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
Filtered answers
22 Known
+ 19 Unknown
= 41 Total results
Companies Values
Apple Inc.+image
Apple Inc.
California (United States)
Yes
Yes,No 2014
Under Armour+image
Under Armour
Maryland (United States)
Yes
Yes,No 2015
Teradata+image
Teradata
Ohio (United States)
Yes
Yes,No 2013
Globant+Image
Globant
Argentina
Yes
Yes,No 2015
National Australia Bank+image
National Australia Bank
Australia
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
DHL
Unknown
Yes,No 2013
OHL Group
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
EuLen
Unknown
Yes,No 2014
Cemex+Image
Cemex
Mexico
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
Yara International+Image
Yara International
Norway
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
Tata Steel Limited+image
Tata Steel Limited
India
Unknown
Yes,No 2014
Westpac Banking Group+image
Westpac Banking Group
Australia
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
Vale SA+Image
Vale SA
Brazil
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
Armor+Image
Armor
France
Unknown
Yes,No 2015
Barilla S.p.A.+image
Barilla S.p.A.
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
GSF+Image
GSF
France
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
Asahi Group Holdings+image
Asahi Group Holdings
Japan
Unknown
Yes,No 2015
Yes Bank Limited+image
Yes Bank Limited
India
Unknown
Yes,No 2015-16
Tieto+Image
Tieto
Sweden
Unknown
Yes,No 2016
WorleyParsons+image
WorleyParsons
Australia
Unknown
Yes,No 2017

Export: csv / json

Metric Type
Researched
Designed By
Topics
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