PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 6, 2026Human Rights Quarterly2 citations

Human Rights Due Diligence: Views of the Process, From the Ground Up

View Full Paper
RCRachel ChambersSHShareen HertelCRCory Runstedler

Key Points

  • The aim is to explore the role of local actors in implementing human rights due diligence laws and their impact on corporate responsibility.
  • Analyzed primary documents at national levels in multiple locations where HRDD is being implemented
  • Examined laws and corporate compliance practices related to HRDD
  • Identified gaps in stakeholder engagement and power dynamics between corporations and local communities.
  • Found minimal specification of stakeholder engagement in HRDD laws
  • Identified unequal bargaining power in designing remedies for harm
  • Concluded that current HRDD practices do not effectively disrupt power imbalances despite intended goals.

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Human rights due diligence (HRDD) laws have emerged as a vehicle for extending oversight within global supply chains, encumbering corporations with the responsibility for “knowing the chain” of business partners, regardless of where in the world production takes place. But there is comparably little analysis of the role that local level actors and communities play in the implementation of related obligations by businesses. Laws at the national level and the regional level lock in corporate responsibility with the aim of protecting individual and community stakeholders and their natural environment from harm, including the European Union Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). But stakeholders at the grassroots level are typically ignored or tokenized in the process, despite the centrality of their knowledge to HRDD. This article analyzes primary documents produced at the national level in multiple sites where HRDD is unfolding to reveal minimal specification of stakeholder engagement in laws and corporate compliance practices. This lack of clarity results in unequal bargaining power in the design and execution of remedies for harm. The power imbalance between corporations and stakeholders is thus not disrupted, despite the laudable aims of HRDD law. Addressing this imbalance is critical to improving the legitimacy and effectiveness of HRDD.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Chambers et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698585aa8f7c464f230092echttps://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2026.a982246
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper