Heads up: this activity does not match your current filter.
It's still shown so you can read it. Change or clear the filter in the side nav under Product filter.
Activity HRa1.2
Objective
Ethical Materials Procurement
Concept
Human Rights
Activity Type
Impact
Rating System Application
Conduct a supply chain risk assessment and action plan
Scope
The Owner shall thoroughly assess its highest risks within the supply chain to identify, prevent, and mitigate negative human rights impacts. The process shall include assessing actual and potential human rights impacts (e.g., forced labor, child labor, or unsafe working conditions), prioritization of risks based on severity and attribution, creating an action plan based upon the findings, and creating a mechanism for tracking responses. Implementation of the action plan is outside the scope of this Activity.
Requirements 119
Act to Avoid Harm
- 01.
A risk assessment for the top ten (10) products/materials with the highest spend plus any from the top riskiest materials list if not already in top 10 products with highest spend (see Guidelines below) that includes the following:
- a.
Supply chain mapping that contains the agents, vendors, producers, manufacturers, distributors, contractors, or relevant entities (Suppliers) at as many levels of the supply chain, including their location, as can reasonably be identified, but no less than Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 at a minimum.
- b.
Identification and assessment of the actual or potential high-priority human rights risks that includes Step 4, 5, and 6 from Guidelines below
- a.
- 02.
List actions to prevent or mitigate identified high-priority human rights risks from Requirement 01 above.
Benefit Impacted Parties
- 03.
Mechanisms to track the effectiveness of implemented actions, ensuring continuous improvement.
Contribute to Solutions
- 04.
Ongoing processes to monitor human rights risks as they change over time.
- 05.
A preferred list that includes products and materials that meet the Project's ethical materials procurement requirements to serve as a reference for procurement decisions.
Due diligence shall cover negative human rights impacts that the Project may cause or contribute to through its own activities, or which may be directly linked to its operations or activities by its business relationships.
Indicators
The performance indicator is the percentage of high-risk supply chain assessed for human rights risks. The first context indicator is total number of Suppliers assessed for human rights risks in the supply chain. The second context indicator is total number of products and materials assessed for human rights risks.
To calculate the performance indicator:
This is expressed mathematically as:
(# of Suppliers assessed for human rights risks / # of Suppliers in the supply chain) x 100
Scoring
Points assignment
| Points | Percentage of High-Risk Supply Chain Assessed |
|---|---|
| 4 points | 0-16% high-risk supply chain assessed |
| 5 points | 17-33% high-risk supply chain assessed |
| 6 points | 34-50% high-risk supply chain assessed |
| 7 points | 51-66% high-risk supply chain assessed |
| 8 points | 67-83% high-risk supply chain assessed |
| 9 points | 84-100% high-risk supply chain assessed |
Additional points assignment
| Points | Requirements met |
|---|---|
| +1 point | Requirement #3 met |
| +1 point | Requirement #4 met |
| +1 point | Requirement #5 met |
Documentation
- 01.
List of financial, human, and material resources utilized for this activity.
- 02.
Supply chain highest risks table (see template below) including:
- a.
list of suppliers, vendors, and contractors categorized by Tiers (Tier 1, Tier 2, etc.), including profiles for each supplier with location and products/services provided.
- b.
List of identified impacted parties within each tier of the supply chain, with records of any surveys, interviews, or on-site visits conducted, including findings or insights.
- c.
Report detailing the analysis of impacted party engagement results, consultation records with third-party experts, software application outputs, or desktop research findings for identified highest human rights risks.
- d.
Scoring sheet detailing severity of each identified human rights risk, with calculations and justifications for each score assigned.
- e.
Report detailing the attribution level for each identified human rights risk, with justifications and reasoning for each attribution level assigned.
- f.
Comprehensive list of company policies addressing high-priority human rights issues, supported by records of impacted party engagements, drafts of new policies, approval records, and communication records ensuring policy awareness.
- g.
Detailed mitigation plans for each high-priority risk, supported by training materials and attendance records, impacted party engagement records, implemented safeguards, and periodic process review records.
- a.
- 03.
Matrix or chart plotting each human rights issue based on impact and attribution, with visual representation highlighting high-priority risks and accompanying notes.
Guidance
On limits of Owner responsibility
Mapping supply chains does not necessarily imply that an Owner is responsible for all impacts and risks associated with every entity in the chain. As stated in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, "where business enterprises have large numbers of entities in their value chains, it may be unreasonably difficult to conduct due diligence for adverse human rights impacts across them all. If so, business enterprises should identify general areas where the risk of adverse human rights impacts is more significant, whether due to certain suppliers' or clients' operating context, the particular operations, products, or services involved, or other relevant considerations and prioritize those for human rights due diligence."
