News about Our Work -
© FEMNET
New study: How real participation succeeds
How can the involvement of workers in the textile industry be transformed from a theoretical compulsory exercise into an effective, systemic practice? Using the Dindigul Agreement as an example, the new study by FEMNET and the Society for International Cooperation (GIZ) shows how companies can move from symbolic consultation to effective co-determination.
With the new study ‘Meaningful Stakeholder Engagement in Textile Supply Chains: From ‘proven practice’ to systemic implementation’ FEMNET and GIZ present a comprehensive analysis of how real participation in global supply chains can be structurally anchored. The focus is on Meaningful Stakeholder Engagement (MSE), an approach that focuses on the binding involvement of those groups most affected by business decisions.
Who are ‘rightholders’?
The core of the MSD approach is the involvement of rights holders. This refers to persons and groups of persons whose human rights are potentially or actually affected by business activities. These include, in particular, workers in the factories, but also, for example, smallholder farmers, fishermen, miners and local residents and affected communities along the supply chains. In contrast to stakeholders – a broad term that encompasses various stakeholders, such as companies, NGOs, suppliers, authorities or consumers – rights holders are at the heart of human rights due diligence obligations.
Key results: Empowerment instead of symbolism
The study of 14 different frameworks shows a clear gap between effective models and purely symbolic integration. Successful examples, notably the Dindigul Agreement, show that legally binding agreements and the direct involvement of trade unions create measurable improvements: higher wages, greater occupational safety and increased freedom of association.
Other important findings of the study are:
- Empowerment is non-negotiable: Participation fails if it is not designed to really shift power relations. The binding involvement of trade unions is the necessary bridge from mere consultation to enforceable change.
- Purchasing practices are key: Engagement is perceived as disingenuous when the underlying commercial causes such as wages, Costs and delivery times, not to be addressed. These must be the first item on any agenda for a credible due diligence dialogue
- Strengthening local systems instead of bypassing them: Building parallel external systems (e.g. third-party complaint structures) often weakens sustainable local structures such as trade unions or labour courts. Resources of all steakholders should instead strengthen existing democratic institutions.
- A reliable process is more important than fast results: Trust and real improvements only come from long-term, continuous dialogues, not from short-term projects that focus on delivering results that are relevant to the public.
Pathways to systemic implementation
To broadly anchor MSDs, the study proposes three strategic avenues: the transformation of existing multi-stakeholder initiatives into rights-holder-led forums, the integration of binding participation clauses into brand agreements and the promotion of manufacturer-led co-determination through commercial incentives. The goal is an ecosystem of accountability that sustainably strengthens the position of workers and enables structural change.