Frequently asked questions

What are the human rights risks covered by the dashboard?
For human rights risks, we incorporate 8 risks:

• Child labour
• Forced labour
• Discrimination
• Freedom of association and collective bargaining
• Occupational health and safety
• Insufficient remuneration
• Access to land and material resources
• Violence and harassment

What are the environmental risk scores covered by the dashboard?
For environmental risks, we assess 7 different risks:

• Deforestation
• Biodiversity loss
• Water stress
• Climate change
• Eutrophication
• Acidification
• Ecotoxicity

What definitions of the risk themes do you apply?
The definitions of the risk themes applied in the dashboard are outlined in the full methodology document(externe link).

What is the rationale for selecting these themes?
The selected themes were chosen to, combined, cover the most relevant sustainability risks in global agricultural supply chains. They are aligned with major international standards and (regulatory) frameworks in the field of Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Responsible Business Conduct, such as: the UN Guiding Principles, OECD Guidelines, Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), and the EU due diligence legislation (CSDDD).

How can I access all human rights and environmental risks scores?
You can access all human rights and environmental risks scores by signing up for the free dashboard. After signing up you immediately have access to 8 human rights risks scores and 7 environmental risks scores, specific to the cocoa and palm oil sector in Cameroon. For more countries and/or commodities, explore our premium dashboard.

Which commodities are covered by the dashboard?
The Due Diligence Dashboard currently covers cocoa, cotton, soy, palm oil, rubber, maize, wheat, rice and coffee across 34 countries.

Which countries are covered by the dashboard?
The Due Diligence dashboard currently covers 34 countries.

What is a sustainability risk assessment?
A sustainability risk assessment is a high-level assessment of the most salient risks - based on criteria of severity and likelihood - that companies may encounter within their supply chains. This concerns either their own business operations, their direct suppliers, or their indirect suppliers. A sustainability risk assessment typically consists out of three levels of assessment:

• A high-level risk assessment, that identifies key risks within a specific geography, sector, and product. This assessment, combined with enterprise-specific risks enables a first prioritisation of risks to be used as input for deeper risk assessment. The environmental risk scores are intended for this purpose.
• An in-depth risk and impact assessment is the next step. This is an assessment of company-specific risks by assessing prioritised Responsible Business Conduct risks and prioritised operations, suppliers, or other business relationships. This second step provides a company-specific basis to address, prevent, mitigate, and remediate (potential) adverse impacts.
• An event-based risk assessment, which is an incidental risk assessment, based on the occurrence of specific changes. It can be triggered, for example, by changes in business activities, by new substantiated knowledge such as reporting on incidents, or by changes in the operating environment, whether actual or expected, such as societal tensions.

How are the risk scores calculated?
Human rights risk scores
The human rights risk scores are calculated using a comprehensive methodology combining existing data on various national and subnational theme-related indicators with insights from a standardised literature review. These scores support your initial steps towards aligning with Due Diligence legislation. For the full methodology see the methodology page.

Environmental risk scores
We assess deforestation, biodiversity loss, and water stress using a spatial analysis, which uses the spatial patterns in production areas and combines them with spatial maps related to each theme. Climate change, eutrophication, acidification, ecotoxicity, and water use are assessed using a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). All scores range from 0 (no risk) to 5 (high risk). For more details, please see the methodology page.

How should I interpret the risk scores?
Human rights risk scores
A risk score indicates the likelihood of a risk for a specific commodity in a particular region. The human rights risk scores are benchmarked to a single score between 0 and 5, where 0 indicates no risk at all, 1 indicates a very low risk, and 5 indicates a very high risk. The human rights risk scores can be compared across different commodity sectors and various regions within a country. It is important to note that risk scores on the lower end of the scale (e.g. a risk score of 2) still require further assessment.

Environmental risk scores
A risk score indicates the likelihood of a risk for a specific commodity in a particular region. The environmental risk scores range between a score of 0, indicating no risk and a score of 5, indicating a very high risk. The environmental risk scores are commodity specific, and intended to compare between different regions or countries of the same commodity sector. They should not be used to compare between different commodity sectors. For more details, please see the methodology page.

What are the next steps I can take based on these risk scores?
Organisations can use the risk scores directly as input for a prioritisation of risks for the second level of risk analysis: a company-specific in-depth risk and impact assessment. Following the OECD guidelines, the user is expected to combine these risk scores with an enterprise-specific risk assessment as a basis for prioritisation. This involves high-level scoping of a company’s areas of operation and type of business relationships.

The user combines these two assessments to prioritise human rights risks and specific operations, suppliers, or business operations as input for a company-specific risk assessment. Countries, regions, and/or commodity sectors with higher levels of risk and prioritised operations, suppliers, or business relationships could be the first ones to be tackled by a companies’ measures aimed at e.g. the prevention or remediation of (potential) adverse impacts.

Based on the risk scores, companies take steps in areas such as:

• Strategy and policy development: Gaining clarity on the major risks within the company's chain of activities to prioritise risks and impact areas, engage internal stakeholders, and develop policies to manage these risks.
• Being compliant with CSDDD: Comprehending the steps required for compliance, including the obligation of risk identification, and conducting thorough investigations into major risks to formulate action plans for their mitigation.
• Determining the right KPIs when developing an improvement programme, and monitoring, benchmarking, and communicating results.
• R&D development: Learning from other areas where certain risks are lower or decreasing, including benchmarking.

