Search Results

< Back < Previous | Next > Integrity & Culture 2025 OECD Global Anti-Corruption and Integrity Forum and ICC side event on business and government as partners for integrity to the OECD 6 Apr 2025 At the 2025 OECD Global Anti-Corruption and Integrity Forum, ICC hosted a side event to boost business-government collaboration on integrity, highlighting tools like updated anti-corruption clauses. Forum discussions focused on bribery solicitation, tech-driven anti-corruption efforts, integrity in the green transition, and public-private cooperation for fairer global markets. On the sidelines of the OECD -OCDE Anti-Corruption & Integrity Forum on March 24 in Paris, the ICC Global Commission on Business Integrity connected government and business leaders in encourage strong ethical standards that drive trust, investment, and strong-success for all. Key Takeaways • Companies need to sharpen their capacity to detect and assess geopolitical dynamics to do global business. • Harnessing trade facilitation to bolster integrity at border crossings. There are key risks at borders. Public and private partnerships are recommended to mitigate the risks. • Tools to drive integrity through contracts-update of ICC Anti-Corruption Clause. • ICC Guidance on Responsible Business for Challenging Contexts is an essential tool to support companies in anticipating crisis situations • Stronger together. Businesses and governments unite to drive integrity forward. The OECD Forum on Wednesday 26th started after the opening remarks by Mathias Cormann, Secretary-General, OECD, with launching the global dialogue; insights form leaders. The OECD forum was attended by representatives of the Public and Private sector, Universities and Civil Society. Key Topics • Galvanising the private sector for integrity: from policy to practice. Concrete solutions emerging from public-private cooperation such as peer-to-peer learning and the use of technology for integrity were topic of conversation. • Tackling the demand side: Innovative approaches to combat foreign solicitation. Bribery solicitation remains a pervasive challenge in global markets, undermining fair competition and public trust. The 2021OECDAnti-Bribery Recommendation introduced new provisions to address bribery solicitation, to move a step forward. Participants discussed how to enhance cross-border collaboration and enforcement can help disrupt solicitation schemes while fostering greater accountability and fairness in international business. The proactive role of companies in resisting solicitation, strengthening compliance programmes, and reporting corrupt practices were also highlighted. Tackling both the demand and supply sides of bribery is crucial to building a balance and effective approach, ensuring systemic change and promoting integrity in global markets. • Harnessing cutting-edge technologies and collaboration for a holistic fight against corruption. Cutting-edge technologies – such as data analytics, digital forensics, and artificial intelligenceare driving transformation in enforcement, compliance and oversight efforts. The collaboration between enforcements authorities , the private sector, and civil society, multistakeholder approaches and data-sharing framework, can strengthen the global response to corruption. • Addressing de-risking and illicit financial flows to unlock sustainable development financing. Panellists examined how cooperation, public-private partnerships, and strong political commitments can help mitigate de-risking and mobilise finance for sustainable development. • On Thursday March 27th focused a session on the OECD Public Integrity Indicators (Plls): From evidence to reform. The panellists, including Gonzalo Guzman, Chair of the ICC Global Commission on Business Integrity, shared insights on how the Plls can drive action, build resilience to risks, and support innovation. The Plls can help to a structured approach. The session also awarded the winners of the OECD Anti-Corruption Research Challenge, researchers who used the OECD Public Integrity Indicators to propose novel insights for anticorruption policies across OECD member and non-member countries. The winners didn’t really find significant results referring to the indicators. However transparency is quite important. The mentioned the Netherlands as one of the countries which can set more goals. • Greening with integrity: Tackling corruption in the green transition. The green transition offers immense opportunities for sustainable development but also presents significant corruption risks that could undermine its potential. How we can make sure that the green transition is with integrity. A panellist from the World Bank stated that corruption is everywhere. Insights were shared into how anti-corruption measures can strengthen trust and transparency, ensuring that the race toward a greener future remains both sustainable and equitable. Make the data available, use a multistakeholder approach and invest in transparency to make the difference. Not only the technical solutions are important, but also the political will. A challenge is how to show that a fair green transition is not slower, will cost no more. • Addressing strategic corruption: How to leverage the anti-corruption toolbox. • Bridging the data gap: Leveraging technology to strengthen the fight against corruption. In addition there were a lot of side events during the conference and the rest of the week.

< Back < Previous | Next > What ICC Members Can Expect from ICC Netherlands in 2026 6 Jan 2026 In this New Year edition, ICC Netherlands outlines its strategic priorities for the year ahead, focusing on trade, integrity, dispute resolution, sustainability, leadership and digitalisation. Discover how we will work with our members, partners and global ICC network to strengthen Dutch business resilience in a rapidly changing world. What ICC Members Can Expect from ICC Netherlands in 2026 A message from the Director General of ICC Netherlands Laure Jacquier As we step into 2026, I want to begin with a simple but important message: ICC Netherlands will continue to work with our partners in the spirit of close cooperation. Nothing we do happens in isolation. ICC, at every level, is a platform for collaboration – both globally and locally – and our strength lies precisely in that collective network . We work closely with partners such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, ICC Global and UN Global Compact while at the same time building strong local partnerships here in the Netherlands. Our philosophy is clear: progress only happens when we work together . That belief will guide everything ICC Netherlands does in 2026. In a world marked by geopolitical tension, economic fragmentation and regulatory uncertainty, my optimism comes from one place: when businesses engage, participate and work together, they can still create stability, predictability and progress . Guided by this conviction, ICC Netherlands will focus on five strategic priorities in 2026, each designed to help our members strengthen trust, resilience and cooperation in international business . 1. Defending multilateralism and international trade In today’s geopolitical context, the defence of multilateralism and rules-based international trade is not an abstract principle: it is a business necessity . The competitiveness of the Netherlands and the European Union depends on open, predictable trade rules. For Dutch companies operating globally, predictability versus volatility is no longer a theoretical debate – it directly affects day-to-day activities, from supply chain management to growth and investment. Geopolitical developments are not ‘emerging risks’ anymore: they’re the new reality. If you want to gain a deeper insight into the importance of embedding resilience into your company's operating methods , then our interview with Tim Bosch (co-founder of the Birdwatcher Group) is a must-read. The WTO system is under pressure, but there is no viable alternative. Rather than walking away from multilateralism, ICC is calling for a coordinated effort by all ICC national committees to modernise and reform the WTO so that it reflects today’s trade realities . This must also include a stronger reflection of the role of emerging economies. A key priority for ICC Netherlands in 2026 is ensuring that the voice of business is heard ahead of the next WTO Ministerial Conference. In the Netherlands, we contribute to this through public-private dialogue . At the end of January, ICC Netherlands will host a WTO roundtable open to all ICC NL members. This is not a closed-door exercise; it is a structured, safe space for companies to openly share concerns, best practices and real-life experiences, and to feed that input into international discussions. My message is simple: if businesses do not show up, multilateralism will not defend itself. If you want reform to happen, you have to participate. This same logic applies to the development of international trade tools. In 2026, the Incoterms® reform process will officially start, aiming towards Incoterms® 2030. It is essential that these globally used rules reflect real business needs. ICC Netherlands will actively encourage members to contribute. The same is true for potential revisions of UCP 600 and ISBP, where ICC is currently gathering feedback from practitioners. ICC Netherlands encourages its members to participate in the live surveys and consultations. If businesses do not engage, these standards risk being shaped by an unbalanced set of voices . 