The Open Supply Hub released Beyond Transparency: Building Safe, Accessible Digital Tools for Supply Chain Accountability (September 2025). The report details findings from consultations with 65 trade unions, worker collectives and civil society organisations across six continents, on the effectiveness of digital tools for addressing human rights issues in the supply chains.
Human Level’s Take:
- Workers face four main barriers to engaging with digital supply chain accountability tools: structural (e.g., restrictive labour organising laws, employer retaliation and underfunding); design limitations (e.g., English-only or jargon-heavy tools, unsuitability for mobile phones and lack of user tech support); data security concerns (e.g., unclear data ownership, risks of retaliation and lack of redress mechanisms); and misuse of tools by companies as “tick-box” compliance exercises in place of genuine engagement.
- Open Supply Hub has identified six principles for digital tools that are effective and worker-centred: Tools should be adapted to local conditions; ensure reciprocity for worker input; promote inclusive participation; prioritise safety and anonymity; include workers in governance; and maintain full transparency over data use and control.
- Some key recommendations for companies: first, companies can use platform data to enhance, not replace, direct worker dialogue. Second, they can engage directly with rightsholder groups and representatives to contextualise findings and find solutions together. Third, they can invest directly in the development of rightsholder-centred tools.
- The report also outlines key features of effective, rights-respecting platforms. This includes transparent data governance; design for accessibility and low-connectivity contexts; built-in safety and data security training features; and adaptability. In addition, rightsholders should be involved in the governance of digital platforms, and should get value from the data they provide (for example, access to free data, tools or visibility for local campaigns).
Some key takeaways:
- Barriers to participation: The report identifies four interconnected barriers that can make digital tools inaccessible for workers. First, there may be structural constraints that make it unsafe for workers to access these tools, like political repression of worker organisation, the risk of employer retaliation and chronic underfunding of worker representative organisations. For example, 22% of respondents, especially in Asia, see restrictive labour laws and government surveillance as barriers to contributing to digital tools, and 19% expressed fear of retaliation from employers or brands. In addition, 25% pointed to structural challenges limiting use, like staffing shortages, limited digital literacy and a lack of core funding. A second barrier is design limitations that create usability gaps. For example, platforms designed primarily for desktop computer use or those requiring high memory and bandwidth will be inaccessible for the many workers (especially in developing countries) who rely on mobile phones to access digital platforms. In addition, tools built in English may be inaccessible to many workers, while the use of jargon or highly technical language can be difficult to understand and translate. Workers also highlighted challenges where there is limited user support and onboarding. A third barrier is concerns about data security, ownership and governance. There is a need for clear terms of use, transparent ownership of data (and shared ownership with workers, where possible), and redress mechanisms for harm arising from data disclosure, like retaliation or prosecution. The fourth barrier identified is the risk that digital tools become tick-box exercises, where tools are used to signal compliance with human rights due diligence frameworks, replacing other forms of engagement with workers and unions.
- Principles for worker-centred design: Open Supply Hub has crafted six core principles based on the insights shared by workers and unions. First, adapt tools to real-world conditions, considering local factors like limited internet connectivity, multiple languages and low literacy rates. This includes language support, ease of use and tailored formats. Second, ensure reciprocity for workers and unions who contribute data to the tools, for example access to relevant data, co-created tools, visibility for their work, or financial support to sustain their engagement. Third, ensure inclusive, diverse participation, considering gender, geography, sector and organisation type. Fourth, design tools with safety considerations like anonymity and secure data handling at the forefront, especially where rights to organise are restricted. Fifth, bring rightsholders into oversight and decision-making processes from the start, going beyond consultation - for example, as part of advisory boards or review panels. Sixth, ensure data use transparency, with clarity on how data is collected, used, stored and governed, and the ability to challenge or withdraw it.
- Recommendations for companies: The report offers recommendations to a number of actors, including employers. Companies will need to continue direct meaningful engagement with workers and their representatives, using platform data to inform their approach rather than replace dialogue. Where issues are identified, companies can engage directly with rightsholder organisations to understand the context and determine next steps. In addition, companies need to ensure that data is shared transparently and responsibly, ensuring that consent and safety considerations are taken in account, especially where there are heightened risks to workers and organizers. Finally, companies can invest in the development of rightsholder-centred tools, for example through financial or in-kind support, participating in co-design initiatives, and advocating for meaningful, realistic standards. The report also offers recommendations for platform developers, which can also serve as a useful reference point for companies to understand the necessary features of digital platforms they use or help create. This includes ensuring that data governance is transparent and that consent is clearly obtained, which requires terms of use to be clear and in a language workers can understand. In addition, platforms should be designed for accessibility and with minimal barriers to use, anticipating low connectivity and low digital literacy. Platforms should also ensure built-in safety features, identifying risks via risk assessments and helping build user capacity on data security practices. Rightsholders should be embedded in the governance of platforms and engagement of rightsholders should be reciprocal, offering free access to relevant data, tools or visibility for local campaigns. Further, platforms can be kept fit for purpose “future-ready” through updates and integrations, as well as through collaboration with digital rights and open data communities.
