206 Towards resilient boundaries.

In relation to the issue of determining the legitimate boundaries of supply chain due diligence, I therefore propose to accommodate the resilience-oriented approach of the ecosystem perspective within the legal approach of the institutional perspective. Such a resilience-oriented approach would include the focus of the partnership perspective on the operation of the enterprise, while extending it to include the larger dynamic of the ecosystems in which the enterprise is embedded.1 Consequently, the board is expected to include those social and ecological aspects in its due diligence which require consideration for maintaining the resilience of its enterprise and the larger ecosystem. Meanwhile, boards can dismiss any other environmental aspects which do not intersect with the outward-reaching movement of its enterprise.2

The interests related to maintaining the resilience of a natural ecosystem which provides key natural resources to the corporation should therefore be part of the due diligence expected from the board. For example, the dependence of Unilever on the Borneo rainforest to continue providing palm oil may require that Unilever includes aspects related to the resilience of the Borneo rainforest in its supply chain due diligence.3 Similarly, the resilience of a local community to continue to provide labour for third-party manufacturers may require a corporation which depends on those third-party manufacturers to include this aspect in its supply chain due diligence. Meanwhile, interests related to other ecosystems which operate beyond the reach of the corporate ecosystem may be legitimately omitted from a board’s due diligence process. By implication, some aspects of global ecosystems are by their very nature relevant for all corporations, such as the resilience of the planetary atmospheric ecosystem to absorb carbon dioxide and to maintain the temperature that is necessary for life to flourish.4

In order to overcome the problem of identification and representation, the operationalization of such ecosystemic supply chain due diligence may require localized governance mechanisms in which corporations collaborate with local stakeholders in relation to a specific social or natural ecosystem.5 Such polycentric governance involves the coupling of scientific methods such as due diligence with democratic forms of governance used in the governance of common-resource pools, as identified by Ostrom.6 I will return to such forms of localized collaboration in relation to the engagement of stakeholders further below.7 In sum, I articulate the following recommendation in relation to the issue of determining the legitimate boundaries of supply chain due diligence: