Modern slavery and transparency in supply chains: the role of business

2019 ◽  
pp. 187-218
Author(s):  
Colleen Theron
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Value Chain ◽  
Mandatory Reporting ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Voluntary Reporting ◽  
Reporting Requirements ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Uk

This chapter explores how business is implicated by modern slavery, and the salient requirements of the UK Modern Slavery Act (MSA) transparency in supply chain provision, in the context of growing mandatory reporting requirements for business to report transparently on their supply chain impacts. It also examines how business has responded to the MSA. It concludes with some practical steps that business can take to address the risk of modern slavery in its supply chains. Among these are ensuring that top management is supportive of tackling modern slavery in the organisation and supply chains; understanding how these obligations fit within any wider mandatory or voluntary reporting undertaken by the business; putting policies in place; establishing robust due-diligence processes; mapping the supply and value chain of the business.

Modern slavery in supply chains: insights through strategic ambiguity

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-101
Author(s):  
Joanne Meehan ◽  
Bruce D. Pinnington
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sustainable Supply Chains ◽  
Collaborative Action ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Uk

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to assess whether firms' transparency in supply chain (TISC) statements indicate that substantive action is being taken on modern slavery in UK government supply chains.Design/methodology/approachThe authors analyse 66 of the UK government's strategic suppliers' TISC statements and 20 key documents related to the policy intent of the UK Parliament, 2015 TISC requirements. Qualitative document analysis identifies what suppliers say they are doing and what they are not saying to provide novel insights into how firms employ ambiguity to avoid timely action on modern slavery in their supply chains A set of propositions are developed.FindingsThe authors elaborate the concepts of time and change in socially sustainable supply chains and illustrate how firms use ambiguity in TISC statements as a highly strategic form of action to defend the status quo, reduce accountability and delay action for modern slavery within supply chains. The authors identify three ambiguous techniques: defensive reassurance, transfer responsibility and scope reduction that deviate from the policy intention of collaborative action.Social implicationsThe results illustrates how ambiguity is preventing firms from taking collaborative action to tackle modern slavery in their supply chains. The lack of action as a result of ambiguity protects firms, rather than potential victims of modern slavery.Originality/valuePrior research focuses on technical compliance rather than the content of firms' TISC statements. This qualitative study provides novel insights into the policy-resistant effects of ambiguity and highlights the dynamic and instrumental role of modern slavery reporting. Theoretically, we identify accountability as an essential concept to address the causes of modern slavery in supply chains and for developing collaborative supply chain environments to tackle the issues.

scholarly journals Corporate Responses to Tackling Modern Slavery: A Comparative Analysis of Australia, France and the United Kingdom

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Fiona McGaughey ◽  
Hinrich Voss ◽  
Holly Cullen ◽  
Matthew C. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Mandatory Reporting ◽  
Manufacturing Companies ◽  
Supply Chain Risk ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Reporting Requirements ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Uk

Abstract The business and human rights agenda is gaining momentum internationally, perhaps best evidenced through recent legislative responses to tackling modern slavery. Using a reflexive law lens, we analyse three recent laws – the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015, the French ‘duty of vigilance’ law of 2017, and the Australian Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Cth). The three laws, or their accompanying guidance, share characteristics in terms of reporting requirements: the supply chain; risk mapping/assessment and management; analysis of subsidiary and supply chain risk; and effectiveness. The French Act has a broader scope as it is a due diligence, rather than a reporting law and includes obligations with regard to human rights and fundamental freedoms, health and safety, and the environment. It is the only Act of the three with substantive penalty provisions. All reporting requirements in the French and Australian Acts are mandatory, but the UK Act has limited mandatory reporting requirements. We find that only 22 companies globally will be required to report under all three laws. Using a subset of this dataset, we analysed 59 French vigilance plans and UK modern slavery statements published by nine manufacturing companies. This provided some preliminary analysis of how businesses have reported under the French Droit de Vigilance and the UK Modern Slavery Act (reports under the Australian Modern Slavery Act for these companies were not published at time of writing). Overall, businesses are using less demanding measures such as introducing policies and delivering training more commonly than the somewhat more resource-intensive activities such as audits. The more onerous requirements of the French law were reflected in the content and level of detail in the vigilance plans, compared with the UK modern slavery statements. However, for some companies, there were strong similarities between the UK and French publications, indicating ‘creep’ from the French Act into UK reports or a ‘race to the top’.

