LIST OF PANELS

This panel aims to add a public policy perspective to the literature global environmental governance and impacts of globalization. We are particularly interested in the governance of the environmental implications of global interconnections, such as commodity chains or global production networks. While the global environmental governance literature tends to focus on the global commons, particular global interconnections mean that localized human activity (production or consumption) can have repercussions in distant places across the globe.

In line with literatures on global social-ecological systems, we describe such phenomena as ‘telecoupling’ (Liu et al. 2013; Friis and Nielsen 2017) – though papers using alternative concepts are welcome – and point to significant challenges for environmental governance (Lenschow et al. 2016; Eakin et al. 2017). First, there is the problem of scale, as neither local nor global governance capture the specific flows connecting distant places. Second, there is the issue of transparency, as distant implications of local actions may not be visible (as they are locally contained) or easily traceable due to complex global production and trading networks. Third, there is the issue of cross-sectoral impacts escaping classical issue-focused global environmental governance arrangements. Attempts to study, and indeed to govern, globally interconnected phenomena and their often-local environmental impacts have remained relatively isolated (Dauvergne and Clapp 2016).

Different strands of academic literature have analyzed global connections and their environmental implications, as well as institutional arrangements, agencies and actors to govern the global environment. Two relevant strands stand out in particular (Biermann et al. 2009; Pattberg and Widberg 2015): One strand focusses on global governance arrangements and the prospect of an encompassing authoritative international environmental organization. This work does not capture specifically interconnected relations, however. The other strand focusses on transnational private and multi-stakeholder arrangements, zooming in on relevant, but often isolated governance measures largely “beyond the state”. On the practical level, an authoritative global governance structure seems only a distant option, while many private and multi-stakeholder initiatives encounter problems of accountability and limited effectiveness.

This panel will address the challenges of governing globally interconnected – ‘telecoupled’ – phenomena and discuss questions such as:

1. Given the multitude of private and multi-stakeholder initiatives on the one hand, and their limited effectiveness on the other, what could be the role of public policy therein? How could private governance of complex global commodity chains and public governance approaches be better coordinated? What role does (or could) public policy play to co-ordinate, harmonize or orchestrate existing international private environmental standards?

2. What kinds of institutions could manage social and environmental trade-offs across multiple scales? What role does (or could) national public policy play in addressing the distant effects (cross-border externalities) of corporate activities.  How might flow-based and place-based (jurisdictional) approaches be coordinated?

3. How do we explain the selective uptake of specific distant impacts (e.g. deforestation) in governance initiatives, while other impacts (e.g. the loss of access to land and water of local populations) are disregarded? How might environmental impacts that are masked and often ignored be addressed between distant places?

This panel aims to add a public policy perspective to global environmental governance and impacts of globalization. We are particularly interested in papers that address the governance of the social-environmental implications of global interconnections, such as commodity chains and global production networks. While the global environmental governance literature tends to focus on the global commons, particular global interconnections mean that localized human activity (production or consumption) can have repercussions in distant places across the globe.

In line with literatures on global social-ecological systems, we may describe such phenomena in terms of ‘telecoupling’ (Liu et al. 2013; Friis and Nielsen 2017) and point to significant challenges for environmental governance (Lenschow et al. 2016; Eakin et al. 2017). First, there is the problem of scale, as neither local nor global governance capture the specific flows connecting distant places. Second, there is the issue of transparency, as distant implications of local action may not be visible (as they may be locally contained) or easily traceable due to complex global production and trading networks. Third, there is the issue of cross-sectoral impacts, which escape classical issue-focused global environmental governance arrangements.

While other concepts (such as global commodity chains, global land system analysis, environmental flows etc.), may serve to describe environmental impacts arising out of global interconnectedness, attempts to study, and indeed to govern, globally interconnected phenomena and their local impacts remain relatively isolated (Dauvergne and Clapp 2016). Our panel aims particularly to bridge the public-private governance gap that characterizes the literature on global and transnational environmental governance (e.g. Biermann et al. 2009; Pattberg and Widberg 2015) and to move towards “grounding” the globally (often Northern) oriented literature, by acknowledging specific local conditions.

We invite papers that address the challenges of governing globally interconnected – ‘telecoupled’ – phenomena and discuss questions such as:

1. Given the multitude of private and multi-stakeholder initiatives on the one hand and their limited effectiveness on the other, what could be the role of public policy therein? How could private governance of complex global commodity chains and public governance approaches be better coordinated? What role does (or could) public policy play to co-ordinate, harmonize or orchestrate existing international private environmental standards?

2. What kind of institutions could manage social and environmental trade-offs across multiple scales? What role does (or could) national public policy play in addressing the distant effects of corporate activities (e.g. the recent French Law of the Corporate Duty of Vigilance or the Swiss Responsible Business Initiative). How might flow-based and place-based (jurisdictional) approaches be coordinated across different scales?

3. How do we explain and effectively address the selective uptake of specific distant impacts (e.g. deforestation) in governance initiatives, while other impacts (e.g. the loss of access to land and water of local populations) are disregarded?

To this end, we welcome papers that theorize and conceptualize such globalized socio-environmental interconnection, as well as empirical papers focusing on specific case studies, network analyses, governance and policy instruments, or governance implications and options to enhance environmental sustainability effectively.