The Contribution of Sustainable Human Resource Management to International Trade Governance

Abstract

In the last 30 years, many scholars have proposed multilevel regulatory systems that go beyond the mere management of duties, tariffs, and non-tariff barriers, seeking instead to promote ethical, environmental, and social principles in international trade. A literature review shows that no detailed studies have examined whether, or how, sustainable human resource management (SHRM) practices can contribute to the development of effective international trade governance models. The role of human resource management (HRM) in major international trade agreements proposed by the World Trade Organization, USA, and EU is analyzed and discussed. Adopting a narrative review method, this study formulates and discusses six propositions on the potential contribution of SHRM practices to enhancing the effectiveness of international trade governance. A model to carry out a construct and criterion validation of such SHRM practices to increase the efficacy of international trade governance is proposed. Finally, critical issues arising from the constraints imposed by the current international context—marked by high levels of uncertainty and conflict—are analyzed. This analysis provides a realistic assessment of the actual contribution of SHRM practices to the effective governance of international trade.

1. Introduction

In the last 30 years, many scholars have shown a growing interest in analyzing international trade governance models designed to efficiently regulate the flow of goods and services between countries with increasing capacity.

The research conducted focused on the most diverse topics, including the following: (a) the transformations that are affecting the traditional global value chain (GVC) models due to the decline of U.S. consensus and the corresponding consolidation of new centers of political and economic power, most notably China [1]; (b) the role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) models in reshaping the strategies and operating methods by which companies govern their GVC processes [2]; (c) the effectiveness of international governance models at addressing the main environmental issues [3]; (d) the contribution offered by a bundle of administrative law practices to making supranational governance models more effective [4]; (e) the shift from the Neoliberal to Geoeconomic paradigm in the international trade and investment sector [5].

The interest of scholars in international trade governance is unsurprising, as effective governance regulates economic relations between countries by promoting fair, predictable, and advantageous trade, reducing the likelihood of conflicts and ensuring equitable treatment among parties. This is particularly relevant in a context of growing economic interdependence and, more recently (from 2022 to the present), the occurrence of global events capable of redrawing the economic, political, and social scenarios in which international trade actors operate. Notable examples include the coronavirus pandemic, the war between Russia and Ukraine—with the indirect involvement of all European countries and the USA—and the conflict between Israel and several Middle Eastern countries (the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, the West Bank, and, most recently, Iran), with direct U.S. involvement in Iran.

In a global context currently characterized by chaos and uncertainty, it is reassuring to know that multilevel regulatory systems for international trade are in place that are not only limited to the mere management of duties, tariffs, and non-tariff barriers but that also encompass the promotion of ethical, environmental, and social principles. Once the acute phase of a systemic, global crisis has passed, these systems can facilitate the difficult process of “normalizing” international and commercial relations between states.

Looking at the literature produced in the last fifteen years, it becomes evident that studies are beginning to be published which examine some of the most widely adopted international standards promoting sustainable human resource management in the international trade sector. More specifically, scholars have focused their analyses on the relationships between international trade and the following standards: corporate social responsibility (CSR) [6,7,8,9,10,11]; Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) [8,12,13]; the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) [14,15]; Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) [16,17,18,19]. Although these standards consider sustainable human resource management as an essential dimension for effective international trade governance, to date, no study has explored in detail whether or how sustainable human resource management practices contribute to the development of more effective international trade governance models. A search on the Scopus and Clarivate platforms (by title, abstract, and keywords) of the terms Governance AND “International Trade” AND Sustainable AND “Human Resource Management”; Governance AND “International Trade” AND Sustainable AND “Human Resource”; Governance AND “Global Trade” AND Sustainable AND “Human Resource Management”; Governance AND “Global Trade” AND Sustainable AND “Human Resource”; Governance AND “Value Chains” AND Sustainable AND “Human Resource Management”; Governance AND “Value Chains” AND Sustainable AND “Human Resource” did not return any article or review focused on this topic. In short, the research conducted so far has not adequately and strategically explored the relationships between the development of effective models of international trade governance and the sustainable management of human resources. The aim of this study is to address this gap by suggesting some propositions on the contribution that sustainable human resource management can offer to the development of international trade governance.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Sustainable Development

The United Nations is one of the most active organizations in combating environmental degradation and all forms of social inequality. In 1987, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) published a report in which the concept of sustainable development was introduced for the first time, at least in its modern sense. This report—known in history as the “Brundtland Report” (from the name of the president of the aforementioned commission)—emphasized how the use of the planet’s resources must adhere to the principle of intergenerational equity, which establishes that development is sustainable only if the satisfaction of the present needs do not compromise the ability to satisfy the needs of future generations [20]. Although the Brundtland Report focused solely on the environmental dimension, a sustainability model gradually emerged that interprets the actions of human beings and organizations as capable of impacting three distinct dimensions (Triple Bottom-Line): profit, the environment, and people [21]. It was therefore understood that sustainability is a multidimensional concept that requires attention not only to the economic consequences (profit) of human action but also to the impact that such action produces at the environmental level—for example, through increased pollution rates or the depletion of natural resources for future generations—and at the social level—for instance, affecting people’s health and safety. Over time, the literature has explored the topic of SHRM by introducing models that, although distinct in their primary focuses and strategies adopted—including Green HRM [22,23], Socially Responsible HRM [24,25,26], Triple Bottom-Line HRM [21,22,23,24,25,26,27], and Common-Good HRM [28,29]—share a common commitment to the sustainable development of both the company and human resources. In this perspective, due attention must also be given to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) formulated by the United Nations, which represent the most difficult global challenges to overcome, despite being universally accepted [30]. In recent years, scholars have created several connections between SHRM and the SDGs of the 2030 Agenda, increasingly highlighting the strategic role that HRM policies designed in line with the principles of sustainability can play in achieving some SDGs, such as gender equality, decent work, reductions in inequalities, and access to quality education [31,32,33].

2.2. Sustainable Human Resource Management

Sustainable human resource management (SHRM) is an area of research and study that focuses on the impact of organizational actions and corporate policies in human resource management on workers, redefining the way of conceiving the relationship between organizations and people.

Given that scholars’ interest in the “human factor” in organizational contexts dates back to the early twentieth century, with the pioneering works of Elton Mayo and the birth of the human relations movement, the key aspect highlighted by the sustainable approach to human resource management is the need for organizations to move beyond the simple pursuit of individual and organizational efficiency and productivity. Instead, they must integrate the fundamental principles of sustainable development into HRM policies to balance economic results, respect for the environment, and the social impact of the company on all its stakeholders, both internal and external, while ensuring that this balance is maintained in the long term [34]. Topics such as well-being and professional development, equity, social responsibility, organizational justice, inclusion, workplace health, and talent valorization have become cardinal points of this new cultural orientation, which does not hesitate to highlight the social costs generated by HRM practices solely focused on the short term [35,36]. From this perspective, the relationship that the company builds with the time factor represents a crucial dimension for a realistic application of SHRM models.

Some of the research highlights how investment in SHRM reduces costs related to turnover, absenteeism, and the management of intraorganizational conflicts—phenomena that, if not adequately managed, can quickly lead to reduced levels of productivity and difficulties in fostering innovation and attracting talent [35,36,37]. Human capital must be interpreted as a key stakeholder whose well-being, development, and involvement are intrinsically connected to the success of the organization and the entire society in the long term rather than as a mere resource to be exploited [37,38]. Those working in the HRM sector must set objectives for people that are not only sustainable but also capable of generating sustainability through a multi-stakeholder, multilevel, and collaborative approach [39].

2.3. Strategic HRM vs. Sustainable HRM

Of great interest is the distinction between strategic HRM (S-HRM) and sustainable HRM (SHRM). While sustainable HRM focuses on the ability of personnel management policies and practices to generate sustainable development, strategic HRM centers on the contribution that human resource management can offer to allow a company to successfully pursue its business strategy [40]. In fact, many scholars who have studied the strategic approach to human resource management have sought to understand how HRM practices can better help an organization to achieve its strategic objectives and desired levels of organizational performance, and to consolidate its competitive advantage over competitors [41,42,43,44]. The SHRM model instead emphasizes that HRM policies and practices must be designed and implemented not only to successfully pursue the corporate strategy—a factor that remains critically important—but also to satisfy the needs of all the organization’s stakeholders, both internal and external. This contributes to increasing productivity and innovation [37,45], organizational resilience [46], and corporate reputation [47].

Ultimately, balancing economic performance, environmental responsibility, and social justice through sustainable human resource management is far more than a response to external pressures; it is a real art. It represents the natural evolution of the traditional business model, a model capable of navigating the complexity and uncertainty of the contemporary world precisely because it has the courage to put people and their development at the center of every strategy. It is an investment in the future and for the future. All this requires a real metamorphosis for the HRM sector, which must transform itself into a promoter of a new organizational culture based on social responsibility and integral sustainability.

