Search

A recent article in this journal (Jackson 2021) validly emphasized that debates about the Anthropocene need to recognize a diverse range of perspectives, worldviews, and forms of knowledge. In doing so, however, the author mischaracterized scholarship on earth system governance as being antithetical to a critical and pluralistic stance on the Anthropocene. In this commentary we address key concerns about the article: selective and misleading quotations regarding the earth system governance literature’s diversity; unwarranted insinuations that juxtapose the implications of this literature with those of slavery and holocausts; and neglect of the breadth and diversity of scholarship on earth system governance. We underscore the need for scholarly debates on the Anthropocene to be informed by a balanced and rigorous assessment of existing scholarship, and for a constructive dialogue between global and locally situated ways of understanding the earth.

Markets for plant-based protein products are experiencing unprecedented growth. However, the extent to which the wider diffusion of plant-based protein products is beneficial to human and planetary health is still a contested issue in public discourses. The study of media frames for plant-based protein products can serve as a basis for approaches of technology assessment, which aim to inform actors involved in innovation processes of important aspects of diffusion, including controversy and unexpected risks regarding societal reactions. In this paper, we conduct a frame analysis of three U.K. broadsheet newspapers (the Telegraph, the Guardian, and the Times) between 2010–2020 to explore how media frame plant-based protein products. The results show that overall media coverage for plant-based diets has adopted a positive stance. However, there is variation in how plant-based protein products and particularly meat and dairy substitutes are portrayed. The biggest stumbling block appears to be potentially adverse health implications associated with the consumption of meat and dairy substitutes. We therefore argue that the scope of strategic choices regarding product design should also focus on the development of products more analogous to whole plant-based foods. Moreover, we argue that the long-term resilience of the plant-based protein sector will require strategies that convincingly align with policy goals for food security and broader food system sustainability.

This chapter provides an overview of the multi-faceted landscape of methods used to study the steering effects of the Sustainable Development Goals. After a discussion of the political use of science and the complex relations between science and politics, the chapter showcases a selection of different methods that are employed to trace the steering effects of the Sustainable Development Goals. Selecting the most suitable method for a particular research question requires understanding their main characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. The chapter highlights that all methods and tools need to be combined to comprehensively assess the political impact of the goals, the progress towards their achievement, and their overall transformative potential. As data gaps and unequal geographical coverage still hamper a broader understanding of the political impact of the globalgoals, we need to build bridges across language communities, disciplines and methodological camps, which still work very much in isolation.

Private philanthropic foundations—nongovernmental, nonprofit organizations with assets provided by donors for socially useful purposes—have become key political actors in global sustainability governance. Their collective efforts amount to over USD 112 billion for the implementation of the United Nations (UNs)’s ambitious plan to deliver on seventeen interconnected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This corresponds to about a quarter of governmental contribution through official development assistance for the same purposes. Many of these foundations implicitly or explicitly aim to foster global justice, through, for example, empowering women, reducing inequalities, and promoting democracy. They thus act as justice agents shaping the substance and practice of justice in global sustainability governance. But what does this direction of private money into supporting global justice norms really mean? This question deserves scrutiny, especially against a context of diverse and contested meanings of justice and because philanthropy—beyond an act of giving—is often an exercise of power. Using critical discourse analysis of texts produced by selected foundations that are key funders of the UN Sustainable Development Agenda, this paper examines how private foundations frame global justice and with what implications for sustainability governance. Les fondations philanthropiques privées - organisations non gouvernementales à but non lucratif dont les actifs sont fournis par des donateurs à des fins d'utilité sociale - sont devenues des acteurs politiques clés de la gouvernance mondiale de la durabilité. Leurs efforts collectifs s’élèvent à plus de 112 milliards de dollars pour la mise en œuvre du plan ambitieux de l'ONU visant à atteindre dix-sept objectifs de développement durable (ODD) interconnectés. Cela correspond à environ un quart des contributions gouvernementales apportées par le biais de l'aide publique au développement aux mêmes fins. Nombre de ces fondations visent implicitement ou explicitement à favoriser la justice mondiale, par exemple en renforçant l'autonomie des femmes, en réduisant les inégalités et en promouvant la démocratie. Elles agissent ainsi en tant qu'agents de justice façonnant la substance et la pratique de la justice dans la gouvernance mondiale de la durabilité. Mais que signifie réellement cette orientation de l'argent privé vers le soutien des normes de justice mondiale? Cette question mérite un examen approfondi, en particulier dans le contexte de significations diverses et contestées de la justice et parce que la philanthropie - au-delà de l'acte de don - est souvent un exercice du pouvoir. Cet article s'appuie sur une analyse critique du discours des textes produits par une sélection de fondations qui sont des participantes clés au financement du Programme de développement durable de l'ONU et examine la manière dont les fondations privées définissent la justice mondiale et ce que cela implique pour la gouvernance de la durabilité. Las fundaciones filantrópicas privadas (organizaciones no gubernamentales y sin fines de lucro que utilizan los activos que les proporcionan sus contribuyentes con propósitos útiles para la sociedad) se han convertido en actores políticos claves en la gestión de la sostenibilidad global. Sus esfuerzos colectivos equivalen a USD 112 000 millones aproximadamente para la implementación del ambicioso plan de la ONU que plantea cumplir con 17 Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) interconectados. Esto equivale a alrededor de un cuarto de la contribución gubernamental a través de la Ayuda Oficial al Desarrollo para los mismos propósitos. Muchas de estas fundaciones tienen como objetivo implícito o explícito promover la justicia global a través de, por ejemplo, el empoderamiento de las mujeres, la reducción de las desigualdades y el fomento de la democracia. Por lo tanto, actúan como agentes de justicia que configuran el fundamento y la práctica de la justicia en la gestión de la sostenibilidad global. Sin embargo, ¿cuál es el significado real del uso del dinero privado en el apoyo de las normas de justicia global? Esta pregunta debe analizarse especialmente en un contexto de significados diversos y cuestionados sobre la justicia y teniendo en cuenta que la filantropía, más allá de ser un acto caritativo, suele representar un ejercicio del poder. Mediante el análisis crítico del discurso de textos producidos por fundaciones seleccionadas que financian la Agenda sobre el Desarrollo Sostenible de la ONU, este documento analizará cómo las fundaciones privadas construyen la justicia global y cuáles son las implicaciones para la gestión de la sostenibilidad.