Using the risk-based approach to curb modern slavery in the supply chain

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-322
Author(s):  
Ehi Eric Esoimeme
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Money Laundering ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
The Uk

Purpose This paper aims to critically examine the modern slavery statements of Anglo American Plc. and Marks and Spencer Group Plc. to determine the level of effectiveness of the risk assessment and risk mitigation measures of both companies and provide recommendations on how the risk assessment and risk mitigation measures of both companies could be strengthened. Design/methodology/approach The analysis took the form of a desk study, which analysed various documents and reports such as the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015, the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 (Transparency in Supply Chains) Regulations 2015, the UK Guidance issued under Section 54(9) of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, the 2018 Global Slavery Index, funded by Forrest’s Walk Free Foundation, the Anglo American Plc. Modern Slavery Statement of 2017/18, the Marks and Spencer Modern Slavery Statement of 2017/18, the Financial Action Task Force Guidance on the Risk Based Approach to Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (High Level Principles and Procedures) 2007, the Financial Action Task Force International Standards On Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism and Proliferation (The FATF Recommendations) 2012, the Australia Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Rules Instrument 2007 (No. 1) (as amended), the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada Guidance on the risk-based approach to combatting money laundering and terrorist financing 2017 and the Central Bank of Nigeria (Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism in Banks and Other Financial Institutions in Nigeria) Regulations, 2013. Findings This paper determined that the standard due diligence measures and the enhanced due diligence measures of Anglo American Plc. are not effective enough to identify/assess the risk(s) of modern slavery in the supply chains reason being that Anglo American Plc. does not use diverse methods/methodologies for her due diligence programme. This paper, however, determined that the standard due diligence measures and the enhanced due diligence measures of Marks and Spencer Group Plc. are effective enough to identify/assess the risk(s) of modern slavery in the supply chains because Marks and Spencer adopts diverse methods/methodologies for her due diligence programme. This paper also determined that both Anglo American Plc. and Marks and Spencer Group Plc. adopt diverse methods for the monitoring of their corrective action plans which are designed to mitigate the modern slavery risk(s) associated with high-risk suppliers. For example, Anglo American Plc. monitors anti-modern slavery compliance with the use of both internal Anglo American teams and third-party auditors to ensure that the identified issues are adequately addressed. Research limitations/implications This paper focuses on Section 54 of the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 and the Modern Slavery Statements of Anglo American Plc. and Marks and Spencer Group Plc for the year 2017/18. Originality/value Several articles have been published on this topic. Among them, is an article by Stefan Gold, Alexander Trautrims and Zoe Trodd titled “Modern slavery challenges to supply chain management”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 20 Issue: 5, pp.485-494 and an article by Stephen John New titled “Modern slavery and the supply chain: the limits of corporate social responsibility?”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 20 Issue: 6, pp.697-707. The article by Stefan Gold, Alexander Trautrims and Zoe Trodd drew attention to the challenges modern slavery poses to supply chain management. Although the article briefly talked about the risk-based approach to monitoring supply chains for slavery, it did not discuss about the due diligence measures that UK firms are required to apply during risk identification and risk assessment, and the risk mitigation measures that will address the risk(s) that have been identified. The article by Stephen John New examines legal attempts to encourage supply chain transparency and the use of corporate social responsibility methods. Though the article mentions the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015, more attention was paid to the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act [S.B. 657], State of California, 2010), enacted in 2011 and in effect from 2012. The article analysed the California Act without critically discussing the risk assessment procedures for UK companies. In addition to discussing the different stages of the risk assessment/risk management process, this paper will examine the modern slavery statements of Anglo American Plc. and Marks and Spencer Group Plc. This paper will provide recommendations on how the risk assessment/risk mitigation measures of both companies could be strengthened. This is the only paper to adopt this kind of approach. The analysis/recommendations in this paper will help UK companies to design effective due diligence procedures for their supply chain.