3. Methodology

As noted in the Introduction, a review of the literature shows a clear gap in the studies analyzing the nature of the relationship between SHRM and international trade governance. The author has therefore adopted a narrative review model to explore these relationships. This approach allows for the analysis of a topic that, by its very nature, requires an interdisciplinary research model to be adopted and remains underexplored in the literature. This review examined papers published in journals listed by Scopus and Clarivate (Web of Science) using the following keywords: “Human Resource Management”; Governance; “International Trade; “Sustainable Development”; Sustainability; “Global Chains”. This process allowed us to identify the papers included in this research. More specifically, the literature screening criteria were based on the following parameters: publication date—papers published from 2000 to 2025 (with a few exceptions due to their particular relevance); study design—all designs (qualitative and quantitative); methodology—all methodologies; population—all populations; relevance to research question—articles and reviews that the author judged most closely aligned with the review goals; language—papers published in English; and type of paper—articles and reviews published in high-impact scientific journals.

Given that, in a narrative review, it is possible to modify the search strategy of the articles to be included during the course of the research based on emerging findings, the author constantly evaluated the opportunity to include additional papers that, although not initially selected by the Scopus and Clarivate platforms, were deemed highly relevant for a rigorous analysis of the research object. For example, papers relating to the indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of the governance of international trade were added only at a later stage. More specifically, after an introduction to the topic under study, the author carried out a literature analysis on the topic of SHRM. The subsequent analysis of the literature on international trade governance and sustainable development revealed studies that addressed the contribution of SHRM practices to governance only superficially and often indirectly. Such research was primarily focused on the relationship between the main international standards on sustainable development (CSM, ESG, GRI, GHRM) and international trade, without adopting a strategic approach to examining the role of SHRM practices in enhancing the governance capacity to better regulate international trade. We then proceeded to identify the contribution of HRM expressly referred to in the main agreements and formally declared strategies—such as the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. This analysis revealed that, apart from HRM practices expressly aimed at generic respect for human rights and working conditions, these agreements do not acknowledge the usefulness of HRM practices in promoting the governance of international trade. We then analyzed the contribution indirectly offered by SHRM practices to making international trade governance more functional; however, this section was not included in the literature analysis, as the considerations made were the result of the author’s interpretative work. This allowed us to identify six SHRM practices that most frequently emerged—albeit indirectly—from this analysis. Propositions were then formulated regarding the contribution that such SHRM practices could offer to improve the effectiveness of international trade governance. Finally, a model was proposed to carry out a construct validation of such SHRM practices. This research concludes with a critical discussion of the constraints imposed by an international context characterized by high levels of uncertainty and conflict, which limit realistic contributions of SHRM practices to effective international trade governance.

4. The Role of Human Resources in the Main International Trade Agreements

Over time, various agreements have been drafted to regulate international trade between countries. This section analyzes how each of these agreements refers—directly or indirectly—to the issue of human resource management.

4.1. Agreements Promoted by the World Trade Organization

The World Trade Organization (WTO) has drafted several multilateral agreements to regulate trade between nations. Specifically, the WTO has produced the following four agreements: the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), and the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA).

4.1.1. GATT

The GATT is a historic agreement on trade in goods between countries and, in fact, has little direct connection to human resource management. Its primary objective is to promote the free exchange of goods by reducing tariff and non-tariff barriers. However, upon closer inspection, there are indirect links between the rules underlying such exchanges and the way in which companies engaged in international trade must manage human resources. For example, the GATT explicitly refers to the importance of liberalizing international trade, which generates—through an avalanche effect—global competition. The market opening promoted by the GATT can compel companies to review their structures or organizational cultures, relocate departments or entire functions, convert factories, and retrain personnel who risk falling behind rapidly evolving technological development. In such a context characterized by significant change, human resource managers must act as facilitators of organizational learning processes. That is, they must strengthen their company capabilities for detecting weak signals of market change, anticipating major trends, including regulatory ones. To adequately support these processes, HR personnel must conduct interviews, redesign careers, and manage the exit of employees who no longer have a place in the company while maintaining constructive dialogue with unions.

4.1.2. GATS

While the GATT only indirectly addresses human resource management, the GATS has had a much more significant impact on how companies engaged in international trade design their human resource management policies. The reason is straightforward: in the world of services, people ARE the product. Consider the issue of international staff mobility. When a company sends a consultant from Milan to Mumbai for six months, or transfers a team of engineers to Canada, a wide range of tasks must be managed—from obtaining visas to tailoring employment contracts according to the tax regulations of the destination country. The HR expert becomes a tightrope walker, navigating different regulations and pay packages that reflect the cost of living in vastly different geographical contexts while also preparing employees to work and live in unfamiliar sociocultural environments without losing their connection to the corporate culture. With the market liberalization in the tertiary sector promoted by the GATS, the competition for talent has intensified. Companies must seek candidates with hyper-specialized skills that are marketable from New York to Singapore. Recruiters can no longer rely solely on local talent pools; they must build global networks to optimize recruitment processes, compete with multinationals to retain high-potential workers, and navigate the complexities of the cross-border recognition of qualifications. Transparency has also become an issue of primary concern. The GATS requires countries to make their labor regulations transparent. For multinational companies, this means that they can no longer operate in regulatory grey areas. HR professionals must act as organizational chameleons, adapting company policies to varying cross-border regulations while always respecting fundamental workers’ rights—a delicate balance between flexibility and ethical principles. The GATS also facilitates outsourcing processes; for example, a German insurance company can relocate its customer service to Portugal or purchase accounting services from India. For human resources, this entails managing personnel with a level of complexity previously unimaginable. Work teams may need to be reorganized, professional roles redefined to meet changing needs, and unions engaged to explain why certain business functions should be performed abroad through consultancy contracts with other companies. This transformation in HRM processes has turned HR managers into global-scale directors, capable of building bridges between diverse systems and designing careers for professionals who move rapidly across countries. In this services market, people—with their skills and mobility—become the true currency of exchange. It is a challenging role, requiring exceptional adaptability, but one that is essential for competing in the arena of international trade.

4.1.3. TRIPS

Contrary to common belief, the TRIPS agreement on copyright and patents is not solely a matter for legal professionals. This agreement is revolutionizing the way in which companies manage their talents, especially in industrial sectors where the quintessential intangible resources are more valuable than the tangible assets. A central issue is the management and protection of intellectual capital. TRIPS obliges companies to safeguard intellectual property to foster innovation and technology transfer and encourage related investments. In practical terms, this requires HR departments to develop policies that address complex challenges, such as determining patent ownership, designing fair innovation reward systems, and incorporating appropriate confidentiality clauses into employment contracts. One of the most delicate matters involves the potential conflicts between the rights of the company and those of employees who generate innovation through personal creative initiative. The HR function must therefore design models in which companies and employees perceive each other as partners rather than adversaries in legal disputes. The legal protection of intellectual property—firmly anchored in the knowledge and skills of employees—elevates corporate training into a strategic lever for enhancing competitiveness. HR professionals must create career paths and systems for managing and disseminating knowledge that enable every professional to become a “guardian and disseminator of knowledge”, as well as supported ongoing training and sophisticated models of organizational learning and knowledge management. Finally, there remains the pressing issue of protecting trade secrets. The TRIPS agreement establishes strong barriers against information leaks. In everyday practice, this means that those who manage personnel must be able to draft stringent confidentiality policies, provide ongoing training to the workforce on handling sensitive data, and design security systems that take into account individual behaviors and perceptions. In creativity-intensive sectors—pharmaceuticals, tech, fashion—managing recruitment and selection processes becomes a genuine treasure hunt. The HR function is constantly engaged in searching for professional profiles (competency systems) capable of innovating within hyper-regulated environments. Retaining such talents requires adopting human resource management policies that include tailor-made remuneration systems, launching stimulating projects that capture workers, and building work environments where hard-earned know-how does not easily migrate to competitors. In a knowledge economy, managing people means managing the most valuable asset. The rules on intellectual property protection have transformed personnel offices from administrators to guardians of knowledge, architects of innovation, and mediators between opposing interests.

