Search

We have investigated the role of the state in the creation of democratic alternatives to private voluntary food sustainability standards (VFSS). Our study illustrates the complex relationship between civil society (in this case, the Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) VFSS), private VFSS and state actors, and the supportive role played by the state in establishing a framework for a food governance system that delivers food according to the values of all stakeholders. The PGS system is an alternative for family farmers that was initiated by civil society organizations (CSO) to reduce certification costs and bring more autonomy to family farmers through its democratic governance structure (in contrast to other private governance schemes). However, the institutionalization and development of such a governance system (i.e. PGS), was supported due to the action of the state. One of the key contributions of this study is the proposed typology that can help to identify and assess how such governance systems are evolving (by assessing how mature the system is) and at the same time, pointing out areas where the state actors could further act to develop a more democratic governance system. These include institutional support, market institutionalization, demand creation, technical support, and financial support. Our findings show that a polycentric system of food governance can result in greater participation, transparency, and accountability compared to a governance system driven by private VFSS. These characteristics can help drive greater equity in the food system which may be the key to promoting a healthier and more resilient governance system. • Theorise how the state supports development of private food governance mechanisms • Develops a typology of the role of the state in alternative food governance system • Hybrid approach that embeds legitimacy and democratic principles into private food governance [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Half of Latin American scientists are not addressing the land-sea systems as a whole. • Communication of scientists with stakeholders across environments is deficient. • Governance schemes are compartmentalized and do not align with ecological linkages. • Institutional instruments and intermediaries' involvement foster holistic governance. • Boundary work and trade-offs modeling may mainstream ES concept to policy. The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES) highlights that human wellbeing depends on nature and is a 'whole system aware' view. Land-sea systems are examples of complex systems including interfaces that can be perceived as boundaries, overlooking connections of the whole system. We explored the occurrence of several features of scientific knowledge building and governance of these systems that can hinder the recognition of connectivity, challenging an ES approach. We analyzed online survey responses from academics representing 22 research institutions and 13 case studies, all from Latin America. Results showed that the generation of scientific knowledge is not integrally approached and there are deficiencies in researchers' communication with stakeholders across the land-sea interface. These drawbacks in scientific knowledge building could be one of the reasons why an ES approach is rarely applied on governance of land-sea systems. The cases showed segmented governance schemes and that conflict situations enhance the visibility of ecosystem relations. The establishment of long-lasting institutional instruments and the involvement of intermediaries connecting sectors are complementary paths to improve integrated governance. Using ES as a boundary concept could improve integration between sectors and ES trade-off analysis can help to introduce ecosystem relations to stakeholders related to their own interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]