Shift released its report How Businesses Are Sustaining Human Rights Progress in a Rapidly Changing World (September 2026), synthesising insights from its Business Impact Program thematic workshop held in Amsterdam in May 2026, alongside a related roundtable with company Chief Sustainability Officers in London in June 2026.
Human Level’s Take:
- Today’s political pressures and competing business priorities may shift with the next election cycle or two, but the deeper geopolitical currents behind them may not disappear as quickly. So what do businesses need to do in order to build human rights structures with enough staying power for the medium and long term?
- It might start with a mindshift. Shift frames the current headwinds not as evidence of retreat, but as a sign that human rights is being treated more like other strategic business concerns. That brings greater scrutiny, competition for resources and demands for evidence.
- Sustainability legislation adds another layer. The EU’s CSDDD and CSRD/ESRS create pressure, but can also provide more durable internal anchors than advocacy alone. Bringing overlapping requirements into a single process can, in turn, create efficiencies rather than additional layers of work.
- Making the case internally also depends on who is listening. Shift finds that managers tend to respond to data, while senior leaders respond more to narratives connected to strategy. The task is to find the right balance of both for the audience and issue at hand.
- As such, four approaches emerge of how practitioners are sustaining momentum: moving from siloed expert to integrated service provider; framing issues as opportunities as well as risks; using legislation to create concrete entry points; and building alliances across procurement, HR, public affairs and beyond.
- Taken together, the direction is towards making human rights less dependent on individual champions or the priorities of the moment, and more embedded in how companies operate and make decisions. In that context, today’s friction around compliance, responsibilities and ownership may mark part of a longer shift from specialist function to established business concern.
Some key takeaways:
- Human rights practitioners are operating in an increasingly difficult business environment: Political instability, tariffs, short-termism, tighter budgets and competing internal priorities, alongside deeper pressures such as rising inequality, climate change and heightened geopolitical tensions, are among the factors Shift identifies as making it harder for businesses to operate and thrive. These challenges are unfolding against a rapidly evolving legal landscape, particularly for companies with significant ties to the EU single market, as mandatory human rights reporting and due diligence requirements continue to develop. Yet Shift’s conclusion from two days of discussion with practitioners is not that the human rights agenda is retreating. Rather, three insights emerge. First, the headwinds may themselves be a sign of how far the field has come as human rights is increasingly being subjected to the same scrutiny, trade-offs and demands for evidence as other strategic business priorities. Second, while sustainability reporting and due diligence legislation creates real pressure, it can also provide leverage and more durable internal anchors for human rights work than advocacy alone. And third, making the case for action increasingly depends on combining narrative with data with the balance between the two shaped by the audience and the issue at hand.
- Four practical shifts run through how practitioners are keeping momentum: The first is repositioning the human rights function itself, moving from siloed expert to something closer to an integrated service provider, offering expertise and advice while embedding human rights into the moments when decisions are actually made. Second, practitioners are becoming more deliberate about how they make the case internally. Several participants reported gaining more traction by framing issues as opportunities rather than risks and adjusting the balance of data and storytelling to the audience with managers tending to respond to data and senior leaders to narratives connected to strategy. Third, they are looking for concrete entry points that can demonstrate value before scaling up, while using legislation such as the EU’s CSDDD and CSRD/ESRS as a lever rather than simply a constraint. Demonstrating that aligning overlapping requirements into a single process, for example, can create efficiencies rather than additional work. Finally, practitioners are building alliances that extend their reach, particularly across public affairs, procurement and HR, as well as with external experts. The aim is to bring human rights into partners’ thinking early enough to shape decisions from the outset, rather than retrofitting it after the fact.
- Making human rights harder to unwind: Shift’s discussions underline that while today’s political pressures may change over successive election cycles, the deeper geopolitical forces shaping them are likely to persist. For companies, that puts greater emphasis on embedding human rights into the systems and relationships through which decisions are made, rather than allowing progress to depend on individual champions or the priorities of the moment. The report points to several ways practitioners are doing this: using legislation such as the CSDDD and CSRD/ESRS to create more durable internal anchors; combining data and narrative according to the audience they need to bring along; and building relationships with procurement, HR, public affairs and external experts early enough for human rights considerations to shape decisions from the outset. Seen in that context, the current friction around compliance, responsibilities and internal ownership is not necessarily evidence of retreat. Shift’s finds that it may be part of a longer process through which human rights moves from a specialist concern towards a more established part of how businesses operate and make decisions.
