Social transformation framework

To measure and incentivize companies to leave no one behind
January 2021

Introduction

Table of contents
Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................2
The World Benchmarking Alliance .............................................................................................................3
Overview of the social transformation framework ....................................................................................4
Key elements of the framework ................................................................................................................5
Scope of the social transformation ............................................................................................................7
WBA expectations for the social transformation........................................................................................9
Expectations regarding respect for human rights ....................................................................................10
Expectations regarding decent work .......................................................................................................16
Expectations regarding ethical conduct ...................................................................................................20
Corporate purpose and WBA social expectations ....................................................................................23
Workstreams to meet social expectations ............................................................................................... 25
Workstream 1 - Embed principle of ‘leave no one behind’ in the other six transformations .................... 26
Workstream 2 - Spotlight benchmarks ....................................................................................................34
Workstream 3 – Support and build on the work of Allies and other pre-existing initiatives ..................... 36
Core social assessment ............................................................................................................................ 37
Development of the core social indicators...............................................................................................37
Format of the core social indicators ........................................................................................................38
Scoring the core social indicators ............................................................................................................39
Weighting the core social indicators ........................................................................................................39
Referenced sources for the core social indicators ....................................................................................41
Core social indicators 1-8: Respect human rights .....................................................................................43
Core social indicators 9-14: Provide and promote decent work ............................................................... 51
Core social indicators 15-18: Act ethically................................................................................................57
Corporate purpose and controversies assessment...................................................................................61
Mapping social ........................................................................................................................................61
Next steps ............................................................................................................................................... 61
Annex 1: Materials reviewed to develop the core social indicators .......................................................... 62
Annex 2: Glossary ................................................................................................................................... 65
Annex 3: References ................................................................................................................................ 69

Social transformation framework | 1

Introduction

Introduction
Our planet and society are facing systemic social, economic and environmental challenges, including inequality
and poverty, a climate crisis and biodiversity loss. In 2015, the United Nations (UN) introduced the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to address these
global challenges. Five years later, the coronavirus pandemic has reinforced the fragility of our systems, how
our current economic models are leaving too many people behind and the mountain to climb in the coming
decade.
The 2030 agenda requires us to adopt new thinking: we cannot assess progress SDG by SDG, issue by issue,
when all areas are interrelated. Therefore, the World Benchmarking Alliance (WBA) is using a systems
approach to develop benchmarks, focusing on seven transformations we believe are vital for putting oursociety, planet and economy on a more sustainable and resilient path. The social transformation seeks toachieve universal human development by respecting human rights, promoting equality and empowering
people to pursue the opportunities and choices they value. The social transformation sits at the heart of ourmodel, underpinning and enabling the other six transformations (Figure 1).
When, in 2015, UN member states adopted the 2030 agenda, including the 17 SDGs and their corresponding
169 targets, people were placed first. At its core, the SDGs promote a people-centred agenda that envisions aworld where ‘all life can thrive’ by seeking ‘to realise the human rights of all and to achieve gender equality
and the empowerment of all women and girls’ (1). WBA believes the private sector is critical for realising thisvision and was established in recognition of the power of benchmarks to drive change. This document sets out
WBA’s approach to supporting the social transformation, which is how we put people at the heart of assessing
and incentivising business contributions to the 2030 agenda.
Only when companies eliminate the human rights risks in their operations and value chains can they deliver
the people-centred sustainable development to which the 2030 agenda aspires. Further, companies should
work to address inequalities of power and wealth in their relations with workers, communities and consumers
to ensure that the human rights of all are respected. Companies support, oppose and operate within the
myriad political systems that are linked to both the root causes of inequality and the principal drivers ofdevelopment.
Choices made in terms of business model (including worker social protection and contract security,
shareholder versus stakeholder primacy, extended and outsourced supply chain oversight, political influenceand tax arrangements) all have material impacts on a company’s contribution to the SDGs. To help realise the2030 agenda and support long-term stakeholder value creation, we need companies that can profitably solve
societal problems without profiting from societal harms.
Moreover, to ensure that no one is left behind, we need companies to conduct themselves in a responsible
manner, respecting human rights, providing and promoting decent work and acting ethically. This frameworkdescribes our expectations regarding business conduct, how we arrived at them, how they will be integrated
into all our transformation benchmarks and how we will support the social transformation in the next decade.

Social transformation framework | 2

Introduction

The World Benchmarking Alliance
WBA is an independent organisation that is building
a movement to measure and incentivise business
impact towards a sustainable future that works foreveryone. We have identified seven systems
transformations that need to take place to put oursociety, planet and economy on a path to achieve
the SDGs (Figure 1). To turn these transformations
into action, WBA, in close collaboration with its
Allies, is developing a series of benchmarks thatassess and measure the contributions of the 2,000
most influential companies to the SDGs. We callthese companies the SDG2000.

Figure [1] – Seven systems transformations

The seven systems transformations that WBA has
identified are outlined below:
•
•

•
•
•
•
•

Social transformation: achieve universal human development by respecting human rights, promoting
equality and empowering people to pursue the opportunities and choices they value.
Food and agriculture transformation: produce healthy and nutritious food to feed a growing world
population while staying within planetary boundaries and ensure a decent standard of living forfarmers, fishers and their families.
Decarbonisation and energy transformation: provide universal access to modern energy services while
significantly reducing the world’s dependency on carbon-based energy.
Circular transformation: decouple consumption and production from natural resource use and design
out waste and pollution.
Digital transformation: harness the potential and benefits of digital technologies for all while managing
risks, including safeguarding against undesirable effects.
Urban transformation: create sustainable, inclusive and connected cities that are safe, resilient andclean.
Financial system transformation: reorient the flow of resources and exercise good stewardship toaccelerate the economy’s transition towards long-term sustainable development.

Each of the companies in the SDG2000 will be assessed on the transformation(s) most relevant to them, withall companies being assessed on a social component. The resulting benchmarks will show companies where
they stand compared to their peers, where they can improve and where urgent action is needed to achieve
the SDGs. Moreover, the benchmarks will be freely and publicly available, empowering investors,
governments, civil society and individuals with the information they need to exert their full influence andencourage others to do the same.
In this way, WBA is pushing for positive change in corporate behaviour to achieve the seven systems
transformations and the 2030 agenda, thereby contributing to a sustainable future that leaves no one behind.

Social transformation framework | 3

Introduction

Overview of the social transformation framework
WBA’s model details the seven systems transformations that need to take place if we are to achieve thesustainable future for all envisioned by the 2030 agenda. Underpinning and enabling this model is the socialtransformation.
The social transformation framework sets out the societal expectations for business conduct thatcompanies should meet in order to leave no one behind. By respecting human rights, providing andpromoting decent work and acting ethically, companies can support the SDGs, address inequalities andcontribute to a sustainable future for all. The framework sets out how WBA will assess and compare
company performance on the social transformation and incentivise companies to create a future thatworks for everyone.

At a global level, social transformation means achieving universal human development by respecting humanrights, promoting equality and empowering people to pursue the opportunities and choices they value. For
WBA, with our focus on corporate accountability, social transformation is about putting people at the heart ofbusiness contributions to the SDGs as well as at the heart of our model. It is not a standalone transformation
but an integral part of all systems transformations. Likewise, there is no single ‘social system’ to transform,
but there are a huge number of social issues that companies must address if no one is to be left behind. In
dealing with these issues, the common thread for companies is socially responsible business conduct.
In addressing social issues, there are multiple narratives available to different stakeholders: the development
narrative of sustainability, the political narrative of inequality, the economic narrative of stakeholder
capitalism, the investment narrative of S (‘social’) in ESG (environmental, social and governance) criteria andthe accounting narratives of human and social capital. These represent five overlapping but sometimes
competing narratives that influence decision makers (2). The business and human rights agenda can bind allthese narratives together to bring about transformative change in support of a sustainable future for all. As
such, we see business respect for human rights as a key enabler of social transformation. Ethical conduct andproviding and promoting decent work are two further enablers that are key to business contributions to socialtransformation.
Shareholder value maximisation models, which disregard wider stakeholder impacts, have resulted in too
many companies acting irresponsibly. Calls to reset or reinvent capitalism have been amplified by the eventsof 2020. WBA’s social transformation framework recognises that the wheel does not need reinventing; weneed companies to meet societal expectations of responsible business conduct, many of which are alreadybroadly accepted and have been explained in key frameworks such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises. As such, the social transformation aims to incentivise companies to meet a core set of
expectations so that companies leave no one behind.

Social transformation framework | 4

Introduction

Key elements of the framework
The social transformation framework describes how WBA will measure what the world’s most influential
companies (keystone companies) are doing to ensure they leave no one behind. It has three key elements: a
set of high-level expectations regarding company behaviour; a set of 18 core social indicators that point
towards the achievement of these expectations; and three workstreams that will ensure the social component
is integrated in all our assessments to drive impact in the social transformation.
Expectations for the social transformation – The framework lays out a set of high-level societal expectations
that all keystone companies should meet if they aspire to be part of a systems transformation that leaves noone behind. These expectations are grounded in companies’ responsibility to respect human rights, their rolein providing and promoting decent work and their ethical conduct in areas such as lobbying and tax. WBA’s
aim is to incentivise companies to meet these expectations by creating and leveraging transformation andspotlight benchmarks.
Core social indicators – Based on pre-existing tools and frameworks, WBA defined a set of core social indicators(CSIs) that reflect the above-mentioned expectations and provide an assessment of whether companies areon the path towards meeting these expectations. As such, we view the CSIs as ‘signposts’ towards the
expectations for the social transformation.
Companies that fail to meet these core social indicators will be regarded as failing to demonstrate sufficientcommitment to meeting the high-level societal expectations and to responsible business conduct in general.
The CSIs represent a line below which we question a company’s ability to contribute to the SDG
transformations and whether the company can be seen as a responsible actor. All companies should meet all
the requirements of the CSIs. In other words, no company should fall below the line. The detailed list of CSIs
is presented in the ‘Core social assessment’ section of this framework.
Social transformation workstreams – To incentivise companies to respect human rights, provide and promote
decent work and act ethically, we will implement three workstreams via the social transformation framework:
Figure 2 – The three workstreams of the social transformation

Social transformation framework | 5

Introduction

These are explained in more detail in subsequent sections, but can be summarised as follows:
1. Embed the ‘leave no one behind’ principle in all systems transformations. This framework explains
how the CSIs will be integrated into the other six transformations methodologies and supplemented
by transformation-specific social indicators. Together, these indicators will measure what companies
are doing to leave no one behind. Companies that fail to demonstrate their commitments towards
social transformation will see this reflected in their ranking in the relevant transformation benchmark.
2. Create and leverage spotlight benchmarks that focus on priority change areas that cut across sectors
and are impact multipliers that can be strategic in driving progress towards the SDGs. The CSI
assessment will provide a baseline of 2,000 keystone companies on the high-level expectations for thesocial transformation. However, we already know there are significant gaps between company
behaviour and societal expectations. A single ‘social benchmark’ that aims to measure and drive
transformation across all social issues and across all sectors is not feasible. Yet certain issues do cut
across many sectors and, if addressed, can be catalysts for change. For example, living wages are
relevant to all companies, sectors and geographies, and addressing wage exploitation in operationsand value chains would have a huge positive impact on the achievement of multiple SDGs. As such,
WBA recognises the benefit of focusing on specific topics that can be catalytic for systemic change or
impact multipliers. The framework sets out the priority change areas for the spotlight benchmarksthat we will develop and use.
3. Support and build on the work of Allies and other pre-existing initiatives that focus on SDG impact inother important change areas. There may be opportunities to support companies to meet othersocietal expectations. Effort will be concentrated on issues that are cross-cutting and can support theother systems transformations. This workstream will rely more on collaboration with Allies andbuilding on the core social indicator data, rather than creating bespoke benchmarks with very narrow
topical or geographic focus. The core social indicators will provide a useful methodology to baseline
aspects of companies’ responsible business conduct efforts and which could be potentially deliveredat a national level with third parties, or at a portfolio level for investors.

Social transformation framework | 6

Introduction

Scope of the social transformation
Industry scope
Using the seven systems transformation model, WBA identified the most relevant industries that can impact
each transformation. This analysis was informed by scientific research, UN and (inter)governmental reports,
industry publications and research by civil society organisations. We focused on the influence of specificindustries in shaping the transformations. This influence can be positive, whereby the industry enables oraccelerates the transformation; negative, whereby the industry hampers or negatively influences thetransformation; or both. Industries can also be linked to multiple transformations. Although both positive andnegative influences were considered, some industries were excluded on the grounds that significant negative
impact from business models or products and services meant their role in the transformation would be limited(e.g. companies that derive the majority of their revenues from the sale of tobacco, coal or weapons).
Figure 3 represents WBA’s mapping of systems transformations to industries. The social component is relevant
to all industries, as represented by the red dots, because all companies should respect human rights, provide
and promote decent work and act ethically.
Figure 3 – Mapping of systems transformations to industries

Social transformation framework | 7

Introduction

Company scope
After identifying relevant industries, WBA built on leading academic research to expand the concept of
keystone actors, which refers to organisations with disproportionate influence on the structure and functionof the systems within which they operate (3). Inspired by this concept, WBA developed the idea of ‘keystonecompanies’. These keystone companies are catalysts for change and their actions are vital for a wider, systemictransformation. We drew on the five principles set out in Figure 4 to select the keystone companies.
Figure 4 – WBA principles for selecting keystone companies

The list of keystone companies was first published as the SDG2000 in January 2020 and will be updated on anannual basis.
Figure 5 – Key figures and geographic representation of the SDG2000

Social transformation framework | 8

WBA expectations for the social transformation

WBA expectations for the social transformation
In general, WBA expects companies to behave responsibly. In the context of the social transformation, WBA
expects companies to respect human rights, provide and promote decent work and act ethically; a foundationof responsible conduct on which opportunities for positive impact can be built. Respect for human rights
underpins both decent work and ethical conduct. Together, the three areas of responsible business conduct
are key enablers of the social transformation.
The following sections set out the 12 high-level societal expectations that WBA sees as critical for the keystonecompanies to meet if they are to support systems transformations that leave no one behind. These
expectations do not cover all aspects of responsible business conduct but focus on the behaviours andoutcomes we consider most important in underpinning and enabling companies’ contribution to the socialtransformation. We take a ‘principles-based approach to contribute to the SDGs’, as championed by the UN
Global Compact (4). For each of the three areas of responsible business conduct, we identified four associatedexpectations that are summarised in Figure 6. Socially responsible companies will meet all these expectations.
Figure 6 – Business conduct expectations to achieve social transformation

