Background

Business and human rights (BHR) measures include regulations, frameworks, standards, certifications and auditing designed to prevent, mitigate and remediate human rights abuses in supply chains. Although many measures are formally voluntary, emerging market and developing economy (EMDE) exporters experience them as mandatory due to their reliance on access to regulated markets. Global developments such as the UN Guiding Principles, ILO Fundamental Principles, OECD Guidelines, and new mandatory due diligence laws (e.g., CSDDD, CSRD, forced labour import bans, EUDR) have increased expectations around transparency, traceability and due diligence.
Implementation challenges arise in EMDEs because of widespread informality, limited regulatory alignment, high prevalence of child labour, weak enforcement capacity, and fragile contexts marked by conflict, corruption and displacement. These conditions heighten the difficulty of meeting BHR requirements and can affect access to markets and investment.

Purpose of the research

The research aimed to understand how BHR measures are experienced by EMDE stakeholders, identify positive impacts, challenges and unintended consequences, and gather recommendations on improving regulatory and non-regulatory approaches. It focused on insights from those typically least visible in supply chains—such as smallholders and upstream actors—and examined how these measures influence progress toward SDG 8, market access and human rights outcomes.

Methodology

The study consulted 118 stakeholders across Kenya, Ghana and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), including producers, suppliers, processors, traders, investors, civil society, community groups, government and trade unions. It used qualitative interviews, context analysis and national validation workshops. Research covered major regulations and standards including CSDDD, CSRD, FLR, EUDR, the German Supply Chain Act, the UK Modern Slavery Act, France’s Duty of Vigilance, Canada’s Supply Chains Act, and standards such as Fairtrade, Rainforest Alliance, Sedex and the ETI Base Code.

Case study countries

Kenya has a relatively stronger regulatory landscape and export-oriented sectors in tea, coffee and floriculture. Ghana’s economy is more commodity-focused, with key sectors including cocoa, cashew, forestry and apparel. Child labour risks persist despite legal prohibitions.
DRC’s economy remains dominated by mining (cobalt, copper, tantalum), with significant informal activity, governance challenges, armed conflict and elevated risks of child labour. Emerging sectors such as cocoa and coffee face similar implementation constraints but lower capacity for meeting international reporting demands.

Key findings

Awareness of BHR measures varies significantly. Forty-one per cent of participants were unaware of any BHR regulation, although all could name at least one standard or certification. Large firms and those trading with Europe or the US showed higher awareness. ESG-linked financing requirements have helped increase knowledge.
Positive impacts reported include improved access to markets and investors, enhanced worker safety and well-being, better productivity through structured working hours and OSH measures, and stronger supplier–buyer relationships. Kenya and Ghana reported 100 per cent positive impacts; in DRC only 30 per cent did so.
Challenges were universal. Stakeholders cited misalignment between requirements and local norms, such as childcare responsibilities or child work as knowledge-transfer. Smallholders face resource constraints and “requirement overload”. Compliance costs—including audits, data collection and hiring specialist staff—pose significant burdens. Data requirements are often designed with a developed-economy mindset that does not reflect local availability.
Unintended consequences include exclusion risks, such as EUDR geolocation requirements that many smallholders cannot meet. In DRC, mineral traceability has sometimes reduced conflict but also decreased miners’ incomes due to high participation fees, increased smuggling, and limited improvements in livelihoods. Compliance-driven approaches may prioritise form over outcomes, worsening vulnerabilities. EMDE companies also fear disengagement by buyers and may divert exports to markets with weaker requirements.

Recommendations

The report recommends bottom-up design of BHR measures, impact assessments that reflect local realities, and aligning national laws with global standards. Stakeholders should promote equitable contracting, shared compliance costs, and direct buyer–supplier relationships.
Traceability approaches should reduce administrative burdens, incorporate public risk databases and reward positive outcomes through pricing or longer-term contracting.
Capacity-building should address systemic barriers, support local innovations, provide targeted financial and technical assistance, and strengthen local business service ecosystems.
Stronger collaboration across investors, companies, governments and civil society is advised to share data, address unintended consequences and promote inclusive economic development.