You're browsing our English site, so by default we are only showing content in English. If you'd prefer to view all available content regardless of language, please change this switch.
You're browsing our English site, so by default we are only showing content in English. If you'd prefer to view all available content regardless of language, please change this switch.
'Responsible Contracting: From Policing to Partnership'
Contracts are a key tool to support effective human rights due diligence in increasingly complex global supply chains. Based on its work with leading global companies, including a deep dive practice group focused on supply chain due diligence that the Responsible Contracting Project joined, Shift has gained important insights into the limitations of traditional, compliance-driven contracting approaches and identified practical steps toward a more collaborative, shared-responsibility approach between buyers and suppliers to uphold human rights standards together...
Why is responsible contracting needed?
Cascading vs. burden sharing: Contractual clauses, along with supplier codes of conduct, are among the most widely used instruments companies rely on to implement aspects of human rights due diligence. But they are not a silver bullet and need to be complemented by other tools... Suppliers also point to tensions between contractual expectations and buyers’ own commercial practices, such as price pressures, late payments, changing specifications, and tight delivery deadlines, which hinder suppliers’ ability to uphold the contractual standards for human rights and environmental protection.
Contracts can have two very different effects: either to reinforce negative impacts or to drive positive change for people. Traditional contracting practices often contain zero tolerance and strict penalties for (even minor) non-compliance, including immediate termination. This perfect compliance approach can drive issues underground and incentivize unrealistic assurances that adverse impacts either don’t exist or have been eliminated. Such an approach is not in line with new regulatory expectations or the UNGPs, which encourage companies to work with suppliers to surface risks to people and support improvement, rather than cut and run. Alternatively, contracts can be crafted to promote shared responsibility, including through responsible purchasing practices, mutual trust, transparency, and constructive engagement to mitigate and remedy adverse impacts on people.
Evolving regulatory expectations: Under CSDDD, companies must take ‘appropriate measures’, i.e., measures that effectively address sustainability impacts and drive changes in behavior and practice. The Directive is clear on what this means for contracts: due diligence obligations cannot simply be transferred to suppliers; each party’s responsibilities must be spelled out clearly; buyers are expected to examine whether their own commercial practices — including on pricing and delivery timelines — undermine the very standards they are asking suppliers to meet...
[...]
As expectations around human rights due diligence continue to evolve, contracts can no longer function simply as liability shields. Increasingly, they are becoming a test of whether companies are prepared to align their commercial practices with their human rights commitments.
The shift from traditional to responsible contracting is therefore not just a legal or procurement exercise. It is a broader shift in how companies understand business relationships, leverage, and accountability in global supply chains. Companies that approach contracting as a collaborative tool for identifying and addressing risks, rather than simply transferring them downstream, are likely to be better positioned to build resilient supplier relationships and deliver more effective human rights outcomes over time.
The European Coalition for Corporate Justice and other CSOs, warn that although the European Commission has pledged to improve transparency and justify its use of fast-tracked procedures following maladministration findings by the EU Ombudswoman, it refuses to address what the CSOs see as fundamentally flawed practices that bypass impact assessments, limit consultations, and weaken environmental and climate safeguards.
As the Omnibus I has been adopted, the Institute urges pragmatic, stakeholder-driven implementation of the revised CSDDD and CSRD aligned with international standards.
"Under the banner of cutting 'red tape’, vital protections have been dismantled", writes ECCJ as the European Parliament – again with far-right backing – approves the Omnibus I package. A number of core elements to build on remain in place, despite the compromised process.
“The final text means corporate interests are being prioritized over the rights of workers, communities, and environmental protection”, says Helene de Rengervé of Human Rights Watch. She nevertheless urges communities, workers, and civil society partners to use what is left of the law to fight for justice for victims of corporate abuses worldwide.
"There is much to regret in the Omnibus process", writes Shift, while stressing that the political agreement's preservation of a risk-based rather than tier-1-focused approach to due diligence is a significant result.
The agreement "reflects short-sighted political decision-making, forced through with the far-right, at a time where the EU needs to stand firm and speed up the transition for its own strategic interests", said Julia Otten of Frank Bold. ECCJ noted it is the first major file pushed through via an EPP–far right alliance. After the political agreement was approved in Council and the European Parliament's legal affairs committee, it will now be subject to parliamentary plenary vote on 16 December 2025.
