Barking Up the Right Tree? NGOs and Corporate Power for Deforestation-Free Supply Chains

Abstract

: Supply chain sustainability has become a key issue for multinational corporations (MNCs). Hundreds of MNCs in agri-commodity sectors have recently committed to eliminate deforestation from their supply chains. In this article, we examine the power of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) participating in two initiatives that support the implementation of such commitments: the Accountability Framework initiative (AFi) and Transparency for Sustainable Economies (Trase). Drawing on document and literature research, participant observation as well as semi-structured interviews, we find that these NGOs exercise power with MNCs, in particular in terms of raising awareness and changing corporate self-perceptions. At the same time, though, there is a bias towards representing the positions and interests of materially strong actors in global supply chains. In doing so, NGOs risk reinforcing MNCs’ power over more marginalized actors. In this light, we argue that initiatives such as AFi and Trase can only be a first step towards a new economic system that respects ecological limits and delivers social justice. In order to shape transformative change, NGOs need to more actively push discussions about equitable distribution, emancipation and justice in natural resource governance.

Unearthing the myths of global sustainable forest governance

“…Technocratic governance mechanisms and voluntary sustainability standards promise a ‘win–win–win’ scenario where the complexities of deforestation are managed in a ‘synergetic’ and ‘cost-effective’ way (Cashore et al , 2003; Nielsen, 2014). This narrative is also prevalent in the TFA 2020, which actively promotes the idea of forests providing a ‘triple win’ of eliminating deforestation, boosting agricultural productivity and reducing poverty (Weber & Partzsch, 2018). Arguably, however, the ‘sustainable intensification’ narrative is then used to promote increased productivity of export commodities, which may exclude considerations of alternative agricultural production systems (Spann, 2017).…”

Transparency for Multi-Tier Sustainable Supply Chain Management: A Case Study of a Multi-tier Transparency Approach for SSCM in the Automotive Industry

“…These advancements have not only made global sourcing and outsourcing [11,12] more practicable, it is also becoming easier for buyers and suppliers and sub-suppliers to pass on information [11,13]. On the other hand, critical stakeholders are more able than ever before to draw attention to the negative impacts of global firms' operations all around the globe [3,8,[14][15][16][17]. At a time when consumers are increasingly wondering where and how their clothes are made and just how sustainable their potential new electric vehicle might be, given the raw materials required to make it, transparency in global supply chains is a core issue to be addressed.…”

Which forests could be protected by corporate zero deforestation commitments? A spatial assessment

“…This finding adds to a growing body of literature showing that the definition of forest significantly impacts estimates of forest cover and forest cover change (Chazdon et al 2016, Sexton et al 2016, Mermoz et al 2018. The lack of a well-agreed forest definition led nine environmental and social NGOs to launch the Accountability Framework initiative in 2016; a framework that has been developed to provide companies with detailed guidance to implement their commitments and standardize definitions of forest, deforestation, and related terms (Weber and Partzsch 2018). Greater consensus on forest classification is needed to reduce the uncertainty in the area covered by the corporate commitments and facilitate more effective monitoring (Lyons-White and Knight 2018).…”