Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- Preface
- 1 Non-state actors as standard setters: framing the issue in an interdisciplinary fashion
- PART I New actors and processes in contemporary standard setting
- PART II The legitimacy and accountability of actors and standards
- PART III The authority and effectiveness of actors and standards
- 13 Standard setting for capital movements: reasserting sovereignty over transnational actors?
- 14 Certification as a new private global forest governance system: the regulatory potential of the Forest Stewardship Council
- 15 Private standards in the North – effective norms for the South?
- 16 International corporate social responsibility standards: imposing or imitating business responsibility in Lithuania?
- 17 Legal pluralism under the influence of globalisation: a case study of child adoption in Tanzania
- 18 Towards non-state actors as effective, legitimate, and accountable standard setters
- Index
- References
14 - Certification as a new private global forest governance system: the regulatory potential of the Forest Stewardship Council
from PART III - The authority and effectiveness of actors and standards
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 January 2010
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- Preface
- 1 Non-state actors as standard setters: framing the issue in an interdisciplinary fashion
- PART I New actors and processes in contemporary standard setting
- PART II The legitimacy and accountability of actors and standards
- PART III The authority and effectiveness of actors and standards
- 13 Standard setting for capital movements: reasserting sovereignty over transnational actors?
- 14 Certification as a new private global forest governance system: the regulatory potential of the Forest Stewardship Council
- 15 Private standards in the North – effective norms for the South?
- 16 International corporate social responsibility standards: imposing or imitating business responsibility in Lithuania?
- 17 Legal pluralism under the influence of globalisation: a case study of child adoption in Tanzania
- 18 Towards non-state actors as effective, legitimate, and accountable standard setters
- Index
- References
Summary
The failure of intergovernmental negotiation processes on forests
As ‘global public goods’ that benefit numerous states and cannot be controlled by any one, forests present a particular challenge to national regulators. In response, governments began in the early 1980s to negotiate on forest regulation. These intergovernmental coordination efforts aimed to create binding and hierarchical measures for implementing international policies at the national level and produced forest management and protection standards. They therefore resulted in the creation of a ‘regime’, that is, ‘a set of principles, standards, rules and decision-making procedures, whether explicit or implicit, around which actors’ expectations converge in a specific area of international relations'. However, from the beginning, it was a regime weakened by fragmentation.
A fragmented international architecture
The architecture of international forest regulation is complex and segmented, due to the overlapping responsibilities for forest issues among different institutions and instruments. The forest negotiation process at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit resulted in non-binding texts, including the Forest Declaration and Chapter 11 of Agenda 21, and continues today under the auspices of the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF). Two other multilateral instruments are specifically devoted to forests: the International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA) and the FAO Committee on Forestry. Other non-specific international mechanisms incorporate provisions that are essential for forests. In particular, the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) regards forests as carbon sinks and the prevention of deforestation as a means of combating carbon emissions.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Non-State Actors as Standard Setters , pp. 379 - 408Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
1998, ‘The Political Influence of Global NGOs’, Case Studies on the Climate Change and Biodiversity Convention, Utrecht, International Books.Google Scholar
and 2002, ‘Forest Certification: Pending Challenges for Tropical Timber’, ITTO Technical Series, no. 19, Yokohama.Google Scholar
et al. 1998, ‘Costs and Benefits of Forest Management for Timber Production in Eastern Amazonia’, Forest Ecology and Management, no. 108, 9–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, ‘Certification as a Manifestation of Changing Roles in Forestry’, Making Forest Policy Work, Oxford Forestry Institute.Google Scholar
2002, ‘Global Forest Governance: Emerging Impacts of the Forest Stewardship Council’, Berlin, SUSTRA Workshop on Architecture of the Global System of Governance of Trade and Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
et al. 2004, Avaliação de Certificação do Manejo Florestal das Florestas Naturais da Cikel Brasil Verde S.A., Brasilia, SCS.Google Scholar
2004, Barriers to Forest Certification in Developing Tropical Countries, University of Toronto, Faculty of Forestry.Google Scholar
and 2005, ‘Public–Private Partnerships: Effective and Legitimate Tools of International Governance?’ in and (eds.), Complex Sovereignty: Reconstituting Political Authority in the 21st Century, University of Toronto Press, 195–216.Google Scholar
et al. 2001, Agir dans un Monde Incertain: Essai sur la Démocratie Technique, Paris, Le Seuil.Google Scholar
2004, O Dinheiro é Verde? A Construção Social do Mercado de Madeiras Certificadas na Amazônia Brasileira, Universidade Federal de Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Filosofia e Estudos Sociais.Google Scholar
and 2005, ‘Non-State Global Governance: Is Forest Certification a Legitimate Alternative to a Global Forest Convention?’ in and (eds.), Hard Choices, Soft Law: Combining Trade, Environment and Social Cohesion in Global Governance, Aldershot, Ashgate.Google Scholar
2002, ‘Legitimacy and the Privatization of Environmental Governance: How Non-State Market-Driven (NSMD) Governance Systems Gain Rule-Making Authority’, Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions, vol. 15, no. 4, 503–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2006, L'Aménagement des Concessions Forestières en Amazonie Brésilienne et dans le Bassin du Congo: Un Echange d'Expérience, La lettre de l'ATIBT, no. 24.
