A human rights impact assessment (HRIA) is a process for identifying, understanding, assessing and addressing the adverse effects of a business project or activities on the human rights enjoyment of impacted rights-holders such as workers and community members. HRIAs can take various shapes and be led by different stakeholders, but should share the ultimate goal of protecting human rights and improving accountability of businesses for their adverse impacts on human rights.
The UN Guiding Principles firmly establish the corporate responsibility to respect human rights as a standard of expected conduct. This includes the expectation that businesses implement due diligence to identify, avoid, mitigate and remediate the human rights impacts with which they are involved. HRIA can provide a process for businesses to understand and address such impacts. While the UN Guiding Principles do not necessarily require that businesses conduct “human rights impact assessments”, they indicate that a range of approaches may be appropriate for assessing human rights impacts. Examples of approaches that have been developed include “stand-alone” HRIA (i.e. assessments that focus exclusively on human rights), “integrated’ assessments” (e.g. integrating human rights into environmental, social and health impact assessments) and others (e.g. community-led, sector-wide, or in the area of trade and investment).
Read more
According to the UN Guiding Principles, businesses should do the following when assessing their human rights impacts:
Draw on internal and/or independent human rights expertise;
Undertake meaningful consultation with potentially affected rights-holders and other relevant parties;
Be gender-sensitive and pay particular attention to any human rights impacts on individuals from groups that may be at heightened risk of vulnerability or marginalisation;
Assess impacts from the perspective of risk to people rather than risk to business; and
Repeat its risk and impact identification and assessment at regular intervals (i.e. before entering into a new activity, prior to significant decisions about changes in activities, and periodically throughout the project-cycle). (UNGP 18 and Commentary).
Although HRIAs can be an important tool for addressing adverse human rights impacts, a poor HRIA may become little more than a tick box exercise with limited impact on the human rights of the most vulnerable or disadvantaged. Therefore, businesses should carefully select the most appropriate HRIA methodology to cater to the size and complexity of their operations.
A number of HRIA tools are available for different types of assessments. For example, the “Getting it Right” tool designed by Rights & Democracy is a methodology to conduct a community-based, participatory process to analyse the human rights impacts of private foreign investments. The Danish Institute for Human Rights has developed a HRIA Guidance and Toolbox to facilitate HRIAs of business projects and activities with a human rights-based approach that is consistent with the UNGPs. Another form of HRIA is a sector-wide impact assessment (SWIA), which goes beyond a particular project to cover a sector as a whole and address project level, cumulative level and sector level impacts holistically.
Given the cross-cutting relevance of human rights for SDG implementation, HRIA is a critical tool for businesses to use prior to any engagement with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Unfortunately, many businesses have taken up the SDGs to highlight only those goals and targets that they have a positive impact on. The inter-connectedness of the SDGs and targets is critical as these same activities may have positive or negative impacts in other areas.
12) Responsible Consumption and Production
No references.
What National Action Plans say on Human rights impact assessments
Belgium (2017 - open)
Action point 17
Advocate for strengthening the integration of sustainable development (including human rights) in free trade agreements
This point explains that free trade agreement negotiations at the EU-level have presented several objectives, including the maximization of transparency and impact assessments on sustainable development.
The NAP states that, within EU Council negotiations, the aim of Belgium is to insist on carrying out impact assessments on sustainable development in order to map the economic, social and environmental impact of potential trade agreements, both for the European Union and for the countries with which negotiations on a free trade agreement are under way.
The Flemish government furthers that in addition to “sustainable impact assessments”, they will also urge the EU to engage with “human rights impact assessments”, and that such an impact assessment is made within each free trade negotiation.
The region of Brussels will ensure that a HRIA has been carried out before any ratification of investment and trade agreements, and that any major negative impact on the respect, protection and promotion of human rights has not been detected in third-party countries.
Action point 15
Incorporate the principle of “due diligence” into the management of the company, also in the terms of human rights
The NAP briefly mentions that the integration of the “due diligence” obligation for companies (as covered by the EU directive 2014/95/EU) will ensure better business continuity, and optimize relationships with local communities and workers, through a clear commitment and ongoing dialogue about the impact of their activities.
Action Point 3.2 (page 35-36): The Ministry of Social Development will:
Prepare, through the Division of Social Policy of the Under-Secretariat of Social Evaluation, a statistical report about the socio-economic situation of risk groups including migrants, youth, disabled people, women and indigenous peoples, based on the Socio-Economic Qualification (SEQ) including income generated by work, capital and pensions, contained in the Household Social Register, divided by territory (regional division). This has the purpose of having available information regarding vulnerable groups within certain territory.
Strand 8: Legislation, Policies and Incentives
Action Point 8.1. (page 49): The Ministry of Economy will support the legal provision committed in the Agenda for Productivity, Innovation and Growth seeking to create a legal framework for social business enterprises, by encouraging the incorporation of business and human rights criteria.
Action Point 8.2. (page 49): The Ministry of Energy will identify, promote and design the necessary mechanisms to implement the local development policy concerning energy projects. Among other things, the policy includes measures to support the assessment of impacts on the human rights of communities, and mechanisms to resolve the disputes that may arise between communities and business enterprises, within the context of the development of energy projects.
Strand 9: State Business Enterprises
Action Point 9.3 (page 50)
To strengthen coordination between the Ministries forming part of the Inter-Ministerial Working Group, amplify the impact of this Action Plan, and make known its progress, the Group will carry out the following actions: …
2. Encourage the adoption of policies, statements or codes of conduct by business enterprises and urge the implementation of mechanisms of due diligence.
