Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-x64cq Total loading time: 0.443 Render date: 2022-05-28T00:44:49.687Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Private experiments in global governance: primary commodity roundtables and the politics of deliberation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2012

James Brassett
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, International Political Economy, Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Ben Richardson
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, International Political Economy, Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
William Smith
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Social and Political Theory, Department of Government and Public Administration, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong

Abstract

Emerging scholarship on global governance offers ever-more detailed analyses of private regulatory regimes. These regimes aim to regulate some area of social activity without a mandate from, or participation of, states or international organizations. While there are numerous empirical studies of these regimes, the normative theoretical literature has arguably struggled to keep pace with such developments. This is unfortunate, as the proliferation of private regulatory regimes raises important issues about legitimacy in global governance. The aim of this paper is to address some of these issues by elaborating a theoretical framework that can orientate normative investigation of these schemes. It does this through turning to the idea of experimentalist governance. It is argued that experimentalism can provide an important and provocative set of insights about the processes and logics of emerging governance schemes. The critical purchase of this theory is illustrated through an application to the case of primary commodities roundtables, part of ongoing attempts by non-governmental organizations, producers, and buyers to set sustainability criteria for commodity production across a range of sectors. The idea of experimentalist governance, we argue, can lend much needed theoretical structure to debates about the normative legitimacy of private regulatory regimes.

Type
Original Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, KennethSnidal, Duncan. 2009a. “Strengthening International Regulation through Transnational New Governance: Overcoming the Orchestration Deficit.” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 42:503577.Google Scholar
Abbott, KennethSnidal, Duncan 2009b. “The Governance Triangle: Regulatory Standards Institutions and the Shadow of the State.” In The Politics of Global Regulation, edited by Walter Mattli and Ngaire Woods, 4488. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Altman, AndrewWellman, Christopher Heath. 2009. A Liberal Theory of International Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansell, Christopher K. 2011. Pragmatist Democracy: Evolutionary Learning as Public Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beetham, David. 1991. The Legitimation of Power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Steven. 2011. “Legitimacy in Intergovernmental and Nonstate Global Governance.” Review of International Political Economy 18(1):1751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Steven, Betsill, Michele, Hoffman, MatthewPaterson, Matthew. 2010. “A Tale of Two Copenhagens: Carbon Markets and Climate Governance.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39(1):161173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Julia. 2008. “Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric Regulatory Regimes.” Regulation & Governance 2:137164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brassett, JamesTsingou, Eleni. 2011. “The Politics of Legitimate Global Governance.” Review of International Political Economy 18(1):116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Garrett. 2010. “Safeguarding Deliberative Global Governance: The Case of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.” Review of International Studies 36:511530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, Allen. 2010. “The Legitimacy of International Law.” In The Philosophy of International Law, edited by Samantha Besson, and John Tasioulas, 79–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, AllenKeohane, Robert O.. 2006. “The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions.” Ethics & International Affairs 20:405437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashore, Benjamin. 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 15(4):503529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Amy J. 2010. “Governance Legalism: Hayek and Sabel on Reason and Rules, Organization and Law.” Wisconsin Law Review 2:357387.Google Scholar
Cohen, JoshuaSabel, Charles. 1997. “Directly Deliberative Polyarchy.” European Law Journal 3(4):313340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, JoshuaSabel, Charles 2006. “Global Democracy?NYU Journal of International Law and Politics 37(4):763797.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 2010. “Communication from the European Commission on Voluntary Schemes and Default Values in the EU Biofuels and Bioliquids Sustainability Scheme.” Official Journal of the European Union 160/01, 19 June, 1–7.Google Scholar
