A/HRC/39/48 40. Although examples of its application exist, the practice is of very limited application. Requiring the adoption of the hierarchy of controls as an international standard would level the playing field by harmonizing upwards. However, business actors continue to stifle global progress by insisting that applying the hierarchy will reduce competitiveness. Workers continue to be exposed to toxic substances, including toxic industrial chemicals and highly hazardous pesticides, when demonstrably less dangerous alternatives exist. Another egregious example of an industry that continues to externalize impacts on poor workers and communities in developing countries by failing to apply the hierarchy is the shipping industry and its practice of shipbreaking. 41. Business enterprises can develop and adopt alternatives that reduce harm to human health and the environmental impact of their operations and business relationships. Some have done so. However, many enterprises have outsourced and/or buried the problem of toxic exposure further down their global supply chains, enabling them to continue business as usual instead of adopting measures to respect workers’ rights affected by toxic work, despite increasing expectations that business enterprises should prevent exposure to toxics as part of their human rights due diligence. C. Monitoring and enforcement gaps 42. To ensure they are not turning a blind eye to the exploitation of workers, States must monitor working conditions, including routine monitoring of exposures, and enforce laws for the protection of workers’ rights. However, the vast majority of States do not adequately perform their duties related to monitoring, oversight, protection or redress for workers whose rights are abused by their exposure to toxic substances in their jurisdiction. The systematic decline in funding for institutions responsible for monitoring 45 presents significant and enormous difficulties for States in monitoring the large number of workplaces in their jurisdiction and challenges persist in relation to the collection of statistical information, particularly with respect to the informal sector. In most countries, recording and notification of occupational accidents and, in particular, diseases is poorly done, not harmonized and significantly underreported. D. Exploitation of those most at risk 43. Multiple factors such as social status, education, age, gender, country of origin, ethnicity or disability can exacerbate the risks in the exposure to toxics. Prevention and response to exposure must take into account these specific vulnerabilities to be effective. 44. Those most at risk of exposure are those who are most vulnerable to exploitation: the poor, children and women, migrant workers, people with disabilities and older persons. They are often prone to abuse of a myriad of human rights, they are forced to make the abhorrent choice between their health and income and their plight is invisible to most consumers and policymakers with the power to enable a just transition. 1. Poverty 45. Poverty is common among most workers whose rights are abused by their exposure to toxic chemicals. The disparity of exposure between low- and high-income workers is visible both within and between countries. 46. Very often low-income workers have lower educational levels that drive them to accept occupations that expose them to toxic chemicals, limit their access to information and knowledge and prevent them from being able to defend their rights. The impacts of occupational exposure of low-income workers to toxic substances are more likely to be attributed to other, non-work exposures that are higher in poorer communities such as air, 45 10 ILO, Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, Report III (Part 1B), containing the General Survey on certain occupational safety and health instruments (Geneva, 2017), para. 436.