IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v10y2022i3p155-166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building Legitimacy in an Era of Polycentric Trade: The Case of Transnational Sustainability Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Natalie J. Langford

    (Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Sheffield, UK)

  • Luc Fransen

    (Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Increasing multi-polarity within global politics is understood to be a key contributor to the current legitimacy crisis facing global governance organisations. International relations scholars studying this crisis recognise that a prominent strategy to confront “Northern” dominance within this arena is through the construction of alternative governance institutions. Yet while the de-legitimation of long-established international organisations is widely discussed, there is less focused attention on how alternative institutions seek to gain legitimacy, particularly when they advance in fields where both “Northern” and “Southern” interests matter and beliefs about what constitutes proper governance may differ. This article analyses the field of transnational economic governance where the de-legitimation of pre-existing Northern-oriented governance takes the shape of new initiatives backed by Southern actors. Specifically, we focus on transnational sustainability standards governing trade and production in the global economy. This global governance arena has been transformed by the increasingly polycentric nature of global trade, in which producers governed by sustainability standards cater to rapidly expanding markets in the Global South as well as markets in the Global North. As markets have expanded in emerging economies, transnational sustainability standards must increasingly navigate and respond to actors and interests within different geographies in order to gain and establish legitimacy. The recent development of Southern-oriented sustainability standards (as opposed to established Northern-led standards) reflects the existence of diverging perspectives on the appropriateness of established rules and procedures when it comes to the regulation of trade and production. These standards are seen as partially challenging established standards but may likely seek to establish legitimacy within the wider transnational field of sustainability governance. This article examines the case of a recently established India-based sustainability standard known as Trustea to illustrate how various actors managed design and policy dilemmas to reconcile the preferences and beliefs of various audiences. The case illustrates the significance of both “Northern” and “Southern” audiences to Trustea’s legitimacy-seeking strategies in the context of broader political contestations regarding how production should be governed in relation to sustainable practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalie J. Langford & Luc Fransen, 2022. "Building Legitimacy in an Era of Polycentric Trade: The Case of Transnational Sustainability Governance," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(3), pages 155-166.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:155-166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/5354
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Verena Bitzer & Alessia Marazzi, 2021. "Southern sustainability initiatives in agricultural value chains: a question of enhanced inclusiveness? The case of Trustea in India," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(2), pages 381-395, June.
    2. Jennifer Bair & Florence Palpacuer, 2015. "CSR beyond the corporation: contested governance in global value chains," Post-Print hal-02009049, HAL.
    3. Guido Palazzo & Andreas Scherer, 2006. "Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 71-88, June.
    4. Steven Bernstein & Benjamin Cashore, 2007. "Can non‐state global governance be legitimate? An analytical framework," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(4), pages 347-371, December.
    5. Allison Loconto & Eve Fouilleux, 2014. "Politics of private regulation: ISEAL and the shaping of transnational sustainability governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 166-185, June.
    6. Natalie J. Langford, 2021. "From Global to Local Tea Markets: The Changing Political Economy of Tea Production within India's Domestic Value Chain," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 52(6), pages 1445-1472, November.
    7. Abbott, Kenneth W. & Green, Jessica F. & Keohane, Robert O., 2016. "Organizational Ecology and Institutional Change in Global Governance," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 70(2), pages 247-277, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gerda van Roozendaal & Nienke de Deugd, 2022. "Current Challenges to the Legitimacy of International Economic and Financial Arrangements," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(3), pages 90-97.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    2. Irene Chu & Mai Chi Vu, 2022. "The Nature of the Self, Self-regulation and Moral Action: Implications from the Confucian Relational Self and Buddhist Non-self," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 245-262, September.
    3. Islam, Muhammad Azizul & Deegan, Craig & Haque, Shamima, 2021. "Corporate human rights performance and moral power: A study of retail MNCs’ supply chains in Bangladesh," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    4. Antonio Martos-Pedrero & David Jiménez-Castillo & Francisco Joaquín Cortés-García, 2022. "Examining drivers and outcomes of corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(3), pages 79-86.
    5. Andersen, Sophie Esmann & Johansen, Trine Susanne, 2021. "Corporate citizenship: Challenging the corporate centricity in corporate marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 686-699.
    6. Veronica Devenin & Constanza Bianchi, 2018. "Soccer fields? What for? Effectiveness of corporate social responsibility initiatives in the mining industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 866-879, September.
    7. Yuan-Shuh Lii & May-Ching Ding & Chih-Huang Lin, 2018. "Fair or Unfair: The Moderating Effect of Sustainable CSR Practices on Anticipatory Justice Following Service Failure Recovery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Jon Reast & François Maon & Adam Lindgreen & Joëlle Vanhamme, 2013. "Legitimacy-Seeking Organizational Strategies in Controversial Industries: A Case Study Analysis and a Bidimensional Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 139-153, November.
    9. Amal Aouadi & Sylvain Marsat, 2018. "Do ESG Controversies Matter for Firm Value? Evidence from International Data," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(4), pages 1027-1047, September.
    10. C. Randall Henning, 2019. "Regime Complexity and the Institutions of Crisis and Development Finance," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(1), pages 24-45, January.
    11. Gordon Liu & Catherine Liston-Heyes & Wai-Wai Ko, 2010. "Employee Participation in Cause-Related Marketing Strategies: A Study of Management Perceptions from British Consumer Service Industries," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 195-210, March.
    12. Simon Hartmann & Thomas Lindner & Jakob Müllner & Jonas Puck, 2022. "Beyond the nation-state: Anchoring supranational institutions in international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 1282-1306, August.
    13. Gagalyuk, Taras & Chatalova, Lioudmila & Kalyuzhnyy, Oleksandr & Ostapchuk, Igor, 2021. "Broadening the scope of instrumental motivations for CSR disclosure: An illustration for agroholdings in transition economies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(4), pages 717-737.
    14. Scherer, Andreas, 2013. "Legitimacy Strategies in a Globalized World: Organizing for Complex and Heterogeneous Environments," Papers 566, World Trade Institute.
    15. Philipp Pattberg, 2017. "The emergence of carbon disclosure: Exploring the role of governance entrepreneurs," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(8), pages 1437-1455, December.
    16. Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "Transnational public-private governance initiatives in world politics: Introducing a new dataset," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 137-174, January.
    17. Helmerich, Nicole & Raj-Reichert, Gale & Zajak, Sabrina, 2021. "Exercising associational and networked power through the use of digital technology by workers in global value chains," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 25(2), pages 142-166.
    18. J. Mahadeo & V. Oogarah-Hanuman & T. Soobaroyen, 2011. "A Longitudinal Study of Corporate Social Disclosures in a Developing Economy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(4), pages 545-558, December.
    19. Mette Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2022. "Ordering global governance complexes: The evolution of the governance complex for international civil aviation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 293-322, April.
    20. Hao Ren & Rongrong Wang & Suopeng Zhang & An Zhang, 2017. "How Do Internet Enterprises Obtain Sustainable Development of Organizational Ecology? A Case Study of LeEco Using Institutional Logic Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-21, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:155-166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.