Abstract Voluntary standards are key instruments to address sustainability concerns in value chains. The legitimacy of these initiatives has been debated, particularly related to acceptance by Global South stakeholders. The governance literature has predominantly argued that initiatives employing democratic approaches to governance are more likely to increase their legitimacy. In this article, we use a configurational approach to test this proposition in relation to standard acceptance by southern producers. A qualitative comparative analysis of eight cases was carried out, linking three elements of input legitimacy (inclusion, participation, and accountability) to the outcome of standard uptake in the Global South. While our findings suggest that an inclusive governance structure is important, overall, they show no evidence to explain the presence or absence of standard acceptance in the Global South. We conclude that theoretical assumptions about democratic legitimacy cannot be confirmed and argue for further opening up the scholarly debate to include conceptualizations, methods, and approaches inclusive of different ways of creating and perceiving legitimacy.
{"title":"Input Legitimacy of Voluntary Sustainability Standards and Acceptance Among Southern Producers: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis","authors":"G. Schouten, Hilde M. Toonen, Dorine Leeuwerik","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00666","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00666","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Voluntary standards are key instruments to address sustainability concerns in value chains. The legitimacy of these initiatives has been debated, particularly related to acceptance by Global South stakeholders. The governance literature has predominantly argued that initiatives employing democratic approaches to governance are more likely to increase their legitimacy. In this article, we use a configurational approach to test this proposition in relation to standard acceptance by southern producers. A qualitative comparative analysis of eight cases was carried out, linking three elements of input legitimacy (inclusion, participation, and accountability) to the outcome of standard uptake in the Global South. While our findings suggest that an inclusive governance structure is important, overall, they show no evidence to explain the presence or absence of standard acceptance in the Global South. We conclude that theoretical assumptions about democratic legitimacy cannot be confirmed and argue for further opening up the scholarly debate to include conceptualizations, methods, and approaches inclusive of different ways of creating and perceiving legitimacy.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"104-135"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"64549129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Resource extraction has become something of an unavoidable topic for scholars of Latin America. Whether one begins one’s career by studying Indigenous language politics in Bolivia (Gustafson 2009) or populism in Argentina (Martuccelli and Svampa 1997), it seems that, these days, all roads lead to extractivism. There are good empirical and political reasons for this focus. In a context where the provenance of money used to fund progressive political agendas is increasingly under scrutiny (spoiler alert: it’s resource rent) and extractive frontiers are cropping up in relatively new places (where they provoke relatively new social conflicts), extractivism appears as the root problem, the key contradiction, or the articulating concern of multiple social groups. Accordingly, it is also the shared topic of interest for the three books examined in this review. As Maristella Svampa underscores in her recent summary of the topic, Neoextractivism in Latin America, the commodity boom that started in 2003 prompted Latin American governments from across the political spectrum to lean into the “el dorado” promises of expansive and rapid resource extraction. However, it is the enthusiasm with which an emerging set of leftist governments approached resource extraction that has sparked the most debate.
