| OCR Text |
Show 349 environmental sustainability, and technical modalities. So, a future research question may include, How do corporations emerge as expert subjects in environmental controversies? Second, future researchers may wish to further unpack the legal actions and consequences of the constitutional corporate subject when corporations are charged with crimes against humanity. Moreover, this researcher wonders how the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) challenges constitutional corporate subjects in an international context. This is a growing area of interest because recently, various international stakeholders dealing with social, economic, and environmental consequences of corporate subjectivity have attempted to use the 1789 statute to claim reparations from companies such as Rio Tinto, Royal Dutch Petroleum, Coca-Cola, and Chevron for environmental and human rights abuses, the recent decision in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum ruled that the ATS is not applicable to countries other than the United States (see Hasian & McFarlane, 2014). So even though corporations are constitutionally protected subjects, they are not necessarily accountable to international standards of human rights when they commit horrible acts of violence against some peoples unprotected by their own governments. This also warrants reconsideration about the humanist assumptions of the United Nation's Universal Declaration on Human Rights in a civil society dominated by corporate rather than human actors. Third, I would like to investigate how the networks of corporate subjectivity intermingle with ecological networks such as the Nitrogen Cycle, the Carbon Cycle, and the Phosphorus Cycle that create what Foster, Clark, and York (2010) call the "ecological rift" in places such as Salt Lake City, UT, Louisville, KY, and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Understanding the forces of corporate subjectivity from a posthumanist |
