Forest certification with Chinese characteristics: state engagement with non-state market-driven governance

Abstract

Forest certification is conceptualized as non-state market-driven (NSMD) governance, whereby forces within the market are used to drive sustainable practices at the forest management level and throughout supply chains. Whilst recent scholarship has considered the "cross fertilization" and hybrid nature of the state and non-state in creating sustainable forest governance, these studies have tended to focus on national cases involving democratic countries where the "space" for private standards and auditors is relatively unconstrained. This study seeks to fill this gap though an examination of the entry of transnational forest certification approaches into China. Drawing on extensive fieldwork conducted in China during 2010, it traces the creation of a new forest certification scheme, which aims to be adopted under the Program for Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes (PEFC). The study examines the legitimacy sought by the Chinese government on three fronts-to appeal to the differing needs of both international and domestic markets simultaneously, whilst ultimately assuming a legitimate form of (institutionalized) domestic governance, which allows the government to maintain their authority over the mechanism and its operations. The study also focuses on the principles of NSMD governance through an analysis of the legitimate authority afforded to the state, third-parties and NGOs within China. It contributes to political geography by examining how isomorphic forms of institutionalized governance are reproduced within local settings, with the aim of adhering to both global norms of legitimate governance and domestic norms of legitimate power.

Powered by the state or finance? The organization of China’s carbon markets

“…Low incentives for non-state finance Non-state economic actors do not actively engage in environmental issues generally (Buckingham and Jepson 2013;Mol 2006). Mol (2006, 52) has noted that in China, Eurasian Geography and Economics 401 economic and financial institutions such as insurance companies, banks, and business associations "have virtually no role to play in advancing environmental interests."…”

Grounding transnational business governance: A political‐strategic perspective on government responses in the Global South

“…Schemes such as the Brazilian Forest Certification Programme, the Malaysian Timber Certification Council (Cashore et al 2006) and the China Forest Certification Council (Bartley 2014) were initially developed as a replace response to the FSC. While developing their own alternatives, many countries simultaneously constrained the ability for the FSC to operate within their borders (Bartley 2014) and progressively became aligned to the PEFC (Buckingham & Jepson 2013).…”

The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) and Its Contribution to Sustainable Forest Management in Indonesia

“…In this regard, both schemes are rolled out according to their respective characteristics. The FSC scheme is perceived to be designed by environmentalists, whereas the PEFC is seen to be closer to the interests of forest production industries by analysts such as Buckingham and Jepson (2013). We can easily understand why some studies conclude that getting FSC certification will be time consuming and costly (Bartley 2010;Ruslandi et al, 2014).…”