Human Rights and Equality Impact Assessments: Critical Evaluation and Methodological Leadership
Submitting Institution
University of WarwickUnit of Assessment
LawSummary Impact Type
PoliticalResearch Subject Area(s)
Law and Legal Studies: Law
Summary of the impact
The research examines how the use of norms and standards of human rights
and equality law are used to measure human rights performance through
`human rights and equality impact assessment'. The work has been directly
used by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Pacific
and Geneva), the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, the Canadian
Government, and the Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC), and has been
influential both in developing and in changing policy. It has also been
used by a wide range of civil society organisations in the UK, Europe,
Pacific, India and Canada, and has informed debates at all levels of
government.
Underpinning research
Human Rights Impact Assessments (HRIAs), together with Equality Impact
Assessments, and the combination of the two (EHRIAs) are widely recognised
tools for measuring human rights impacts in a broad range of areas - from
development projects to activities of multinational companies, and from
trade agreements to activities of public authorities. However, until
recently there has been relatively little consensus on how such
assessments should be conducted, nor has there been a great deal of
critical engagement with existing practice. In order to address this gap
in understanding, James Harrison (Assistant Professor at Warwick 2008-
2010, Associate Professor 2010-present), undertook research evaluating
their use, exploring their normative foundations, and devising proposals
for how practice can be enhanced in the future. The research, carried out
with the support of colleagues in the Law School's Centre for Human Rights
in Practice (CHIP), led to the development of an eight-step methodology
for undertaking impact assessments and principles for ensuring that the
methodology is carried out appropriately. It also identified the
institutional architecture, and checks and balances that are required to
make such assessments effective.
This research has resulted in a number of academic publications (see e.g.
3a, b and d); 2 major commissioned reports (for the Office of the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the SHRC (3c)); and 2 other
specially commissioned papers (for the UN Special Rapporteur on Food and
the Canadian Council on International Co-operation), as well as a range of
collaborative research projects (3e and f).
Harrison's research initially focused on the use of HRIAs in the field of
international trade law, including the value and limitations of such
assessments of trade agreements; key methodological issues in undertaking
assessments, and the extent to which they have the potential to enhance
wider debates about human rights law and trade law inter-linkages in the
future. The Human Rights Impact of the World Trade Organisation
(3a) explained why human rights are an important mechanism for assessing
the social justice impact of the international trading system. His 2008
article (3b: with Goller), funded by a British Academy grant, identified
existing good practice in the field and key areas where methodologies
needed enhancement.
Later research critically evaluated the use of HRIAs across the full
range of policy areas where such work had been undertaken. Human
Rights Impact Assessment: Review of Practice & Guidance for Future
Assessments (3c) was carried out with Stephenson (then an
independent researcher and now studying for a PhD within CHIP under an
ESRC-awarded scholarship). This originated as a study commissioned by the
SHRC and then continued as an independent research project. The study
reviewed existing practice, made detailed recommendations on how future
HRIAs should be conducted, and set out for the first time the eight core
elements that should be included in an HRIA in any field. Harrison's 2011
article (3d) built upon this research and highlighted good and bad
practice with regard to each element.
A final strand of the research focuses on the use of joint human rights
and equality impact assessment in the UK as a mechanism for evaluating the
degree to which public spending cuts are complying with equality and human
rights obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and Human Rights Act 1998.
Unravelling Equality? (3e) and Getting off Lightly or Feeling
the Pinch? (3f) were researched and written with Stephenson, and
Stewart (Reader at Warwick) was also a co-author on the second report.
This research applies Harrison's methodology in the context of the UK's
human rights and equality legislation, and has provided the first
comprehensive blueprint for carrying out equality and human rights impact
assessment of crucial public spending decisions across the full range of
spending decisions which affect vulnerable individuals and groups in the
UK.
References to the research
(a) Harrison, J., (2007) The Human Rights Impact of the World Trade
Organisation (Hart) [peer- reviewed book submitted in 2008 RAE
period].
(b) Harrison, J. and Goller, A. (2008) `Trade and Human Rights: What Does
"Impact Assessment" Have to Offer?' 8(4) Human Rights Law Review
pp. 587-615 (main author - 80%) [based on research funded by a grant of
£8,000 from the British Academy (Human Rights Impact Assessments of
International Trade Agreements, July 2006-July 2007), published in a peer-
reviewed OUP journal and part of REF 2013 submission].
(c) Harrison, J. and Stephenson, M-A. (2010) Human Rights Impact
Assessment: Review of Practice & Guidance for Future Assessments,
A Report for the SHRC pp. 1-98 [commissioned by the SHRC and subsequently
published on their website at http://scottishhumanrights.com/.]
(d) Harrison, J. (2011) `Human Rights Measurement: Reflections on the
Current Practice and Future Potential of Human Rights Impact Assessment'
3(2) Journal of Human Rights Practice pp. 162-187 [peer-reviewed
OUP journal and part of REF 2013 submission].
