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.
"What is risk-based due diligence? And what is it not? Getting back to basics as part of EU Omnibus simplification.", 8 April 2025
...Drawing on over a decade of experience working with business to implement due diligence, here is Shift’s view about the basics of risk-based due diligence that EU policy makers should reinforce, and not lose sight of, in the weeks and months ahead.
Risk-based due diligence is about companies directing attention to their greatest sustainability risks... Risk-based due diligence always starts with the same simple steps. These are the same steps that companies need to take to determine the focus of reporting.
To identify impacts and make robust decisions about where to focus, companies follow these same initial steps:
1: Identifying, based on the best available information, which areas of the company’s operations and value chain are most likely connected to the most serious impacts.
2: Understanding more about the impacts in those areas, using various sources of information to build up that picture.
3: Establishing which issues merit most urgent attention based on the relative severity and likelihood of the impacts the company has identified...
Risk-based due diligence involves companies making good faith judgements based on reasonably available information. It is not about waiting for issues to materialize. But equally, it is not about burdensome entity-by-entity assessments and questionnaires in the mythical search for perfect information. Risk-based due diligence is about being on the front foot in managing risks. This requires companies to make use of, and where necessary seek out, sustainability intelligence relevant to their business [...]
...Reducing sustainability due diligence within EU regulation to a set of “one size fits all” procedural rules and tick-box exercises will achieve little more than wasting resources by focusing companies where they are least needed. It will leave companies exposed more generally to legal and other consequences around the world because they have not identifed the risks that matter most, and which other governments and national legislation in countries, including the United States, are asking them to address...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
In their statement, ECCJ argues that the leaked draft Omnibus proposal severely weakens the EU’s corporate sustainability framework and firmly reject the proposal.
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.
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."
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
240 European researchers, mainly economists, have issued an open letter warning of the dangers of the ‘Omnibus’ initiative being prepared by the European Commission.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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 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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.
Analytics cookie
ON
OFF
When you access our website we use Google Analytics to collect information on your visit. Accepting this cookie will allow us to understand more details about your journey, and improve how we surface information. All analytics information is anonymous and we do not use it to identify you. Google provides a Google Analytics opt-out add on for all popular browsers.
Promotional cookies
ON
OFF
We share news and updates on business and human rights through third party platforms, including social media and search engines. These cookies help us to understand the performance of these promotions.
Your privacy choices for this site
This site uses cookies and other web storage technologies to enhance your experience beyond necessary core functionality.
