Catalogue of business cases
Use the filters to explore the various case briefs included in the database and how the cases are linked to the SDGs and targets. You can browse by keywords, issues, due diligence steps and SDGs.
Case brief | Issues | Goals | Targets | Due diligence |
---|---|---|---|---|
Multinational retailer acts to protect suppliers and its workersWhile H&M, the Swedish retail giant, decided early on in the COVID-19 pandemic that it would temporarily halt new orders it maintained its commitments to existing orders and would not alter the agreed terms, highlighting the potential huge impacts the pandemic would have on garment workers. |
||||
Businesses affirm role of human rights defendersThe Business Network on Civic Freedoms and Human Rights Defenders, an informal network of companies supported by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, The B Team and the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), released a statement in January 2019, in which it affirmed the "crucial role” of human rights defenders and the network’s commitment to the protection of civic freedoms. The business network includes members from a broad range of industries - consumer goods, mining, apparel & footwear, banking, and jewellery sectors – and is made up of Unilever, adidas, Primark, ABN AMRO, Domini, Anglo American, Leber Jeweler and the Investor Alliance on Human Rights. This network stated that its members, and businesses in general, “have a duty to respect human rights and human rights defenders” in order to be aligned with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Fulfilling this duty, the statement says, “enhances the private sector’s ‘social license’ to operate”. In particular, in the statement, the various businesses commit to partnering with defenders to identify problems in their businesses and encouraging due diligence and in the case of harm, access to remedy; exploring how their policies can be strengthened in order to protect human rights defenders; encouraging governments to protect civic freedoms and human rights defenders, as well as prevent abuse, harassment, intimidation, physical attacks, or limitations to the freedom of speech, assembly, association and movement of these defenders; and working to find how businesses can positively contribute to threatened human rights as they relate to human rights defenders. According to the statement, the network itself can be used to exchange information between members as well as to take collective action to address systemic issues, thereby increasing the members leverage to address identified negative human rights impacts on human rights defenders. |
Freedom of association and collective bargaining, Freedom of expression | |||
Group of leading companies pushes for transparent tax systemsThe B Team is a global group of corporate leaders working together to ensure that companies must not only be driven by profit, but must also take concerted, positive action that will ensure business becomes a driving force for social, environmental and economic benefit. They have in co-operation with civil society (e.g. ActionAid UK, Oxfam and Transparency International), institutional investors and several leading businesses (e.g. Allianz, Maersk, Natura Cosméticos, Safaricom and Unilever) developed its Responsible Tax Principles. The Principles are a framework detailing what the B Team and its collaborators believe good tax practice should look like and cover areas such as tax management strategy, interactions with authorities, and reporting. The Principles outline that taxes are a critical resource to help realise the SDGs through enhanced public services and investments. The B Team also outlines other important links between responsible taxation and the SDGs, including: Accountability to taxpaying citizens, accountability being a key principle of both human rights and the 2030 Agenda; Clear and robust tax rules promote predictability for businesses and encourages long term investments needed to realise the SDGs; Encouraging certain investment behaviours and discouraging certain negative social outcomes such as smoking; Using taxes to redistribute income, which addresses inequality and ensures that no-one is left behind. |
Tax, anti-corruption and human rights | |||
Energy company calls on regulators to demand increased tax transparency from peersUK energy and FTSE 100 company SSE was the first to receive the UK’s Fair Tax Mark in 2015 and has since received it for 5 consecutive years. In its 2018 tax report, SSE says that “tax is the fundamental way in which businesses contribute to the societies that enabled their business success. Without it, we believe the public legitimacy of companies is diminished.” SSE also explicitly links its tax contributions to the SDGs, stating that “SSE is committed to supporting the SDGs and recognises that they are not only for governments to achieve, but for business and civil society to contribute to as well.” SSE further recognises the links between tax and the success of business by acknowledging that “the payment of tax by business is the fundamental way in which profitable businesses contribute to the communities and society that enabled their business success.” SSE also calls on the UK energy regulator Ofgem to demand greater tax transparency from all energy suppliers in the UK due to the close links between tax payments and funding for public services. The Fair Tax Mark, a not-for-profit community benefit society, is a UK certification scheme launched in 2014 that “recognises organisations that pay the right amount of corporation tax at the right time and in the right place.” One of its goals is to bridge the gap between corporate responsibility and the wide tax justice movement. |
Tax, anti-corruption and human rights | |||
