--- title: "CSDDD prevention vs mitigation: potential and actual adverse impacts" canonical_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/eu/csddd/faq/prevention-vs-mitigation" source_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/prevention-vs-mitigation" author: "Sorena AI" description: "CSDDD FAQ on when to prevent or mitigate potential adverse impacts, when to end or minimise actual adverse impacts, and what evidence records to keep." published_at: "2026-05-09" updated_at: "2026-05-09" keywords: - "CSDDD prevention mitigation" - "potential adverse impacts" - "actual adverse impacts" - "Article 10" - "Article 11" - "corrective action plan" - "CSDDD" - "Directive (EU) 2024/1760" - "prevention action plan" --- **[SORENA](https://www.sorena.io/)** - AI-Powered GRC Platform [Home](https://www.sorena.io/) | [Solutions](https://www.sorena.io/solutions) | [Artifacts](https://www.sorena.io/artifacts) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) | [Contact](https://www.sorena.io/contact) | [Portal](https://app.sorena.io) --- # CSDDD prevention vs mitigation: potential and actual adverse impacts CSDDD FAQ on when to prevent or mitigate potential adverse impacts, when to end or minimise actual adverse impacts, and what evidence records to keep. *FAQ* *CSDDD* *EU* ## CSDDD prevention vs mitigation Potential and actual adverse impacts Under the CSDDD, prevention and mitigation are mainly the Article 10 response to potential adverse impacts. Article 11 applies once an adverse impact is actual: the company must bring it to an end or, if that cannot happen immediately, minimise its extent. Use this page to separate potential-impact controls, actual-impact corrective actions, stakeholder engagement, monitoring, and evidence records. CSDDD teams should not use prevention, mitigation, ending an impact, and minimising an impact as interchangeable labels. The Directive separates the work by impact status: identify and prioritise actual and potential adverse impacts, prevent or adequately mitigate potential adverse impacts, and bring actual adverse impacts to an end or minimise their extent where they cannot immediately be ended. ## CSDDD prevention vs mitigation Compare the CSDDD response for potential adverse impacts with the response for actual adverse impacts. - **Potential adverse impact**: Article 10 work: prevent the impact where possible, or adequately mitigate it where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible. - **Actual adverse impact**: Article 11 work: bring the impact to an end, or minimise its extent where it cannot immediately be brought to an end. | Dimension | Potential adverse impact | Actual adverse impact | Operational implication | Sources | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Scope boundary | A potential adverse human-rights or environmental impact is identified under Article 8 and then prioritised under Article 9. | An actual adverse human-rights or environmental impact is identified under Article 8 and then prioritised under Article 9. | Separate the status first. Article 10 is for potential impacts, while Article 11 applies once the impact is actual. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 use different response objectives for potential and actual adverse impacts. | | Covered actors | Prevent the potential impact; where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate it. | Bring the actual impact to an end; where it cannot immediately be ended, minimise its extent. | Write the objective in operational terms: avoided, reduced likelihood or severity, ended, or minimised. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Recital 38 states that the steps for potential impacts and actual impacts should be clearly distinguished. | | Trigger | Use a prevention action plan where the nature or complexity of the prevention measures requires one, with defined timelines and indicators. | Use a corrective action plan where the actual impact cannot immediately be brought to an end, with defined timelines and indicators. | Keep plan names aligned with the impact status so records, supplier asks, and monitoring indicators are not misleading. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 both require action plans to use timelines and qualitative and quantitative indicators where those plans are needed. | | Core obligations | Measures can include contractual assurances with verification, investments, operational or purchasing-practice changes, design and distribution changes, SME support, and collaboration. | Measures can include neutralising or minimising the impact, a corrective action plan, contractual assurances with verification, investments, operational changes, SME support, collaboration, and remediation. | Do not treat supplier clauses as the only control; match measures to involvement, leverage, severity, and what would actually change the impact. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 both require measures to be selected in light of involvement, business-partner location, and ability to influence. | | Evidence record | Keep the Article 8 mapping, Article 9 priority rationale, prevention action plan, verification records, SME support evidence, stakeholder input, and monitoring indicators. | Keep the actual-impact finding, corrective action plan, minimisation or ending evidence, remediation assessment, stakeholder input, complaint or notification records, and monitoring indicators. | A useful file proves the classification, the selected measures, the implementation status, and whether measures remained adequate and effective over time. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 15 requires periodic assessment of implementation, adequacy, and effectiveness of measures for prevention, mitigation, ending impacts, and minimising extent. | | Timing and deadlines | If a severe potential impact cannot be prevented or adequately mitigated, Article 10 may require no new or extended relationship, an enhanced prevention action plan, suspension, or termination where legal conditions are met. | If a severe actual impact cannot be ended or minimised, Article 11 may require no new or extended relationship, an enhanced corrective action plan, suspension, or termination where legal conditions are met. | Before suspension or termination, assess whether the adverse impacts of that step could be manifestly more severe than the unresolved impact. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 require assessment of adverse impacts before suspension or termination and require notice and review where the relationship is suspended or terminated. | | Enforcement | Potential-impact controls are enforced through Article 10 duties to prevent or adequately mitigate risks before the harm occurs. | Actual-impact controls are enforced through Article 11 duties to end the harm or minimise its extent once the harm has occurred. | The enforcement question is not whether the company has a plan at all, but whether the plan matches the impact status and the article that applies. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 use different response objectives for potential and actual adverse impacts. | | Overlap and reuse | Potential-impact work can still later become an actual-impact file if the risk materialises. | Actual-impact work should not be documented as a prevention file, even if some controls are reused. | Reuse tools and evidence where helpful, but keep the legal classification and the plan name aligned with the real status of the impact. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Recital 38 explains that prevention and mitigation of potential impacts should be clearly distinguished from bringing actual impacts to an end or minimising their extent. | | Practical decision rule | If the issue is still only a risk, use Article 10 and document prevention or mitigation measures. | If the harm is already happening or happened, use Article 11 and document ending, minimisation, and remediation steps where relevant. | Check the facts first, then pick the article. If you are still classifying the event, do not copy the same wording into both sides of the comparison. | [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - The directive requires potential and actual impacts to be handled under distinct steps. | Sources for Scope boundary - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 applies to potential adverse impacts identified under Article 8 and prioritised under Article 9. - Quote: "potential adverse impacts that have been, or should have been, identified" Sources for Scope boundary - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 applies to actual adverse impacts identified under Article 8 and prioritised under Article 9. - Quote: "actual adverse impacts that have been, or should have been, identified" Sources for Scope boundary - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 use different response objectives for potential and actual adverse impacts. - Quote: "prevent, or where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate" Sources for Covered actors - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 distinguishes prevention from adequate mitigation of potential adverse impacts. - Quote: "prevent, or where prevention is not possible" Sources for Covered actors - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 distinguishes ending an actual adverse impact from minimising its extent. - Quote: "minimise the extent of that impact" Sources for Covered actors - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Recital 38 states that the steps for potential impacts and actual impacts should be clearly distinguished. - Quote: "should be clearly distinguished" Sources for Trigger - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 describes prevention action plans for potential adverse impacts. - Quote: "reasonable and clearly defined timelines" Sources for Trigger - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 describes corrective action plans for actual adverse impacts. - Quote: "corrective action plan" Sources for Trigger - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 both require action plans to use timelines and qualitative and quantitative indicators where those plans are needed. - Quote: "qualitative and quantitative indicators" Sources for Core obligations - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 lists relevant prevention and mitigation measures for potential adverse impacts. - Quote: "make necessary modifications of, or improvements to" Sources for Core obligations - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 lists relevant measures for actual adverse impacts, including neutralising or minimising the impact and remediation. - Quote: "neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent" Sources for Core obligations - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 both require measures to be selected in light of involvement, business-partner location, and ability to influence. - Quote: "ability of the company to influence" Sources for Evidence record - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 13 to 15 support stakeholder, complaints, notification, and monitoring records for prevention and mitigation measures. - Quote: "developing prevention and corrective action plans" Sources for Evidence record - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 12 to 15 support remediation, stakeholder, complaints, notification, and monitoring records for actual adverse impacts. - Quote: "where a company has caused or jointly caused" Sources for Evidence record - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 15 requires periodic assessment of implementation, adequacy, and effectiveness of measures for prevention, mitigation, ending impacts, and minimising extent. - Quote: "at least every 12 months" Sources for Timing and deadlines - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10(6) sets last-resort options for unresolved severe potential adverse impacts. - Quote: "enhanced prevention action plan" Sources for Timing and deadlines - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11(7) sets last-resort options for unresolved severe actual adverse impacts. - Quote: "enhanced corrective action plan" Sources for Timing and deadlines - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 require assessment of adverse impacts before suspension or termination and require notice and review where the relationship is suspended or terminated. - Quote: "manifestly more severe" Sources for Enforcement - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 applies to potential adverse impacts identified under Article 8 and prioritised under Article 9. - Quote: "prevent, or where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate" Sources for Enforcement - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 applies to actual adverse impacts identified under Article 8 and prioritised under Article 9. - Quote: "bring actual adverse impacts to an end" Sources for Enforcement - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10 and 11 use different response objectives for potential and actual adverse impacts. - Quote: "should be clearly distinguished" Sources for Overlap and reuse - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 covers potential adverse impacts and their prevention or mitigation. - Quote: "potential adverse impacts" Sources for Overlap and reuse - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 covers actual adverse impacts and their ending or minimisation. - Quote: "actual adverse impacts" Sources for Overlap and reuse - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Recital 38 explains that prevention and mitigation of potential impacts should be clearly distinguished from bringing actual impacts to an end or minimising their extent. - Quote: "should be clearly distinguished" Sources for Practical decision rule - Potential adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 applies to potential adverse impacts identified under Article 8 and prioritised under Article 9. - Quote: "prevent, or where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate" Sources for Practical decision rule - Actual adverse impact: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 applies to actual adverse impacts identified under Article 8 and prioritised under Article 9. - Quote: "Where the adverse impact cannot immediately be brought to an end" Sources for Practical decision rule - operational implication: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - The directive requires potential and actual impacts to be handled under distinct steps. - Quote: "should be clearly distinguished" ### Practical decision rule - Start with the evidence: if the facts only show a risk, treat the issue as potential and use Article 10. - If the facts show the harm already occurred or is ongoing, switch to Article 11 and record ending or minimisation actions. - Use remediation notes only where the company caused or jointly caused the actual adverse impact, and keep the evidence file tied to the article you applied. ## What is the CSDDD difference between prevention and mitigation? Prevention is the first Article 10 objective for a potential adverse impact: stop the impact from occurring where possible. Mitigation is the Article 10 fallback where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible: reduce the likelihood, severity, or conditions that could allow the potential impact to occur. For an actual adverse impact, the vocabulary changes. Article 11 requires companies to bring the impact to an end. If the impact cannot immediately be brought to an end, the company must minimise its extent and use corrective measures proportionate to the severity of the impact and the company's implication in it. - Use Article 10 for potential adverse impacts identified under Article 8 and prioritised under Article 9. - Use prevention measures where the impact can still be avoided. - Use mitigation measures where avoidance is not possible or not immediately possible. - Use Article 11 corrective measures when the adverse impact already exists. - Record