Oberlack, C., D. Sietz, E. Bürgi Bonanomi, A. De Bremond, J. Dell'Angelo, K. Eisenack, E. C. Ellis, G. Epstein, M. Giger, A. Heinimann, C. Kimmich, M. T. J. Kok, D. Manuel-Navarrete, P. Messerli, P. Meyfroidt, T. Václavík, and S. Villamayor-Tomas. 2019. Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making. Ecology and Society 24(2):26. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10747-240226

Trade between Europe and developing countries should be shaped such that market shares are just and trade flows foster human rights and sustainable development both in the global South and in the global North. But this is not always the case. While developing countries have much to gain from trade, they can also suffer serious losses. This is apparent for instance with regard to food security, which in poorer countries often depends largely on smallholders and informal markets. Rapidly or indiscriminately liberalized (or protected) trade can destroy smallholder livelihoods and threaten a country’s ability to feed its most vulnerable groups—a clear violation of human rights. Similar harm may occur if markets in the North remain closed to products from the South. This article sketches the link between trade and human rights, and describes how integration of human rights impact assessments into European Union (EU) trade policy can help ensure sustainable trade regimes that do not cause undue harm. It does so by comparing the Sustainability Impact Assessment practice and methodology used by the EU in the past to the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights Impact Assessments of Trade and Investment Agreements, and by discussing the most recent developments in the EU.