Mandatory Disclosure for Ethical Supply Chains: A Conflict Mineral Case Study

59 Pages Posted: 12 Apr 2021

See all articles by Maria Macia

Maria Macia

University of Notre Dame - Notre Dame Law School

Date Written: April 8, 2021

Abstract

Mandatory disclosure requirements for corporate supply chains have the potential to leverage consumer and investor sensibilities to incentivize corporations to source more ethically. Despite their growing prevalence, there are few empirical studies of their effects: whether they actually put pressure on companies remains untested. This Article supplies such evidence by examining the consumer and investor responses to corporate supply chain disclosures made pursuant to Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The act requires publicly traded companies to disclose to the Securities and Exchange Commission whether their supply chain contains “conflict minerals” (minerals important in global supply chains whose sourcing supports the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo and surrounding areas). The law aims to give customers and investors information about corporate supply chains, with the hope that they will support companies that source responsibly and punish those that do not. But whether this is actually accomplished is an open question.

This Article provides an empirical study of the market responses to three years of Section 1502 disclosures, whose contents were coded to create a novel dataset. Disclosures implying that a company has a higher risk of contributing to the conflict are associated with higher revenues and stock performances than those implying a lower risk. This implies there is no market discipline of bad actors in response to the disclosures; instead, bad actors are rewarded. This is consistent with the finding that the number of companies reporting a higher risk of contributing to the conflict through their supply chains did not decrease over the three years. One potential explanation is that consumers and investors may read disclosures more for signals of a corporation’s honesty or profit-maximization skills than for information about conflict-minerals exposure, and firms disclosing a higher risk of this exposure are more likely to be honest and profit seeking. Because disclosures about supply chains will generally send these signals as well, expecting investors or consumers to discipline the supply chains in response to securities disclosures is unrealistic. But scores for the due diligence procedures and forward-looking commitments in the disclosures generated by an NGO for a subset of the companies are positively correlated with revenues, suggesting how mandatory disclosure regimes might be improved. The NGO’s success in disseminating and analyzing the information suggests that the SEC may not be the best actor for implementing supply chain disclosure requirements and the criteria for the scoring suggest that disclosure requirements should focus more on the reporting of processes so that they are less likely to send a signal about honesty.

Keywords: Disclosure, Supply Chain Management, Human Rights, Corporate Law

JEL Classification: K22

Suggested Citation

Macia, Maria, Mandatory Disclosure for Ethical Supply Chains: A Conflict Mineral Case Study (April 8, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3822064 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3822064

Maria Macia (Contact Author)

University of Notre Dame - Notre Dame Law School ( email )

Eck Hall of Law
Notre Dame, IN 46556
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
194
Abstract Views
777
Rank
285,307
PlumX Metrics