Three Takeaways from Responsible Business 2025

At Responsible Business 2025, the Responsible Business Alliance (RBA) brought together its members—representing industries across the electronics value chain—as well as stakeholders in government and civil society, to examine the inflection point responsible supply chain governance is facing.

RBA is the “world's largest industry coalition dedicated to responsible business conduct in global supply chains.” It brings together companies working in electronics, from upstream mining companies and suppliers to downstream major brands, in order to build consensus and norms around supply chain sustainability. It also facilitates initiatives such as the Responsible Minerals Initiative and the Responsible Factories Initiative as multi-stakeholder fora to delve deeper into the issues facing companies in these realms. RBA also develops standards, like its Validated Assessment Program, to support companies in their supply chain governance.

I was able to attend with the Erb Institute’s support and was particularly interested in this event, given how it ties together responsible business engagement and the global demand for critical minerals necessary for the energy transition. Along with industry members of RBA, the audience included many leading auditing and data provider organizations that work with companies to gather supply chain data and implement best practices. These companies tabled in an open area throughout the event, connecting with potential clients and sharing new tools they’ve developed.

We were also joined by policymakers from several regions, who shared how regulation in their jurisdictions is shaping the global responsible supply chain ecosystem. Opening remarks each day were delivered virtually by the Director-General of the International Labour Organization, Gilbert Houngbo, and by the former president of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. Their reflections highlighted the importance of collective action and global commitment to RBA principles.

The two days of the conference, which included plenary sessions and smaller panels, were followed by one day of partner events conducted by nonprofit organizations—the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA) and the Cobalt Institute—to discuss how non-industry organizations connect to this work.

Across the three days, three prevalent themes stood out to me in discussions of the crossroads facing supply chains:

1. Momentum shaped by a decade of headwinds. The first is that the headwinds of the past decade of work in this space have generated optimism and momentum. That said, preparing for incoming regulation is a major priority, even for the theoretically better-positioned members of RBA.

2. Regulatory uncertainty as a defining concern. Headlines related to European regulation, as well as emerging laws and frameworks from many other jurisdictions that strengthen labor rights globally, were frequently discussed. Conversations addressed the lack of certainty around what exactly will be expected of companies, how they will comply with these expectations, and how to pursue best practices.

3. Geopolitics and supply chain resilience. Finally, geopolitical issues were prominent throughout the conference, with much discussion focused on supply chain resilience. Topics such as responsible exit, building respect for human rights into contracts, and how upstream companies make decisions in this context were clearly colored by the past year’s tariffs.

Along with the material shared on panels, which covered the high-level concerns companies are grappling with, the continuing discussions after presentations were equally enlightening. Company representatives from various industries participated in several Q&A sessions over the two days. Though the conversations were conducted under Chatham House Rules, the interactions were revealing—for example, which companies chose not to share, how their approaches differed from peers at the same stage, and how perspectives varied among actors positioned differently in the supply chain. These dynamics communicated a lot about who the leaders are in this space.

From these discussions, it is clear that companies in this industry are committed to reducing harm, but it was less apparent how their work can prevent, rather than react to, human rights abuses. The interest was certainly there: discussions about circularity and supplier codes of conduct highlighted proactive thinking. However, conversations about responsibility in extractive industries often fell short of addressing the parallel issue of demand for transition minerals. There is clearly a level of tension here, given that RBA’s membership is largely industry, but it creates a significant gap for sustainability ambitions and commitments.

Overall, the experience left me with a lot to consider regarding the human rights implications of how we respond to environmental issues. Back in the classroom at Michigan, I’ve been thinking a great deal about the management and decision-making questions companies face.