With respect to politics, the private governance bodies are encouraging multi-stakeholder policy deliberation and increasing direct stakeholder rule-making responsibility. And with regard to policy, the private standards are establishing rules that not only reinforce legal requirements but also go beyond the law.
Thus, as will be evaluated over the course of this dissertation, the emergence of private environmental governance authority has significant implications for policy-making, the traditional role of government, and overall state governance capacity to address local and global sustainability challenges.
Corporate Social Responsibility in Finland
Although there is no single standard definition of the term, in common political usage, governance is ultimately about how to steer the economy and society towards reaching collective goals. Rather 39 The usages of the term governance have developed separately within different academic sub-fields such as public administration, public policy, international relations and organizational theory.
For example, there are micro-level corporate governance concerns with respect to organizational accountability and transparency and macro-level international development concerns regarding good governance political reforms.
See Rhodes The policy and governance literature interprets this as a shift from government to governance whereby private actors participate to a greater degree in the formation and implementation of public policy and global governance mechanisms. The typology presented in Figure 2. As evaluated in the next section 2.
- Bibliography 1974–75 Organic and Organometallic Crystal Structures.
- Jane Lister - Google Scholar Citations.
- The Business Idea: The Early Stages of Entrepreneurship.
- Navigation menu.
- Dangerous Grains;
- Abraham as Spiritual Ancestor. A Postcolonial Zimbabwean Reading of Romans 4.
For more recent literature on the transformed state role see Bartle and Vass ; Hennebel et. Implementation concerns the on-the-ground delivery of the rules. Enforcement refers to the mechanism to ensure transparency and accountability of rule implementation. With hierarchical governance, the state has central authority, makes the decisions, and delivers and enforces compliance.
Public Policies on CSR
Governments maintain central authority but delegate certain self-regulatory responsibilities. This category of regulatory instrument constitutes the traditional forms of voluntary industry self-regulation. Unlike state-centric delegated self-regulation discussed above , with private governance, self-regulation occurs outside of the realm of government sanction.
Examples include communication, knowledge transfer and voluntary approaches such as industry self-regulation, voluntary codes, voluntary challenges, charters, covenants and negotiated agreements. See section 2. See Peters and E. As well, see Parker for a discussion of meta-regulation i. As a mechanism of industry self-regulation, there are numerous descriptors such as pure self-regulation, unilateral self-regulation, or multi-stakeholder regulation.
As well, governance scholars have employed other terms including: corporate social responsibility,49 non-state market driven governance NSMD ,50 non-state global governance,51 private regulation,52 private hard law,53 civil regulation,54 and corporate codes of conduct. The final mode of governance in the typology is CSR co-regulation. The term co-regulation is less commonly applied to describe the joint private governance arrangements between regulated organizations e.
As well, in some instances, the term co-regulation is employed to describe joint governance arrangements between government authorities i.
Corporate Social Responsibility and the State : International Approaches to Forest Co-Regulation
With private governance, private actors formulate the policy agenda, implement the rules, and oversee enforcement while governments are positioned in a lagging role having to decide whether and how to respond. Government engagement in CSR therefore constitutes a new mode of governance. As examined in the next section, with CSR co- regulation, public and private authority are coincident within a shared governance system. See Ohmae ; and Strange In the public policy literature, the hollowing of government refers to new public management reforms transferring various functions and activities traditionally undertaken by governments to private actors.
However, prior to this, I review the traditional policy debate regarding the pros and cons of statutory intervention versus market-based voluntary self-regulation and argue that while the policy literature generally paints a black and white distinction between these regulatory instruments, in fact, the public-private boundaries are increasingly blurred.
Through a comparative evaluation of several regulatory typologies, I show that there is an increasingly complex array of unilateral, multi-stakeholder, delegated and non-delegated self-regulatory and co-regulatory approaches that reflect varying public and private hybridized arrangements. The section concludes with an overview of the underlying objectives of an optimal co-regulatory policy mix.
- Documents & Reports Error.
- UBC Theses and Dissertations.
- Corporate Social Responsibility and the State;
Markets depend on government rules to function efficiently and fairly. Sorensen See Levi-Faur and Braithwaite Source: Maged Hard law and soft law approaches represent state-based regulatory and delegated voluntary mechanisms that range from high to low coercion see Table 2. Assuming that policy instruments are substitutable, regulatory theory argues that governments prefer the least intervention lowest coercion in order to maintain legitimacy policy acceptance.