why the issue is treated as potential or actual before assigning controls. Sources for this answer: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 covers preventing or adequately mitigating potential adverse impacts; Article 11 covers bringing actual adverse impacts to an end or minimising their extent. - [EUR-Lex summary: corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj?ref=sorena.io) - The EUR-Lex summary describes the CSDDD due diligence duty as addressing potential and actual human-rights and environmental adverse impacts. ## How should a team classify a finding before choosing a response? Start with the Article 8 identification record. Map the company's own operations, subsidiaries, and relevant chains of activities, then decide whether the finding is a potential adverse impact or an actual adverse impact. If multiple impacts cannot be addressed at the same time, Article 9 requires prioritisation based on severity and likelihood. The classification should also record involvement and leverage. Articles 10 and 11 both ask whether the company caused, jointly caused, contributed through acts or omissions with a subsidiary or business partner, or is linked through a business partner in the chain of activities, and whether the company can influence the relevant business partner. - Impact status: potential adverse impact or actual adverse impact. - Location: own operations, subsidiary, direct business partner, or indirect business partner in the chain of activities. - Involvement: caused by the company, caused jointly, or caused only by a business partner. - Priority: severity and likelihood when impacts cannot all be addressed fully at once. - Leverage: what influence the company has and what additional leverage can realistically be built. Sources for this answer: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 8 and 9 require identification, assessment, mapping, in-depth assessment, and prioritisation of actual and potential adverse impacts. - [European Commission: corporate sustainability due diligence](https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/doing-business-eu/sustainability-due-diligence-responsible-business/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence_en?ref=sorena.io) - The Commission page summarises the core due diligence duty as identifying and addressing potential and actual adverse impacts in own operations, subsidiaries, and relevant business partners. ## What measures belong in a prevention or mitigation plan? For potential adverse impacts, Article 10 lists measures that may be relevant depending on the circumstances. A prevention action plan is needed where the nature or complexity of the measures requires one, and it should include reasonable and clearly defined timelines plus qualitative and quantitative indicators for improvement. The plan should not stop at supplier clauses. Article 10 also points to investments, operational adjustments, purchasing-practice changes, design and distribution changes, targeted SME support, and collaboration where that increases the company's ability to prevent or mitigate the potential adverse impact. - Prevention action plan with timelines and indicators where needed. - Contractual assurances from direct business partners, supported by verification measures. - Operational investments, adjustments, upgrades, or infrastructure changes. - Changes to business plans, strategies, operations, purchasing practices, design, or distribution. - Targeted and proportionate SME support where needed in light of resources, knowledge, and constraints. - Collaboration with other entities where no other measure is suitable or effective. Sources for this answer: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 10 lists potential-impact prevention and mitigation measures, including prevention action plans, contractual assurances, investments, business changes, SME support, and collaboration. ## What changes when the adverse impact is already actual? Once the impact is actual, the response should be managed as Article 11 work. The first objective is to bring the impact to an end. If that cannot happen immediately, the company must minimise the extent of the impact, and Article 11 measures include neutralising the impact or minimising its extent, corrective action plans, contractual assurances, investments, operational changes, SME support, collaboration, and remediation where Article 12 applies. A corrective action plan is not the same thing as a prevention action plan. It should be tied to the specific actual impact, use reasonable and clearly defined timelines, and include qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring improvement. - State the factual evidence showing that the adverse impact has occurred or is occurring. - Define what would count as bringing the impact to an end. - If immediate ending is not possible, define what minimising the extent means in measurable terms. - Use a corrective action plan where needed, not a generic risk-control plan. - Assess remediation separately where the company caused or jointly caused the actual adverse impact. Sources for this answer: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Article 11 sets the actual-impact response, and Article 12 addresses remediation where a company caused or jointly caused an actual adverse impact. ## When should suspension, termination, or disengagement