Pillar 2: The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights
Strand 1: Contextual Issues: Preparation of Documents allowing Business Enterprises to Understand the Local Context and the Risks of Potential Negative Impacts on Human Rights
Action Point 1.3 (page 53): The National Health Institute will coordinate, with expert support, the preparation of a study about the impact of the pharmaceutical industry.
Strand 2: Promotion of Corporate Due Diligence in the Field of Human Rights
Action Point 2.2 (pages 55-56): The Ministry of Economy, Development and Tourism will:
Hold a working group meeting at least once each semester with the Division of Social Economy and Associativity and the Division of Smaller Business Enterprises, with the purpose of identifying the impact of human rights in the management of businesses such as cooperatives and SMEs, and of incorporating the vision of human rights and business enterprises within this type of economic associations. Based on the activities of the working groups, sector guides will be developed to evaluate compliance with human rights issues, with special emphasis on the management of supply chains. …
Support the Ministry of Energy in the development of a Guide about the impact of projects on local communities, seeing to the integration of business and human rights standards into the development of projects within communities and, particularly, containing best practices about due diligence in human rights-related issues. …
Subscribe in 2017 to an agreement with a technical, specialised body to develop a system to diagnose and measure the impact of small and medium size enterprises on human rights, through a digital tool of public access.
Pillar 3: Access to Redress Mechanisms
Action Point 2.5 (page 62): Within the framework of the Local Development Policy of the Ministry of Energy, the following actions will be carried out: …
Promotion of formal and permanent spaces for dialogue between business enterprises and communities, whereby potential impacts may become known and
the relevant measures may be taken. For smooth operation of these spaces for dialogue, the public sector will promote the availability of a record of advisors and facilitators to be used by communities, and a Symmetry Fund allowing to finance such advisors or facilitators.
Publication and dissemination of existing documents, education and awareness-raising [page 11]
“Tasks:
Assess the vehicles in place to provide businesses with information on human rights risks in countries or regions where they are planning to set up operations.
Coordinator: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: 31 December 2020”
Trade in military equipment [page 19-20]
“Current state of play:
Trade in military equipment is regulated beyond the framework of national legislation and at EU level, in particular by Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment. That Common Position defines eight binding criteria for assessment of applications to export military equipment, including the need to consider the risk of potential violations of human rights.
Tasks:
Offer all necessary cooperation and assistance to the Parliamentary Subcommittee on Acquisitions of the Ministry of Defence, Trade in Military Equipment and Innovations of the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic so that regular assessments can be carried out of the human rights risks posed by export licences and by military equipment exports that have been made.
Coordinators: Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running”
Public procurement [page 23]
“… certain international standards, such as ISO 26000, contain criteria recommended for human rights risk assessments. …”
State aid, guarantees and subsidies [page 25]
“Current state of play:
Aid applicants must submit a detailed environmental impact assessment for a selected export where CEB- and EGAP-backed projects have a larger-scale environmental and social impact.”
The Czech NAP contains a section on Due diligence [page 35-36] which is relevant to human rights impact assessments (see the analysis on Human rights due diligence)
Transparency [page 37-38]
“The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses where the activities, products, services or business relationships are associated with risks of serious human rights violations formally provide information on how they are dealing with those risks, even in situations where the law does not require them to do so. The government recommends all companies reporting on human rights to take account of the Reporting Framework for the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Reporting should provide information of relevance without overwhelming the reader. The Government also recommends that large-scale projects with a potential major impact be publicly presented and consulted.”
Voluntary non-financial reporting [page 38]
“A business may publish periodic non-financial reports in numerous forms, either as part of the annual report or entirely separately. In any case, they should be posted online on the business’s website. The non-financial report should not be drawn up just for show, but should shed light on significant information relevant to an impact assessment of the business’s operations. On the other hand, it should remain brief and concentrate on matters of relevance. Parent companies should include information on the activities of their subsidiaries.”
The Danish NAP highlights human rights impacts, reporting on these impacts, and due diligence requirements across all chapters. However the NAP makes no explicit reference to a ‘human rights impact assessment’. This can be seen in the three examples highlighted below.
Appendix 1, GP 3c
Initiatives taken or planned as a dedicated measure to implement the UNGPs (after the UN ratification of the Guiding Principles) [page 27]
“The Trade Council in co-operation with the Danish Business Authority holds workshops in Responsible Supply Chain management, especially focusing on small and medium-sized enterprises and their local business partners (GP 3c). The courses are held on an annual basis. They will include practical guidance on how to demonstrate due diligence in business operations in regard to adverse impacts on human rights.”
Appendix 1, GP 7
State Duty to Protect [page 30]
“Because the risk of gross human rights abuses is heightened in conflict-affected areas, States should help ensure that business enterprises operating in those contexts are not involved with such abuses, including by: …
b) Providing adequate assistance to business enterprises to assess and address the heightened risks of abuses, paying special attention to both gender-based and sexual violence; …”
Appendix 1, GP 10
Status in Denmark (initiatives implemented before the UN ratification of the Guiding Principles) [page 32]
“Denmark has also been active in promoting that The International Finance Cooperation (IFC) actively supports its clients in addressing human rights risks and impacts.”
Government covering note on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights National Action Plan
“The identification and management of human rights problems has been recognised as a challenge in companies operating at the international level. As a rule, Finnish companies deal responsibly with human rights issues and support their implementation. Despite this fact, the possibilities for a single company to identify human rights risks and rectify them are limited. This is why international co-operation, more efficient distribution of information, more effective enforcement of existing legislation and existing human rights conventions (e.g. ILO core conventions), transparency and the proper promotion of regulation for various actors should be emphasised in the promotion of human rights. The Team Finland network should also be more effectively developed to assist companies in understanding, taking notice of and managing human rights issues, particularly in areas where human rights risks are considerably high. The work of NGOs should be supported in accordance with the action plan drafted by the working group.”
