Asia’s extensive manufacturing networks in global supply chains have fueled historic growth. However, the economic expansion that underpins this success has also exposed structural challenges such as widening inequality, labor exploitation, and environmental damage. Recognizing these harms, countries in Asia have been working to explore regulatory approaches to address the impacts. Several countries across the region have already introduced the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, including Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia. 

Nevertheless, these non-binding frameworks are often criticized for their lack of enforcement mechanisms and robust oversight. Without effective evaluation and monitoring, the approach is often perceived as a compliance measure. Since 2025, a growing trend has emerged toward mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD) in the supply chain in Asia. South Korea’s National Assembly is currently considering two HRDD bills, while Thailand proposed draft legislation on responsible business conduct in July last year. In Indonesia, a proposal on business and human rights risk assessment has also been introduced and placed on a fast-tracked legislative process. These developments reflect a shift toward hard-law approaches that impose binding obligations on businesses and underscore liability for negative effects; and this shift can be attributed to a convergence of internal and external drivers. 

Prior to the adoption of the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in 2024, European countries like France, Germany, Norway, and the UK had already enacted national laws imposing due diligence and reporting obligations on companies. As these developments evolve, Asian countries are responding to these changes by exploring regulatory frameworks that reflect international standards. This dynamic is especially pronounced in export-driven economies, since access to global markets depends heavily on compliance with international standards. More critically, multinational corporations are substantially exposed to risks on operation and credibility due to labor exploitation. In April 2025, the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a Withhold Release Order (WRO) against the largest salt producer in South Korea over allegations of abusive working conditions[1]. In another case, a forced labor lawsuit against Dyson’s operations in Malaysia was brought in a UK court and was recently settled[2]. Such cases underscore the tangible financial and reputational consequences associated with failures in labor protection and the need to align with the international standards.

On the ground, Asian governments face an urgent need to address human rights violations. In Indonesia, corporations account for the second-highest number of complaints brought to the National Commission on Human Rights. (Komnas HAM). Between 2019 to September 2021, the Commission recorded 1,366 complaints related to alleged human rights violations by corporations[3]. Thailand has also experienced an increase in complaints related to business activities. At the same time, Over 10% of the workforce consists of migrants from Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar. Problems such as recruitment costs and poor working conditions leave them highly exposed to labor exploitation and human trafficking[4]. Given the severe situation, a comprehensive due diligence framework is necessary to ensure legal certainty for remediation. The system can protect individuals to freely raise concerns about wrongdoing and move beyond mere punishment, which helps businesses proactively mitigate risks related to environmental disputes and labor litigation. 

Within global trading systems, forced labor has been leveraged as an enforcement mechanism on the trade agenda. In tariff negotiations between the United States and several Asian countries last year, labor rights protection clauses have been included in Agreements on Reciprocal Trade (ART), with particular emphasis on addressing forced labor[5]. This year in March, the USTR initiated Section 301 investigations targeting 60 trading partners to assess whether they have failed to enact import bans on forced labor. Similarly, the EU Forced Labor Regulation is set to take effect in 2027, prohibiting all products from forced labor to enter the EU market. The topic is becoming a critical threshold of market access and an instrument of trade enforcement. From this perspective, addressing forced labor requires a more proactive and risk-based approach to tackling structural vulnerabilities.

In a broader context, the incentives to adopt international standards are shaped by different national priorities. As Indonesia and Thailand pursue OECD membership, synchronizing their national frameworks with international norms is pivotal to meeting the accession criteria and attracting foreign investment. South Korea already has membership in both the OECD and the UN, and with the commitment to integrate international norms into its domestic legal framework. The country also aspires to play a leading role in advancing human rights protections. 

Reflecting on the growing momentum across Asia, the development of human rights due diligence in Taiwan is also influenced both domestically and internationally. In Taiwan’s export-driven economy, companies adhere to international standards as a condition of doing business. In the manufacturing sector, codes of conduct frequently include rigorous human rights requirements, setting ethical standards that go beyond local compliance. As regulations tighten, some companies are already affected financially. In September 2025, Giant’s Taiwan-made bicycles were detained at the US border due to alleged forced labor[6]. The company undertook immediate reforms and remediation efforts, particularly addressing the reimbursement of recruitment fees.[7]. On the trade agenda, the recently signed Taiwan–US tariff agreement includes provisions to prohibit imported forced labor products. Taiwan has also committed to restrict recruitment fees on migrant workers in the manufacturing and fishing industries. In the next 5 years, protections for freedom of association are also expected to be gradually strengthened[8]. 

In Taiwan, the forced labor risks are closely linked to migrant workers, who face recruitment fees, workers’ health and safety, and the biased restrictions. The National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights from 2020 has mostly functioned as an overview of the current state without a clear implementation schedule or efficient enforcement mechanisms. To date, the updated version has yet to be issued. More recently, the Ministry of Labor released the guidance on forced labor indicators and started to encourage major manufacturing to conduct HRDD, covering around 80 companies in Taiwan. While manufacturers have long prioritized quality and technical expertise, the global trade landscape demands a broader scope of accountability. Reliance on voluntary compliance runs a higher risk of exposing businesses to escalating financial impacts and reputational damage. A robust supply chain due diligence framework is no longer optional, but essential to address the footprints of the global supply chain on social and environmental impacts.

[1] U.S. Customs and Border Protection. (2025, April 3). CBP issues withhold release order on Taepyung Salt Farm.
[2] BBC News. (2026, February 27). Dyson settles forced labour suit in landmark UK case
[3] Friedrich Naumann Foundation. (2024, March 8). A blueprint for advancing business and human rights in Indonesia.
[4] International Organization for Migration. (2024, November 28). IOM and AIM-Progress promote human rights due diligence practices for responsible recruitment in Thai supply chains.
[5] Office of the United States Trade Representative. (USTR.). Agreements on reciprocal trade
[6] U.S. Customs and Border Protection. (2025, Sept 24). CBP issues Withhold Release Order on Giant Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
[7] Bengtsen, P. (2025). Taiwan bicycle WRO development tracker. Taiwan bicycle WRO development tracker

(Featured photo by Thomas Parker on Pexels)