2. Business integrity as a foundation for trade Trade cannot function without trust. That is why business integrity remains a core priority for ICC Netherlands in 2026. This year marks an important milestone: 10 years of the Week of Integrity, an initiative founded by ICC Netherlands to raise awareness and create a trusted space for dialogue between the private and public sectors. The Week of Integrity is open not only to ICC members, but also to non-members. Why? Because integrity is not exclusive . Everyone should be working on it. This year’s overarching theme is Leading with Integrity in a Digital World . It’s a crucial subject: while digitalisation increases efficiency, it also brings new risks. Corruption, misconduct and integrity failures have real economic and reputational consequences: for companies and society as a whole. The Week of Integrity takes place each year in the last week of October. The first partner meeting and workshops will take place on 6 February, focusing on embedding integrity into leadership and decision-making. Besides the Week of Integrity, ICC Netherlands will also continue facilitating cross-sector exchanges between businesses, banks and legal professionals. The most significant point here is the cross-sector perspective: this is one of the biggest strengths of ICC Netherlands . We bring together a diverse array of sectors to communicate and share their ideas. Building on the roundtables initiated last year, an upcoming session will focus on indirect sanctions – how sanctions imposed by third countries affect Dutch trade in practice, and how businesses experience this on the ground. Through the Business Integrity Commission, ICC Netherlands will define its 2026 agenda during its first members-only meeting at the end of January. This ensures that our priorities remain aligned with the concrete challenges Dutch companies face. 3. Dispute resolution: bridging business and legal practice Effective dispute resolution is necessary to build trust, continuity and resilience in international business. In 2026, ICC Netherlands will continue to focus on building bridges between business and legal professionals. Too often, disputes are approached from parallel perspectives. In-house counsel deal with commercial realities; external lawyers focus on legal frameworks. There is room for better alignment ; I think the communication between these two disciplines can really be improved. This is where ICC can add value. We are organising a number of targeted roundtable sessions on topics selected jointly with our legal and business members. In addition, ICC Netherlands will host the Joint Arbitration Day in Amsterdam, bringing together professionals from the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Germany to exchange best practices . Our Dispute Resolution Forum, hosted this year by Houthoff, will remain a key moment for dialogue, while we continue to promote alternative dispute resolution and its practical benefits for Dutch businesses. We are also committed to engaging young professionals. Giving the next generation a voice within our arbitration work is not optional. New perspectives bring new ideas, and they strengthen the future of dispute resolution in the Netherlands. 4. Sustainability, finance and inclusive leadership Sustainability, inclusion and economic resilience go hand in hand. ICC Netherlands works closely with ICC Global on the ICC Principles for Sustainable Trade Finance (PSTF), which have already been adopted by two major Dutch banks. Through the Sustainability Commission, we will identify which topics matter most to Dutch businesses in 2026, with circularity playing a central role. One issue I care deeply about is green-hushing. We all know about the dangers of greenwashing, but the phenomenon of green-hushing deserves equal attention . If companies become afraid to communicate about their sustainability efforts, we risk creating the impression that sustainability no longer matters. That silence also travels down the supply chain. If suppliers do not hear about sustainability efforts, they may stop their own. Those who are intrinsically motivated must speak up. Participation matters here too. If we want sustainability to remain central to business, we must talk about it. Inclusive leadership remains equally important. Despite progress, a significant gender gap persists in Dutch business leadership. On this subject, I am particularly proud of the WISE – Women in Strategic Engagement programme. WISE is a leadership development programme offered by ICC Netherlands that focuses on impact, relationships and real-world leadership challenges. WISE is designed to complement (not compete with) high-end executive programmes, offering practical tools and networks . After a very successful first cohort last year, we will launch a new cohort on 12 March this year. On the finance side, ICC Netherlands continues to work with Banking and Sustainability Commissions. The fact is that the countries that need investment the most often face the greatest barriers due to risk ratings and regulatory constraints. The goal is simple: to create the biggest possible impact at a global scale. 5. Digitalisation of trade documents Finally, digitalisation of trade documentation remains a priority – and a frustration. Digital trade is a critical enabler of modern trade, yet the Netherlands is still lagging behind . Legal barriers continue to slow progress, even as other countries move faster and see immediate benefits. The Netherlands is not fully legally aligned with international requirements for digital trade documents, leading to higher costs, delays and risk s such as loss or fraud. ICC Netherlands will continue to push for legal reform, while also taking practical steps. In 2026, we will reactivate the Digitalisation Working Group, make the topic more accessible through clear communication, and actively involve businesses in sharing real-life experiences. A key project will be ICC Netherlands’ participation in the ICC Digital Standards Initiative (DSI) – Global Digital Trade Sandbox. This initiative provides a safe environment for companies to test digital trade solutions through pilots and proof-of-concept transactions, bringing together companies, banks, platforms, regulators and national committees. For ICC Netherlands, this is a concrete way to help Dutch companies move from ambition to implementation . For countries like France and the UK, the impact of digitalisation has been immediate and visible: fewer errors, less fraud, faster processing . But progress requires businesses to speak up – to share real-life problems with paper documents, customs delays and inefficiencies. We have a strong working group on digitalisation, but we need more business voices. Once again, participation is the key. Looking ahead Am I optimistic about 2026? Absolutely. Not because the world is simple – but because I believe deeply in what happens when businesses engage, collaborate and take responsibility. ICC Netherlands will continue to be a platform where those voices come together, locally and globally, to strengthen trade, integrity, sustainability and innovation. And we will do it the only way it truly works: by showing up, by participating, and by doing it together. Want to get involved? ICC Netherlands is driven by its members. If your organisation is working on topics that connect with ICC’s priorities – from international trade and dispute resolution to integrity, sustainability, digitalisation or geopolitics – we would love to hear from you. We regularly feature member voices through interviews, articles and events, and we are always keen to share practical experiences from the business community. Get in touch if you would like to contribute or be part of the conversation.

< Back < Previous | Next > Marketing & Advertising European Commission Withdraws Green Claims Directive — ICC Welcomes Opportunity for Constructive Recalibration 30 Jun 2025 The European Commission has withdrawn the Green Claims Directive after concerns over burdens on SMEs, marking a key advocacy win for ICC and its members. ICC now invites businesses to help shape future sustainability marketing policies that are credible, practical, and innovation-friendly. After months of uncertainty, the European Commission has formally withdrawn the Green Claims Directive. ICC invites members to shape the next phase of environmental marketing policy. Brussels, June 2025 – In a significant development for sustainability regulation and business communication, the European Commission has announced the withdrawal of its proposal for a Green Claims Directive. The decision, shared during the Commission’s midday press briefing, comes amid growing concern over the administrative burden the legislation would have imposed—particularly on Europe’s 30 million micro-enterprises. The Directive, originally introduced in 2023, aimed to tackle greenwashing by requiring businesses to substantiate environmental claims—such as “climate neutral” or “100% recycled”—through detailed criteria and mandatory third-party verification. While widely supported in principle, the approach raised major concerns across the business community for its potential to hinder innovation, create disproportionate compliance costs, and undermine existing good practices. A milestone for business engagement ICC has consistently supported the goal of credible, science-based sustainability communication, while also advocating for a more balanced, proportionate approach. As ICC noted in its response to the proposal, mandatory ex-ante verification risked penalising responsible companies and disincentivising voluntary leadership, particularly among SMEs. Thanks to continued feedback and coordinated outreach from ICC members across Europe, these concerns were heard. Today’s withdrawal marks a milestone in collaborative advocacy—and opens the door for a more workable path forward. What comes next? While the Commission has withdrawn the Green Claims Directive, existing EU consumer protection legislation remains in place: · The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) already prohibits misleading environmental claims and will remain a key enforcement tool. · The Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive, adopted earlier this year, will also enter into force in 2026 with new requirements around environmental marketing. These frameworks continue to provide a baseline for action against greenwashing, and ICC will work to support their consistent and practical implementation. More importantly, this moment provides an opportunity to co-design better solutions. As the Commission considers future steps, ICC encourages a renewed focus on: Supporting self-regulatory mechanisms , such as the ICC Marketing Code and Environmental Claims Checklist Promoting clear, scalable guidance that builds trust without excessive red tape Ensuring that frameworks are workable for all business sizes , especially SMEs ICC’s call to members This is not just a regulatory win—it’s a call to action. ICC is inviting members to help shape the next phase of policy by sharing real-world examples, common challenges, and practical alternatives. Constructive engagement now can ensure the next iteration of EU policy supports credible sustainability claims—while enabling business innovation and competitiveness. Once again, ICC thanks its network for the active engagement that helped deliver this outcome. The work ahead is equally important—and we look forward to continuing the conversation with you. 📄 Read ICC’s response to the Green Claims Directive