资源开采已成为拉美学者不可回避的话题。无论是从研究玻利维亚的原住民语言政治(Gustafson, 2009)，还是阿根廷的民粹主义(Martuccelli and Svampa, 1997)开始自己的研究生涯，如今似乎所有的道路都通向采掘主义。这种关注有很好的经验和政治原因。在这样一个背景下，用于资助进步政治议程的资金来源日益受到审查(剧剧警告:这是资源租金)，采掘边界在相对较新的地方出现(在那里它们引发了相对较新的社会冲突)，采掘主义似乎是根本问题，关键矛盾，或者是多个社会群体的明确关注。因此，这也是本评论中检查的三本书的共同兴趣主题。正如Maristella Svampa在她最近的主题总结中所强调的那样，拉丁美洲的新开采主义，2003年开始的商品繁荣促使拉丁美洲各国政府从各个政治领域向“黄金国”(el dorado)的承诺倾斜，即扩大和快速开采资源。然而，正是新兴的左翼政府对资源开采的热情引发了最多的争论。
{"title":"Extractivist States: Contesting and Negotiating the “Commodities Consensus” in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Across Latin America","authors":"Andrea Marston","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00662","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00662","url":null,"abstract":"Resource extraction has become something of an unavoidable topic for scholars of Latin America. Whether one begins one’s career by studying Indigenous language politics in Bolivia (Gustafson 2009) or populism in Argentina (Martuccelli and Svampa 1997), it seems that, these days, all roads lead to extractivism. There are good empirical and political reasons for this focus. In a context where the provenance of money used to fund progressive political agendas is increasingly under scrutiny (spoiler alert: it’s resource rent) and extractive frontiers are cropping up in relatively new places (where they provoke relatively new social conflicts), extractivism appears as the root problem, the key contradiction, or the articulating concern of multiple social groups. Accordingly, it is also the shared topic of interest for the three books examined in this review. As Maristella Svampa underscores in her recent summary of the topic, Neoextractivism in Latin America, the commodity boom that started in 2003 prompted Latin American governments from across the political spectrum to lean into the “el dorado” promises of expansive and rapid resource extraction. However, it is the enthusiasm with which an emerging set of leftist governments approached resource extraction that has sparked the most debate.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"194-200"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44684141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 1999, the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) was established to manage and develop the Nile Basin waters. The NBI has fostered and facilitated dialogue among its ten member states since its inception, but tension over the use of the Nile waters remains high. Many countries continue to build large hydroelectric projects in the basin without the agreement of other countries. Egypt has argued that it has a right to a continuous volume of water and has threatened to use military force to guarantee that right. Other factors, particularly climate change, are also undermining the volume and predictability of water supplies in the basin. Access to basin waters is especially in demand to improve national and regional electricity supplies and irrigation and, ultimately, to transform and improve the quality of life of basin residents. But how do these regional and national interventions manifest at the individual and community levels? How do citizens and communities, willingly or not, become subjected to these transformations in their everyday lives? The Lived Nile provides an enthralling and critical historical examination of these questions. The book examines the transformation of the Nile into a perennial source of water for irrigation to support a colonial and postcolonial economy in Egypt. This transformation was not achieved simply through the construction and expansion of dams, barrages, and canals but through the interplay between global and domestic capital, colonial authorities and domestic elites, foreign and Egyptian engineers and physicians, and, ultimately, the lives of Egyptian “bodies.” The book goes beyond “the history of Egypt’s colonial economy from the vantage point of its primary commodity [cotton] and social relations of rural Egypt” to focus on the “environmental transformations that enabled it” (3). One of the most important contributions of the book is to bring the reader’s attention to how the creation of the “perennial Nile” was experienced by rural Egyptians—“the complex ways in which rural populations and experts alike were rendered subjects of the colonial economy through their entanglements with the river that watered it” (13). Derr does this using extensive and impressive archival evidence, particularly British, French, and Egyptian sources. Each of the five main chapters illustrates how the technical transformation of the Nile was intertwined with the lives of Egyptians. But the chapters can also stand on their own as individual arguments, moving from a critical history of
{"title":"The Lived Nile: Environment, Disease, and Material Colonial Economy in Egypt by Jennifer L. Derr","authors":"C. Gore","doi":"10.1162/glep_r_00663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_r_00663","url":null,"abstract":"In 1999, the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) was established to manage and develop the Nile Basin waters. The NBI has fostered and facilitated dialogue among its ten member states since its inception, but tension over the use of the Nile waters remains high. Many countries continue to build large hydroelectric projects in the basin without the agreement of other countries. Egypt has argued that it has a right to a continuous volume of water and has threatened to use military force to guarantee that right. Other factors, particularly climate change, are also undermining the volume and predictability of water supplies in the basin. Access to basin waters is especially in demand to improve national and regional electricity supplies and irrigation and, ultimately, to transform and improve the quality of life of basin residents. But how do these regional and national interventions manifest at the individual and community levels? How do citizens and communities, willingly or not, become subjected to these transformations in their everyday lives? The Lived Nile provides an enthralling and critical historical examination of these questions. The book examines the transformation of the Nile into a perennial source of water for irrigation to support a colonial and postcolonial economy in Egypt. This transformation was not achieved simply through the construction and expansion of dams, barrages, and canals but through the interplay between global and domestic capital, colonial authorities and domestic elites, foreign and Egyptian engineers and physicians, and, ultimately, the lives of Egyptian “bodies.” The book goes beyond “the history of Egypt’s colonial economy from the vantage point of its primary commodity [cotton] and social relations of rural Egypt” to focus on the “environmental transformations that enabled it” (3). One of the most important contributions of the book is to bring the reader’s attention to how the creation of the “perennial Nile” was experienced by rural Egyptians—“the complex ways in which rural populations and experts alike were rendered subjects of the colonial economy through their entanglements with the river that watered it” (13). Derr does this using extensive and impressive archival evidence, particularly British, French, and Egyptian sources. Each of the five main chapters illustrates how the technical transformation of the Nile was intertwined with the lives of Egyptians. But the chapters can also stand on their own as individual arguments, moving from a critical history of","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"204-206"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42525363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract While anecdotal evidence suggests that transnational private rule-making organizations (TPROs)—such as eco-certification organizations—lobby public policy makers, we know little about the extent of this phenomenon or the characteristics of TPROs that lobby. TPRO lobbying is relevant given that their rule-making activities directly intersect with public policy. We use the interest group and private governance literatures to examine TPRO features that distinguish TPROs that lobby from those that do not. We developed an original data set of 147 environmental TPROs and assessed TPRO lobbying by their registration in the European Union’s Transparency Register (TR). We find that a quarter of the TPROs in our data set are registered in the TR, and that capacity and expertise matter. Contrary to expectations, however, we do not find that certain key features of TPROs—such as business origins or credibility—are correlated with being registered, which implies that these features do not create inequalities in the TPRO population in terms of lobbying likelihood. By assessing environmental TPROs as interest organizations that engage in lobbying, we contribute to research on public–private governance interactions and identify TPROs as an interest group population in its own right.
{"title":"Transnational Private Environmental Rule Makers as Interest Organizations: Evidence from the European Union","authors":"Stefan Renckens, Kristen Pue, Amy Janzwood","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00665","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00665","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While anecdotal evidence suggests that transnational private rule-making organizations (TPROs)—such as eco-certification organizations—lobby public policy makers, we know little about the extent of this phenomenon or the characteristics of TPROs that lobby. TPRO lobbying is relevant given that their rule-making activities directly intersect with public policy. We use the interest group and private governance literatures to examine TPRO features that distinguish TPROs that lobby from those that do not. We developed an original data set of 147 environmental TPROs and assessed TPRO lobbying by their registration in the European Union’s Transparency Register (TR). We find that a quarter of the TPROs in our data set are registered in the TR, and that capacity and expertise matter. Contrary to expectations, however, we do not find that certain key features of TPROs—such as business origins or credibility—are correlated with being registered, which implies that these features do not create inequalities in the TPRO population in terms of lobbying likelihood. By assessing environmental TPROs as interest organizations that engage in lobbying, we contribute to research on public–private governance interactions and identify TPROs as an interest group population in its own right.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"136-170"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48005570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract What shapes social-environmental regulations in the World Bank? To date, scholars have emphasized the influence of nongovernmental organization activism, donor power, and various elements of the Bank’s internal culture and incentive system. This article documents a new and important source of influence: outside financing options for borrower countries. I demonstrate this influence through an in-depth study of the World Bank’s Safeguards Review and Update, a four-year policy-making process that concluded in 2016. As alternative sources of finance carrying less stringent safeguard requirements than those of the World Bank proliferated in years preceding the Safeguards Review, borrowers gained negotiating power over Bank policy, enabling them to successfully push for more regulatory autonomy. These findings suggest that understanding the future of social-environmental standards in development finance institutions will require greater attention to new sources of finance and the power shifts they may entail.
