Regarding the VDMA’s withdrawal from the Industrial Dialogues for the mechanical and plant engineering sector

The NAP Industrial Dialogues were originally launched as an initiative by the Federal Government to support companies in implementing the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (NAP) through dialogue with stakeholders from civil society and politics, as well as other business actors. The Hamburger Stiftung für Wirtschaftsethik had been closely involved in the discussions from the outset.

The enactment of the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) in June 2021 imposed a legal obligation on the companies concerned to exercise human rights due diligence. Consequently, from the VDMA’s perspective, the relationship and relevance of the NAP, the Industrial Dialogues and the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act do not appear to have been sufficiently clarified or justified, leading the association to feel compelled to terminate the Industrial Dialogues.

The VDMA’s decision comes as a surprise not only in light of the nearly twelve months of trusting and intensive cooperation, but above all in terms of the substance of the matter. This is because the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provide an international framework of reference for both the NAP and the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act. Consequently, the Industrial Dialogue on mechanical and plant engineering could have been a useful tool for companies in these sectors in implementing the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act. The VDMA’s focus on the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act in the area of human rights protection does not render the Industrial Dialogue superfluous. On the contrary: whilst such networks for implementing the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act are currently being set up in many other sectors, we believe the VDMA is missing an opportunity for itself as a stakeholder and for its member companies.

As participants in several multi-stakeholder dialogues, we see great added value in the interaction between different groups of stakeholders, with a view to jointly achieving a significantly greater improvement in the human rights situation where it is truly needed. The VDMA has failed to capitalise on this opportunity at this stage, which certainly does not make dialogue with civil society actors any easier. Nevertheless, it is the individual companies that face the challenge of familiarising themselves with the risks associated with their own actions and establishing appropriate processes. Given the immense challenges involved, doing so in dialogue with policymakers and civil society appears absolutely essential and should continue to be considered in the future.