< Back < Previous | Next > ICC Netherlands General Assembly 2026 Europe has the diagnosis. Execution is missing 12 May 2026 ICC Netherlands General Assembly 2026: four voices on competitiveness, AI, energy and MedTech – and the one challenge they all converge on Europe has the diagnosis. Execution is missing. ICC Netherlands General Assembly 2026: four voices on competitiveness, AI, energy and MedTech – and the one challenge they all converge on Twenty months after the Draghi Report identified Europe’s competitiveness problems, just 11.2% of its 176 recommendations have been implemented. The Wennink Report has since translated the same diagnosis into a Dutch context – current growth of 0.5 to 0.9% against the 1.5 to 2.0% needed to keep the economy on track. All in all, the members, partners and policy voices convening at ICC Netherlands annual General Assembly on 6 May 2026 had enough to talk about. The theme of the day was deliberately provocative: can Europe keep up? The answer that emerged across four very different presentations was the same. Europe is not short of diagnosis: it’s short of delivery.To explore why, the Assembly brought together four voices from different facets of the European business and policy conversation. Paul Verhagen, lecturer at the University of Amsterdam, on technology and geopolitics. John Müller, IT Director of AI Engineering at ING, on the AI race. Norbert Both, partner at Publieke Zaken and a former diplomat and Shell executive, on energy. Thomas Leenders, Head of Government and Public Affairs Benelux at Philips, on MedTech and the Wennink Growth Plan. ICC Global Deputy Director Andrew Wilson, joining from Paris, closed with a global perspective. A new strategic map Paul Verhagen opened with the harshest framing of the day. Europe faces three simultaneous threats: militarily vulnerable to Russia, economically exposed to China, and increasingly held hostage technologically by the United States. “Our oldest ally is now acting more and more like an enemy,” he said. The neoliberal era that shaped European business was, he argued, never a product of pure market forces; it was underwritten by cheap Russian energy, American security and American technology. The pragmatic conclusion of his message is uncomfortable: Europe should pivot toward China for the things it now needs the most. China has won the EV race, he argued; Europe should drop its tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, buy them at scale, and free European industrial capacity for what Europe still has to build for itself – including for defence purposes. In exchange, Europe should leverage what China badly wants and needs: access to ASML’s EUV machines, traded for rare-earth elements and Chinese cooperation on Ukraine. The trade-off is morally costly, he conceded. “What you’re saying is you’re going to trade Taiwan for EUV. That is what it means.” The strategic priority for Europe, in his view, is Ukraine over Taiwan. His positive model is what he called a garden with high walls – internal European market competition behind tariffs protecting strategically vital sectors. “Mutual dependence becomes a transaction,” he said. “Where it helps us, we use it. Where it hurts us, you cut it like the weed that it is.” Beneath the provocations was the diagnosis the day kept returning to. “We have the Chips Act. We have the Green New Deal. We have the Mining Act. And we have the AI Act. We’re trying to do all these things at the same time,” he said. “This sounds like megalomania – because it is.” He drew the comparison to the Meiji Restoration: in the 19th century, watching the Qing Dynasty dismantled, Japan sent emissaries to learn where European strength came from – and rebuilt its institutions accordingly. Europe today, he argued, needs to ask the same question of others. The AI gap John Müller moved the discussion from grand strategy to the engineering floor. ING’s AI lead with fifteen years in the field, he is part of the small group of European practitioners who have seen the technology evolve both before and after ChatGPT – and who now have to make hard procurement decisions on the back of that knowledge. “There is only one superpower in AI right now,” he said. The US outspent the EU more than five-to-one on AI in 2024, and some analysts expect a further 44% rise in investment in 2026. The structural risk, he argued, is not just spending volume but dependency. “Most of you,” he reminded the audience, “won’t be able to log in to your computer if Microsoft turns off its ID service.” The US hyperscalers, in his framing, are no longer just companies. “You need to start looking at them as essentially central banks for the digital economy, not just as corporate entities.” He laid out four scenarios available to Europe – each with a serious downside. Keep leaning on US cloud providers? Accept the structural dependency, and notice that even the hyperscalers are starting to ration capacity. Use European cloud alternatives instead? “They’re years behind. If the first one goes down, everything goes down.” Build it all yourself with open-source tooling? Your most valuable engineers stop working on the business that pays them. Make a big bet on a single European champion? Just hope you choose the right one. Müller closed not with an answer but with a question for the audience: which silver bullet are you willing to choose? It was the most uncomfortable moment of the afternoon. No scenario was the safe option – and every Dutch business in the room is, in some form, already making the choice. From PetroStates to ElectroStates Where Verhagen and Müller pushed toward decisive choices, Norbert Both argued for something less dramatic but harder: Europe getting its own house in order before deciding who to lean on next. “There is no place on earth that can be fully self-sufficient,” he said. “Europe will always be an energy importer – in the fossil system, and in the new electrified one.” The question, for him, is not how to escape dependency but how to manage it: build optionality, redundancy, and diversified suppliers. He reached for a household analogy. “Different shoes for different occasions – and so it is with energy.” Both reframed the global picture as a shift from PetroStates, which control oil and gas, to ElectroStates, which control critical minerals and the processing capacity behind them. China dominates the second category almost entirely. The infrastructure wave behind it is colossal: quoting NVIDIA’s Jensen Huang, he reminded the audience that AI represents “the biggest infrastructure build-out in human history” – roughly a doubling of electricity demand for data centres over the next five to seven years, “the equivalent of adding Germany’s entire electricity system.” The Dutch side of that build-out is sobering. Citing Tennet, he noted that the Netherlands alone will need around 100,000 kilometres of additional cable, 50,000 new transport stations, 670 high- and mid-voltage substations, and 30,000 additional technicians – taking up a footprint equivalent to 11,000 football pitches. “And still I hear politicians and senior civil servants say: we just need to electrify the system. Fine. But be honest about the scale.” There is a fossil side of the story that has gone quiet too. Europe has reduced its refinery capacity ten years in a row, leaving a direct import dependency of 25 to 30% on jet fuel. Sustainable aviation fuel will help, but “even if it’s produced, it will still be based on imported methanol – and the biggest producer of green methanol is China. Same choke points, same dependencies.” His call was for humility, then action. “Speak softly and carry a big stick,” he said. “Get your act together. And don’t use big words when you know you are dependent.” His most provocative proposal: where the business case for energy security is disappearing – refineries, gas storages, coal-and gas-fired power stations – the state should be willing to step in and spend money to keep these assets available for when society needs them up and running. “Corporates won’t pay that bill.” From plan to execution If the geopolitics panel framed the challenge, Thomas Leenders described what execution can look like in practice. Philips contributed to both the Wennink Report and the resulting MedTech Growth Plan – a roadmap shaped by more than a thousand stakeholders and aimed at positioning the Netherlands among the world’s top three MedTech ecosystems, and number one in Europe, by 2035. The numbers behind the ambition are concrete: around 30,000 MedTech jobs in the Netherlands today, with potential for 11,000 more; €5 billion in additional annual export value by 2035; over €22 billion in potential healthcare cost savings through digitisation and AI; and more than 75 new start-ups and scale-ups already on the horizon. Philips alone invests €650 million a year in Dutch R&D – 40% of its total worldwide R&D spend – and employs around 4,000 people at its Best location, where the Assembly was held. But Leenders was clear that ambition is the easy part. “We see in the Draghi Report a lot of good plans, but no execution,” he said. “This plan must be different. Otherwise, after six, eight or twelve months, it’s still only a plan – and then it becomes a problem in five or ten years’ time.” His proposal for delivery was tangible. The plan calls for a government structure with twenty programme leaders per domain, and a triple-helix approach binding industry, science and government together from day one. He pointed to the Dutch ministerial task force already being assembled – led from the Prime Minister’s office in partnership with the Ministry of Economic Affairs – as the kind of structure that could make the difference between a plan that delivers and a plan that becomes a footnote of history. Four priorities, one challenge Closing the panel, Andrew Wilson zoomed back out. Brussels’ problem, he argued, is not a lack of ideas but a lack of focus. Europe tries to do everything at once and rarely converges on the four or five things that matter most. From a Brussels vantage point, he sketched what those priorities might be. First, China: Europe needs a coherent collective view of its most important external relationship. Second, AI and the future of work: Europe must move past a defensive, regulatory-first posture and engage strategically. Third, the Single Market, particularly services, where reform has been promised for more than twenty years and is still incomplete. Fourth, energy markets: competitiveness rests on industrial energy costs that today are simply unworkable. The 11.2% Draghi implementation figure, he conceded, may be a little unfair as a headline. “But the direction of travel,” he said, “is unmistakable. “Europe’s weakness is no longer in diagnosis. It is in delivery.” And delivery, in his view, will not come from the European Commission alone. “Business will have to step into the conversation.” Where ICC Netherlands fits in Which is where ICC Netherlands sees its role. For Director General Laure Jacquier, the Assembly’s discussion underlined exactly why the organisation matters now. “The global rulebook is being rewritten in real time,” she said. “Our role is to make sure Dutch businesses are at the table where that happens – bringing practical experience into global rule-making, and translating global complexity into something boards can act on.” The Assembly closed with the formal business of the year and a reminder of ICC Netherlands’ five strategic priorities for 2024–2026: multilateralism and trade, business integrity, dispute resolution, sustainability and inclusive leadership, and digital trade. The conversation continued over drinks among Philips’ medical technology – a fitting reminder that the question of whether Europe can keep up is, in the end, a question about what its companies will choose to build, deliver and stand for next.