be considered? Articles 10 and 11 treat suspension or termination as last-resort measures, not the first response. For potential impacts that cannot be prevented or adequately mitigated, an enhanced prevention action plan may use or increase leverage through temporary suspension if there is a reasonable expectation that the effort will succeed. If there is no such expectation, or if the enhanced plan fails and the potential adverse impact is severe, termination may be required where the law governing the relationship allows it. For actual impacts, the parallel last-resort route is an enhanced corrective action plan and, where necessary, termination if the actual adverse impact is severe. Before suspension or termination, the company must assess whether the adverse impacts of doing so can reasonably be expected to be manifestly more severe than the impact that could not be addressed. - Record why ordinary Article 10 or Article 11 measures were insufficient. - Record the enhanced prevention or corrective action plan and its timeline. - Assess expected adverse impacts of suspension or termination before acting. - Provide reasonable notice to the business partner when suspension or termination is chosen. - Keep the decision under review and continue monitoring where the relationship is not suspended or terminated. Sources for this answer: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 10(6) and 11(7) set last-resort steps for severe unresolved potential or actual impacts, including enhanced action plans, suspension, termination, notice, and review. ## What evidence records should be kept? The useful record is an impact file, not a generic memo. It should let a reviewer see the identified impact, the Article 10 or Article 11 classification, the prioritisation basis, stakeholder input, measures selected, implementation status, and monitoring result. Article 15 requires periodic assessments of operations and measures, including subsidiaries and relevant business partners, to monitor the adequacy and effectiveness of identification, prevention, mitigation, bringing to an end, and minimisation. Those assessments should be based where appropriate on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be updated after significant changes, at least every 12 months, and when reasonable grounds indicate new risks may arise. - Impact register entry with potential or actual status and Article 8 mapping evidence. - Severity, likelihood, and prioritisation rationale under Article 9. - Prevention action plan or corrective action plan, including timelines and indicators. - Contractual assurances, verification records, SME support records, and operational-change evidence. - Stakeholder engagement notes for information gathering, plan development, termination or suspension decisions, remediation, and monitoring indicators. - Complaint and notification records, including founded or unfounded outcomes and actions taken or planned. - Periodic assessment record showing effectiveness, updates after significant changes, and open residual issues. Sources for this answer: - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Articles 13 to 15 support stakeholder-engagement, complaints, notification, and monitoring records for prevention, mitigation, ending impacts, and minimising their extent. ## Primary sources - [Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - The directive requires potential and actual impacts to be handled under distinct steps. - Quote: "should be clearly distinguished" - [EUR-Lex summary: corporate sustainability due diligence](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj?ref=sorena.io) - Summary source used to validate the plain-language distinction between preventing or mitigating potential problems and bringing actual ones to an end. - Quote: "preventing and mitigating potential problems, bringing actual ones to an end" - [European Commission: corporate sustainability due diligence](https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/doing-business-eu/sustainability-due-diligence-responsible-business/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence_en?ref=sorena.io) - Commission overview used for the high-level framing that the due diligence duty covers potential and actual human-rights and environmental impacts in own operations, subsidiaries, and relevant business partners. - Quote: "identifying and addressing potential and actual adverse human rights and environmental impacts" ## Topic Guides - [CSDDD adverse impact prioritisation workflow](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/adverse-impact-prioritisation-workflow.md): A CSDDD workflow for identifying actual and potential adverse human rights and environmental impacts, ranking severity and likelihood, and documenting prevention, mitigation, remediation, and stakeholder evidence. - [CSDDD Applicability Test: EU and Non-EU Company Scope](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/applicability-test.md): Test whether Directive (EU) 2024/1760 may apply to an EU or non-EU company using grounded CSDDD employee, turnover, group, franchise, royalty, exclusion, and phase-in checks. - [CSDDD chain of activities and supplier due diligence](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/chain-of-activities-and-suppliers.md): Explain CSDDD chain-of-activities scope, upstream and downstream boundaries, subsidiaries, direct