"The imminent trilogue decision can shape the sustainability of European business, with implications extending to the EU’s functioning as an open society and sovereign democracy and market", the letter says.
Leaked documents allegedly reveal how a secretive alliance of 11 large multinational enterprises has worked to tear down the EU’s flagship human rights and climate law, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. The mostly US-based coalition, which calls itself the Competitiveness Roundtable, has targeted all EU institutions, governments in Europe’s capitals, as well as the Trump administration and other non-EU governments to serve its own interests.
Giving up on transparency, reliability and diligence is not simplification but self-harm, writes EU Commission Executive Vice-President Teresa Ribera in a piece for Financial Times.
Among other recommendations, ENNHRI calls on EU institutions to uphold the original civil liability provision to ensure coherence on the conditions of civil liability across the EU.
“There was a demand from the US to delete climate plans, and the climate plans have gone,” liberal MEP Pascal Canfin is quoted by FT. The article also covers the Resource Centre's outreach to 10 companies associated with the Evian CEO letter.
Civil society and others criticise EPP for aligning with far right to adopt Omnibus I position; they urge co-legislators to uphold key CSDDD and CSRD provisions in trilogues.
21 German companies like Otto, Aldi Süd, Tchibo & Ritter Sport have written to Chancellor Merz and Vice-Chancellor Klingbeil, implicitly referring to the Evian CEO letter by describing the proposed abolition of CSDDD as "counterproductive" and instead calling for "strong and reliable standards".
While the stated aim of the Omnibus I package is simplification, the Danish Institute for Human Rights warns that the current proposals risk dismantling key elements of CSDDD & CSRD.
The statement was launched and signed by the the Responsible Business Alliance, Amfori, DIGITALEUROPE, Euratex, EuroCommerce, the European Semiconductor Industry Association, the Global Electronics Association, the Japan Business Council in Europe and FoodDrinkEurope.
Ahead of the scheduled vote during the Plenary session on Thursday 13 November, the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) and over 138 EU and non-EU civil society organisations from 27 different countries are urging the major pro-European political groups to come together and secure a responsible, ambitious, and workable agreement on Omnibus I.
The report says: "Some of these laws are now subject to revision. In such recast process, it is important that the essence of these laws is preserved so that the EU can deliver on the Green Deal in a way that advances a just transition that serves the EU internal market and its people."
Deutsche Bank, German state-owned bank KfW, insurance giant Allianz and French asset manager Amundi all confirmed to Tagesspiegel Background that they continue to support the EU supply chain law CSDDD.
Some signatories of a joint appeal by French and German business bosses to loosen merger rules and scrap environmental laws have already distanced themselves from the letter.
"What is a cornerstone of responsible business in Europe is being turned into a political bargaining chip", ClientEarth's Amandine Van den Berghe said.
The European Commission refused to confirm on Monday that its previous commitment to “simplify” EU legislation without “deregulating” remains intact, after Ursula von der Leyen emphasised the importance of “deregulation” to boost growth and private investment last week.
The analysis highlights a striking imbalance between companies' support for robust sustainability due diligence and some trade associations' lobbying to weaken or delay implementation.
Signatories include Allianz, Nordea, Union Investment, Ingka Group | IKEA, Aldi South Group, EDF, Decathlon, Nokia, H&M, ACCIONA, Vattenfall, Melitta Group & Nestlé.
Much of what is on the table does not deliver simplification but makes laws less efficient and effective, risking burdensome tick-box compliance with limited impact for sustainability and the protection of people’s rights, the authors write.
Not only is the original directive a vital tool for tackling human rights violations, particularly in the Global South, but also a driver of long-term economic welfare, the study finds.
Hundreds of marchers and supporters filled Brussels’ EU quarter yesterday after a 3-day, 60 km protest walk from Maastricht. The “Back to the Future” march brought together affected communities, trade unions, NGOs, and political leaders demanding an end to the EU’s deregulation wave, which they say puts workers, the environment and human rights at risk.
"The lack of MEPs in the room suggests some policymakers have made up their mind to listen only to a very specific group of big businesses and their lobbyists", writes Philippa Nuttall of FT Sustainable Views.
Most of the undersigned professors are from EU Member States and other European countries, expressing their deep concern with the current direction of the EU Omnibus process.
470 civil society, trade union, and public interest groups warn EU leaders that the Commission’s current "simplification efforts" are dismantling protections for people, workers, democracy, and the environment. They demand stronger—not weaker—laws and enforcement to safeguard rights, justice, and the planet.
