Amnesty International+Conducts Own Due Diligence
0

Conducts Own Due Diligence

Does the company conduct its own conflict minerals due diligence?

Company
Industry
Project
search
Year
Metric value
Companies Values
National Australia Bank
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
DHL
2013 = Unknown /Yes,No
OHL Group
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
EuLen
2014 = Unknown /Yes,No
Cemex
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
Yara International
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
Tata Steel Limited
2014 = Unknown /Yes,No
Westpac Banking Group
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
Vale SA
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
Armor
2015 = Unknown /Yes,No
Barilla S.p.A.
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
GSF
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
Asahi Group Holdings
2015 = Unknown /Yes,No
Yes Bank Limited
2015-16 = Unknown /Yes,No
Tieto
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
WorleyParsons
2017 = Unknown /Yes,No
NEC Corporation
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
Novozymes
2016 = Unknown /Yes,No
Vallourec
2015 = Unknown /Yes,No
Apple Inc.
2014 = Yes /Yes,No

Export: csv / json

Designed By
Topics
Metric Type
Researched
Research Policy
Community Assessed
Report Type
Conflict Minerals Report
Value Type
Category
Options:

Yes and No


About

Under the OECD Guidance, downstream companies are supposed to assess the due diligence practices of their smelters/ refiners. Some companies do conduct due diligence on their smelters /refiners, for example by conducting spot checks or site visits to smelters /refiners and reviewing incident reports to look out for risks linked to the smelters / refiners in their supply chain. Others have outsourced this responsibility entirely by relying on third party schemes such as theConflict Free Sourcing Initiative (CFSI)'s Conflict Free Smelter Program (CFSP) or the Global e-Sustainability Initiative, who check the due diligence practices of smelters / refiners. While companies can use these schemes as a tool to aid their due diligence, they should not be relying solely on them.

Methodology

This metric is asking whether the company’s Conflict Minerals Report describes due diligence conducted directly by the company, (e.g. through site visits, reviewing incident reports).

Some companies have outsourced this responsibility entirely by relying on third party schemes such as the Conflict Free Sourcing Initiative (CFSI)'s Conflict Free Smelter Program (CFSP) or the Global e-Sustainability Initiative, who check the due diligence practices of smelters / refiners.

Answer options:
Yes - Where the company has undertaken its own due diligence, give a “Yes” value and quote the relevant part of the report as a comment. For an example see Apple’s 2016 report, which discusses how it reviews reports on incidents that may be linked to its smelters / refiners, conducts spot audits and engages directly with its smelters / refiners: page 4 “Further Due Diligence: Incident Review and Resolution” and page 5 “Leveraging Expertise to Drive Desired Outcomes”.

No - Where the company does not describe any due diligence it has conducted directly give a “No“ value. If the report references a third party scheme such as CFSI, please make a note about this as a comment.

Tip: Try searching (ctrl-f) for terms like “visit”, “site“, “facility” or “SOR” - if you find any other good search terms for this metric please add them here.

Bulk Import