How companies can pragmatically fulfill their due diligence obligations along the supply chain
In global and increasingly complex supply chains, it is becoming more difficult to ensure transparency regarding working and social conditions along all stages of the value chain, especially in the case of widely dispersed supplier structures. Customers, legislators, and other stakeholders such as employees and credit institutions are increasingly insisting that companies adhere to social and ecological standards along the supply chain. As a result, this issue is also becoming a competitive factor for German and European companies.
valantic helps you to pragmatically implement the requirements for social supply chains, whether due to legal regulations or stakeholder requirements. With our in-depth experience in sustainability as well as in purchasing and supply chain management, we are the ideal partner for making your supply chain end-to-end sustainable. We always ensure that all adjustments are integrated seamlessly into existing processes and systems in order to make the integration of sustainability requirements as efficient as possible.
We have proven our expertise time and again in numerous projects with dozens of satisfied customers. We are also happy to put you in touch with reference customers.
Especially since the German Supply Chain Sustainability Act (Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz or LkSG for short), many companies have had to deal with the social aspects of their own supply chain. We can help you to pragmatically integrate the requirements into your day-to-day business in order to protect your employees and resources.
The Supply Chain Act, which went into force on January 1, 2023, obliges companies to comply with human rights and environmental standards along their supply chains. This applies not only to activities within the company itself, but also to the business areas of suppliers and upstream suppliers at all stages of the supply chain. It therefore helps to ensure that production processes and working conditions in the supply chain that violate human rights can be traced so that targeted measures can be taken, and abuses eliminated.
The legal regulations are explicitly designed to ensure that organizations take responsibility for their actions and reduce potential risks to the environment and employees.
The law requires the following aspects
Establishment of a risk management system
Establishment of a comprehensive risk management system with regard to LkSG-relevant human rights and environmental risks (including responsibilities for operational implementation of due diligence obligations and monitoring of risk management)
Risk analyses in company's business area
Carrying out risk analyses with regard to the company’s own business area and direct suppliers
Complaints management system
Establishment of a complaints management system
Preventive measures against risks
Implementation of preventive measures to reduce potential risks (e.g. training, adaptation of purchasing practices, obtaining Supplier Code of Conduct)
Measures against existing risks
If necessary, implementation of remedial measures to immediately eliminate existing risks/violations
Publication of human rights strategy
Publication of the policy statement on the corporate human rights strategy
Reporting
Annual reporting to the responsible federal office
It is advisable to implement the requirements of the Supply Chain Act in three steps in order to fulfill all due diligence obligations efficiently and step by step.
Readiness Check
First of all, a readiness check should be carried out to determine where the company currently stands and what still needs to be done to meet the LkSG requirements. To this end, existing documents (e.g. sustainability strategy, supplier code of conduct, supplier selection criteria) must be scrutinized critically. As the Supply Chain Act is a cross-departmental issue, it is advisable to involve all relevant departments at an early stage. The status quo of the company’s own activities and expectations should therefore also be discussed with the relevant stakeholders from different areas of the company (purchasing, compliance, management, sustainability, etc.). On this basis, a comparison can then be made with the legally required due diligence obligations (GAP analysis) and an implementation plan (compliance action plan) drawn up.
Risikoanalyse
In the second step, work should begin on defining the risk management system and carrying out risk analyses.
Results
Based on the risk management system and the results of the risk analyses, the third step is to close the remaining gaps in order to meet all legal requirements. This includes the creation and implementation of a training concept in the relevant business areas in which the identified risks are addressed or the creation of a policy statement on the corporate human rights strategy.
As it turns out, the introduction of the LkSG requirement can be very complex and time-consuming if you do not have extensive experience and best practices to fall back on. As experts in the introduction of the Supply Chain Act due diligence obligations with experience from dozens of projects with a wide range of customers from all industries, we can ensure that you implement the legal requirements pragmatically.
Our subject matter experts will be happy to talk to you with no obligation!
In March 2023, after long and tough negotiations, the CSDDD, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, was adopted. This means that from now on there will be a uniform supply chain law for all companies based or operating in Europe. The law therefore has a far-reaching impact on numerous companies and will significantly define future due diligence obligations in relation to their own supply chains.