Social transformation framework | 9

WBA expectations for the social transformation

Expectations regarding respect for human rights
Human rights and the SDGs
The 2030 agenda aims to ‘realise the human rights of all’. Human rights are inextricably linked to the SDGs,
with over 90% of the SDG targets directly connected to international and regional human rights instruments
and labour standards (5). Companies play a critical role in achieving the SDGs and have responsibilities torespect the human rights of those involved in or impacted by their operations. As such, company respect forhuman rights is relevant to any SDG with which a company interacts. In short, human rights and humandevelopment go hand in hand.
The UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights noted in 2018: ‘Robust human rights due diligence
enables and contributes to sustainable development. For businesses, the most powerful contribution tosustainable development is to embed respect for human rights in their activities and across their value chains,addressing harm done to people and focusing on the potential and actual impacts.’ (6)Businesses are expected to respect human rights. This means that they should avoid infringing on the humanrights of others and should address adverse human rights impacts with which they are involved. The UN
Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) provide the authoritative standard on business andhuman rights and a framework to guide companies to respect human rights. WBA expects companies tooperate in accordance with the UNGPs.
Under the UNGPs, businesses need to know and show that they respect human rights. To do so, they shouldhave in place policies and processes appropriate to their size and circumstances, including:a) A policy commitment to meet their responsibility to respect human rights;b) A human rights due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they
address their impacts on human rights; andc) Processes to enable the remediation of any adverse human rights impacts they cause or towhich they contribute.
The UNGPs are sometimes viewed through a ‘do no harm’ lens, in contrast to the ‘positive’ view of contributing
to the SDGs. This is a false dichotomy. Firstly, because in addressing key human rights issues linked to theiroperations (such as forced labour in the supply chain), companies can directly contribute to the achievementof the SDGs and identify opportunities to drive additional impact. Secondly, because by undertaking humanrights due diligence, companies can understand and avoid or address potential negative impacts of theirefforts in support of the SDGs (e.g. community impacts of renewable energy products). In reinforcing theconnection between the UNGPs and SDGs, the Danish Institute for Human Rights suggests that
‘implementation of the UNGPs can be the single most important contribution by business to the realisation of
the SDGs’.
For WBA, respect for human rights is a necessary condition for all systems transformations. It is the motor thatpowers responsible business conduct, and it underpins the realisation of decent work and ethical conduct.
The sections below provide more detail on the commitment, due diligence and remedy aspects of the UNGPs.
Social transformation framework | 10

WBA expectations for the social transformation

Policy commitment to respect human rights
A policy commitment sets the ‘tone at the top’ that is needed to embed respect for human rights in acompany’s core values and culture. It indicates that senior management considers respect for human rights
to be a minimum standard for conducting business with legitimacy; and it lays out expectations for how staff
and business relations should act as well as what others can expect of the company. It should trigger a rangeof other internal actions that are necessary to meet the commitment in practice.

Expectation 1 – Companies are expected to have a policy commitment to respect human rights.
The responsibility of businesses to respect human rights refers to internationally recognised human rights –understood, at a minimum, as those expressed in the International Bill of Human Rights and the principles
concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) Declaration on
Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.
CSI 1 (commitment to respect human rights) and CSI 2 (commitment to respect the human rights of workers)
provide the signposts for this part of the high-level expectation, covering both parts of the minimum framingof ‘internationally recognised human rights’.

Human rights due diligence
Human right due diligence provides the ‘backbone of the day-to-day activities of a business enterprise intranslating into practice its responsibility to respect human rights’ (6).

Expectation 2 – Companies are expected identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they avoid andaddress negative human rights impacts they cause, contribute to or which are linked to their activities throughbusiness relationships.
This expectation covers a company’s entire value chain, including the use, misuse and disposal of a company’s
products and services. It is critical that companies engage in this process in order to ‘proactively manage thepotential and actual risks of adverse impacts on the rights and dignity of people’ (6). Figure 7 shows the key
steps for conducting human rights due diligence that are explored in five separate indicators in WBA’s
Corporate Human Rights Benchmark (CHRB) methodology.
The signposts for the expectations regarding human rights due diligence are core social indicators 3(identifying human rights risks and impacts), 4 (assessing human rights risks and impacts) and 5 (integrating
and acting on human rights risks and impacts), which were developed based on the CHRB methodology. These
only represent some of the elements of human rights due diligence, but the CHRB data shows that companies
who fail to identify, assess and act on risks and impacts are also highly unlikely to monitor or report on theiractions. As such, the core social indicators focus on the initial stages of due diligence.

Social transformation framework | 11

WBA expectations for the social transformation

Figure 7 – Human rights due diligence process

Embedding respect for human rights
Businesses need coherence between their responsibility to respect human rights and the policies andprocedures that govern their business activities and relationships. To achieve this, the company commitment
to meeting the responsibility to respect human rights should be embedded throughout the wholeorganisation, from top to bottom. Embedding includes the development of operational policies andprocedures that cut across business functions (e.g. procurement, sales, lobbying, operations), which aregoverned by appropriate controls, and are supported by performance incentives, training and communicationof company expectations. However, a ‘rights-respecting culture’ within the organisation is also needed,
whereby respect for human rights becomes ‘the new normal’ (7).

Expectation 3 – Companies are expected to embed the commitment to respect human rights within both thecompany’s culture and its management systems.

Social transformation framework | 12

WBA expectations for the social transformation

The expectation can be met through activities such as:
•
•
•
•
•
•

allocating responsibilities for human rights, including incentives and performance management
integrating human rights within the business risk management approach
disseminating commitments and training workers on human rights
developing monitoring and correction processes for human rights issues
engaging with business relationships to cascade respect for human rights into the value chain
engaging meaningfully with affected and potentially affected stakeholders.

The activities above are reflected in multiple indicators in the CHRB methodology regarding embedding
respect for human rights in company systems. Shift, a centre of expertise on the UNGPs, has also produced aseries of 22 indicators focusing on evaluating progress towards a ‘rights-respecting culture.’ (8) WBA focuses
on stakeholder engagement, as a common feature and critical enabler of respect for human rights, in relation
to embedding respect.
Effective engagement involves listening to stakeholder input and factoring it into company decision making.
Human rights policies, impact assessments, management plans and grievance mechanisms should all be
informed by relevant stakeholder engagement in order to be legitimate, effective and avoid creating negative
impacts. Affected and potentially affected stakeholders are a priority for stakeholder engagement as they are
the groups most at risk or vulnerable to harm. CSI 6 (engaging with potentially affected and affectedstakeholders) is used as a signpost for the embedding expectation, along with the indicators for human rights
due diligence and remedy.

Access to remedy
Access to remedy is a human right in and of itself, and therefore a core part of respecting human rights. Unless
a company actively engages in the remediation of adverse impacts it has caused or contributed to, it cannot
fully meet its responsibility to respect human rights. Negative human rights impacts may occur despite acompany’s best efforts, given the complexity of activities and business relationships involved. Companies need
to be prepared for this, so they can respond quickly and effectively.

Expectation 4 – Companies are expected to provide or cooperate in the provision of remedy where they havecaused or contributed to adverse impacts, in accordance with the UNGPs.
Where a company identifies that it has caused or contributed to negative human rights impacts, it should
provide for or cooperate in the provision of remedy through legitimate processes. Companies should establish
or participate in effective operational-level grievance mechanisms for stakeholders who may be negatively
impacted by company activities. Remediation processes provided by the state or third-party institutions (e.g.
multi-stakeholder initiatives) can offer alternative channels for affected stakeholders to raise complaints orconcerns.
As part of providing remedy, companies should enable access to mechanisms to manage complaints andconcerns from workers, external individuals and communities, with user involvement in the mechanisms’design and performance. Companies should also be transparent about how the mechanisms operate and thefact that they do not impede access to state-based or international mechanisms. Finally, companies should
Social transformation framework | 13

WBA expectations for the social transformation

provide or cooperate in the provision of remedy to victims where companies have caused or contributed toadverse human rights impacts and should be transparent about the approaches they take to ensure this.
Regarding the access to remedy expectation, core social indicators 7 (grievance mechanisms for workers) and
8 (grievance mechanisms for external individuals and communities) have been included as the signposts,
drawing on two of the seven CHRB indicators relating to remedies and grievance mechanisms.

Core labour standards and the SDGs
Companies are expected to respect multiple human rights. But in expecting companies to commit torespecting the rights of workers, we are referring, at a minimum, to the rights contained in the ILO Declaration
on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, which covers the following four fundamental principles andrights at work, laid out in eight conventions (referred to as the ILO Core Labour Standards):••••

freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining (Convention
No. 87 and No. 98)
elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour (Convention No. 29 and No. 105)
effective abolition of child labour (Convention No. 138 and No. 182)
elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation (Convention No. 100 and No.
111).

Because issues such as forced and child labour are more relevant to some sectors than others, the core social
indicators have a limited focus on addressing these issues and they are signposted to in indicator 2(commitment to respect the human rights of workers). They will be addressed in more detail in the othersystems transformations methodologies where relevant (e.g. child labour in the Food and Agriculture
Benchmark) and the social spotlights (e.g. freedom of association in the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark).
WBA also recognises the initiatives that are already driving change in these areas and will look to collaborate
and reinforce impact where relevant (e.g. forced labour in the apparel supply chain assessed by KnowTheChain
and the Global Child Forum’s Corporate Sector and Child Right’s Benchmark).
Cases of child labour, forced labour, discrimination and restrictions on workers associating all represent humanrights abuses. Informed by appropriate human rights due diligence, companies will understand which of the
ILO Core Labour Standards are most important in terms of the risks that fundamental rights will be infringed,
or in terms of the opportunities to advance the SDGs and systems transformations by supporting collective
bargaining rights, or in eliminating discrimination, child labour and forced labour. Depending on the context,
these issues will be more or less relevant to companies’ own operations and value chains.
Where such issues are prevalent in company operations or value chains, companies are expected to address
them as laid out below.
•

Freedom of association and collective bargaining – Companies are expected to eliminate any
restrictions on workers attempting to exercise their rights to associate and bargain. Companies should
also support the elimination of restrictions on workers in their value chains.

Social transformation framework | 14

WBA expectations for the social transformation

•

•

•

Non-discrimination – Companies are expected to eliminate discrimination based on gender, race,
ethnicity or any other characteristic, at all stages of the employment relationship. Companies should
support efforts to eliminate discrimination in their value chains.
Child labour – Companies are expected to eliminate child labour from their operations and support
the eradication of child and forced labour in their value chains, while avoiding negative outcomes forchildren as a result of their actions.
Forced labour – Companies are expected to eliminate forced labour from their operations and support
the eradication of forced labour in their value chains.

The following sub-sections discuss the importance of the ILO Core Labour Standards in relation to the SDGs.
Freedom of association and collective bargaining are fundamental human rights enshrined in both theInternational Bill of Human Rights and ILO Conventions 87 and 98, and the freedom to associate is seen as aprerequisite to collective bargaining. Upholding these rights is essential to the enjoyment of other humanrights. In enjoying these rights, workers can use collective power to improve their working terms andconditions, in turn supporting multiple SDGs, including SDG 8 (decent work), SDG 10 (reduced inequalities)
and SDG 16 (accountable and inclusive institutions).
Companies that actively support freedom of association and collective bargaining create an enabling
environment for the protection of fundamental rights and the realisation of multiple SDGs. Similarly, without
workers’ associations, the incorporation of worker voices into business decisions becomes less likely,
undermining causes such as a just transition.
Forced labour refers to situations in which people are coerced to work through the use of violence or
intimidation, or by more subtle means such as accumulated debt, retention of identity papers or threats ofdenunciation to immigration authorities. Despite forced labour being prohibited under ILO Convention 29
since 1930, tens of millions of people are currently victims of forced labour in both developed and developing
countries and across all types of economic activity (9). The elimination of forced labour will contribute todecent work (supporting SDG 8), reduce inequalities (supporting SDG 10) and assist in building sustainableeconomies.
Child labour is work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity and that isharmful to physical and mental development (10) – is endemic, with various estimates placing the number ofchildren (aged 5 to 17) in employment in the 100-200 million range (11) (12). Tens of millions of these children
are engaged in the worst forms of child labour, including labour that is hazardous to their health and safety.
In the least developed countries, approximately one in four children are engaged in labour that is considereddetrimental to their health and development.
Companies can be linked to child labour in various ways: directly employing children, benefitting from the low
cost of child labour in the supply chain, failing to conduct adequate due diligence (to identify child labour deepin the supply chain), failing to pay living wages (preventing parents from keeping their children in school) or
incentivising child labour by setting high production targets (13).
Eliminating child labour in company operations and value chains will contribute to the fulfilment of multiple
SDGs, including SDG 4 (quality education), SDG 8 (decent work), target 16.2 (end abuse, exploitation,
Social transformation framework | 15

WBA expectations for the social transformation

trafficking and all forms of violence and torture against children) and particularly target 8.7 (take immediate
and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure theprohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and use of child soldiers,and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms).
Discrimination. WBA recognises the right of all people to secure their human rights without discrimination on
any grounds, including sex, race, colour, language, religion, political opinion, national/social origin, property,
sexual orientation, gender identity/status, marital status, disability or pregnancy/maternity status.
Discrimination is linked to other core social issues as it may impact remuneration, occupational health andsafety, and gender equality, among others (14).
Discrimination can negatively impact the achievement of multiple SDGs and targets, including target 8.5(decent work for all men and women), target 8.8 (safe and secure working environments for … migrant
workers), SDG 10 (reduction of inequality, including target 10.2: empower and promote economic inclusion of
all irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, economic or other status), SDG 3 (healthy
lives and well-being for all) and SDG 5 (achievement of gender equality and an end to all forms of
discrimination against all women and girls everywhere). Companies that fail to eliminate discriminatory
practices in their activities should be held to account.

Expectations regarding decent work
To WBA, decent work involves providing secure, safe and healthy work, where people are fairly and equallyremunerated, where workers have a meaningful say in decision making, where discrimination is not justeliminated but the barriers to equal treatment have been removed, and where all people are enabled topursue the opportunities and choices they value. WBA expects companies to provide decent work in their own
operations and to promote decent work in their value chains.

Decent work and the SDGs
In 2015, decent work and the four pillars of the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda (employment creation, social
protection, rights at work and social dialogue) became integral to the 2030 agenda, with SDG 8 focusing onsustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work forall. The ILO defines decent work as ‘summing up the aspirations of people in their working lives. It involves
opportunities for work that is productive and delivers a fair income, security in the workplace and social
protection for families, better prospects for personal development and social integration, freedom for people
to express their concerns, organise and participate in the decisions that affect their lives and equality ofopportunity and treatment for all women and men’.
In terms of the SDG2000, the following SDG 8 targets are most immediately relevant:
8.5 – By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including foryoung people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value.

