IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v20y2020i3d10.1007_s10784-020-09489-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transforming our world? Discursive representation in the negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goals

Author

Listed:
  • Carole-Anne Sénit

    (Utrecht University)

Abstract

Calls to advance the democratization of sustainable development negotiations have recently proliferated. However, the participatory schemes set up by international organizations and governments have fallen short of answering to academic and empirical demands for global democracy, in particular by excluding the most marginalized actors from policymaking. Deliberative democrats argue that discursive representation may, in some contexts, overcome the shortcomings of actor-based representation and advance global democracy. To what extent, then, does discursive representation effectively contribute to the democratization of global policymaking by representing diverse interests, including those of marginalized actors? By performing a qualitative–quantitative discourse analysis of 122 primary documents issued during the formal sessions of negotiations of the Open Working Group on the Sustainable Development Goals, this article explores the extent to which different sustainability discourses that evolve in the public space got represented within authoritative circles of decision-making. While the negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goals involved more than ten million civil society voices and resulted in an agreement that claims to “transform our world” and “leave no-one behind,” the study shows that discursive representation was biased toward a progressive sustainability discourse, depicting a state-centric orientation of equity and responsibilities to address global sustainable development challenges. Besides, the coalitions that emerged between state and non-state actors on alternative sustainability discourses failed to increase the saliency of the interests of marginalized actors in the shaping of the goals. As the understandings of transformation and inclusiveness conveyed in the negotiations were biased toward the interests of the most represented actors in the Open Working Group, the article reveals that in the context of the negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goals the effectiveness of discursive representation in democratizing global policymaking was eventually limited.

Suggested Citation

  • Carole-Anne Sénit, 2020. "Transforming our world? Discursive representation in the negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 411-429, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:20:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10784-020-09489-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-020-09489-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-020-09489-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-020-09489-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Utting & Ann Zammit, 2009. "United Nations-Business Partnerships: Good Intentions and Contradictory Agendas," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 39-56, May.
    2. Maarten Hajer & Måns Nilsson & Kate Raworth & Peter Bakker & Frans Berkhout & Yvo De Boer & Johan Rockström & Kathrin Ludwig & Marcel Kok, 2015. "Beyond Cockpit-ism: Four Insights to Enhance the Transformative Potential of the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-10, February.
    3. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1856-1864, September.
    4. Dryzek, John S. & Stevenson, Hayley, 2011. "Global democracy and earth system governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1865-1874, September.
    5. Jane Briant Carant, 2017. "Unheard voices: a critical discourse analysis of the Millennium Development Goals’ evolution into the Sustainable Development Goals," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 16-41, January.
    6. Carole-Anne Sénit & Frank Biermann & Agni Kalfagianni, 2017. "The Representativeness of Global Deliberation: A Critical Assessment of Civil Society Consultations for Sustainable Development," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(1), pages 62-72, February.
    7. Liliana B. Andonova, 2010. "Public-Private Partnerships for the Earth: Politics and Patterns of Hybrid Authority in the Multilateral System," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(2), pages 25-53, May.
    8. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy: An analytical challenge for earth system governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1854-1855, September.
    9. Dryzek, John S. & Niemeyer, Simon, 2008. "Discursive Representation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(4), pages 481-493, November.
    10. Joshua C. Gellers, 2016. "Crowdsourcing global governance: sustainable development goals, civil society, and the pursuit of democratic legitimacy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 415-432, June.
    11. Jennifer Clapp & Peter Dauvergne, 2011. "Paths to a Green World: The Political Economy of the Global Environment," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262515822, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Carole-Anne Sénit, 0. "Transforming our world? Discursive representation in the negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-19.
    2. Nasiritousi, Naghmeh & Hjerpe, Mattias & Buhr, Katarina, 2014. "Pluralising climate change solutions? Views held and voiced by participants at the international climate change negotiations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 177-184.
    3. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    4. Biermann, Frank, 2012. "Planetary boundaries and earth system governance: Exploring the links," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 4-9.
    5. van Kerkhoff, Lorrae & Berry, Helen, 2016. "Serving the public good: Empirical links between governance and research investment in the context of global environmental change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 101-107.
    6. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    7. Joyeeta Gupta & Aarti Gupta & Courtney Vegelin, 2022. "Equity, justice and the SDGs: lessons learnt from two decades of INEA scholarship," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 393-409, June.
    8. Catacora-Vargas, Georgina & Tambutti, Marcia & Alvarado, Víctor & Rankovic, Aleksandar, 2022. "Governance approaches and practices in Latin America and the Caribbean for transformative change for biodiversity," Documentos de Proyectos 48542, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    9. Duncan Weaver, 2018. "The Aarhus convention and process cosmopolitanism," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 199-213, April.
    10. Teresa Kramarz & Susan Park, 2016. "Accountability in Global Environmental Governance: A Meaningful Tool for Action?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, May.
    11. Marin-Burgos, Victoria & Clancy, Joy S. & Lovett, Jon C., 2015. "Contesting legitimacy of voluntary sustainability certification schemes: Valuation languages and power asymmetries in the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 303-313.
    12. Pickering, Jonathan & Jotzo, Frank & Wood, Peter J., 2015. "Splitting the difference: can limited coordination achieve a fair distribution of the global climate financing effort?," Working Papers 249508, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    13. Cathrin Zengerling, 2019. "Governing the City of Flows: How Urban Metabolism Approaches May Strengthen Accountability in Strategic Planning," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 187-199.
    14. Michelle Scobie, 2018. "Accountability in climate change governance and Caribbean SIDS," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 769-787, April.
    15. Shukui Tan & Haipeng Song & Ghulam Akhmat & Javeed Hussain, 2014. "Governing Harmonious Human Engagement with the Spatial Capital," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-19, March.
    16. Michelle Scobie, 2020. "International aid, trade and investment and access and allocation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 239-254, June.
    17. Schouten, Greetje & Bitzer, Verena, 2015. "The emergence of Southern standards in agricultural value chains: A new trend in sustainability governance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 175-184.
    18. van Oosten, Cora & Runhaar, Hens & Arts, Bas, 2021. "Capable to govern landscape restoration? Exploring landscape governance capabilities, based on literature and stakeholder perceptions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    19. Klusáček, Petr & Alexandrescu, Filip & Osman, Robert & Malý, Jiří & Kunc, Josef & Dvořák, Petr & Frantál, Bohumil & Havlíček, Marek & Krejčí, Tomáš & Martinát, Stanislav & Skokanová, Hana & Trojan, Ja, 2018. "Good governance as a strategic choice in brownfield regeneration: Regional dynamics from the Czech Republic," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 29-39.
    20. Adelaide Glover & Heike Schroeder, 2017. "Legitimacy in REDD+ governance in Indonesia," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 695-708, October.

    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:spr:ieaple:v:20:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10784-020-09489-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.