A/HRC/38/49 (c) The complexity of monitoring large supply chains; (d) Access to effective remedy is still a challenge for most companies; (e) Human rights issues in the large informal economy that are not covered by the formal regulations are largely neglected. 64. In order to plug the gaps, participants drew attention to the need for: • A combination of regulatory tools • Both binding agreements and more flexible and pragmatic sources of governance • Clear expectations and continuous scrutiny by Governments requiring all companies, regardless of their size, to implement the Guiding Principles • Government guidance and support for small and medium-sized enterprises, including by means of peer and sectorial platforms • Consumers and investors to call for systematic changes • In the case of investors, frameworks that reward companies that address human rights risks, beyond simply having policies in place • New technologies and partnerships to address the scope and scale of challenges • States, as economic actors, to lead by example at a significant scale by integrating human rights in public procurement and State-owned enterprises (assuming that there is the political will to do so) 65. Participants noted that benchmarking and ranking initiatives, such as the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark, 9 were considered important forces for driving progress, even though all initiatives also found that companies scored particularly poorly with regard to remediation efforts. At the same time, participants noted that the engagement of capital markets to a much larger extent was needed; if Fortune 500 were placed on a human rights index, more people and investors would take notice and base their decisions on that information. Another challenge was how to measure actual impact and company performance, given that benchmarks tended only to show what companies say they are doing, not what they do in practice. 66. One key issue for corporate respect of human rights concerned exercising leverage in business relationships when they are linked to, but not causing or contributing to, human rights abuse. During one discussion, participants explicitly asked how transnational corporations could use leverage to advance access to remedy through business relationships. Reference was also made to the revised ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (see para. 47 above), which calls upon multinational enterprises to use their leverage to encourage their business partners to provide effective means of enabling remediation for abuses of internationally recognized human rights. Participants concluded that: (a) Collaboration with others (including industry organizations and competitors) is the most important means for strengthening leverage; (b) The financial services industry plays an important role: engagement can lead to better outcomes; (c) Companies should “translate” from the language of lawyers to terms that are understood by more people across organizations; (d) Leverage could be built up-front into contracts, dialogue and training with suppliers and joint venture partners; (e) Investments should be made in social dialogue and local solutions. 67. During a special session, attention was drawn to experiences of human rights due diligence in investment and supply chains in China, and lessons were shared on 9 16 See www.corporatebenchmark.org.