Education company discloses tax arrangements and makes link between tax contributions and the fulfilment of the SDGsPearson’s (a UK based education company) 2018 tax report contains its tax principles, that commit to e.g. aligning tax payments with actual economic activity, as well as not using tax havens to avoid paying tax elsewhere. In the report, Pearson also accounts for why it has companies in tax havens such as the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and Delaware, and discloses a financing arrangement it has in Ireland which reduces its tax contribution, but which has been approved by the Irish and UK tax authorities. The tax report also details how much tax Pearson paid in each jurisdiction and how many employees they have in each of them. Through its tax reporting Pearson has improved its transparency, disclosed its tax arrangements and explained its presence in tax havens, and explicitly linked its tax contributions to e.g. funding public services and education as well as contributing to a more equal society – all of which contributes to the fulfilment of various SDGs. In its 2018 tax report, Pearson states that its tax contribution help to “fund vital public services, including education, as well as investment in infrastructure to fuel economic growth and promote a more equal society.” The company further says that companies “need to strengthen public trust in the taxation system and that one way companies can do this is by being open about their tax practices.” In 2018, Pearson won the PWC Building Public Trust Award for its tax reporting. |
Tax, anti-corruption and human rights | |||
Multinational telecommunications company publishes country-by-country tax reportAs part of its tax transparency, Vodafone has in addition to aggregate global figures, started publishing in its annual tax report how much tax they pay in each jurisdiction where they operate, the total revenue and profit figures and how many employees they have in that jurisdiction. This is a part of its identified responsibility to society as a whole and that taxes due should be fully paid, since governments need those funds to e.g. fund necessary infrastructure projects. The tax reports also detail at length the company’s tax approach, its reasons for having operations in certain jurisdictions considered tax havens, and also provide publicly the official country-by-country report in conformity with the standards developed by the OECD-led BEPS process. In developing its tax report, Vodafone has engaged with civil society, including organisations such as Oxfam and Action Aid. By providing this information publicly in an accessible format, Vodafone provides an example of tax transparency for other multinationals. While good tax transparency does not equate with good tax practices, transparency can lead to increased accountability to citizens and tax authorities, and provides opportunities to assess corporate contributions to domestic resource mobilisation, a key component of SDG 17. |
Tax, anti-corruption and human rights | |||
Company prohibits facilitation payments throughout global activitiesCarlsberg Group’s Anti-Bribery & Corruption policy contains principles which seek to go beyond compliance with customary practice in their prohibition of facilitation payments. The principles note that while facilitation payments “may be considered a customary way of doing business in some countries” they are disallowed by the company. The policy acknowledges exceptional circumstances, such as the threat of employee safety, which would make non-compliance unavoidable, and mandates that an incident report be submitted to the VP Group Compliance in such a case. The policy prohibits such payments whether they are made directly or indirectly through a third party. |
Tax, anti-corruption and human rights | |||
Company taking practical steps to imlpement zero-tolerance policy towards corruption in value-chainCoca-Cola has committed to eliminating all forms of corruption in Myanmar within its own operations and within its value chain, including bottlers. In order to protect its drivers from being forced to pay “facilitation payment”, in 2015 Coca-Cola equipped the drivers of Coca-Cola trucks with an anti-corruption card highlighting Coca-Cola’s commitment towards no bribery or facilitation payments. The cards were available in Burmese and English, and stated that the drivers were prohibited from paying any bribes to the traffic police or local road transport authorities. The card clarified that the drivers would be required to report to the management as any such bribes or facilitation payments would be a violation of anti-corruption laws. Though the drivers were initially met with resistance, over time the local traffic police reportedly started respecting Coca-Cola’s policy against corruption and there was a decrease in bribery demands. |
Tax, anti-corruption and human rights | |||
Global multi-stakeholder group undertake cross-sectoral and collaborative efforts to end corruptionThe UNGC Anti-Corruption Working Group is comprised of professionals from companies, business associations, civil societies, academia, and international organisations working to facilitate cooperation and align their efforts in increasing impact. Specific issues that they work to overcome include fighting corruption in the supply chain, implementation of the UN Convention Against Corruption, anti-corruption risk assessment and reporting, and other areas targeted to members’ area of business. Companies that are a part of the Working Group have an opportunity to exchange experiences and good practices around anti-corruption efforts and contribute to the development of leading guidance whilst engaging with other stakeholders to take action against corruption and serve as the voice of the private sector on issues related to transparency and accountability as it relates to sustainable development. |
Tax, anti-corruption and human rights | |||
Dam project cancelled after severe impacts are identifiedEnel (previously Endesa Chile) planned to develop six dams in the Patagonia region of Chile. This concerned the local communities who are highly dependent on tourism in the area for their livelihoods. Endesa carried out social and environmental impact assessments and ended up abandoning the project after local communities and potentially affected people opposed it, despite having already invested $52 million in the project. The reason provided by management was, in part, because Enel strives to only develop projects that have “the acceptance of the [local] communities”. |
Community rights |
DISCLAIMERThe case briefs featured on this site are not an endorsement of a particular company, their approach to human rights as such or their business model in general. Case briefs serve only as isolated illustrative examples for inspiration. The case briefs do not reflect all commitments or actions by any given company. In developing the case briefs DIHR has NOT evaluated the actual human rights and developmental outcomes or impacts of mentioned policies and activities. As such cases have been included for their ability to conceptually illustrate the link between human rights due diligence and sustainable development, not due to their verified impacts.