Key Takeaways from the 2024 UN Annual Forum on Business and Human Rights 🌍

Following the 2024 UN Annual Forum on Business and Human Rights, we had the opportunity to de-brief as a community, as part of our collective that brings together business and human rights practitioners on a monthly basis.

Here were the key takeaways echoed across the group:

1. The value in community. Working on business and human rights, day in day out is not easy. We can face push back from colleagues, we can be asked again and again for the business case, we can see how contextual factors makes our work harder. Practitioners all found that the UNAF provided incredible value in terms of the energy gained through the discussions – in the forum sessions, but also during side events, between sessions, and even while queuing for coffee. This energy, and the in-person connections created and forged at the forum, will carry us through the next few months.

2. The laws based on the UN Guiding Principles are hereto stay. Although there has been discussion regarding how recent political discussions will affect business and human rights laws, the forum saw a number of different officials and speakers, from places of authority (including at the EU level) make one point very clear: the expectation of companies to conduct human rights due diligence, in a way that is aligned with the UN Guiding Principles, is here to stay. Whatever happens moving forward, companies are well advised to gear up for implementation of the EU CSDDD and CSRD as envisioned, so that they are ready for the road ahead.

3. Meaningful stakeholder engagement, with a capital M. Attendees celebrated the spotlight placed on meaningful stakeholder engagement, with a number of speakers highlighting that this is the most transformative expectation in the legislation. Without meaningful stakeholder engagement, companies will revert back to a "tick-box" compliance that does not meet the spirit of the law. Discussions centred around worker-driven social responsibility models, global framework agreements, binding agreements with stakeholders, power-sharing and profit-sharing arrangements with communities and Indigenous Peoples, and sustainability standards that connect companies to workers and farmers – amongst others. If we don’t get this right, we don’t get human rights due diligence right.

4. Collaboration, collaboration, collaboration. Given the interconnected nature of global challenges, meaningful progress on human rights due diligence requires collective action. Companies cannot address these issues in isolation; they need to collaborate not only with each other but also with governments, international agencies, civil society, trade unions – and other. Such collaborations enable the pooling of resources, expertise, and influence to tackle systemic human rights risks effectively – and enable each stakeholder group to effectively play its role. For instance, we’ve always known that there are inherent limitations to the UNGPs’ pillar 2, if pillar 1 (governments meeting their duty towards human rights) is not standing strong! This also helps explain why the focus on corporate lobbying – good and bad – was on the rise at the forum.

5. The elephant in the room: re-visiting business models. There was extensive discussion about the ‘elephants in the room,’ with one of the largest being business models fundamentally designed to prioritise profit above all else. Such models present a significant barrier to respecting human rights, as they inherently limit what human rights due diligence can realistically achieve. There was growing interest and dialogue around newer business models that aim to share value more equitably across the value chain and in so doing, play a role in restoring the imbalance of power that often exists within business structures.  

6. Just transition in a new age of acceleration. Just transition and climate change took centre stage of discussions, in many ways. Indigenous groups shared their experiences with land rights violations linked to renewable energy projects. Uyghur Muslims shared their experiences of what it feels like to be victims of state-sponsored forced labour that is relied upon for the production of solar panels. Workers shared their experiences of child labour in waste picking. The human rights impacts that happen when companies are not integrating a just transition approach into their work are increasingly seen. In addition, we are seeing a growth in business drivers for paying attention to a just transition (increased scrutiny by investors, called for by laws, rise in just transition lawsuits, and the list goes on). Advancing a just transition in practice is now the name of the game.

7. Companies as participants – but a bit less active than before. A notable theme among attendees was that, while companies were well-represented at the forum, they appeared to take a less active role compared to previous years. There were fewer practical case studies shared, fewer company-driven questions from the floor, and less open exchange between differing perspectives. Several factors were discussed to explain this shift:many company representatives were more in ‘listening and learning’ mode, some were hesitant to take positions on issues they hadn’t fully resolved, some company representatives in attendance were of a less senior level and therefore not in a position to speak on behalf of their company, and some attendees had even been instructed to avoid public commentary to prevent scrutiny of their human rights practices. As a result, the discussions felt noticeably “safer” and less confrontational than in past sessions.

💡 What were your takeaways from the Geneva UN Annual Forum you want to ensure that we capture?