自愿可持续性标准的投入合法性与南方生产者的接受度:定性比较分析

IF 3.9 2区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Global Environmental Politics Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI:10.1162/glep_a_00666
G. Schouten, Hilde M. Toonen, Dorine Leeuwerik
{"title":"自愿可持续性标准的投入合法性与南方生产者的接受度:定性比较分析","authors":"G. Schouten, Hilde M. Toonen, Dorine Leeuwerik","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00666","DOIUrl":null,"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":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"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\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Environmental Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00666\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environmental Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00666","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自愿性标准是解决价值链中可持续性问题的关键工具。这些倡议的合法性一直存在争议,特别是与全球南方利益相关者的接受程度有关。治理文献主要认为,采用民主方法进行治理的倡议更有可能增加其合法性。在本文中,我们使用一种配置方法来测试这一命题与南方生产者的标准接受度有关。对八个案例进行了定性比较分析,将投入合法性的三个要素(包容、参与和问责制)与全球南方国家标准吸收的结果联系起来。虽然我们的研究结果表明,包容性的治理结构很重要,但总体而言,它们没有证据来解释全球南方存在或缺乏标准接受。我们的结论是,关于民主合法性的理论假设无法得到证实,并主张进一步开放学术辩论,包括概念化、方法和途径,包括创造和感知合法性的不同方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Input Legitimacy of Voluntary Sustainability Standards and Acceptance Among Southern Producers: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Global Environmental Politics examines the relationship between global political forces and environmental change, with particular attention given to the implications of local-global interactions for environmental management as well as the implications of environmental change for world politics. Each issue is divided into research articles and a shorter forum articles focusing on issues such as the role of states, multilateral institutions and agreements, trade, international finance, corporations, science and technology, and grassroots movements.
期刊最新文献
The Ecocentrists: A History of Radical Environmentalism by Keith Makoto Woodhouse The Role of Translation in Enacting Multiscalar Climate Action: Insights from European Christian Faith-Based Actors All Hands on Deck: Solutions-Based Pedagogies for Global Environmental Politics African Ecomedia: Network Forms, Planetary Politics by Cajetan Iheka Realpolitik in the Anthropocene: Resilience, Neoclassical Realism, and the Paris Agreement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1