{"title":"The Influence of Alternative Development Finance on the World Bank’s Safeguards Regime","authors":"Gus Greenstein","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00664","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract What shapes social-environmental regulations in the World Bank? To date, scholars have emphasized the influence of nongovernmental organization activism, donor power, and various elements of the Bank’s internal culture and incentive system. This article documents a new and important source of influence: outside financing options for borrower countries. I demonstrate this influence through an in-depth study of the World Bank’s Safeguards Review and Update, a four-year policy-making process that concluded in 2016. As alternative sources of finance carrying less stringent safeguard requirements than those of the World Bank proliferated in years preceding the Safeguards Review, borrowers gained negotiating power over Bank policy, enabling them to successfully push for more regulatory autonomy. These findings suggest that understanding the future of social-environmental standards in development finance institutions will require greater attention to new sources of finance and the power shifts they may entail.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"171-193"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47288104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract There is increasing evidence that right-wing populist parties (RWPPs) and their supporters are hostile to climate and low-carbon energy policies. In this article, we provide a quantitative analysis of the effects of RWPP representation in the legislature and executive on climate and renewable energy policy for a number of countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development over the period 2007–2018. After controlling for other political, economic, and environmental factors, we find evidence for a significant and large negative effect of RWPPs in power on climate policy. Importantly, we also show that these negative effects vary with the proportionality of the electoral system and European Union membership. Both of these factors significantly moderate the negative influence of RWPPs. In countries with majoritarian electoral systems, the effects of RWPPs on climate policy work through both indirect legislative and direct executive routes. In contrast to climate policy, there is no overall significant relationship with renewable policy.
{"title":"How Do Right-Wing Populist Parties Influence Climate and Renewable Energy Policies? Evidence from OECD Countries","authors":"Ben Lockwood, M. Lockwood","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00659","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00659","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is increasing evidence that right-wing populist parties (RWPPs) and their supporters are hostile to climate and low-carbon energy policies. In this article, we provide a quantitative analysis of the effects of RWPP representation in the legislature and executive on climate and renewable energy policy for a number of countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development over the period 2007–2018. After controlling for other political, economic, and environmental factors, we find evidence for a significant and large negative effect of RWPPs in power on climate policy. Importantly, we also show that these negative effects vary with the proportionality of the electoral system and European Union membership. Both of these factors significantly moderate the negative influence of RWPPs. In countries with majoritarian electoral systems, the effects of RWPPs on climate policy work through both indirect legislative and direct executive routes. In contrast to climate policy, there is no overall significant relationship with renewable policy.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"12-37"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48434765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Multiple visions for how urbanism can respond to the climate crisis and foster sustainability have emerged on the international agenda, including the ecocity, low-carbon city, smart city, and resilient city. These competing visions have been joined by one deploying “nature-based solutions.” We examine how nature-based solutions are emerging as a linchpin holding together the nature and climate agendas and what this means for where and by whom nature-based solutions are forming part of transnational urban governance. We argue that this field is animated by four frames connecting urban nature and climate: nature for resilience, nature for mitigation, the integrated benefits of nature, and nature first. Diverse actors, from conservation organizations to design firms to transnational municipal networks, draw on these frames and adopt new governance arrangements such that what it means to govern climate in the city is shifting. How this emerging nature–climate governance complex is structured will generate new momentum for governing urban nature over the coming decade.
