Gender and governance of global value chains: Promoting the rights of women workers

• Published date: 01 December 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ilr.12150
• Author: Stephanie BARRIENTOS,Lara BIANCHI,Cindy BERMAN
• Date: 01 December 2019

International Labour Review, Vol. 158 (2019), No. 4

Copyright © The authors 2019

Journal compilation © International Labour Organization 2019

* Global Development Institute, University of Manchester, email: s.barrientos@manches

ter.ac.uk. ** Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, email: lara.

bianchi@nottingham.ac.uk. *** The Ethical Trading Initiative, email: Cindy.Berman@eti.org.uk.

Responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles rests solely with their authors,

and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the ILO.

Gender and governance

of global value chains:

Promoting the rights of women workers

Stephanie BARRIENTOS,* Lara BIANCHI** and Cindy BERMAN***

Abstract. Private governance channelled through social compliance programmes

and gender initiatives of multinational companies have had limited impact in tack-

ling gender discrimination in global value chains (GVCs). The United Nations

Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) provide a public–

private governance framework to address human rights globally, including gender

equality. This article considers whether the UNGPs can provide a more effective

governance framework for addressing women workers’ rights in GVCs. It argues

that interlayered forms of governance (involving public, private and social actors)

are critical in addressing gender discrimination in GVCs and advancing a gendered

approach to human rights due diligence.

Global value chains (GVCs), largely coordinated by multinational com-

panies, have generated hundreds of millions of jobs in low-income and

emerging economies. Women occupy a signicant proportion of these jobs

and constitute the majority of workers in some industries, such as the garment

and food processing industries (Barrientos, 2014; ILO, 2015; Posthuma and

Rossi, 2017). However, global sourcing across international borders involves

high levels of competition between companies seeking lower production costs,

which results in precarious jobs for many workers given that labour is the cost

factor that suppliers often squeeze when under pressure from the purchasing

practices of multinational companies (ILO, 2017). This especially affects work-

ers in groups discriminated against on the basis of gender, caste, race, religion,

ethnicity, physical ability or sexual orientation. In particular, women are dis-

proportionally affected by business activities (United Nations, 2019). Gender

discrimination is endemic in GVCs, and women drawn in as a source of low-

cost labour are concentrated in the more insecure and less protected jobs with

International Labour Review730

low pay and poor conditions (Barrientos, 2019). They often lack the ability to

negotiate the terms and conditions of work with their employers, organize

through independent trade unions or raise grievances.

Many multinational companies, including retailers, brands and some large

intermediaries, have adopted voluntary codes of labour practice to ensure

minimum labour standards. In many cases, these have been developed in re-

sponse to pressure from civil society organizations, in particular trade unions

and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Voluntary codes form part of

multinational companies’ private governance of GVCs and have spawned a

large social compliance industry. However, social auditing of the implemen-

tation of codes has been ineffective in picking up on or addressing gender

discrimination and harassment, and the quality of audits is often poor (BSR,

2018a; Barrientos, 2019). Recognition of the limitations of social compliance

to address labour rights is therefore growing.

Some multinational companies that are looking “beyond compliance”

have adopted gender initiatives to promote the rights of women workers in

their value chains. They have broadened their GVCs governance to include

support for women in communities or in the factories and farms from which

they source (Scott, 2017). In many cases, delivery of programmes also involves

collaboration with civil society organizations. However, an analysis of selected

gender initiatives in multinational companies (examined below) found that

these are fragmented. They rarely address or prevent the underlying drivers

of gender discrimination, or the business operations of buyers and suppliers

that can compound women’s precarious work in GVCs.

The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

(UNGPs), endorsed by the Human Rights Council in 2011, provide a broader

governance framework that some multinational companies are adopting (United

Nations, 2011). The rst pillar of the UNGPs emphasizes the importance of

public governance in promoting human rights (i.e. State duty to protect), while

the second recognizes the importance of private governance by companies

(i.e. corporate responsibility to respect). The third pillar of the UNGPs estab-

lishes workers’ right to access remedy and remediation for business-related

abuses. The UNGPs apply to cross-border operations and business relationships,

in line with the transnational nature of GVCs. They set a global standard of ex-

pected conduct that exists above national laws and refers to internationally rec-

ognized human rights, including the International Bill of Human Rights and the

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-

up. In contrast to “box-ticking” social compliance, the UNGPs require a com-

prehensive accountability system based on human rights due diligence. The aim

is to understand the potential or real impacts of business operations on rights-

holders (such as workers and local communities), and ensure that States and

businesses take responsibility for mitigating such impacts and providing remedy

for people who have been adversely affected or whose rights have been abused.

However, the debate around the UNGPs has only recently begun actively

addressing gender as an underlying dimension of abuse (Bourke-Martignoni