In global sustainability governance, many actors have emphasised the need for policy integration across the economic, social, and environmental dimensions. In 2015, the United Nations agreed on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to advance such integration. But have international organisations responded to this call, and can we observe any integrative effect of the SDGs? We draw on International Relations theories that incorporate change in their analysis and develop an analytical framework to assess change through the lenses of ideas, norms, and institutions. We use this framework to assess sustainability-oriented change in the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The ILO is traditionally an organisation with a primarily socio-economic mandate and hence an ideal case to study whether the SDGs had any impact after 2015 in strengthening the environmental dimension of sustainability in the ILO’s institutional settings and policy development. We focus on the 2010–2019 period and conduct a systematic qualitative content analysis of primary documentary sources, complemented with expert interviews and data on operational developments. The paper concludes that there is a significant yet instrumental greening trend in the ILO’s approach to sustainable development, but also a bidirectional influence between the ILO and the SDGs.

The Routledge Handbook of Global Sustainability Governance provides a state-of-the-art review of core debates and contributions that offer a more normative, critical, and transformatively aspirational view on global sustainability governance. In this landmark text, an international group of acclaimed scholars provides an overview of key analytical and normative perspectives, material and ideational structural barriers to sustainability transformation, and transformative strategies. Drawing on pivotal new and contemporary research, the volume highlights aspects to be considered and blind spots to be avoided when trying to understand and implement global sustainability governance. In this context, the authors of this book debunk many myths about all-too optimistic accounts of progress towards a sustainability transition. Simultaneously, they suggest approaches that have the potential for real sustainability transformation and systemic change, while acknowledging existing hurdles. The wide-ranging chapters in the collection are organised into four key parts: • Part 1: Conceptual lenses • Part 2: Ethics, principles, and debates • Part 3: Key challenges • Part 4: Transformative approaches This handbook will serve as an important resource for academics and practitioners working in the fields of sustainability governance and environmental politics.

This introduction presents an overview of the key concepts discussed in the subsequent chapters of this book. The book reviews prominent conceptual and analytical lenses critical of mainstream approaches to sustainability governance. It addresses the role of religion in sustainability governance and religious actors’ potential contribution to sustainable development, and argues that “one should take seriously the claim that there is a religious answer to the global ecological crisis.” The book suggests that transformative global sustainability governance research calls for empirically oriented social scientists to reflect on the normative ramifications of their work and for normative oriented political theorists not to neglect the empirical grounds for their argumentation. It focuses on well-being and links it back to the question of growth by calling for a move beyond Gross Domestic Product – both as a measure of prosperity and a wider economic paradigm rooted in a growth-centred capitalism.