Ownership policy and social responsibility
“Companies with a controlling interest held by the State assess the human rights risks of their own operations and those of their subcontractor chains, reporting on them and their own tax procedures.”
1 The state obligation to protect human rights
1.3 Activities in the EU [page 18-22]
TRADE POLICY
“As a follow-up measure, the working group suggests that in order to reinforce the human rights aspect in the EU trade policy:
Finland will support the strengthening of human rights assessments in third countries during EU trade or investment agreement negotiations and when monitoring their implementation. Finland shall make use of the human rights assessments in forming its own opinions related to trade policy positions. Finland supports that human rights will be taken in to account in the EU investment agreements or in potential new bilateral agreements made by Finland.”
PUBLIC FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION
“Finland’s official export guarantee company, Finnvera, uses policies updated on 1 January 2013 for evaluating the environmental and social effects of projects. When granting export credit guarantees and confirming export credit guarantee conditions, the environmental and social impacts of the project in question are taken into consideration as part of the project’s total risk assessment. The development of Finnvera’s environmental and social impact assessment is continuing in accordance with the OECD Common Approaches agreement. As with other public export credit companies, Finnvera also reports on its progress at the expert meetings related to the OECD agreement.”
3 Expectations towards companies and support services [page 24]
“The Finnish state is committed to promoting the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Although following the guidelines is voluntary for companies, the Finnish government expects companies to observe them. Companies’ obligation to respect human rights includes various actions to proactively mitigate the risk of human rights violations. This may be done for instance by including a human rights assessment in the company’s risk management system or by carrying out various special measures.
A careful human rights risk assessment and careful prevention has favourable long-term effects on the company’s own business activities.”
3.1 Clarification of due diligence [page 25]
“If the company has a lot of suppliers, it should identify the areas where the risk of adverse impacts is highest and contribute to the prevention of these risks.”
3.5 Support for Finnish and international organisations promoting the subject [page 28]
“Defenders of human rights, trade unions and other civil society operators can play an important role in the assessment of the impact of business activities on human rights, the availability of legal remedies and national and international discussion.”
The political declaration supporting the UN Guiding Principles was adopted in April 2014 and the Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)3 on human rights and business was adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 2 March 2016.
Currently this recommendation includes the following provisions:
Article 20. Member States should apply such measures as may be necessary to encourage or, where appropriate, require that:
business enterprises domiciled within their jurisdiction apply human rights due diligence throughout their operations;
business enterprises conducting substantial activities within their jurisdiction carry out human rights due diligence in respect of such activities; including project-specific human rights impact assessments, as appropriate to the size of the business enterprise and the nature and context of the operation.”
8. Trade and Investment Agreements [page 19]
In 2013, France issued a number of proposals to improve the way in which social and environmental standards were addressed in European trade agreements. These proposals are still relevant.
These proposals focus on five main areas:
…
2. Improving the evaluation of sustainable development chapters through rigorous impact assessments. These impact assessments must provide a clear overview of social and environmental standards in countries negotiating agreements with the EU. France has completed a major revision of the European manual used to write these impact assessments. This could lead to progress in the field.
…
Actions to be Implemented
Encourage impact assessments to be completed before and after agreements are concluded and make all free trade agreements conditional on the inclusion of human rights clauses and the prioritization of the UN Guiding Principles.
The National Framework
13. The Role of Public Agencies
The Agence Française de Développement (AFD)
… the AFD adopted a 2014-2016 CSR action plan developed with internal and external stakeholders. The goals of this action plan are to increase transparency
by consulting with relevant parties and by publishing information on AFD-funded projects and final reports. Other information is available upon request, including social and environmental impact assessments …
II- Businesses’ Responsibility to Respect Human Rights
3. Risk Analysis and Impact Assessment [page 40]
Businesses must understand the type and scope of adverse human rights impacts (both real and potential) caused directly or indirectly by their operations, particularly in their business relationships. This enables them to identify measures to prevent, remedy and mitigate these impacts.
Practically speaking, businesses analyse their human rights risks by:
Using external risk analysis tools (see below), which may or may not be adaptable;
Identifying human rights issues that are specific to their operations or sector;
Carrying out country risk assessments by compiling the available external data;
Carrying out background checks and audits on suppliers and other stakeholders.
Many tools are available to help businesses analyse risks and assess the impact of their operations. If necessary, they can also call on employers’ organizations and other appropriate stakeholders.
Actions Underway
The following points are key to the implementation of risk management measures:
Impact assessments must be completed for new operations, projects, commercial relationships, countries, etc.;
…
Actions to be Implemented [page 41]
Promote the completion and publication of voluntary impact assessments, ensuring that all appropriate stakeholders are included (if necessary, through the free, prior and informed consultation of populations), particularly rights holders for companies that are not required to complete project-specific impact assessments, and ensure these assessments are monitored.
Practical Tools Addressing Specific Issues:
The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre (www.businesshumanrights.org) is an online library with connections to a wide range of working
documents and conceptual tools published by businesses, NGOs, governments, sector-specific initiatives and institutions. Many tools have been sorted by issue, country, sector or company policy/steps (policy, impact assessment, training, reporting, etc.).
“The legal system of the Federal Republic of Germany contains numerous instruments that are focused primarily on the protection of human rights. They are binding on all enterprises. Where the business operations of an enterprise have an international dimension, procedures for identifying any actual or potential adverse impact on the human rights of people affected by its business activity should be developed and implemented.”
