Overlapping Public and Private Governance: Can Forest Certification Fill the Gaps in the Global Forest Regime?

By L. Gulbrandsen. Global Environmental Politics, 2004

296 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Plant Science, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/97d2fb37a1087b011aed862b6c1bf0e3065e9526

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

In Plant Science

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Weak Coffee: Certification and Co-Optation in the Fair Trade Movement (2012, background): “A coalition of social movements, NGOs, firms, and foundations created the Forest Stewardship Council in the 1990s in an effort to curb tropical deforestation (Bartley 2007a; Gulbrandsen 2004; Klooster 2005; Taylor 2005b).”
Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships (2018, background): “MSPs are often conceptualized as forms of private governance (e.g., Gulbrandsen 2004; Pattberg 2006; Mena and Palazzo 2012).”
The Forest Stewardship Council: Risk and Potential of Private Forest Governance (2005, background): “In addition to the shortcomings analyzed above, several structural limitations to certification and private governance in the forestry sector have been put forward (Gulbrandsen, 2004).”
Private Global Business Regulation (2008, background): “Forestry standards have been the most extensively studied civil regulations (e.g., Lipschutz 2000, Bostrom 2003, Gulbrandsen 2004, Pattberg 2005, Meidinger 2006b, Auld et al. 2007, Sasser 2006).”
Research, part of a Special Feature on Understanding Adaptive Capacity in Forest Governance Local Consequences of Applying International Norms: Differences in the Application of Forest Certification in Northern Sweden, Northern Finland, and Northwest Russia (2009, background): “…with forest owners and forest-sector interests regularly adopting much more of a focus on the economic viability of the local community (Rantala and Primmer 2003, Tikkanen et al. 2003) and on the affordability and perceived legitimacy of certification schemes for forest owners (Gulbrandsen 2004).”
Trust, legitimacy and power in forest certification: A case study of the FSC in British Columbia (2012, background): “competition among environmentalists and the forest industry to gain legitimate authority over resource use (e.g. Bernstein and Cashore, 2007; Eden and Bear, 2010; Gulbrandsen, 2004; Tollefson et al., 2008).”
Challenges to Legitimacy at the Forest Stewardship Council (2010, methodology): “The FSC is perceived as NGO-dominated, whereas the PEFC is perceived as corporatist (Cashore and Vertinsky, 2000; Gulbrandsen, 2004).”