.), Re-imagining Labour Law for Development: Informal Work in the Global North and South (Oxford: Hart Publishing), 191–211.Google Scholar
Novitz, T. (2019b), ‘Tripartism as sustainable governance’ in Politakis, G., Kohiyama, T. and Lieby, T. (eds.), ILO100 – Law for Social Justice (Geneva: International Labour Office), 337–54, available at: https://bit.ly/3HZe2xl.Google Scholar
Novitz, T. (2020a), ‘Past and future work at the International Labour Organization: Labour as a fictitious commodity, countermovement and sustainability’ 17 International Organizations Law Review, 10–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novitz, T. (2020b), ‘Engagement with sustainability at the International Labour Organization and implications for worker voice’ 159(4) International Labour Review, 463–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novitz, T. (2020c), ‘The perils of collective begging: The case for reforming collective labour law globally and locally too’ 44(2) New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 3–19.Google Scholar
Nowag, J. (2016), Environmental Integration in Competition and Free-Movement Laws (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD (2019), Policy Responses to New Forms of Work (Paris: OECD Publishing), 21 March to 24 April, available at: https://bit.ly/3I4Q1EV.Google Scholar
Otto, H.-U., Walker, M., and Ziegler, H. (eds.) (2017), Capability-promoting Policies: Enhancing Individual and Social Development (Bristol: Policy Press).Google Scholar
Peinhardt, C. and Allee, T. (2016), ‘Political risk insurance as dispute resolution’ 7 Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 205–24.Google Scholar
Persson, L., Carney Almroth, B. M., Collins, C. D. et al. (2022a), ‘Outside the safe operating space of the planetary boundary for novel entities’ 56(3) Environmental Science & Technology, 1510–21.Google ScholarPubMed
Persson, L., Carney Almroth, B. M., Collins, C. D. et al. (2022b), ‘Response to comment on “Outside the safe operating space of the planetary boundary for novel entities”’ 56 Environmental Science & Technology, 6788–9.Google Scholar
Piketty, T. (2014), Capital in the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polanyi, K. (2001), The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. 2nd paperback edition (Boston: Beacon Press).Google Scholar
PwC (PricewaterhouseCoopers) and WWF (2020), ‘Nature is too big to fail. Biodiversity: The next frontier in financial risk management’, January, available at: https://pwc.to/3OH4M4M.Google Scholar
Raworth, K. (2012), A Safe and Just Space for Humanity: Can We Live within the Doughnut? Oxfam Discussion Paper. (Oxford: Oxfam GB).Google Scholar
Raworth, K. (2017), Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-century Economist (White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing).Google Scholar
Richardson, K., Steffen, W., Lucht, W. et al. (2023), ‘Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries’ 9 Science Advances, eadh2458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riding, S. and Mooney, A. (2020), ‘Investors blast EU’s omission of oil from ESG disclosures’, Financial Times, 3 May, available at: https://on.ft.com/3HVJGvA.Google Scholar
Ringsmuth, A. K., Otto, I. M., van den Hurk, B. et al. (2022), ‘Lessons from COVID-19 for managing transboundary climate risks and building resilience’ 35 Climate Risk Management, 100395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. (2009), ‘Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity’ 14 Ecology and Society, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saastamoinen, S. (2019), ‘Sustainable corporate governance in the wake of the climate crisis’, 24th European Corporate Governance Conference, 12 December, Helsinki, available at: https://bit.ly/3OGbGXX.Google Scholar
Semieniuk, G., Holden, P. B., Mercure, J.-F. et al. (2022), ‘Stranded fossil-fuel assets translate to major losses for investors in advanced economies’ 12 Nature Climate Change, 532–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjåfjell, B. (2019), ‘The environmental integration principle: A necessary step towards policy coherence for sustainability’ in Ippolito, F., Bartoloni, M. E., and Condinanzi, M. (eds.), The EU and the Proliferation of Integration Principles under the Lisbon Treaty (Abingdon: Routledge), 105–122.Google Scholar
Sjåfjell, B. (2020a), ‘How company law has failed human rights – And what to do about it’ 5 Business and Human Rights Journal, 179–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjåfjell, B. (2020b), ‘The financial risks of unsustainability: A research agenda’, University of Oslo Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2020-18, 29 June, Nordic & European Company Law Working Paper No. 21-05. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3637969.Google Scholar
