A/HRC/44/56 plans, multi-stakeholder platforms and economic incentives, much still needed to be done in terms of policy coherence and government action and leadership, including by engaging in dialogue with relevant stakeholders; (b) Governments needed to meet their obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and fundamental freedoms. In doing so, they should use a smart mix of measures – a combination of mandatory and voluntary, national and international measures – to foster business respect for human rights in particular contexts. Although legislation was a core element of this mix, and perhaps the strongest driver for creating a level playing field and incentivizing companies to adopt responsible business practices, as underscored by businesses and non-governmental organizations alike, legislation alone was not sufficient; (c) Governments should, when acting as economic actors, lead by example to foster responsible business practices, including by integrating human rights due diligence into the operations of State-owned enterprises, trade and investment promotion efforts and public procurement operations; (d) There had been positive developments in “regional races to the top” exercises, with examples from projects in Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean demonstrating the importance of peer learning among stakeholders at the regional and subregional levels; (e) International investment continued to play an important role in fostering respect for human rights worldwide. Investors were key actors in respecting human rights and should act accordingly; (f) Rights holders needed to be at the centre of any measure developed and implemented by States, businesses, investors and other stakeholders; (g) State action to enhance access to remedy for victims was critical and urgent. Not enough progress on access to remedy had been made, especially by Governments, despite the fact that remedy-related obligations were a core part of the State duty to protect against business-related human rights abuses. Peer-learning platforms were crucial for providing States, businesses and other stakeholders with better knowledge on mechanisms for providing access to remedy; (h) It was important to build capacity and broaden understanding of States’ and businesses’ respective duties and responsibilities under the Guiding Principles in order to enhance efforts towards the effective implementation of the Guiding Principles; (i) Business activities in conflict and post-conflict areas still required more research, including more guidance for businesses in order to allow them to respect human rights while developing their activities; (j) Despite playing a key role as potential business partners in achieving business respect for human rights, human rights defenders continued to face intimidation, harassment and attacks by Governments and businesses. States must ensure a safe environment, encourage an open and constructive dialogue with defenders and between defenders and businesses and provide effective remedies for defenders when abuse occurs; (k) Discriminated and marginalized individuals and groups such as women and girls, indigenous peoples, minorities, migrant workers, children, members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community and persons with disabilities remained especially vulnerable to business-related human rights abuses. States needed to consider and address the particular risks faced by these individuals and groups when developing legislative and policy measures to foster business respect for human rights; (l) Respect for human rights within supply chains remained a major issue and initiatives, including multi-stakeholder initiatives, must urgently fill any gaps with regards to transparency and collaboration among all those involved in supply chains; (m) As Governments were pursuing the Sustainable Development Goals and seeking to engage the private sector in achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, it was critical to ensure the development of more strategic partnerships and initiatives among key actors at several levels and that such partnerships were firmly grounded in respect for human rights; 19