4.1.4. GPA

The GPA on public procurement is not just a system of rules that a company must comply with to call for or participate in a public procurement. Reading between the lines of the system of rules referred to in this agreement, it emerges that it has started a silent earthquake capable of shaking the foundations of the traditional human resource management models. A public administration interested in announcing a tender must guarantee absolute compliance with the principles of transparency, non-discrimination, and equal treatment of participants. However, a company interested in participating in public tenders announced by other countries often finds itself facing a real legal labyrinth. It is necessary to have experienced experts, including lawyers who know every significant contractual nuance, project managers who master the complex procedures governed by the tender notices, and procurement specialists attentive to national and international regulations on anti-corruption and conflicts of interest. The shock waves of these new imperatives arrive directly at the personnel offices of both public administrations (the contracting authorities) and the companies interested in participating in the public tender. Consider the specialized expertise required for a company to participate in a public tender. The human resource function assumes a pivotal role in assembling multidisciplinary teams capable of proficiently managing the diverse functional areas involved, ranging from legal and financial departments to technical and research and development sectors. This necessitates continuous investment in corporate training, as well as the advancement of knowledge management and organizational learning frameworks, whilst concurrently ensuring the retention of talent adept at navigating this complex domain. As already underlined, when it comes to public procurement, transparency is not optional. The GPA imposes strict rules against any form of discrimination or opacity in tenders, thereby shaping the manner in which public administrations administer their internal processes. The human resources —and company management more broadly—must continuously foster a culture of transparency permeating every level of the organization. This commitment is crucial, as audits require concrete evidence that transparency and equal treatment are not mere slogans but embedded daily practices. Additionally, companies securing international public procurement face unique challenges: rapidly recruiting qualified personnel, managing transnational teams, and ensuring compliance with diverse regulatory frameworks. The HRM function must develop flexible solutions, stipulate adaptable contracts, implement protections for employees abroad, and oversee business travels with transparent budgets—balancing agility with regulatory compliance. Consequently, ethical organizational management emerges as a critical determinant of success within this specific business segment. The GPA was designed to combat corruption and promote integrity in public procurement management. For companies, this necessitates establishing strict ethical codes of conduct, ensuring continuous training in antitrust and anti-corruption policies, and implementing internal mechanisms to prevent conflicts of interest while promoting organizational citizenship behaviors. In this perspective, HR personnel end up becoming guardians of organizational justice, encouraging employees to identify ethical ambiguities and document actions thoroughly to avoid any appearance of impropriety. In recent years, the corporate sustainability movement has increasingly influenced public procurement regulated by the GPA, with more tenders incorporating incentives for companies that uphold environmental standards and workers’ rights. To qualify for these rewards, companies must demonstrate fair wage practices, promote diversity, and combat worker exploitation. For the HRM function, this entails certifying inclusive policies, measuring the social impact of their organizational action, and developing management models that are both competitive and respectful of human rights. Although the GPA does not explicitly address human resource management, it has fundamentally transformed its role. HR professionals in companies operating within the public sector are no longer mere administrators but custodians of legality and corporate ethics. Transparency, ethical conduct, and competence have thus become essential prerequisites for any company aspiring to compete in this field.

4.2. Agreements Promoted by the United States

The USMCA, which connects the United States, Mexico, and Canada, is not merely an update of the former NAFTA; rather, it represents a quiet revolution fundamentally altering the framework for managing personnel within companies operating across North America. Unlike past trade agreements, this pact places workers’ rights and working conditions at its core, establishing clear and enforceable obligations rather than mere recommendations. These include the protection of freedom of association, the right to collective bargaining, and stringent measures against child labor and discrimination. For multinational corporations, this shift necessitates a thorough revision of internal regulations, hiring policies, and codes of ethics across all partner countries. HR professionals, in turn, become the daily guarantors of these principles, tasked with ensuring their consistent application—from factories in Mexico to offices in Canada. One of the most significant innovations of the USMCA in terms of human resource management is the “Rapid Response Labor Mechanism”. This provision empowers auditors to initiate immediate inspections of individual companies accused of labor rights violations. As a result, HR departments are compelled to implement proactive monitoring systems, manage real-time reporting, and promptly address any issues before they threaten export activities. In this context, a single error today can halt production tomorrow. For the automotive industry, the rules are even more stringent: the USMCA mandates that a significant portion of vehicles must be manufactured in factories where the hourly wage is not below a certain threshold. Consequently, companies can no longer exploit wage disparities aggressively between countries. The HR function must reassess pay policies, harmonize wages across factories, and mitigate social tensions. Professional training assumes a strategic role, as companies are compelled to invest in reskilling programs to equip workers with the skills needed to operate advanced technologies. Once again, HR is tasked with leading this transition, turning workforce development into a competitive advantage. Furthermore, sustainability is a core priority under the USMCA, which encourages companies to build inclusive and safe work environments that respect the regulatory diversity of the three partner countries. Human resources must actively demonstrate respect for union rights, prevent abuses, and translate the principles of the treaty into measurable behaviors. Under the USMCA framework, therefore, human resource management becomes the strategic linchpin maintaining competitiveness in a North American market where trade and labor rights are increasingly aligned. Companies that fail to modernize their human resource management practices risk significantly diminishing their ability to compete in this vital market.

4.3. Agreements Promoted by the European Union

The European Union does not rely on a rigid agreement model to regulate international trade with third countries; instead, it has developed guiding principles that inform the drafting of international trade agreements. These principles are reflected in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), which aim to ensure that agreements between the EU and third countries uphold the Union’s political priorities and founding values. Recent agreements signed by the European Union with Singapore, Korea, and Vietnam and the 2017 Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with Canada explicitly emphasize the role of international trade in promoting sustainable economic development. More specifically, these agreements include sections dedicated to the roles of social justice, respect for human rights, maintenance of high labor standards, and environmental protection as integral to sustainable economic development. While each agreement is tailored to respect the unique characteristics and geopolitical context of the partner country, they all adhere to a common framework for all agreements grounded in these fundamental values.

The European Union thus demonstrates a strong commitment to establishing a flexible yet coherent regulatory framework as an essential basis for good governance of international trade. This legal architecture skillfully balances economic interests and fundamental and constitutive values of the European Union itself, positioning the Union as a reference point for those who advocate for international trade based on clear rules, a strong propensity towards environmental sustainability, and respect for human dignity. When engaging with the countries of Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific (the so-called “ACP” countries), the EU’s short-term interest in market access is secondary to fostering sustainable development. The governance mechanisms embedded in these agreements aim to stimulate economic growth and regional integration in partner countries. Within these agreements, trade union freedom, collective bargaining, the fight against child labor and all forms of discrimination, the protection of diversity and gender equality, and the promotion of organizational well-being evolve from aspirational ideals into binding obligations for companies seeking to operate in these markets. Practically, this requires companies in countries with less developed labor protections to align their personnel and labor policies with these higher standards. Consequently, the HR sector thus finds itself acting as a “guarantor” of compliance with these principles by integrating them into every practice of the human resource life cycle, from selection to career management—from recruitment and career development to training, reward management, transparent contracting, and the promotion of equal opportunities for all workers—regardless of their gender, ethnicity, religion, or social background.

The impact of these agreements on staff training, though often indirect, is nonetheless significant. Operating in increasingly open and competitive international markets compels companies to develop a robust skill set that distinguishes them from their competitors. As a result, multinational corporations are encouraged to invest in training programs and establish knowledge management and socialization systems. HRM experts thus become architects of intercultural professional development, tasked with identifying and leveraging opportunities created by new trade agreements. Moreover, technical cooperation projects—built on partnerships aimed at developing local competencies—facilitate the transfer of know-how between EU workers and those from third countries. Some agreements, such as the CETA, further address the recognition of professional qualifications by enabling certain professional associations to negotiate the mutual recognition of the profession and related qualifications. In cases where qualification recognition is not automatic, the HR sector must be able to identify, evaluate, and certify the skills acquired abroad and design integration pathways that capitalize on these “hybrid” qualifications, which is not only an opportunity to attract talent but also a challenge for standardizing the procedures for recognizing and certifying skills. The commercial opening offered by such agreements can not only create new businesses and new jobs but, at the same time, can also put some traditional sectors into crisis. The employment impact of such models of international trade governance is perhaps one of the most delicate aspects to address. Human resource managers play a pivotal role in this difficult game, guiding companies though complex processes, such as corporate restructuring and the retraining of redundant workers, while maintaining continuous dialogue with unions to facilitate the transition towards sustainable business models. In this capacity, the human resource sector is a crucial link between the foundational principles and values of the European Union and the practical realities faced by economic actors. It shapes work environments that uphold 0human dignity through comprehensive programs aimed at transforming corporate culture. Consequently, intercultural leadership, change management, and union mediation emerge as essential competencies for companies striving to remain competitive in the turbulent waters of contemporary international trade.

Two recent strategies adopted by the European Union deserve careful consideration, as they contribute to further defining the role of sustainable human resource management as a vital policy instrument for fostering sustainable economic development. The 2021 strategy, titled “Open, Sustainable and Assertive Trade Policy”, alongside the 2024 EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), place sustainable human resource management at the heart of corporate obligations. These documents represent an attempt to recalibrate the EU’s approach to international trade by integrating the principles of open markets, environmental and social sustainability, and sustainability due diligence. Within this conceptual framework, sustainable human resource management is explicitly evoked. For instance, the strategy places strong emphasis on social sustainability, establishing a framework in which respect for workers’ rights and adherence to International Labour Organization (ILO) standards are non-negotiable. Consequently, the social clauses included in the trade agreements signed by the parties are becoming increasingly stringent, forcing European and third-country companies (that is, companies that do not have their registered offices in EU countries) to review, where necessary, their HRM policies to guarantee fair working conditions, full trade union freedom, and strict compliance with gender equality and health and safety requirements at work. Human resource managers are tasked with operationalizing these obligations across all HR functions, including recruitment, training, compensation systems, and industrial relations.

But there is more. These documents invite companies to monitor the entire production chain. Through the CSDDD, the EU emphasizes the critical importance for companies to conduct systematic due diligence on human rights and working conditions across their entire value chain, including their suppliers and subcontractors. The directive, in fact, requires rigorous assessments of labor practices in all operational locations. This compels companies to identify risks related to forced labor, child exploitation, compromised health and safety standards, discrimination, restrictions on union activities and collective bargaining, and adherence to minimum wage laws. The most relevant issue of the directive is the direct responsibility it places on companies to ensure compliance with fundamental rights by the conventions of the ILO and European Social Charter throughout their value chains. For the HR management sector, this means creating new procedures useful for data collection, monitoring working conditions in geographically distant locations, drafting reports, and addressing any identified violations of the directive. HR experts thereby assume the roles of ethical code architects, social auditors, and managers of continuous-improvement initiatives—becoming true custodians of corporate sustainability. HRM policies must also strive to foster inclusive work environments, where empowerment programs, flexible contract models, and corporate welfare systems customized to workers’ needs represent the operational outcomes.