< Back < Previous | Next > WISE Understanding leadership: a series of interviews from ICC Netherlands 11 May 2026 Interview with Fabia Tetteroo-Bueno Understanding leadership: a series of interviews from ICC Netherlands Every successful career has a story worth sharing. To mark the launch of this year’s WISE (Women in Strategic Engagement) programme, this new series of articles spotlights inspiring senior professionals and business leaders. Through candid conversations, we aim to share practical insights on leadership: the decisions that shaped their careers, the lessons learned through setbacks and change, and the advice they would give to younger generations navigating today’s complex business environment. We also explore the challenges and opportunities these leaders see ahead – and how they believe companies and individuals can respond with resilience, purpose and impact. To kick off the series, we spoke to Fabia Tetteroo-Bueno, a business leader whose career has taken her across Europe, Asia and Latin America. Today, after 28 years at Philips, Brazil-born Fabia has risen from trainee to Senior Vice President. Now based in the Netherlands, she is entering a new phase of her career: one that is defined by creating impact beyond her corporate role. Fabia’s career began with a setback. In 2000 – two years into a traineeship with Philips in Brazil – she applied for another position: a three-month programme in Germany, but she didn’t get selected. When she asked the hiring manager why, she was given an answer that reflected the reality many women faced at the time in Brazil. “The message was: ‘I don’t like to put women in this kind of role, because if you get pregnant, we lose money’,” she recalls. She was disappointed, but a week before the assignment started, the man who had been selected withdrew; his girlfriend was pregnant and he didn’t want to leave her behind in Brazil. Fabia immediately stepped forward. “Someone got pregnant and it was not me. You need someone that speaks Portuguese and English; you need someone next week. And that’s me,” she told the manager. The assignment was meant to last three months. Instead, it became the start of a global career lasting half of her life so far. Fabia’s career can be defined by international leadership roles and constant change. After Germany, her job took her to the Netherlands, China, the Philippines, Panama and, two years ago, back to the Netherlands. Along the way, she shifted across industries and functions, moving from consumer business, lighting, into healthcare and rising steadily into senior leadership. Giving more women a board-level voice Fabia is now preparing for a transition away from her current executive role with a focus on leadership transformation, particularly connected to gender equality in healthcare and Artificial Intelligence (AI). A major driver of this is what she sees as a lack of women’s voices at the highest levels of corporate management. “I believe that women bring a different style and strength to a company’s board. The healthy company boards are the ones that have real diversity of thought. At senior levels in general, we need to have different voices, different backgrounds and different opinions. That’s how you make governance and strategy stronger.” Turning her attention to the first topic where she believes the lack of women’s voices has serious consequences – healthcare – Fabia points out how often women are dismissed. “A woman at a doctor’s office hears the words ‘what you’re feeling is normal’ so often. ‘Normal’ is not necessarily ‘good’.” She believes this happens because women’s health has historically been under-researched. “There is not enough research being done on women’s medical care,” she says. “Actually the only research on women that’s well developed is around pregnancy.” AI is her second major concern. “In AI, you also see bias,” she says, “because most models are based on past standards and past standards are mainly white male dominated, in most industries” To Fabia, the risk is clear: without change, inequality will deepen. “Otherwise, for the next generation, things are not going to change,” she warns. “We’re going to keep having gaps in medical research; the bias in AI is going to increase exponentially.” Fabia connects this mission to her own leadership journey. Early in her career, she was labelled ‘pitbull’ at work because of her directness. She didn’t like the label, and asked a coach why people saw her that way. His answer stayed with her: “You don’t have enough female role models. You are mimicking a man in your style of working.” The lesson was clear: she didn’t need to copy a leadership model that didn’t fit her. “How can you be an authentic leader if you’re copying someone else? I had to learn to be myself but also, I made a commitment to myself. I thought back then ‘if we miss female role models now, I want to make sure I can become a female role model for next generations, so they don’t struggle with the same issues I struggled with’.” Connecting continents Linking these goals is a parallel mission: strengthening collaboration between regions. Having spent one-third of her career in Europe, one-third in Asia, and one-third in Latin America, Fabia believes she can help close the gap. “There is a lot of knowledge in Latin America and Europe that is not being exchanged; so many companies there would love to expand to Europe and vice versa. Especially in today’s current geopolitical climate, Fabia believes she can serve as a “bridge for businesses expanding across continents, particularly in healthcare and AI”. A practical approach In working on leadership transformation, Fabia’s approach is practical, drawing on the many lessons learned during a long international career. “One of the biggest things I have learned is that life consists of phases,” she says. At the beginning of a career, she believes curiosity is everything. “You are building your network and knowledge toolbox so you need to be curious for everything that comes your way,” she says. “You also need to be open to feedback. Feedback is a gift: it’s a way for you to get better.” Later, the focus shifts to sharpening skills and building deeper capability. Even then, learning remains constant. “Now even more, you need to keep learning, keep evolving,” she notes. For Fabia, successful people share three traits: “Commitment, curiosity and capability: these are really the things that you need to strive towards.” Redefining resilience How to deal with setbacks and discrimination is another area where Fabia provides some valuable advice. “I’ve heard so many stupid comments, so many microaggressions during my career,” she says. “In the beginning, when I was younger, I would get so upset. But I have learned not to take things personally. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge; if the person lacks knowledge, the best thing you can do is to give them knowledge by proving them wrong.” This line of conversation causes Fabia to dive deeper into the concept of resilience. “I believe there are three levels of reaction when something bad happens to you. The first is a fragile reaction: you break down. Then there is resilience: holding yourself together. And then there is antifragile: the ability to become stronger when something bad happens.” She uses two examples to illustrate her point. The first is from her time in the Philippines, when a major typhoon devastated the country. “You’re walking on the street, you see debris, you smell bodies. It was horrible,” she says. Her response was to focus on building strength within her team, “building such a bond despite the adversity”. The second example comes from when she was leading a 6,000-strong team in Latin America during the COVID pandemic, the financial consequences of which were dire: 25% of personnel were at risk of losing their jobs. One way to prevent this was for the entire team to give up part of their holiday pay. “I didn’t take the decision unilaterally. We voted as a team – some of us would suffer a lot or all of us would suffer a little. Everybody voted for sharing the pain – and we became so much stronger as a team because of that.” Optimism for the future? Considering the current imbalance in gender representation on corporate boards of directors, is Fabia optimistic about her ambition to level the playing field of corporate decision-makers? “I was super optimistic until COVID,” she says. “That was a very negative moment; I saw so many good women leaving the workforce. Then you realise that women have so much pressure from the ‘invisible’ tasks related to motherhood and care.” To that end, her answer to women asking her about career advice is direct: “Be picky about your partner: you need someone who shares the load and really supports your career choices. Someone who doesn’t hold you back.” Despite setbacks, she remains hopeful. “Gen-Z, for example, is more equalitarian and more willing to fight for equal obligations and equal rights.” She also sees potential in technology. “I’m very optimistic about what artificial intelligence can do, if we do it right,” she says. “In theory, everybody could create their own AI tool. This empowers so many people to innovate – to solve a problem in their community – that’s the beauty of this technology.” But Fabia is clear that progress is not automatic. “It’s not a battle that’s won yet,” she says. “It is still a journey.” For her, that journey now defines the next chapter of her career – one where success is measured not only by personal achievement, but by the impact she helps create for others.

< Back < Previous | Next > COP 31 - Implementation is the real test 25 Feb 2026 As preparations for COP31 move forward, climate policy is shifting from targets to delivery, with new finance rules, carbon markets and trade measures increasingly shaping investment conditions, risk management and competitiveness for internationally active Dutch businesses. Implementation Is the Real Test: Can Climate Policy Deliver for the Real Economy? COP30 concluded in Belém under unusually complex geopolitical conditions. After extended negotiations, Parties adopted the “Belém Political Package” alongside technical decisions that reaffirmed commitment to the Paris Agreement and climate multilateralism. While the outcome did not resolve all open questions, particularly around finance clarity and national ambition signals, it marked a shift in emphasis. The climate agenda is now firmly situated within broader economic policy: industrial competitiveness, financial stability, energy security, and trade architecture. The focus has moved from negotiating targets to implementing systems. For internationally active businesses, this transition has direct implications. What changed and why it matters for companies Three developments emerging from COP30 are particularly relevant. Climate policy is entering the risk-management phase Climate commitments are reflected in domestic regulation, financial supervision, and litigation trends. The discussion has evolved from long-term environmental ambition to near-term risk exposure. For businesses, this affects: Capital allocation decisions Insurance costs and availability Supply chain resilience planning Disclosure and compliance obligations Long-term asset valuation Boards are no longer asking whether climate risk matters. The question is how rapidly it will materialise in financial and legal terms. Implementation mechanisms are being built Initiatives such as the Global Implementation Accelerator and Brazil’s roadmaps on fossil fuel transition and deforestation aim to move beyond political signalling toward deployment and coordination. For companies, this signals: Greater scrutiny of transition plans Increased demand for technology deployment partnerships More structured government–business collaboration Potential acceleration of permitting and regulatory reforms The implementation phase will test whether climate ambition translates into predictable investment conditions. Market instruments are becoming structural Carbon pricing, Article 6 markets, voluntary carbon market integrity, and border carbon adjustments are no longer peripheral topics. They are becoming structural components of trade and investment systems. For Dutch companies, operating through global value chains, ports, finance and logistics, this means: Internal carbon pricing strategies require alignment with evolving international mechanisms Cross-border carbon accounting will affect competitiveness Supply chain contracts increasingly incorporate emissions performance Trade compliance teams must track carbon-related border measures Market design and integrity now directly influence commercial strategy. Finance: the central enabler One of the most closely watched elements of COP30 was climate finance. While agreement was reached on forward-looking processes, implementation will determine whether capital flows at the required scale. For financial institutions and corporates active in emerging markets, several issues remain central: Cost of capital differentials Risk-sharing mechanisms Prudential regulatory treatment of green investments Clarity around blended finance frameworks Unlocking private finance is less about new pledges and more about removing structural barriers. This is where business expertise is essential. ICC’s global agenda: aligning policy with practice ICC’s 2026 Environment & Energy Commission workplan reflects this implementation focus. Priorities include: Channeling business expertise into UNFCCC negotiations ahead of COP31 Supporting high-integrity cross-border carbon markets Advocating practical reforms to unlock private climate finance Strengthening sustainable trade finance frameworks Engaging in biodiversity, plastics and minerals governance processes The upcoming Global Commission meeting will concentrate specifically on advancing implementation toward Antalya. The emphasis is clear: business input must move from general endorsement to technical contribution. Looking ahead to Antalya COP31 in Antalya will be assessed less on new declarations and more on implementation progress. Key indicators for business will include: Whether carbon market mechanisms deliver operational clarity Whether climate finance discussions reduce investment friction Whether trade–climate dialogues avoid fragmentation Whether permitting and policy signals become sufficiently predictable for long-term capital deployment The geopolitical environment remains complex. Economic conditions remain uncertain. But climate policy is increasingly embedded in economic architecture rather than treated as a parallel track. For internationally active companies, this requires integration, not separate sustainability strategies, but mainstream business planning. ICC Netherlands will continue to provide a platform where Dutch business can both anticipate regulatory evolution and contribute constructively to global processes. Implementation is no longer a distant objective. It is the phase we have entered. And in this phase, technical input, commercial realism and policy coherence matter more than rhetoric.

