Human Rights Risks in Global Supply Chains: Applying the UK Modern Slavery Act to the Public Sector
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12501 |
| Published date | 01 November 2017 |
| Date | 01 November 2017 |
| Author | Olga Martin‐Ortega |
Human Rights Risks in Global Supply Chains:
Applying the UK Modern Slavery Act to the
Public Sector
Olga Martin-Ortega
University of Greenwich, School of Law
Abstract
Global supply chains (GSCs) are organised through complex networks which leave workers vulnerable to exploitation and
unprotected against abusive labour practices including modern slavery. In the past decade’s, attention has focused on busi-
ness responsibilities for the impact of commercial activities on human rights with little focus on the role of states as economic
actors and their duties regarding their own supply chain, including through public procurement. This article analyses the appli-
cation of the Transparency in Supply Chains provision (TiSCs) of the UK Modern Slavery Act (2015) to the public sector. Since
2016 commercial organisations are obliged to report on efforts to identify, prevent, and mitigate modern slavery in their sup-
ply chain. This includes over one hundred higher education institutions (HEIs). This article finds that while most reporting in
the first year fall short of what is expected of institutions according to Government guidance the exercise of reporting has ini-
tiated an important process of awareness. HEIs face a steep learning curve to develop effective human rights due diligence in
their supply chain however, the TiSCs obligation has proved a catalyst for a wider process of understanding human rights risks
and responsibilities of the public sector, and more specifically HEIs.
Policy implications
•Box-ticking exercises do not represent the spirit and ultimate aim of the regulation. The Slavery and Human Trafficking
Statement (the statement) should be a live document, which should drive policy change, commitments and behaviours to
guarantee that purchasing choices do not contribute to the violation of the rights of labourers. Public bodies should have
the necessary support and guidance to comply with their obligations.
•Through due diligence processes, public buyers should establish systematic ways to access and assess information on their
supply chain, and avenues for effective dialogue and engagement with suppliers. Preventing, mitigating and remediating
human rights risks in supply chains does not necessarily imply terminating relationship with suppliers. Universities need to
develop adequate due diligence processes to satisfy their responsibilities under the MSA and transform the way they think
about procurement. They need to devote the necessary resources and human capital to them; public procurement teams
alone cannot undertake such responsibilities.
•Public buyers have a heightened responsibility to combat human rights violations in their supply chain and as such it
should be reflected in the MSA. New obligations to reflect this responsibility and social expectations should be introduced
and effective guidance should be developed, as well as sanctions for non-compliance. Public buyers are key actors in
bringing positive change and transforming GSCs to minimise and address the impact of modern slavery. Considerations to
amend the MSA to include specific provisions for public authorities should be taken seriously in order to guarantee an
appropriate role of public buyers in the combat against modern slavery in the GSC.
•Several states are considering the development of UK-style modern slavery legislation. They should establish clear obliga-
tions for public buyers in these normative developments and provide the necessary guidance to guarantee the fulfilment
of the state obligation to protect human rights when acting as an economic agent, beyond the ad hoc inclusion of some
public buyers among the reporting organisations, as it has happened in the UK.
Transparency in supply chains as a means to
promote respect for human rights
Global production of goods is organised in complex
global supply chains (GSCs) which involve hundreds of
suppliers (companies) scattered around the globe and
connected through advanced information and communi-
cation technologies. (Locke, 2013; Martin-Ortega et al
2015).
These production systems are highly volatile, as they are
very dependent on a constantly changeable consumer
demand, which makes planning for production, and there-
fore planning for investment in materials, technologies and
workforce difficult. This has led to the flexibilisation of the
workforce through subcontracting, the use of temporary
and casual workforce and adding overtime to address
changing demand requirements (Berliner et al., 2015; Locke,
2013). Preference of short-term and temporary contracts
©2017 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Global Policy (2017) 8:4 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12501
Global Policy Volume 8 . Issue 4 . November 2017
512
Special Section Article
To continue reading
Request your trial