Finally, the directive strongly emphasizes meaningful stakeholder involvement, prioritizing workers and unions. Consulting stakeholders is no longer merely a best practice but a mandatory obligation, requiring companies to actively involve them in process management risk identification, corrective action development, and evaluations of the effectiveness of implemented measures. Last but not least, the directive obliges companies to create safe and accessible complaint channels that enable workers, unions, or local communities to report potential abuses without fear of retaliation. The correct management of these channels lies with the HRM sector, which must establish procedures that ensure confidentiality, conduct thorough analyses of reported issues, and implement appropriate corrective measures. Companies that fail to comply with these obligations face severe sanctions and potential compensation claims. From the above, it is evident that these trade agreements, originally designed to regulate commerce, have progressively become catalysts for a quiet revolution that has profoundly affected the human resource management sector. In a world where trade borders are falling, the real challenge lies in building bridges between different societies, cultures, and economies, starting from the people who animate them. Both companies and institutions are called upon to translate the principles of equity, social justice, and inclusion into concrete behaviors, elevating individuals from mere professional resources to active drivers of sustainable development.

Table 1. The key role of human resource management in the main international trade agreements.

Agreement	Promoter	Key Role of Human Resource Management	Description	Impact of HRM at the Operational Level
GATT	WTO	Facilitator of organizational adaptation	Indirect but crucial role in managing the impact of competition on organizational structure and staff skills	- Staff retraining - Management of restructuring/offshoring - Union mediation during changes - Anticipating market and regulatory trends
GATS	WTO	Global mobility and talent manager	Central to the people-intensive nature of our services, with a focus on mobility and multilevel compliance	- International transfer management (visas, contracts) - Transnational recruiting - Adaptation of HR policies to local regulations - Outsourcing - Intercultural training
TRIPS	WTO	“Guardian” of intellectual capital	Protecting intellectual property by building a link between innovation and employee retention and training policies	- Patent/trade secret protection policies - Innovation incentive systems - Specialized training - Recruitment of high-tech talent - Mediation of conflicts between creativity and corporate rights
GPA	WTO	Guarantor of competence and ethics in procurement	Evaluation and development of staff’s technical (tenders) and ethical (anti-corruption) skills, with an emphasis on certifiable transparency models	- Establishment of multidisciplinary teams for tenders - Compliance/anti-corruption training - Management of transnational contracts - Certification of inclusive policies - Monitoring of transparency
USMCA	USA	Implementer of binding international labor standards	Introduces sanctionable constraints on workers’ rights, adopting internal enforcement policies	- Alignment of remuneration policies - Monitoring of union rights - Reskilling training - Management of rapid review mechanisms (Rapid Response) - Prevention of discrimination
FTA/EPA, CSDDD	EU	Integration of sustainability and human rights	Broad integration of social/environmental values into binding clauses, expanding the role of human resource management as a “guarantor of sustainability” along the entire value chain	- Adoption of ILO standards across the global supply chain - Human rights due diligence - Gender inclusion/equality policies - Complaint channel management - Intercultural training - Professional retraining - Adoption of ILO standards across the global supply chain - Human rights due diligence - Gender inclusion/equality policies - Complaint channel management - Intercultural training - Professional retraining

shows the key role played by HRM in the main international trade agreements.

However, the role formally assigned to human resource management within these agreements or directives is solely attributable to respect for the fundamental rights enshrined in the ILO conventions and the European Social Charter, without explicit recognition of the broader contribution that sustainable human resource management can make to enhancing the effectiveness of the governance of international trade. Furthermore, many of the sustainable human resource management policies indicated in the context of various trade agreements or strategies are only indirectly referenced rather than explicitly identified as foundational elements of a new governance of international trade.

5. Sustainable Human Resource Management for Effective International Trade Governance

In light of the analysis of the role attributed—whether directly or indirectly—to human resource management in international trade agreements and strategies, it is reasonable to affirm that SHRM represents a fundamental pillar for effective international trade governance. In an increasingly interconnected economy, where value chains cross numerous countries and involve many actors (stakeholders), promoting the adoption of SHRM models can enhance predictability and fairness in trade, particularly through their capacity to secure legitimacy and strengthen the reputations of adopting companies [31,34]. It is therefore essential to identify and describe which sustainable human resource management practices can most effectively contribute to the sound governance of international trade.

5.1. Propositions About the Contribution of SHRM Practices to International Trade Governance

The considerations made so far allow for the formulation of a series of propositions about the role of SHRM practices in contributing to the effectiveness of international trade governance. Based on the analysis of the literature on SHRM and international trade governance, the following appear to be the practices most likely to exert positive impacts on the quality and effectiveness of such governance (

Table 2. The six propositions and their impacts on some indicators of international trade governance effectiveness.

Focus of the Proposition	Description of the Proposition	Impact of the SHRM Policy on Some Indicators (or Its Direct Determinants) of Effectiveness of International Trade Governance
1. Adoption of rigorous standards on human rights and working conditions	SHRM encourages companies to adopt rigorous standards on workers’ human rights and working conditions throughout the entire value chain, using transparent “social due diligence” models to prevent disputes and trade sanctions arising from violations in these areas—for example, reductions in disputes at the WTO Dispute Settlement Body.	- Prevention of customs embargoes - Stabilization of trade flows through alignment with “trade and labor” clauses - Reduction in NGO campaigns damaging to the company’s reputation - Prevention of transnational boycotts and import restrictions - Reputational protection in risky sectors (for example, textiles and extractives) by avoiding ethical scandals
2. Development of distinctive staff skills on sustainable international trade development	SHRM encourages companies to develop distinctive skills in their staff in the field of the sustainable development of international trade and to facilitate the definition of complex environmental clauses within the trade agreements to be signed, such as those referring to circular economy models. These skills, by influencing the organizational behavior of staff, contribute to consolidating the company’s reputational balance by facilitating the development of its commercial infrastructures thanks to preferential access to financing provided by institutions such as the World Bank.	- Return on investments in green reskilling for compliance with environmental protection mechanisms - Reduction in non-tariff barriers linked to environmental standards - Facilitation in the application of circular economy criteria - Preferential access to financing for sustainable commercial infrastructures - Increase in co-financing for SDG 8 aligned projects - Reduction in geopolitical risks in strategic corridors
3. Alignment of remuneration policies with recognized international standards	SRHM encourages companies to align their remuneration policies along the entire value chain with internationally recognized standards—such as the Fair Wage Network Index—in order to prevent disputes, accusations of adopting wage dumping practices, and accusations of promoting the distortion of competition. Furthermore, SHRM encourages companies to adopt sustainability metrics in reward systems, aligning the incentive system with the objectives of the 2030 Agenda.	- Neutralization of accusations of social dumping, often the cause of disputes - Transnational wage harmonization in order to prevent competitive distortions - Compliance with wage clauses defined in agreements - Alignment of managerial incentives with 2030 Agenda objectives - Increase in cross-border partnerships for companies with integrated ESG KPIs - Support for the implementation of continental agreements
4. Personnel training on the issues of cultural intelligence, transparency, and social reporting	SHRM encourages companies to implement staff training programs focused on cultural intelligence, transparency, and social reporting. Developing the ability to interpret complex sociocultural and geopolitical dynamics reduces the failure likelihood of trade negotiations—particularly in emerging markets characterized by high political and social instability—and contributes to ensuring the greater continuity of global supply chains.	- Reduction in negotiation failures in unstable emerging markets - Acceleration of government authorizations for joint ventures - Stabilization of investments in critical regions (such as the Sahel or the Horn of Africa) - Facilitated access to supranational initiatives (e.g., EU’s Global Gateway) - Support for continuity in global supply chains
5. Adoption of diversity and inclusion policies	SHRM encourages companies to implement certified diversity and inclusion policies capable of functioning as a “relational passport” for the most complex trade negotiations that risk failing due to mere misunderstandings, thereby reducing asymmetries of trust with local stakeholders.	- Reduction in asymmetries of trust with local stakeholders - Facilitated access to markets characterized by high cultural sensitivity - Prevention of failure negotiations due to misunderstandings between parties
6. Hiring purpose-driven talent	SHRM encourages companies to recruit, hire, and train purpose-driven talent, individuals who demonstrate a motivation to work anchored in a genuine desire to contribute to generating sustainable development.	- Increase in sustainable patents - Diversification of exports to circumvent protectionist barriers - Compliance with advanced regulations on sustainable development (e.g., the EU Taxonomy Regulation) through technological innovation

).

Proposition 1 (P1).

An effective international trade governance system must ensure that companies adopt rigorous standards on human rights and working conditions along the entire value chain.