III. Federal Government expectations regarding corporate due diligence in respecting human rights
Procedure for the identification of actual and potential adverse impacts on human rights [page 9-10]
“Central to the exercise of due diligence is the establishment of a procedure that serves to identify, to prevent or to mitigate potentially adverse effects of corporate activity on human rights. It is not – or not only – a matter of considering risks to the company’s own business activity but is primarily about risks to the human rights of those who may be affected by corporate activity, such as employees of the enterprise itself or of other companies in the supply chain, local populations and customers.
The consideration of potentially adverse impacts on human rights is a continuous task that accompanies work processes and, in particular, is performed with a sectoral focus. It should take place when new divisions, products or projects are launched as well as in the context of existing business activities. When potential risks are examined, a distinction must be made between the following types of impact:
those generated directly by the enterprise itself,
those to which the enterprise contributes, for example through direct contractual relations with suppliers, and
those connected indirectly with the enterprise through its business relations, its business activity or its products or services even though no direct contractual relationship exists, for example in situations involving numerous intermediary dealers. Granting loans, issuing credit lines and providing other financial services to other banks, insurers or other financial service providers do not in themselves constitute a relationship in the above sense if those transactions cannot be unambiguously attributed to a particular business activity in the real economy.
This systematic approach to identifying key impact factors and risks is nothing new and is already part of established management systems and processes, as may be seen, for instance, in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 on the voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS), which deals with the internal environmental review to be conducted by participating organisations.
The size of an enterprise, the sector to which it belongs and the nature of its business activity directly influence the risk that its operations will have an impact on human rights. The required depth and breadth of the risk assessment depends on these factors. An initial risk analysis on the part of an enterprise should be conducted for each division or each product category and possibly for each location too. The starting point may be a simple overview of the company’s main activities and of the value chains and business relations these activities entail. On the basis of this overview and with due regard to the international human rights standards enshrined in instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights, the ILO Core Labour Standards and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, potential risk areas can be identified. Contextual circumstances such as the political framework and the presence of vulnerable groups of people (indigenous populations, for instance) should be factored into the analysis. The choice of method and the assessment of risks can be made on the basis of the analysts’ own research, interviews in-house, in subsidiary enterprises and/or with business partners and input from external specialists.
With the aid of this analysis, enterprises should determine whether an in-depth review is needed. This is most likely to be the case if the risk of an adverse impact on the human rights of particular groups is particularly high and fuller information is required before any action can be taken. For this reason, the recognised problem areas should be ranked in order of priority.
The risk of a particularly adverse impact arises, for example, in cases where a large number of people may be affected or the potential impact would have serious, unforeseeable, or irreversible consequences. The in-depth review should at least include local dialogue with actually or potentially affected parties and recourse to both internal and external expertise in the field of human rights.”
1.1 Basic rules of economic policy
Bi- and multilateral economic relations [page 17-18]
“it is important that trade should be shaped in a development-friendly way. This means, for example, that environmental, social and human rights standards should firmly underpin free-trade agreements, which should be accompanied by impact-assessment and monitoring mechanisms.”
The current situation
“The Federal Government supports further development of the range of instruments for human rights impact assessment of trade and investment agreements.”
Measures
“The Federal Government advocates and supports further development of the range of instruments for human rights impact assessments of the EU’s trade and investment agreements. Moreover, comprehensive impact assessments should be conducted before negotiations begin, so as to guarantee that the findings of the assessments can influence the negotiations.”
1.3 State support
Export credits, investment guarantees and other instruments for the promotion of external trade page 24-25
The current situation
“The processing of export credit guarantees, DIA guarantees and untied loan guarantees is undertaken on behalf of the Federal Government by the mandated companies Euler Hermes and PwC. Respect for human rights is already an element in the assessment of applications. Where there is reason to do so, environmental and social aspects as well as human rights considerations are closely examined.
How closely depends on the potential impact of the project. The minimum requirement for the assumption of a guarantee is compliance with the national standards of the target country. Projects with a considerable impact on human rights are subjected to a more thorough examination.”
Measures
“The Federal Government will ensure that human rights, which have hitherto been an element of the environmental and social impact assessment, are given more specific consideration and a higher profile in assessment procedures. It will measure the existing assessment procedures against the requirements set out in chapter III above and make adjustments where necessary. One particular priority will be measures for better identification of risks to human rights as part of the assessment process.”
II. Initial priorities for the Business and Human Rights Implementation Group [page 18]
“ix. Encourage companies and NGOs funded by the State to carry out human rights due diligence as appropriate to their size, the nature and context of operations and the severity of the risk of adverse human rights impacts.”
Annex 1 – List of additional and ongoing actions to be carried out across Government
EU and Multilateral Efforts [page 20]
“7. Continue to take account of the human rights elements of European Commission impact assessments when providing input in the course of Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations and support the appropriate implementation of human rights clauses in FTAs as they arise in EU Agreements.”
3.2. Pillar 2: Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights
Policy Actions [Page 19]
c) Human rights due diligence: Require businesses to identify their human rights impacts including through conducting comprehensive and credible human rights impact assessments before they commence their operations and continuously review the assessment to ensure that they prevent, address and redress human rights violations. Such impact assessment should involve meaningful consultation with potentially affected groups and other relevant stakeholders and include particular gendered impacts.
3.3. Pillar 3: Access to Remedy
B) Non- State-Based Grievance Mechanisms [Page 21]
Policy Actions
The Government will:
3. Assist community-based organisations working on human rights issues to build their technical capacity to effectively monitor human rights impacts of businesses and advocate for individuals and communities to enforce their right to a remedy for human rights violations.