< Back < Previous | Next > Marketing & Advertising ICC’s Work on Marketing and Advertising 30 Jan 2025 Since its first publication in 1937, the ICC Advertising and Marketing Communications Code has served as the gold standard for responsible advertising. Recognized and implemented by self-regulatory bodies in over 40 countries, it provides a global framework for ethical marketing practices. The Code helps businesses maintain trust with consumers, ensure compliance with regulations, and adapt to evolving challenges in the advertising landscape. Setting Global Standards for Responsible Marketing As marketing evolves with new technologies and consumer expectations, ICC continues to update and expand its guidance to promote transparency, fairness, and integrity in advertising worldwide. The latest 11th edition of the ICC Code reflects these ongoing efforts, addressing issues like green claims, influencer marketing, and diversity & inclusion . Key Focus Areas & 2025 Agenda This year, the ICC Marketing and Advertising Commission is tackling some of the most pressing issues in advertising and marketing. Key initiatives include: 📌 Responsible AI in Advertising – Developing new guidance on the ethical use of AI in marketing (new workstream led by Microsoft & Google). 📌 Marketing & Advertising to Children – Updating ICC’s standards to ensure responsible digital advertising to young audiences (new workstream led by Lego & Keller & Heckman). 📌 Environmental Marketing Communications – Strengthening the ICC framework for clear, evidence-based green claims (new workstream led by Keller & Heckman). 📌 Responsible Food & Beverage Marketing – Updating ICC’s guidelines on advertising food and beverages in a responsible way (new workstream led by WFA). 📌 Responsible Alcohol Marketing – Revising ICC’s self-regulation rules for alcohol marketing , ensuring high ethical standards (new workstream led by WFA & IARD). 📌 Market & Social Research Ethics – Finalizing the updated ICC/ESOMAR Code on ethical research and data analytics. These initiatives aim to help businesses navigate complex regulations, align global best practices, and protect consumer trust in an increasingly digitalized world. New Dutch Advertising Code Released! We are pleased to announce the launch of the Dutch version of the ICC Advertising and Marketing Communications Code. To mark the occasion, we hosted a webinar discussing the latest updates to the ICC Code, green claims, and key legal and compliance challenges in advertising. Webinar Overview: Responsible Advertising – Challenges and Solutions 📅 30 January 2025 The webinar provided key insights into the evolving landscape of advertising regulations, with a strong focus on environmental claims, cross-border compliance, and the increasing complexity of marketing regulations . Key Takeaways: 🔹 Navigating Cross-Border Advertising Rules Advertising laws are only partially harmonized across Europe , leading to different interpretations in each country. Businesses face challenges due to varied enforcement bodies , including consumer authorities, NGOs, and self-regulatory organizations. Inconsistent rulings and legal interpretations across jurisdictions create uncertainty for international advertising campaigns . 🔹 The Growing Complexity of Environmental Claims Greenwashing is under increased scrutiny —companies must ensure environmental claims are clear, substantiated, and not misleading . Regulators and NGOs actively monitor and challenge vague or exaggerated sustainability claims (e.g., "climate neutral" or "eco-friendly"). From product packaging to digital ads, investor reports, and recruitment materials , all communications can be subject to green claim regulations. Businesses must consider how consumers perceive their claims , as even well-intended messages can be misleading . The risk of "green-hushing" —where companies under-communicate sustainability efforts to avoid regulatory risk —is increasing. 🔹 Legal and Compliance Risks in Advertising Companies must balance the marketing of innovation with compliance, ensuring that new and emerging technologies are communicated accurately without overstating their impact. Claims about technological advancements, sustainability improvements, or new product features must be fact-based and verifiable to avoid misleading consumers. The role of AI in advertising introduces new challenges in accountability and transparency. Influencer marketing is under growing scrutiny, with specific rules for large-scale influencers (500K+ followers) . 🔹 How Businesses Can Stay Ahead ✅ Implement good practice guidelines for legal and marketing teams. ✅ Establish internal training programs to build awareness of advertising risks across departments. ✅ Develop a risk-based approach to green claims and advertising content. ✅ Seek external compliance reviews for high-risk campaigns. ✅ Maintain transparency and accuracy —especially in sustainability messaging. 💡 Final Thought: The advertising landscape is evolving rapidly. With heightened regulatory scrutiny, increased NGO activism, and stricter enforcement, businesses must stay vigilant and proactive to ensure responsible marketing practices. Missed the webinar? 📺 The full session will be published soon. Get Involved Are you interested in shaping the future of responsible marketing and advertising ? ICC welcomes businesses, legal experts, and policymakers to join our initiatives. Contact us to learn more about how you can participate! The ICC Advertising and Marketing Communications Code - ICC - International Chamber of Commerce

< Back < Previous | Next > Reflections on a career in international trade: Bart Jan Koopman on the ‘new normal’, survival mode, and the future of global commerce Tom Scott 6 Apr 2026 “Optimism is almost a responsibility. Without a healthy dose of optimism and perseverance, you won’t get anywhere.” Reflections on a career in international trade: Bart Jan Koopman on the ‘new normal’, survival mode, and the future of global commerce “Optimism is almost a responsibility. Without a healthy dose of optimism and perseverance, you won’t get anywhere.” One year after our previous interview, we spoke again with Bart Jan Koopman, Managing Director of evofenedex, to reflect on how geopolitics is reshaping international trade and supply chains. With Bart Jan now preparing to retire after more than a decade leading evofenedex – and a career spanning over 40 years in international business – this conversation is both a timely update and a moment of reflection on a long career. He shares what has surprised him over the past 12 months, his definition of ‘survival mode’, and why resilience and agility have become essential for staying competitive in today’s trade environment. Have you been surprised at the events of the last 12 months? Not so much the predictable unpredictability of the US government. But what I did find surprising was how – for a limited number of people – it’s only a small step to go from a tariff war to a real war. I think it’s good to be surprised about that; if that were to be normalised, I think the world would disappear faster than we all want. How is this impacting the business world? Once again, some things should not become normalised. The business world is also evolving from rule-based to power-based. However, ‘power-based’ doesn’t only mean a strong negotiating position but also the use of blackmail and power abuse. These are concepts that should not be normalised. The business world has had to deal with a lot of things all at the same time: the clear deterioration of the geopolitical situation and the trade climate – and all the associated problems. At the same time, there are also revolutions happening in the business world. One is the digital technological revolution; everything involving AI is going so fast, is so uninhibited and unregulated. It’s a huge struggle for companies to understand and adapt into their business processes. The second is the energy transition. We are still terribly dependent on fossil fuels, and energy demand is only increasing, and energy prices are very different around the world. That price difference is going to put a lot of pressure on existing business models. I think this will continue – meaning that some industries are in survival mode rather than a careful and gradual energy transition. How do you define ‘survival mode’? It’s about risk management. Having all aspects of your business – liquidity, currency risk, raw materials, supply of components, digital security – as far as possible under control to be able to run your business processes in the short term. Another definition please. How ‘short’ is short term? A daily or weekly basis: that is short term. For example, companies dependent on Asia-Europe supply chains, or dealing with fuel shortages, are having great difficulties carrying out their business processes. Companies need to incorporate resilience for the medium-term and agility for the short-term. You have led evofenedex for more than a decade. What were the most transformative developments for international trade during that period? The Brexit referendum was ten years ago. I remember that I was at 10 Downing Street, talking to a number of people from the government. To my amazement, rather than this being a rational discussion, this was a fact-free conversation – more of a feeling – about what was going to happen. Eventually we found our way out of this misery with a trade deal, but we are still repairing what was broken. What followed was far more dramatic: from Ukraine to Trump’s trade war to real wars. But the most transformative development has been the hegemonic rivalry between the US and China. While this may seem like a conflict outside Europe, it affects Europe directly. Europe is under threat – not so much in the triangle of the three blocs – but in between the US and China. Ideally, Europe should have enough power and independence to determine its own position. Yet instead of a world with three strong blocs, global dynamics are increasingly dominated by US–China rivalry, leaving Europe struggling to find answers – and even more so to convert those answers into policy and action. Looking back at your whole career, what is the biggest lesson you have learned about how companies deal with uncertainty? That there’s no such thing as ‘business as usual’ anymore. The world has never been calm, but the previous ten years show that unpredictability is the new normal. I think that is the biggest lesson that companies should learn: not to run their businesses on the hope that things will go back to normal. What advice would you give to young professionals starting a career in international trade today? For a long time, the business world didn’t have a good reputation in society – there was a perception that the whole system was aimed purely on the exploitation of people and the environment, rather than at a broader prosperity. I have the feeling that the pendulum is swinging back. Having said that, my message to young people is that – whether they start their career in the corporate world, a government position, or with an NGO – we all need each other. This will make the difference to those necessary and complicated transitions that we will see in the world. My advice is, if you want to make a difference, work together instead of trying to solve things on your own. Despite geopolitical tensions and fragmentation, are you fundamentally optimistic about the future of international trade? I’m a healthy optimist – in fact, optimism is almost a responsibility. But you have to do something with that responsibility, because if you’re an entrepreneur or a company, without a healthy dose of optimism and perseverance, you won’t get anywhere. Challenges will always appear, and things may get harder, but history shows humanity endures, and setbacks are temporary. I’m hopeful for Europe and the world. Recent trade agreements with Mercosur, India and Australia show that cooperation works better than isolation. The EU’s potential is still underutilised, and applying even part of the Draghi or Wennink recommendations could unlock significant gains. The key is to act rather than wait.