On the Anti-Bribery “Watchlist”: Compliance and Labor/Anti-Trafficking Issues

2019 ◽  
pp. 675-696
Author(s):  
Andrew Boutros
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Human Trafficking ◽  
Child Labor ◽  
Forced Labor ◽  
Labor Laws ◽  
Labor Practices ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
Federal Contracts ◽  
The Uk

Today’s companies must understand and prevent the myriad problems flowing from labor issues. Increasingly demanding, serious compliance attention and resources are now being focused on the emerging area of human anti-trafficking and forced labor laws and regulations as they relate to business supply chains. These mandates include the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act, the Executive Order on Strengthening Protections Against Trafficking in Persons in Federal Contracts, and the UK Modern Slavery Act of 2015. By enlisting or conscripting companies into the fight against human trafficking, child labor, and other “forced” or “coerced” labor practices, these laws introduce a wholly new compliance reality requiring accountability and supply chain compliance.

Organisational responses to mandatory modern slavery disclosure legislation: a failure of experimentalist governance?

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
pp. 1505-1534
Author(s):  
Michael Rogerson ◽  
Andrew Crane ◽  
Vivek Soundararajan ◽  
Johanne Grosvold ◽  
Charles H. Cho
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Mandatory Reporting ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
Improve Compliance ◽  
Experimentalist Governance ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Board Level

PurposeThis paper investigates how organisations are responding to mandatory modern slavery disclosure legislation. Experimentalist governance suggests that organisations faced with disclosure requirements such as those contained in the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 will compete with one another, and in doing so, improve compliance. The authors seek to understand whether this is the case.Design/methodology/approachThis study is set in the UK public sector. The authors conduct interviews with over 25% of UK universities that are within the scope of the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 and examine their reporting and disclosure under that legislation.FindingsThe authors find that, contrary to the logic of experimentalist governance, universities' disclosures as reflected in their modern slavery statements are persistently poor on detail, lack variation and have led to little meaningful action to tackle modern slavery. They show that this is due to a herding effect that results in universities responding as a sector rather than independently; a built-in incapacity to effectively manage supply chains; and insufficient attention to the issue at the board level. The authors also identity important boundary conditions of experimentalist governance.Research limitations/implicationsThe generalisability of the authors’ findings is restricted to the public sector.Practical implicationsIn contexts where disclosure under the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 is not a core offering of the sector, and where competition is limited, there is little incentive to engage in a “race to the top” in terms of disclosure. As such, pro-forma compliance prevails and the effectiveness of disclosure as a tool to drive change in supply chains to safeguard workers is relatively ineffective. Instead, organisations must develop better knowledge of their supply chains and executives and a more critical eye for modern slavery to be combatted effectively. Accountants and their systems and skills can facilitate this development.Originality/valueThis is the first investigation of the organisational processes and activities which underpin disclosures related to modern slavery disclosure legislation. This paper contributes to the accounting and disclosure modern slavery literature by investigating public sector organisations' processes, activities and responses to mandatory reporting legislation on modern slavery.

scholarly journals Food supply chains and the antimicrobial resistance challenge: On the framing, accomplishments and limitations of corporate responsibility

2021 ◽  
pp. 0308518X2110152
Author(s):  
Alex Hughes ◽  
Emma Roe ◽  
Suzanne Hocknell
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Antimicrobial Resistance ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Value Chain ◽  
Food System ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Wicked Problem ◽  
Meat Production ◽  
Drug Resistant ◽  
The Uk

This paper presents a critique of supply chain responses to a particular global wicked problem – antimicrobial resistance (AMR). It evaluates the understanding of AMR (and drug-resistant infections) as a food system challenge and critically explores how responsibility for addressing it is framed and implemented. We place the spotlight on the AMR strategies applied in UK retailers’ domestic poultry and pork supply chains. This provides a timely analysis of corporate engagement with AMR in light of the 2016 O’Neill report on Tackling Drug Resistant Infections Globally, which positioned supermarket chains, processors, and regulators as holding key responsibilities. Research included interviews with retailers, industry bodies, policy makers, farmers, processors, consultants and campaigners. We evaluate how strategy for tackling AMR in the food system is focused on antimicrobial stewardship, particularly targets for reducing antibiotic use in domestic food production. The global value chain notion of multipolar governance, where influence derives from multiple nodes both inside and outside the supply chain, is blended with more-than-human assemblage perspectives to capture the implementation of targets. This conceptual fusion grasps how supply chain responsibility and influence works through both a distributed group of stakeholders and the ecological complexity of the AMR challenge. The paper demonstrates in turn: how the targets for reducing antibiotic use in domestic meat production represent a particular and narrowly defined strategic focus; how those targets have been met through distributed agency in the UK supply chain; and the geographical and biological limitations of the targets in tackling AMR as a wicked problem.

