There is an ambivalence within political ecology about whether the unequal power relations that emerge from many development projects are intended or unintended. This ambivalence is a result of an empirical focus on the effects of these programs on target communities, as opposed to an empirical focus on the people who are responsible for developing those programs. Drawing on qualitative fieldwork among people tasked with designing, promoting, and enforcing sustainability standards in global agricultural supply chains, I argue that the empowerment of multinational corporations and well-funded environmental NGOs that characterizes market-oriented sustainability programs is, in fact, intentional. This intention reflects the belief among sustainability professionals that the intersection of western scientific expertise with the dynamics of “the market” is the most effective way to promote sustainability in global supply chains, and to generate global sustainability in a more general sense. Concepts like “stakeholder engagement” and a commitment to flexibility and accommodation in the development and adoption of social and environmental standards are examples of what I call euphemistic sustainability, which shifts critical attention away from a balance of power that is increasingly tilted toward private interests, even as that imbalance remains an intended outcome of non-state market-driven governance systems like ostensibly voluntary sustainability standards.
ArcherM (2020)
Stakes and stakeholders in the climate Casino. GeoHumanities 6(1): 171–187.
2.
ArcherM (in press) Imagining impact in global supply chains: Data-driven sustainability and the production of surveillable space. Surveillance and Society.
3.
BeskyS (2014) The Darjeeling Distinction: Labor and Justice on Fair-trade Tea Plantations in India.
Berkeley:
University of California Press.
4.
BlackmanARiveraJ (2011)
Producer‐level benefits of sustainability certification. Conservation Biology25(6): 1176–1185.
5.
BlaikieP (1985) The Political Economy of Soil Erosion in Developing Countries.
London:
Longman.
6.
BrunssonNJacobssonB (2010) A World of Standards.
New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
7.
BryantRL (ed.) (2015) The International Handbook of Political Ecology.
Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
8.
Cashore B (2002) Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How non-state market-driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule-making authority. Governance: An international journal of policy, administration, and institutions 15; 4: 503–529.
9.
ClausCA (2020) Drawing the Sea Near: Satoumi and Coral Reef Conservation in Okinawa.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
10.
CornwallA (2007a)
Buzzwords and fuzzwords: Deconstructing development discourse.Development in Practice17(4–5): 471–484.
11.
CornwallA (2007b)
Revisiting the ‘gender agenda’. IDS Bulletin38(2): 69–78.
12.
CrowBCarneyJ (2013)
Commercializing nature: Mangrove conservation and female oyster collectors in the Gambia. Antipode45(2): 275–293.
13.
DallasMPPonteSSturgeonTJ (2019)
Power in global value chains. Review of International Political Economy26(4): 666–694.
14.
De BakkerFGARascheAPonteS (2019)
Multi-stakeholder initiatives on sustainability: A cross-disciplinary review and research agenda for business ethics.Business Ethics Quarterly29(3): 343–383.
15.
DelabreIOkerekeC (2020)
Palm oil, power, and participation: The political ecology of social impact assessment. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space3(3): 642–662.
16.
De ZwartF (2015)
Unintended but not unanticipated consequences.Theory and Society44(3): 283–297.
17.
DolanCHumphreyJ (2004)
Changing governance patterns in the trade in fresh vegetables between Africa and the United Kingdom. Environment and planning A36(3): 491–509.
18.
ErenA (2017)
The political ecology of uncertainty: The production of truth by juridical practices in hydropower development. Journal of Political Ecology24(1): 386–405.
19.
Escobar A (1995) Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
20.
Ferguson J (1994) The anti-politics machine: “Development,” depoliticization, and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
21.
FortinE (2013)
Transnational multi-stakeholder sustainability standards and biofuels: understanding standards processes. Journal of Peasant Studies40(3): 563–587.
22.
FouilleuxE (2012) Sustainable voluntary standards: Towards privatized regulation in the food and farm sector. In: Development, the environment, and food: Towards agricultural change. Delhi: TERI Press; pp. 215–225.
23.
FouilleuxELocontoA (2017)
Voluntary standards, certification, and accreditation in the global organic agriculture field: A tripartite model of techno-politics. Agriculture and Human Values34(1): 1–14.
24.
FreidbergS (2003)
Cleaning up down South: Supermarkets, ethical trade and African horticulture. Social & Cultural Geography4(1): 27–43.
25.
FreidbergS (2017)
Trading in the secretive commodity. Economy and Society46(3–4): 499–521.
26.