CHAPTER FOUR: IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
ANNEX 1: SUMMARY OF POLICY ACTIONS
Strategic Objective
Policy Actions
Key Actors
Strategic objective 2:
Enhance understanding of the obligation of business to respect human rights
Businesses to identify their human rights impacts including through conducting comprehensive and credible human rights impact assessments before they commence their operations.
The Lithuanian NAP makes reference to impact assessments, but only in the context of impact assessments conducted by the state on regulatory proposals.
Objective 1: ensuring State’s duty to protect, defend and respect human rights
A. Legislative measures [page 2]
1. “Improvement of the legislative process … Law on Legislative Framework of the Republic of Lithuania was adopted on 18 September 2012, and came into force on 1 January 2014. Following the principles of openness and transparency, it provides for law-making to be made public, as general interest-related legislative decisions cannot be made without public awareness and without the possibilities to participate; the public must have access to information related to the national policy objectives, the need for legal regulation and participating bodies; the civil society and interest groups must be provided with a possibility to submit proposals for legal regulation at all the stages of law-making. It also provides for the right to know the bodies that were involved in submitting, drafting and assessing regulatory impact of a respective legislative proposal, and the bodies monitoring legal regulation.”
‘Luxembourg’s NAP does not explicitly address this issue’
The 2020-22 NAP states the second edition of the National Action Plan complements the first NAP. Additional information about the first NAP can be found here.
Integrating And Managing The Finding From Due Diligence Process And Risk Analyses [page 34]:
The 19th principle concerns how companies should follow up the findings of the impact assessments: 19. In order to prevent and mitigate adverse human rights impacts, business enterprises should integrate the findings from their impact assessments across relevant internal functions and processes, and take appropriate action.
CHAPTER 3: National Action Plan Priority Areas and Proposed Actions
3.2. NAP Priority Areas
3.2.3 | Human Rights Due Diligence
Proposed Actions
Federal (page 26)
‘34. Conduct a study on the potential impact of the future enactment of mandatory human rights due diligence legislation by major trading partners, such as the European Union, on Pakistan’s competitiveness in export markets, inflows of foreign direct investment, Pakistan’s role in global supply chains, and schemes such as GSP+.
Performance indicator(s): (i) Assessment report
UN Guiding Principle(s): 1, 2, 3, 8, 9
Relevant SDG(s): Goal 8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth; Goal 12 – Responsible Consumption and Production; Goal 17 – Partnerships for the Goals’
This information is also covered under Appendix 1: Implementation Plan, Proposed Action 34 designating the Ministry of Commerce as Leading Entity (page 56).
3.2.4 | Labour Standards and the Informal Economy
Proposed Actions
Federal and Provincial (pages 29-30)
‘42. Conduct a review process of labour laws, standards, and policies to gauge the differentiated impacts or deficits of these laws, standards and policies on women and vulnerable or marginalised workers, including in the informal economy, and identify and enact as required new or amended laws, standards, or policies.
Performance indicator(s): (i) Review process reports; (ii) Proposal of Amendments; (iii) Laws, standards, or policies enacted
UN Guiding Principle(s): 1, 3, 8
Relevant SDG(s): Goal 5 – Gender Quality; Goal 8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth; Goal 10 – Reduced Inequalities; Goal 16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions’
This information is also covered under Appendix 1: Implementation Plan, Proposed Action 42 designating the Provincial Governments and the Provincial Labour & Human Resources Departments as Leading Entities, and designating the Provincial Commissions on the Status of Women; Provincial Law Departments; Provincial Human Rights Departments; Provincial Women Development Departments; Provincial Departments of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities; Provincial Social Welfare Departments; Provincial Labour Departments; Provincial Industries Departments; Provincial Commerce Departments; Provincial Rural Development Departments; Provincial Local Government Departments as Additional Entities (page 61).
Provincial (page 31)
‘50. Conduct an Impact Assessment of COVID-19 on the tourism industry (including a gender impact assessment), with a focus on adverse human rights impacts.
Relevant SDG(s): Goal 1 – Zero Poverty; Goal 5 – Gender Quality; Goal 8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth; Goal 10 – Reduced Inequalities; Goal 11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities; Goal 12 – Responsible Consumption and Production; Goal 16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions’
This information is also covered under Appendix 1: Implementation Plan, Proposed Action 50 designating the Provincial Governments and the Tourism Departments as Leading Entities, and designating the Provincial Finance Departments; Provincial Planning and Development Departments; Provincial Excise and Taxation Departments; Provincial Social Welfare and Human Rights Departments; Provincial Industries, Mines & Minerals Departments; Provincial Labour Departments; Provincial Commerce Departments as Additional Entities (page 65).
CHAPTER 4: State Expectations of Business Enterprises (pages 38-39)
‘[…]6. Establish adequate human rights due diligence mechanisms to identify, prevent, and remedy human rights impacts. Human rights due diligence should consider both internal risks that stem directly from business operations as well as external risks, which relate to all other entities that the business work with across their operations or are linked with through their value chains. Human rights due diligence should be carried out before commercial operations and business activities, proportionate to the size and scope of the enterprise and the scale and complexity of its potential human rights impacts, and on a continuous basis to ensure that integrated findings from impact assessments shape future business decisions […].
7. Identify and manage the human rights impacts of their operations during COVID-19 by using tools such as the Human Rights Due Diligence and COVID-19 Rapid Self-Assessment tool developed by UNDP within the BHR framework.’
ANNEX II: Actions Already Undertaken by Pakistan
A | General Measures Relevant to Business and Human Rights (page 73)
‘Protection from environmental degradation is also a priority for Pakistan. Under the State Bank Guidelines for Infrastructure Project Financing, companies must draft a description of environmental impact assessments and must report on health and safety issues to provide information as to the compliance of the project with relevant laws.
