Benjamin Cashore

Legitimacy and the Privatization of Environmental Governance: How Non–State Market–Driven (NSMD) Governance Systems Gain Rule–Making Authority

In recent years, transnational and domestic nongovernmental organizations have created non–state market–driven (NSMD) governance systems whose purpose is to develop and implement environmentally and socially responsible management practices. Eschewing traditional state authority, these systems and their supporters have turned to the market’s supply chain to create incentives and force companies to comply. This paper develops an analytical framework designed to understand better the emergence of NSMD governance systems and the conditions under which they may gain authority to create policy. Its theoretical roots draw on pragmatic, moral, and cognitive legitimacy granting distinctions made within organizational sociology, while its empirical focus is on the case of sustainable forestry certification, arguably the most advanced case of NSMD governance globally. The paper argues that such a framework is needed to assess whether these new private governance systems might ultimately challenge existing state–centered authority and public policy–making processes, and in so doing reshape power relations within domestic and global environmental governance.

Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Governance

The United Nations conference in Rio de Janeiro in June is an important opportunity to improve the institutional framework for sustainable development. Science assessments indicate that human activities are moving several of Earths sub-systems outside the range of natural variability typical for the previous 500,000 years (1, 2). Human societies must now change course and steer away from critical tipping points in the Earth system that might lead to rapid and irreversible change (3). This requires fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions toward more effective Earth system governance and planetary stewardship.

The Dependent Variable Problem in the Study of Policy Change: Understanding Policy Change as a Methodological Problem

Abstract The new orthodoxy in studies of policy dynamics is that policy change occurs through a homeostatic process. “Perturbations” occurring outside of an institutionalized policy subsystem, often characterized as some type of societal or political upheaval or learning, are critical for explaining the development of profound and durable policy changes which are otherwise limited by “endogenous” institutional stability. These homeostatic assumptions, while useful for assessing many cases of policy change, do not adequately capture the historical patterns of policy development found in many sectors. The roots of this problem are traced back to the origins of the new orthodoxy in comparative policy research whereby different levels (orders) of policy making have been incorrectly juxtaposed, providing a parsimonious, but sometimes empirically incorrect, view of policy change. Revising existing taxonomies of policy levels provides a superior identification of the processes of change, and uncovers more than one mechanism through which significant policy change can occur. Three of these alternative mechanisms – a “neo-homeostatic” one in which paradigmatic changes occur through endogenous shifts in goals; a “quasi-homeostatic” in which exogenous factors influence changes in objectives and settings; and a “thermostatic” one in which durable policy objectives require that settings adapt to exogenous changes – are discussed.

Forest certification (eco-labeling) programs and their policy-making authority: explaining divergence among North American and European case studies

In recent years, transnational and domestic non-governmental organizations have created private standard setting bodies whose purpose is to recognize officially companies and landowners practicing ‘sustainable forest management’. Eschewing traditional state processes and state authority, these certification programs have turned to the market to create incentives and force compliance to their rules. This paper compares the emergence of this non-state market driven (NSMD) phenomenon in the forest sector in eight regions in North Am40erica and Europe. We specifically seek to understand the role of forest companies and landowners in granting competing forest certification programs ‘legitimacy’ to create the rules. We identify distinct legitimation dynamics in each of our cases, and then develop seven hypotheses to explain differences in support for forest certification. 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Globalization, Four Paths of Internationalization and Domestic Policy Change: The Case of EcoForestry in British Columbia, Canada

Governments appear increasingly constrained in their ability to make independent policy choices in an era of global economic finance and communication. As a result, scholars are more closely examining how actors, institutions and economic forces that extend beyond state borders can influence domestic public policies and politics. This scholarship on “globalization” and “transnational relations” serves as a corrective to a comparative public policy literature that has tended to treat external pressures as either exogenous shocks, or as simply other interests to which the state must respond.

Private or self-regulation? A comparative study of forest certification choices in Canada, the United States and Germany

Forest certification is perhaps the best example of a voluntary governance structure for addressing environmental spillovers. Competing forest certification schemes have evolved. At the global level, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 certification and Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification focus on environmental processes and sustainable management of forestland, respectively. Regional/domestic schemes have been started by industry and/or landowners to compete with the FSC system. The main difference between FSC certification and the others is that the FSC relies on regulation by a non-state private regulator, while the others employ a form of self-regulation. In this study, survey data from firms in Canada, the United States and Germany are used to investigate factors that cause firms to prefer and/or choose a particular certification scheme. The findings indicate that market access is an important reason why forest firms certify, but it is an insufficient reason for them to pick the FSC system despite opinion polls that reveal a preference for FSC-style certification. Rather, firms prefer (participate in) FSC certification because they perceive it to confer environmental benefits, while those choosing another certification scheme do so on economic grounds. Finally, as companies become increasingly aware of their certification options, they are less likely to pursue FSC certification.