Social transformation framework | 16

WBA expectations for the social transformation

8.7 – Take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and humantrafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour … and by 2025 end
child labour in all its forms.
8.8 – Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including
migrant workers, particularly women migrants, and those in precarious employment.
For the SDG2000 companies in scope for the seven systems transformations, WBA has selected the following
four core topics for decent work. These are clearly not exclusive, nor are they ‘the end of the conversation’when it comes to decent work. However, they represent an initial focus area as WBA regards them as the mostimportant issues that can cut across all sectors and geographies. The four topics are living wages, diversity andbalance, healthy and safe workplaces and worker empowerment.
Issues such as paid sick leave, redundancy, pension contributions and parental leave as well as the existenceof a recognised employment relationship are all important to decent work. Employment models that remove
worker protections and provisions (such as reliance on zero-hour contracts or gig working) have the potential
to undermine the realisation of the SDGs. Due to the variety of business models and large number of countries
where the companies in scope operate, these more contextual issues have not been included in this first
framework.
Achieving a healthy, safe, secure, fairly remunerated, equitable and representative workplace relies in part on
worker freedom of association and collective bargaining, and is not reconcilable with discrimination, childlabour, forced labour or the suppression of workers’ rights. As such, decent work implies zero discrimination,
forced labour, child labour or worker suppression. Because issues like child and forced labour may not besalient for all SDG2000 companies, these four expectations are not dealt with in detail in the core social
indicators, but are signposted by core social indicator 2 (commitment to respect the human rights of workers).
The Corporate Human Rights Benchmark deals with these issues in more detail for high-risk sectors. Where
relevant to the individual transformations, these issues should also be addressed as transformation-specificsocial indicators in the other six transformation methodologies.
The following sections describe the decent work expectations and which core social indicators are used topoint towards their achievement. It should be noted that decent work clearly depends on respect for humanrights and, as such, expectations 5-8 are all signposted by the core social indicators related to respect forhuman rights (CSIs 1-8).

Healthy and safe workplaces
Healthy and safe workplaces go beyond physically safe environments; mental health and well-being are also
critical elements of decent work. While all people have the right to healthy and safe working conditions, theILO estimates that 6,000 people die every day as a result of work-related accidents and diseases. This is inaddition to over 340 million work-related accidents and over 160 million work-related illnesses annually (15).
Companies have the ability to impact hundreds of millions of workers through their operations and value
chains and have a responsibility to help address these impacts.

Social transformation framework | 17

WBA expectations for the social transformation

Expectation 5 – Companies are expected to provide healthy and safe workplaces for all workers and support
efforts to ensure healthy and safe workplaces in their value chains (encompassing physical and mental healthand well-being as well as freedom from violence, harassment or threats, both physical and non-physical).
The exact health and safety profile of each company in the SDG2000 will vary, but this is a universal
expectation. Key SDGs related to health and safety include SDG 3 (good health) and SDG 8 (decent work andeconomic growth) (16) and in particular these two targets:
3.9 – By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air,water and soil pollution and contamination.
8.8 – Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments of all workers, including
migrant workers, particularly women migrants, and those in precarious employment.
WBA signposts the expectation concerning healthy and safe workplaces with core social indicators 9 (healthand safety fundamentals) and 11 (working hours fundamentals).

Living wage
There are numerous definitions of living wage but the core concept is to provide fair remuneration that is
sufficient for a decent living for a worker and his or her family, based on a regular work week not including
overtime hours and where workers receive equal pay for equal work. A living wage is sufficient to cover food,water, clothing, transport, education, health care and other essential needs for workers and their officiallyentitled dependents and provide some discretionary income. Precarious work, zero-hour contracts andbusiness models that remove traditional worker benefits can all impact how a living wage is defined for a
specific context.

Expectation 6 – Companies are expected to ensure workers are paid a living wage and should support efforts
to ensure workers in their value chains are paid a living wage.
WBA believes that living wages have exceptional potential to address multiple SDGs directly and indirectly. At
the same time, minimum wage laws are neither universally applied nor necessarily adequate to ensure adecent quality of life. As such, a living wage is a critical enabler of the private sector’s contribution to the 2030
agenda. Article 7 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognises the right ofeveryone ‘to just and favourable conditions of work, including fair and non-discriminatory remuneration thatprovides a decent living for workers and their families’.
A non-discriminatory living wage is particularly important because it contributes directly and indirectly to thefulfilment of several other fundamental human rights of both the workers and their dependents (such as therights to food, water, health, adequate housing, education and family life).
A living wage may also help to ensure no one is left behind by underpinning decent work (SDG 8), reducing
inequalities (SDGs 5 and 10), ending poverty (SDG 1) and supporting good health and well-being (SDG 3). It
may also prevent children from having to work, supporting quality education (SDG 4) and decrease theprevalence of hunger (SDG 2) by enabling adequate access to quality food and nutrition. To signpost the living
Social transformation framework | 18

WBA expectations for the social transformation

wage expectations, WBA uses core social indicators 10 (living wage fundamentals) and 11 (working hours
fundamentals). Living wages will be a strong focus area for WBA in the future.

Worker empowerment
Empowered workers are able to enjoy their fundamental rights, can be fully included in the workplace, beheard and have a meaningful say in the decisions that affect them. Empowered workers can help address
multiple issues including child labour, forced labour, discrimination, gender and ethnic pay gaps, unreasonable
working hours and unsafe working conditions. Worker empowerment is seen as a catalyst for the realisationof decent work (SDG 8), reduced inequalities (SDG 10) and gender equality (SDG 5), particularly where worker
protections are weak and where the balance of power in the employment relationship is heavily skewed infavour of the company. In many places, this potential is not just unrealised but actively supressed throughunion busting (17) and related discrimination.
It is crucial for companies to eliminate restrictions on workers’ rights, but it is not enough for companies tomerely tolerate workers who exercise their freedom to associate or engage in collective bargaining. Without
active support and an enabling environment, workers’ rights will not be fully realised, worker voices areunlikely to be integrated into business decision making and the workplace will not be truly inclusive.

Expectation 7 – Companies are expected to enable the empowerment of all workers so that they, or theirrepresentatives, can represent their interests and influence matters that affect them at work. Companies
should support worker empowerment in their value chains.
Beyond contributing to a decent workplace, or the potential business benefits associated with an engaged
workforce who have a meaningful say in the decisions that affect them, worker representation will be
increasingly important for the large-scale transitions in our economies that must take place to achieve the2030 agenda. For example, the transition away from carbon-intensive energy production towards a renewable
and regenerative economy may cause significant disruption to workers. A ‘just transition’, where no one is left
behind, is therefore impossible without the active participation of the people affected by the transition.

Diversity and balance
Balance refers to an equitable distribution of opportunities and resources. Achieving balance involves
addressing barriers to equality of outcome and creating cultures where every person feels safe and free fromdiscrimination, no matter their gender identity or expression, race or ethnicity, sexuality, religion, backgroundor other characteristic. Eliminating discrimination is a necessary, but insufficient, step to achieving equality ofopportunity or outcome. Balanced workplaces are those where systemic issues such as the lack of diversity incompany leadership and management have been addressed. When combined with the achievement of equalpay for equal work, diversity and balance will help eliminate problems such as gender and ethnic pay gaps.

Expectation 8 – Companies are expected to achieve ‘balance’ across all levels of management, representativeof their operating context, for all relevant diversity categories (e.g. gender and ethnicity), and they should
support efforts to achieve balanced representation in their value chains.

Social transformation framework | 19

WBA expectations for the social transformation

The expectation regarding diversity and balance is linked to multiple SDGs, notably SDG 5 (achieve genderequality and empower all women and girls), SDG 10 (reduce inequality), target 10.2 (empower and promote
the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin,religion or economic or other status), SDG 8 (decent work) and target 8.5 (achieve full and productive
employment and decent work for all women and men … and equal pay for work of equal value).
This expectation is necessarily broad, to capture all the possible contexts for the SDG2000 companies. It issignposted by core social indicator 13 (workforce diversity disclosure fundamentals) and 14 (gender equality
and women’s empowerment fundamentals).
Diversity, discrimination, equality, equity, justice and inclusion: untangling the terminology
If diversity describes the differences within groups, discrimination means the prejudicial treatment ofpeople on the basis of those differences. Discrimination produces and entrenches inequalities ofopportunity and outcome. Eliminating discrimination is a necessary, but insufficient, step to achieving
equality of opportunity or outcome. Equity goes beyond non-discrimination, by recognising and addressing
existing inequalities. Equity requires positive action to identify and address inequalities withoutdisadvantaging other groups. Justice refers to a situation in which systemic barriers to equality have beenaddressed. Inclusion is where people are valued for their differences. However, inclusion does not equate
to diversity, nor does diversity guarantee inclusion.
Different groups have different interpretations and uses for the terms diversity, inclusion, justice andequity. At their heart, they can be seen as different ways of looking at fairness. Organisations who focus on‘diversity and inclusion’ may simultaneously be discussing equity and justice but not explicitly using that
language.

Expectations regarding ethical conduct
WBA expects companies to act ethically. According to the Institute of Business Ethics, ‘Ethics goes beyond thelegal requirements for a company and is, therefore, about discretionary decisions and behaviour guided byvalues.’ (18) In developing the list of societal expectations, WBA identified several issues that could have
exceptional impact on companies’ contribution to the SDGs and, in contrast to expectations like ‘respecthuman rights’, they were not all covered by normative standards or internationally agreed frameworks. Theseissues are linked to ‘ethical action’.
The four areas of ethical action that WBA has chosen to focus on are (protecting) data privacy, (fair) corporate
taxation, (eliminating) bribery and corruption and (responsible) lobbying and political engagement, coveredby expectations 9-12. The following sections set out the ethical action expectations and which core social
indicators are used to signpost them. It should be noted that there are clear links between respect for humanrights and ethical conduct and, as such, expectations 9-12 are all signposted by the core social indicators
related to respect for human rights (CSIs 1-8).

Social transformation framework | 20

WBA expectations for the social transformation

Data privacy
Privacy is a human right (enshrined in Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 17of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and is a guarantor of human dignity. Privacy isimportant for maintaining personal security, protecting identity and promoting freedom of expression in thedigital age. (19) Data plays an increasingly important role in business and society at large. Companies collect,use, sell and/or provide growing amounts of personal data pertaining to their staff, customers, clients andother stakeholders. Companies also facilitate the collection, use and sharing of personal data for othercompanies and governments.
As a result, companies are at particular risk of negatively impacting the right to privacy and are also therefore
linked to SDG target 16.10 (protect fundamental freedoms). At the same time, useful data on people will be
critical for tracking and monitoring progress towards the SDGs.

Expectation 9 – Companies are expected to respect the right to privacy of employees, workers, users,
customers, clients and any individuals who may be affected by company activities.
The use and misuse of personal data can have significant impacts on individuals as well as the SDGs. Personal
information can be used to support discrimination and the exclusion of people from the workplace(undermining SDG 8 – decent work) or participating in public life. It can also be used to undermine legitimate
democratic processes (with democracy being seen as essential for sustainable development and theeradication of poverty and hunger in the 2030 agenda (1)).
Companies are expected to respect the right to privacy of employees, workers, users, customers, clients andany individuals who may be affected by company activities. This expectation goes far beyond the protectionof personal data. Companies should assess the risks to and impacts on people caused by their activities inrelation to privacy and personal data, from data breaches to the sharing of information with governments andthe facilitation of third parties (including through the provision of access, hardware, software and platforms).
In accordance with the UNGPs, companies are expected to avoid, mitigate and remediate human rights
impacts relating to privacy issues. WBA signposts this expectation via core social indicator 15 (personal dataprotection fundamentals).

Corporate taxation
Companies are expected to pay a fair amount of tax. Tax revenues provide the fundamental resources thatenable legitimate (state) actors to support the protection, well-being and development of their people, andare therefore vital to the achievement of the SDGs (20). Unfortunately, large amounts of tax revenue are lost
because of tax avoidance and evasion. This presents a key obstacle to sustainable economic, political and social
development, and by extension to the achievement of the SDGs that are dependent on government funding(21).

Expectation 10 – Companies are expected to have a socially responsible approach to corporate taxation,
overseen by the highest governing body and supported by appropriate controls and transparency, which
complies with both the letter and spirit of the law in the countries where they operate; ensuring the rightamount of tax is paid, at the right time, in the countries in which it creates value.
Social transformation framework | 21

WBA expectations for the social transformation

Companies can undermine the realisation of rights and the achievement of the 2030 agenda through theirinvolvement in or connection with tax evasion and avoidance practices, which ultimately deprive states ofcritical resources. As the payment of taxes directly impacts a State’s ability to deliver on the 2030 Agenda, it
has the ability to impact on all the SDGs that are dependent on government funding. In addition, tax is clearly
linked to target 17.1 (strengthen domestic resource mobilisation, including through international support todeveloping countries, to improve domestic capacity for tax and other revenue collection).
Corporate tax issues overlap with lobbying, political influence, bribery and corruption issues. WBA thisexpectation regarding socially responsible approaches to corporate taxation via core social indicator 16(responsible tax fundamentals).

Bribery and corruption
As with tax evasion and avoidance, corruption is a key obstacle to sustainable economic, political and social
development, severely limiting progress towards the SDGs (21). With an estimated USD 1 trillion paid in bribes
and a USD 2.6 trillion cost of corruption each year, the extent of the problem is staggering (22), particularly incountries where these sums represent money that may be used to directly undermine the realisation of theSDGs instead of supporting them.

Expectation 11 – Companies are expected to eliminate bribery and corruption in all its forms in relation to theiractivities, including in their value chains. They are expected to have a systemic approach to anti-bribery andanti-corruption that is overseen by the highest governing body and supported by appropriate controls andpublic disclosures.
Corruption and bribery can indirectly impact all the SDGs. From WBA’s perspective, target 16.5 is most clearly
linked to businesses (substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms). WBA signposts the
expectation regarding the elimination of bribery and corruption via core social indicator 17 (anti-bribery andanti-corruption fundamentals).

Lobbying and political engagement
Companies can use a range of tools to influence the political process, such as political donations andengagement, advertising, public relations and mobilising trade associations and advocacy groups (23). The
outcomes of both lobbying and corporate political engagement may have positive and negative impacts onsociety, a positive impact being a policy environment that supports and rewards actors that contribute to amore sustainable future.

Expectation 12 – Companies are expected to have a socially responsible approach to direct and indirect
lobbying and political engagement, overseen by the highest governing body and supported by appropriate
controls and transparency, and which at a minimum does not undermine either the 2030 agenda orinternational human rights frameworks.
Due to the vast range of lobbying and political engagement activities, any SDGs and targets that companies
may interact with have the potential to be positively or negatively impacted by those activities. As such,
Social transformation framework | 22

WBA expectations for the social transformation

lobbying and political engagement can be critical enablers of, or risks to, the 2030 agenda and companies’
contribution to it.
The activities themselves, by their very nature, carry risks of bribery, corruption, conflicts of interest andfinancial and reputational damage (24). SDG targets 16.5 (substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all
their forms), 16.6 (develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels) and 16.7 (ensure
responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision making at all levels) have clear links tocorporate political influence. WBA signposts this expectation with CSI 18 (responsible lobbying and politicalengagement fundamentals).

