The legitimacy of biofuel certification

The biofuel boom is placing enormous demands on existing cropping systems, with the most crucial consequences in the agri-food sector. The biofuel industry is responding by initiating private governance and certification. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and the Cramer Commission, among others, have formulated criteria on “sustainable” biofuel production and processing. This article explores the legitimacy of private governance and certification by the biofuel industry, highlighting opportunities and challenges. It argues that the concept of output based legitimacy is problematic in the case of biofuel as long as no consensus or commonly agreed “best” solution has been established on what sustainable biofuel production is. Furthermore, it shows that the private governance initiatives analyzed fail to adequately include actors from developing countries. Finally, the article argues that we need mechanisms for control and accountability in order to guarantee that the political output of biofuel certification serves the common welfare

Private governance in the biofuel industry

"The boom of biofuel is placing enormous demands on existing cropping systems, with most crucial consequences in the agro-food sector. For instance, spurred by the increasing use of corn for ethanol, tortilla prices in Mexico suddenly tripled in early 2007. While the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Jean Ziegler is demanding an international five-year ban on producing biofuels to combat soaring food prices, the biofuel industry is responding with first initiatives of private governance and certification. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil and the Cramer Commission among others have formulated criteria on 'sustainable' biofuel production and processing. The German Environmental Minister plans to impose compulsory blending of only certified biofuel with petrol available at German stations in the near future. This paper explores the legitimacy of private governance and certification by biofuel industry, highlighting opportunities and challenges. There are three dominant lines of argumentation when it comes to legitimacy of private governance. (1) Most authors argue highly (or only) output-oriented ('de facto' legitimacy). In case of biofuel, this is problematic as long as no consensus has been established on what sustainable biofuel production is. (2) Deliberative democratic theories tell us that deficits of input-legitimacy can be balanced by the participation and inclusion of stakeholders (legitimacy through stakeholder inclusion). When analysing the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil and the Cramer Commission, we find that both initiatives, in particular, fail to adequately include actors from the countries of production. (3) Finally, it is argued we need modalities for control and accountability in order to guarantee that the political output serves the common welfare (legitimacy through control and accountability). We will see that, again, the dominance of actors from the North is problematic because they cannot be held accountable by people in the South. Growing disaffection and lack of accountability are indicated by current hunger protests in the developing world." (author's abstract

Alternatives to Multilateralism

Analysis and case studies of emerging forms of private, public, and hybrid social and environmental governance. The effects of globalization on governance are complex and uncertain. As markets integrate, governments have become increasingly hesitant to enforce regulations inside their own jurisdictions. At the same time, multilateralism has proven unsuccessful in coordinating states' responses to global challenges. In this book, Lena Partzsch describes alternatives to multilateralism, offering analyses and case studies of emerging—alternative—forms of private, public, and hybrid social and environmental regulation. In doing so, she offers a unique overview of cutting-edge approaches to global governance. After laying the theoretical and empirical foundation of her argument, Partzsch presents three case studies from the countries most affected by these new forms of governance. Drawing on primary documents, interviews, and participatory observations, she analyzes cotton supply chains and voluntary (private) cotton certification in Ethiopia; public supply-chain regulation of “conflict resources” from the Democratic Republic of the Congo; and hybrid governance of palm oil production in Indonesia. Partzsch finds that the new entanglement of public and private regulation fails to address social and environmental considerations in mainstream markets; argues that only in exceptional cases do alternative forms of regulation overcome the power asymmetries between actors in the consuming countries of the Global North and those in the producing countries of the Global South; and concludes that, while the paradigm of free trade fades, we must continue to develop viable alternatives in order to pursue collective norms of environmental sustainability and social justice

City networks’ power in global agri-food systems

Cities and local governments loom large on the sustainability agenda. Networks such as Fair Trade Towns International (FTT) and the Organic Cities Network aim to bring about global policy change from below. Given the new enthusiasm for local approaches, it seems relevant to ask to what extent local groups exercise power and in what form. City networks present their members as “ethical places” exercising power with, rather than power over others. The article provides an empirical analysis of the power of FTT and Organic Cities in Germany. In both cases, we found cities that are eager to emphasize their inclusive potential. Their willingness to compromise is demonstrated most illustratively by the fact that several cities are members of both networks: While the FTT campaign aims to address problems of international trade but does not abandon it, Organic Cities advocate for a new localism based on food supply from farmers in the same region. In both cases, city networks use their purchasing power to increase the share of certified products. By doing so, the city networks reproduce privileged positions of consumers benefitting from the global capitalist order (power over). However, our analysis revealed that networks also make citizens reflect upon agri-food challenges and allow developing alternatives for more sustainable systems (power with)

Von Zukunftsgründern und Heldengeschichten

Social Entrepreneurship und insbesondere die Zusammenarbeit von Social Entrepreneurs bieten langfristig ein großes Nachhaltigkeits-Potenzial. Kurzfristig muss aber vor vermeintlichen Heldengeschichten und überzogenen Erwartungen gewarnt werde

Scoping article:Research frontiers on the governance of the Sustainable Development Goals

Non-Technical Summary: This article takes stock of the 2030 Agenda and focuses on five governance areas. In a nutshell, we see a quite patchy and often primarily symbolic uptake of the global goals. Although some studies highlight individual success stories of actors and institutions to implement the goals, it remains unclear how such cases can be upscaled and develop a broader political impact to accelerate the global endeavor to achieve sustainable development. We hence raise concerns about the overall effectiveness of governance by goal-setting and raise the question of how we can make this mode of governance more effective. Technical Summary: A recent meta-analysis on the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has shown that these global goals are moving political processes forward only incrementally, with much variation across countries, sectors, and governance levels. Consequently, the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development remains uncertain. Against this backdrop, this article explores where and how incremental political changes are taking place due to the SDGs, and under what conditions these developments can bolster sustainability transformations up to 2030 and beyond. Our scoping review builds upon an online expert survey directed at the scholarly community of the ‘Earth System Governance Project’ and structured dialogues within the ‘Taskforce on the SDGs’ under this project. We identified five governance areas where some effects of the SDGs have been observable: (1) global governance, (2) national policy integration, (3) subnational initiatives, (4) private governance, and (5) education and learning for sustainable development. This article delves deeper into these governance areas and draws lessons to guide empirical research on the promises and pitfalls of accelerating SDG implementation. Social Media Summary: As SDG implementation lags behind, this article explores 5 governance areas asking how to strengthen the global goals

Missing the SDGs: Political accountability for insufficient environmental action

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) demonstrate an integration of development and environmental agendas. However, none of the environmental sub-targets, which were due by 2020, were accomplished. Global governance through goal setting requires functioning mechanisms of accountability. Based on a theoretical framework that differentiates between public, private and voluntary logic of accountability, the article illustratively explores accountability mechanisms concerning the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This allows to discuss the untapped potential for holding power wielders, such as governments, private companies, and norm champions, accountable. While the SDGs were adopted within public governance institutions, there are regulative means of accountability available that follow private and voluntary logic. Acknowledging this hybrid character of accountability in the implementation stage, the article concludes that there is a need for additional research to explore dimensions of non-public accountability for goals agreed upon by the international community. SDG indicators should be mandatory for corporate reporting, and civil society organisations should report more comprehensively on the spread of environmental norms in global development