IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/glenvp/v8y2008i3p103-121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Private Rule-Making and the Politics of Accountability: Analyzing Global Forest Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Sander Chan

    (Sander Chan is a Ph.D. candidate at the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije University, Amsterdam. His research focuses on transnational multi-stakeholder networks in global sustainability politics with a special emphasis on environmental governance in China. His publications include "Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: does the promise hold?" in Partnerships, Governance and Sustainable Development. Reflections on Theory and Practice, edited by P. Glasbergen, F. Biermann and A. P. J. Mol (2007).)

  • Philipp Pattberg

    (Philipp Pattberg is a senior researcher at the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije University, Amsterdam, and an Assistant Professor for International Relations at the Department of Political Science, Vrije University, Amsterdam. He is also the research coordinator of the International Global Governance Project (glogov.org). His publications include Private Institutions and Global Governance: The New Politics of Environmental Sustainability (2007) and a number of journal articles in Annual Review of Environment and Resources; Global Governance; Governance; and Third World Quarterly, among others.)

Abstract

Private rule-making features prominently on the research agenda of International Relations scholars today. The field of forest politics in particular has proven to be a lively arena for experimenting with novel policies (for example, third party certification and labeling) and procedures (for example, power-sharing in stakeholder bodies). This article focuses on the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), one of the earliest and most institutionalized private certification schemes, in order to assess the role and relevance of accountability politics for global forest governance. Specifically, we ask three related questions: first, what role did a deepening accountability crisis and the resulting reconstruction of accountability play in the formation of the FSC? Second, how is accountability organized within the FSC? And finally, what accountability outcomes emerge as a result of the FSC's policies and operations? The article closes with some reflections about the limitations of private-based accountability in global environmental politics. (c) 2008 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Sander Chan & Philipp Pattberg, 2008. "Private Rule-Making and the Politics of Accountability: Analyzing Global Forest Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 8(3), pages 103-121, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:8:y:2008:i:3:p:103-121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/glep.2008.8.3.103
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Giessen, Lukas & Krott, Max & Möllmann, Torsten, 2014. "Increasing representation of states by utilitarian as compared to environmental bureaucracies in international forest and forest–environmental policy negotiations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 97-104.
    2. Carmen Rodríguez Fernández-Blanco & Sarah L. Burns & Lukas Giessen, 2019. "Mapping the fragmentation of the international forest regime complex: institutional elements, conflicts and synergies," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 187-205, April.
    3. Ingo Take, 2012. "Regulating the Internet infrastructure: A comparative appraisal of the legitimacy of ICANN, ITU, and the WSIS," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), pages 499-523, December.
    4. A. Marx & E. Bécault & J. Wouters, 2012. "Private Standards in Forestry. Assessing the Legitimacy and Effectiveness of the Forest Stewardship Council," Chapters, in: Axel Marx & Miet Maertens & Johan Swinnen & Jan Wouters (ed.), Private Standards and Global Governance, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Frederick Ahen, 2019. "Making Resource Democracy Radically Meaningful for Stakeowners: Our World, Our Rules?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Shkaruba, Anton, 2018. "Governance and legitimacy of the Forest Stewardship Council certification in the national contexts – A comparative study of Belarus and Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 180-188.
    7. Rafael, Gabriel C. & Fonseca, Alberto & Jacovine, Laércio Antônio Gonçalves, 2018. "Non-conformities to the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) standards: Empirical evidence and implications for policy-making in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 59-69.
    8. Aarti Gupta, 2010. "Transparency to What End? Governing by Disclosure through the Biosafety Clearing House," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 28(1), pages 128-144, February.
    9. Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias & Macdonald, Kate, 2017. "The role of beneficiaries in transnational regulatory processes," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68757, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. FabianG. Neuner, 2020. "Public Opinion and the Legitimacy of Global Private EnvironmentalGovernance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(1), pages 60-81, February.
    11. Mathias Koenig-Archibugi & Kate Macdonald, 2017. "The Role of Beneficiaries in Transnational Regulatory Processes," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 670(1), pages 36-57, March.
    12. Secco, Laura & Pettenella, Davide & Gatto, Paola, 2011. "Forestry governance and collective learning process in Italy: Likelihood or utopia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 104-112.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Steve Williams & Brian Abbott & Edmund Heery, 2017. "Civil Governance in Work and Employment Relations: How Civil Society Organizations Contribute to Systems of Labour Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 103-119, August.
    16. Frank Biermann & Michele Betsill & Joyeeta Gupta & Norichika Kanie & Louis Lebel & Diana Liverman & Heike Schroeder & Bernd Siebenhüner & Ruben Zondervan, 2010. "Earth system governance: a research framework," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 277-298, December.
    17. Aarti Gupta & Harro van Asselt, 2019. "Transparency in multilateral climate politics: Furthering (or distracting from) accountability?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 18-34, March.
    18. Lena Partzsch, 2017. "Powerful Individuals in a Globalized World," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(1), pages 5-13, February.
    19. Sarah L. Stattman & Aarti Gupta & Lena Partzsch & Peter Oosterveer, 2018. "Toward Sustainable Biofuels in the European Union? Lessons from a Decade of Hybrid Biofuel Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    20. Cille Kaiser, 2022. "Rethinking polycentricity: on the North–South imbalances in transnational climate change governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 693-713, December.
    21. Stephen Wyatt & Sara Teitelbaum, 2020. "Certifying a state forestry agency in Quebec: Complementarity and conflict around government responsibilities, indigenous rights, and certification of the state as forest manager," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 551-567, July.
    22. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:tpr:glenvp:v:8:y:2008:i:3:p:103-121. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    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.