(e) Stephenson, M-A. and Harrison, J. (2011) Unravelling Equality? A
Human Rights and Equality Impact Assessment of the Public Spending Cuts
on Women in Coventry, pp. 1-64 (40,000 words), available at
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/chrp/publications/unravelling_equality_full.pdf[described
by MPs as `excellent' and `a first class piece of work' that would
increasingly be seen as a `landmark' (Hansard, 12 July 2011, col 58WH]
Details of the impact
The research has had an extensive impact on the development of
methodologies in HRIAs and EHRIAs and on policy debate at international,
national and local levels, across a range of areas:
Impact on the use of HRIAs to assess international trade agreements:
Harrison's research was integral to the incorporation of the first ever
legally-binding human rights reporting process in an international trade
agreement. He was commissioned by the Canadian Council for International
Co-operation (see 5b) to apply his research (3b) to the Canada-Colombia
context and his resulting paper, Conducting A Human Rights Impact
Assessment Of The Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Key Issues,
was a major influence on the policy debate, both in parliament and in
civil society campaigns. He presented it to key parliamentarians and civil
society actors (via webcast seminars), gave evidence to the subsequent
Parliamentary enquiry into the Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement (FTA)
(see 5g), and was part of a small expert advisory group advising the
Canadian Department for Foreign Affairs and Trade on the appropriate
methodology for the Canada-Colombia FTA reporting process (5b). The
agreement concerning annual reports on human rights and free trade between
Canada and Colombia was signed in May 2010 and the free trade agreement
was implemented in 2011. Harrison has since given evidence to
Parliamentary hearings in relation to the first year of the reporting
process (5b).
Harrison's work has also informed the development of policy on HRIAs
within the United Nations. In June 2010 the UN Special Rapporteur on Food,
Professor Olivier De Schutter (5a), convened a meeting of experts in
Geneva to advance methodologies and thinking for undertaking HRIAs for
trade and investment agreements. Harrison was commissioned to produce the
main background paper for the meeting, applying research in his 2008 and
2011 articles (3b and c) to the UN context. He subsequently formed part of
a small expert group responsible for assisting the UN Special Rapporteur
in drafting the UN Guiding Principles of Human Rights Impact
Assessments of Trade and Investment Agreements (see 5a and f). These
principles are now the key reference document for States that are
undertaking HRIAs.
Harrison has also provided research evidence to the UN Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights, having been commissioned to produce a major
study of the impact of international trade and investment agreements on
the protection and promotion of human rights. The resulting Study on
Human Rights Trade and Investment (forthcoming) includes detailed
analysis and guidance for conducting an HREIA of a trade agreement (see
5a).
Impact on the methodology for conducting HRIAs of trade agreements:
Harrison's research has also been vital to a number of individual HRIA
studies conducted by the UN and civil society organisations including an
HRIA of the PACER-Plus trade agreement between Australia and New Zealand
and the Pacific Island countries; an HRIA of the EU-India FTA; a study of
the impact of PACER-plus on the Pacific Island of Vanuatu and a study of
the impact of intellectual property provisions in bilateral trade
agreements on farmers' livelihoods in three different developing
countries. His research is referenced in all of these studies, and his
methodological insights have been utilised extensively (see e.g. 5e and
h). In addition, his research findings on institutional arrangements for
HRIAs (3b) have been utilised as the basis for the work of the Alternative
Trade Mandate Alliance (a network representing over 100 member
organisations across Europe) in their campaign for a reformed EU Trade
Policy (5e).
Impact on the methodology for conducting EHRIAs of policy: As a
result of the work described above, CHIP was commissioned by the SHRC to
undertake a study which critically evaluated both equality and human
rights impact assessment across the full range of policy areas where
studies have been undertaken. Human Rights Impact Assessment: Review
of Practice & Guidance for Future Assessments (3c) led to the
Scottish Commissioner for Children and Young People reforming its
methodology for conducting EHRIAs. It was welcomed by the Chair of the
SHRC as `an extremely valuable contribution to both to the
Commission's own work and that of other practitioners and civil society
groups working to eliminate and mitigate the negative human rights
impacts of policy and decision making' (5c).
The research is also the basis for on-going work between the Scottish
Government, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Society of
Local Authority Chief Executives, the Scottish Council Equalities Network,
the NHS/SG Health Directorate, Audit Scotland, the Association of Chief
Police Officers in Scotland and the Scottish Prison Service, including the
piloting of joint EHRIAs throughout Scotland. Harrison has provided
research evidence to all these groups and has drafted Guiding Principles
based on his research for conducting future EHRIAs. He is currently acting
as advisor to a project where the new approach advocated by his research
will be piloted in two local authorities in Scotland (Fife and
Dumfriesshire) over the next 18 months. Leicestershire County Council have
also utilised the SHRC research as the basis for reforming their own EHRIA
process (5c).