How to identify high-priority human rights risks xxvi
Step-by-step guidance for identifying high-priority human rights risks in supply chains:
Step 1: Supply Chain Mapping
- Begin by listing all agents, vendors, producers, manufacturers, distributors, contractors, or relevant entities (Suppliers) involved in your supply chain. This can be achieved through the following:
- Requiring Tier 1 Suppliers to list their Tier 2 and so on as well as each Supplier listing products and materials to be sourced as part of the project
- Using supply chain mapping software that has database connections to shipping bills of lading or other technology innovations
- Third-party supply chain mapping entity
- Categorize suppliers based on tiers: Tier 1 (direct suppliers), Tier 2 (suppliers of Tier 1), and so on.
- Document the location, products/services provided, and scale of operation for each supplier.
- Map all specified products and materials in your supply chain, especially beyond Tier 3, as they might pose a high risk. By doing so, you can identify and include Suppliers linked to these high-risk items on your map.
Step 2: Impacted Party Engagement (where possible)
- Identify impacted parties within each tier of your supply chain.
- Prioritize engagement with vulnerable groups within these tiers.
- Use surveys, interviews, and on-site visits to gather insights on potential human rights concerns.
Step 3: Comprehensive Rights Assessment
- Identify and list all potential human rights risks using any of the following methods:
- Analyze impacted party engagement results
- Consult a third-party expert in human rights assessment
- Utilize a software application that identifies human rights risks in supply chains (see Guidance below)
- Conduct desktop research using materials lists (see Guidance below), official databases, and other open-source intelligence resources
Step 4: Determine severity of Impact
- Number of people affected (scope) is given a score of 1 to 3 where:
- 3 = >20% total population in impact area or >50% identifiable group
- 2 = >10% total population or 11-49% identifiable group
- 1 = >5% total population or <10% identifiable group
- Severity of issue (scale) is given a score of 1 to 3 where:
- 3 = Will cause death or adverse health effects that could lead to significant reduction in quality of life and/or longevity
- 2 = A tangible human right infringement of access to basic life necessities (including education, livelihood, etc.)
- 1 = all other impacts
- Remediability (whether the consequence can be reversed) is given a score of 1 to 3 where:
- 3 = difficult
- 2 = moderate
- 1 = easy
Score each impact by adding scores for each aspect of Severity. A score of 3 is considered low severity. A score of 4 is considered medium severity. A score of 5 or higher for any impact is considered high severity.
Step 5: Assign an attribution level (connection to company)
- Directly caused = high – the actions of the Owner alone are sufficient to cause the negative impact
- Contributes = medium – the actions of the Owner lead to or create incentive for another entity to cause the negative impact
- Directly linked = low – the Owner has a direct and active involvement in the impact, either through its own actions or through its business relationships
Step 6: Risk Prioritization
- Plot each human rights issue on an x-y axes matrix where impact is on the y-axis with high at the top and low at the bottom, and attribution (connection to company) is on the x-axis with high on the right and low on the left. Use the following model to determine if plotted points fall into the red, which are high-priority risks.
On creating the action plan
Owner should ensure reasonable policy coverage of all high-priority human rights issues.
Policy Development
Establish clear policies that address high-priority human rights issues identified through the Arc exercise.
Steps:
- Examine existing company policies to identify gaps related to high-priority human rights issues.
- Engage with internal and external impacted parties to gather insights and recommendations for policy formulation.
- Develop clear and comprehensive policies addressing each high-priority issue.
- Seek approval from senior management or the board for the newly drafted policies.
- Ensure that all employees, suppliers, and relevant impacted parties are aware of and understand the new policies.
Process Implementation
Implement internal controls and processes to prevent and mitigate potential human rights abuses.
Steps:
- For each high-priority risk identified, develop a specific mitigation plan. This should detail the actions to be taken, responsible parties, timelines, and expected outcomes.
- Develop and implement training programs on human rights best practices for employees, especially those in high-risk areas.
- Regularly engage with impacted parties, including local communities and NGOs, to gather feedback on company operations.
- Implement safeguards, such as identity document checks for new hires, to prevent issues like child labor.
- Regularly review and update processes based on feedback and changing circumstances.
On top riskiest materials list 120
- Bamboo (furnishings, construction materials)
- Bricks
- Calcium carbonate (limestone)
- Carpets
- Copper
- Cotton (textiles, furnishings)
- Electronics (integrated technology solutions)
- Glass
- Gold (electronic components, luxury fittings)
- Granite
- Gravel (crushed stones)
- Polysilicon (solar panels)
- Rubber
- Sandstone
- Sodium carbonate (soda ash)
- Steel
- Stones
- Tantalum ore (coltan) (electronics)
- Tin ore (cassiterite) (electronics)
- Textiles (interior furnishings)
- Timber
- Tungsten ore (wolframite) (electronics)
Referenced Source
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)
- UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011)