Corporate purpose and WBA social expectations
The 12 expectations for the social transformation described above define how companies should act on a dayto-day basis. They are not all-encompassing but concentrate on three key areas with a focus on people andthe transformations needed to achieve the SDGs, overlapping and supporting broader governance andenvironmental issues. WBA believes the 2,000 keystone companies should already be meeting these
expectations. However, we know this is not the case, which is why we need a transformation. We also
recognise that many companies do not, or say they cannot, accommodate broader groups of stakeholders
because of the way they are set up, with company bylaws or business models providing justification for acting
in ways that prioritise profit over other considerations. As such, the prevailing model for corporate purpose(where the purpose of a company is to maximise short-term financial value for shareholders) may be a
structural barrier to the social transformation.
Conversely, a company whose purpose is to focus on profitably solving societal problems without profitingfrom societal harms would be well placed to support the transformations needed to achieve the SDGs. A
transformation in corporate purpose could therefore be an enabler of the social transformation.
A good purpose statement does not guarantee responsible business conduct. Similarly, acting responsibly does
not guarantee wider societal problems will be solved. However, a successful company that supports a systems
transformation (solving a societal problem) while acting responsibly (without profiting from harms) would be
acting with true social purpose. Conversely, a company that behaves in a way that contradicts these
expectations and harms people would not be seen to be acting with purpose.
Controversies related to the social expectations will be used to provide a non-scored narrative on whether
companies are potentially profiting from societal harms and therefore not acting with purpose. This will
support the core social indicator assessments and provide an insight into behaviours ‘on the ground’.
How the 18 core social indicators relate to the 12 expectations for the social transformation, in support of thethree key enablers concerning human rights, decent work and ethical conduct, are summarised in Figure 8 on
the following page.

Social transformation framework | 23

WBA expectations for the social transformation

Figure 8: Core social indicators within the framework

Social transformation framework | 24

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Workstreams to meet social expectations
WBA’s theory of change is based on creating indicators and collecting data to produce publicly available
methodologies and benchmarks. These methodologies and benchmarks enable key stakeholders (including
companies, financial institutions, governments and multilaterals, civil society, the media and our Allies) tomake more informed decisions, leading to companies changing their behaviour and practices. Our ultimate
goal is transformed systems and positive business impact on people, workers, communities and theenvironment, particularly in developing countries, which is achieved when others use the information we
produce.
WBA’s social transformation aims to incentivise companies to meet societal expectations regarding
responsible business conduct that leaves no one behind. There are too many expectations and topics for us tofocus on simultaneously. As a result, we have prioritised three workstreams in support of the socialtransformation.
The first is embedding the ‘leave no one behind’ principle into the other six transformations, by incentivising
companies to meet expectations regarding responsible business conduct as part of those transformations’
theories of change. Many companies will not meet the core social indicators, so the six transformation
benchmarks will encourage companies to meet this baseline. However, there may be significant gaps between
current company performance, the core social indicators and the achievement of the expectations. So, thesecond workstream seeks to drive change in specific social areas that cut across multiple transformations andsectors. WBA’s focus will be those areas that can have a catalytic effect on responsible business conduct orcompany contributions to the SDGs. This work will be informed by spotlight benchmarks (see the ‘Spotlightbenchmarks’ section below). The initial focus areas for this second workstream are based on the following
three problems:•••

business failure to respect human rights, representing a broad market failure;
gender inequality in the workplace, from a gender pay gap to representation; andlack of a living wage for workers, linked to precarious work and reduced worker representation.

There may be opportunities to help companies meet other societal expectations, and WBA will map and workwith pre-existing initiatives to avoid duplication of efforts. Instead, we will concentrate on issues that are crosscutting and can support the other systems transformations. This is the third workstream, which will rely moreon collaboration with Allies and building on the core social indicator data, rather than producing bespoke
benchmarks. An example could be providing the social data for all North American companies to anorganisation that wants to create a ranking of corporate approaches to addressing racial inequality for thatgeography. WBA can support work with a narrow topic or geographical focus but is unlikely to lead it.
To help guide our social transformation work, an Expert Review Committee (ERC) will be set up. This willcomprise one social champion from each of the other transformation ERCs, plus several individuals withexpertise across multiple social topics and stakeholder groups. The ERC will aid the selection and prioritisationof spotlight benchmarks and collaboration with third parties. It will also identify opportunities for collective
impact, in support of the social transformation and changing company behaviour.
Social transformation framework | 25

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Workstream 1 - Embed principle of ‘leave no one behind’ in the othersix transformations
The following sections explain the approach to integrating the ‘leave no one behind’ principle in the food andagriculture, financial, decarbonisation and energy, urban, circular and digital systems transformations. As a
guiding principle, every transformation benchmark will assess companies on the core social indicators, which
will make up a minimum of 20% of the final ranking. The value of the transformation-specific social indicators
will be different for each transformation, and it will be up to the relevant transformation benchmark teams todetermine the final weighting of ‘social’ within the relevant methodologies. The justification for this approach
can be found in the social transformation consultation feedback report.
The social transformation framework was developed after the publication of the first digital anddecarbonisation and energy transformation benchmarks but alongside the Food and Agriculture Benchmark
methodology and the scoping study for the financial system. There will be some sequencing issues toimplement changes in the methodologies, but from 2023, all transformation benchmarks should have fully
integrated both the core and transformation-specific social indicators. The timings and progress are discussed
in the following sections for each transformation.
Figure 9 – Embedding the principle of ‘leave no one behind’ in all systems transformations

Social transformation framework | 26

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Food and agriculture transformation
Aim of the transformation
The food and agriculture transformation requires large-scale and fundamental
action led by those who drive environmental, health and social pressures in thesystem. This transformation aims to stimulate the most influential food andagriculture companies to apply sustainable business practices throughout theiroperations as well as use their influence to encourage value chain partners to
do the same. WBA’s Food and Agriculture Benchmark will rank 350 keystonecompanies and will be updated on an iterative basis.
Relevance of the core social expectations
Social inclusion is a priority area for the food and agriculture transformation. Social issues, such as land rights
and child and forced labour, are prevalent in many agricultural supply chains and require a robust humanrights due diligence approach to identify and address them. In addition, worker livelihoods must be improved,
ensuring a living income and living wage, underpinned by collective bargaining and responsible sourcing
practices.
Figure 10 – Embedding theprinciple of ‘leave no one
behind’ in the Food andAgriculture Benchmark

Social transformation framework | 27

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Transformation-specific social issues
In July 2020, the food and agriculture transformation launched its methodology framework. This outlined the
key topics underpinning the food transformation agenda, with social inclusion as one of its focus areas. Beyond
the core social expectations, transformation-specific social issues include resource rights, such as land tenure
and access to water, smallholder productivity and climate resilience as well as a deeper look at salient labour
issues such as child and forced labour, smallholders’ living income and workers’ living wage.
Progress and timeline
A baseline of the 350 companies in the food and agriculture transformation has been published. The baseline
provides an initial understanding of where companies currently stand with regard to their commitments tothe food transformation, including in relation to social issues. The results show that companies are not drivingsocial change, with over one third of the companies assessed not sufficiently acknowledging their
responsibility to ensure that the human rights of workers in their supply chains are respected and failing todemonstrate any intention to improve the livelihoods of smallholder farmers. Some 40% of the companies
assessed do not publicly commit to eliminating child and forced labour in their own operations and supply
chains.
In Q1 2021, the food and agriculture benchmark methodology will be published, integrating the core social
and transformation-specific social indicators from the outset (labelled as the social inclusion theme). In Q3
2021, the first iteration of the Food and Agriculture Benchmark should be published to coincide with theinaugural UN Food Systems Summit. The second iteration of the benchmark is due to be released in 2022 andthe third iteration in 2023.
Spotlight benchmarks for the food and agriculture transformation
The food and agriculture framework has two spotlight benchmarks to allow for deeper analysis of key
sectors and issues. The Seafood Stewardship Benchmark assesses how the world’s leading seafood
companies contribute to the sustainable management of our oceans and coastal ecosystems as well as
how they help ensure responsible social practices are implemented across all stages of the supply chain.
The Access to Seeds Index measures and compares the world’s leading seed companies’ efforts toenhance the productivity of smallholder farmers, with global companies assessed alongside key smalland medium-sized companies in specific regions. Both methodologies are being reviewed against the coresocial indicators, but the 20% weighting may be adjusted for spotlights due to their contextual focus.

Social transformation framework | 28

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Decarbonisation and energy transformation
Aim of the transformation
A major decarbonisation and energy transformation is needed to prevent theworst impacts of climate change and limit global warming to well below 2°C.
Without urgent climate action, the world will experience more extreme weather
events, rising sea levels and negative impacts on ecosystems. These will have adisproportionate effect on the poorest and most vulnerable populations for
decades to come. We believe that private sector engagement alongside action by
governments and civil society are critical for meeting the Paris Goals. WBA’s Climate and Energy Benchmark
will rank 450 keystone companies in high-emitting sectors and will be updated on an iterative basis.
Relevance of the core social expectations
The transition to a net-zero world risks leaving many people behind, if not paired with an intentional focus onsocial inclusion. The private sector has a critical role to play in facilitating a just transition. Labour rights, andespecially collective bargaining and worker relationship structures, will be key in ensuring those employed inhigh-emitting sectors are included in the ‘new’ green economy. Additionally, human rights due diligence isfundamental in identifying and addressing the severe human rights risks that are salient in the supply chainsof high-emitting keystone companies.
Potential transformation-specific social issues
A just transition sits at the intersection between the need to decarbonise and provide universal access tosustainable energy and the necessity to achieve this in a way that leaves no one behind and manages the risks
to and negative impacts on society that will occur with transformational change. WBA will develop and publish
a set of just transition indicators against which all 450 companies in scope of the decarbonisation and energy
transformation will be assessed. These indicators will assess topics such as stakeholder engagement on thejust transition (including social dialogue), green and decent job creation, reskilling workers and social
protection. Following the publication of these indicators, all future climate and energy benchmarks will assesscompanies on these just transition indicators.
Progress and timeline
To date, 80 companies in the decarbonisation and energy transformation have been assessed on theircontributions to the Paris Goals. However, these companies have not been assessed on social elements, 1 giventhat the assessment pre-dated the development of the social transformation framework. In 2021, 180
companies across the oil and gas, electric utilities and automotive sectors will be assessed against a combined
decarbonisation and social methodology to provide a just transition-focused assessment that will be timed tocoincide with the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP 26) in the United Kingdom. The
remaining 270 companies will be benchmarked before 2024, incorporating the core social and just transitionindicators from the outset.
1

Except for insights into whether a company is supporting climate-negative lobbying and trade associations.

Social transformation framework | 29

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Circular transformation
Aim of the transformation
A shift away from a linear system, which generates extreme amounts of waste
and exacerbates the climate crisis, is more urgent than ever. Several companies
have already committed to implementing circular principles, but much moreneeds to be done. We believe that a wide application of circular models isnecessary and should not be limited to a niche set of companies. WBA has
identified 750 companies, spanning a dozen goods-producing industries, thatwill be benchmarked on their circular efforts.
Relevance of the core social expectations
Circular supply chains will only be truly sustainable if companies focus not only on reducing their ecologicalfootprint but also on managing their social impacts. As with all other transformations, a strong human rights
due diligence approach is fundamental for identifying and addressing all human rights risks, including those
upstream and downstream in the value chain, particularly those associated with waste management.
Potential transformation-specific social issues
As part of the methodology development process that will take place during 2021, WBA intends to scope
additional social issues that are especially relevant for the circular transformation.
Progress and timeline
The circular transformation was scoped in 2020. In 2021, the circular benchmark methodology will be
developed and published including transformation-specific social indicators. The first iteration of thebenchmark will be published thereafter and will assess companies in scope on the core social indicators andtransformation-specific social indicators.

Social transformation framework | 30

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Digital transformation
Aim of the transformation
Digital technology can be a powerful enabler of the SDGs. However,widespread divides around access to technology, digital skills, inclusivetechnology development and exposure to online risks and harms persist,slowing the potential to achieve the SDGs. As such, digital technology
companies – from mobile money providers that give the unbanked access tofinancial resources, to internet and web applications that help people
connect and cooperate globally – have significant potential to accelerate
progress towards the SDGs. To unleash this potential, the barriers excluding billions of people from accessing
and harnessing digital technology need to be removed. WBA’s Digital Inclusion Benchmark aims to highlightindustries and companies that are currently leading the way in fostering digital inclusion, to trigger a race tothe top across the digital sector as well as hold underachieving companies accountable. It will rank 200
keystone companies and will be updated on an iterative basis.
Relevance of the core social expectations
In order to do no harm and leave no one behind, the rapidly evolving digital industry must ensure the existenceof policies and processes to protect privacy and personal data. Additionally, technology companies have an
extensive global footprint and a wide spectrum of salient human rights risk in both their upstream anddownstream value chains. A robust human rights due diligence process will thus be fundamental in enablingcompanies to identify, prevent and address these risks in a timely and effective manner. Fair tax is also an
issue for digital companies that have limited physical footprints in the countries where their value is generated.
Transformation-specific social issues
Since the digital transformation focuses on digital inclusion, transformation-specific social indicators areintegrated throughout the methodology. In line with the ‘leave no one behind’ principle, a special emphasis isplaced on digital access and inclusion of all, regardless of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion,
economic or other status. Other social issues encompassed by the methodology include skills development,
inclusive employment, cybersecurity and school connectivity.
Progress and timeline
In 2020, the first iteration of the Digital Inclusion Benchmark was published. It assessed 100 companies on
digital inclusion, which is arguably inherently social. In 2021, the second iteration of the benchmark will be
published and will assess the 150 companies in scope against the current methodology. The core social
indicators will be used to assess all 150 companies, but the 2021 ranking will be unlikely to integrate the coresocial scores. Rather, they will be shown alongside the digital scores and ranking. The third iteration of thebenchmark is planned for release in 2022, fully integrating the core social indicators and any additionaltransformation-specific social indicators into the final ranking.

Social transformation framework | 31

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Urban transformation
Aim of the transformation
By 2050, the world’s urban population is expected to nearly double, making
urbanisation one of the most transformative megatrends of this century.
Sustainable urban development is socially inclusive, environmentally
sustainable and resilient and provides opportunities for all, as emphasised by
the New Urban Agenda adopted in Quito, Ecuador in 2016. Businesses andgovernments have a vital role to play in delivering this agenda, and publicprivate cooperation is increasingly important for the development andmanagement of urban infrastructure and the provision of public services. WBA has initially selected 302
companies, spanning heavy machinery to waste management, as part of the urban transformation.
Progress and timeline
We plan to scope the urban transformation in 2022, if certain fundraising targets are met. As part of thescoping, WBA will consider the potential transformation-specific social indicators against which the companies
in scope should be assessed. If the scoping goes ahead, it is likely that the first iteration of the benchmark will
be published in 2023, integrating the social indicators from the outset.

