A/HRC/35/32 However, these enterprises were not noticeably active in the processes leading up to the publication of the Guiding Principles in 2011. This is perhaps not surprising, as the primary focus of international efforts to develop business and human rights standards has been on transnational corporations. Examples of this are the unsuccessful attempt to develop a United Nations code of conduct, the original OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy and the Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/12/Rev.2). 20. The low level of engagement of small and medium-sized enterprises in the international business and human rights conversation is not only due to the focus on transnational corporations in international policy discussions, but also a reflection of the fact that, in most jurisdictions, the government regulatory and policy departments and agencies that are oriented towards these enterprises either lack the awareness of international human rights standards or view them as irrelevant to smaller enterprises. II. Implementing the Guiding Principles by small and mediumsized enterprises A. Opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises 1. Comparative advantages of small and medium-sized enterprises 21. Small and medium-sized enterprises are more labour-intensive than large business enterprises and often have a greater capacity to absorb labour (including unskilled labour),22 which can help to lift families and communities out of poverty. Small businesses are usually locally owned and controlled and can therefore strengthen the extended family, as well as other social systems and cultural traditions. Family-owned business enterprises in particular have been found to exhibit strong ethical and philanthropic approaches, 23 which may provide a platform for a wider strategy to respect human rights. Some studies have found size within a company to have a positive effect on responsible engagement,24 while others have contradicted this 25 or claimed a “U-shape” relationship between size and engagement.26 22. There are aspects of small and medium-sized enterprises that may lead to outcomes that are beneficial to human rights. For example, small firms play an important economic and social role in general, and the development and growth of small firms may also help redress social and economic exclusion. Given that they are often deeply embedded in the community context, such enterprises may have a greater understanding of local cultural and political contexts and more links with civil society, 27 which may in turn increase their socially responsible practices.28 They can also be at the forefront of the struggle against 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 See H. Rwigema and P. Karungu, “SMME Development in Johannesburg’s Southern Metropolitan Local Council: An assessment”, Development Southern Africa, Vol. 16, Iss. 1 (1999), pp. 107 and 111. See United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications for Small and Medium Enterprises in Developing Countries (Vienna, 2002) p. ix. Available from www.unido.org/fileadmin/import/userfiles/puffk/corporatesocialresponsibility.pdf. See European SMEs and social and environmental responsibility (footnote 21 above). See “Effect of buyer pressure on suppliers in SMEs” (footnote 17 above). See K. Udayasankar, “Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Size”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 83, p. 167 (2008). See “Effect of buyer pressure on suppliers in SMEs” (footnote 17 above), p. 261. See Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, “Small business: a global agenda” (2010). Available from www.accaglobal.com/content/dam/acca/global/PDF-technical/small-business/pol-afbsbaga.pdf. 7