The Pakistan Environmental Protection Act 1997 also provides for environmental impact assessments and initial environmental examinations to ensure the protection of the environment in carrying out business activity.’
B | Measures Relevant to NAP Priority Areas
iii. Human Rights Due Diligence (page 80)
‘[…] The State Bank has developed guidelines which provide that as a pre-requisite companies must draft a description of environmental impact assessments and must report on health and safety issues to provide information as to the compliance of the project with relevant laws.
[…] A few multinational companies operating in Pakistan like Jazz, Telenor, and Coca Cola do have due diligence policies in place to address human rights risks through impact assessments.’
Maps of risks and threats to human rights in business context and good practice catalogues
[page 29]
“The Embassies of the Republic of Poland will continuously update the Maps of risks and threats to human rights in business in the host countries and good practice catalogues. Once a year, by order of the Department of United Nations and Human Rights of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, all embassies will send the updated Maps and Catalogues both to the Headquarters and to other Polish missions in their host countries (Consulates General and Polish Institutes). The aforesaid documents will be placed on the internal website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Diplopedia section, in the State Websites tab, as information material available to the employees of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as to people going on missions. At embassies, persons shall be appointed whose scope of duties includes monitoring of human rights issues in business context and familiarising new staff in the mission with relevant documents relating to the UN Guiding Principles. Pre-departure training on business and human rights based on the UN Guiding Principles will continue for heads of mission and all others going to work in foreign missions.”
11. Ministry of Foreign Affairs
[page 30-31]
Authorisation to export arms and military equipment
“The Security Policy Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will take into account the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in the course of assessment procedure regarding applications for granting permission to export arms and military equipment, in accordance with Articles 12 and 12 a. of the Act of 29 November 2000 on Foreign Trade in Goods, Technologies and Services of Strategic Significance for State Security and for Maintaining International Peace and Security and Article 88 of the Act of 13 June 2019 on Conditions of Business Activity related to the Production of and Trade in Explosives, Weapons and Ammunition, as well as Products and Technologies to be used for Military or Police Purposes. A criterion taken into account by the Department when assessing applications for the granting of export licences is, inter alia, a risk assessment as to whether the arms to be exported could be used for activities in violation of international humanitarian law or whether the granting of the licence would have a negative impact on respect for human rights.”
Appendix 2 (information of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
Recommendations
[page 46]
“In their activities supporting Polish entrepreneurs, public procurement and development aid projects implementation, Polish foreign missions are guided by the following principles requiring them to:”
(…) “- acquire and expand knowledge of the host country – its history, social and economic problems, culture and customs in the context of developing business contacts; develop and continuously update risk and threat maps as regards human rights in the host country taking into account periodic reports prepared within the framework of the UN and the EU;”
“The Government will establish networks among Spanish companies or that the ones that operate in Spain for the promotion of: measures, procedures or internal systems that can effectively contribute to the prevention and/or mitigation of the negative consequences of business activities on human rights; as well as for the dissemination of good practices aimed to avoid these consequences, or to influence their avoidance, reduction or remedy. The establishment of procedures for internal assessment and determination of action will be promoted in a manner that avoids other negative consequences on human rights.”
Measure 8
“The Monitoring Commission will design and submit to the Government the adoption of an incentive system that includes both large companies and Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) that carry out policies in the field of human rights. These incentives may be economic, commercial, visibility and image, or other nature, to encourage companies to have policies and reliably certify that they have implemented adequate procedures at a global level according to their size and circumstances, namely:
A public commitment to assume its responsibility to respect human rights in accordance with the provisions of the Principle no. 16;
A process of due diligence aligned with the sectorial guides regarding the OECD (due diligence guidance), and based on the dialogue with stakeholders that allows identification, prevention, mitigation, and accountability of how they address the impact of their own activities and those that are directly related to their business relationships in accordance with the provisions of Principles no. 17 to no. 21;
Some processes that allow to remedy all the negative consequences on human rights that have caused or contributed to provoke according to what is established in Principles no. 22, no.29, no. 30, no. 31.”
Guiding Principle 3
Measure 10
“In order to increase transparency, and the confidence of consumers and investors on Spanish companies, the Government will compile the reports that companies write voluntarily, in accordance with the Spanish Strategy for Corporate Social Responsibility, and the Article 39 of the Sustainable Economy Law. It will be encouraged that these take into account the impact of their activities on human rights, including the value chain, introducing a specific chapter for that purpose. Likewise, and in relation to the reports and reports mentioned in the article 35 2 a) of the Sustainable Economy Law, which binds state business corporations, and public business entities attached to the General State Administration, it will be promoted the inclusion of a section on human rights. In addition, the transposition of Directive 2014/95 / EU on disclosure of non-financial information and information about diversity by certain large companies and certain groups will be carried out.”
“Sweden is carrying out awareness-raising activities on this issue and supports the OECD’s work on how companies are to identify risks in the supply chain and avoid trade in conflict minerals (OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas).”
Annex: Measures taken [page 24]
Action by government agencies
“In its ‘Common Approaches’ recommendations, the OECD prescribes a method that the EKN (and its equivalents in other OECD countries) should follow when assessing the environmental and human rights impacts of projects in particularly sensitive sectors to which it guarantees deliveries by Swedish companies.”
Annex: Measures planned [page 29]
The State as owner
“The Government will work to increase knowledge about the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in state-owned companies and will ensure that these companies, where appropriate, conduct human rights due diligence in order to assess and address any significant risk to human rights.”