Social transformation framework | 32

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Financial system transformation
Aim of the transformation
Although the global economy is highly decentralised and involves millions ofenterprises all over the world, financial resources are concentrated andmanaged by a relatively small number of intermediaries. This makes financial
institutions key decision makers in the allocation and stewardship of resources,
affording them a distinct role in the global economy in support of the SDGs.
Consequently, the Financial System Benchmark aims to identify the actions that
financial institutions can take to improve their impact on people, workers,
communities and the environment. The benchmark will assess 400 leading financial institutions – including
asset managers, banks, insurance companies, pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and development financeinstitutions – on their contribution to the 2030 agenda.
Relevance of the core social expectations
Financial institutions have an extensive footprint, which opens up opportunities to drive positive change andprogress towards the SDGs as well as risks of adverse social impacts across the globe, through their own
operations and their investment value chain. The benchmark will likely assess financial institutions on theirorganisational practices, market signalling activities, capital allocation, and financial products and services
provided. Strong human rights due diligence processes, efforts to promote decent work, including bydisclosing information on workforce diversity and gender equality and ensuring that financial institutions act
ethically through data protection, tax, lobbying and anti-corruption practices, are essential for fostering social
inclusion.
Potential transformation-specific social issues
Beyond the core social expectations, the scoping report, which was developed in 2020, looks at the ability of
the financial system to address issues related to inclusion, capital allocation and broader interconnectedchallenges such as climate and inequality.
Progress and timeline
Research and consultation on the scope of the financial system transformation took place in 2020. In 2021,
the Financial System Benchmark methodology will be developed, including transformation-specific social
indicators, with a first benchmark planned for 2023. This will assess companies on the core social indicatorsand the transformation-specific social indicators.

Social transformation framework | 33

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Workstream 2 - Spotlight benchmarks
To assess the gap between current corporate performance on social issues and societal expectations, WBA
will develop spotlight benchmarks. The purpose of these benchmarks is to assess companies on cross-cuttingsocial issues that, if addressed, can be catalytic for the SDGs. These spotlight benchmarks will help close thegap between the core social indicators and the high-level societal expectations and accelerate impact oncompany contribution to the SDGs.
While there are many potential social issues that WBA could focus on, from living wages to racial justice andinclusivity, our early consultations with stakeholders identified two initial priority areas for spotlightbenchmarks: corporate human rights and gender. In the future, spotlights will be informed by the broadfindings of the core social indicator assessments, but an initial focus will be the living wage, as discussed below.
This approach aligns with WBA’s preference to achieve scale first and depth later.

Respect for human rights
Figure 11 – 2020 Key findings report for CHRB

As noted earlier, human rights are
inextricably linked to the SDGs, andcompanies have a responsibility torespect human rights. However, there isa market failure in relation to corporate
respect for human rights, which
undermines the achievement of the
SDGs. Markets are not routinely
promoting corporate human rights
responsibility or innovation throughinvestment decisions and the allocationof capital, media scrutiny, regulation or
advocacy for companies that aremanaging their human rights risks andimpacts well. Because of this, most companies have no reason to account for their social ‘costs’; their impacts
on human rights. As a consequence, capital is being misallocated: companies that impose the costs of their
negative impacts on workers, communities and local governments are able to raise capital at the same rate as
their more responsible peers, ultimately making them more competitive.
To address this market failure, WBA will benchmark companies on their human rights performance to createcompetition, drive accountability and provide evidence for policy intervention. Instead of reinventing thewheel, the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark (CHRB) – which assesses and ranks companies in high-risk
sectors on their human rights performance – has been integrated into our Alliance and acts as a spotlightbenchmark to help address this market failure and therefore support the social transformation.
In 2020, WBA published assessments of 230 companies from five high-priority sectors, namely agricultural
products (fourth iteration), apparel (fourth iteration), extractives (fourth iteration), electronics manufacturing(second iteration) and automotive manufacturing (first iteration). The CHRB team also analysed the initialSocial transformation framework | 34

Workstreams to meet social expectations

response of these 230 companies to the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the human rights implications of
the crisis.
In 2021, we aim to start the year by releasing the results of the one-off COVID-19 study. The revised CHRB
methodology is due for release in Q2, with subsequent benchmarks for two or three sectors planned for Q4.
Thereafter, sectors are likely to be reassessed bi-annually, rather than annually, with the core social indicators
providing an annual update of progress on key aspects of ‘respect for human rights’.

Gender equality and women’s empowerment
Figure 12 – Gender Benchmark methodology report

Genderequality
andwomen’s
empowerment are the explicit focus of
SDG 5, but they are integral to all
dimensions of inclusive and sustainable
development, with 54 gender-specifictargets included in the other 16 SDGs.
Accordingly, action taken to drive genderequality and women’s empowerment
does not only advance one SDG but
advances all the SDGs and therefore
sustainable development as a whole.

However, women continue to experience various forms of discrimination and violence in all spheres of life due
to social norms, patriarchal power structures and gender stereotypes (25). In the workplace, gender inequality
manifests itself in a variety of ways, such as low levels of women represented in leadership positions, apersistent gender pay gap, discrimination against pregnant women and new mothers, limited support for
women’s reproductive health and sexual harassment (26). As major employers, companies are uniquely
positioned to drive gender equality and women’s empowerment across their value chains.
Accordingly, through its Gender Benchmark, WBA will benchmark companies on how they drive and promote
gender equality and women’s empowerment to accelerate corporate progress in closing the gender gap. The
Gender Benchmark acts as a spotlight benchmark in support of the social transformation.
In 2020, the Gender Benchmark published a baseline assessment of the gender impacts of the most influential
apparel companies globally. In mid-2021, the first iteration of the full benchmark will be launched. Following
the launch, WBA will identify and use the lessons learned from the first iteration to explore how themethodology can be adjusted to make a rapid assessment of a company’s contribution to SDG 5, with the aimof expanding the benchmark’s scope to assess more sectors, and therefore more companies, in the SDG2000.

Social transformation framework | 35

Workstreams to meet social expectations

Living wage
Figure 13 – Living Wage Spotlight

A living wage can contribute to the direct and indirect fulfilment of a rangeof fundamental human rights of both workers and their dependents, andtherefore the achievement of multiple SDGs.
Companies have a critical role to play in improving the lives of workers andtheir families by taking steps to ensure workers are paid a living wage andsupporting efforts to ensure workers in their value chains are also paid aliving wage; simultaneously supporting the achievement of the SDGs andrespecting and enabling workers’ rights.
Accordingly, WBA is considering benchmarking companies on how they address living wages, or the living wage
gap. A living wage benchmark would act as a spotlight benchmark in support of the social transformation.
In 2021, WBA will scope a potential living wage spotlight benchmark, with the aim of publishing an approachin 2022. This will be informed by the performance of the first 1,000 companies on the living wage and working
hours indicators, and engagement with key stakeholders to determine the best focus areas and the need todevelop a bespoke benchmark, versus working with pre-existing initiatives (such as the Living Wage
Foundation, Global Living Wage Coalition, the Sustainable Trade Initiative and the UN Global Compact’s SDG
Ambition Living Wage Benchmark).

Workstream 3 – Support and build on the work of Allies and other preexisting initiatives
Figure 14 – Workstream 3

WBA recognises that there are too many social issues toaddress through our benchmarks alone and we will not beable to focus on every topic that is important to every
stakeholder.
Where there are opportunities to reinforce and support thework of Allies using our methodologies and data, we will
look to create change in support of the SDGs. This could bethrough the development by third parties of new
benchmarks which build on the core social data and expand
into specific topics, or the use of the methodology atnational, regional or investment-portfolio levels. We aim todrive more impact through collaboration, especially inareas where we cannot currently go alone.

Social transformation framework | 36

Core social assessment

Core social assessment
As described in earlier sections, the core social indicators point towards the achievement of the high-level
expectations (signposting) regarding respect for human rights, providing and promoting decent work andacting ethically. Companies that do not meet these core social elements will be seen as failing to demonstratesufficient commitment to the high-level expectations and therefore to responsible conduct. Accordingly, allcompanies should meet the core social indicators, regardless of the sector in which they operate.
The core social indicators are summarised below:
CSI 1.
CSI 2.
CSI 3.
CSI 4.
CSI 5.
CSI 6.
CSI 7.
CSI 8.
CSI 9.
CSI 10.
CSI 11.
CSI 12.
CSI 13.
CSI 14.
CSI 15.
CSI 16.
CSI 17.
CSI 18.

Commitment to respect human rights
Commitment to respect the human rights of workers
Identifying human rights risks and impacts
Assessing human rights risks and impacts
Integrating and acting on human rights risks and impacts
Engaging with affected and potentially affected stakeholders
Grievance mechanisms for workers
Grievance mechanisms for external individuals and communities
Health and safety fundamentals
Living wage fundamentals
Working hours fundamentals
Collective bargaining fundamentals
Workforce diversity disclosure fundamentals
Gender equality and women’s empowerment fundamentals
Personal data protection fundamentals
Responsible tax fundamentals
Anti-bribery and anti-corruption fundamentals
Responsible lobbying and political engagement fundamentals

Companies will be assessed on the core social indicators based on publicly available information (with one
exception relating to controversies, discussed below) in order to drive transparency around responsible
business conduct. Company information that is not in the public domain will not be considered.

Development of the core social indicators
The core social indicators were developed through an extensive research and multi-stakeholder engagement
process. The process included:
•
•
•
•
•
•

initial workshopping with the CHRB, Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, Workforce
Disclosure Initiative, EIRIS Foundation and WBA staff
extensive desk-based research on hundreds of existing initiatives
testing indicator topics with WBA Allies and key stakeholders
publication of the draft indicators and proposed weighting and scoring methodology
12 WBA roundtables that were attended by more than 150 participants
two roundtables organised by Caux Round Table Japan that were attended by 40 participantsSocial transformation framework | 37

Core social assessment

•
•
•

•
•

one roundtable organised by the International Trade Commission Technical Working Group that was
attended by 15 participants
one roundtable organised by Business Fights Poverty that was attended by 272 participantsa joint WBA/European Commission scoping session that was attended by the European External action
Service (EEAS), Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development (DEVCO) andDirectorate-General for Justice.
over 26 bilateral calls with subject-matter experts
written feedback from over 20 organisations.

In addition, WBA tested the core social indicators to ensure they were broadly applicable to the different
sectors covered by the SDG2000. This was done by WBA’s internal research team, the Columbia Center on
Sustainable Investment and SustainoMetric. Further details can be found in the social transformation
consultation feedback report.
The core social indicators align with:•••

Stakeholders’ expectations. Following the release of the social transformation draft methodology inJune 2020, WBA launched its public consultation phase, inviting all interested stakeholders to provide
feedback on the draft over a 14-week period. The feedback received is included in the socialtransformation consultation feedback report. This feedback was used to refine each of the indicators.
Normative standards. International conventions and declarations setting out the normative standards
for corporate behaviour were a key source we drew on to clarify expectations regarding corporate
policies, practices and performance, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights.
Existing initiatives. Another key source was indicators and metrics from existing benchmarks,
standards and frameworks, such as WBA’s Corporate Human Rights Benchmark, Gender Benchmark
and Digital Inclusion Benchmark as well as the Global Reporting Initiative’s standards. A
comprehensive mapping of the core social indicators to existing benchmarks, standards andframeworks will be conducted in 2021.

A full list of the materials reviewed during the development of the CSIs is included in Annex 1.

Format of the core social indicators
The next sections detail each core social indicator, which all follow a standard format:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Topic: a short descriptor of the issue.
Indicator: sets out the topic-specific outcome(s) expected of a company.
Elements: sets out what companies will be assessed against for the indicator.
Sources: lists the key existing initiatives that the indicator aligns with or builds upon.
Scores available: sets out the possible scores that a company can receive based on the elements of an
indicator that it meets (i.e. 0, 0.5, 1).
Weighting: sets out whether an indicator receives single or double weighting.

Social transformation framework | 38

Core social assessment

Scoring the core social indicators
Each core social indicator will be scored on a scale of 0 to 1. The scale will be represented by three levels:
1. Fully met: a company meets all of the elements for a particular indicator (1 point).
2. Partially met: a company meets some of elements for a particular indicator (0.5 points).
3. Not met: a company meets none of the elements for a particular indicator (0 points).
In cases where an indicator can be met by fulfilling one element, a partially met score of 0.5 points is notavailable. A company can only fully meet (1 point) or not meet (0 points) such indicators.
Indicators will be scored on publicly available information. While policy documents do not have a time limit,
other evidence of action will be limited to information published within the last three years unless statedotherwise.

Weighting the core social indicators
Each core social indicator will be singly weighted, with the exception of the following indicator topics that form
part of the human rights due diligence process:••assessing human rights risks and impacts
integrating and acting on human rights risks and impacts.

Given the foundational importance of human rights due diligence not only for embedding corporate respectfor human rights but also in enabling decent work and ethical conduct, the two indicator topics listed above
will receive double weighting. As such, the 18 core social indicators will represent a total of 20 points.
The table on the following page shows the weighting per indicator and per pillar.

Social transformation framework | 39

Core social assessment

Figure 15 – Weighting of the core social indicators

Core social indicators – Weightings per indicator and maximum points per indicator grouping
Respect human rights

Max.
pts

1. Commitment torespect human rights
2. Commitment torespect the humanrights of workers
3. Identifying humanrights risks andimpacts
4. Assessing humanrights risks andimpacts
5. Integrating and acting
on human rights risks
and impacts

Max.
pts

1

16. Responsible tax
fundamentals

1

17. Anti-bribery andanti-corruption
fundamentals

1

10. Living wage
fundamentals

1

11. Working hours
fundamentals

2

12. Collective
bargaining
fundamentals

1

13. Workforce diversity
disclosure
fundamentals

11

7. Grievancemechanisms forworkers1

8. Grievancemechanisms forexternal individuals
and communities

1Max. points

10/20

Max. points

18. Responsible
lobbying andpolitical
engagement
fundamentals

Max.
pts

1

1

1

1

1

6/20

Total points available = 20

Social transformation framework | 40

1

1

14. Gender equality
and women’s
empowerment
fundamentals

Act ethically
15. Personal dataprotection
fundamentals

9. Health and safety
fundamentals

2

6. Engaging withaffected andpotentially affectedstakeholders

Provide andpromote decent
work

Max. points

4/20

Core social assessment

Referenced sources for the core social indicators
The table below lists the acronyms for sources referenced directly within individual core social indicators andwhich were used to build the indicators and elements. A wider set of materials was also used to inform
development of the core social indicators more generally. These materials are listed in Annex 1.
SourceDanish Institute for Human Rights – Indicators for Business
Ethical Trading Initiative Base CodeFair Labor Association Workplace Code of Conduct and Compliance Benchmarks
General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679
Global Living Wage Coalition
Global Reporting Initiative
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Ranking Digital Rights
Social Accountability 8000 International Standard
The B Team – A New Bar for Responsible Tax: The B Team Responsible Tax Principles
Transparency International UK – Open Business Principles and Guidance for AntiCorruption Corporate Transparency
Transparency International UK – Wise Counsel or Dark Arts? Principles and Guidancefor Responsible Corporate Political Engagement
UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights
UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework
WBA Corporate Human Rights Benchmark
WBA Gender Benchmark
WBA Digital Inclusion Benchmark
World Economic Forum – Measuring Stakeholder Capitalism: Towards Common
Metrics and Consistent Reporting of Sustainable Value Creation White Paper(September 2020)
Workforce Disclosure Initiative

Social transformation framework | 41

Acronym
HRIB
ETI
FLA
GDPR
GLWC
GRI
ICESCR
RDR
SA8000B Team Tax
Principles
TI Anti-Corruption
Principles
TI Political
Engagement
Principles
UNGP
UNGPRF
CHRB
GB
DIB
WEF

WDI

Core social assessment

Core social indicators 1-8: Respect human rights
CSI 1: Commitment to respect human rights
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting
indicator
element (a).

