Rendering social: rethinking the role of shrimp aquaculture certification in Thailand

Samerwong, Phatra

doi:10.18174/528362

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 179 publications

(374 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We therefore argue that scholarly debates on acceptance of MSIs would benefit from conceptualizations, methods, and approaches that highlight different ways of creating and perceiving legitimacy and acceptance more broadly. In this regard, we suggest that particularly a sociological perspective would allow for studying diversity in views and values and provide insights into the ways and means by which differences are linked to particular sociocultural contexts, institutional settings, market and value chain characteristics, and specific norm sets (Bernstein 2011;Bush et al 2015;Samerwong 2020;Schouten et al 2016). Such a perspective asks not only for the use of different theoretical groundings but also for a broadening of methodologies to get an in-depth understanding of what other conditions and factors contribute to the acceptance and uptake of certification-based MSIs (e.g., process tracing).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Input Legitimacy of Voluntary Sustainability Standards and Acceptance Among Southern Producers: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Schouten¹,

Toonen²,

Leeuwerik³

2022

Global Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Voluntary standards are key instruments to address sustainability concerns in value chains. The legitimacy of these initiatives has been debated, particularly related to acceptance by Global South stakeholders. The governance literature has predominantly argued that initiatives employing democratic approaches to governance are more likely to increase their legitimacy. In this article, we use a configurational approach to test this proposition in relation to standard acceptance by southern producers. A qualitative comparative analysis of eight cases was carried out, linking three elements of input legitimacy (inclusion, participation, and accountability) to the outcome of standard uptake in the Global South. While our findings suggest that an inclusive governance structure is important, overall, they show no evidence to explain the presence or absence of standard acceptance in the Global South. We conclude that theoretical assumptions about democratic legitimacy cannot be confirmed and argue for further opening up the scholarly debate to include conceptualizations, methods, and approaches inclusive of different ways of creating and perceiving legitimacy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%