455 4 archive 16 disk0/00/00/04/55 2006-12-01 2008-07-18 09:44:10 2008-07-16 15:46:36 conference_item show Gale F Fred.Gale@utas.edu.au unpub 160603 349901 220000 360102 public paper forest stewardship council globalization governance regulation While the recent process of globalisation has been underway for at least 50 years, its extensity, intensity, velocity and impact propensity have never before been so great (Held et al 1999). In the past two decades, globalisation has been facilitated by neoliberal ideas promoting a reduced role for the state and an increased role for the market dramatically increasing the number, reach and power of multinational corporations (Harvey 2005). Although it is evident that the global market system has grown beyond the control of individual states and inter-state organisations, many analysts continue to seek national, inter-national and regional regulatory arrangements (Cerny 2006). Yet expecting such institutions to regulate the global market in the interest of good economic, social and environmental outcomes misunderstands the new role of the state in a globalising world, which is to capture as much of the economic surplus generated by globalising capitalism as possible within its borders. Despite its regulatory weakness, the state will continue to play a crucial role in creating the base conditions for society and the good life in any neo-medieval, poly-centric future (Ruggie 1993; Cerny 2006). Increasingly, however, the regulation of global capitalism for the economic, social and environmental benefit of all rests with global civil society, which must empower itself directly via its own institutions. In this paper, I focus on one specific global civil society organization - the Forest Stewardship Council - and examine its formal organisational features to demonstrate two key points. First, the uniqueness of FSC's organisational structure, constituting it as a sui generis institution in the world of global civil society; and second, its fitness and capacity to regulate the emerging global forest "polity", reconceptualized in non-spatial terms for the new, globalising world. 2006-09 published 23 Australasian Political Studies Association Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia 25-27 Sept 2006 conference UNSPECIFIED TRUE Abusow, K. 2005. Canadian Forest Management Certification Status Report: September 15, 2005 (BC Data only). Prepared for the Canadian Sustainable Forestry Certification Coalition. Compiled by Abusow International Ltd. Ottawa ON. 10 pp. http://www.certificationcanada.org/pdfs/csbcco.pdf Bernstein, S. 2001. The Compromise of Liberal Environmentalism. Columbia University Press: New York. Bernstein, S. & B. Cashore. 1999. World trends and Canadian forest policy: trade, international institutions, consumers and transnational environmentalism. Forestry Chronicle 75: 34-38. Bernstein, S. & B. Cashore. 2002. Globalization, four paths of internationalisation and domestic policy change in British Columbia, Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science 33: 67-99. Boetekees, G., K. Moore and G. Weber. 2000. Forest Stewardship Standards for the Maritime Region: Commission of Enquiry Final Report. Bonn: FSC-IC (May 31) Cashore, B. 2002. Legitimacy and the privatisation of environmental governance: how non state market-driven (nsmd) governance systems gain rule making authority. Governance Journal 15: 503-529. Cashore, B., G.C. van Kooten, I. Vertinsky, G. Auld & J. Affolderbach. 2005. Private or self regulation? A comparative study of forest certification choices in Canada, the United States and Germany. Forest Policy and Economics 7: 53-69. Cashore, B., G. Auld and D. Newsom. 2004. Governing Through Markets. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Cerny, P. 2006. “Multi-nodal politics in a globalizing world.” Paper presented to the Second OCIS Conference, Melbourne University, Victoria, Australia, 57 July. Clogg, J. 1999. Comments on the Public Consultation Draft of the Forest Stewardship Council Regional Certification Standard for British Columbia. WCEL: Vancouver. [url] http://www.wcel.org/wcelpub/1999/wrapper.cfm?docURL=http://www.wcel.org/wcelpub/1999/13013.html Collier, R., R. Diabo, J. Gladu, P. Smith & V. Peachey. 2001. Draft Strategic Directions Paper on Indigenous Peoples and Forest Stewardship Council Certification. Prepared by an Indigenous Writing Committee for Review and Comment. 14 pp. http://www.fsccanada.org/pdf_document/direction.pdf CSFCC. 2005. Forest Stewardship Council. http://www.sfms.com/fsc.htm Cutler, C., T. Porter and V. Haufler (eds). 1999. Private Authority and International Affairs. New York: SUNY Press. Elliott, C. & R. Schlaepfer. 2001. The advocacy coalition framework: application to the policy process for the development of forest certification in Sweden. Journal of European Public Policy 8: 642-661. FSC-CA. 2006. “Celebrating a Landmark Consensus on Forest Management.” Toronto, Ontario: FSC-Canada Media Advisory, 30 March. FSC-CA Working Group. 2001. Concept Paper: Addressing the Application of Principle 3, Indigenous Rights, and Indigenous Involvement in the Forest Stewardship Council. 4 pp. FSC-IC. 2005. FSC Plantations Review: Report from the First Policy Working Group Meeting. 