Climate change law faces a serious implementation problem. New instruments promoted by states from the Global North to address the implementation gap come from the sphere of trade and supply chain regulation. This article focuses on corporate climate due diligence legislation and its potential contribution to fulfilling the objectives outlined in the Paris Agreement. By examining the EU’s legislative process towards adopting a Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), it explores various approaches to regulating the climate impacts of corporations, including along global supply chains. The article critiques both the ultimately adopted climate transition planning requirement and the European Parliament’s alternative proposal, which aimed to incorporate climate mitigation into the general due diligence framework of the Directive but was unsuccessful. It applies two overarching critiques, termed ‘not enough’ and ‘regulatory imperialism’, to the specific context of corporate climate due diligence. Although these critiques may initially appear contradictory, the article endeavours to reconcile them through a compromise approach that fosters greater participation, integrates measures to mitigate impacts on self-determination, and specifies the obligations imposed on corporations regarding climate mitigation. Finally, the article discusses the idea of a decentralised enforcement regime and highlights the importance of regulation in states of the Global South to achieve a truly planetary legal order on corporate climate accountability.

Human rights due diligence (HRDD) is the main (voluntary) process through which companies can assess and address negative human rights impacts. In recent years, however, mandatory HRDD requirements are increasingly seen as a more effective way to persuade more companies to better address human rights risks in their global value chains (GVCs). This study investigates whether such mandatory legislative initiatives can positively impact workers’ rights in GVCs as an essential part of those human rights that should be addressed in HRDD. The study provides an in-depth analysis of the legal framework of workers’ rights in GVCs. It then uses the French vigilance law as a case study to empirically investigate the effects of a mandatory HRDD duty for companies using a simple difference-in-differences analysis with data from the Refinitiv database from 2014 to 2020. The study shows that there are indications that the French vigilance law positively impacts corporate human rights conduct. This finding particularly holds for the practices of companies that can be considered “laggards”, which can imply that legislators need to increase the mandatory requirements to further improve responsible corporate conduct.