GC has conducted Human Rights Risk Assessment (HRRA) within GC group since 2015 to identify, prevent and mitigate any human rights risks throughout the value chain due to the business operations. These risk assessments cover the different activities at country level, industries sectors and at 12 operational sites in eight countries

operational sites

countries

which are Thailand, Malaysia, New Zealand, Australia, United States, Germany, France, England and Poland, in which the company operates.

Moreover, GC has conducted HRRA for business partners and joint ventures that the company does not have management control to establish effective management practices for the operational areas at risk. Additionally, GC has identified human rights related issues and assessed impact on risky groups or vulnerable groups such as children, indigenous groups, foreign labor or any impacts at a national, operation and individual level. Criteria for risk assessment regarding the human rights are considered based on two factors; the likelihood and the impact. The assessment covers six human rights aspects include labor rights, community rights, supply chain, safety, environment and customer’s rights.

According to the HRRA results, GC has established measures to control and mitigate impacts which may occur as well as assessed the residual risks after established preventive and correction actions regarding human rights for its business operation. This is to ensure that the human rights management approach is effective for controlling the impacts throughout the value chain.

GC Human Rights Risk Assessment Matrix

Risk Level

Risk Assessment Evaluation Criteria: Impacts

The human rights impact depends on its scale, scope, and limits on the ability to restore those affected to a situation at least the same as their situation before the adverse impact.

Impact Level

4 Extreme

Description of Impacts
  • Human rights impacts affect a larger scale or targeted at particular population groups beyond the scope of the operational areas
  • Operation is unable to control or remediate human rights impacts to restore the ability of an individual on human rights
  • Impacts/situations of human rights abuses require the involvement of independent and trusted organizations to rectify the issues

Impact Level

3 High

Description of Impacts
  • Operation is knowingly providing practical assistance or encouragement that has a substantial effect on the commission of human rights violation (Legal Complicity)
  • Human rights are violated at the individual level by the operation and value chains
  • Operation has disputes over human rights related concerns with vulnerable groups

Impact Level

2 Medium

Description of Impacts
  • Operation is seen to benefit from abuses committed by other (Non-legal Complicity)
  • Business fails to provide response to or communication on the human rights related concerns raised by internal or external groups

Impact Level

1 Low

Description of Impacts
  • Potential impacts of human rights related concerns raised by internal or external groups are prevented by the operational level and our grievance mechanism.

Risk Rating Scale: Likelihood

Likelihood Level Description of Likelihood
4 Likely (>25%) The event has occurred in the operation several times per year
3 Possible (10-25%) The event occurred in the operation several times
2 Unlikely (1-10%) The event rarely occurs in the operation, but possible to occur
1 Rare (<1%) The event occurred several times in the industry of the operation but unlikely to happen in the operation

Results from Human Rights Risk Assessment

GC’s operating areas (including Joint Ventures where GC has management control)
  • Health, safety and welfare of employees and contractors in operating areas.
  • Impact of environmental pollution
  • Health and safety of communities
  • Living standard and quality of life for local communities
Critical Tier 1 Feedstock Suppliers
  • Employment in the supply chain, such as consideration of human rights issues
  • Environmental, Health and Safety Management
  • Stakeholder engagement
Critical Tier 1 Non-Feedstock Suppliers
  • Employment in the supply chain, such as consideration of human rights issues
  • Environmental, health and safety management
  • Stakeholder engagement
Joint Ventures where GC does not have management control
  • Employment guidelines
  • Environmental, health and safety management

Percentage of operating areas with human rights risk and controlling approach

Percentage of operation areas which have been assessed human rights risks Percentage of operation areas which found human rights related risks Percentage of operation areas which have human rights risks and have controlling approach Controlling Approach
GC’s operating areas (including joint ventures where GC has management control) 100 95 100 Operate according to GC’s management approach e.g Environmental, Occupational Health and Safety Manual for joint ventures, and corporate governance guidelines, etc.
Critical Tier 1 Feedstock Suppliers 100 100 100 Operate according to GC’s management approach e.g. Environmental, Health and Safety Management System and Sustainability Management Framework, etc.
Critical Tier 1 Non-feedstock Suppliers 100 80 100 Operate according to GC’s supplier management approach e.g. Environmental, Health and Safety Management System
Joint Ventures where GC does not have management control - - - No joint venture in GC management control

The key Human Rights issues related associated to GC’s operations

Level og Risk Impact

The results of human rights risk assessment indicated that the residual risk level of the communities’ rights are at a low to moderate level whilst minority and indigenous groups were not affected by the company’s operations. The company thus set up a controlling approach and remedy the issues with residual human rights risk as follows