This first proposition—explicitly reflected in various international trade agreements—concerns the adoption by companies engaged in international trade of internationally recognized human rights standards, applied across the entire value chain. Such standards include compliance with ILO conventions, encompassing the prohibition of forced and child labor, the rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining, and the principle of non-discrimination. Equally important is the requirement for companies to adopt a proactive approach to ensuring that these rights are upheld throughout their value chains. The consistent application of these principles serves as a true form of transnational governance, helping companies to mitigate reputational risks, avoid legal disputes, and prevent conflicts with local stakeholders. Within this scenario, the human resource sector assumes a central regulatory function, including direct oversight of the value chain actors. This approach helps to prevent sanctions arising from human rights violations. Aligning HMR policies with the human rights and working condition clauses contained in trade agreements—such as the EU–Vietnam FTA and the USMCA—contributes to stabilizing trade flows and transforms ethical compliance into a genuine competitive advantage for companies [48,49]. Transparent management of the social due diligence process further reduces the risk of international boycotts against the companies involved [50], especially for those operating in industrial sectors at high risk of non-compliance, such as textiles and extractives, where reputational scandals can trigger import restrictions by control bodies [51]. The promotion of workers’ well-being—through policies on work–life balance, mental health, and occupational safety—has been shown to significantly influence the overall performance of companies and their ability to maintain stable and long-lasting business relationships at an international level [37]. Such policies, indeed, reduce turnover, improve productivity, promote a positive organizational climate, and increase levels of staff engagement, all of which strengthen a company’s reputation in global markets [52,53,54]. This practice is also consistent with the concept of “decent work” as defined in the Sustainable Development Goals and the World Health Organization’s recognition of occupational health as a fundamental and inalienable human right [55].

Proposition 2 (P2).

An effective international trade governance system must ensure that companies consolidate the competence system of their personnel on the issue of the sustainable development of international trade.

Companies are increasingly required to address complex environmental clauses to be inserted into trade agreements, such as commitments to adopt circular economy models or carry out due diligence ensuring that all suppliers within the value chain respect the human rights of workers and the standards on working conditions applied to them. It is therefore necessary to employ qualified personnel capable of negotiating the precise formulation of such clauses. Studies conducted on multinationals engaged in international trade reveal that investments in “green reskilling” significantly enhance corporate compliance with environmental sustainability principles [56]. Companies that can align their HRM policies with the principles of the UN Global Compact demonstrate enhanced reputational profiles and can accelerate the development of their trade infrastructures through preferential access to financing provided by institutions such as the World Bank.

Proposition 3 (P3).

An effective international trade governance system must ensure that companies align their remuneration policies with recognized international standards along the entire value chain.

Aligning their remuneration policies with recognized international standards—such as those promoted by the Fair Wage Network—enables companies engaged in international trade to prevent protracted litigation and avoid accusations of wage dumping or fostering unfair competition. By promoting ethical and responsible remuneration policies throughout the entire value chain, multinational corporations stimulate inclusion and participation and positively influence their suppliers and partners by promoting higher standards at the international level [57,58,59]. This, in turn, contributes to establishing a fairer and more regulated and predictable global trade environment through a cascading effect [60,61]. Significant remuneration disparities between countries, or among workforce segments within the same country, if left unaddressed, risk generating social tensions that can severely damage a company’s reputation and undermine its operational effectiveness [36]. The research highlights how reward mechanisms focused on the short term end up eroding a company’s social capital. In contrast, integrating multidimensional metrics into reward systems—measuring contributions to organizational health, environmental impact reduction, and social value creation—aligns individual incentives with collective well-being [37,62]. Incorporating sustainability metrics into corporate reward systems greatly simplifies the alignment between managerial and employee behavior and the objectives of the 2030 Agenda, thereby generating greater coherence between corporate tactics and the principles of sustainable development. This alignment positively influences cross-border partnerships, which are crucial for implementing mutually satisfactory trade agreements [63,64]. Sustainability-linked reward systems also favor the emergence in companies of a sustainable leadership that acts as a transformative catalyst, incorporating ethics and ecology into the managerial DNA. Such leaders shape values through consistency between words and actions, promote decision-making transparency, and integrate sustainability criteria into the corporate strategy [65,66,67]. Their capacity to engage all stakeholders is crucial to rooting sustainability values in the shared, tacit assumptions at the hearth of organizational culture [68,69].

Proposition 4 (P4).

An effective international trade governance system must ensure that companies implement adequate staff training programs on the topics of “cultural intelligence”, transparency, and social accountability.

By training their staff on the topics of “cultural intelligence”, companies stimulate their staff’s ability to decode the complex social, cultural, and geopolitical dynamics of the local context in which they operate. This capability reduces the failure rate of trade negotiations, particularly in emerging markets characterized by high political and social instability. Teams skilled at “political risk navigation” accelerate government authorizations for joint venture projects, even in geopolitically sensitive regions [70]. Moreover, companies engaged in international trade that prioritize transparency and accountability in their human resource management strengthen their capacities to manage sustainable development. This approach minimizes reputational risks and supports compliance with international regulations and standards outlined by the OECD and ILO guidelines, consistent with the principles of the United Nations Global Compact [71,72]. These “soft law” tools strongly rely on the adoption of SHRM models, emphasizing respect for human rights and the promotion of decent working conditions [73]. Including human resource management practices in sustainability reports serves as a form of institutional pressure, stimulating ethical conduct across the entire value chain. Finally, ethical expatriation programs—initiatives that companies engaged in international trade may implement—play a crucial role in enhancing the ability to build commercial relationships with foreign companies or institutions. These programs favor the development of “boundary spanners”, professionals skilled at institutional and intercultural mediation who facilitate companies’ access to supranational initiatives such as the European Union’s Global Gateway program (Global Gateway 2030) and help ensure continuity in global supply chains [74].

Proposition 5 (P5).

An effective international trade governance system must ensure that companies implement diversity and inclusion policies.

Companies that design and implement certified diversity and inclusion policies often recognize that these policies serve as a “relational passport” in complex commercial negotiations, where misunderstandings and trust asymmetries with local stakeholders could otherwise cause failure [75,76]. Effective management of diversity and inclusion is often fundamental for overseeing multicultural and transnational teams and thus helps companies to improve the quality of their international cooperation and reduce internal and inter-organizational conflicts [77,78]. Promoting ethnic, cultural, and gender diversity within organizations—especially those with extended global value chains—encourages more inclusive and representative decision-making processes, ultimately strengthening the legitimacy of their commercial practices [79,80]. Organizations operating in the international trade sector often must manage highly heterogeneous workforces, each bringing distinct values, norms, and expectations. Sustainable HR management in this context values differences rather than imposes uniform models. It fosters the development of an organizational culture shared by all members—one that integrates the values of local communities with the company’s own underlying assumptions [68]. This approach reduces conflicts, strengthens team cohesion, and enhances the organization’s capacity for innovation and resilience [34,80,81].

Adopting a rigorous diversity management policy, therefore, is not only a matter of social justice but also a tangible competitive advantage for companies operating in global markets. This includes rethinking personnel selection processes to minimize the impact of cognitive biases [82], developing mentorship programs for underrepresented groups [83], promoting cultural flexibility that values ethnic and generational differences [84], and guaranteeing structural accessibility for people with disabilities [85]. Companies with a strong commitment to inclusion may also engage in public–private partnerships, such as the Global Apprenticeship Network, to promote youth employment—helping to reduce the inequalities that fuel anti-globalization movements and lower non-tariff barriers in economies in transition.

Proposition 6 (P6).

An effective international trade governance system must stimulate companies to recruit, hire, and train “purpose-driven” talent.

Companies engaged in international trade should cultivate a particular sensitivity in recruiting, hiring, and training “purpose-driven” talent—individuals motivated by a genuine desire to contribute to sustainable development. Such purpose-driven employees are more inclined to innovate and develop patents aligned with sustainability principles, demonstrating a strong commitment to creating solutions that are both effective and socially responsible [86]. This not only enhances innovation but also strengthens the company’s reputational capital. Additionally, “purpose-driven” talents play a vital role in fostering organizational learning and sharing their transversal and technical skills, which are essential to deal with the complexity and changeability of international markets [87,88,89]. Companies that invest in “purpose-driven” talents through continuous training, sustainable leadership development, and employee engagement programs demonstrate greater resilience to global crises, enhanced adaptability to evolving regulatory environments, and a stronger capacity to innovate in foreign markets [90,91]. The cultivation of “purpose-driven” talents’ skills is fundamentally tied to the sustainability of organizational actions in international trade. Successful organizations require managers and teams that are adept at operating effectively within complex international settings, possessing a deep understanding of the cultural, social, and economic dynamics unique to each local context [92]. This requires not only the implementation of targeted training programs but also the careful management of international mobility. Crucially, HRM strategies should go beyond merely transferring skills—they must co-create them through collaboration with local communities, develop reskilling programs to ensure the equitable management of technological transitions, and adopt mechanisms for intergenerational knowledge transfer to strengthen the sustainability of international operations [93]. This approach aims to boost employability levels by counteracting professional obsolescence and facilitating career development in an increasingly complex, dynamic, and multicultural labor market [94,95,96].

From the above, it clearly emerges that these SHRM practices chart a path toward transforming organizations into places where ethics, safety, productivity, inclusiveness, and respect for human rights are integral to organizational life. In this perspective, the HRM sector proposes itself to company management as a strategic lever—one capable of making the company economically, socially, and environmentally responsible, and thereby contributing, even in a small way, to the creation of a more equitable, productive, and inclusive global commercial order [97].