Sjåfjell, B. (2021), ‘Reforming EU company law to secure the future of European business’ 18 European Company and Financial Law Review, 190–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjåfjell, B. and Bruner, C. M. (2019), ‘Corporations and sustainability’ in Sjåfjell, B. and Bruner, C. M. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Corporate Law, Corporate Governance and Sustainability (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjåfjell, B. and Taylor, M. B. (2019), ‘Clash of norms: Shareholder primacy vs. sustainable corporate purpose’ 13 International and Comparative Corporate Law Journal, 40–66.Google Scholar
Sjåfjell, B. and Cornell, S. E. (2024), ‘What the actual ….? Tensions in the science-business-policy interface for global sustainability’. Manuscript under review in the journal European Law Open. On file with current author.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, L., Bright, C., McCorquodale, R. et al. (2020a), Study on Due Diligence Requirements through the Supply Chain: Final Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, January. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2838/39830.Google Scholar
Smit, L., Bright, C., Pietropaoli, I., Hughes-Jennett, J., and Hood, P. (2020b), ‘Business views on mandatory human rights due diligence regulation: A comparative analysis of two recent studies’ 5 Business and Human Rights Journal, 261–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solana, J. (2019), ‘The power of the Eurosystem to promote environmental protection’ 30 European Business Law Review, 547–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J. et al. (2015), ‘Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet’ 347 Science 1259855.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tansey, R. (ed.) (2018), Corporate Capture in Europe – When Big Business Dominates Policy-making and Threatens Our Right, Alliance for Lobbying Transparency and Ethics Regulation in the EU (ALTER-EU).Google Scholar
TCFD (Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures) (2017), Final Report: Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures, June, available at: www.fsb-tcfd.org/publications/final-recommendations-report.Google Scholar
TNFD (Taskforce on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures) (2023) Recommendations of the Taskforce on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures. Available at https://bit.ly/3Xa1Xy2.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. B. (2020), ‘Litigating Sustainability – Towards a Taxonomy of Counter-Corporate Litigation’, 3 February, University of Oslo Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2020-08. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3627580. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3627580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, M. B. (2021), ‘Counter corporate litigation: Remedy, regulation, and repression in the struggle for a just transition’ 13 Sustainability, 1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations General Assembly (2015), ‘Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’, General Assembly Resolution A/RES70/1.Google Scholar
Villarrubia-Gómez, P., Cornell, S. E., and Fabres, J. (2018), ‘Marine plastic pollution as a planetary boundary threat – The drifting piece in the sustainability puzzle’ 96 Marine Policy, 213–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weissbrodt, D. and Rumsey, M. (eds.) (2011), Vulnerable and Marginalised Groups and Human Rights (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteman, G. and Williams, A. (2019),‘Systemic planetary risks: Implications for organization studies’ in Gephart Jr., R., Miller, C. C. and Helgesson, K. S. (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Risk, Crisis and Emergency Management (London: Routledge), 213–27.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. (2018), ‘Consumer preferences continue to shift toward sustainability, market research shows’, TriplePundit, 13 November, available at: https://bit.ly/49dRULx.Google Scholar
World Bank (2019), World Development Report 2019: The Changing Nature of Work, 24 April, available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30435.Google Scholar
World Economic Forum (2017), Global Risk Report 2017, available at: www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2017/.Google Scholar
World Economic Forum (2020), Global Risk Report 2020, available at: www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2020/.Google Scholar
World Economic Forum (2022), Global Risks Report 2022, available at: www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-report-2022/.Google Scholar
World Inequality Report (2018), available at: https://wir2018.wid.world/.Google Scholar
Yu, C.-Y. (2018), ‘An application of sustainable development in indigenous people’s revival: The history of an indigenous tribe’s struggle in Taiwan’ 10 Sustainability, 3259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zerk, J. (2014), Towards a Fairer and More Effective System of Domestic Law Remedies, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Corporate Liability for Gross Human Rights Abuses, available at: https://bit.ly/3wglvFC.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×