A/HRC/36/41 substances are far too international — involving global supply chains, transnational corporations, foreign investment and transboundary movement of pollution and waste — to be effectively addressed through a nationalistic approach. 51. At present, the issue is predominantly regulated at the global level through a patchwork of treaties for specific issues or chemicals of concern, which leave enormous gaps. A strong and robust global approach to the life cycle of toxics is necessary for the realization of human rights. 52. Certain elements have proven important with respect to increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of treaties. These include: participatory processes; flexibility in developing stronger controls as scientific evidence of threats and impacts develop; trade-related incentives; appropriate timelines for reductions in and elimination of use; independent panels for technology assessments; non-consensus decision-making; compliance mechanisms to ensure accountability; access to adequate financial and other resources to support low-income countries; and transfer of technology. 53. However, provisions for many of the above-mentioned aspects are lacking in current treaties for toxic chemicals and wastes, which hampers the effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of those treaties. The main concerns are the lack of effective compliance mechanisms and the inadequacy of financial resources and decision-making processes, which impede action at the global level. Regarding occupational safety and health, very few countries have ratified key, albeit outdated, ILO conventions. Among those who have, many are not adequately implementing or enforcing the obligations contained therein. 54. Furthermore, the narrow scope of existing treaties remains a major concern in terms of responding effectively and efficiently to increasing evidence of what in fact constitutes a chemical of global concern. Existing treaties employ an outdated and exceedingly narrow definition of what constitutes a chemical of global concern, the most restrictive criteria being that the substance must travel significant distances via wind and water. Therefore, existing multilateral environmental agreements provide global standards for the production and use of only a few dozen hazardous substances, out of several thousand that are part of today’s global economies and are of global concern. 55. Without strong global standards, there will continue to be a significant risk that the most vulnerable people, particularly those in lower-income countries, will become victims of toxic exposure. Global supply chains and trade flows require a different definition of what constitutes a chemical of global concern and a global regime that reflects modern reality. D. Enact and enforce legislation 56. States must establish legislative and regulatory frameworks to protect human rights from infringement as a result of toxic chemicals and wastes. The failure to enact or enforce laws necessary to prevent the adverse impacts of hazardous substances on, inter alia, the rights to life, to health and to the integrity of the person is a violation of a State’s obligations.48 A life-cycle approach to such frameworks is necessary. States must take steps to effectively regulate the foreign conduct of businesses domiciled or headquartered in their territory in order to protect human rights in other States. 49 Uphold human rights through national laws 57. States must uphold human rights through legislation to protect them from infringement resulting from toxic working conditions, unsafe consumer products, pollution, contamination and waste. Many States have established constitutional rights and legislation of direct relevance to toxics. Legislation in place covers particular life-cycle stages, 48 49 12 See, for example, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 14, para. 51. See also Committee on the Rights of the Child, general comment No. 16. See, for example, CCPR/C/DEU/CO/6 and CRC/C/CAN/CO/3-4.