Voluntary approaches such as self-regulation are criticized for being difficult to apply; less rigorous in their performance requirements; and for their uncertain public accountability. Industry generally advocates for the use of voluntary rather than regulatory approaches as this avoids the imposition of inefficient regulation and offers policy direction while at the same time providing a flexible framework for innovation.
Further, industry argues that self-regulation generates business process improvements and positive changes in corporate culture that are often hard to quantify. As well, policy scholars argue that voluntary approaches can enhance efficiency and effectiveness by positioning the development and implementation of agreements in the hands of those closest and most knowledgeable about the issues.
Rather, many voluntary approaches incorporate regulatory requirements and government oversight, and are seldom implemented in isolation of other policy instruments. As explained in the previous section, self-regulation represents the low-coercion end of the scale of regulatory tools that governments can employ. Self-regulation is not a new concept.
Professional associations such engineers, lawyers, medical doctors and accountants continue to be largely self-regulated, although recently for some, under the increasingly watchful eye of the state. With neo- liberal reforms, state delegated self-regulation has not only increased in prominence as a favoured environmental policy tool but also new forms of non-delegated CSR self- regulation have emerged. This has broadened the spectrum of self-regulatory approaches, as well as created a varied landscape of regulatory terminology.
This section applies the previously introduced governance typology presented in section 2. As well, Gunningham and Rees note that self-regulation can be distinguished in terms of its focus on the individual versus the group. Individual Self-regulation Group Self-regulation Industry Self-regulation - An entity such as a firm, regulates itself independent of others. Economic Self-regulation Social Self-regulation - Control of markets or other facets of economic life. In summary, this review of regulatory typologies highlights two main findings.
Firstly, the analysis shows how the definitions of self-regulation vary as per the extent of government engagement, the stage of the policy cycle e. And secondly, the evaluation demonstrates the lack of definitional consistency in the policy literature, i. To a large degree, the definitional confusion stems from the first finding. This blurring of public and private 40 boundaries is characteristic of emerging co-regulatory systems of governance.
- Navigation menu.
- Forest Certification in the Boreal.
- Sigmund Freud (Key Sociologists).
- Hardy Boys 13: The Mark on the Door (The Hardy Boys).
The next section presents a conceptual map to help clarify the various categories of governance instruments within a co-regulatory policy mix. In this section, I argue that as multi-stakeholder CSR initiatives gain rule making authority, there is not only a shift in the mode of governance but also increased interaction with public policy and a growing prospect for the co- regulation of these private environmental governance mechanisms to increase governance capacity.
I illustrate this in Figure 2. Specifically, the figure shows how the various tools of governance are situated by the degree of public versus private rule-making authority and the extent to which they are state versus market-driven. Delegated self-regulation is also a traditional policy tool with authority continuing to reside with the state but with self-regulatory policy responsibilities delegated to the market.
Non- delegated self-regulation and regulated self-regulation constitute co-regulatory governance instruments that leverage private authority. And as already noted, the overall mix of these various regulatory instruments constitutes a co-regulatory governance system. Figure 2. For example, regulated self-regulation combines command-control regulation and non-delegated self-regulation i.
Traditional Governance Public authority with delegated self-regulatory responsibilities. CSR Co-regulation Co-regulating private authority. Co-regulatory Governance 42 with a voluntary CSR standard. As well, the categorization of non-delegated self- regulation as a purely non-state and market-driven mechanism NSMD is only a partial account. Ultimately, non- delegated private self-regulatory regimes overlap with public governance; rely on enabling legal frameworks and overarching legislative oversight; and civil society actors and the state not just markets have been drivers.
Beyond the challenge of sorting the definitional categories of new modes of governance and co-regulatory policy instruments, there is also the question of how to combine the various governance tools so as to achieve an optimal mix that maximizes the strengths while minimizing the weaknesses of the various policy approaches.
These are outlined below. Ayres and Braithwaite argue for responsive regulation and minimal sufficiency, i.
A lasting legacy
The pyramid progresses from self-regulation to enforced self-regulation, to command regulation with discretionary punishment to command regulation with non-discretionary punishment. To illustrate the concept they expanded upon the Ayres and Braithwaite pyramid to include three dimensions. The figure depicts the coordinated use of a number of different instruments across a number of different governance spheres, i. Prefer policy mixes incorporating a broader range of instruments and institutions; 2. Prefer less interventionist measures by applying instead the principle of low interventionism; 3.
Ascend a dynamic instrument pyramid to the extent necessary to achieve policy goals. Empower participants which are in the best position to act as surrogate regulators by applying the principle of empowerment; and 5. Maximize opportunities for win-win outcomes.
Related Corporate Social Responsibility and the State: International Approaches to Forest Co-Regulation
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved