Search Results

Blog | Tuesday July 20, 2021

A Human Rights Assessment of the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT)

Preview

The Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT)—a multi-stakeholder effort founded by Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube—launched in 2017 with a mission to prevent terrorists and violent extremists from exploiting digital platforms.

In late 2020, GIFCT commissioned BSR to undertake a human rights assessment of its strategy, governance, and actions. Today, we are publishing the final report.

Our assessment used a methodology based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Given the role of governments in GIFCT, we considered the first pillar of the UNGPs (the state duty to protect human rights), as well as the second and third pillars (the corporate responsibility to respect and access to remedy). The scope of our assessment was GIFCT itself, not the actions of individual GIFCT member companies, and our assessment was primarily forward looking in focus rather than a review of prior activities.

GIFCT is a young and newly independent organization that appointed its first executive director in mid-2020. In that context, we appreciate GIFCT’s foresight for undertaking a human rights assessment at such an early stage in its evolution, and we trust that our assessment provides a framework for the integration of human rights into the strategy, governance, and actions of GIFCT over the coming years.

The full assessment is organized around nine themes, makes 47 recommendations for GIFCT, and is intended to provide useful insights for the counterterrorism field overall. Here, we emphasize five key points:

• GIFCT mission and goals: The purpose of GIFCT is to prevent terrorists and violent extremists from exploiting digital platforms, and in doing so, GIFCT enhances the protection, fulfillment, and realization of human rights—in other words, human rights for GIFCT should be about more than “avoiding harm” while pursuing its mission. GIFCT would benefit from a clearer description of the interdependent relationship between human rights and its mission that conveys human rights as a deeply embedded, complementary, and reinforcing objective in counterterrorism and violent extremism efforts.
• Terrorist and violent extremist content: The lack of consensus around definitions of terrorist and violent extremist content, and the prevalence of bias in the counterterrorism field—manifested in a disproportionate focus on Islamist extremist content—influence GIFCT’s human rights impacts. The multi-stakeholder status of GIFCT provides an opportunity to create a common understanding of terrorist and violent extremist content based on “behavior” rather than “group.” We recommended that GIFCT explore the potential benefits of this common understanding, such as pushing back against overbroad definitions deployed by governments, improving the capability of smaller companies to establish their own definitions, and creating a bulwark against “slippery slope” definitions that may extend too far into other forms of speech.
• GIFCT membership: We encountered considerable debate around whether GIFCT should increase its company membership, especially with companies headquartered outside the U.S. Given the UNGPs' emphasis on prioritizing the most severe human rights impacts, we recommended that a human rights-based approach should focus on the locations where impacts are most severe rather than where they have the highest profile. By making a proactive effort to engage more with companies and organizations outside the U.S. and Europe, GIFCT will be better positioned to achieve its mission through more engagement with companies and organizations outside the U.S. and Europe. However, expanding GIFCT membership also presents human rights risks, and we make several recommendations for GIFCT membership criteria, such as a public commitment to the International Bill of Human Rights and the UNGPs.
• Stakeholder engagement: GIFCT contains some features of a multi-stakeholder initiative (i.e. non-companies actively participate in the work of GIFCT) but lacks others (i.e. decision-making power rests solely with companies). However, stakeholder engagement plays a central role in a human rights-based approach, so we recommended that GIFCT’s work would benefit from a more deliberate integration of affected stakeholders into its work, including by broadening the range of groups engaged and clarifying the role of governments in GIFCT. GIFCT would also be strengthened by increasing its interaction with the UN Special Procedures system, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the UN Office of Counter-Terrorism.
• Governance, accountability, and transparency: We conclude that GIFCT’s Operating Board, which currently consists of four founding member companies, is not a sustainable model over the medium and long term and recommend that GIFCT consider the merits of transitioning to a multi-stakeholder decision-making model two years from now. We also made several recommendations to clarify, strengthen, and formalize the role of GIFCT’s Independent Advisory Committee (IAC). Given GIFCT’s connection to human rights impacts exists primarily through the actions of member companies, we placed special emphasis on the transparency requirements of GIFCT member companies, in addition to GIFCT itself.