2 National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights 2020-23
2.1 Pillar 1: state duty to protect
Guiding Principles 1 to 3
2.1.2 Operational principles: legislative and information policy measures
Measure 8: Human rights in tourism
The federal government supports the Roundtable on Human Rights in Tourism assessment of human rights impacts along the tourism value chain. This project, which will initially focus on Thailand, adopts a multi-stakeholder approach and seeks to develop practical guidelines for the tourism industry as a whole.
Measure 11: Human rights due diligence by public-private development partnerships
The Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) Risk Assessment for Partnerships with the Private Sector takes into account the impact that these partnerships could have on human and employment rights, government structures and the environment. Consequently, the federal government will not work with partners which have repeatedly been involved in human rights abuses or cannot provide cogent evidence that they have substantially reduced their exposure to human rights risks.
The federal government is currently working with other donors on a risk management model for public-private development projects. The outcome of this process, which takes place within the framework of the Private Sector Engagement Working Group of the Donor Committee for Enterprise Development (DCED), could necessitate amendments to the SDC Risk Assessment for Partnerships with the Private Sector.
Objective
Indicator
Responsibility
Prevent human rights risks in public-private development partnerships.
A tangible example that the SDC Risk Assessment guidelines have been implemented, including a human rights risk assessment, prior to entering into a new public-private development partnership.
FDFA [Federal Department of Foreign Affairs],
EAER [Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research].
2.1.5 Policy coherence
Guiding Principle 10
Measure 20: Promotion of the UN Guiding Principles in consultations, human rights dialogue and bilateral projects
The federal government systematically profiles ‘business and human rights’ in political consultations and human rights dialogue conducted with partner States. When preparing consultations and dialogue meetings, the FDFA consults with different federal agencies as well as other interest groups such as the private sector and civil society.
The federal government also promotes the UN Guiding Principles in supporting specific bilateral projects. It also engages in political dialogue and strategic partnerships with the governments of host States to discuss circumstances where regulations, policies, or other action on the part of the host State make it difficult for Swiss business enterprises to respect human rights.
3 Implementing, monitoring and reviewing the NAP
The FDFA [Federal Department of Foreign Affairs] and the EAER [Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research will base its evaluation of NAP implementation on the performance indicators assigned to each measure. All policy instruments include clear objectives as well as performance indicators to gauge the progress the federal government has made on implementation and improve the transparency of the outcomes. The federal government will also explore the possibility of conducting an impact assessment at some point in the future. At the end of the legislative period, the FDFA and the EAER will publish a short joint status report.
3. The core content of the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights
3.2 Action plan for community, land, natural resources and the environment
3.2.1 Overview of the situation
For the mining project, details of improvement of the environmental and social impact assessment system are as follows:
(1) … The scope of the mining project (in accordance with the promotion and conservation of national environmental quality law defined as type 2 or type 3 mines) must include preparing the environmental impact assessment report (EIA or EHIA), dependent upon the context of each case.
(2) Improvements in the environmental and social impact assessment system for mining projects in order to be prudent and concise by requiring public hearings with affected communities, both according to the mineral law and in accordance with the law on promotion and conservation of national environmental quality are as follows:
3.2.3 Action Plan (2019–2022)
Pillar 1: State duties in protecting (Protect)
No.
Issues
Activities
Responsible agencies
Time-frame (2019–2022)
Indicators (wide frame)
Compliance with National Strategy/ SDGs/UNGPs
3.
Environmental and Health Impact Assessment (EIA/ EHIA)
Require the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and the Environmental Health Impact Assessment (EHIA) to assess public participation in a neutral, independent, and transparent manner.
Monitor and investigate after passing the environment evaluation to control the business sector not to violate various rights after the project has been approved.
– Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
– Ministry of Industry
2019–2022
– Doing EIA/EHIA as required by law, with people and communities in the area participating
– Set a process to monitor the project periodically
– National Strategy for Eco-Friendly Development and Growth
– SDG 11, 13, 14
and 15
– UNGPs Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8
Strengthen the current impact assessment process to be stronger, especially in large-scale development projects such as infrastructure and mining and energy projects
– Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
– Ministry of Energy
– Ministry of Industry
– Ministry of Transport
2019–2022
Strictly implementing the EIA/EHIA process especially on large projects
– National Strategy for Eco-Friendly Development and Growth
– National Strategy for Public Sector Rebalancing and Development
– SDG 11, 13, 14 and 15
– UNGPs Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8
Follow up and monitor the implementation of the measures specified in the EIA report for prevention and addressing of expected impacts from the project accurately and quickly in order to be a database of projects to prevent and address the expected effects in the future
– Agency that is authorized to approve the project is the main responsible agency with the following joint agencies:
– Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
– Ministry of Industry
– Ministry of Energy
– Ministry of Transport
2019–2022
Monitoring of compliance with the measures set out in the EIA/EHIA evaluation report for prevention and address the expected effects in the future
– National Strategy for Eco-Friendly Development and Growth
– National Strategy for Public Sector Rebalancing and Development
– SDG 11, 13, 14 and 15
– UNGPs Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8
Pillar 2: Responsibilities of the business sector in respecting of human rights
2.3 EIA/EHIA
State enterprises and the business sector should conduct an EIA/EHIA assessment by an independent, credible and accredited expert.
State enterprises and the business sector should conduct an EIA/EHIA assessment in accordance with the guidelines as specified in the relevant laws, regulations and measures.
State enterprises and the business sector should build mutual understanding with the people and communities affected by operations in the surrounding areas and provide opportunities for those persons to participate in the EIA/EHIA process.
State enterprises and the business sector should cooperate with the government and various departments in the event of investigation of the correctness and transparency in the making of the EIA/EHIA.