5.2. The Theoretical Framing of the Six Propositions

Since the theoretical framing of the six propositions (P1–P6) described above have not been explicitly presented, the main theoretical frameworks explaining the mechanisms behind these proposition are described and discussed below.

5.2.1. Neo-Institutional Theory

Neo-institutional Theory [98], which analyses how institutions influence the behavior and decision-making of individuals and organizations, attributes a key role to isomorphism. This phenomenon is divided into three distinct forms: mimetic isomorphism, which encourages imitation of the best practices adopted by companies; coercive isomorphism, resulting from external pressure, such as sanctions; and normative isomorphism, which stimulates the process of the internalization of values and professional standards [98,99]. Following this model, international trade agreements establish a regulatory framework that legitimizes certain values—such as compliance with ILO standards—and delegitimizes others, like worker exploitation. This framework encourages companies to adopt the required standards on human rights and working conditions (a) in light of the choices made by their most feared competitors (mimetic isomorphism); (b) for fear of incurring sanctions or suffering reputational damage (coercive isomorphism); (c) due to the transformation of the perception of the standards from optional to mandatory through the process of the cultural internalization of such standards (normative isomorphism). Through this process, companies gain institutional legitimacy and reduce risks such as boycotts or trade restrictions that could arise from failing to adopt these standards [100]. Neo-institutional Theory therefore offers a robust theoretical foundation for P1, which states that an effective international trade governance system must ensure the adoption of standards on human rights and working conditions throughout the entire value chain. The cultivation of a corporate culture embedding these standards among its core shared tacit assumptions allows for the institutionalization of this contamination process resulting from the isomorphic pressures described above, driving companies toward sustainable human resource management practices [37,68]. Furthermore, this theory also underpins P3, where institutional pressure—stemming from globally recognized standards like those of the Fair Wage Network—induces isomorphic behaviors that enhance international trade governance by encouraging the better alignment of corporate compensation policies with international benchmarks across the entire value chain.

5.2.2. Organizational Complexity Theory

Organizational Complexity Theory [101] applies the concepts of complexity theory to organizational contexts, conceptualizing companies as complex systems composed of multiple interdependent subsystems. This theory clarifies why companies must extend their monitoring of compliance with human rights and labor standard compliance throughout the entire value chain, as indicated in P1. In the context of international trade, where value chains are often highly fragmented and geographically dispersed, adopting supply chain mapping policies and standardizing monitoring procedures enables companies to transform stakeholder relationships from opaque to transparent. Such measures strengthen institutional legitimacy and reduce the risk of boycotts and/or trade restrictions resulting from inadequate oversight, in line with due diligence requirements. Organizational Complexity Theory also explains the synergistic—rather than merely additive—nature of the relationship between practices for developing cultural intelligence, transparency, and social accountability, which are central elements of P4. These practices generate a virtuous, self-reinforcing cycle, in line with Systems Thinking Theory [102], whereby the development of cultural competence facilitates the contextualized—and therefore more sustainable—implementation of corporate policies consistent with international standards for corporate sustainability, even in culturally and geopolitically complex or “resistant” environments. This, in turn, fosters greater transparency in human resource management, enhancing the corporate reputation and motivating further investment in cultural competence development. Moreover, Organizational Complexity Theory explains how organizations that incentivize the work of purpose-driven talent trigger systemic effects that extend beyond the organizational sphere, promoting knowledge transfer and reskilling initiatives at the community level. This results in reducing structural inequalities, combating professional obsolescence, and fostering the development of partnerships based on mutual trust and shared values—outcomes that ultimately strengthen the foundations of a fairer and more sustainable international trade system.

5.2.3. Resource-Based View, Capability Theory, and Dynamic Capability Theory

Although these three theoretical approaches should be considered separately, for the purposes of our objective, they are analyzed together, as they share a common emphasis on the link between investment in human capital—specifically, the development of employee skills—and the achievement of a competitive advantage. In line with the assumptions of the Resource-Based View [103], while P1 focuses only on a single, albeit fundamental, practice of sustainable human resource management, the adoption of international standards regarding respect for human rights and working conditions contributes to the development of important intangible resources capable of generating a competitive advantage for companies. These resources include organizational engagement and commitment, a strengthened perception of organizational justice, and an enhanced corporate reputation. Collectively, they not only drive higher productivity levels but also help ensure—other factors being equal—stability in business relationships. Capability Theory [104] offers significant theoretical support for P2, which points out that an effective international trade governance system must foster the consolidation of corporate sustainability capabilities. This perspective underscores that sustainable corporate development depends on empowering employees through the cultivation of capabilities that enable them to achieve what is worthy of value. In the context of international trade, this implies that possessing technical knowledge of corporate sustainability principles, circular economy models, or social due diligence frameworks is not sufficient. Employees must also be encouraged and supported in translating these capabilities into concrete actions that ensure compliance with social, environmental, and economic sustainability principles [105]. In parallel, Dynamic Capability Theory [106] reinforces this view by emphasizing that companies must develop in their workforces the specific skills needed to adapt, innovate, and reconfigure resources and business processes, thereby securing a competitive advantage in environments characterized by high levels of unpredictability and rapid change. Specifically in international trade, companies are frequently confronted with regulatory environments that are both extremely complex and subject to unpredictable change—for instance, the intricate processes of negotiating and renegotiating tariffs that the United States, numerous other countries, and the European Union are expected to undertake by 2025. Such volatility compels companies to develop the following abilities: “sensing opportunities” (identifying emerging trends, threats, and opportunities), “seizing opportunities” (taking timely action to capitalize on opportunities or mitigate threats), and “reconfiguring resources” (adjusting and reshaping company resources to maintain a competitive advantage). This context also drives the transformation of sustainability training from a sporadic or isolated initiative into a continuous process of individual and organizational learning, thereby enhancing long-term adaptability and resilience [107].

5.2.4. International Regime Theory

International Regime Theory [108] posits that the governance of human rights and labor conditions in international trade emerges from the interaction between public and private sectors, giving rise to a multilevel architecture in which states, businesses, and civil society act as stakeholders with a shared interest in ensuring compliance with jointly established standards. Following the indications provided by P1—which points out that an effective international trade governance system must ensure the adoption of standards on human rights and labor conditions across the entire value chain—the human resource function assumes the role of “regulatory actor”. In this capacity, it is responsible for translating the abstract principles articulated in international trade agreements into concrete, operational human resource management practices that are not only designed and implemented but also subject to ongoing monitoring and evaluation.

5.2.5. Sensemaking Theory

Sensemaking Theory [109] highlights how organizations autonomously interpret which actions or decisions should be considered sustainable or not. In the context of international trade, this process requires balancing the legitimate pursuit of productivity objectives with the obligation to comply with the environmental protection clauses and stringent labor and ethical standards set forth in signed trade agreements. It is therefore essential to have specialized personnel capable of grasping the complexity of this challenge, interpreting the potential contradictions that may emerge between the alternative courses of action—as suggested by the paradox model applied to SHRM [110]—and directing collective attention towards HRM policies capable of ensuring a sustainable trade-off between costs and benefits. In this sense, the development of robust competencies in corporate sustainability directly underpins the organization’s ability to conduct comprehensive risk assessment and management [111], in line with what is stated in P2.

5.2.6. Stakeholder Theory

Stakeholder Theory [112,113] interprets the firm as a complex system of relationships among diverse stakeholder groups whose interests and objectives often diverge—and sometimes conflict—and who both influence and are influenced by the firm’s activities. From this perspective, P3—which states that an effective international trade governance system must ensure the alignment of corporate compensation policies with international standards along the entire value chain—derives not from a mere bureaucratic intent to declare compliance but from a strategic choice to gain legitimacy in the eyes of critical stakeholders such as consumers, investors, governments, and communities. This theory also justifies P4, as effective transparency and social reporting become powerful tools for legitimizing the company and its operations in the eyes of particularly critical stakeholders. Finally, this theory also provides theoretical grounding for P5 by explaining how diversity and inclusion policies respond to the expectations of multiple stakeholder groups: employees, by promoting equitable human resource management; local communities, by ensuring the representation of all social groups, including those in the clear minority; and investors, by reducing reputational risk.

5.2.7. Agency Theory

Agency Theory [114], traditionally focused on the conflict between the delegator (e.g., a company’s shareholder) and the delegate (the company’s manager), can—when extended to include all key corporate stakeholders—provide further theoretical support for P3. Following this theoretical approach, incorporating multidimensional sustainability metrics into reward systems—covering corporate social responsibility, environmental impacts, and worker health and well-being [115]—aligns individual incentives not only with short-term corporate profit, which often benefits only top management and occasional investors, but also, and more importantly, with collective well-being and the creation of long-term social value for all key corporate stakeholders [116].

5.2.8. Sustainable Leadership Theory

Sustainable Leadership Theory [117] interprets corporate management as genuinely motivated to generate well-being and shared value, integrating the pursuit of economic results with respect for the environment and the broader social system in which the company is embedded. From this perspective, the theory offers important theoretical support for P3, as the effective adoption of international standards in designing corporate compensation policies depends on the authentic commitment of corporate leaders. Leaders guided by strong moral and ethical principles act as catalysts for organizational change, infusing the principles of sustainability into every aspect of the corporate strategy. The belief in the importance of adopting fair and ethical salary policies, therefore, becomes a founding element of the “shared tacit assumptions” that define the organizational culture [68], thereby enhancing the company’s reputational and social capital [118].

