Private Rule-Making and the Politics of Accountability: Analyzing Global Forest Governance

Sander Chan and Philipp Pattberg
Additional contact information
Sander Chan: Sander Chan is a Ph.D. candidate at the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije University, Amsterdam. His research focuses on transnational multi-stakeholder networks in global sustainability politics with a special emphasis on environmental governance in China. His publications include "Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: does the promise hold?" in Partnerships, Governance and Sustainable Development. Reflections on Theory and Practice, edited by P. Glasbergen, F. Biermann and A. P. J. Mol (2007).
Philipp Pattberg: Philipp Pattberg is a senior researcher at the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije University, Amsterdam, and an Assistant Professor for International Relations at the Department of Political Science, Vrije University, Amsterdam. He is also the research coordinator of the International Global Governance Project (glogov.org). His publications include Private Institutions and Global Governance: The New Politics of Environmental Sustainability (2007) and a number of journal articles in Annual Review of Environment and Resources; Global Governance; Governance; and Third World Quarterly, among others.

Global Environmental Politics, 2008, vol. 8, issue 3, 103-121

Abstract: Private rule-making features prominently on the research agenda of International Relations scholars today. The field of forest politics in particular has proven to be a lively arena for experimenting with novel policies (for example, third party certification and labeling) and procedures (for example, power-sharing in stakeholder bodies). This article focuses on the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), one of the earliest and most institutionalized private certification schemes, in order to assess the role and relevance of accountability politics for global forest governance. Specifically, we ask three related questions: first, what role did a deepening accountability crisis and the resulting reconstruction of accountability play in the formation of the FSC? Second, how is accountability organized within the FSC? And finally, what accountability outcomes emerge as a result of the FSC's policies and operations? The article closes with some reflections about the limitations of private-based accountability in global environmental politics. (c) 2008 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Date: 2008
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (22)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/glep.2008.8.3.103 link to full text (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:8:y:2008:i:3:p:103-121

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://mitpressjour ... rnal/?issn=1526-3800

Access Statistics for this article

Global Environmental Politics is currently edited by Steven Bernstein, Matthew Hoffmann and Erika Weinthal

More articles in Global Environmental Politics from MIT Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by The MIT Press ().