Public and Private Governance in Interaction: Changing Interpretations of Sovereignty in the Field of Sustainable Palm Oil

Abstract

Since the 1990s, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and businesses have gained prominence as architects of new forms of transnational governance creating Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS). The legitimacy and effectiveness of VSS are dependent on interactions with public authorities and regulation. While studies suggest that the (perceived) gain or loss of sovereignty by a state shapes public–private interactions, we have little understanding on how states use or interpret sovereignty in their interactions with VSS. In this paper, we explore what interpretations of sovereignty are used by states at different ends of global value chains in interactions with VSS. Based on a comparative and longitudinal study of interactions of Indonesian and Dutch state actors with the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, we conclude that states strategically use different and changing notions of sovereignty to control the policy and debate regarding sustainable palm oil. When interactions between public and private governance are coordinative in nature, notions of interdependent sovereignty are used. However, when interactions are competitive, domestic and Westphalian notions of sovereignty are used. Our results show conflicting interpretations and usages of sovereignty by different states, which might negatively impact the regulatory capacity within an issue field to address sustainability issues.

State policies and upgrading in global value chains: A systematic literature review

“…The setting of quality or price standards (e.g., Behuria, 2019) and/ or banning specific (low-value) technologies (e.g., Butollo & Ten Brink, 2018), can foster shifts in local production toward higher value-added products. State regulation has also been associated with improved social conditions, requiring or supporting the adoption of internationally or locally developed certification schemes (Behuria, 2019;Schouten & Hospes, 2018); and through stricter enforcement of labor regulation (e.g., Braun-Munzinger, 2019;Hossain, 2019). However, downsides have also been documented, with protective regulatory measures often contributing to concurrent downgrading and upgrading outcomes, including environmental degradation.…”

Sustainable Palm Oil Certification Scheme Frameworks and Impacts: A Systematic Literature Review

“…Studies on the governance of the RSPO and the adoption of sustainability standards by producers' governments have been reported [57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67]. Martens et al, [68] pointed out that the RSPO failed to completely meet the legal and procedural aspects of good governance practices, as the smallholders neither perceived themselves as part of the vertical palm-oil supply chain nor linked the RSPO to any stakeholders whom they may consider to be important.…”

Sustainability of Palm Oil and Its Acceptance in the Eu

“…The RSPO was founded in 2004 as a voluntary membership association of investors, growers, processing firms and NGO to promote economic, social and environmental sustainability in the production and use of palm oil (Oosterveer, 2015;Von Geibler, 2013). Private certification is justified through a narrative of deficient states (Schouten and Hospes, 2018) and the more effective use of market mechanisms in global environmental governance (Cashore et al, 2004). The RSPO has developed a third party-based certification standard for sustainable palm oil (Brandi et al, 2015) and since its start in 2007, the growth has been considerable with nearly 3.2 million hectares of plantation areas and nearly 140 000 smallholders being certified in 2018 (RSPO, 2019).…”

“…Fourth and final, the RSPO is competing with other sustainability standards such as the Indonesian Initiative for Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) and the Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) certification schemes (Higgins and Richards, 2019;Hospes, 2014;Schouten and Hospes, 2018), which rely on national government regulations and not on voluntary participation like the RSPO. The ISPO and MSPO are, however, hardly recognised within the EU also because they are mandatory for all oil palm growers in their respective countries while they do not distinguish between more and less sustainable production practices (Dauvergne, 2018).…”

“…Nevertheless, this debate may have substantial consequences for imports and use of palm oil and thus for the position of palm oil producing countries. The call for palm oil sustainability means a call for cross-border collaboration and international coordination (Schouten and Hospes, 2018) and for involving private as well as public actors. The focus of the debate is on the definition of sustainable palm oil and on the question whether global standards should be preferred above national standards.…”