The company publicly commits to respecting all internationally recognised human rights across its activities.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a publicly available policy statement
committing it to respect human rights, which is approved by To meet indicator element (a), the company’s policy statement
the highest governance body.
must explicitly:• commit to respect human rights, or• commit to respect the rights in the Universal Declarationof Human Rights, or• commit to respect the rights in the International Bill of
Human Rights, or• commit to respect all internationally recognised humanrights.
A policy that only covers a part of the company’s activities will notmeet the indicator element.

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

CHRB A.1.1; UNGP 11 and 12; UNGPRF A1; GRI 103-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Governance body
Highest governance body
Human rights

Social transformation framework | 43

A committee or board responsible for the strategic guidance of the organisation, the effective monitoring of management
and the accountability of management to the broader organisation and its stakeholders.
A formalised group of persons charged with ultimate authority in an organisation.
Basic international standards aimed at securing dignity and equality for all. Every human being is entitled to enjoy theserights without discrimination.

Core social assessment

CSI 2: Commitment to respect the human rights of workers
Indicator

Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting both ofthe elements (a)and (b).

The company publicly commits to respecting the principles concerning fundamental rights at work in the eight ILO core conventions as set
out in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. It also has a publicly available statement of policy committing it
to respect the human rights of workers in its business relationships.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a publicly available policy statement
committing it to respecting the human rights that the ILO
Indicator element (a) would be met by an explicit commitment tohas declared to be fundamental rights at work, which isrespecting ‘the human rights that the ILO has declared to beapproved by the highest governance body.
fundamental rights at work’ collectively. It would also be met by an
explicit commitment to respect each of the human rights that theAND
ILO has declared to be fundamental rights at work, namely:
freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, and(b) The company has a publicly available statement of policy
the rights not to be subject to forced labour, child labour andthat expects its business relationships to commit todiscrimination in respect of employment and occupation.
respecting the human rights that the ILO has declared to befundamental rights at work.

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

Indicator element (b) would be met by placing a ‘requirement’
instead of an ‘expectation’ on business relationships. However, it
would not be met by using language such as ‘business relationships
are encouraged to respect…’.

CHRB A.1.2; UNGP 12 and 16(c); UNGPRF A1; GRI 103-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Business
The relationships a company has with business partners, entities in its value chain and any other State or non-State entity directly linked torelationships
its operations, products or services. They include indirect relationships in its value chain, beyond the first tier, and minority as well as
majority shareholding positions in joint ventures. It covers both upstream and downstream relationships.

Social transformation framework | 44

Core social assessment

CSI 3: Identifying human rights risk and impacts
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)The company proactively identifies its human rights risks and impacts.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company describes the process(es) to identify its humanrights risks and impacts in specific locations or activities
covering its own operations.

To meet indicator elements (a) and (b), the company must have aclear process or processes in place to identify its risks to and impacts
on people. This could include undertaking desk-based research toidentify key risks in the company’s industry and the regions in which
it operates and analysing its internal process(es) to understand its
own human rights risks.

This indicator isfully met bymeeting both ofthe elements (a)and (b).

AND

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

CHRB B.2.1; UNGP 17 and 18; UNGPRF B2 and C3; HRIB 1.2.1; GRI 412-1 and 414-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)(b) The company describes the process(es) to identify its humanrights risks and impacts in specific locations or activities
through relevant business relationships.

Useful definitions
Human rights due diligence

Human rights risksSocial transformation framework | 45

An ongoing risk management process that a reasonable and prudent company needs to follow in order to identify, prevent,mitigate and account for how it addresses its adverse human rights impacts. As set out in the UN Guiding Principles 17-21, thisincludes four key steps: identifying and assessing actual and potential human rights impacts; integrating and acting on thefindings; tracking responses; and communicating about how impacts are addressed.
Any risks that its operations may lead to one or more negative human rights impacts. They therefore relate to its potential
human rights impacts. Importantly, a company’s human rights risks are the risks that its operations pose to human rights. Thisis separate from any risks that involvement in human rights impacts may pose to the enterprise, although the two areincreasingly related.

Core social assessment

CSI 4: Assessing human rights risks and impacts
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting one of
the elements (a)or (b).

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

Having identified its human rights risks and impacts, the company assesses them and then prioritises its salient human rights risks andimpacts.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company describes its process(es) for assessing its
human rights risks and discloses what it considers to be its
Regarding element (a), in assessing the salience of its human rights
salient human rights issues. This description includes how
issues, the company should consider:relevant factors are taken into account, such as• Scale: the gravity of the impact
geographical, economic, social and other factors.
• Scope: the number of individuals who are or could be
affectedOR• Remediability: any limits on the ability to restore thoseaffected to a situation at least the same as, or equivalent to,their situation before the adverse impact.
(b) The company publicly discloses the results of its
assessments, which may be aggregated across its operations
and locations.
CHRB B.2.2; UNGP 17, 18 and 24; UNGPRF B1, B2 and C3; HRIB 1.2.1; GRI 412-1 and 414-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Double (i.e. this represents two points out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Salient human rights issues
Severe human rights impact

Social transformation framework | 46

Those human rights that are at risk of the most severe negative impacts through a company’s activities or business
relationships. They therefore vary from company to company.
A negative human rights impact is severe by virtue of one or more of the following characteristics: its scale, scope orirremediability. Scale means the gravity of the impact on the human right(s). Scope means the number of individuals that areor could be affected. Irremediability means the ease or otherwise with which those impacted could be restored to their priorenjoyment of the right(s).

Core social assessment

CSI 5: Integrating and acting on human rights risk and impact assessments
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting one of
the elements (a)or (b).

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

The company integrates the findings of its assessments of human rights risks and impacts into relevant internal functions and processes bytaking appropriate actions to prevent, mitigate or remediate its salient human rights issues.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company describes its global system to take action toprevent, mitigate or remediate its salient human rights
Regarding element (a), where the company has a clear global
issues, AND this includes a description of how its global
system, it can be assumed that this system or approach is used insystem applies to its supply chain.
each particular location the company operates in.
OR(b) The company provides an example of the specificconclusions reached and actions taken or to be taken on atleast one of its salient human rights issues as a result ofassessment processes in at least one of its
activities/operations in the last three years.
CHRB B.2.3; UNGP 17, 19 and 24; UNGPRF C4; GRI 103-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Double (i.e. this represents two points out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Supply chain

Social transformation framework | 47

Refers to all supply chain business relationships, tier 1 and beyond, including subcontractors.

Core social assessment

CSI 6: Engaging with affected and potentially affected stakeholders
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting both ofthe elements (a)and (b).

Sources
Scores available
WeightingAs part of identifying and assessing its human rights risks and impacts, the company identifies and engages with stakeholders whose humanrights have been or may be affected by its activities.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company discloses the categories of stakeholders whose
human rights have been or may be affected by its activities.
In order to meet elements (a) and (b), identifying and engaging withstakeholders must be part of the company’s identification andANDassessment of its human rights risks and impacts.
(b) The company provides at least two examples of its
engagement with stakeholders whose human rights havebeen or may be affected by its activities (or their legitimate
representatives or multi-stakeholder initiatives) in the last
two years.

Regarding element (b), engaging with potentially and actuallyaffected stakeholders means engaging in a dialogue with thestakeholders who might be, or are, impacted by the company's
activities and/or with their legitimate representatives and/or withmulti-stakeholder initiatives. Depending on the nature of thecompany's operations, stakeholders can include (but are not limitedto) workers, their families, local communities and any other person
or group of people whose life and environment may be impacted.

UNGP 18 and 21; UNGPRF C2; GRI 102-42, 102-43 and 102-44
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Stakeholder
Stakeholder engagement

Social transformation framework | 48

Any individual or organisation that may affect or be affected by a company’s actions and decisions.
An ongoing process of interaction and dialogue between a company and its stakeholders that enables the company to hear,
understand and respond to their interests and concerns, including through collaborative approaches.

Core social assessment

CSI 7: Grievance mechanisms for workers
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting
element (a).

The company has one or more channel(s)/mechanism(s) (its own, third party or shared) through which workers can raise complaints orconcerns, including in relation to human rights issues.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company indicates that it has one or morechannel(s)/mechanism(s), or participates in a third-party or
An explicit reference to human rights is not required, but it must be
shared mechanism, accessible to all workers to raise
clear to stakeholders that a channel/mechanism designed to covercomplaints or concerns related to the company.
other topics (e.g. a corruption hotline) can be used to raise humanrights complaints or concerns as well.
A mechanism that is purely anonymous will not meet the indicatorelement as it will not necessarily provide access to remedy for
affected individuals.

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

CHRB C.1; UNGP 22, 29 and 30; UNGPRF C6.1 and C6.3; GRI 103-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Remediation/remedy

WorkerSocial transformation framework | 49

Refers to both the process of providing remedy for a negative human rights impact and the substantive outcomes that cancounteract, or make good, the negative impact. These outcomes may take a range of forms such as apologies, restitution,
rehabilitation, financial or non-financial compensation, and punitive sanctions (whether criminal or administrative, such asfines), as well as the prevention of harm through, for example, injunctions or guarantees of non-repetition.
An individual performing work for a company, regardless of the existence or nature of any contractual relationship with thatcompany.

Core social assessment

CSI 8: Grievance mechanisms for external individuals and communities
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting
element (a).

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

The company has one or more channel(s)/mechanism(s) (its own, third party or shared) through which individuals and communities who
may be adversely impacted by the Company can raise complaints or concerns, including in relation to human rights issues.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company indicates that it has one or morechannel(s)/mechanism(s), or participates in a shared
An explicit reference to human rights in the mechanism is notmechanism, accessible to all external individuals andrequired, but it must be clear to stakeholders that acommunities who may be adversely impacted by thechannel/mechanism designed to cover other topics (e.g. acompany (or individuals or organisations acting on theircorruption hotline) can be used to raise human rights complaints or
behalf or who are otherwise in a position to be aware ofconcerns as well.
adverse impacts), to raise complaints or concerns.
A mechanism that is purely anonymous will not meet the indicatorelement as it will not necessarily provide access to remedy for
affected individuals.
CHRB C.2; UNGP 22, 29 and 30; UNGPRF C6.1 and C6.3; GRI 103-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Social transformation framework | 50

Core social assessment

Core social indicators 9-14: Provide and promote decent work
CSI 9: Health and safety fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (d).

The company publicly commits to respecting the health and safety of workers and discloses relevant data. It also places health and safety
expectations on and monitors the performance of its business relationships.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a publicly available policy statement
committing it to respect the health and safety of workers. To meet element (a), the company’s policy statement could cancommit to providing a healthy and safe workplace, respecting theANDhealth and safety of its workers or equivalent language.
(b) The company discloses quantitative information on healthand safety for its workers.
AND(c) The company has a publicly available statement of policythat expects its business relationships to commit torespecting the health and safety of their workers.

Element (b) would be met by at least disclosing information in line with
GRI 403-9:• the number and rate of fatalities as a result of work-related
injuries• the number and rate of high-consequence work-related
injuries (excluding fatalities)• the number and rate of recordable work-related injuries• the main types of work-related injuries• the number of hours worked.

AND
To meet element (c), the company’s policy statement must include an
expectation that its business relationships commit to providing healthyand safe workplaces, respecting the health and safety of their workers
or equivalent wording.
CHRB A.1.2, D.1.7.a and D.1.7.b; GRI 403-9; ICESCR Art. 7; HRIB 3 and 8.2.1; FLA VII.HSE.3; SA8000 IV.3.5 and IV.3.7
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)(d) The company discloses how it monitors the health andsafety performance of its business relationships.

Sources
Scores available
WeightingSocial transformation framework | 51

Core social assessment

CSI 10: Living wage fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (c).

The company is committed to paying its workers a living wage and supports the payment of a living wage by its business relationships.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company discloses a time-bound target for
paying all workers a living wage or that it has
Element (a) would not be met where a target does not state the year inachieved paying all workers a living wage.
which a company intends to achieve the goals.
AND(b) The Company describes how it determines a living
wage for the regions where it operates.
AND

Element (b) would be met where a company:
describes how it works with relevant trade unions (or equivalent worker
bodies where the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining is
restricted under law) to determine a living wage, or describes themethodology it uses to determine a living wage (e.g. the Anker Methodology
for Estimating a Living Wage, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Living Wage Calculator).

(c) The company describes how it works to support thepayment of a living wage by its business
relationships.

Sources
Scores available
WeightingElement (c) would be met where a company:
requires its business relations to pay their workers a living wage, or
expects its business relationships to pay their workers a living wage ANDprovides a description of how it works with its business relationships.
CHRB D.1.1.a and D.1.1.b; ICESCR Art. 7; HRIB 2.4.1 and 8.2.3; ETI 5; SA8000 IV.8.1; GLWC
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Living wage

Social transformation framework | 52

There are numerous definitions of living wage but the core concept is to provide a decent standard of living for a worker andhis or her family. A living wage is sufficient to cover food, water, clothing, transport, education, health care and other essential
needs for workers and their family based on a regular work week not including overtime hours.

Core social assessment

CSI 11: Working hours fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (c).

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

The company does not require workers to work more than the regular and overtime hours and places equivalent expectations on its
business relationships.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company publicly states that workers shall not be
required to work more than 48 hours in a regular work week Element (a) and (c) would not be met if a company’s position on aor 60 hours including overtime.
regular work week is ’60 hours including overtime’ but excludes thekey 48 hours element. This is to avoid a scenario where a company
ANDdefines a regular work week as 55 hours, with only five hours ofpremium overtime, thereby making up a total of 60 hours.
(b) The company publicly states that all overtime work must be
consensual and be paid at a premium rate.
The exception to this would be where a company explains there is alegally defined maximum regular work week of 48 hours, or less, inANDevery country in which both it and its business relationships
operate.
(c) The company has a public expectation that its business
relationships shall not require workers to work more than 48
hours in a regular work week or 60 hours including overtime.
ETI 6; ILO No. 1, 14 and 106; FLA VIII
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Social transformation framework | 53

Core social assessment

CSI 12: Collective bargaining fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting both ofthe elements (a)and (b).