BSR’s assessment makes recommendations in several other important areas, such as restrictions, controls, and oversight mechanisms to address the risk of overbroad removal of content by companies making use of GIFCT resources and developing a GIFCT point of view on what policies, actions, and strategies governments should deploy that would address the exploitation of digital platforms by terrorists and violent extremists in a rights-respecting manner.

The UNGPs emphasize the importance of ongoing human rights due diligence rather than a single “moment in time” assessment. In this spirit, we hope that our assessment increases the “connective tissue” across different segments of GIFCT’s work—such as the Operating Board, IAC, and working groups—and provides a foundation upon which GIFCT can grow.

Reports | Tuesday July 20, 2021

Human Rights Impact Assessment: Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism

Preview

The Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) commissioned BSR to conduct a human rights assessment of its strategy, governance, and activities. The purpose of this assessment is to identify actual and potential human rights impacts (including both risks and opportunities) arising from GIFCT’s work and make recommendations for how GIFCT and its participants can address these impacts. BSR undertook this human rights review from December 2020 to May 2021.

This assessment combines human rights assessment methodology based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) with consideration of the human rights principles, standards, and methodologies upon which the UNGPs were built. This review was funded by GIFCT, though BSR retained editorial control over its contents. 

Reports | Thursday July 15, 2021

Responsible Product Use in the SaaS Sector

Preview

According to many ethical and human rights frameworks, software-as-a-service (SaaS) companies have a responsibility to address adverse impacts that may be associated with their business relationships and use of their products and services.  

This paper explores how SaaS companies should develop, implement, and promote ethical use practices, encompassing acceptable use policies and service terms, best practices for customer gating, transparency measures, reporting channels, and training for customers, employees, and users. It also proposes four foundational elements to help move the field forward.

Reports | Thursday July 15, 2021

Human Rights Due Diligence of Products and Services

Preview

Overview

Human rights due diligence (HRDD) of products and services—also known as “downstream HRDD” or “end use HRDD”—has been a requirement of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) since their endorsement by the UN Human Rights Council in 2011. However, its relevance has skyrocketed in the past few years due to the rise of technology products like social media and artificial intelligence.

As the field of supply chain due diligence has matured, the downstream value chain is increasingly becoming a focal point for more traditional sectors like pharmaceuticals and heavy industry. Now more than ever, we can see and feel the human rights impacts of business products and services, which in turn has elevated the need for businesses to take a serious look at how their products and services are designed and developed, who they are sold to, how they are used, and how they may be misused.

What Is Downstream Human Rights Due Diligence?

Downstream human rights due diligence is the assessment and prioritization of human rights impacts that occur as a result of company actions or omissions during the design, development, promotion, deployment, sale, licensing, or use of products or services. It differs from other types of business human rights due diligence because it focuses entirely on the downstream value chain, rather than the upstream supply chain or direct business operations.

Blog | Tuesday July 13, 2021

What Companies Need to Know about the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation

Preview

“The sustainability reporting landscape is undergoing a transformation” has been a sustainability truism for years now, but the chorus promoting this adage is growing stronger, louder, and more convincing. Why?

We’re finally starting to see tangible change. The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) have merged into the Value Reporting Foundation. They and three other sustainability reporting bodies—CDP, Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), known as the Group of Five—have called for closer coordination and launched a prototype climate-related financial disclosure standard.

The standard-setters that have historically governed financial reporting are also getting involved. In addition to the SEC, which recently closed a 90-day consultation on potentially mandatory climate disclosure (as well as broader ESG disclosure), the EU has adopted a proposal for a new Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and a game-changing EU Taxonomy.

The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation, which sets reporting standards to “bring transparency, accountability, and efficiency to financial markets around the world,” is also considering how it might engage. Its financial reporting standards, developed and approved by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), are required in more than 140 jurisdictions around the world. In a manner similar to the IASB, the IFRS Foundation is exploring whether and how to set up an International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB).

Feedback on a consultation paper published by the IFRS Foundation in September 2020 indicates strong interest in the organization’s potential involvement in setting sustainability reporting standards to complement financial reporting standards. As a result, the IFRS Foundation is leading a Technical Readiness Working Group to provide a “running start” for the potential ISSB to develop a sustainability reporting standard, based on financial materiality, that provides relevant information to investors.

Governments are supportive of the effort. The G7 Finance Ministers recently voiced their support for the IFRS Foundation to develop a baseline standard, and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) echoed their statement. This baseline standard would build on the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework and the existing work of sustainability standards-setters such as the Group of Five.

We welcome the elevation of ESG data so it is treated with the same level of rigor as financials—comparable, assurable, and recognized as critical to understanding both the impact of material ESG issues on the business and a business’s impacts on the issues.

So, what does all of this mean for you? Here are three opportunities and risks that businesses should know about the potential new sustainability standards:

1. ESG issues are material to a range of stakeholders, and non-investor audiences should also be considered. 

The IFRS proposal and creation of an ISSB will enhance reporting on enterprise value, as well as enable quality and comparability of reporting that yields better decision-making by investors. However, the reporting landscape needs standardization that provides information for stakeholders beyond investors and capital markets. There is a risk that the current framing excludes or supersedes companies’ reporting on their outward impacts on ESG issues in favor of purely the financial dimension of materiality.

2. Reporting standards need to be interoperable across regions and jurisdictions. 

The ISSB would function within the architecture and governance structure of a standard-setting body that has already been adopted by over 140 jurisdictions, enabling immediate scale and uptake of common sustainability reporting standards. However, there remains a need to align with the standards under development in the EU, and a continued question around whether or how the US follows suit (e.g. if the SEC develops a separate system for climate or ESG disclosure). Overall, if the IFRS-developed sustainability reporting standards come to fruition as a global disclosure baseline, they may best serve stakeholders if jurisdictions’ additional requirements are harmonized.

3. ESG issues should be covered by reporting standards. 

Standardized disclosure on a range of ESG issues backed by oversight bodies that link to financial reporting and public authorities is in sight. Climate is a natural starting point given the urgency of the challenge, the existence of the TCFD, and some governments (e.g. the UK and New Zealand) already mandating climate disclosure and others (e.g. the US) now exploring the matter. However, climate alone is too narrow, and the IFRS (and SEC) should reflect the fact that no responsible company today reports only on this one issue. Material non-climate ESG issues such as human rights; diversity, equity, and inclusion; and biodiversity will also need to be reported in a similar manner. This presents a risk that companies will move from a unified report to a collection of issue-specific reports that lack cohesion.

The IFRS Foundation’s recognition that investor-focused standards on enterprise value creation are interdependent with others that center on value creation for society and the environment is a positive step. A company that discloses only on the financial impact of ESG issues remains exposed to business risks stemming from their outward impacts on society and the environment. It is for this reason that both dimensions of materiality are critical; we strongly recommend a building blocks approach to reporting that takes interoperability between the dimensions into account.

A company that discloses only on the financial impact of ESG issues remains exposed to business risks stemming from their outward impacts on society and the environment.

We believe these developments are moving the reporting field in a positive direction. We must not forget, however, that financial materiality is but one lens, and a climate disclosure standard is the first step on a broader path to holistic ESG disclosure. We look forward to seeing the results of the IFRS Foundation-led working group and to continuing our engagement in the process. We strongly advise companies and reporting practitioners to do the same. The outcome will have implications for companies’ reporting governance and approval structures, integration of ESG data with financials, and where and how ESG data points are collected and reported.

This blog builds on insights shared within BSR’s Future of Reporting collaboration. Companies interested in discussing the topic further are welcome and encouraged to join the initiative, which has been closely tracking these developments.

Blog | Wednesday June 30, 2021

Accelerating the Use of Technology to Combat Human Trafficking

Preview

Last week, Tech Against Trafficking launched its second Accelerator program, welcoming Seattle Against Slavery and Unseen UK into the community. Both organizations have shown exceptional innovation and potential in their deployment of technology solutions, and this investment in support and expertise by Tech Against Trafficking member companies aims to exponentially accelerate their respective impact over the coming years.

Launched in 2019, the Tech Against Trafficking Accelerator Program aims to identify promising uses of technology in the anti-trafficking field, harnessing the expertise and resources of member companies to advance and scale the work of organizations deploying technology that assists victims, law enforcement, business, and civil society.