08 Apr. 6 pp. http://www.fsc.org/plantations/docs/FSC%20PWG%20 meeting%20report%202005-03%20-%20Eng.PDF FSC-IC. 2003. Forest Stewardship Council: Because Forests Matter. Website. [url] http://www.fsc.org/en/about/contact_fsc FSC-IC. 2002. FSC Annual Report 2002. Oaxaca, Mexico. 22 pp. http://www.fsc.org/keepout/en/content_areas/88/1/files/FSC_1640_e.pdf GWW. 2005. Good Wood Watch: Keeping Forest Certification Honest. http://www.wcel.org/goodwoodwatch/ GrantCraft, “Funders Collaborative: Sustainable Forestry”, New York, NY: The Ford Foundation, www.grantcraft.org, accessed October 2005. Government of Canada, Department of Justice. 2006. Constitution Acts 1867 to 1982. <http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/const/c1867_e.html#pre>, Accessed June 2006. Harvey, D. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Held, D., A. McGrew, D. Goldblatt and J. Perreton. 1999. Global Transformations. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hessing, M. & M. Howlett. 1999. Canadian Natural Resource and Environmental Policy: Political Economy and Public Policy. Vancouver: UBC Press. 338 pp. IAC. 2003. Report of the Indigenous Advisory Council: March 3, 2003. 8 pp. http://www.fsccanada.org/boreal/pdf_document/mar3_03_English.pdf. Information on Certified Forest Sites Endorsed by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), http://www.certified-forests.org/index.htm, accessed October/November 2005. Iisaak Forest Resources. 2000. Website. http://www.iisaak.com/about.html Hauselman, T. 2002. Voting procedure for the election of a multi-stakeholders working group. WB/WWF. http://www.piec.org/pathfinder/Pathfinder_portal/ Instruments_Engl/B4-elections/web/B4-screen.pdf. International Non Governmental Organisations Accountability Charter. 2006. http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGPOL306062006, accessed June 2006. Joint NGO Statement on Forest Certification. 2003. Why FSC is the only Forest Certification System Worthy of Support. 26 March. http://www.wcel.org/ goodwoodwatch/PDF/jointstatement.pdf Kirton, J. and M. Trebilcock. Hard Choices, Soft Law. Burlington, VT: Ashgate. Lindblom, C. 1982. “The market as prison”. Journal of Politics 44, 2 (May), 324332. McDermott, Constance. Personal Trust and Trust in Abstract Systems: A Study of Forest Stewardship Council-Accredited Certification in British Columbia. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2003. NAFA. 2001. An overview of certification and application of FSC’s P3, Indigenous rights. 17 August 2001. http://www.fsccanada.org/Ipforum/summary.shtml National Archives. 2006. Constitution of the United States. < http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution_ transcript.html>, accessed June 2006. National Initiatives Task Force. 2005. National Initiatives Task Force Recommendations Report. FSC-UK: November. Pattberg, P. “The institutionalisation of private governance: how business and non-profits agree on transnational rules”. Governance (forthcoming). Peeling, A.C. 2002. Executive Summary of Review of the Application of Principle 3 in the Boreal Forests subject to Treaties and Aboriginal Rights (of First Nations and Métis). Prepared for the Forest Stewardship Council. Victoria BC. 10 pp. http://www.fsccanada.org/pdf_document/peeling_executive_summary.pdf Ruggie, J. 1993. “Territoriality and beyond: problematizing modernity in International Relations.” International Organization 47 (Winter). Sasser, E.N. 2003. Gaining leverage: NGO influence on certification institutions in the forest products sector. IN L. Teeter, B. Cashore & B. Zhang (eds), Forest Policy for Private Forestry: Global and Regional Challenges. CABI Publishing: Wallingford UK. SmartWood. 2004. Forest Management Public Summary for Inlailawatash Holdings Ltd.: Certification Code SW-FMCOC-1311. New York NY. 116 pp. http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/programs/forestry/smartwood/documents/ inlailawatashholdingsfmpubsum04_000.pdf Stevenson, M.L. 2000. Legal Memorandum Regarding Principle 3 of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC’s) Principle and Criteria. Vancouver BC. 36 pp. http://www.fsccanada.org/pdf_document/stevenson.pdf. Synnott, Tim. 2005. “Some notes on the early years of FSC”. Bonn, Germany: FSC-IC, November. TAT (Technical Advisory Team). Issues Analysis Report. FSC-BC Steering Committee, November 2001. http://www.fsc-bc.org/, accessed November 2005. Weber, Gregory. 2004. “Dispute Resolution in the FSC: Summary of Interviews”, Bonn, Germany: FSC IC. Weber, Gregory. 2005a. “Application of the FSC Interim Dispute Resolution Protocol to the PT Diamond Raya Dispute.” Pacific McGeorge Institute for Sustainable Development, McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific, Sacremento, California, 30 November. Weber, Gregory. 2005b. “Report of the dispute resolution workshop, Manaus, Brazil.” FSC General Assembly, Manaus, Brazil, 5 December. Wilson, B., T. Takahashi & I. Vertinsky. 2001. The Canadian commercial forestry perspective on certification: national survey results. Forestry Chronicle 77: 309-313. 781 1 455 1 application/pdf en public cc_utas

APSA-06-ForestGovernance.pdf

APSA-06-ForestGovernance.pdf 239516 http://eprints.utas.edu.au/455/1/APSA-06-ForestGovernance.pdf