What does the EU supply chain legislation imply for my organisation?
Different EU legislation have a due diligence component, amongst other: the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), the Forced Labour Regulation, and the EU Deforestation Legislation (EUDR). All these legislation require companies to take concrete steps -although their exact requirements differ- to systematically identify, asses and address human rights or environmental risks in their operations and supply chains, and prove that they have done so through documented, risk-based due diligence processes.

The adopted Omnibus package (2025) -meant to simplify and reduce the regulatory burden- has revised some of the thresholds, timing and scope of EU supply chain legislation. Delaying the implementation of various legislations and decreasing their scope and requirements.

The OECD Guidelines and UNGPs play a central role as being a reference framework for many of the EU’s due diligence laws. As such they provide a useful starting point for establishing a harmonized framework for broader due diligence compliance.

What does the CSDDD imply for my organisation?
EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) mandates that companies operating within the European Union integrate human rights and environmental considerations into their business strategies and operations. This involves identifying, preventing, mitigating, and accounting for actual and potential adverse human rights and environmental impacts.

Companies are required to establish and implement due diligence processes, which include regular assessments, taking appropriate measures to prevent or mitigate risks, tracking the effectiveness of these measures, and publicly reporting on their due diligence activities. The directive aims to promote sustainable and responsible corporate behaviour, ensuring that businesses contribute positively to global sustainability goals.

The omnibus package (2025) meant a severe renegotiation of the original directive: o.a. delaying it implementation, narrowing its scope, removing the uniform liability rules and altering the value chain cap. The adoption of the final text is expected by the end of 2025. With the omnibus package under way it is likely that the CSDDD will only apply to a limited number of companies across the EU, with only the largest multinational companies (in terms of size and revenue) will remain in scope.

How do the risk scores help my organisation to be compliant with the EU CSDDD legislation?
The EU CSDDD requires companies to identify, prevent, mitigate, and account for how actual and potential adverse impacts are addressed. The directive allows for the prioritisation of topics to be addressed. The risk scores can be used for this step. Please note that relatively low risk scores still require further assessment to determine if any company-specific adverse impacts may be at play.

The CSDDD doesn’t apply to me, why should I still care?
While other EU supply chain legislation might still be relevant from a legal compliance perspective. And many companies and countries have committed themselves to adhere to the principles of the OECD Guidelines and UNGPS. There are more reasons to engage in a risk-based assessment being:

• An ethical pledge to adhere to social and environmental standards
• A practical tool for screening new sourcing locations
• A starting point to make concrete contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
• A necessary way to guarantee the future viability of specific supply chains.

Can I access the scores offline?
Yes, you can access and use the scores offline. You can download the data in Excel, print or save the scores as a pdf, and download visual representations as png files.

What if I have a question about the dashboard and the scores?
Our human rights, LCA and spatial experts are available to provide comprehensive information about the dashboard and the scores. We are happy to assist you and discuss your needs, so please do not hesitate to contact us.

How do you keep the scores up to date?
Currently, the scores are based on data collected in 2023. As soon as updated data becomes available, it will be promptly incorporated into the risk scores. Users will be promptly notified of the updated data, and provided with information regarding the option to acquire the new scores. Once purchased, users retain perpetual access to the selected data.

Why does a non-profit research institution charge for scores?
Fees are necessary to ensure our scores remain up to date, expand their coverage, and maintain the highest quality. They support ongoing data collection, methodological improvements, and the continuous enhancement of the dashboard.

How is limited data availability managed, and how is data quality assessed?
The selection of the indicators depends on the availability of data. When there are no direct indicators available, we use proxies instead. In addition to relevance to the theme, indicators are also required to meet three other criteria.

First, we rely on data sources which have a history in data collection, are transparent about their methods, and provide updates regularly - this is important as a risk assessment also needs to be updated on a regular basis.

Second, we look for data sources that are independent (as far as possible), meaning government (UN, ILO, World bank, OECD), research centres (World Policy Center), or a consortium of NGOs and government.

Third, data should preferably cover more than 100 countries (this is important for upscaling of the number of countries and commodities covered). Furthermore, we check the indicators for reliability, as well as for the reference year. If we find highly outdated data entries, defined as more than 10 years old, then we exclude them from our analysis.

The methodology is developed with the most reliable and up-to-date scientific knowledge, and is currently being validated by thematic and methodological experts.

What are your usage restrictions?
The use of our Due Diligence Dashboard is subject to several restrictions. For a detailed overview of these restrictions, please refer to Article 3.2 (Use Restrictions) of our Terms of Services.

What is our licensing policy?
Subject to the terms and conditions outlined in our Terms of Service, you are granted a limited, non-transferable, non-exclusive, non-sublicensable license to access and use our Due Diligence Dashboard for internal business purposes, with certain jurisdictional exceptions. For further details, please refer to Article 4 (License to Services) of our Terms of Services.

How should data be cited?
When using data from our Due Diligence Dashboard, proper attribution to Wageningen Food Views Due Diligence Dashboard must be provided Article 3.2 (ix) of our Terms of Services, e.g., “Wageningen Food Views Due Diligence Dashboard”.