Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.4324/9780203139486-36
O. Malets, S. Quack
In this chapter, we explain why and how a set of global ideas of stakeholder/constituency participation, inclusiveness, and fair representation are built into transnational standard-setting organizations’ structures and procedures and how local ideas and concerns are reflected in them. We show that this does not occur in one single manner across various governance fields and identify two trajectories along which transnational governance fields emerge and develop — monopolistic and pluralistic. We demonstrate in two empirical case-studies — financial accounting and forest management standards — how three sets of factors, including initial organizational design, challenges and contestation, and organizational responsiveness, shape these trajectories. We ground our analysis on the notion of glocalization and the literature on transnational standard-setting emphasizing the contested nature of governance fields.
{"title":"Projecting the Local into the Global: Trajectories of Participation in Transnational Standard-Setting","authors":"O. Malets, S. Quack","doi":"10.4324/9780203139486-36","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203139486-36","url":null,"abstract":"In this chapter, we explain why and how a set of global ideas of stakeholder/constituency participation, inclusiveness, and fair representation are built into transnational standard-setting organizations’ structures and procedures and how local ideas and concerns are reflected in them. We show that this does not occur in one single manner across various governance fields and identify two trajectories along which transnational governance fields emerge and develop — monopolistic and pluralistic. We demonstrate in two empirical case-studies — financial accounting and forest management standards — how three sets of factors, including initial organizational design, challenges and contestation, and organizational responsiveness, shape these trajectories. We ground our analysis on the notion of glocalization and the literature on transnational standard-setting emphasizing the contested nature of governance fields.","PeriodicalId":118088,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121912806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Overall the analysis in this paper agrees with the Adam Smith Institute in that: There is a serious need for ongoing research and evaluation of Fair Trade (and indeed any poverty reduction or developmental intervention) to ensure that resources are not wasted in well intended yet inefficient, or, utility reducing strategies. Fair Trade should not be accepted or promoted as, the only or the best consumption based strategy for alleviating poverty. There are many worthy certification schemes and charities that are well deserving of support. The provision of appropriate incentives for producers and consumers inside a regime of international trade is strongly linked to incidences of economic growth and poverty reduction. However, our own analysis leads us to seriously question other aspects of the Adam Smith Report in that: 1. The specific arguments against Fair Trade lack a credible basis in either empirical evidence or theoretical understanding because: Many of them are no more than assertions bereft of any attempt to cite evidence. While some points do reference appropriately rigorous academic and institutional research, other evidence is of a lower and arguably insufficient standard of credibility. 2. There is a lack of cohesion as many of the criticisms of Fair Trade contradict the suggestion that patronage is allocated to other mechanisms instead. 3. Any idea of positive benefit from Fair Trade governance remains unexplored. 4. The lack of sophistication extends to the evidence cited in support of the argument that universal liberalisation is the best way to reduce poverty. Ultimately it is suggested that the Adam Smith report: Fails to establish suitable grounds for the rejection of Fair Trade. Fails to establish an appropriately credible case in favour of trade liberalisation. Fails to take an appropriately rigorous attitude to the evaluation of what are incredibly important issues. In place of the approach taken in the Adam Smith report this analysis suggests that: 1. The cases of China, India and Hong Kong show that it is the appropriate management of local economies in their interaction with the wider world that is the best way to reduce poverty. Far from universal liberalisation this has often included the active management of price incentives as well as direct investment to build the capabilities of local business and the poor. 2. Financially poor actors should not always be expected to voluntarily respond to market incentives because: The developing world is characterised by levels of risk and instability that can make long term planning difficult to carry out. By definition the poor lack the capabilities necessary to meet the immediate and longer term costs of diversification into more beneficial incomes strategies. The developing world often lacks the market incentive structures necessary to promote the structural change that might be necessary to reduce poverty. 3. Poor commodity producers are likely to be assisted in their effort to