The clause requires the European Commission to assess whether financial institutions should be legally obliged to identify and address their impacts on people and the planet.
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) has warned that the EU Council’s proposed amendments to the CSDDD would significantly weaken corporate accountability for human rights and environmental abuses.
This NOVA BHRE podcast episode, based on expert accounts from Norway and Germany, suggests a CSDDD focus on 'tier 1' may contradict Better Regulation Principles.
Human Rights Watch warns that EU member states are turning the supply chain law (CSDDD) into window dressing by backing a weakened position that guts protections for human rights and the environment.
In an open letter, IndustriALL Global Union and industriAll European Trade Union are pushing back against proposed revisions to key EU sustainability laws, warning that the changes could undermine vital protections for workers. Policymakers in Europe must not weaken the CSRD and CSDDD. These laws must be strengthened to ensure the protection of workers and communities everywhere.
The Fair Trade Movement warns that the Council’s position on the CSDDD weakens key protections for smallholders and responsible businesses, undermines risk-based due diligence, and threatens the resilience and fairness of global supply chains.
The letter warns that the EU’s Omnibus I package risks dismantling core sustainability regulations and urges the EU to uphold its environmental and social commitments to maintain credibility, market certainty, and progress toward a just, resilient economy.
"Dozens of legal scholars and economists have issued stark warnings over attempts by the European Commission to weaken corporate accountability laws, saying the action will wreck corporate accountability commitments, slash human rights and environmental protections, and lead to higher costs for companies and society."
A new Swedwatch report shows that limited funding for worker and community driven due diligence approaches is undermining efforts to hold companies accountable to human rights and environmental standards. The report outlines how funders and donors can better invest in these approaches to meet the opportunity posed by new mandatory due diligence laws.
In this legal opinion, Prof. Geert Van Calster analyses how complex the legal landscape would become for companies if the Omnibus proposal were adopted. He concludes that the Omnibus proposal neither delivers on its declared overall aims of harmonisation nor simplification, but instead significantly increases divergence, complexity and uncertainty for companies by proposing to delete 29(1) and (7).
The PensionsEurope’s Position Paper on the EC’s omnibus simplification proposal warns that pension funds, as institutional investors, need data when choosing which companies to include in their portfolios. PensionsEurope is also voices concern with the removal of the civil liability regime in the CSDDD.
The EU Ombudsman has opened an inquiry into the Commission’s alleged breach of Better Regulation Guidelines in preparing the Omnibus Simplification Package, following a complaint by 8 NGOs.
French civil society condemns President Macron's rejection of the EU corporate accountability directive, warning it endangers human rights, environmental protections, and global justice.
Economists urge the EU to implement the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive and the Green Deal ambitiously and without delay, warning that weakening them would undermine human rights, environmental protection, and Europe's long-term economic resilience.
31 legal scholars published a letter, arguing the the European Union's plans to cut back sustainability reporting rules could expose European companies to more climate change-related lawsuits.
A survey conducted by the #WeAreEurope collective, in partnership with HEC Paris reveals that 61% of European companies favor the current CSRD, while 51% reject the Omnibus reform project, contradicting the dominant discourse on the impact of this regulation.
Proposed changes in the EU's Omnibus I package could significantly weaken key sustainability rules for insurers, undermining climate goals, financial stability, and transparency across the sector.
The OHCHR warns that the Omnibus Proposal risks undermining the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive by weakening alignment with international human rights standards, shifting responsibility away from companies, limiting value chain due diligence, and removing key civil liability provisions.
In their new research, SOMO finds that the European Commission's proposal to focus due diligence to direct (Tier 1) suppliers, excludes most companies in countries with high human rights risks that supply major European supermarkets.
Eight NGOs have filed a complaint with the European Ombudsman, accusing the European Commission of allegedly undermining democracy and environmental goals by rushing and weakening key EU sustainability laws through the opaque Omnibus proposal.
The Network of African National Human Rights Institutions expresses concerns about the EU's Omnibus proposal, highlighting its potential to limit the effectiveness of the CSDDD in promoting access to remedy for business-related human rights abuses, particularly in Africa, and urges the EU to uphold key provisions for broader stakeholder engagement, a risk-based due diligence approach, and civil liability mechanisms.