For nine months, selected organizations work with member companies—Amazon, BT, Microsoft, and Salesforce—to advance and scale their technology solutions. The rigorous selection process evaluates the impact, scalability, sustainability, interoperability, and effectiveness of the participants’ initiatives and brings them in to help address key technological challenges or barriers that may prevent them from scaling their work efficiently and effectively.  

Looking Back: The Success of the First Accelerator Program

The 2021 program comes on the heels of the inaugural Accelerator with the Counter Trafficking Data Collaborative (CTDC), completed in 2020. Together, CTDC and the Tech Against Trafficking members:

1. Developed a new, innovative privacy-preserving solution that allows for access to more data, more accurate data, and the means to analyze it more deeply than otherwise possible without compromising confidentiality;
2. Addressed data inconsistencies across the field through a new data standard for human trafficking and accompanying guidance for the implementation of the standard. 

Looking Ahead: Introducing the 2021 Accelerator Cohort

The Tech Against Trafficking selection process for the 2021 cohort sought to build on our initial investment in privacy-preserving mechanisms and best practices related to data standardization by identifying anti-trafficking organizations that can leverage these advancements in pursuit of their unique objectives. Seattle Against Slavery and Unseen UK were chosen in part for their ability to meet this criterion, in addition to bringing new opportunities related to the use of technology to combat trafficking that can benefit the anti-trafficking field as a whole. 

Over the course of the second Accelerator, Seattle Against Slavery, Unseen UK, and Tech Against Trafficking members and advisors will work with participating organizations on a number of different focus areas, ranging from the optimization of data infrastructure systems to the evaluation and innovation of sustainable business models for technology products and platforms.

Seattle Against Slavery is an organization dedicated to combatting labor and sex trafficking through education, technology, and justice and accountability among men. They’ve built Freedom Signal, an online platform to help advocates develop ongoing relationships with potential victims of online sex trafficking or sexual exploitation through texting. With an ever-increasing number of victims identified and supported, Seattle Against Slavery has demonstrated impressive reach and impact. Seattle Against Slavery will be focusing on both technical and organizational workstreams during the accelerator. 

Liz Rush, Director of Technology at Seattle Against Slavery, said: 

“Through helping us tackle some of the biggest and most challenging questions in the anti-trafficking technology world, the Tech Against Trafficking Accelerator has our organization energized to develop new solutions and partnerships to address online commercial sexual exploitation.”

Unseen UK is an organization dedicated to eradicating modern slavery. It runs the Modern Slavery & Exploitation Helpline and Resource Centre as well as the Unseen App, both of which provide victims and the public with access to information and support on issues related to human trafficking and exploitation on a 24/7 basis. Over the course of the Accelerator, Unseen will work with Tech Against Trafficking member companies to develop a technology roadmap for translating data collected from the helpline into actionable trends and insights that will benefit the entire anti-trafficking space.

Justine Currell, Executive Director at Unseen UK, explained: 

 “We are delighted to have been chosen as one of the partners to benefit from the experience, tools, and skills afforded through Tech Against Trafficking. Developing our technological capabilities to better educate the public, law enforcement, and businesses—and reach more potential victims to get them the help they need through the Modern Slavery & Exploitation Helpline—is invaluable.

Technology is the key to providing enhanced services to potential victims, understanding emerging trends and links between cases, and maximizing the data collated through the Helpline to raise awareness of risk areas and inform prevention activities. We are extremely excited to see the real difference we can make to those who are being abused and exploited through our collaboration with Tech Against Trafficking’s Accelerator Program.”

Tech Against Trafficking looks forward to sharing the outcomes of the Accelerator with the broader anti-trafficking community in Spring 2022. To be the first to hear about the outcomes of this initiative and future opportunities, contact us.

Blog | Tuesday June 29, 2021

The Corporate Rainbow: Going beyond Pride Celebrations and Creating Lasting Impact

Preview

I can recall the first time I emerged from the Castro MUNI tunnels in awe, staring up at the biggest rainbow flag I had ever seen. I wore a rainbow bracelet, had hung up a rainbow flag on my bedroom wall, and loved seeing the array of colors in every shop window as I strolled through downtown San Francisco in June. The rainbow had become symbolic to my challenges with coming out and getting comfortable with my identity as a lesbian. I felt accepted by the increasing visibility in my environment.