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

The company discloses information about collective bargaining agreements covering its workforce and its approach to supporting thepractices of its business relationships in relation to freedom of association and collective bargaining.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company discloses the proportion of its total direct
operations workforce covered by collective bargaining
In order to meet element (b), a company should explain more thanagreements.
just how it observes or monitors its business relationships, as part ofits work to support business relationships in relation to freedom ofANDassociation and collective bargaining. For example, with respect toits suppliers, it could provide training to them or conduct joint(b) The company describes how it works to support the
projects with them.
practices of its business relationships in relation to freedomof association and collective bargaining.
CHRB D.1.6.a and D.1.6.b; WDI 9.2 and 9.5; WEF Core Dignity & Equality
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Collective bargaining

Collective bargaining
agreements

Social transformation framework | 54

Collective bargaining refers to all negotiations that take place between an employer, a group of employers or one or more
employers' organisations, on the one hand, and one or more workers' organisations, on the other, for: (a) determining working
conditions and terms of employment; and/or (b) regulating relations between employers and workers; and/or (c) regulating
relations between employers or their organisations and a workers' organisation or workers' organisations.
Collective bargaining agreements (CBA) are written agreements regarding working conditions and terms of employment
concluded between one or more employers or employers' organizations, on the one hand, and one or more representative
workers' organizations or duly elected and authorised representatives of the workers (according to national laws andregulations), on the other.

Core social assessment

CSI 13: Workforce diversity disclosure fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (d).

The company discloses the percentage of employees for each employee category by at least four indicators of diversity.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company discloses the proportion of its total direct
operations workforce for each employee category by age group. Regarding elements (a), (b), (c) and (d), employee category
breakdown can be by level (such as senior management,AND
middle management) and/or function (such as technical,
administrative, production).
(b) The company discloses the proportion of its total direct
operations workforce for each employee category by gender.
In accordance with GRI 405, the suggested age groups forreporting on this disclosure are: under 30 years old, 30-50
ANDyears old and over 50 years old.
(c) The company discloses the proportion of its total direct
operations workforce for each employee category by race or
ethnicity.
AND(d) The company discloses the proportion of its total direct
operations workforce for each employee category by one ormore additional indicators of diversity (e.g. disability, sexual
identity and marital and family status, etc).

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

WDI 4.3 and 4.5; GRI 405-1; WEF Core Dignity & Equality
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Social transformation framework | 55

If the company explains it is unable to meet element (c)because of legal restrictions on the collection of ethnic or
racial data in certain jurisdictions, it can still fully meet thisindicator by satisfying elements (a) (b) and (d).

Core social assessment

CSI 14: Gender equality and women’s empowerment fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (d).

The company publicly commits to gender equality and women’s empowerment and discloses quantitative information on genderequality and women’s empowerment.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a public commitment to gender equality
and women’s empowerment.
Element (a) would be met if, for example, a company is asignatory to the UN Women’s Empowerment Principles. Element
AND(a) would not be met if a company’s commitment relates tospecific aspects of gender equality and women’s empowerment(b) The company discloses one or more time-bound targets on(e.g. representation in leadership). The commitment must be
gender equality and women’s empowerment.
broader than that and cover multiple aspects.
AND(c) The company has at least 30% women on the highest
governance body.
AND

Sources
Scores available
Weighting(d) The company discloses the ratio of the basic salary andremuneration of women to men in its total direct operations
workforce for each employee category, by significant
locations of operation.
GB 1 and 11; GRI 405-1 and 405-2
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Social transformation framework | 56

Element (b) would not be met where a target does not state theyear in which a company intends to achieve the goals. Targets
could relate to representation (e.g. gender equality inleadership), closing the gender pay gap, improving women’s
health and well-being and / or preventing violence andharassment.

Core social assessment

Core social indicators 15-18: Act ethically
CSI 15: Personal data protection fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting both ofthe elements (a)and (b).

The company publicly commits to protecting personal data and has a global approach to data privacy.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a public commitment to protecting
personal data.
To meet element (a), the company could, for example:• commit to respecting the right to data privacy, orAND• commit to protecting personal data or information.
(b) The company has a global publicly available
privacy statement in relation to the collection, sharing andaccess to personal data.

A company would not meet element (a) where it only commits
to protecting the personal data of a certain group of people,
such as employees, to the exclusion of other groups, likecustomers. A commitment to protect personal data should
relate to all stakeholders whose personal data is being
processed by the company.
To meet element (b), the company must at least:• disclose the types of user information it collects• disclose the types of third parties that user informationis shared with, and• allow a user to retrieve a copy of user informationcollected by the company.

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

DIB U.3; RDR P3, P4 and P8; GDPR Art. 13
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Social transformation framework | 57

Core social assessment

CSI 16: Responsible tax fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (c).

The company has a public global tax approach and discloses its corporate income tax payments on a country-by-country basis.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a publicly available global tax strategy,
which is approved by the highest governance body.
For the purposes of element (a), the company’s tax strategy
could take various forms, including a policy, standard or code ofAND
conduct.
(b) A governance body or executive-level position is tasked withaccountability for compliance with the company’s global tax
strategy.
AND

Sources
Scores available
Weighting(c) The company clearly discloses the amount of corporate
income tax paid for each tax jurisdiction where the company
is a resident for tax purposes.
GRI 207-1, 207-2 and 207-4; B Team Responsible Tax Principle 1 and 7
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Social transformation framework | 58

In order to meet element (c), the company’s disclosures should
not be spread across various reports; they need to be easily
accessible and should be contained in one report, document or
webpage.

Core social assessment

CSI 17: Anti-bribery and anti-corruption fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (d).

The company publicly prohibits bribery and corruption and takes steps to identify and address bribery and corruption risks andincidents.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a publicly available policy statement
prohibiting bribery and corruption.
Element (a) would also be met where if the company states thatit has ‘zero tolerance for bribery and corruption’.
AND
In order for element (d) to be met, the channel/mechanism(b) The company describes the process(es) to identify its bribery must be accessible to both internal and external stakeholders.
and corruption risks and impacts in specific locations or
activities covering its own operations.
AND(c) The company includes anti-bribery and anti-corruption
clauses in its contracts with business relationships.
AND

Sources
Scores available
Weighting(d) The company indicates that it has a confidential andanonymous channel/mechanism accessible to all
stakeholders to raise bribery and corruption concerns andcomplaints without fear of reprisals.
GRI 205-3; TI Anti-Corruption Principles 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.11, 1.12 and 1.13
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Social transformation framework | 59

Core social assessment

CSI 18: Responsible lobbying and political engagement fundamentals
Indicator
Indicator
element(s)This indicator isfully met bymeeting all of
the elements (a)to (d).

Sources
Scores available
Weighting

The company has an approach to lobbying and political engagement and has related controls in place.
Indicator element guidance(a) The company has a publicly available policy statement(s) (orpolicy(ies)) setting out its lobbying and political engagement approach. Where a company allows political contributions, itANDwould meet element (b) if it only allows them by(b) The company has a publicly available policy statement that specifies
exception and clearly states the criteria for making
that it does not make political contributions.
them.
AND
(c) The company discloses its expenditures on lobbying activities.
AND(d) The company requires third-party lobbyists to comply with its lobbying
and political engagement policy (or policies).
TI Political Engagement Principles, Recommendations 5, 8 and 9
0 (not met), 0.5 (partially met), 1 (fully met)
Single (i.e. this represents one point out of a maximum of 20 points)

Useful definitions
Lobbying
Any direct or indirect communication with public officials, political decision makers or representatives for the purposes of influencing
public decision making and carried out by or on behalf of any organised group.
Political
The ways in which a company contributes to or participates in the political process. This includes but is not limited to activities such as
engagement
political contributions, indirect political expenditure, lobbying, advocacy through trade associations and other membership bodies, therevolving door, secondments, training and workshops for public sector officials and politicians, and political activities related to theworkplace.

Social transformation framework | 60

Core social assessment

Corporate purpose and controversies assessment
The kind of corporate purpose required to achieve the systems transformations was earlier defined as‘profitably solving societal problems without profiting from societal harms’. The 18 core social indicators point
towards the ‘problem solving’ element of corporate purpose and can also be viewed as a commentary on
whether a company is well placed to identify, avoid, mitigate and remediate harms. Where a company ismeeting the core social indicators but is also causing, contributing or linked to negative impacts, this would
clearly cast doubt on whether the company is actually acting with purpose.
As part of the core social assessment, we intend to screen companies for controversies that indicate they are
acting in a manner that is contrary to the expectations set out in this framework. Types of controversies include
alleged and confirmed cases of bribery, workplace fatalities, union busting, discrimination and wage violations.
We propose that controversies will not initially affect a company’s score. Rather, the company will be assigneda ‘red flag’ alongside its CSI scores. In screening companies for controversies, external sources of information,such as press articles, will be used.
We are working with the idea that a company observed to be profiting from societal harms is ‘not acting withsocial purpose’ (if true social purpose for a company is profitably solving societal problems without profitingfrom societal harm). The number of red flags, in combination with performance on the core social indicators,
will allow WBA to provide a commentary on whether companies are not acting with purpose.

Mapping social
We recognise that multiple initiatives (like GRI, WEF metrics, IPIECA) already use ‘core’ to define a mandatory
set of reporting requirements and we already map the indicators to key frameworks. But this is a rapidlychanging space. We will continue to review frameworks and standards and will publish a more detailed
mapping of the core social indicators in due course.
Being grounded in international norms, new frameworks should hopefully not contradict the core social
indicators, but we will pay particular attention to the revised GRI standards and the developments in theEuropean Union regarding non-financial reporting. Where accepted frameworks or norms shift, we will engage
with Allies to understand what impact this should have on our methodologies. Emerging indicators, such as
those being developed as part of the thinking around ‘transformation thresholds’, will be reviewed for theirability to assess and track company performance towards meeting the social expectations (27).
Our ambition is to publish mapping at several levels:•••

equivalence mapping for the social expectations (e.g. living wage in the ETI base code and the UN
Global Compact SDG Ambition benchmarks)
reporting standards mapping (i.e. showing that if a company reports against this part of GRI/SASB orother standard, then the right type of information should be available for WBA to make an assessment
on a specific indicator)
equivalence mapping of the core social indicators to other assessments (i.e. where indicators or data
points from the core social assessment could feed into other benchmarks like the Corporate Human
Rights Benchmark, KnowTheChain, Workforce Disclosure Initiative and so on).

Social transformation framework | 61

Next steps

Next steps
In 2021, WBA plans to assess 1,000 of the SDG2000 companies against the core social indicators set out in thisframework. The companies assessed will be those that are in scope of the benchmarks WBA will publish in
2021, namely the Digital Inclusion Benchmark, Food and Agriculture Benchmark and Climate and Energy
Benchmark, as well as a subset of those companies that are part of the financial system and circulartransformations. The assessments will be integrated into the various benchmarks.
In 2022, WBA plans to assess the remaining SDG2000 companies against the core social indicators andintegrate the assessments into the various benchmarks published that year. From 2023 onwards, WBA aspires
to update the core social assessments of the SDG2000 companies on an annual basis, but the process andtimeline for updating company scores will be decided on in due course.
To avoid over-burdening companies, WBA does not plan to engage with companies solely on the core social
assessments. Instead, engagement will take place as part of the research cycle of the relevant transformation
benchmarks. The exception to this is the 60 companies that are currently only in the social transformation andnone of the other transformations. Company performance against the core social indicators will be madepublicly available once a company has gone through a benchmark cycle and/or they have had a chance toengage with WBA and provide feedback.
The timeline for integrating the core social indicators into the different benchmark methodologies is detailed
in the ‘Leave no one behind – Social within the other six transformations’ section above and is summarised
below in Figure 16.
Figure 16 – Key activities for social transformation 2021-2023

Social transformation framework | 61

Annex 1: Materials reviewed to develop the core social indicators

Annex 1: Materials reviewed to develop the core social indicators
Principles and normative standards
o International Labour Organization conventions: Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining(Convention No. 87 and No. 98)
 Effective abolition of child labour (Convention No. 138 and No. 182)
 Elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour (Convention No. 29 and No.
105)
 Elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation (Convention No.
100 and No. 111)
 Occupational safety and health (Convention No. 155)
 Working hours (Convention No. 1, No. 14 and No. 106)o Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development:
 OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International
Business Transactions (1997)
 OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct (2018)
 OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (2008)
 OECD Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shiftingo United Nations: Gender Dimensions of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2019)
 Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011)
 Human Rights Indicators: A Guide for Measurement and Implementation (2012) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966)
 Sustainable Development Goals (2015)
 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979)
 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965)
 Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989)
 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)o UN Global Compact: Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact (2018)
Corporate reporting frameworks, disclosure initiatives and benchmarkso BankTrack Human Rights Benchmarko B-Lab SDG Action Manager
o Consumer Goods Forum Sustainability Supply Chain Initiativeo Future-Fit Business Benchmarko Global Reporting Initiativeo KnowTheChaino Platform Living Wage Financialso Ranking Digital Rightso Renewable Energy & Human Rights Benchmark Methodology
o Social and Labor Convergence Programo Sustainability Accounting Board Standardso Transparency International UK – Corporate Political Engagement Index 2018: Rating Private
Sector Political Transparency
Social transformation framework | 62

Annex 1: Materials reviewed to develop the core social indicators

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development – Guidance on core indicators for entity
reporting on contribution towards implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals
United Nations Guiding Principles Reporting Framework
WBA Corporate Human Rights Benchmark methodologies
WBA Digital Inclusion Benchmark methodology
WBA Gender Benchmark methodology
Workforce Disclosure Initiative
World Economic Forum – Toward Common Metrics and Consistent Reporting of Sustainable
Value Creation: Consultation Draft
World Economic Forum – Measuring Stakeholder Capitalism: Towards Common Metrics andConsistent Reporting of Sustainable Value Creation: White Paper

Other
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

B Team – A New Bar for Responsible Tax: The B Team Responsible Tax Principles
Climate Disclosure Standards Board – CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and climatechange information: Advancing and aligning disclosure of environmental information inmainstream reports
Critical Resource – A Manifesto for Better ESG Data in the Resource and Energy Sector
Danish Institute for Human Rights – Indicators for Business
Ethical Trading Initiative – Base CodeEuropean Commission – Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council
on Adequate Minimum Wages in the European Union
Fair Labor Association – Workplace Code of Conduct and Compliance Benchmarks
Fair Wear Foundation Labour Standards
Future-Fit Business Benchmark BE21 – The right tax is paid at the right time
General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679
Global Living Wage Coalition
Global Reporting Initiative – Discussion Paper: Corporate Reporting on Poverty
Global Reporting Initiative – Exposure Draft of Universal Standards: GRI 101, GRI 102 and GRI
103
Global Reporting Initiative and UN Global Compact – Business Reporting on the SDGs: An
Analysis of the Goals and Targets
Institute for Human Rights and Business – Just Transitions for All: Business, Human Rights andClimate Action
Institute for Human Rights and Business – Respecting Human Rights in the Time of the COVID-19
Pandemic: Examining Companies’ Responsibilities for Workers and Affected Communities
International Trade Union Confederation – 2019 ITUC Global Rights Index: The World’s Worst
Countries for Workers
Living Wage Foundation – The Sustainable Development Goals and the Living Wage
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights – Tacking Discrimination against Lesbian, Gay,
Bi, Trans & Intersex People: Standards of Conduct for Business
Principles for Responsible Investment – Advancing Tax Transparency: Outcomes from the PRICollaborative Engagement 2017-2019
Responsible Lobbying – An Evaluation Framework
Shift – Leadership and Governance Indicators of a Rights-Respecting Culture
Shift – Respecting Trade Union Rights in Global Value Chains: Practical Approaches for BusinessSocial Accountability 8000 International Standard
Social and Human Capital Coalition – Social and Human Capital Protocol

Social transformation framework | 63

Annex 1: Materials reviewed to develop the core social indicators

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

Transparency International UK – Open Business: Principles and Guidance for Anti-Corruption
Corporate Transparency
Transparency International UK – Wise Counsel or Dark Arts? Principles and Guidance for
Responsible Corporate Political Engagement
UK Equality and Human Rights Commission – Business and human rights: A five-step guide forcompany boards
United Nations – Global Sustainable Development Report 2019: The Future is Now: Science forAchieving Sustainable Development
United Nations Children’s Fund, UN Global Compact and Save the Children – United Nations
Children’s Rights and Business Principles
United Nations Global Compact – SDG Ambition Benchmark Reference Consultation Draft
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development – Measuring Corporate Sustainability
Towards Accounting Fit for the SDGs
Women’s Empowerment Principles
WBA – Measuring What Matters Most: Seven Systems Transformations for Benchmarking
Companies on the SDGs
World Business Council for Sustainable Development – Reinventing Capitalism: A Transformation
AgendaSocial transformation framework | 64

Annex 2: Glossary

Annex 2: Glossary
Affected stakeholder

An individual whose human rights have been or may be affected by a company’s
operations, products or services.