5.2.9. Organizational Learning Theory and Knowledge-Based Theory

Here, we analyze two distinct theories together, as both suggest that organizations create their competitive advantage through their ability to generate and transfer knowledge. Organizational Learning Theory [119,120], which interprets organizations as social systems capable of generating, managing, and transferring knowledge—including through the redesign of their own learning systems (deutero-learning)—represents a robust theoretical foundation for P4. This theory explains how training in cultural intelligence, transparency, and social accountability facilitates the transformation of tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, developing organizations’ ability to decode complex sociocultural and geopolitical contexts and interact with them effectively. Through the organizational learning process, companies engaged in international trade are better able to interpret the weak signals arising from contexts characterized by complex social, cultural, and geopolitical dynamics. Training staff on transparency and social accountability allows companies to more comfortably address the complexity resulting from the coexistence of complex, multilevel regulatory frameworks at the international, national, and regional levels [121]. From an internal perspective, Knowledge-Based Theory [122] offers a solid theoretical foundation for P5, as it highlights how organizations operating through inclusively managed multicultural teams are better able to quickly and effectively integrate even highly heterogeneous viewpoints, fostering innovative solutions that improve their resilience [123]. Finally, Knowledge-Based Theory also supports P6, since “high potential” workers, such as purpose-driven talents, act as important catalysts for the design and implementation of sustainability-oriented research, development, innovation, and technology transfer programs [122].

5.2.10. Social Identity Theory

Social Identity Theory [124] posits that ethnic, cultural, or gender differences can trigger social categorization dynamics, which may give rise to various forms of conflict. This theory provides a further foundation for P5, as D&I policies act primarily as boundary-spanning mechanisms [125], reducing asymmetries of trust in contexts where strong social and cultural barriers exist between stakeholders. By mitigating the potentially negative consequences of such dynamics, D&I policies can transform the “diversity” factor from a potential barrier to a “relational passport,” fostering a perception of the company as ethical and respectable, thereby strengthening its credibility and reputation in the eyes of governments, business partners, and civil society [126,127,128].

5.2.11. Self-Determination Theory

Self-Determination Theory [129] analyzes the motivational dynamics underlying two distinct forms of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. This model appears to support P6, which states that an effective international trade governance system should encourage companies to recruit “purpose-driven” talent—workers motivated by a genuine desire to contribute to sustainable development. According to this theoretical model, purpose-driven talent satisfies three fundamental psychological needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness) that underlie intrinsic motivation at work. Because intrinsic motivation stimulates creativity and proactive commitment [130], purpose-driven employees contribute to innovations consistent with a corporate strategy oriented towards social, environmental, and economic sustainability. The synergy between the intrinsic motivation that characterizes purpose-driven talent and the constant attention that the company dedicates to strengthening its continuous investment in individual and organizational learning processes contribute to recruiting human resources capable of generating this competitive advantage.

5.3. Towards a Criterion Validation of the Contribution of SHRM Practices to Increasing the Effectiveness of International Trade Governance

Being able to validate the propositions indicated above not only on the basis of their conceptual coherence with what is indicated in the literature (content validation) would represent a significant advancement toward developing criterion validation models. Such models would have a dual focus: concurrent validity, which measures the correlation between a proposition and a measurable external criterion serving as an indicator of effective international trade governance, and predictive validity, which assesses whether the presence of a specific SHRM practice described in the propositions allows for the estimation—or prediction—of the effectiveness of a particular international trade governance model. The first step consists in identifying adequate indicators for estimating the effectiveness of international trade governance. This phase requires the adoption of a multidimensional approach, which forces us to analyze quantitative and qualitative indicators belonging to different disciplinary domains.

Without any claim to present a rigorous and exhaustive list, the main clusters of indicators for assessing the effectiveness of international trade governance are presented below. These indicators have been freely identified by the author based on some studies focused on the analysis of indicators to be used in governance, international trade, and logistics management in international trade [131,132,133,134], with the aim of helping to estimate the effectiveness of international trade governance capable of ensuring the sustainable management of trade:

A. Macroeconomic and Trade Flow Indicators:

• Growth in the volume and value of trade;
• Diversification of trade based on the number of trading partners and the range of exported products;
• Integration into global value chains (GVCs);
• Stability of trade flows, understood as the level of volatility of trade over time and the ability to withstand external shocks.

B. Compliance Indicators:

• Compliance with the obligations explicitly indicated in the agreements signed;
• Transparency, timeliness, and completeness in notifications sent to international bodies;
• Reduction in non-tariff barriers.

C. Administrative and Logistics Efficiency Indicators:

• Trade costs: costs to export/import;
• Customs and port efficiency.

D. Equity, Sustainability, and Inclusiveness Indicators:

• Market access for developing countries;
• Integration of environmental sustainability principles into international trade and compliance with multilateral environmental agreements;
• Integration of social sustainability principles into international trade and adherence to international labor standards;
• Integration of economic sustainability principles into international trade.

E. Resilience and Adaptability Indicators:

• Ability to maintain trade flows during exceptional or particularly chaotic events, such as pandemics, conflicts, and natural disasters;
• Digitalization in international trade;
• Ability to reform obsolete regulations and adapt to new business models.

F. Institutional and Participation Indicators:

• Level of stakeholder participation in global decision-making processes.

To proceed with a preliminary qualitative analysis of the criterion validity of the propositions described above, we evaluate, for each of the indicators for estimating the effectiveness of international trade governance, whether each of the propositions contributes to raising its level—that is, whether it has the capacity to positively impact the value of that indicator.

The following table, created by the author on the basis of the findings of this review, summarizes the results of this operation (

Table 3. Contribution of each proposition (P1–P6) to increasing the value of the indicators for estimating the effectiveness of international trade governance.

Cluster of Indicators	Proposition
	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6
1. Macroeconomic and Trade Flow Indicators:
Growth in the volume and value of trade		X		X	X	X
Diversification of trade based on the number of trading partners and the range of exported products				X	X	X
Integration into global value chains (GVCs)	X	X	X	X	X	X
Stability of trade flows, understood as the level of volatility of trade over time and the capacity for resilience to external shocks				X		X
2. Compliance Indicators:
Compliance with the obligations explicitly indicated in the agreements signed	X	X	X		X
Transparency, timeliness, and completeness in notifications sent to international bodies	X			X		X
Reduction in non-tariff barriers		X
3. Administrative and Logistics Efficiency Indicators:
Trade costs: costs to export/import		X	X
Customs and port efficiency		X		X
4. Equity, Sustainability, and Inclusiveness Indicators:
Market access for developing countries		X	X	X		X
Integration of environmental sustainability principles into international trade and compliance with multilateral environmental agreements		X				X
Integration of social sustainability principles into international trade and adherence to international labor standards	X	X	X	X	X	X
Integration of economic sustainability principles into international trade		X				X
5. Resilience and Adaptability Indicators:
Ability to maintain trade flows during exceptional or particularly chaotic events, such as pandemics, conflicts, and natural disasters		X		X	X	X
Digitalization in international trade		X				X
Ability to reform obsolete regulations and adapt to new business models		X			X	X
6. Institutional and Participation Indicators:
Level of stakeholder participation in global decision-making processes	X	X	X	X	X	X

).

As already mentioned, the data presented in the table show a huge limitation: they are not derived from empirical research but are based solely on the results of a qualitative analysis of the relationships between the propositions proposed by the author and the indicators of the effectiveness of international trade governance. However, these data can represent an initial and useful attempt to methodologically outline a model for the criterion validation of the main determinants (factors) of effective international trade governance, directly attributable to sustainable management.

6. Conclusions

From an institutional perspective, SHRM practices strengthen international trade governance systems by implementing concrete practices and operational models that help companies comply with standards, codes of conduct, and agreements regulating international trade, helping to ensure respect for fundamental rights and reducing power asymmetries along global supply chains. It is important to underline that effective international trade governance requires a systemic and collaborative vision, in which companies, governments, international organizations, and civil society co-design sustainable solutions. Within this framework, sustainable HRM emerges as a crucial tool for bridging different stakeholder interests and ensuring alignment between economic, social, and environmental policies [135].

Sustainable human resource management practices represent the operational architecture that concretely translates sustainability principles into the daily interactions between people. These practices go beyond mere procedural adjustments, representing a profound reconceptualization of the HR function—a shift from an instrumental logic toward a systemic vision that integrates organizational needs and human well-being in the long term [115].

In short, sustainable human resource management practices perform crucial regulatory, cohesive, and legitimizing functions in international trade. They contribute to building responsible global companies, capable of integrating ethics, competitiveness, and respect for fundamental rights [136]. SHRM is not merely one of the many prerequisites for the economic success of a multinational corporation; it is an essential condition for building a more equitable, productive, and inclusive global trade order.