A team of legal experts has conducted a study on the complementarity between the UN binding treaty on business and human rights, currently under negotiation, and the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), adopted in July 2024. The study analyses how the two instruments can mutually reinforce each other.
The UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights warns that the European Commission’s Omnibus Simplification Package weakens corporate accountability by misaligning with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Experts highlight concerns over limited due diligence, lack of civil liability, and reduced stakeholder engagement.
Global trade unions and representatives of the German government will launch a new Human Rights Due Diligence Competence Centre to help trade unions use national and EU laws to protect workers’ rights across global supply chains.
According to a survey by Coolset, most companies see ESG reporting as a strategic advantage rather than just a compliance task. Despite regulatory changes, 90% plan to continue reporting. Stakeholder pressure remains strong, with 85% of businesses stating that ESG transparency is still important to investors, customers, and partners.
Seven sustainability initiatives – including amfori, Cascale, Ethical Trade Norway, ETI Sweden, Fair Labor Association, Fair Wear, and the Social & Labor Convergence Program (SLCP) - call on EU policymakers to ensure that the core elements of the EU sustainability due diligence and reporting framework remain aligned with internationally recognised standards, namely the UNGPs and OECD Guidelines, in light of the recently published Omnibus proposal to amend key regulations.
The paper concludes that the EU has created a nexus of legal provisions which taken together limit the possibility of greenwashing and provide for severe sanctions for environmental, social and governance (ESG) misrepresentations. Hence, it is important that the simplification and streamlining initiated by the European Commission preserves the elements in the sustainable finance framework that prevent greenwashing.
A US Senator has introduced the PROTECT USA Act, aiming to shield US companies, including tech giants and oil firms, from EU due diligence requirements, including the CSDDD.
Olena Uvarova argues in a BHRJ Blog that the Omnibus weakens EU sustainability governance and raises serious rule of law concerns. By prioritizing short-term competitiveness gains over long-term sustainability objectives, the EU risks undermining its credibility, harming the environment both within and beyond its borders, and compromising human rights.
In a joint statement, over 360 CSOs from 53 countries strongly criticise Omnibus proposal and urge the Council of the EU and the European Parliament to reject any amendments that weaken the CSDDD.
In a statement, small and medium-sized German enterprises (SMEs) call for an adjustment of the Supply Chain Act to align with the European regulations adopted in 2024, ensuring legal certainty, avoiding unnecessary burdens, and effectively implementing human rights and environmental protection.
Experts from ShareAction, WWF European Policy Office, the European Coalition for Corporate Justice, the World Benchmarking Alliance and Frank Bold shared their views on the European Commission’s Omnibus proposal during a webinar co-organised by these organisations.
In their initial reflection, Shift analyses that the European Commission’s Omnibus Simplification Proposal risks undermining effective risk-based sustainability due diligence and reporting by complicating company efforts, increasing burdens on SMEs, and weakening transparency despite international standards providing clear and practical guidance for meaningful action.
The Danish Institute for Human Rights is concerned about the Omnibus-proposal made by the European Commission, as the proposed changes risk undermining the ability of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) to meaningfully address the challenges of environmental degradation, climate change, and respect for human rights.
WWF argues in their press release that the Commission’s Omnibus proposal undermines key EU sustainability laws, threatening the Green Deal and creating regulatory uncertainty.
CSRD is key to improving access to ESG data, according to the EU banking regulator. The lack of data standardisation and comparability could present challenges to banks.
The UN Global Compact, the world’s largest corporate sustainability initiative, reiterated its support for a mandatory due diligence framework that aligns with international standards.
In their analysis, SOMO found that the financial cost of complying with the CSDDD – as estimated by the European Commission – would represent only 0.13 per cent of the average shareholder payouts made in 2023.
Kalpona Akter, a labour activist from Bangladesh, criticises the EU's upcoming Omnibus proposal, labelling it as corporate-driven deregulation that weakens the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. She argues that the proposal favours big businesses over workers' rights and jeopardises hard-won protections in global supply chains.
The letter from 14 companies and industry associations, including Nestlé, Ferrero, MARS, Primark and Ingka Group | IKEA, says: "Investment and competitiveness are founded on policy certainty and legal predictability. The announcement that the European Commission will bring forward an “omnibus” initiative that could include revisiting existing legislation risks undermining both of these."