3.4 Action Plan on Cross Border Investment and Multinational Enterprises
3.4.3 Action Plan (2019–2022)
Pillar 1: State duties in protecting (Protect)
No.
Issues
Activities
Responsible agencies
Time-frame (2019–2022)
Indicators (wide frame)
Compliance with National Strategy/ SDGs/UNGPs
1.
Amendments of laws, regulations, policies
and related measures
Establish guidelines and procedures to provide comments to the contract that the government has with transnational corporations, considering the Human Rights Assessment
– Office of the Attorney General
2019–2022
Established guidelines and process to provide comments to the contract that the government has with transnational corporations, considering the Human Rights Assessment
– National Strategy for National Competitiveness Enhancement
– National Strategy for Public Sector Rebalancing and Development
– SDG 8 and 16
– UNGPs Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10
3.
Promotion of Investment
Require studies and assessments of the risk and impact on human rights (human rights due diligence) before undertaking large-scale projects or projects related to public services, including in the case of joint investment between the government and private sectors to prepare conducting projects relating to infrastructure and public services that are a duty of the state, including in the case that the government has assigned the private sector to do the project instead
– Office of the Economic and Social Development Council
– Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (Bureau of Policy and Environmental Plan)
– Ministry of Transport
– Ministry of Finance (Office of the State Enterprise Policy Office)
– Ministry of Energy
– Ministry of Industry (Office of Economic Cooperation and Neighbouring Countries (Public Organization))
2019–2022
A study to assess the risk and human rights impact (human rights due diligence) before the implementation of large-scale projects
– National Strategy for National Competitiveness Enhancement
– National Strategy for Human Capital Development and Strengthening
– National Strategy for Public Sector Rebalancing and Development
Consider the possibility of establishing guidelines or agreements on trans-boundary EIA and surveillance on cross- border effects in health, agriculture, society, land, natural resources and environment
– Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (Office of Policy and Environmental Plans)
2019–2022
– Possibility discussed or studied of establishing guidelines or agreements on trans-boundary EIA
– Measurement discussed and selected to monitor the impact of cross-border work on health, agriculture, society and environment
– National Strategy for Eco-Friendly Development and Growth
– National Strategy for Public Sector Rebalancing and Development
– SDG 8, 13, 14, 15, 16
– UNGPs Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10
5.
Development of government operations
Require a central agency to supervise and inspect in the event of international environmental impact
– Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
2019–2022
Central agency responsible for supervision and inspection in the event of international environmental impact considered and determined
– National Strategy for Eco-Friendly Development and Growth
– National Strategy for Public Sector Rebalancing and Development
The UK 2016 Updated NAP notes in The existing UK legal and policy framework that [page 6]:
“The UNGPs set out the general regulatory and policy measures a state may take in order to fulfil their duty to protect against human rights violations by third parties, including business enterprises. They recommend that states should:
Encourage, or require, business enterprises to communicate their work to address human rights impacts;”
The UK 2016 Updated NAP further notes in The existing UK legal and policy framework that [page 8]:
“The Government exercises controls on the export of “strategic” goods and technology through the export licensing system. All export licence applications are rigorously assessed against the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria. These assessments take full account of possible human rights impacts; a licence would not be granted if we judge there is a clear risk that the proposed export might be used for internal repression.”
The UK 2016 Updated NAP, in the section devoted to The state’s duty to protect human rights: The existing UK legal and policy framework mentions the impact assessment with regards to controls on the export highlights that [page 8]:
“The Government exercises controls on the export of “strategic” goods and technology through the export licensing system. All export license applications are rigorously assessed against the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria. These assessments take full account of possible human rights impacts; a license would not be granted if we judge there is a clear risk that the proposed export might be used for internal repression.”
The UK 2016 Updated NAP makes a reference to impact assessment in Government Commitments section while discussing UNGPs Reporting Framework and Unilever human rights report [page 17]:
“The Commission is working in partnership with the Financial Reporting Council and Shift to publish guidance early in 2016 to help company boards to understand what they are expected to know, do and say about human rights. It will provide company boards with smart questions to ask of the business, help them to understand how human rights risks align with business risk, and bring clarity and coherence to different human rights reporting requirements. The Commission is working with the Institute of Human Rights and Business to publish guidance in early 2016 for UK businesses in the care and private security sectors. The guidance will include an assessment of the main human rights impacts in each sector and practical guidance for managers in areas such as human resources, operational delivery and procurement.”
“… The U.S. government generates and vets relevant information that can be used to conduct appropriate due diligence and risk assessment. While the concept of due diligence is increasingly well understood and accepted among businesses, the tools and resources available to effectively conduct detailed and appropriate risk and impact assessments can be sparse, particularly in many of the complex environments where this type of data is most needed.
To help address those gaps, the U.S. government deploys significant resources to produce and disseminate a variety of reports that help describe the state of human rights, labor rights, commercial, and investment conditions across the world, and produces international company profiles to provide U.S. companies with information to help them vet potential business partners. In certain instances, the government also funds third-party reports that contain information useful to those seeking to promote and implement RBC. As part of the ongoing effort to facilitate RBC, the U.S. government will continue to enhance these resources, making them increasingly user-friendly and easier to find for the purposes of corporate human rights due diligence and social impact assessment.”
A human rights impact assessment (HRIA) is a process for identifying, understanding, assessing and addressing the adverse effects of a business project or activities on the human rights enjoyment of impacted rights-holders such as workers and community members. HRIAs can take various shapes and be led by different stakeholders, but should share the ultimate goal of protecting human rights and improving accountability of businesses for their adverse impacts on human rights.
Taiwan (2020-2024)
Vietnam (2023-2027)