A/HRC/17/32 corporations and host States to ensure that businesses are not involved with human rights abuse, while neighbouring States can provide important additional support. 7. Several existing initiatives address particular aspects of the role of business enterprises in zones of conflicts. They include recent efforts in the United Nations on conflict and natural resources; work by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank on weak governance zones and fragile States; the Kimberley Process on conflict diamonds; or initiatives such as the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, the Guidance on Responsible Business in Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas of the Global Compact or the publication on business and international humanitarian law by the International Committee of the Red Cross. 8. Most of these initiatives primarily address the role of business enterprises. They provide useful guidance for responsible businesses, which increasingly seek ways to avoid contributing to human rights harm in these difficult contexts. But they do not provide much guidance for States, as a result of which there remains a lack of clarity with regard to what innovative, proactive and, above all, practical policies and tools States may have or should acquire for preventing or mitigating corporate-related abuses in situations of conflict. III. States’ options towards businesses operating in conflictaffected areas 9. The engagement of States with business enterprises is needed in order to help those enterprises meet the challenges of working in conflict situations, in particular to avoid contributing to human rights abuse. States should not assume that businesses invariably prefer or benefit from governmental inaction and should not hesitate to contact enterprises proactively. 10. The above engagement should start early, because prevention is cheaper than reaction for both States and business enterprises. It is furthermore more likely that engagement can be effective in helping business enterprises to avoid involvement in human rights abuse if it takes place before violence becomes widespread. Nonetheless, prevention might not be enough, and States should remain engaged with the business enterprise through the conflict cycle. 11. Responsible businesses increasingly seek guidance from States on how to avoid contributing to human rights harm in these difficult contexts. Thus the options for States can be divided based on the willingness of the business to cooperate with them. A. Cooperative enterprises 12. States should warn business enterprises of the heightened risk of being involved with gross abuses of human rights in conflict-affected areas and clearly communicate their expectations with regard to business respect for human rights, even in such challenging environments. With few exceptions, States have yet to convey their expectations of business behaviour in situations of conflicts. Normally, States would convey such expectations through policies, laws and regulations. For example, in the area of anticorruption, States in recent years have agreed upon and communicated their expectations regarding standards of business conduct with respect to bribery through international conventions and domestic policies and regulations. However, unlike anti-corruption, the existing legal and policy framework relevant to conflict-affected regions does not have a component that is specifically designed to deal with the problems of business involvement. 13. This lack of regulatory clarity limits the ability of States to engage or advise business enterprises regarding acceptable conduct in or connected to conflict-affected regions. Therefore, states should review whether their policies, legislation, regulations and 4