CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Corporate Law and Human RightsGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impactRegulation and Compliance Studies

Supply chain divergence challenges a ‘Brussels effect’ from Europe's human rights and environmental due diligence laws

Open access
Bastos Lima, Mairon G., Schilling‐Vacaflor, Almut·2024·Global Policy
DOI 10.1111/1758-5899.13326
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Human rights violations and pressing environmental issues have tainted agricultural trade. The role of international market demand for commodities such as soy in causing those problems is clear, yet they remain mostly unaddressed. Therefore, European countries have led a new global trend on mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence (HREDD), advancing the EU's growing global regulatory ambitions. Here, we analyse the prospects for successful externalisation of Europe's sustainability standards – a ‘Brussels Effect’ – using Brazilian soy as a case. Our analysis exposes how the practice of supply chain divergence (i.e., the segmentation of exports tailored to different consumer requirements) can easily evade policy impacts and negate their additionality where Europe commands a minor market share. To avoid becoming just a niche market in these cases, the EU would need to expand on its actions, (i) engaging with other major consumer countries to export its standards, (ii) doubling down on HREDD's coverage to include financial actors and companies trading with other markets, or (iii) moving beyond ‘do no harm’ policies to adopt more strategically targeted ‘do good’ instruments to counter drivers of deforestation on the landscape level.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1758-5899.13326

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • About 80% of Brazil's soy production is exported, mostly to China but also to other Asian countries and Europe.

    “About 80% of Brazil's soy production is exported, mostly to China but also to other Asian countries and Europe (see Bastos Lima and Schilling-Vacaflor, 2024).”

    From Beyond the “supply chain” framing: Cattle ranching as a vanishing mediator of deforestation and dispossession in the Brazilian and Colombian Amazon (2026) · cites this paper as Bastos Lima and Schilling-Vacaflor, 2024