In their statement, ECCJ argues that the leaked draft Omnibus proposal severely weakens the EU’s corporate sustainability framework and firmly reject the proposal.
Some major companies like Nestlé, Unilever, and Signify oppose the European Commission's plan to weaken newly introduced green regulations, arguing that it threatens sustainability efforts, legal certainty, and a level playing field.
The EU Commission's proposed reforms to sustainability reporting and due diligence are being criticised as deregulation that weakens climate and human rights protections, reduces corporate accountability, and limits investors' access to reliable sustainability data.
In a letter to the European Commission, the GRI urge the EU not to drop the principle of double materiality claiming it is essential for effective sustainability reporting, ensuring companies manage financial risks while also addressing their broader impacts on the environment, people, and the economy.
Global South organisations warn that the EU will fail workers and the environment globally if it weakens or delays the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), urging full implementation of the law to uphold human rights and environmental standards.
Seven sustainability initiatives – including amfori and the Fair Labor Association – call on EU policymakers to ensure that the core elements of the EU sustainability due diligence and reporting framework remain aligned with internationally recognised standards.
Human Level has published this briefing note for companies operating in the EU subject to the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), highlighting the business risks associated with re-opening Level 1 of the directive.
In an open letter to the European Commission, legal scholars expressed concern that a potential reopening Article 22 CSDDD could weaken corporate climate obligations, increase litigation risks, and create regulatory fragmentation.
In a statement, the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights encourages the EU not to reopen the CSDDD text, emphasising legal certainty, alignment with the UNGPs, and the importance of transparency and stakeholder engagement.
Dutch businesses urge the EU to uphold and implement the CSRD, CSDDD, and Taxonomy as planned, emphasising the need for legal certainty, a level playing field, and the benefits of strong sustainability regulations.
CSOs argue that the EU must reject calls for corporate-driven deregulation and uphold sustainability laws to protect people, the planet, and small businesses from exploitation.
Finnish CSOs and companies urge the European Commission to avoid renegotiating agreed sustainability due diligence rules, emphasising the need for certainty, timely transposition, and clear guidance.
Frank Bold's analysis examines the positions on the Omnibus proposal, specifically the CSRD and CSDDD, from certain ministries and authorities in Germany and France.
150+ civil society stakeholders have requested in a joint letter that the European Commission does not create further confusion and uncertainty through re-opening agreed legislative texts. The letter also criticises the way in which the Omnibus process has proceeded.
240 European researchers, mainly economists, have issued an open letter warning of the dangers of the ‘Omnibus’ initiative being prepared by the European Commission.
Investors with a combined €6.6 trillion in assets under management have urged the European Commission to “preserve the integrity and ambition” of the EU’s sustainable finance framework.
In their commentary, Heidi Hautala and the Resource Centre's Director Phil Bloomer argue that Europe must resist deregulation pressures and maintain strong ESG standards to uphold public trust, protect rights, and ensure legal certainty for businesses.
Signatories request President von der Leyen and Commissioner Dombrovskis to "respect the principles of democratic decision-making enshrined in the Treaty on European Union, which are so important to the credibility, mandate and public trust in the EU institutions."
Alexander Burr, ESG policy lead at Legal and General Investment Management, told Bloomberg that rolling back the rules “could risk our ability to understand ESG or sustainability-related risks.” The statement has also been covered by other outlets including Forbes and FT SustainableViews.
The European Commission announced plans to streamline business regulations to boost innovation. CSOs have criticised this Competitiveness Compass, arguing that it steers Europe in the wrong direction.
The European Commission is convening a roundtable with major corporations, particularly from the financial and energy sectors, and civil society groups to discuss revisions to the upcoming Omnibus proposal.
Finnish companies face varying levels of preparedness for EU sustainability regulations, with a key challenge including regulatory uncertainty created by the EU, a new study finds.
Transition plans should be “a single, comprehensive strategic planning process that covers all regulatory requirements stemming from applicable legislation” such as the corporate sustainability reporting directive and corporate sustainability due diligence directive (CSDDD), EBA's new guidelines state.
Ten European National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) expressed concerns in an open letter that the EU’s Omnibus proposal could undermine progress on corporate sustainability and create uncertainty for companies.
CSOs criticise France’s push for an indefinite delay of EU legislation, including CSRD and CSDDD, warning it could undermine social and environmental justice despite the country’s prior support for the legislation.