Today, after a decade of corporate Pride campaigns consisting of rainbow logos featured on social media, parade floats, and banners as well as endless rainbow merch, I find myself needing to see more. I, and the queer community at large, urge companies to support Pride in ways that deliver long-lasting impact for members of society who are still facing social and political inequity and denied basic human rights.

In the last few years, companies have been criticized for both performative allyship and rainbow-washing:

• Performative allyship is a form of action appearing to promote change but that, in reality, raises little to no impact and maintains the status quo. It is usually acted out by people who have privilege and power and serves as a way to minimize scrutiny and garner approval.
• Rainbow-washing is a form of performative allyship. It provides optics that suggest allyship, but there is no substantive action behind the visual cues. It serves as a way to co-opt and commodify movement.

These themes are especially relevant to the latest criticism facing companies in the U.S. For example, companies are being challenged for celebrating Pride while also donating to politicians and political candidates who sponsor discriminatory anti-transgender legislation. According to data highlighted by PBS, 2021 has set a record in anti-trans bills in America. With this growth in oppression, allies and advocates—as individuals and companies—can show solidarity and advocacy in combatting increasing transphobia in society, socially and politically.

Pride is not important just because we want to celebrate our right to love and be ourselves—it exists so that we remember the continued sacrifice of surviving in a world that has been systemically and socially structured to repress our identities.

How Companies Can Combat Performative Allyship and Rainbow-Washing

To fully support the LGBTIQ+ community in ways that create long-lasting impact, companies can take several actions across the business:

• Ask yourself questions to recognize when a Pride campaign lacks impact. What is the transformative impact you seek to have within the LGBTIQ+ community? How can you be inclusive of stakeholders with lived experience? Beyond Pride month, how can you integrate this into regular business operations and culture?
• Share resources for allyship and advocacy with your employees internally. Check out this Human Rights Campaign allyship toolkit as a start.
• Celebrate intersectionality in the LGBTIQ+ community. Use the Progress Pride Flag in your graphics and highlight the history of the Black trans women and other LGBTIQ+ people of color who have been instrumental in the progress of Pride celebrations.
• Invest in your LGBTIQ+ employee resource groups. Provide resources and development opportunities for employees to raise their voices and set up a rewards system for those leading LGBTIQ+ projects in addition to their existing workloads.
• Select LGBTIQ+ suppliers for your Pride campaigns and celebrations and include them as part of your corporate diversity supplier program.
• Address LGBTIQ+ discrimination in countries outside the U.S. by partnering with global civil society organizations and local community NGOs, such as the LGBTIQ+ Workplace Equality Index in India partnership or the Tent Partnership for Refugees.
• Use your influence to combat discrimination in political actions, such as through supporting the passage of the Equality Act, and by incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion work into corporate political spending.

To be clear, I admire the progress in visibility and LGBTIQ+ support that multinational companies and small businesses have made. I appreciate the Pride flags in the windows, the advertisements that include non-heterosexual couples and non-binary individuals, and portions of proceeds that are donated to LGBTIQ+ nonprofits.

However, visibility does not mean inclusion. Pride is not important just because we want to celebrate our right to love and be ourselves—it exists so that we remember the continued sacrifice of surviving in a world that has been systemically and socially structured to repress our identities.

We celebrate Pride because children are still growing up thinking they do not belong in this world, resulting in deep trauma and violence. We need to keep pushing progress forward. Companies participating in Pride cannot celebrate without also helping the LGBTIQ+ community thrive in a world that has historically—to this day—oppressed our human rights. Rather, they have a powerful opportunity to act, enable, and influence to champion LGBTIQ+ rights and generate lasting impact.

Blog | Thursday June 24, 2021

Inside BSR: Q&A with Cameron Steagall

Preview

Inside BSR is our monthly series featuring BSR team members from around the world. This month, we connected with Cameron Steagall, who recently joined BSR’s Transport and Green Freight team as an Associate.

Cameron chatted with us about how public relations brought him to climate work, his passion for the Earth and its people, and why taking on additional projects in LGBTIQ+ rights and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is important to him.