2001, The Development of Global Forest Policy: Overview of Legal and Institutional Frameworks, Genève, IISD – WBCSD.Google Scholar
and 2002, Trading in Credibility: The Myth and Reality of the Forest Stewardship Council, London, The Rainforest Foundation.Google Scholar
et al. 1999, Private Authority and International Affairs, State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
forthcoming, ‘Global Governance and the South: The Affirmative Procedures of the Forest Stewardship Council’, Global Governance, vol. 14.
2005, ‘Does Private Regulation Work in Developing Countries? Private Environmental Regulatory Programs in the Argentine and Brazilian Chemical and Forestry Industries’, Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College Conference on Institutional Mechanisms for Self-Regulation, Berkeley, University of California.Google Scholar
and 2000, Stakeholders' Viewpoints of Forest Certification Processes in Brazilian Amazon: An Opportunity of Reflection for FSC's Secretariat, Belem, Board, Members and Supporters, Belem.Google Scholar
2006, ‘Regulating the Market in an Era of Globalisation: Global Governance via the Forest Stewardship Council’, Newcastle, Australasian Political Studies Association (APSA) Conference.
et al., 2006, ‘Community-Based Forest Management Certification in Brazil: A Sustainable Initiative?’, Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Colloque Gestion concertée des ressources naturelles et de l'environnement.
et al. 2002, ‘L'action des nouveaux mouvements sociaux économiques et le potentiel régulatoire de la certification dans le domaine forestier’, Les cahiers de la Chaire collection recherche, no. 08, UQAM, Montréal.Google Scholar
and 2005, ‘Configuration des nouveaux mouvements sociaux économiques: Résultats préliminaires’, Les Cahiers de Chaire collection recherche, no. 07, UQAM, Montréal.Google Scholar
2006, Livre blanc sur les forêts tropicales humides, Paris, La documentation française.Google Scholar
2002, ‘La forêt tropicale: entre fourniture de bien public global et régulation privée, quelle place pour l'instrument certification?’ in (ed.), L'outil économique en droit international et européen de l'environnement, Paris, La documentation française.Google Scholar
and 2007, ‘Global Forest Governance: Effectiveness, Fairness and Legitimacy of Market-Driven Approaches’ in and (eds.), Participation for Sustainability in Trade, Aldershot, Ashgate.Google Scholar
2004, ‘Overlapping Public and Private Governance: Can Forest Certification Fill the Gaps in the Global Forest Regime?, Global Environmental Politics, vol. 4, no. 2, 75–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘The Effectiveness of Non-State Governance Schemes: A Comparative Study of Forest Certification in Norway and Sweden’, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, vol. 5, no. 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003, ‘Does Forest Certification Conserve Biodiversity?’, Oryx, vol. 37, no. 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003, ‘New Forms of Governance: Certification Regimes as Social Regulations of the Global Market’ in et al. (eds.), Social and Political Dimensions of Forest Certification, www.forsbuch.de, Remagen-Oberwinter.Google Scholar
and 1999, Gouvernance: Note de Synthèse. Available at: www.urbanisme.equipement.gouv.fr/cdu/accueil/bibliographies/gouvernance/note.htm.
et al. 2002, 2nd edn, Custos e Benefícios Financeiros da Exploração Florestal de Impacto Reduzido em Comparaçãoà Exploração Florestal Convencional na Amazônia Oriental, Belém, Fundação Floresta Tropical.Google Scholar
1999, ‘The Evolving Forest Regime’, Global Environmental Change, vol. 3, no. 9, 251–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2006, ‘Status of Tropical Forest Management’, ITTO Technical Series, no. 24, Yokahoma.Google Scholar
and 2004, ‘Les “concessions de conservation” sonnent-elles le glas de l'aménagement forestier durable?’, Revue Tiers Monde, no. 177.Google Scholar
1999, Les instruments économiques de la forêt tropicale: le cas de l'Afrique centrale, Paris, Maisonneuve et Larose.Google Scholar
and 1998, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics, Ithaca, Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
2004, Global Governance Through Transnational Network Organizations. The Scope and Limitations of Civil Society Self-Organization, Berlin, WZB Discussion paper.
and 2002, ‘Precious Woods Amazon (PWA) and Gethal; Certification of Industrial Forestry in the Native Amazon Rainforest’ in and (eds.), Trading in Credibility: The Myth and Reality of the Forest Stewardship Council, London, The Rainforest Foundation, London.Google Scholar
2005, ‘La certification dans le secteur forestier: qui en profite réellement?’ in Configuration des nouveaux mouvements sociaux économiques: Résultats préliminaires, Montréal, Les Cahiers de Chaire collection recherché, no. 07, UQAM.Google Scholar
2005, Position sur l'écocertification, Paris, French Working Group on Tropical Rainforests.Google Scholar
2003, ‘Forest Certification as a Global Civil Society Regulatory Institution’ in et al. (eds.), Social and Political Dimensions of Forest Certification, www.forsbuch.de, Remagen-Oberwinter.
et al. 2005, ‘Does Forest Certification Matter? An Analysis of Operation-Level Changes Required During the SmartWood Certification Process in the United States’, Journal of Forest Policy and Economics, no. 9.Google Scholar
and 2004, ‘Gestion durable des forêts et incitations directes à la conservation de la diversité’, Revue Tiers Monde, no. 177.Google Scholar
et al. 2000, Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1997, ‘Willingness to Pay for Environmentally Certified Wood Products: A Consumer Perspective’, Forest Products Journal, vol. 47, no. 6, 39–48.Google Scholar
and 2003, ‘Certification from the US Consumer Perspective: A Comparison from 1995 and 2000’, Forest Products Journal, vol. 53, no. 3, 13–21.Google Scholar
and 2004, Footprints in the Forest: Current Practice and Future Challenges in Forest Certification, Bruxelles, FERN.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Transnational Organization(s) as Governance: A Comparative Analysis of Private Rules beyond the State’, International Organizations and Global Environmental Governance Conference, Berlin, The Global Governance Project.Google Scholar
2004, The Institutionalisation of Private Governance: Conceptualising an Emerging Trend in Global Environmental Politics, Global Governance Working Paper No. 9, Berlin, The Global Governance Project.Google Scholar
2006, Global Governance: Reconstructing a Contested Social Science Concept, GARNET Working Paper No. 04, University of Warwick.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Sem-toras ameaçam as florestas certificadas’, O Diario do Para, 1 July.
and 2000, Critical Choices: The United Nations, Networks and the Future of Global Governance, Ottawa, International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
2004, Certification in Complex Socio-Political Settings, Washington DC, Forest Trends.Google Scholar
1987, Governance without Government: Systems of Rule in World Politics, Los Angeles, Institute for Transnational Studies, University of South California.Google Scholar
and 1992, Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, Legal Instruments to Enhance the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Forest Resources at the International Level, Bonn, BMZ – GTZ.Google Scholar
1999, Assessing the International Forest Regime, Gland, IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper, no. 37.
1999, ‘Overview of Global Trends in FSC Certificates’, Instruments for Sustainable Private Sector Forestry, London, IIED.Google Scholar
et al. 2000, L'accès difficile aux avantages de la certification. Discussion des incidences sur l'équité, Joensuu, European Forest Institute, Document de discussion no. 8.Google Scholar
et al. 2002, The Timber Footprint of the G8 and China. Making the Case for Green Procurement by Government, Gland, WWF.Google Scholar
and 2003, Gouvernance mondiale des forêts: Une évaluation à partir de l'analyse de la position des organisations non gouvernementales, Paris, Iddri.Google Scholar
1997, Global Governance: Drawing Insights from the Environmental Experience, Cambridge, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.
- 5
- Cited by