and indirect business partners, supplier risk segmentation, and evidence. - [CSDDD Chain of Activities Boundaries](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/chain-of-activities-boundaries.md): Define CSDDD upstream and downstream chain of activities boundaries for subsidiaries, direct and indirect business partners, distribution, transport, storage, and records. - [CSDDD chain of activities boundaries: upstream and downstream FAQ](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/chain-of-activities-boundaries.md): FAQ on how the CSDDD defines chain of activities boundaries for subsidiaries, direct and indirect business partners, upstream activities, downstream logistics, and evidence. - [CSDDD civil liability under Article 29: what companies should check](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/civil-liability.md): FAQ on CSDDD Article 29 civil liability: liability conditions, protected legal interests, causation, compensation, limitation periods, and evidence disclosure. - [CSDDD Climate Transition Plan Requirements](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/climate-transition-plan.md): Article 22 CSDDD guidance for climate transition plans: business model alignment, targets, actions, funding, governance, and 12-month progress updates. - [CSDDD complaints and notifications FAQ](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/complaints.md): FAQ on Article 14 CSDDD complaint and notification mechanisms, who may complain, follow-up rights, confidentiality, retaliation, and evidence. - [CSDDD compliance duties and evidence guide](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/compliance.md): A grounded CSDDD compliance guide covering due diligence policy, adverse impact identification, prevention, corrective action, complaints, monitoring, reporting, climate plans, and supervisory evidence. - [CSDDD contractual assurances FAQ for Articles 10 and 11](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/contractual-assurances.md): How CSDDD Articles 10 and 11 use contractual assurances with business partners, verification, SME support, action plans, and suspension or termination escalation. - [CSDDD deadlines and compliance calendar after Directive (EU) 2025/794](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/deadlines-and-compliance-calendar.md): Current CSDDD calendar for transposition, application phases, Article 16 reporting exceptions, Commission guidance dates, and practical compliance evidence. - [CSDDD due diligence checklist](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/checklist.md): A grounded CSDDD checklist for scope, due diligence policy, chain-of-activities risk mapping, impact prioritisation, action plans, complaints, monitoring, communication, climate planning, and evidence. - [CSDDD Due Diligence Steps Playbook for Articles 5 and 7-16](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/due-diligence-steps-playbook.md): A grounded playbook for the CSDDD due diligence sequence: policy integration, impact assessment, prioritisation, prevention, correction, remediation, stakeholder engagement, complaints, monitoring, communication, and evidence. - [CSDDD FAQ: scope, dates, duties, liability, and evidence](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq.md): Practical answers on CSDDD scope, current application dates, chain of activities, due diligence duties, complaints, remediation, civil liability, climate plans, and evidence. - [CSDDD franchising and licensing scope FAQ](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/franchising.md): FAQ on when franchise or licensing networks can fall within Article 2 of the EU CSDDD, including royalties, turnover, EU and non-EU treatment, and evidence. - [CSDDD grievance and remediation workflow guide](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/grievance-and-remediation-workflows.md): Build a CSDDD grievance, notification, stakeholder engagement, and remediation workflow around Articles 12, 13, and 14 of Directive (EU) 2024/1760. - [CSDDD Liability and Penalties: enforcement, fines, and civil claims](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/liability-and-penalties.md): A grounded guide to CSDDD supervisory enforcement, penalty mechanics, civil liability, compensation limits, evidence records, and national transposition caveats. - [CSDDD non-EU turnover threshold FAQ](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/non-eu-turnover.md): How non-EU companies should assess CSDDD scope using EU-generated turnover, group thresholds, authorised representative records, and competent authority evidence. - [CSDDD Non-EU Turnover Thresholds and Scope Waves](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/scope-waves-and-non-eu-turnover.md): Article 2 and Article 37 CSDDD scope guide for non-EU Union turnover, group routes, franchise and licensing routes, and current application dates after Directive (EU) 2025/794. - [CSDDD Omnibus timing changes after Directive (EU) 2025/794](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/omnibus-current-date-changes.md): FAQ answer on current CSDDD Article 37 dates after Directive (EU) 2025/794 and how to separate adopted timing changes from proposal-stage Omnibus simplification. - [CSDDD penalties and fines under Article 27](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/penalties-and-fines.md): How