In light of the European Commission's announcement of an 'Omnibus Simplification Package’ , a group of business and human rights experts from legal practice, consulting, academia and the business world have expressed their grave concerns regarding the approch in a letter to the Commission.
In light of the discussions around an ‘Omnibus’ law, companies like Nestlé, Mars, Mondelez, Ferrero, Hershey and Tony’s Chocolonely, as well as other chocolate sector actors, urge the European Commission to not modify any elements of the CSDDD, nor to reopen it for renegotiation by the co-legislators, but to focus on guidance and support for its implementation.
170 civil society groups, human rights and environmental defenders, trade unions and climate activists have published a joint statement "saying no" to the 'Omnibus' proposal announced by EU Commission President von der Leyen to amend three key legislative pillars of the European Green Deal: the CSDDD, the CSRD and Taxonomy Regulation
The due diligence approach allows human rights and environmental risks to be assessed in a contextualized manner. Behind what is criticized as a “bureaucratic” approach, there is therefore far-reaching trust in companies, the authors argue.
Some of France’s largest companies, including Amundi SA and Electricite de France SA, have signed a letter to European policymakers urging them to ensure the bloc sticks with its current timetable for implementing ESG reporting rules.
The paper explores how the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive could promote responsible business practices in Sub-Saharan Africa, with examples of the impact on three commodities– cotton, cocoa, and copper supply chains– and provides an action plan for African policymakers.
The 2024 Danish Institute for Human Rights benchmark assesses the human rights policies and due diligence practices of 30 major Danish companies, measuring their alignment with global standards and contributing to discussions on responsible business conduct and the impact of upcoming EU regulations.
A new report by the EIRIS Foundation, applying its Social LobbyMap methodology, examines and highlights the role of private sector influence in the exclusion of financial sector downstream value chain activities from the scope of the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).
The ECCJ, in collaboration with 8 other CSOs, published a Transposition Guide for the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). This essential guide provides key insights and recommendations for the upcoming transposition phase of this EU directive.
The ActionAid report highlights the need for a gender-responsive approach to the CSDDD, emphasizing the importance of addressing gender inequality, women’s rights, and protections for marginalized groups disproportionately affected by corporate abuses.
The report outlines recommendations for governments and companies to enhance corporate human rights performance through robust regulatory frameworks and collaborative efforts.
The study by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law provides reflections on changes in corporate practice resulting from the implementation of HREDD laws, namely the French DVL and German LkSG, and a comparative analysis of these legal models.
Trade unions are pushing for stronger human rights protections in the base metals sector, emphasising the role of HRDD frameworks and the CSDDD in improving worker conditions and holding companies accountable.
Anti-Slavery International's analysis of the EU CSDDD aims to empower civil society organisations to advocate for its effective implementation, address remaining gaps, and promote fair treatment of workers by businesses.
In its report, UNICEF provides its recommendations to the EU Institutions, EU Member States, and businesses on how to effectively implement the CSDDD for children’s rights.
The guide provides an in-depth analysis of the CS3D Directive, offering recommendations for its transposition into national laws to ensure strong environmental protection while encouraging alignment with international standards and supporting lawmakers, public authorities, and companies in understanding and implementing its provisions.
The particular format of the sector dialogues has had some positive results, but on balance the overall result for civil society is rather patchy – this is the conclusion NGOs participating in those sector dialogues present in a new background paper. Attempts by companies to depict their activities in sector dialogues as stakeholder engagement must be viewed in a critical light against the background of the CSDDD and the German Supply Chain Act.
Non-exhaustive examples showing how questions of effectiveness, current supply network/value chain complexity, and feasibility for companies have been addressed by the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).
The guide provides practical guidance on how to engage with policymakers through the transposition of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive to advocate for alignment with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and other international business and human rights standards.
The new blog by BSR says that financial institutions should proactively align with the CSDDD by assessing management gaps, enhancing collaboration, mapping value chains, identifying stakeholders, and developing a roadmap based on international due diligence standards.
Swedwatch views the CSDDD as a positive, long-awaited step towards corporate accountability but urges the Swedish government to strengthen the law during transposition, particularly by addressing gaps in company scope, downstream due diligence, and enforcement.
More than 100 large companies, SMEs and networks including Maersk, Aldi Süd Holding, Cisco, Nokia, H&M Group, Scania and Ritter Sport have united to endorse the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) again at the stage of final formal confirmation.