This paper attempts to fill a significant gap in the literature on international trade governance. While the research conducted to date has focused on the connection between some of the most well-known sustainability standards—such as CSR, ESG, and the GRI—and international trade, no study has systematically and comprehensively explored the role of sustainable human resource management (SHRM) practices in making international trade governance more effective. The scarcity of literature that situates SHRM practices within strategic reflections on the conditions for effective international trade governance is further confirmed by the analysis of trade agreements (WTO, USMCA, EU), which shows that the role of SHRM is often narrowly confined to human rights and working conditions. Furthermore, this paper seeks to highlight how the proactive integration of various SHRM practices can strengthen international trade governance, with international trade agreements as the primary operational driver.

The choice to use a narrative review methodology was motivated by the pioneering and interdisciplinary nature of the topic. The scarcity of prior literature required a flexible approach to integrate knowledge from diverse disciplinary fields, including psychology, law, economics, and sociology. Unlike systematic reviews, this method allowed for the identification of both direct and indirect connections between SHRM and international trade governance through the analysis of sources not always accessible through predefined keywords. This approach enabled the formulation of six propositions, each grounded in established theoretical frameworks, which explain the causal mechanisms underlying the relationship between SHRM practices and international trade governance. Future studies can focus on the experimental verification of these propositions.

6.1. Sustainable Human Resource Management and Geopolitical Instability: A Limit for the Applicability of the SHRM Model in International Trade?

The translation, within an organizational context, of sustainable human resource management models into concrete corporate policies and the corresponding organizational behaviors must contend with the effects of the heightened geopolitical instability that has emerged since 2022. The repercussions of the most recent and, unfortunately, still ongoing armed conflicts (the Russian invasion of Ukraine and escalating tensions involving Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank, and Iran with increasing U.S. involvement) extend far beyond the borders of the directly affected countries. These conflicts significantly influence the economic and social dynamics of international trade on a global scale. This geopolitical instability also has a heavy impact on the markets in countries not directly involved in the conflicts. In these contexts, companies bear the indirect burden of international sanctions imposed on other nations, face increased costs due to commodity price volatility, and grapple with shortages of specialized labor. Moreover, they must navigate the growing variability in international trade regulations and systems—such as changes in import duties—that further complicate their operations. These circumstances make it challenging to adopt the integrated and long-term approaches that are typical of SHRM. Organizations are therefore often forced to adopt reactive logics, reducing investments in training and diversity and inclusion initiatives in favor of conservative policies focused on the issues of operational flexibility and cost containment. Since 2022, Europe, for instance, has simultaneously faced migration crises linked to the influx of refugees, inflationary pressures eroding citizens’ purchasing power, and substantial economic and military support to partner countries at war. In this geopolitical context, management approaches grounded in sustainability—anchored in environmental responsibility and social equity—appear, paradoxically, difficult to reconcile with immediate operational pressures. Global conflicts generate energy shocks, supply chain disruptions, systemic inflation, and volatility in trade, making it difficult for companies involved in international trade to meet their commitments. Rising operational costs, the need to source from alternative suppliers to those operating in geopolitical and economically unstable contexts, and the imperative to ensure operational continuity—even at the expense of socially responsible practices—pose significant challenges for companies seeking to comply with the principles of sustainable global value chain management. In this scenario, the sustainable management of human resources is particularly complex, as its implementation presupposes the ability of employees to work in stable and predictable environments. While these models remain valid as ideal and normative frameworks, their applications require adaptive mechanisms, contextualized approaches, and adequate institutional support to be effective in scenarios of permanent emergency. Only an intrinsically dynamic and resilient concept of sustainability can ensure that these principles remain relevant precisely in the contexts where they are most needed.

6.2. Insights and Implications for Scholars

This article offers a pioneering contribution aimed at addressing a significant gap in the literature on international trade governance. By analyzing the relationship between SHRM practices and international trade governance, it proposes an innovative conceptual framework that integrates insights from various disciplines, including international law, work and organizational psychology, human resource management, economics, and corporate sustainability studies. The examination of the role of human resources in major trade agreements, summarized in Table 1, provides a novel and useful framework for future comparative research and longitudinal studies on the main determinants underlying the evolution of clauses in trade agreements. The six theoretical propositions (P1–P6), although not yet empirically tested, constitute a solid starting point for formulating experimental research hypotheses and developing causal models. They offer an interpretative lens for examining the mechanisms through which SHRM practices shape the effectiveness of international trade governance. Moreover, the article stimulates future investigations into largely overlooked topics, such as the impact of professional skills on managing corporate sustainability processes or the role of purpose-driven talent in global value chain dynamics. The analysis linking the six propositions to distinct theoretical frameworks provides a solid foundation for developing models to verify their validity. The proposed indicators for the criterion validation (Table 3) of the six propositions, albeit preliminary, represent the foundation for a replicable methodological protocol aimed at empirically validating the impact of SHRM policies on international trade governance. The critical analysis of geopolitical variables represents a first attempt to investigate the robustness of SHRM models in contexts characterized by high uncertainty and instability, thereby contributing to the broader debate on institutional and organizational resilience. Furthermore, the discussion on recent regulatory instruments—such as the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)— ensures that the theoretical framework is relevant, positioning this article as a potential reference for future studies on international trade governance models in a global context marked by an increasing need for binding forms of corporate sustainability.

6.3. Insights and Implications for Managers

This article provides operational tools for translating sustainability principles into concrete actions that align with emerging regulatory requirements. A detailed analysis of trade agreements clarifies the growing importance of social clauses, guiding managers in adopting HRM policies that ensure legal compliance and prevent economic and reputational risks. The six propositions serve as a strategic roadmap for redirecting SHRM practices. For instance, the adoption of rigorous human rights standards (P1) and the alignment of compensation policies with international standards (P3) offer clear pathways to reduce the likelihood of litigation and trade sanctions. Similarly, investments in cultural intelligence training (P4) and the implementation of inclusion policies (P5) provide actionable solutions for minimizing the risk of failed large-scale negotiations in complex markets. Table 1 serves as a practical tool for enabling professionals and managers to quickly and effectively identify a company’s HR priorities based on different commercial agreements, obviously based on their relevance to the company’s operations. This article also raises awareness among company management of the strategic role of SHRM as a catalyst for accessing preferential financing and fostering transnational partnerships, thereby reframing sustainability from a perceived cost into a source of competitive advantage. The discussion of the challenges posed by geopolitical variables contributes to a healthy realism in the analysis, highlighting the contextual factors that may affect the effective implementation of the proposed models. This perspective supports professionals in calibrating their interventions, striking an appropriate balance between regulatory compliance and operational continuity to ensure the medium- and long-term sustainability of adopted policies.

This article thus positions itself as a bridge between theory and practice. For academics, it offers value by delineating an emerging field of research and generating empirically testable hypotheses. For practitioners, it provides a structured set of SHRM practices designed to address the pressures arising from social clauses in trade agreements, thereby framing SHRM not as an optional component but as a fundamental pillar of resilient and ethical international trade governance.

6.4. Limits of This Work

This work presents several limits. First, the use of narrative reviews entails inherent constraints related to the subjectivity involved in selecting studies for inclusion. Although this limitation was mitigated by explicitly specifying the selection criteria, the methodology does not achieve the same standards of replicability, transparency, and reliability as systematic literature review (SLR) models. In particular, the lack of standardized protocols and the absence of clear and fully documented inclusion/exclusion criteria applied at each stage of the paper-drafting process limit the ability to assess the completeness of the analysis. While this methodological approach is justified by the interdisciplinary nature of the topic and the scarcity of prior literature directly addressing the research focus, it nonetheless imposes significant constraints on the validity, objectivity, and generalization of the findings.

Another limitation of this research is that the six propositions (P1–P6), despite the fact that they were argued for and justified through the use of a wide range of theoretical frameworks, still lack a rigorous process of empirical and/or experimental verification. The proposed study is limited to a purely conceptual validation of the results, establishing logical connections between the theoretical frameworks and the proposed propositions without providing empirical, experimental, or case-based evidence. Although Table 3—which maps the propositions to the indicators of international trade governance effectiveness—represents a first step towards a criterion validation of the six propositions, it is based on the author’s qualitative analysis rather than systematically observed and experimentally verified data. Furthermore, it does not include a critical reflection on the operationalization and measurability of the indicators proposed for evaluating the effectiveness of international trade governance (Table 3). The potential limitations of these indicators —such as data availability, time lags, and subjectivity in data assessment—are not discussed, nor is there an analysis of how SHRM practices might concretely influence them when controlling for the impact of broader macroeconomic and geopolitical factors.

A further limitation is the limited exploration of counterarguments and contextual constraints. While a dedicated section addresses the role of geopolitical factors (including conflicts, sanctions, and instability) as possible barriers to interpreting SHRM practices as drivers of more effective international trade governance, this discussion is not systematically integrated into the evaluation of the propositions. How geopolitical uncertainty might specifically undermine the sustainability of each of the six proposed practices—such as the feasibility of global wage alignment in hyper-inflationary contexts or the prioritization of “green” training during acute energy crises—is not systematically explored. The analysis of the topic remains declarative rather than analytical. In summary, while this study offers an ambitious theoretical integration and pioneering conceptual exploration of the relationship between SHRM and international trade governance, its heuristic potential is constrained by the speculative nature of the propositions and the absence of an empirical or experimental foundation.