{"title":"Transnational Governance and the Urban Politics of Nature-Based Solutions for Climate Change","authors":"Laura Tozer, H. Bulkeley, Linjun Xie","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00658","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00658","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Multiple visions for how urbanism can respond to the climate crisis and foster sustainability have emerged on the international agenda, including the ecocity, low-carbon city, smart city, and resilient city. These competing visions have been joined by one deploying “nature-based solutions.” We examine how nature-based solutions are emerging as a linchpin holding together the nature and climate agendas and what this means for where and by whom nature-based solutions are forming part of transnational urban governance. We argue that this field is animated by four frames connecting urban nature and climate: nature for resilience, nature for mitigation, the integrated benefits of nature, and nature first. Diverse actors, from conservation organizations to design firms to transnational municipal networks, draw on these frames and adopt new governance arrangements such that what it means to govern climate in the city is shifting. How this emerging nature–climate governance complex is structured will generate new momentum for governing urban nature over the coming decade.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"81-103"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49421997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sayel Cortes, J. van der Heijden, Ingrid Boas, S. Bush
Abstract It is often thought that local governments in the Global South have less influence over climate city networks than those from the Global North. We question this by examining how different climate city networks relate and function as interconnected, yet independent, decision-making centers. We explore the extent to which this polycentric system overcomes the assumed exclusivity and inequality of these networks. We analyze twenty-two climate city networks using qualitative comparative analysis to classify the networks with a majority of members from either the Global North or the Global South based on conditions related to their context, diversity of members, and degree of homogeneity. We find that climate city networks overcome North–South dependencies through targeted support reflecting the local needs and conditions of city members. This diversity of tailored alternatives for cities provides equality and inclusivity at the polycentric system level, despite showing inequality and exclusivity at the network level.
{"title":"Exclusive Apart, Inclusive as a System: Polycentricity in Climate City Networks","authors":"Sayel Cortes, J. van der Heijden, Ingrid Boas, S. Bush","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00657","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00657","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It is often thought that local governments in the Global South have less influence over climate city networks than those from the Global North. We question this by examining how different climate city networks relate and function as interconnected, yet independent, decision-making centers. We explore the extent to which this polycentric system overcomes the assumed exclusivity and inequality of these networks. We analyze twenty-two climate city networks using qualitative comparative analysis to classify the networks with a majority of members from either the Global North or the Global South based on conditions related to their context, diversity of members, and degree of homogeneity. We find that climate city networks overcome North–South dependencies through targeted support reflecting the local needs and conditions of city members. This diversity of tailored alternatives for cities provides equality and inclusivity at the polycentric system level, despite showing inequality and exclusivity at the network level.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"59-80"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46346904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The argument for recognizing the rights of nature (RoN) is hardly new—the late Christopher Stone first made the case for granting legal rights to environmental entities in 1972. Beginning with a 2006 RoN ordinance in the United States and an Ecuadoran constitutional amendment in 2008, the movement for the rights of nature has recently caught fire. This is the puzzle driving Craig Kauffman and Pamela Martin’s research in their book The Politics of the Rights of Nature. Why has the RoN movement gained so much momentum in the past two decades, and what accounts for the “salience” and unexpected diffusion of the RoN norm? To address these questions, Kauffman and Martin employ a sophisticated mixed methodological approach, including case studies and several years of fieldwork in five of the six countries they profile. Beyond interviews and surveys, they engaged in comparative historical analysis, process tracing, and social network analysis to explore the emergence and diffusion of RoN. Kauffman and Martin contribute to the growing body of literature on RoN, as well as building on existing theories of norm diffusion and contestation. RoN norm emergence challenges leading explanations of norm diffusion, given the independent but “nearly simultaneous” development of RoN norms at multiple levels of government (from local to national). The authors draw on evolutionary biology, using convergent evolution theory, to explain the concurrent development of normatively similar but institutionally distinct RoN legislation. Akin to convergent evolution theory in evolutionary biology, they argue that “functionally similar RoN laws ... emerged independently in response to common environmental pressures” (19). Part of what makes Kauffman and Martin’s work so expansive is their thorough coverage of the major cases of RoN legislation in Ecuador, Bolivia, the United States, and New Zealand, as well as the recent emergence of environmental personhood in India and Colombia. They begin their case study analysis with a most-similar-systems comparison between Ecuador and Bolivia—both of which incorporated RoN clauses into their constitutions after electing left populist leaders who claimed to support the Indigenous communities in their respective countries. Despite similar cultures and socioeconomic structures, Ecuador’s RoN clause flourished, while Bolivia’s 2012 RoN amendment languished to the point of oblivion. In their exploration of Ecuador’s growing body
