Transnational Corporations and Human Rights
8
becomes evident that statistical analyses and comparative case studies cannot be used as
evidence against each other unless great caution is provided.
Secondly, the direct causal effect of the activity of TNCs and host countries’ human
rights’ scores is indiscernible as far as political rights and civil liberties concerns. Host
countries’ human rights’ scores are far more likely to be coloured by the actions of the host
countries’ government, only indirect effects of TNC activity – through economic development
(i.e. socio-economic rights) – can be expected. Conversely, opposite causality reveals a
stronger causal relationship as it is widely acknowledged that high scores on political rights
and civil liberties is conducive to the investment decisions of the TNCs (UNCTAD,
1998:180). Nevertheless, statistical analyses can only say something about the degree of
correlation between TNC activities (i.e. FDI), on one hand, and host countries’ government
respect for political rights and civil liberties, on the other (Goldthorpe, 2001:1-20 and
Freedman, 1997:156-7). No robust causal relationship can be provided. For this the kind of
theoretical investigations, comparative case studies are required (Ragin, ibid. and
Rueschemeyer et al., ibid.).
11
Thirdly, pro-TNC and anti-TNC studies alike have been known to highlight only the
virtuous or vicious consequence respectively without emphasising the overall effect of TNC
activity.
12
However, a methodological problem arises for case evidence limiting its search for
positive or negative effects only: there is a lack of a control group. In choosing the cases to
be examined, there is a tendency to focus on the subject under study (Gleditsch, 1998:191-2;
and Rueschemeyer et al., 1992:30-4). Comparative corporate case studies and well-designed
country case studies will, therefore, complement statistical analyses and country case studies,
as they will help to ensure both the appropriate use of control groups and the use of
transnational corporations as the unit of analysis.
Finally, although combining methods increasingly is argued to be the appropriate
choice of research strategy (Rueschemeyer et al., 1992: 12-39; Ragin, 1987:69-71; and King
et al., 1994:5-6), the inadequacy of a simple combination of qualitative and quantitative
method in the context of TNC and human rights has become evident throughout this section.
However, combining methods not only allows you to highlight different contexts it also
serves as a validity check, and validity within quantitative or qualitative methods is – as we
have seen – as important as validity between the two methods (Read and Marsh, 2002:237-
11
There are those statisticians who are optimistic about statistical analysis providing causal directions (McKim,
1997:11). However, the conventional view is that regression analysis only can say something about the degree
of correlations (e.g., Goldthorpe, 2001:1-20 and Freedman, 1997:156-7).
12
E.g., Fabig, 1999:313-4, 320-1; Williams, 1999:67-8; and Madeley, 1999.
Convention