Corporate Europe Observatory, Transnational Institute and Grupo de Reflexión Rural. 2007. “Paving the Way for Agrofuels: EU Policy, Sustainability Criteria and Climate Calculations.” Joint Discussion Paper, September 2007. Available at: http://www.cbd.int/doc/biofuel/Econexus%20Discussion%20Paper%20Agrofuels.pdf.Google Scholar
Corporate Europe Observatory. 2009. “Sugarcane Ethanol: A Sweet Solution for Europe's Fuel Addiction?” CEO Report, February 2009. Available at: http://www.corporateeurope.org/agrofuels/content/2009/02/sugar-cane-ethanol-not-so-sweet.Google Scholar
Cutler, A. Claire, Haufler, VirginiaPorter, Tony, eds. 1999. Private Authority and International Affairs. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Dawson, Mark. 2010. “Transforming Into What? New Governance in the EU and the ‘Managerial Sensibility’ in Modern Law.” Wisconsin Law Review 2:389440.Google Scholar
De Búrca, Gráinne. 2010. “New Governance And Experimentalism: An Introduction.” Wisconsin Law Review 2:227238.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2006. Deliberative Global Politics: Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2010. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fransen, Luc W.Kolk, Ans. 2007. “Global Rule-Setting for Business: A Critical Analysis of Multi-Stakeholder Standards.” Organization 14(5):667684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friends of the Earth Europe. 2008. “Sustainability as a Smokescreen: The Inadequacy of Certifying Fuels and Feeds.” Friends of the Earth Report, April. Available at: http://www.foeeurope.org/publications/2008/sustainability_smokescreen_fullreport_med_res.pdf.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2003. “Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and their Consequences.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 11:338367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Archon, O'Rourke, Dara, Sabel, Charles. 2001. “Realizing Labour Standards.” Boston Review, February/March.Google Scholar
Gale, Fred, Haward, Marcus. 2004. “Public Accountability in Private Regulation: Contrasting Models of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Marine Stewardship Council (MSC).” Paper prepared for the Australasian Political Studies Association Conference, University of Adelaide, Australia, September 29–October 1 2004.Google Scholar
Gerstenburg, Oliver. 1997. “Law's Polyarchy: A Comment on Cohen and Sabel.” European Law Journal 3(4):343358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerstenberg, OliverCharles, Sabel. 2002. “Directly Deliberative Polyarchy: An Institutional Ideal for Europe?.” In Good Governance in Europe's Integrated Market, edited by Christian Joerges, and Renaud Dehousse, 289–342. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbon, PeterLazaro, Evelyne. 2010. “Agro-Food Standards and Africa: An Introduction.” In Global Agro-Food Trade and Standards, edited by Peter Gibbon, Stefano Ponte, and Evelyne Lazaro, 1–20. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, Robert. 2008. Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice after the Deliberative Turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenpeace. 2008. United Plantations Certified Despite Gross Violations of RSPO Standards. Amsterdam: Greenpeace Netherlands.Google Scholar
Greenpeace 2010. “Sinar Mas Gets Ultimatum from RSPO over Palm Oil and Deforestation.” Greenpeace blog, September 24. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/sinar-mas-gets-ultimatum-from-rspo-over-palm-/blog/26480/.Google Scholar
Gulbrandsen, Lars H. 2008. “Accountability Arrangements in Non-State Standards Organizations: Institutional Design and Imitation.” Organization 15(4):563583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, R.B.Biersteker, T.J., eds. 2002. The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, Carolyn M. 2008. “On Inclusion and Network Governance: The Democratic Disconnect of Dutch Energy Transitions.” Public Administration 86(4):10091031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgens, WintonTamm Hallström, Kristina. 2007. “Standardization, Globalization and Rationalities of Government.” Organization 14(5):685704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgott, Richard, Underhill, GeoffreyBieler, Andreas, eds. 2000. Non-State Actors and Authority in the Global System. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kell, GeorgRuggie, John Gerard. 2001. “Global Markets and Social Legitimacy: The Case of the ‘Global Compact’.” In The Market or the Public Domain? Global Governance and the Asymmetry of Power, edited by Daniel Drache, 321334. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Koenig-Archibugi, Mathais. 2005. “Transnational Corporations and Public Accountability.” In Global Governance and Public Accountability, edited by David Held, and Mathais Koenig-Archibugi, 110135. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Krasner, Stephen. 1983. “Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables.” In International Regimes, edited by Stephen Krasner, 121. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Macdonald, Terry. 2008. Global Stakeholder Democracy: Power and Representation Beyond Liberal States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchetti, Raffaele. 2012. “Models of Global Democracy: In Defence of Cosmo-Federalism.” In Global Democracy: Normative and Empirical Perspectives, edited by Danielle Archibugi, Mathias Koenig-Archibugi, and Raffaele Marchetti, 2246. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Overdevest, Christine. 2010. “Comparing Forest Certification Schemes: The Case of Ratcheting Standards in the Forest Sector.” Socio-Economic Review 8:4776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overdevest, ChristineZeitlin, Jonathan. 2012. “Assembling an Experimentalist Regime: Transnational Governance Interactions in the Forest Sector.” Regulation & Governance doi: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01133.x.Google Scholar