Tell us a bit about your background. Where are you from, where are you based, and how have you been dealing with working from home?

I grew up in Raleigh, North Carolina—where I also recently returned to during COVID. While it’s a bit far from the New York City office, I’m grateful for the situation because my parents have needed some extra support during the pandemic, and it allowed me to step in to help them out.

I’ve always had jobs that allowed me to work from home a decent amount, so the transition has felt natural for me. I’m also happy that I can spend extra time with family and my dog. 

How did you get into sustainable business, and what made you decide to apply to BSR? Talk to us about your new role here.

While I originally moved to New York to pursue a career in journalism, it soon evolved into public relations work. That experience exposed me to multiple environmental organizations and gave me the opportunity to work directly with sustainable food companies—it was then that I realized my environmental passion could actually turn into a career. That’s why I decided to apply to Middlebury for my M.A. in International Environmental Policy. 

I first heard about BSR during school and was immediately interested. It felt like the perfect place for me to leverage my private sector background with my environmental degree. Working at a mission-driven organization was an imperative; I need to feel like I am doing work that matters in the world and with an organization that won’t sacrifice values for profit. I was lucky to find that in BSR. 

I joined BSR with a background in the maritime sector, climate adaptation, and climate justice, which allowed me to quickly jump into the Transport and Green Freight team to help lead two of our collaborative initiatives: the Clean Cargo Working Group and the Sustainable Air Freight Alliance (SAFA). This role has been exciting for me because I get to collaborate directly with members, work on one of the most difficult-to-decarbonize sectors, and ultimately learn directly from the companies.

What are some interesting projects that you get to work on as part of your role at BSR? What do you enjoy about them? 

I really love working on Clean Cargo and SAFA because, beyond everything I get to learn, I feel a sense of commitment and dedication to the long-term work. I have also had great experiences on projects where I have been asked to leverage my experience and expertise on port sustainability, low- and zero-emission fuels, DEI, and climate justice.

Recently, I had an opportunity to work with a BSR member to help them better understand the ramifications on LGBTIQ+ staff should they expand into countries that still criminalize same-sex or non-traditional relationships. As an openly gay man, it’s important for me to be able to share my knowledge, lived experience, and passion for equality with others who want to learn and take steps toward inclusion and equity. 

My favorite thing about working at BSR is that I feel that I am asked to take on completely different types of projects like LGBTIQ+ rights, climate justice, and transportation sector decarbonization, and still have space to explore other interests.  

What issues are you passionate about and why? What do you hope to do and learn while at BSR?

I have always felt a connection with the Earth, which makes me passionate about preserving biodiversity, product circularity, decarbonization, and DEI. One of the main reasons I joined BSR, aside from the development of more climate justice work, is the increased focus on DEI efforts internally. We, like many organizations, have a long way to go, but working with others who share my vision and mission for a better, more sustainable, and more equitable future is imperative for me to find happiness in a career. 

There are certain things we cannot compromise on, such as equal rights and equity for all people and protecting our planet for future generations, and I’m grateful to be surrounded by people at BSR who feel similarly.

My one hope for working at BSR is that I will continue to pursue my passion, make a difference, and never stop learning. There are so many problems that seem insurmountable today, but I know with the help of so many passionate experts, we can change the world for the better.

2020 was undoubtedly a difficult year. What brought you joy amid lockdowns?

2020 was a difficult year for me. I was living in California for school and had to graduate over Zoom, enter the job market when nearly every company was downsizing or in a hiring freeze, move home to my parents’ house in North Carolina, and, of course, deal with a pandemic.

However, I found happiness in adopting my dog (the very cute and cuddly Staffy), spending time with family after a decade of living out-of-state, and trying new hobbies like surfing, starting a business, and cooking.

Ultimately, I’ve learned to be more grateful overall, but especially about the fact that I was able to try new things and find a work-life balance that I don’t think I would have found living in a big city and working in the office every day.

Blog | Tuesday June 22, 2021

UNGPs’ 10th Anniversary: The Next Decade of Business and Human Rights

Preview

This June 2021, we mark the 10th anniversary of the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Unanimously endorsed by the UN Human Rights Commission in 2011, the UNGPs have become the universal standard guiding business responsibility to respect human rights.