FrenchM (2014)
Gaps in the gaze: Informatic practice and the work of public health surveillance. Surveillance & Society12(2): 226–242.
27.
HobartM (ed.) (1993) An Anthropological Critique of Development: The Growth of Ignorance.
London:
Routledge.
28.
HornborgA (1998)
Towards an ecological theory of unequal exchange: Articulating world system theory and ecological economics. Ecological Economics25(1): 127–136.
29.
JaffeeDHowardPH (2010)
Corporate cooptation of organic and fair trade standards. Agriculture and Human Values27(4): 387–399.
30.
KeeleyJBlackmoreE (2012) Pro-poor Certification: Assessing the Benefits of Sustainability Certification for Small-scale Farmers in Asia. IIED Natural Resource Issues, no. 25.
London:
IIED.
31.
KillJ (2016)
The role of voluntary certification in maintaining the ecologically unequal exchange of wood pulp: The Forest Stewardship Council's certification of industrial tree plantations in Brazil. Journal of Political Ecology23(1): 434–445.
32.
KöhneM (2014)
Multi-stakeholder initiative governance as assemblage: Roundtable on sustainable palm oil as a political resource in land conflicts related to oil palm plantations. Agriculture and Human Values31(3): 469–480.
33.
LangfordNJ (2019)
The governance of social standards in emerging markets: An exploration of actors and interests shaping Trustea as a Southern multi-stakeholder initiative. Geoforum104: 81–91.
34.
LiTM (2007) The Will to Improve: Governmentality, Development, and the Practice of Politics.
Durham, NC:
Duke University Press.
35.
LocontoABuschL (2010)
Standards, techno-economic networks, and playing fields: Performing the global market economy. Review of International Political Economy17(3): 507–536.
36.
McGoeyL (2012)
Strategic unknowns: Towards a sociology of ignorance. Economy and Society41(1): 1–16.
37.
NaderL (1972) Up the anthropologist: Perspectives gained from studying up. ERIC.
38.
NaylorL (2019) Fair Trade Rebels: Coffee Production and Struggles for Autonomy in Chiapas.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
39.
NkrumahK (1965) Neo-colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism.
London:
Thomas Nelson and Sons.
40.
OyaCSchaeferFSkalidouD (2018)
The effectiveness of agricultural certification in developing countries: A systematic review. World Development112: 282–312.
41.
PaulsonSGezonLLWattsM (2003)
Locating the political in political ecology: An introduction. Human Organization 62(3): 205–217.
42.
PonteS (2019) Business, Power and Sustainability in a World of Global Value Chains.
London:
Zed Books Ltd.
43.
PonteSGibbonPVestergaardJ (2010) Governing through Standards: Origins, Drivers and Limitations.
New York, NY:
Palgrave Macmillan.
44.
PorterTM (1995) Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
45.
Reinecke J, Manning S and Von Hagen O (2012) The emergence of a standards market: Multiplicity of sustainability standards in the global coffee industry. Organization studies 33(5-6): 791–814.
46.
RiisgaardLOkindaO (2018)
Changing labour power on smallholder tea farms in Kenya. Competition & Change22(1): 41–62.
47.
ScottJC (1998) Seeing Bike a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition have Failed.
New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press.
48.
SenD (2017) Everyday Sustainability: Gender Justice and Fair Trade Tea in Darjeeling.
Albany, NY:
SUNY Press.
49.
SoulelesD (2018)
How to study people who do not want to be studied: Practical reflections on studying up. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review41(S1): 51–68.
50.
SvarstadHBenjaminsenTAOveråR (2018)
Power theories in political ecology.Journal of Political Ecology25: 350–363.
51.
SyllaN (2014) The Fair Trade Scandal: Marketing Poverty to Benefit the Rich.
Athens, OH:
Ohio University Press.
52.
Van der VenHRothackerCCashoreB (2018)
Do eco-labels prevent deforestation? Lessons from non-state market driven governance in the soy, palm oil, and cocoa sectors. Global Environmental Change52: 141–151.
53.
WaartsYGeLTonG, et al. (2012) Sustainable tea production in Kenya: Impact assessment of Rainforest Alliance and Farmer Field School training. LEI report 2012-043.
The Hague:
LEI Wageningen UR.
54.
ZengLChattiDHebdonC, et al. (2016)
The political ecology of knowledge and ignorance. The Brown Journal of World Affairs23: 159.
55.
ZeyenABeckmannMWoltersS (2016)
Actor and institutional dynamics in the development of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics135(2): 341–360.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