< Back < Previous | Next > Geopolitics How businesses can tackle isolationism and protectionism Tom Scott 3 Feb 2025 Andrew Wilson As Deputy Secretary General for Policy at ICC Global, Andrew Wilson ’s job focuses on any public policy relevant to business. That’s everything from trade to tax, from climate to financial regulation. He carries out this work at a range of different levels: national, EU, but mainly various United Nations bodies such as the WTO. He describes ICC’s role as being “the voice of business in international policymaking, ensuring that what is agreed at the UN or WTO really meets the needs of local private sectors across the world”. We caught up with Andrew to talk to him about the challenges of geopolitics today: how it affects international trade, the global shift towards isolationism, the impact (if any) of Trump’s second term in the White House. In addition to ICC’s response to these issues, we also discussed the various options open to businesses to tackle the trend of increasing unilateralism and protectionism. What is ICC’s view of the current state of geopolitics? We are living in an increasingly fragmented and uncertain world. We’ve got hot conflict in Ukraine and, until recently, the Middle East. And we have severe tension between the largest two economies in the world: the USA and China. In addition to this, there is also a steadily growing mindset of unilateralism and protectionism within many economies. Looking closer at unilateralism and protectionism, how does this affect international trade? The trade environment is far more complex and certainly less stable than it was, say, before the pandemic. In 2023, for example, there were 3,000 new trade barriers erected by governments across the world. This represents a five-fold increase over the previous five years. This steady drift, almost unnoticed by much of the media, towards greater isolationism is certainly not conducive to high levels of trade growth, which powers long-term job creation and GDP growth. Indeed, the USA is currently getting a lot of media attention about tariffs. Surely this huge increase in trade barriers is not originating only from the White House? This is an important point of clarification that we want to bring to the debate. The USA is certainly not alone in its protectionist policies. This is part of a much broader trend towards unilateralism in trade: the steady erosion of the multilateral trading system. There are governments in other regions – Southeast Asia and, to a lesser extent, Latin America – that are introducing some forms of restrictions to trade. These aren’t necessarily tariffs; it could be distortionary subsidies or export restrictions. Just how much influence does the USA have? Another point of nuance that is sometimes missing is that the USA accounts for only ten per cent of global trade flows. Compared to the 1930s, for example, the USA just simply doesn’t have the same market power today. However, we are very conscious of how countries may respond to the ‘America First’ policy. What possible options do countries have? They could choose to negotiate. Or accept the imposition of tariffs. Or to retaliate. Our big concern from a systemic perspective is if other major economies start to retaliate – the European Union, China, Canada, for instance – then we could end up with tariff escalations within the G20 or even the G7. That would obviously be extraordinarily concerning. Our message is to see the bigger perspective and avoid retaliation: keep calm and negotiate. And what advice can ICC give businesses to deal with the trend of unilateralism and protectionism? Coming from discussions we’ve run together with the International Monetary Fund with a whole range of corporates, we have identified six best practises for how businesses can navigate this very uncertain environment. Maybe it sounds facile, but there’s no need to overreact or to essentially follow the media cycle. We think it’s important that businesses stay sanguine. We strongly recommend internal education by ensuring that relevant teams are properly educated about tariffs, currency fluctuations and other trade barriers. In some cases, companies will need to extend this education down their supply chains. Companies should have a contingency plan. So as soon as there is any indication of possible trade policy changes, companies know how they may be impacted by tariffs or any other import or export restriction. Then they can respond accordingly, for the short-term but also potentially for the mid-term and long-term. Invest in intelligence. We know that not every company can do this, so wherever possible, use advanced tech such as AI to develop intelligence on supply chain shifts, possible policy changes and uncertainties. Use this intelligence to manage supply chains and volumes. Clear communication with suppliers is vital. If you’re at the top of the supply chain, or near the top, make sure to maintain solid relationships with suppliers, particularly if those are of a strategic or long-standing nature. Create a joint plan of action throughout the supply chain. We recommend effective advocacy. Companies can use associations like ICC as a way to influence government policy in a constructive way. Considering ICC’s history, established in 1919 to promote open global trade and investment after Word War One – and consequently promoting peace – what is ICC’s position in today’s world? We see this as a key moment for ICC to step up. We are very well aware of the responsibility we have at this moment to respond to the needs of business in an effective way. This is using our position in the WTO system, in the UN, and with our global network of chambers. I think of ICC being a space where business can convene to openly and honestly discuss how they are approaching some of the challenges they’re facing. In practical terms, how will ICC achieve this? In terms of external focus, we have three main aims. Our objective number one is the preservation of the existing multilateral trading system which is absolutely vital for the global economy and for society as a whole. This includes maintaining the WTO. Although the WTO is not the ‘new thing in town’, it underpins a huge percentage of international trade and it is absolutely critical for developing and emerging economies. We published research last year that showed that if the WTO was to disappear overnight, the impact on trade would be enormously severe. Here’s just one example: trade flows in sub-Saharan Africa would decline within a five-year period by 40 per cent. The second point is how do we effectively remake the case for international trade? Twenty years ago, the mainstream consensus was that multilateral trade was a good thing. I fear that this opinion has been lost in many ways. Therefore, we want to look at how we can tangibly, realistically and creatively start to rebalance the discussion on trade. The third and final point is, as the world appears to be going in a protectionist direction, what practical solutions can business bring to government discussions to strengthen the system? Here’s one example. The WTO dispute settlement mechanism no longer functions because under the Obama administration, the USA refused to appoint new judges. That is hugely problematic for the WTO to provide discipline and order within the multilateral system. We accept that there is very little prospect of this being resolved in the new Trump administration. As an alternative to the classic model of WTO dispute resolution, one idea we’re working on is state-to-state arbitration to enable the resolution of trade disputes and thus avoid escalation. It’s this kind of practical, but potentially very valuable intervention that we need to pursue with greater vigour. These solutions would be informed very much by the needs of the business community – in our case, ICC members – to identify the problems, work together on practical solutions, and then use our position to advocate for those solutions.

< Back < Previous | Next > Integrity & Culture Speaking up is Golden: The Importance of Integrity for a Safe Reporting Culture in Organizations Kristien Verbraeken, Senior Integrity Advisor, Dutch Whistleblowers Authority 8 May 2025 Organisations are often well-insured against rare events like fires but underestimate the frequent and damaging risks of integrity violations such as fraud or misconduct; investing in a strong integrity culture and internal reporting procedures is essential for early detection and reduced harm. 1. How Well Is Your Organisation Protected Against Risks? Does your organisation have fire insurance? It probably does; sometimes it is even mandatory to insure yourself against certain risks. Fortunately, fires do not occur too often in organisations, and there is a willingness to take safety measures to prevent fires or respond quickly to them. But what does your organisation do to prevent integrity risks such as fraud, theft, data leaks or inappropriate behaviour? Integrity issues occur much more frequently than fires, yet not all organisations actively work on promoting integrity or creating a safe reporting environment to prevent and properly address such risks when they occur. That is why it is very valuable for organisations to invest in integrity and an efficient reporting procedure. 2. The Cost of Integrity Violations Integrity violations can cause a lot of damage to organisations. The ACFE (Association of Certified Fraud Examiners) publishes an annual Report to the Nations on the average damage organisations suffer due to fraud. If the organisation has an internal reporting system, the financial damage can amount to $100,000. Without a proper reporting system, the average damage can easily double. 43% of fraud cases are discovered through a report or tip-off. Most tips or reports come from employees (52%), 21% from customers, and 11% from suppliers. Figure 1, from Report to the Nations 2024, ACFE, p. 24 It is primarily the employees themselves who are the first to notice when something is wrong within the organisation. They report this via a formal reporting channel, such as a hotline (53%), or to someone within the organisation, most often to their direct supervisor (29%), followed by the director or board members (16%), and thirdly to internal audit (14%). Some whistleblowers report through multiple channels. These findings from the ACFE show us that it is very important for organisations that employees can report internally. The sooner incidents are noticed and reported, the sooner they can be addressed and the less damage the organisation will suffer. However, simply having an internal reporting channel and procedure is not enough. More is needed to protect your organisation against integrity violations. 3. Investing in Integrity Pays Off To support employees to report incidents or raise concerns, your organisation must ensure that there are as few barriers as possible and that employees are encouraged to speak up. This starts with building a positive integrity culture. Tony Simons, in his Research on Ethical Management: The High Cost of Low Trust ( 2002), described the positive effects of employees’ trust in the integrity of their managers and, conversely, how damaging it is when that trust is lacking. Ethical leadership leads to more engaged employees, who take fewer sick days, perform better, and speak more positively about their employer. This, in turn, results in higher customer satisfaction and greater profitability. Research by Karin Lasthuizen ( Leading to Integrity: Empirical Research into the Effects of Leadership on Ethics and Integrity , 2008) and Leonie Heres ( Tonen van de Top , 2016) confirms the significant impact of ethical leadership. In the private sector, for example, integrity contributes to the continuity of processes, strengthens trust between business sectors, reduces administrative burdens and enhances corporate reputation. In the public sector , the importance of integrity is often framed in terms of public trust; it contributes to economic growth, legitimacy, social stability, and the quality of public services. In both sectors, an integrity-driven organisational culture boosts employee motivation and engagement. Employees in organisations with a strong integrity culture experience less stress, anxiety, uncertainty, and emotional exhaustion. Moreover, integrity-driven organisations are more attractive to job seekers. Research by the Erasmus Happiness Economics Research Organisation even showed that a government that prioritises integrity and anti-corruption contributes to the well-being of its citizens and, of course, of its own employees. It is therefore fitting that building a culture of integrity and integrity management is receiving increasing attention. However, integrity within organisations does not arise automatically. It requires an integrated and coordinated approach. 4. Integrity Management: A Matter of Culture and Structure Effective integrity management consists of various measures. These contribute to both a culture of integrity and the implementation of appropriate structural safeguards. It is important that these measures reinforce one another and align with the organisation’s culture. An integrity-driven culture reflects the moral values and norms desired by the organisation (and society). These values and norms are expressed through group patterns, collective behaviour, employee attitudes, and shared beliefs. Examples of cultural measures include: values workshops, onboarding and mentoring programs, dilemma training, internal communication, employee satisfaction surveys, and fostering a culture of giving and receiving feedback. To support these, the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority offers various practical tools such as the guidelines: Tips and insights for integrity communication , and Integrity in practice - Towards an ethical culture . Not only does an organisation’s culture influence employee behaviour, organisational structure also plays a key role. Structural measures include, for example, the introduction of procedures and protocols that define how employees should act in certain situations. Just like cultural measures, structural measures guide people’s behaviour. Structural measures may include: laws, codes, and (house) rules; performance standards and reward systems; procedures and protocols; reporting and investigation procedures; physical and digital access rights; allocation of authority; monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. To strengthen structural measures, the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority also provides practical advice in brochures such as The Reporting Procedure and Internal Investigation . In practice, there is a constant interaction between structure (measures) and culture (measures). The structure defines what employees may and may not do in certain situations (according to agreed procedures); the culture ensures that employees actually adhere to these expectations. To help organisations build integrated and coordinated integrity management, the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority developed the Integrity Infrastructure Model (see Figure 2), which consists of seven crucial and interconnected elements. Figure 2: Integrity Infrastructure by the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority The Integrity Infrastructure is also used as a guiding framework for the Integrity Compass ( IntegriteitsWijzer ). This is a free online tool that organisations can use to assess their integrity management and identify the strengths and weaknesses of their approach. After answering 35 questions – covering the seven elements of the Integrity Infrastructure – the organisation receives a customised report with recommendations for further strengthening its integrity management. 5. Successful Reporting The Whistleblowers Protection Act requires organisations with over 50 employees to have an internal reporting procedure. However, simply having a procedure does not guarantee its effective operation. Several conditions contribute to its success. Research by Utrecht University, in collaboration with the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority , provides insight into how interpersonal contacts between those involved play a key role in the successful handling of internal reporting processes. Specifically, organisations must ensure: Social and psychological safety, so that whistleblowers feel safe enough to come forward; A careful and swift procedure, where the involved actors take decisive and visible action; A reporting process that aligns with both written and unwritten agreements, and of course complies with legal requirements; Expert and objective investigators who are also well-intentioned and empathetic, so that the reporter feels seen, heard, and supported; Investment in the knowledge, skills, competencies, and attitudes of the actors involved in the reporting process, such as managers, confidants, investigators, and other integrity actors; A personal approach combined with continuous and timely contact with everyone involved, so they see that active steps are taken and the report is taken seriously; Openness and transparency to ensure it is clear to everyone what information can and cannot be shared and why; Ongoing, up-to-date information about the steps in the process for all involved, so they understand why specific steps are taken and know what the next steps are; Systematic evaluation of reports and reporting processes so that lessons can be learned and the reporting process is continuously improved. 6. In a Nutshell Whistleblowers are crucial for organisations to detect integrity issues and ensure they are addressed promptly. According to ACFE data, employees prefer to report internally. To make this possible, not only is an internal reporting system necessary, but also a positive integrity culture where whistleblowers feel confident that their reports will be handled safely and effectively. At the core lies an integrated and coordinated integrity policy. There are conditions for successful reporting. On one hand, there is a professional, proper, swift, and visible approach that follows established procedures and agreements. On the other hand, there is great attention to transparency and interpersonal contacts between those involved. This strengthens trust that the organisation will handle the report quickly and sincerely. The Dutch Whistleblowers Authority is happy to provide organisations with practical support through various tools and information available on its website .