scholarly journals Oxfam GB Statement on Modern Slavery for the financial year 2019/20

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Brill ◽  
Beck Wallace
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Initial Response ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Public Statement ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

The UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 requires organizations with a turnover of over £36m to make a public statement on the steps they are taking to identify and prevent modern slavery in their operations and supply chains. Oxfam GB advocated for this legislation to be enacted. In this, our fifth statement, we share our progress against the three-year objectives set last year, which focus on corporate responsibility governance, human rights due diligence and inclusion of our country programmes. Due to the particularly devastating impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, we have added a section to highlight our initial response in March 2020, which fell under this reporting period.

Class Acts? A comparative analysis of modern slavery legislation across the UK

2019 ◽  
pp. 97-120
Author(s):  
Vicky Brotherton
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
International Law ◽  
Human Trafficking ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Uk

In 2015, three new Acts had passed into law: the Modern Slavery Act (MSA), the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Criminal Justice and Support for Victims) Act, and the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Act. The three Acts are comprehensive in scope and include: a raft of new criminal offences; measures aimed at preventing modern slavery; support provisions for child and adult victims; and in the MSA, the role of an Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner and a ‘Transparency in Supply Chains’ provision, aimed at improving businesses' response to slavery and exploitation. This chapter considers the key, comparable provisions across the three Acts — assessing if and how they differ from each other and from standards in international law. It also details the extent of their implementation and impact to date.

AI technologies and their impact on supply chain resilience during COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sachin Modgil ◽  
Shivam Gupta ◽  
Rébecca Stekelorum ◽  
Issam Laguir
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
Information Processing ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Failure Modes ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
Weak Links ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Supply Chain Resilience

PurposeCOVID-19 has pushed many supply chains to re-think and strengthen their resilience and how it can help organisations survive in difficult times. Considering the availability of data and the huge number of supply chains that had their weak links exposed during COVID-19, the objective of the study is to employ artificial intelligence to develop supply chain resilience to withstand extreme disruptions such as COVID-19.Design/methodology/approachWe adopted a qualitative approach for interviewing respondents using a semi-structured interview schedule through the lens of organisational information processing theory. A total of 31 respondents from the supply chain and information systems field shared their views on employing artificial intelligence (AI) for supply chain resilience during COVID-19. We used a process of open, axial and selective coding to extract interrelated themes and proposals that resulted in the establishment of our framework.FindingsAn AI-facilitated supply chain helps systematically develop resilience in its structure and network. Resilient supply chains in dynamic settings and during extreme disruption scenarios are capable of recognising (sensing risks, degree of localisation, failure modes and data trends), analysing (what-if scenarios, realistic customer demand, stress test simulation and constraints), reconfiguring (automation, re-alignment of a network, tracking effort, physical security threats and control) and activating (establishing operating rules, contingency management, managing demand volatility and mitigating supply chain shock) operations quickly.Research limitations/implicationsAs the present research was conducted through semi-structured qualitative interviews to understand the role of AI in supply chain resilience during COVID-19, the respondents may have an inclination towards a specific role of AI due to their limited exposure.Practical implicationsSupply chain managers can utilise data to embed the required degree of resilience in their supply chains by considering the proposed framework elements and phases.Originality/valueThe present research contributes a framework that presents a four-phased, structured and systematic platform considering the required information processing capabilities to recognise, analyse, reconfigure and activate phases to ensure supply chain resilience.

scholarly journals The Role of Intent-Based Networking in ICT Supply Chains

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mounir Bensalem
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Network Management ◽  
Network Systems ◽  
Supply Chain System ◽  
System P ◽  
Innovative Solutions ◽  
Heterogeneous Nature ◽  
General Architecture

The evolution towards Industry 4.0 is driving the need for innovative solutions in the area of network management, considering the complex, dynamic and heterogeneous nature of ICT supply chains. To this end, Intent-Based networking (IBN) which is already proven to evolve how network management is driven today, can be implemented as a solution to facilitate the management of large ICT supply chains. In this paper, we first present a comparison of the main architectural components of typical IBN systems and, then, we study the key engineering requirements when integrating IBN with ICT supply chain network systems while considering AI methods. We also propose a general architecture design that enables intent translation of ICT supply chain specifications into lower level policies, to finally show an example of how the access control is performed in a modeled ICT supply chain system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document