A/HRC/14/29 (b) Clarify some of the key dilemmas, such as how to respect human rights in situations where national law conflicts with international human rights norms; (c) Make recommendations about how to continue the work on business and human rights, building on the framework that has already been accepted by the Human Rights Council. 65. Continued progress requires a clear understanding of the context within which the business and human rights debate is taking place coupled with a clear strategic vision. 66. In relation to context, the Special Representative said it is important to note that we are no longer at the crest of the latest wave of globalization. We have gone beyond it and a backlash has set in. Emerging powers have different views about the relationships between markets and authority, and they have their own traditions and policy preferences. Populism has re-emerged, in developed and developing countries, on the political right and left. It is necessary to take such factors into account when moving forward because the process needs the support of all Governments. 67. In relation to strategic vision, the Special Representative noted that change agents currently in the business and human rights domain may have various different strategic visions. They may all aspire to the same ultimate goal but involve different strategies to reach it. For example, some participants in this debate have as their main objective to advance the long-term promotion of international human rights law, no matter how long it takes. This is not necessarily the same vision held by those who wish to vindicate the rights of specific individuals here and now with any mechanisms available. The first category includes human rights organizations, law professors et al. The second includes grass-roots organizations and plaintiff lawyers. The Special Representative’s vision falls into yet a third category, which aims to reduce corporate-related abuses to the maximum extent possible in the shortest possible period of time. To cite but one difference among them concerning interim steps: effective alternative dispute resolution mechanisms play a significant role in the second and third visions, but they may not necessarily help — and may actually reduce the need for — the long-term evolution of some aspects of human rights law. It is necessary to be sensitive to these differences. They have nothing to do with favouring either voluntary or mandatory approaches, or with being bold or not; they are simply different. 68. Many views expressed during the consultation draw on different strategic concepts, but one needs to realize that they are not identical. For example, alternative dispute resolution does not necessarily help long-term evolution of human rights law. One needs to be sensitive to the idea of vision and strategic mission being different while in the long run they all have the same aim. This has nothing to do with favouring either voluntary or mandatory approaches, or with not being bold; it is just different. 69. The nature of the framework reflects the Special Representative’s strategic vision. There is no single silver bullet solution to the question of business and human rights. It is too complex and requires all of us to learn to do many things differently. This is a complex systems design challenge: developing the components of an interrelated, dynamic system and structuring them in such a way that they interact in a cumulative process to induce progress. 70. The Special Representative expressed his firm commitment to making this task work. The challenge is huge; time is short but the cause is just and the word impossible has no meaning. 16 GE.10-12935