The Climate Regime as Global Forest Governance: Can Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) Initiatives Pass a ‘Dual Effectiveness’ Test?

SUMMARY For two generations, policy makers, environmental groups, industry associations and other stakeholders have given global forest deterioration concerted and sustained attention. Widespread disappointment over the failure to achieve a binding global forest convention at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit has been followed by frustration over the relatively limited impact to date of post-Rio forest-related global policy initiatives, including intergovernmental and non-state efforts. This paper argues that “reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation” (REDD) initiatives will yield significant impacts only if decision makers are committed to a results-based “dual effectiveness” test, addressing both forest degradation and global emissions reductions, and involving significant and measurable global-scale targets. While the importance of such a commitment may appear obvious, lessons from past forest and climate efforts suggest that greater results-based accountability is needed to overcome short-term and narrowly defined organizational and national self-interest.

In search of sustainability : British Columbia forest policy in the 1990s

The forests of British Columbia have become a battleground over sustainable resource development, setting environmentalists against the forest industry and forestry workers and communities. In an effort to broker peace, British Columbias NDP government launched a number of promising new forest policy initiatives in the 1990s. These policies are analyzed by a group of political scientists who focus on how and why change has occurred. They examine land use, forest practices, tenure, Aboriginal issues, timber supply, pricing, and jobs to find that while environmental values have acquired a more central place in BC forest policy, they have not displaced timber production as the dominant force in policy making. The authors conclude that despite the astonishing level of activism, the governments search for sustainability - whether measured by environmental, social, economic, or political indicators - has ultimately failed. The authors are Benjamin Cashore, Auburn University; George Hoberg, University of British Columbia; Michael Howlett, Simon Fraser University; Jeremy Rayner, Malaspina University College; and Jeremy Wilson, University of Victoria.

Revising Theories of Nonstate Market-Driven (NSMD) Governance: Lessons from the Finnish Forest Certification Experience

We assess the ability of Cashore, Auld, and Newsoms theoretical framework on Nonstate Market-Driven (NSMD) governance to explain the emergence of and support for forest certification in Finland. In contrast to Swedens experience, the environmental group-initiated international forest certification program, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), failed to gain significant support. Instead, the commercial forest sector created and adopted the Finnish Forest Certification Program, which domestic and international environmental groups ultimately rejected as inadequate. The NSMD framework must better incorporate two key findings. First, the dependence of international markets on the targeted countrys forest products can shape domestic certification choices. We found that the largely non-substitutable qualities of Finnish paper products gave the domestic sector greater leeway in responding to international pressures. Second, whether the FSC is being championed primarily to influence a countrys domestic forestry debates or indirectly as a lever with which to improve forest practices elsewhere appears to permeate the forest sectors overall receptiveness to the FSC.

Differences That ‘Matter’? A Framework for Comparing Environmental Certification Standards and Government Policies

Abstract Competition among environmental certification systems has created considerable demand for transparent comparison. Drawing on the case of forest certification, this article presents an analytical framework for comparing certification standards and government policies according to their policy approach and environmental threshold requirements. A detailed analysis of existing policies is applied to one key indicator, i.e. riparian buffer zones, where it reveals clear differences among the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) regional standards and among the FSC, the Canadian Standards Association (CSA), and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) certification systems. The FSC regional standards of British Columbia and the Pacific Coast contain quantitative riparian buffer zone thresholds, with the FSC British Columbia standards being the most restrictive. The FSC Southeast standards are comparable with the SFI standards in deferring to state buffer zone guidelines but making those guidelines mandatory. The systems-based CSA standards contain no substantive prescriptions. Most certification standards appear to closely mimic government policy approaches. Standards that cover multiple jurisdictions resemble an averaging of the prescriptiveness and performance thresholds of government policies, resulting in an increase in some state requirements and no additional requirements in others. These findings lay the groundwork for further explanatory research on the interaction of state and non-state policies as well as the systematic comparison of policy effectiveness.