    The passage headed “Table 1 (Continued)” reports substantial Brazilian soy exports in 2021, mainly to China, with Thailand and several European countries also listed. It does not state what share of Brazil’s total soy production was exported, so the “about 80%” figure is not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Bartley, T. (2014) Transnational governance and the re-centered state: sustainability or legality? Regulation & Governance, 8(1), 93-109.
  2. Bartley, T. (2018) Rules without rights: land, labor, and private au- thority in the global economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. Bastos Lima, M.G. (2021) The politics of bioeconomy and sustain- ability: lessons from biofuel governance, policies and produc- tion strategies in the emerging world. Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing.
  4. Bastos Lima, M.G. & Gupta, J. (2014) The extraterritorial dimensions of biofuel policies and the politics of scale: live and let die? Third World Quarterly, 35(3), 392-410.
  5. Bueno, N. & Bright, C. (2020) Implementing human rights due diligence through corporate civil liability. International & Comparative law Quarterly, 69(4), 789-818.
  6. Chen, X., Hou, Y., Kastner, T., Liu, L., Zhang, Y., Yin, T. et al. (2023) Physical and virtual nutrient flows in global telecoupled agri- cultural trade networks. Nature Communications, 14(1), 2391.
  7. Crona, B., Eriksson, K., Lerpold, L., Malmström, M., Sanctuary, M. & Sandberg, J. (2021) Transforming toward sustainability through financial markets: four challenges and how to turn them into opportunities. One Earth, 4(5), 599-601.
  8. Dimitrov, R. (2020) Empty institutions in global environmental poli- tics. International Studies Review, 22(3), 626-650.
  9. Grabs, J. & Carodenuto, S.L. (2021) Traders as sustainability gover- nance actors in global food supply chains: a research agenda. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(2), 1314-1332.
  10. Gustafsson, M.T., Schilling-Vacaflor, A. & Lenschow, A. (2023) The politics of supply chain regulations: Towards foreign corporate accountability in the area of human rights and the environ- ment? Regulation & Governance, 17(4), 853-869.
  11. Héritier, A. & Lehmkuhl, D. (2008) The shadow of hierarchy and new modes of governance. Journal of Public Policy, 28(1), 1-17.
  12. LDC. (2022) LDC commits to zero deforestation & native vegeta- tion conversion in its supply chains by end 2025. Available from: https:// www. ldc. com/ press -relea ses/ ldc-commi ts-to- zero-defor estat ion-nativ e-veget ation -conve rsion -in-its-suppl y-chain s-by-end-2025/ [Accessed 06 March 2023
  13. Le Baron, G., Lister, J. & Dauvergne, P. (2017) Governing global supply chain sustainability through the ethical audit regime. Globalizations, 14(6), 958-975.
  14. Monciardini, D., Bernaz, N. & Andhov, A. (2021) The organizational dynamics of compliance with the UK modern slavery act in the food and tobacco sector. Business & Society, 60(2), 288-340.
  15. Moser, C. & Leipold, S. (2021) Toward "hardened" accountability? Analyzing the European Union's hybrid transnational gov- ernance in timber and biofuel supply chains. Regulation & Governance, 15(1), 115-132.
  16. Mueller, C., West, C., Bastos Lima, M.G. & Doherty, B. (2023) Demand-side actors in agricultural supply chain sustainability: an assessment of motivations for action, implementation chal- lenges, and research Frontiers. World, 4(3), 569-588.
  17. Newig, J., Challies, E., Cotta, B., Lenschow, A. & Schilling-Vacaflor, A. (2020) Governing global telecoupling toward environmental sustainability. Ecology and Society, 25(4), 21.
  18. Park, S. & Kramarz, T. (Eds.). (2019) Global environmental gover- nance and the accountability trap. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  19. Pinheiro, S.M., Emberson, C. & Trautrims, A. (2019) 'For the English to see' or effective change? How supply chains are shaped by laws and regulations and what that means for the exposure of modern slavery. Journal of the British Academy, 7, 167-190.
  20. Poynton, S. (2015) Beyond certification. Oxford: Do Sustainability.
  21. Rajão, R., Soares-Filho, B., Nunes, F., Börner, J., Machado, L., Assis, D. et al. (2020) The rotten apples of Brazil's agribusi- ness. Science, 369(6501), 246-248.
  22. Rausch, L.L., Gibbs, H.K., Schelly, I., Brandão, A., Jr., Morton, D.C., Filho, A.C. et al. (2019) Soy expansion in Brazil's Cerrado. Conservation Letters, 12(6), e12671.
  23. Renier, C., Vandromme, M., Meyfroidt, P., Ribeiro, V., Kalischek, N. & Zu Ermgassen, E.K. (2023) Transparency, traceability and deforestation in the Ivorian cocoa supply chain. Environmental Research Letters, 18(2), 24030.
  24. Ruggie, J.G. (2018) Multinationals as global institution: power, au- thority and relative autonomy. Regulation & Governance, 12(3), 317-333.
  25. Schilling-Vacaflor, A. & Gustafsson, M.T. (2023) Towards more sustainable global supply chains? Company compliance with new human rights and environmental due diligence laws. Environmental Politics, 1-22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09644 016. 2023. 2221983 · DOI
  26. Schilling-Vacaflor, A. & Lenschow, A. (2021) Hardening foreign corporate accountability through mandatory due diligence in the European Union? New trends and persisting challenges. Regulation & Governance, 17(3), 677-693.
  27. VanWey, L.K. & Richards, P.D. (2014) Eco-certification and green- ing the Brazilian soy and corn supply chains. Environmental Research Letters, 9(3), 31002.
  28. Vogel, D. (1997) Trading up and governing across: transnational governance and environmental protection. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(4), 556-571.
  29. Young, A.R. (2015) The European Union as a global regulator? Context and comparison. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(9), 1233-1252.
  30. Zu Ermgassen, E.K.H.J., Ayre, B., Godar, J., Bastos Lima, M.G., Bauch, S., Garrett, R. et al. (2020) Using supply chain data to monitor zero deforestation commitments: an assessment of progress in the Brazilian soy sector. Environmental Research Letters, 15, 35003.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bastos Lima, M. G., & Schilling‐Vacaflor, A.
Affiliations
  • The Stockholm Environment Institute Stockholm Sweden
  • Osnabrück University (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Global Policy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-01-14
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
260-275
ISSN
  • 1758-5880 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-5899
DOI
10.1111/1758-5899.13326
OpenAlex
W4390858445
Cited by
35
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 8
FWCI
12.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Global Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas
  • Vetenskapsrådet
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Corporate Law and Human Rights
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Global trade, sustainability, and social impact
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Regulation and Compliance Studies
Keywords
Brussels effect, agricultural trade, deforestation, commodity markets, sustainability standards, financial actors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review