Following this, the Joint Committee on Human Rights' Report on the
Implementation of the Right of Disabled People to Independent Living
recommended that the Government should publish an integrated human rights
and equality impact assessment of the likely cumulative impact of the
proposals on independent living, based on the methodology developed for
the SHRC (5c). Impact on policy debate by conducting EHRIAs: The
two EHRIAs (3e and f) undertaken jointly with Coventry Women's Voices, an
umbrella organisation representing around 150 organisations and
individuals (including Coventry Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre, Foleshill
Women's Training, Valley House, Coventry Haven, Unite the Union and
Coventry Ethnic Minority Action Partnership) in order to assess the impact
of the public sector spending cuts on the human rights of women in
Coventry, have enhanced public understanding of the issues, provided
research evidence that has stimulated debate both locally and nationally,
led to changes in policy, and inspired research by a range of voluntary
organisations (5d and j).
The three studies have been widely disseminated, with public launches
both locally and nationally, widespread media coverage, and over 15,000
downloads from the website. The studies have been discussed in two UK
Parliamentary debates, with Geoffrey Robinson MP predicting that they
would be seen as a `landmark' (Hansard, 12 July 2011) and Yvette Cooper
identifying them as a model for future research on the impact of the cuts
(Hansard, 8 June 2011).
Councillor Ann Lucas, leader of Coventry City Council, commented that `the
reports have had a huge impact both in Coventry and nationally' and
identified that their key contribution was to `bring together all the
different effects of the cuts and demonstrate clearly how it is the
combined impact that is most devastating'. She also commented: `I
am often down in Westminster and see both MPs and peers carrying around
copies of these reports with them and referring to them frequently -
they should be compulsory reading' (5j).
The research also informed the production of a toolkit for the Trades
Union Congress (5i) and has also inspired women's groups in Bristol,
Islington, Liverpool, Yorkshire and the North East (5d and j) to undertake
EHRIAs directly utilising the methodology in the Coventry study, which in
turn are having an impact across the country. As Mott (5d), chair of
Bristol Fawcett Society noted, `[o]n the basis of the work done by
[CHIP], we were able to produce our own report on the impact of the cuts
on women in Bristol. The report had a big impact in Bristol, was
referred to by officers in the drafting of their budgets, and has meant
that the Council is now more willing and able to engage with the issues
we have identified as they make their tough spending decisions.'
CHIP has been awarded an ESRC Collaborative Studentship Investigating
Cuts and Changes to Legal Advice Services (2012-2015) to continue this
work and the Barrow Cadbury Trust, an independent charitable foundation,
has funded a third report launched in 2013, assessing the human rights and
equality impact of the spending cuts on Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic
women (5d and j).
Sources to corroborate the impact
(a) UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food [confirming the importance
of Harrison's work in the UN system].
(b) Former Policy Coordinator, Canadian Council for International
Co-operation and Deputy Director, Parliamentary Affairs, Office of the
Leader of the Official Opposition, New Democratic Party [confirming the
importance of Harrison's work in the Canadian context]
(c) Chair, Scottish Human Rights Commission [commissioned the 2010 study
and can confirm its utility and on-going influence in Scotland]
(d) Chair, Bristol Fawcett Society [used the 2011 and 2012 studies and
can confirm their impact on carrying out similar research elsewhere, and
their impact on policy debates]
(e) Policy Advisor on business and human rights for MISEREOR, the German
Catholic Bishops' Organisation for Development Cooperation [confirming the
importance of Harrison's work for NGOs in relation to the methodology for
conducting HRIAs of trade agreements and the importance of his research
findings on institutional arrangements for HRIAs]
(f) Human Rights Impact Assessments for Trade and Investment Agreements:
Report of the Expert Seminar, June 23-24, 2010, Geneva, Switzerland
[confirming Harrison's participation and the centrality of his report
which is reproduced in full at Annex 2] available at
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/food/docs/report_hria-seminar_2010.pdf]
(g) Canadian Parliamentary Debate, 40th Parliament, 3rd Session, Standing
Committee on International Trade, 25 May 2010 and House of Commons Debate,
7 June 2010; available at http://www.parl.gc.ca [Harrison giving evidence,
based on his research, on the nature of the HRIA process that should be
adopted by the Canadian Government and his evidence then reported to
Members of Parliament]
(h) Ecofair Trade Dialogue `Right to Food Impact Assessment of the EU -
India Trade Agreement' available at
http://www.ecofair-trade.org/content/study-right-food-impact-assessment-eu-india-trade-agreement [citing
Harrison's 2010 study, and the De Schutter Principles which Harrison
helped develop as the key methodological underpinnings of that study, see
p.11]
(i) TUC - Women and the Cuts Toolkit available at
http://www.tuc.org.uk/equality-issues/gender- equality/tuc-women-and-cuts-toolkit
[confirming at p.3 that this toolkit
is `based on' our Coventry report]
(j) University of Warwick, Centre for Human Rights in Practice website
`Impact of Our Work' at
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/chrp/engagement/hrequalityimpact
[includes links to Bristol, Islington, Liverpool, Yorkshire and the North
East studies with references to the importance of the Coventry methodology
for their work; testimony from those who have utilised the studies and
links to press coverage and details about further impact of this area of
Harrison's work]