CSDDD Article 27 sets penalty rules, turnover-based fine caps, public decision publication, supervisory authority powers, and national transposition caveats. - [CSDDD remediation FAQ: when companies must remedy adverse impacts](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/remediation.md): FAQ on CSDDD remediation: when Article 12 requires remedy, how complaints and stakeholder engagement affect the response, and what evidence to keep. - [CSDDD Remediation Plan Template: Article 12, 13 and 14 evidence](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/remediation-plan-template.md): A CSDDD remediation plan template for actual adverse impacts, complaint inputs, stakeholder engagement, action records, and monitoring evidence. - [CSDDD requirements: scope, due diligence, climate plan, and evidence](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/requirements.md): A grounded map of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive requirements across scope, due diligence policy, impact assessment, complaints, remediation, monitoring, communication, and climate transition planning. - [CSDDD risk prioritisation FAQ: severity, likelihood, and evidence](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/risk-prioritisation.md): How to prioritise CSDDD adverse impacts when teams cannot address everything at once, using severity, likelihood, stakeholder evidence, and a reviewable rationale. - [CSDDD Scope Thresholds: EU, Non-EU, Group and Franchise Routes](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/scope-thresholds-and-in-scope-groups.md): Article 2 CSDDD scope thresholds for EU companies, non-EU Union turnover, ultimate-parent groups, franchise and licensing routes, consecutive-year tests, and evidence records. - [CSDDD scope waves: current Article 37 dates and thresholds](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/scope-waves.md): FAQ on the current CSDDD phase-in after Directive (EU) 2025/794: 26 July 2028, 26 July 2029, Article 2 scope thresholds, and evidence to retain. - [CSDDD Supplier Contract Clause Review Workflow](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/supplier-contract-clause-review-workflow.md): Review supplier contract clauses against CSDDD Articles 10 and 11: contractual assurances, verification, SME fairness, support, action plans, and escalation evidence. - [CSDDD Supplier Contract Clauses: Articles 10 and 11 Evidence](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/supplier-contract-clauses.md): How to use CSDDD supplier contract clauses without treating clauses as a substitute for due diligence: contractual assurances, verification, SME support, action plans, limits, and evidence. - [CSDDD supplier human rights impact scoring template](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/supplier-human-rights-risk-scoring-template.md): A CSDDD supplier impact scoring template for Article 8 identification, Article 9 prioritisation, severity, likelihood, stakeholder input, chain-of-activities boundaries, and evidence records. - [CSDDD transition plans FAQ: Article 22 climate plan requirements](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/transition-plans.md): FAQ on CSDDD Article 22 climate transition plans: targets, decarbonisation levers, investment and funding, governance, CSRD overlap, and evidence records. - [CSDDD vs CSRD: Due Diligence and Reporting Compared](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/csddd-vs-csrd.md): Compare CSDDD due diligence duties with CSRD sustainability reporting, including scope, timing, Article 16 reporting, evidence overlap, assurance, and enforcement. - [CSDDD vs German LkSG Comparison](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/csddd-vs-german-lksg.md): Compare the EU CSDDD with Germany's LkSG without mixing directive duties, national-law duties, chain boundaries, complaints, reporting, and enforcement routes. - [CSDDD vs OECD Guidelines](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/csddd-vs-oecd-guidelines.md): Compare the binding EU CSDDD with the OECD Guidelines for responsible business conduct across scope, due diligence duties, business relationships, remediation, and evidence. - [How CSDDD overlaps with OECD, UNGP, and ILO standards](/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/oecd-ungp-and-ilo-overlap.md): FAQ on how OECD responsible business conduct guidance, the UN Guiding Principles, and ILO labour standards inform CSDDD due diligence without being the same legal instrument. *Recommended next step* *Placement: after evidence section* ## Turn CSDDD impact decisions into evidence records Use this CSDDD FAQ to separate potential-impact prevention, potential-impact mitigation, actual-impact corrective measures, stakeholder input, and monitoring evidence. - [Open Research Copilot](/solutions/research-copilot.md): Check CSDDD impact classifications against cited source material. - [Discuss CSDDD implementation](/contact.md): Review prevention, mitigation, corrective action, and evidence records with Sorena. --- [Privacy Policy](https://www.sorena.io/privacy) | [Terms of Use](https://www.sorena.io/terms-of-use) | [DMCA](https://www.sorena.io/dmca) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) (c) 2026 Sorena AB (559573-7338). All rights reserved. Source: https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/faq/prevention-vs-mitigation