Transparency with Teeth: A Way Forward for the Bangladeshi Garment Industry Barrister Manzoor Hasan, O.B.E. and Dr. Jonathan Rose The recent tragedy in Savar is just one in a series of industrial accidents that have claimed thousands of lives in Bangladesh. Bangladeshis generally recognize the enormous contribution of the industry to both the economy and the lives of the poor, but still they find these accidents unacceptable, along with the global community. Thus far, despite the history of accidents, various stakeholders have clearly failed to find a solution. The traditional ones have been tried: government regulation, buyer social compliance, and a few projects. Unfortunately, these lagging efforts have not only cost lives, but they are also now threatening the industry, with consumer confidence shattered and threats of the removal of trade preferences in the GSP by both the United States and the European Union. We would like to propose transparency solutions that may help address the overall magnitude of the problem. Part 1: an independent monitoring body for the industry, run by national and international private firms, that posts the results of their inspections for public viewing. Businesses, buyers and donors may jointly finance private sector firms to form an independent body of monitors to inspect factories for 1. The quality of construction; 2. Fire safety conditions; and 3. Other major factory violations. The body will then post the reports generated on their website, thus, for the first time, providing systematic and easily accessible information on the major safety issues in the garment industry. The factory management, media, BGMEA, government inspectors, buyers, worker organizations and civil society may then carefully track the state of the industry based on an objective assessment. Part 2: a mobile feedback system for workers to text or call into, to file complaints on fire safety, construction quality and other major, flagrant violations of the law; upon verification by monitors, these complaints are posted publicly. Worker rights are still lagging in Bangladesh, with very few garment workers organized into trade unions. Clearly, workers will not find extensive negotiating power with management in the near future. However, that does not mean that they cannot have a voice, nor that their input is not important in preventing future tragedies. Even in the Savar incident, workers resisted management when they put them into the structurally damaged building. Therefore, workers should have the ability to appeal to an independent body to promptly inspect a severe problem. Part 3: link these compliance measures with duty-free market access if those trade regimes will change. Such a transparent system of monitoring could be incorporated into the trade regime of importing countries, who are now threatening to remove preferential access to their markets. While we have mixed feelings over such actions, the most effective way of transforming bad practices is to financially recognize good behaviour. Entrenched and failing systems will change if there is sufficient incentive (say, awarding a higher level of market access under GSP), which may be applied over a period of time based on real improvement on a set of ‘triggers’. This initiative could come with the cooperation of the governments of importing countries, namely the European Union and United States. These forms of transparency would finally create public information about what is happening in the factories. At present, there is no systematic, verified evidence of the quality of construction of garment factories, nor of their fire safety. Factory owners might respond that this is private information; why should some outsiders have the right to come into their factory and nose around their business? The truth is that it is no longer just their business when things go wrong. Yes, a factory fire can put them out of business. But now, with the threat of trade sanctions, an abysmal reputation for the industry, and buyers warning of leaving Bangladesh due to repeated extreme violations and worker deaths, the whole industry suffers. Moreover, a similar system was successfully pioneered in Cambodia in the early 2000s, when labor standards, monitored by the ILO, were linked to MFA quota allocation in the United States. This example should provide an inspiration to Bangladesh as it moves forward. Of course, if Bangladesh were better governed, it would be able to monitor and penalize producers who violate such laws, and the system would not be necessary. But all nations struggle with the ability to regulate a large and dynamic private sector. Also, our proposed system complements government oversight of the garment industry. In fact, if the government – or BGMEA and buyers for that matter – take swift action, they would automatically have independent and verified information regarding their actions. And even if they don’t take action, people would know about it. Bangladesh really can’t afford to remain opaque about its most important industry. Greater transparency can surely increase consumers’ confidence and exporters’ credibility – which are presently lagging.
Monday, March 24, 2025