At BSR, we have seen tremendous progress over the past decade as we have worked with businesses to align their policies and practices with the UNGPs. The broad consensus around the UNGPs has given companies across sectors—and their partners in government and civil society—a shared roadmap for respecting human rights and has driven the development of corporate commitments, policies, and procedures to better prevent and mitigate harm due to business activity.

Our work is far from over, however.

Corporate commitment and process has not always translated into impact in real life, and we continue to see headlines associating companies with human rights abuses through their operations, sourcing, and sales.

Why is this? In part, this is due to the gap between commitment and implementation—the ongoing need to better resource and more meaningfully embed efforts to avoid, prevent, mitigate, and remedy human rights violations across corporate functions.

But this is also due to the scale and complexity of the great challenges of our time—climate change, rising inequality, persistent marginalization of women and people of color, and growing geopolitical tensions, to name just a few. These challenges exacerbate the risk that business activity will be involved with harm.

How can we close the gap between aspiration and impact? Throughout 2021, to mark the 10th anniversary of the UNGPs, BSR is reflecting on what additional action business and other actors can take to shape a future where human rights are realized in law and in practice. In the coming months, we will publish deep dives into emerging issues and evolving approaches that will shape the next decade of business and human rights, including:

1. The Shared Opportunity to Promote Human Rights: Based on the premise that the absence of action to promote human rights presents severe risks to their fulfillment, our first paper draws upon BSR experience over the past decade to propose a framework for the shared promotion of human rights.
2. Downstream Human Rights Due Diligence: This primer provides a practical overview of human rights due diligence of products and services.
3. Climate Change and Human Rights: This paper explores the anticipated linkages between climate change and adverse human rights impacts, as well as mitigating measures that companies can take to prevent harm.
4. Business in High-Risk Contexts: Building on the UN report on business, human rights, and conflict, this issue brief lays out practical steps companies can take to conduct enhanced human rights due diligence in conflict-affected and high-risk areas.
5. Access to Remedy: Delving into the oft-neglected third pillar of the UNGPs, this issue brief explores challenges as well as best practices in providing remedy for human rights harms.
6. Human Rights Assessment: Drawing on over 25 years of experience, this paper lays out BSR’s synthesized learning and refreshed approach to conducting decision-useful human rights assessments for companies.

In a world facing increased climate impacts, rapidly changing technologies, and shifting geopolitics, resilient business strategies are critical to business success. By embedding human rights approaches across business, sales, and supply chain operations, companies can not only build resilience but help to create a more just, sustainable world. Join us as we explore what this means for business in this decisive decade.

Reports | Tuesday June 22, 2021

The Shared Opportunity to Promote: A Second-Decade Priority for the UNGPs

Preview

Introduction

The UN Human Rights Council endorsed the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) 10 years ago. Since then, the UNGPs have been used by a growing number of global companies, integrated into the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and referred to by governments, investors, and civil society organizations everywhere.

At BSR, we have learned a great deal by helping companies implement the UNGPs in practice. Our methods have evolved with each company engagement, and we have been struck by how often referring to the precise text of the UNGPs helps identify how we may improve our approaches for the next project. Ten years later, we are still learning, and that is a testament to the richness of the UNGPs.

The three UNGP pillars of “state duty to protect,” “corporate responsibility to respect,” and “access to remedy” have provided much-needed clarity for our work with companies, providing clear direction for company action to address adverse human rights impacts.

However, we believe that a step change in the interpretation of these three pillars is needed to more effectively prevent human rights violations associated with business activities and secure the wider enjoyment of human rights.

Specifically, we believe that the business and human rights field will benefit from a framework for the enjoyment, realization, and fulfillment of human rights—a shared opportunity to promote human rights—that moves beyond a perception that the UNGPs’ three pillars are solely about avoiding harm.

Based on the premise that the absence of action to promote human rights presents very severe risks to their fulfillment, this paper draws upon BSR experience over the past decade to propose a framework for the shared promotion of human rights.

We view the promotion of human rights to be a key part of fulfilling the corporate responsibility to respect human rights.