Below you will learn how the scope of application of the CSDDD is defined, what measures are necessary, what potential sanctions may apply, and how you can make your company fit for the requirements of the European Supply Chain Act.
Scope of application and legal requirements
The directive applies to companies headquartered within the EU. It also includes companies that operate within the EU through their business activities. However, not all companies are affected equally. To mitigate the costs for small companies, the EU Commission has defined thresholds that will decrease continuously over a period of three years.
This means that around 1,450 companies in Germany and 5,300 companies throughout the EU will be directly affected by the new legislation.
Please note: Smaller companies are also likely to be indirectly affected by the CSDDD if they are a supplier to a directly affected company (e.g. automotive suppliers). The directly affected companies are likely to pass on parts of the disclosure and due diligence obligations to the supply chain. Therefore, early engagement with the requirements of the CSDDD today is a potential competitive advantage for the future.
Scope of application/depth of the supply chain
The European Supply Chain Act also represents an expansion of the scope of application in relation to the supply chain. Companies subject to the CSDDD are therefore subject to a detailed duty of care and reporting on activities in their own business area and in the supply chain.
Similar to the German Supply Chain Act (LkSG ), a comprehensive duty of care applies here.
In contrast to the LkSG, the CSDDD also requires the proactive consideration of activities in the deeper supply chain. This includes the activities of tier-n suppliers. However, the CSDDD does not require the analysis of all tier-1 to tier-n suppliers, but only those that are in the company’s “chain of activities.”
The EU thus describes those suppliers that are significantly responsible and necessary for the production of the goods or services of the reporting company. For a manufacturing company in France, for example, the suppliers of its Taiwanese chip manufacturer may very well be relevant, whereas the supplier of food and drink for the canteen does not fall under the scope of the CSDDD. In general, the law describes activities in the areas of design, mining, procurement, manufacturing, transportation, storage and supply of raw materials, materials, products, or parts of the product as relevant business activities.
However, each company must individually check which suppliers must be considered and which are not material.
In addition to monitoring suppliers, the CSDDD also requires the assessment of risks in the downstream supply chain. By definition, this includes activities in the areas of distribution, transportation, and storage. The entire issue of waste disposal was excluded from the obligation.
In the event of non-compliance with legal regulations or willful infringement, the CSDDD provides for relevant penalties for the companies concerned. These can amount to up to 5% of the company’s annual sales.
Civil liability is also explicitly anchored as an instrument in the CSDDD. However, clear conditions have been defined for this.
In contrast to earlier drafts, the possible exclusion from public procurement for the company was removed from the final law.
The implementation of the CSDDD at companies is very similar to the requirements of the LkSG.
In certain aspects, however, the CSDDD differs from the LkSG. For example, the law prescribes a scoping approach for risk analysis. This provides for the following steps:
The law provides some guidance for prioritization by allowing probability and severity of adverse effects as criteria. However, aspects that were still frequently used in the LkSG are not permitted. These include expenditure or sales with the supplier in question, the supplier’s own leverage, and the duration of the collaboration.
Prioritization therefore becomes a decisive factor in the legally compliant implementation of the CSDDD. We are happy to assist you here.
In addition to the risk analysis, the CSDDD also deviates slightly from the directives of the LkSG in terms of preventive and corrective measures. As part of the European Supply Chain Act, it is also necessary to define your own share of existing or potential violations. Depending on the assessment, different options for action arise for companies.
In this case, the company must stop the behavior immediately and actively. Suitable measures must be defined and documented for this purpose. These must be reviewed for their effectiveness over time and adjusted, if necessary, until the risk has been eliminated.
If the company is involved in the infringement together with others, similar requirements apply as in the case of complete own fault. However, it is specifically mentioned that the company should primarily reduce its share of the risk.
If the company has become aware of breaches caused by a direct or indirect business partner, the company must use its leverage with the partner to bring about the cessation of the infringement. Here, it is crucial to define and document appropriate measures.
Marco Fuhr
Managing Consultant
valantic Supply Chain Excellence
Jan Laakmann
Chief Operating Officer
HÖVELER HOLZMANN – a valantic company
Dr. Jens Lehnen
Principal
mm1 – a valantic company
Sebastian Badaghlou
Partner
valantic Digital Finance