Bribery

The offering, promising, giving, accepting or soliciting of an advantage as an
inducement for an action which is illegal, unethical or a breach of trust.
Inducements can take the form of gifts, loans, fees, rewards or other advantages.

Business activities

Everything that a company does in the course of fulfilling the strategy, purpose,
objectives and decisions of the business. This may include activities such as mergers
and acquisitions, research and development, design, construction, production,
distribution, purchasing, sales, provision of security, contracting, human resource
activities, marketing, conduct of external/government relations including lobbying,engagement with stakeholders, relocation of communities and social investment.

Businessrelationships

The relationships a company has with business partners, entities in its value chain
and any other State or non-State entity directly linked to its operations, products orservices. They include indirect relationships in its value chain, beyond the first tier,and minority as well as majority shareholding positions in joint ventures. It covers
both upstream and downstream relationships.

Child labour andchild work

A ‘child’ is anyone under the age of 18 as defined by the Convention on the Rightsof the Child (CRC). A child can ‘work’ at an earlier age than 18 as specified in ILO
Convention 138 Minimum Age for Admission to Employment (1973) – i.e. if the age
is above the age for finishing compulsory schooling, is in any case not less than 15
years of age (and at 14 years of age in specific circumstances in developing
countries) and as long as it is not ‘hazardous work’. ‘Child labour’ is work by people
under 18 (‘children’) that is not permitted (as set out above). ‘Child work’ is work bypeople under 18 (‘children’) that is permitted. Child work is carried out by ‘young
workers’.

Collective bargaining

Collective bargaining refers to all negotiations which take place between an
employer, a group of employers or one or more employers' organisations, on the
one hand, and one or more workers' organisations, on the other, for: (a)determining working conditions and terms of employment; and/or (b) regulating
relations between employers and workers; and/or (c) regulating relations between
employers or their organisations and a workers' organisation or workers'organisations.

Collective bargaining
agreementsCollective bargaining agreements (CBA) are written agreements regarding working
conditions and terms of employment concluded between one or more employers
or employers' organizations, on the one hand, and one or more representative
workers' organizations or duly elected and authorised representatives of theworkers (according to national laws and regulations), on the other.

Social transformation framework | 65

Annex 2: Glossary

Corruption

The abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Corruption can be classified as grand,
petty or political, depending on the amounts of money lost and the sector where it
occurs.

Embedding

The macro-level process of ensuring that a company’s responsibility to respecthuman rights is driven across the organisation, into its business values and culture.
It requires that all personnel are aware of the company’s public commitment torespect human rights, understand its implications for how they conduct their work,
are trained, empowered and incentivised to act in ways that support thecommitment, and regard it as intrinsic to the core values of the workplace.
Embedding is one continual process, generally driven from the top of the company.

Employee category

Breakdown of employees by level (such as senior management, middle
management) and function (such as technical, administrative, production).

Employees

All those workers who hold paid employment jobs, which are those where theincumbents hold employment contracts, which give them a basic remuneration notdirectly dependent upon the revenue of the unit for which they work.

Fundamental rights
at work

These rights are set out in the International Labour Organization’s Declaration on
Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and cover: (a) freedom of associationand the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; (b) the eliminationof all forms of forced or compulsory labour; (c) the effective abolition of childlabour; and (d) the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment andoccupation.

Forced labour

Forced labour refers to situations in which persons are coerced to work through theuse of violence or intimidation, or by more subtle means such as accumulated debt,
retention of identity papers or threats of denunciation to immigration authorities.
Forced labour, contemporary forms of slavery, debt bondage and human trafficking
are closely related terms though not identical in a legal sense. Most situations ofslavery or human trafficking are, however, covered by ILO’s definition of forced
labour.

Governance body

A committee or board responsible for the strategic guidance of the organisation,
the effective monitoring of management and the accountability of management tothe broader organisation and its stakeholders.

Highest governancebody

A formalised group of persons charged with ultimate authority in an organisation.

Human rights

Basic international standards aimed at securing dignity and equality for all. Every
human being is entitled to enjoy these rights without discrimination.

Human rights due
diligence

An ongoing risk management process that a reasonable and prudent company
needs to follow in order to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how it
addresses its adverse human rights impacts. As set out in the UN Guiding Principles

Social transformation framework | 66

Annex 2: Glossary

17-21, this includes four key steps: identifying and assessing actual and potential
human rights impacts; integrating and acting on the findings; tracking responses;
and communicating about how impacts are addressed.
Human rights risks

Any risks that its operations may lead to one or more negative human rights
impacts. They therefore relate to its potential human rights impacts. Importantly, acompany’s human rights risks are the risks that its operations pose to human rights.
This is separate from any risks that involvement in human rights impacts may poseto the enterprise, although the two are increasingly related.

Living wage

There are numerous definitions of living wage but the core concept is to provide adecent standard of living for a worker and his or her family. A living wage is sufficient
to cover food, water, clothing, transport, education, health care and other essential
needs for workers and their family based on a regular work week not including
overtime hours.

Lobbying

Any direct or indirect communication with public officials, political decision makers
or representatives for the purposes of influencing public decision making andcarried out by or on behalf of any organised group.

Negative humanrights impact

Occurs when an action removes or reduces the ability of an individual to enjoy hisor her human rights. Human rights impacts can either have occurred or be ongoingor be potential human rights impacts in the future.

Personal data

Any information relating to an identified or identifiable person. An identifiable
person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference
to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online
identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic,
mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person.

Policy commitment
to respect humanrightsA high-level and widely available statement by a company that sets out its intention
to respect human rights with the expectation of being accountable for achievingthat aim.

Political engagement

The ways in which a company contributes to or participates in the political process.
This includes but is not limited to activities such as political contributions, indirect
political expenditure, lobbying, advocacy though trade associations and othermembership bodies, the revolving door, secondments, training and workshops for
public sector officials and politicians, and political activities related to theworkplace.

Remediation/remedy Refers to both the process of providing remedy for a negative human rights impact
and the substantive outcomes that can counteract, or make good, the negative
impact. These outcomes may take a range of forms, such as apologies, restitution,
rehabilitation, financial or non-financial compensation and punitive sanctions

Social transformation framework | 67

Annex 2: Glossary(whether criminal or administrative, such as fines), as well as the prevention of harmthrough, for example, injunctions or guarantees of non-repetition.
Remuneration

Basic salary plus additional amounts paid to a worker.

Salient human rights
issuesThose human rights that are at risk of the most severe negative impacts through a
company’s activities or business relationships. They therefore vary from company
to company.

Severe human rights
impactA negative human rights impact is severe by virtue of one or more of the following
characteristics: its scale, scope or irremediability. Scale means the gravity of the
impact on the human right(s). Scope means the number of individuals that are or
could be affected. Irremediability means the ease or otherwise with which those
impacted could be restored to their prior enjoyment of the right(s).

Stakeholder

Any individual or organisation that may affect or be affected by a company’s actions
and decisions.

Stakeholder
engagement

An ongoing process of interaction and dialogue between a company and its
stakeholders that enables the company to hear, understand and respond to theirinterests and concerns, including through collaborative approaches.

Suppliers

Defined as tier 1 and beyond, including subcontractors.

Supply chain

Refers to all supply chain business relationships, tier 1 and beyond, including
subcontractors.

Tax jurisdiction

Country or territory with autonomous taxing powers similar to a country.

Trade union

A trade union is defined as a workers' organization constituted for the purpose offurthering and defending the interests of workers.
A company’s value chain encompasses the activities that convert input into output
by adding value. It includes entities with which the company has a direct or indirectbusiness relationship and which either (a) supply products or services that
contribute to the company’s own products or services or (b) receive products orservices from the company.

Value chain

WorkerAn individual performing work for a company, regardless of the existence or natureof any contractual relationship with that company.

Social transformation framework | 68

Annex 3: References

Annex 3: References
1. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York :United Nations, 2015. A/RES/70/1.
https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_
RES_70_1_E.pdf.
2. Rees, C. Transforming How Business Impacts People: Unlocking the Collective Power of Five Distinct
Narratives. Cambridge, MA : Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative, Harvard Kennedy School,2020.https://shiftproject.org/resource/unlocking-narratives/.
3. Österblom H, et al. Transnational Corporations as 'Keystone Actors' in Marine Ecosystems. s.l. : PLoS One,2015, Vol. 10(5). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4446349/.
4. United Nations Global Compact. White Paper - The UN Global Compact Ten Principles and the Sustainable
Development Goals: Connecting Crucially. s.l. : United Nations Global Compact, 2016.
https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/4281.
5. Morris, D, Wrzoncki, E and Andreasen, S. Responsible Business Conduct as a Cornerstone of the 2030
Agenda - A Look at the Implications: A Discussion Paper. s.l. : The Danish Institute of Human Rights, 2019.
https://www.humanrights.dk/publications/responsible-business-conduct-cornerstone-2030-agenda-lookimplications.
6. United Nations. The Report of the Working Group on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational
Corporations and Other Business Enterprises. New York : United Nations, 2018. A/73/163.
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx.
7. Sherman, J. Rights-Respecting Corporate Culture: Identifying the Cultural Norms and Values that Underpin
Business Respect for Human Rights. s.l. : Shift Project, 2019. https://shiftproject.org/resource/rightsrespecting-corporate-culture-cultural-norms-values-that-underpin-business-respect-for-human-rights/.
8. Shift Project. Leadership & Governance Indicators of a Rights-Respecting Culture Beta. s.l. : Shift Project,2020. https://shiftproject.org/resource/leadership-governance-indicators-of-a-rights-respecting-culturebeta/.
9. International Labour Organization. What is Forced Labour, Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking.
[Online] https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/forced-labour/definition/lang--en/index.htm.
10. International Labour Organization. What is Child Labour. [Online] https://www.ilo.org/ipec/facts/lang-en/index.htm.
11. International Labour Organization. Global Estimates of Child Labour: Results and Trends 2012-2016.
Geneva : International Labour Organization, 2017.
https://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/WCMS_575499/lang--en/index.htm.
12. United Nations Children's Fund. Child Labour. [Online] https://www.unicef.org/protection/child-labour.
13. Danish Institute for Human Rights. Child Labour. [Online] https://biz.sdg.humanrights.dk/salientissue/child-labour.
14. International Labour Organization. Q&As on Business, Discrimination and Equality. [Online]
https://www.ilo.org/empent/areas/business-helpdesk/faqs/WCMS_DOC_ENT_HLP_BDE_FAQ_EN/lang-en/index.htm.
15. International Labour Organization. World Statistic. [Online] https://www.ilo.org/moscow/areas-ofwork/occupational-safety-and-health/WCMS_249278/lang--en/index.htm.
16. International Labour Organization. Relevant SDG Targets related to Health and Safety at the Workplace.
[Online] https://www.ilo.org/moscow/dw4sd/themes/osh/WCMS_558571/lang--en/index.htm.
17. Business and Human Rights Resource Centre. Union Busting & Unfair Dismissals: Garment Workers
during COVID-19. s.l. : Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, 2020. https://www.business-

Social transformation framework | 69

Annex 3: References

humanrights.org/en/from-us/briefings/union-busting-and-unfair-dismissals-garment-workers-during-covid19/.
18. Institute of Business Ethics. What is Business Ethics? [Online] https:/www.ibe.org.uk/knowledgehub/what-is-business-ethics.html.
19. The Global Network Initiative. The GNI Principles. [Online] https://globalnetworkinitiative.org/gniprinciples/.
20. Global Reporting Initiative. GRI 207: Tax. 2019. https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/standardsdevelopment/topic-standard-project-for-tax/.
21. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and World Bank. Improving Co-operation
between Tax Authorities and Anti-Corruption Authorities in Combating Tax Crime and Corruption. 2018.
22. Thomas, G. Why our Report on Business Efforts to Combat Corruption should Ring Alarm Bells. Reuters
Events. [Online] https://www.reutersevents.com/sustainability/why-our-report-business-efforts-combatcorruption-should-ring-alarm-bells.
23. Influence Map. Our Methodology. [Online]
https://influencemap.org/site/data/000/286/Methodology.pdf.
24. Beagan, M and Groves, B. Corporate Political Engagement Index 2018: Rating Private Sector Political
Transparency. s.l. : Transparency International UK, 2018.
https://www.transparency.org.uk/publications/cpei2018/.
25. United Nations. Gender Dimensions of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. New York :United Nations, 2019. A/HRC/41/43. https://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/41/43.
26. UK Government and KPMG. Hampton-Alexander Review: FTSE Women Leaders: Improving Gender
Balance in FTSE Leadership. 2018. https://ftsewomenleaders.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/HA-ReviewReport-2018.pdf.
27. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development and r.3.0. Thresholds of Transformation:
Invitation for Pilot Testing - Sustainable Development Performance Indicators. 2020. https://www.r30.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/UNRISD-r3-SDPI-Brochure-Final.pdf.

Social transformation framework | 70

FUNDING
The World Benchmarking Alliance is funded by:

COPYRIGHT
This work is the product of the World Benchmarking Alliance. Our work is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license,
visit www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
World Benchmarking Alliance
Rhijnspoorplein 10-38, 1018 TX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
info.social@worldbenchmarkingalliance.org
www.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org

Social transformation framework | 71