Governments increasingly expect businesses to carry out social and environmental due diligence in their operations and along their supply chains. They do so through a wide range of policies, including through legislation and non-binding policy measures.1 This paper focusses on legislative measures due to interest from governments in exploring opportunities for greater co-operation and coherence across mandatory measures to avoid unnecessary costs and complexity for companies, suppliers and enforcement authorities. It builds on earlier work by the OECD exploring opportunities for international co-operation on due diligence policy,2 and will form the basis for a future online tool to navigate across both binding and non-binding measures. The paper also builds on a legislative and policy mapping project undertaken by the OECD for Ireland and the European Commission.
These findings also helped to inform discussion during the second meeting of the OECD Inclusive Platform on Due Diligence Policy Co‑operation, held on 27‑28 October 2025. The Platform brings together policymakers from around the world to discuss effective design, implementation and uptake of social and environmental due diligence policy and accompanying measures. This policy paper builds on the discussions and papers prepared for the first meeting and sets out ideas for reflection and is intended to trigger discussion. It is not intended to be comprehensive nor represent official positions of the OECD. It is published in parallel with the paper (OECD, 2026[1]).
The paper aims to help governments:
understand key commonalities and divergences in how existing legislation integrates due diligence, including in relation to international standards.
identify opportunities for enhancing international policy co‑operation to promote coherent and effective due diligence practices and minimise complexity and costs for businesses and regulators.
Mapping key areas of convergence and divergence is important for governments in the process of designing new laws and policies as it provides reference points to build on. How policymakers choose to translate concepts such as “risk-based approach” (see Box 1) or proportionality, or how they define the supply chain, can shape where and how companies focus their efforts. Similarly, policy expectations on responding to risk can determine when and how companies engage with suppliers and other business partners, and whether they take proactive steps to support effective mitigation, prevention and remediation outcomes.
Governments with legislation in place have opportunities to leverage existing convergence and address potential ambiguities and inconsistencies in how companies perceive their due diligence responsibilities. Many of the legislative measures in scope are only recently adopted or not yet fully implemented and enforced. In some cases, national implementing laws, official guidance aimed at clarifying due diligence expectations and other support measures are all forthcoming. While this creates challenges for discussions on policy co‑operation, it also creates important opportunities, including to promote effective company practices, pre‑empt potential challenges and/or conflicts in implementation, and shape coherent enforcement approaches. Upcoming guidance is also an opportunity to mitigate perceived differences and explain the relationship between different pieces of legislation to support more co‑ordinated and coherent approaches across jurisdictions.
Where legislation is based on international standards, these can provide an important common basis for future policy co‑operation, understanding that translating voluntary international standards into legal requirements involves a level of discretion and subjectivity as policymakers seek to strike a balance between legal certainty and flexibility.