< Back < Previous | Next > Navigating Geopolitical Risk in a Fractured World Tom Scott 1 Dec 2025 In a global landscape marked by geopolitical tension, regulatory fragmentation and increasingly fragile supply chains, businesses face risks that are more complex – and more consequential – than ever. To explore how organisations can navigate this uncertainty, we spoke with Tobias Wellner, a Senior Analyst at global specialist risk consultancy Control Risks. Navigating Geopolitical Risk in a Fractured World An interview with Tobias Wellner, Senior Analyst, Control Risks In a global landscape marked by geopolitical tension, regulatory fragmentation and increasingly fragile supply chains, businesses face risks that are more complex – and more consequential – than ever. To explore how organisations can navigate this uncertainty, we spoke with Tobias Wellner , a Senior Analyst at global specialist risk consultancy Control Risks . Based in Berlin, Tobias focuses on geopolitics, sanctions, and trade restrictions, drawing on insights from Control Risks’ network of more than 90 analysts worldwide. His perspective is shaped not only by years advising multinational companies, but also by his earlier work in humanitarian aid and peacebuilding – including time spent on the frontlines of the South Sudan conflict – experience that continues to inform his approach to understanding and managing risk today. When we speak of geopolitical risk, which issues should business leaders pay most attention to in today’s environment? Tobias: I see two overarching trends that will shape global business more than anything else. The first is the growth in regulatory complexity. We’re seeing a revival of industrial policy and growing interventionism by governments, particularly in strategic sectors such as tech, defence and renewables. The competition between the US and China is the biggest driver of this: sanctions, tariffs, export controls are being implemented more and more by both sides. Just recently, China expanded export controls on rare earth technologies, and the US expanded its export restriction toolkit. A trade war truce agreed in October will remain fragile, with both sides remaining committed to longer term strategic competition. Their trade restriction measures (often masked as protective actions) will ripple through global supply chains, creating enormous challenges for compliance teams. Companies will need stronger internal capabilities in sanctions, trade controls and regulatory analysis. And this isn’t just about the US and China. As a result of increasing global complexities, we are seeing the rise of the so-called Middle Powers: countries like Mexico, Brazil, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, South Africa, Vietnam and Indonesia. These countries are really stepping up their own regulatory regimes to bolster the growth of their economies. The second trend is the rising disregard for territorial integrity. We are going to see even more regional conflicts. This will have obvious impacts for companies going forward, increasing particularly operational and security risks. Companies will have to make sure their people are safe during war incidents, or how to travel safely, and manage security incidents. Not only will supply chains be impacted, but there will also be greater reputational risks. Employees, investors and the wider society will expect businesses to take clearer stances on conflicts and political issues. How should companies balance the tension between needing to take bold strategic bets in uncertain times and the urge to be overly cautious? Tobias: There’s no clear-cut answer to this formula, but there are a few aspects to consider. First, business decision-makers need a really good inflow of geopolitical risk analysis, rather than today’s newspaper headlines. We often work with companies to develop geopolitical scenarios – each with clear assumptions, indicators and triggers. We are transitioning towards a much more fragmented and flexible trade system, one that’s defined by the diversification of global supply chains. The companies that are going to survive are the ones that can operate across diverging regulatory frameworks and remain agile amidst a growing number of conflicts and regulatory pressures – while finding a balance between cautious and strategic decision-making. Second, companies must move from reactive crisis management to embedded resilience. In practice, this means accepting that volatility is normal rather than exceptional. The shift from ‘just in time’ to ‘just in case’ is real. However, this brings its own risks: if volatility is normalised, then everything is a potential crisis. This, in turn, makes a company’s ability to prioritise, plan and innovate much more difficult. Geopolitical risks and the supply chain – how effective or sustainable are strategies like near-shoring, friend-shoring, and supply chain decoupling? Tobias: Few companies have the ability or willingness to completely decouple for certain markets, such as China. What we see instead is diversification; a mix of near-shoring and friend-shoring combined with multi-route, multi-supplier strategies. After years of disruptions – the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, the Gaza conflict, tariff wars – companies and governments are now pricing in volatility. Supply chain disruptions, extreme weather events, or new tariffs are no longer surprises. They are part of the new operating reality. How can companies sift out the important information in all the noise of this unpredictable world? Tobias: There are a lot of headlines, a lot of noise. Everyone is bombarded with this. You need to listen to the noise, but you also need to learn how to identify the underlying music – the patterns and drivers that matter for your business. Scenario analysis helps. Strong internal compliance teams help. Partnerships with local stakeholders help. But above all, you need a disciplined process for connecting geopolitical developments to business decisions. What shifts in the geopolitical order will most shape global business over the next 5–10 years? Tobias: Three stand out. The first is a more complex, loosely multipolar system. The US is retreating in some areas; China is recalibrating its global engagement; and many regional powers are becoming more assertive. International organisations like the UN will still matter, but mostly as diplomatic forums – not as strong rule-setters. Expect more bilateral deals and regional blocs. The second is a key defining threat, one that we've been talking about for a very long time: climate change. The world in general is just not ready for the fast-paced changes that will come our way from a climate change perspective. I think everyone – companies and societies – should expect much more supply chain disruptions and supply chain shifting because of climate-induced disruptions. Especially, but not exclusively, in emerging markets. And third – on a personal level, I am quite worried about democratic backsliding. This is not just for my own love of democracy, but also from a business point of view. Democratic processes such as elections, institutions, regulatory processes: if these are not transparent anymore, this will disrupt the equal playing field. And that will be harmful for the economy at large. But there is good news too: countries in the Global South are really accelerating the diversification of their trade and foreign relations. This is a response to geopolitical volatility; these countries want to move away from dependence on just the US market, just the EU or China. We will see many more trade links such as the new trade deals between Mexico and Brazil, Vietnam’s outreach to the Global South, or the Gulf States’ massive investments in Africa. This will create opportunities for companies to benefit from these increasing south-south trade corridors. How does your experience in humanitarian aid, conflict analysis and peacebuilding connect with business-focused geopolitical risk? Tobias: I think there are two lessons from the humanitarian world that matter enormously for business. First: local conflict analysis. When you operate in a war zone, understanding your environment is a matter of survival. That same principle applies to global companies. If you don’t truly understand the political, social and security dynamics in the places you operate, you expose your business, your people, and your reputation to unnecessary risk. Second: humanitarian organisations understand that risk can’t be avoided; it can only be managed. For example, my current employer is called Control Risks, not Avoid Risks. The humanitarian sector takes calculated risks based on in-depth situational knowledge. That’s a skill businesses increasingly need. There’s also a deeper connection: peacebuilding strengthens the security environment on which all economic activity depends. And practically, humanitarians often have the best local networks – government, civil society and community leaders. Companies planning new operations can benefit enormously from these local perspectives. If you could offer CEOs one piece of geopolitical advice, what would it be? Tobias: The global operating environment is going to remain unstable and geopolitics won’t become simpler. We are in a transition to a more fragmented, flexible and conflict-prone world. Invest in understanding your operating environment, building strategies for agility, not stability. Control Risks | Global Risk Consultancy

< Back < Previous | Next > What Geopolitical Fragmentation Means for International Business Tom Scott 3 Feb 2026 Geopolitical fragmentation is no longer a risk scenario, it is the operating environment. In our interview, Michael Every unpacks what today’s geopolitical shifts mean for international business, and why companies must rethink strategy, resilience and assumptions. What Geopolitical Fragmentation Means for International Business It has been almost a year since we spoke to Michael Every , Global Strategist in Rabobank’s Global Economics and Markets Division, about the impact of geopolitics on international trade. At the time, his core message was stark: “These are just warning shots of the kind of tectonic shift that is happening.” With the world again struggling to process events in Venezuela, Greenland, Iran and Syria, we returned to Michael to ask what has changed – and what internationally operating businesses should be doing differently. We start the conversation with the topic of geopolitical fragmentation and how businesses should react. Michael is clear in his answer: “I think the first thing that businesses must do is to take 15 minutes out of their busy day to absorb the fact that they are operating within an overarching environment. The foundational pillars of that environment are not the ECB, not EU regulation, not Wall Street; they are the global geostrategic, geopolitical and geoeconomic architecture. If you don’t understand that fundamental architecture, then you don’t fully understand what’s likely to happen to your business.” Fragmentation as the new normal “Businesses have got used to operating within a technocratic, largely transparent and understandable world map,” he explains. This is the predictable and controlled (even well-behaved) rules-based world order – the end of which we have read so much about in the media over the previous year. That this world is likely to disappear is not a new phenomenon, notes Michael. “World orders do collapse. And when they do, in the overwhelming majority of world history, it is when countries put national security ahead of markets.” Historically, territory was the asset deemed worthy of fighting for. “Now it’s commodities: how much oil do you have? How much gas do you have? How much lithium do you have? Power will determine which country or which constellation of countries have access to these critical supply chains.” Europe’s strategic dilemma We are now in a world in which Europe has repeatedly said, ‘we understand – it’s a world of hard power’. However, few of Europe’s actions demonstrate that they actually do understand,” Michael argues. Even with plans to slowly increase military spending to 5% of GDP, “Europe will still be a military minnow compared to America for years.” From his perspective, this has a hard implication for businesses: “If America is now an opponent… America will win every time. Therefore, Europe needs to be pragmatic in terms of what it can do.” Pragmatic action or misplaced expectations? Readers may point to the recent Mercosur and Indian trade deals as examples of such pragmatic action. On Mercosur, it’s fair to say that Michael is not filled with hope: “Especially if you take the Donroe Doctrine into account; I think it's a joke to presume that a piece of paper signed between Mercosur and Europe will be more important than an American aircraft carrier off the coast of Latin America controlling what goes in and what comes out.” And while he finds the EU/India deal genuinely interesting in that it “shows for the first time that Europe is able to do something that America hasn’t”, he has steadfast reservations. “The broader thrust of it is that Europe is going to be importing a whole lot more from India. As such, lots of European industries will suffer from more competition from India.” “This is not just about Trump,” Michael stresses. On the contrary, he adds, there are multiple actors around the world. “And not all of them involve America; other countries are doing things that we tend to overlook. China, for example, which Europe refuses to decouple with and continues to invest in.” The power to change There is light at the end of the tunnel: there is potential for positive action. “The power to change the world lies within European hands. However, I think that Europe has far too much belief in itself, but not enough action. Too much ego and not enough ergo,” states Michael. “From a geostrategic perspective, if Europe implemented the Draghi reforms [referring to the 2024 Draghi report on European economic competitiveness and the future of the European Union], all of which are domestic, Europe would strengthen its hand internationally vastly more than with any deal it can strike with India or anyone else. However, as things are currently structured in terms of strategic autonomy, reducing dependencies, investment and governance reform, nothing in the Draghi report has been addressed.” Strategic advice for businesses We ask Michael the billion-dollar question that geopolitical strategists dread: do you have any advice for internationally operating businesses? He is happy to answer: “Europe’s greatest ability to strengthen itself and to plan long term on an international basis can be achieved by planning better within Europe. If you’re a Dutch business, why are you constantly looking further abroad rather than investing in your own bloc? What can you do with this collection of countries that you have far more in common with than others?” His final point brings the conversation full circle: back to fragmentation, and the balance between risks and opportunities. “The fragmentation process has a great deal further to run,” Michael concludes. “Venezuela was just one example. If Cuba falls this year, it’ll be another. What if the Iranian regime were to fall – and suddenly a new market of 90 million people opens up?” For businesses, the message is not to freeze, but to adapt. “The world is changing – bringing great risks, but also great opportunities. And with that, businesses need to be the change they want to see in the world.”