{"title":"The Politics of Rights of Nature: Strategies for Building a More Sustainable Future by Craig M. Kauffman and Pamela L. Martin","authors":"Mary E. Witlacil","doi":"10.1162/glep_r_00661","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_r_00661","url":null,"abstract":"The argument for recognizing the rights of nature (RoN) is hardly new—the late Christopher Stone first made the case for granting legal rights to environmental entities in 1972. Beginning with a 2006 RoN ordinance in the United States and an Ecuadoran constitutional amendment in 2008, the movement for the rights of nature has recently caught fire. This is the puzzle driving Craig Kauffman and Pamela Martin’s research in their book The Politics of the Rights of Nature. Why has the RoN movement gained so much momentum in the past two decades, and what accounts for the “salience” and unexpected diffusion of the RoN norm? To address these questions, Kauffman and Martin employ a sophisticated mixed methodological approach, including case studies and several years of fieldwork in five of the six countries they profile. Beyond interviews and surveys, they engaged in comparative historical analysis, process tracing, and social network analysis to explore the emergence and diffusion of RoN. Kauffman and Martin contribute to the growing body of literature on RoN, as well as building on existing theories of norm diffusion and contestation. RoN norm emergence challenges leading explanations of norm diffusion, given the independent but “nearly simultaneous” development of RoN norms at multiple levels of government (from local to national). The authors draw on evolutionary biology, using convergent evolution theory, to explain the concurrent development of normatively similar but institutionally distinct RoN legislation. Akin to convergent evolution theory in evolutionary biology, they argue that “functionally similar RoN laws ... emerged independently in response to common environmental pressures” (19). Part of what makes Kauffman and Martin’s work so expansive is their thorough coverage of the major cases of RoN legislation in Ecuador, Bolivia, the United States, and New Zealand, as well as the recent emergence of environmental personhood in India and Colombia. They begin their case study analysis with a most-similar-systems comparison between Ecuador and Bolivia—both of which incorporated RoN clauses into their constitutions after electing left populist leaders who claimed to support the Indigenous communities in their respective countries. Despite similar cultures and socioeconomic structures, Ecuador’s RoN clause flourished, while Bolivia’s 2012 RoN amendment languished to the point of oblivion. In their exploration of Ecuador’s growing body","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"201-203"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44191194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The transnational scope of corporate activities often results in extraterritorial environmental harm elsewhere on the planet. Within the European context, two legal developments are challenging this state of affairs. First, several legislative initiatives seek to establish due diligence standards for corporate activities along global supply chains. Second, domestic courts increasingly assume jurisdiction over environmental damage arising from corporations’ subsidiary operations abroad. This article argues that both these developments are emblematic of the transnationalization and judicialization of environmental governance in the twenty-first century. Rather than providing particularized relief only, national judges may become crucial allies in the construction and enforcement of polycentric regimes. However, the advent of unilateral judicial interventions in the environmental affairs of other countries also raises concerns over the international and institutional legitimacy of the emerging corporate accountability apparatus.
{"title":"Judicializing Environmental Governance? The Case of Transnational Corporate Accountability","authors":"D. Bertram","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00651","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00651","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The transnational scope of corporate activities often results in extraterritorial environmental harm elsewhere on the planet. Within the European context, two legal developments are challenging this state of affairs. First, several legislative initiatives seek to establish due diligence standards for corporate activities along global supply chains. Second, domestic courts increasingly assume jurisdiction over environmental damage arising from corporations’ subsidiary operations abroad. This article argues that both these developments are emblematic of the transnationalization and judicialization of environmental governance in the twenty-first century. Rather than providing particularized relief only, national judges may become crucial allies in the construction and enforcement of polycentric regimes. However, the advent of unilateral judicial interventions in the environmental affairs of other countries also raises concerns over the international and institutional legitimacy of the emerging corporate accountability apparatus.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"117-135"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47174879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：