We explore the relevance of structural characteristics of policy networks for policy outcomes, thereby highlighting the continuing relevance of the policy network approach for policy analysis. Focusing on networks for transparency in the food chain in the Netherlands and the EU, we examine the proposition that network interactions in the form of communication and trust make a substantial difference in the estimation and explanation of transparency policy. Thereby, we identify existing obstacles to a successful transformation of the norm of transparency into appropriate political frameworks and governance mechanisms as well as potential steps for improvement. Data were gathered in structured interviews with the network actors in the Netherlands and at the EU level and are employed in a mathematical model allowing us to highlight the impact of communication and trust relationships on policy output.

The future of food is one of the major world-wide challenges. In this perspective paper, we set-up a framework for a multi-disciplinary future food systems approach, building on the UN Sustainable Development Goals. We hereby combine a truly sustainable approach including social science aspects combined with the One Health approach. Scientists from a large number of backgrounds have addressed four key areas that are discussed in more detail in this paper: (i) nature inspired food production, (ii) sustainable immune resilience, (iii) social and cultural change of food behavior, and (iv) food fairness. We believe that transformations to integrated future food system approaches should move beyond single solutions and can only be solved by working in transdisciplinary settings of science, society, and industry.

This introduction presents an overview of the key concepts discussed in the subsequent chapters of this book. The book reviews prominent conceptual and analytical lenses critical of mainstream approaches to sustainability governance. It addresses the role of religion in sustainability governance and religious actors’ potential contribution to sustainable development, and argues that “one should take seriously the claim that there is a religious answer to the global ecological crisis.” The book suggests that transformative global sustainability governance research calls for empirically oriented social scientists to reflect on the normative ramifications of their work and for normative oriented political theorists not to neglect the empirical grounds for their argumentation. It focuses on well-being and links it back to the question of growth by calling for a move beyond Gross Domestic Product – both as a measure of prosperity and a wider economic paradigm rooted in a growth-centred capitalism.

During the negotiations of the Sustainable Development Goals, the United Nations consulted worldwide nearly ten million people for their views. Such proliferating megaconsultations are often uncritically accepted as a remedy for an assumed democratic deficit of intergovernmental institutions. We argue, however, that the potential of civil society consultations to democratize global governance is constrained by the limited legitimacy of these consultations in the first place. Global consultations regularly fail to include civil society actors from developing countries, or show other sociodemographic biases. Also, they often fail to strengthen accountability between citizens, international organizations and governments. In this article, we investigate the causes of this phenomenon by exploring the relationship between the design of consultations and their democratic legitimacy. The basis for our argument is an in-depth empirical study of three consultations carried out during the negotiations of the Sustainable Development Goals. We find that design is an important variable to explain the overall legitimacy of consultations. Yet its exact role is sometimes unexpected. Extensive material resources and open access conditions do not systematically enhance the legitimacy of the studied consultations. Instead, developing clear objectives, allocating sufficient time to participants, and formally binding the consultation to the negotiations hold considerably more promise.

The dissertation is organised in four parts. The first part (Chapter 2) sets the background. It explores the status quo and explains the need for transparency in the food chain. This chapter argues that transparency is a condition for responding to the set of changes that occurred in the food system during the last decades. The second part (Chapters 3, 4 and 5) presents the theoretical approaches that this dissertation draws on as well as the analytical perspective and methods used. Chapter three examines the theories and approaches most valuable for analyzing the process of promoting transparency in a multi-actor context. Having reviewed the major approaches, the dissertation¿s own analytical perspective is presented in chapter four. We view the formation of policy outputs for transparency, as a result of both actor strategies and network structures. More specifically, the network is considered to set the context within which individual strategies can evolve. The way actors and network characteristics are operationalised and measured is presented in chapter five. We also present the dissertation¿s methodology for the collection as well as analysis of data and case selection in this chapter. The third part (Chapters 6, 7, 8 and 9) presents the empirical analyses. Putting the model into force, chapters six and seven assess the political feasibility of efforts to improve transparency in the pork chain in the Netherlands and the EU respectively. In a similar vein, chapters eight and nine focus on the farmed-fish chain in the Netherlands and the EU respectively. Finally, the fourth part (Chapter 10) concludes the dissertation, interprets the results and discusses their implications for transparency and sustainability related policies and politics.