Monitoring Forced Labour and Slavery in Global Supply Chains: The Case of the California Act on Transparency in Supply Chains
| Published date | 01 November 2017 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12512 |
| Date | 01 November 2017 |
Monitoring Forced Labour and Slavery in
Global Supply Chains: The Case of the
California Act on Transparency in Supply
Chains
Marieke Koekkoek, Axel Marx and Jan Wouters
Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies (GGS), University of Leuven
Abstract
Supply chains have more and more become global supply chains, due to which it becomes increasingly more difficult for
states to monitor whether the production process of goods entering the territory has been free of labour rights abuses. States
are less able to hold corporate entities accountable that are knowingly or unknowingly benefiting from labour rights abuses.
Transparency measures have been suggested as a way to close this accountability gap and circumvent traditional issues of
enforcement when production and consumption of goods takes place in different jurisdictions. This paper discusses whether
transparency measures live up to these expectations by assessing the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act (California
Act). We analyse whether the Act does indeed contribute to greater accountability by filling the existing information gap
between companies and consumers. The workings of the Act, as well as its impact on primary stakeholders will be deter-
mined. The paper discusses action taken by companies, consumers and non-governmental organizations by looking at the
degree to which the new California Act generated differences in behaviour and practices of these affected parties. Based on
this information the question is answered which possibilities and limitations are connected to the use of transparency mea-
sures in combatting the abuse of labour rights in the global supply chain. It is discussed which lessons can be learned from
the California Act and which policy implications this could have for future transparency measures.
Policy implications
•Policymakers need to be aware of ‘loose ends’when drafting transparency related legislation. Important details such as
the frequency and working of audits, the results of audits, frequency of information updates, should be included in the
disclosed information.
•Transparency measures should accommodate for the establishment of mechanisms which gather and compare the infor-
mation creating perspective with regards to the performance of individual companies. Such a comparative mechanism
should be easily accessible and, preferably, monitored and updated by an objective organ.
•Transparency measures should allow for private citizens and/or other stakeholders to address grievances through legal
action. To ensure that companies would not be disproportionally confronted with legal claims, transparency measures
should include pre-set conditions under which individuals could bring a claim to court.
From information to accountability
Domestic consumption relies increasingly on global supply
chains since technological advancement has allowed for the
production processes of most goods to take place in more
than one country. Due to this fragmented process it has
become significantly more difficult for national governments
to control and regulate the production of goods entering
the domestic market, in particular when it comes to the
enforcement of international and domestic labour rights.
The greater the distance between the regulator and the pro-
duction-site, the more vulnerable the global supply chain
becomes to abuse. The risk that products are derived from
forced or slave labour becomes a very real one. In an effort
to reduce this risk most traditionally consuming countries
(as opposed to producing countries) have looked for effec-
tive ways to monitor the global supply chain. In practice,
this has been a difficult process. Most initiatives have either
been aimed solely at regulating the national market, or have
resulted in international instruments addressing efforts that
should be taken by states. One disadvantage of existing
international approaches towards the protection of labour
rights is that they do not effectively address the role compa-
nies play in the global supply chain, since the actions of pri-
vate parties do not fall within the scope of public
international law. Firms are not easily held accountable for
the way they shape and make use of global supply chains
(Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum, 2013).
©2017 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Global Policy (2017) 8:4 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12512
Global Policy Volume 8 . Issue 4 . November 2017
522
Special Section Article
To continue reading
Request your trial