{"title":"A Response to the Adam Smith Report & A New Way to Think About Measuring the Content of the Fair Trade Cup","authors":"Alastair M. Smith","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1543903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1543903","url":null,"abstract":"Overall the analysis in this paper agrees with the Adam Smith Institute in that: There is a serious need for ongoing research and evaluation of Fair Trade (and indeed any poverty reduction or developmental intervention) to ensure that resources are not wasted in well intended yet inefficient, or, utility reducing strategies. Fair Trade should not be accepted or promoted as, the only or the best consumption based strategy for alleviating poverty. There are many worthy certification schemes and charities that are well deserving of support. The provision of appropriate incentives for producers and consumers inside a regime of international trade is strongly linked to incidences of economic growth and poverty reduction. However, our own analysis leads us to seriously question other aspects of the Adam Smith Report in that: 1. The specific arguments against Fair Trade lack a credible basis in either empirical evidence or theoretical understanding because: Many of them are no more than assertions bereft of any attempt to cite evidence. While some points do reference appropriately rigorous academic and institutional research, other evidence is of a lower and arguably insufficient standard of credibility. 2. There is a lack of cohesion as many of the criticisms of Fair Trade contradict the suggestion that patronage is allocated to other mechanisms instead. 3. Any idea of positive benefit from Fair Trade governance remains unexplored. 4. The lack of sophistication extends to the evidence cited in support of the argument that universal liberalisation is the best way to reduce poverty. Ultimately it is suggested that the Adam Smith report: Fails to establish suitable grounds for the rejection of Fair Trade. Fails to establish an appropriately credible case in favour of trade liberalisation. Fails to take an appropriately rigorous attitude to the evaluation of what are incredibly important issues. In place of the approach taken in the Adam Smith report this analysis suggests that: 1. The cases of China, India and Hong Kong show that it is the appropriate management of local economies in their interaction with the wider world that is the best way to reduce poverty. Far from universal liberalisation this has often included the active management of price incentives as well as direct investment to build the capabilities of local business and the poor. 2. Financially poor actors should not always be expected to voluntarily respond to market incentives because: The developing world is characterised by levels of risk and instability that can make long term planning difficult to carry out. By definition the poor lack the capabilities necessary to meet the immediate and longer term costs of diversification into more beneficial incomes strategies. The developing world often lacks the market incentive structures necessary to promote the structural change that might be necessary to reduce poverty. 3. Poor commodity producers are likely to be assisted in their effort to ","PeriodicalId":118088,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)","volume":"386 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121383732","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This chapter focusses on global environmental risks such as climate change, an issue that must be confronted as we move into the future. It proposes sound principles of risk management that make sense in today's society generally, going beyond their role of averting and hedging climate risks. This chapter is about these and related questions. In attempting to answer them, it deals with different aspects of the theory of risk-bearing. I explain current responses to global change, focusing on the new challenges: human-induced or endogenous risks, including potentially catastrophic risks, which are not adequately treated by traditional economic analysis. In summary, we are dealing with risks that have two major new characteristics: they are endogenous and potentially catastrophic. In addition, climate risks have three more conventional features: they are poorly understood, correlated and irreversible. In all cases, this chapter proposes ways to advance our understanding of the problems. This chapter proposes ways to evaluate decisions under endogenous and potentially catastrophic risks, and incorporates often neglected features of correlated, poorly understood and irreversible risks. The analysis proposed here opens new ways of thinking and at the same time poses new challenges. At the end I indicate new areas of research.
{"title":"The Economics of Global Environmental Risks","authors":"G. Chichilnisky","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1375489","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1375489","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focusses on global environmental risks such as climate change, an issue that must be confronted as we move into the future. It proposes sound principles of risk management that make sense in today's society generally, going beyond their role of averting and hedging climate risks. This chapter is about these and related questions. In attempting to answer them, it deals with different aspects of the theory of risk-bearing. I explain current responses to global change, focusing on the new challenges: human-induced or endogenous risks, including potentially catastrophic risks, which are not adequately treated by traditional economic analysis. In summary, we are dealing with risks that have two major new characteristics: they are endogenous and potentially catastrophic. In addition, climate risks have three more conventional features: they are poorly understood, correlated and irreversible. In all cases, this chapter proposes ways to advance our understanding of the problems. This chapter proposes ways to evaluate decisions under endogenous and potentially catastrophic risks, and incorporates often neglected features of correlated, poorly understood and irreversible risks. The analysis proposed here opens new ways of thinking and at the same time poses new challenges. At the end I indicate new areas of research.","PeriodicalId":118088,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115984181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：