Oxfam. 2011. “Land and Power: The Growing Scandal Surrounding the New Wave of Investment in Land.” Briefing Paper, September. Available at: http://www.oxfam.de/sites/www.oxfam.de/files/bp151-land-power-land-rights-220911-en.pdf.Google Scholar
Partzsch, Lena. 2011. “The Legitimacy of Biofuel Certification.” Agriculture and Human Values 28(3):413425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pogge, Thomas. 2007. “Moral Priorities for International Human Rights NGOs.” In Ethics in Action: The Ethical Challenges of International Human Rights Nongovernmental Organizations, edited by Daniel A. Bell, and Jean-Marc Coicaud, 218256. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Richardson, Ben. 2013. “The Governance of Global Commodities Trading.” In The Handbook of International Political Economy of Governance, edited by Tony Payne, and Nicola Phillips. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Roundtable for a Sustainable Cocoa Economy. 2009. “Report of the Second roundtable for a Sustainable Cocoa Economy (RSCE2).” Available at: http://www.roundtablecocoa.org/showpage.asp?Reportrsce2.Google Scholar
Sabel, Charles. 2004. “Beyond Principal-Agent Governance: Experimentalist Organizations, Learning and Accountability.” In De Staat van de Democratie. Democratie voorbij de Staat, edited by Ewald Engelen and Monika Sie Dhian Ho, 173195. WRR Verkenning 3 Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Sabel, CharlesSimon, William H.. 2011. “Minimalism and Experimentalism in American Public Law.” Georgetown Law Review 100(1):5393.Google Scholar
Sabel, CharlesZeitlin, Jonathan. 2008. “Learning from Difference: the New Architecture of Experimentalist Governance in the European Union.” European Law Journal 14(3):271327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabel, CharlesZeitlen, Jonathan, eds. 2010. Experimentalist Governance in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sabel, Charles, Zeitlen, Jonathan. 2011. “Experimentalism in Transnational Governance: Emergent Pathways and Diffusion Mechanisms.” Paper presented at the International Studies Association Conference, Montreal.Google Scholar
Sabel, Charles, Zeitlen, Jonathan 2012. “Experimentalist Governance.” In The Oxford Handbook of Governance, edited by David Levi-Faur, 169183. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William E. 2004. “Democratic Experimentalism or Capitalist Synchronization: Critical Reflections on Directly-Deliberative Polyarchy.” Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 17:101127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart. 2005. Globalization: A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart 2011. “Towards Greater Legitimacy in Global Governance.” Review of International Political Economy 18:110120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, Colin. 2002. “Private Regulation of the Public Sector: A Neglected Facet of Contemporary Governance.” Journal of Law and Society 29:5676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, WilliamBrassett, James. 2008. “Deliberation and Global Governance: Liberal, Cosmopolitan and Critical Perspectives.” Ethics and International Affairs 22(1):6992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strange, Susan. 1996. The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Super, David A. 2008. “Laboratories of Destitution: Democratic Experimentalism and the Failure of Anti-Poverty Law.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 157:541616.Google Scholar
Tamm Hallström, KristinaBoström, Magnus. 2010. Transnational Multi-Stakeholder Standardization. Organizing Fragile Non-State Authority. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utting, Peter. 2002. “Regulating Business via Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives.” In Voluntary Approaches to Corporate Responsibility: Readings and a Resource Guide, edited by NGLS/UNRISD, 1–37. Geneva: NGLS/UNRISD.Google Scholar
World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). 2010a. “Certification and Roundtables: Do They Work?” WWF Report, September 2010. Available at: http://assets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_msireview_sept_2010_lowres.pdf.Google Scholar
World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) 2010b. “New Method Emerges to Deter ‘Indirect’ Land Grab for Biofuel Production.” Press Release, 8 October 2010. Available at: http://wwf.panda.org/who_we_are/wwf_offices/brazil/news/?uNewsID=195535.Google Scholar
Zhou, R. 2010. “Greenwashing the Palm Oil Industry.” Reportage/Enviro, 3 February.Google Scholar
16
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Private experiments in global governance: primary commodity roundtables and the politics of deliberation
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Private experiments in global governance: primary commodity roundtables and the politics of deliberation
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Private experiments in global governance: primary commodity roundtables and the politics of deliberation
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *