IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v109y2021ics0264837721003549.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Articulating FPIC through transnational sustainability standards: A comparative analysis of Forest Stewardship Council’s standard development processes in Canada, Russia and Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Teitelbaum, Sara
  • Tysiachniouk, Maria
  • McDermott, Constance
  • Elbakidze, Marine

Abstract

An increasing number of sustainability standards integrate the principle of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) as a requirement to ensure respect for the rights of Indigenous peoples. FPIC remains a contested norm, due in part to divergences of interpretation and gaps in implementation. Drawing on a typology based on FPIC conceptions, this paper presents a comparative analysis of the Forest Stewardship Council’s (FSC) standard development processes in three countries, Canada, Russia and Sweden. The paper investigates the dynamics of designing FPIC requirements and conceptions of FPIC reflected in national standards. Drawing on semi-structured interviews and analysis of written standards, this study finds similarities in terms of the key debates, such as the scope of Indigenous authority and applicability of FPIC to non-Indigenous communities, however underscored by different stakeholder dynamics and outcomes. Despite the structuring presence of International Generic Indicators, different conceptions of FPIC are reflected in national standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Teitelbaum, Sara & Tysiachniouk, Maria & McDermott, Constance & Elbakidze, Marine, 2021. "Articulating FPIC through transnational sustainability standards: A comparative analysis of Forest Stewardship Council’s standard development processes in Canada, Russia and Sweden," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:109:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721003549
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105631
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721003549
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105631?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Teitelbaum, Sara & Wyatt, Stephen, 2013. "Is forest certification delivering on First Nation issues? The effectiveness of the FSC standard in advancing First Nations' rights in the boreal forests of Ontario and Quebec, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 23-33.
    2. Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna, 2014. "‘Free prior and informed consent’, social complexity and the mining industry: Establishing a knowledge base," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 91-100.
    3. Fontana, Lorenza B. & Grugel, Jean, 2016. "The Politics of Indigenous Participation Through “Free Prior Informed Consent”: Reflections from the Bolivian Case," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 249-261.
    4. Dobrynin, Denis & Smirennikova, Elena & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2020. "Non-state forest governance and ‘Responsibilization’: The prospects for FPIC under FSC certification in Northwest Russia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Tysiachniouk, Maria S. & McDermott, Constance L. & Kulyasova, Antonina A. & Teitelbaum, Sara & Elbakidze, Marine, 2021. "The politics of scale in global governance: Do more stringent international forest certification standards protect local rights in Russia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    6. Meadows, John & Annandale, Mark & Ota, Liz, 2019. "Indigenous Peoples’ participation in sustainability standards for extractives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    7. Sandstrom, Camilla & Widmark, Camilla, 2007. "Stakeholders' perceptions of consultations as tools for co-management -- A case study of the forestry and reindeer herding sectors in northern Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1-2), pages 25-35, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Meadows, John & Annandale, Mark & Ota, Liz, 2019. "Indigenous Peoples’ participation in sustainability standards for extractives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    2. Kyle Bahr & Masami Nakagawa, 2017. "The effect of bidirectional opinion diffusion on social license to operate," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1235-1245, August.
    3. Alberti, Federica & Mantilla, César, 2020. "Provision of noxious facilities using a market-like mechanism: A simple implementation in the lab," Working papers 35, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    4. So, Hau Wing & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2022. "Reviewing the impacts of eco-labelling of forest products on different dimensions of sustainability in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    5. Khan, Md Faisal Abedin & Uddin, Md Sazib & Giessen, Lukas, 2021. "Microcredit expansion and informal donor interests: Experiences from local NGOs in the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest, Bangladesh," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    6. Watts, John D. & Pasaribu, Katryn & Irawan, Silvia & Tacconi, Luca & Martanila, Heni & Wiratama, Cokorda Gde Wisnu & Musthofa, Fauzan Kemal & Sugiarto, Bernadinus Steni & Manvi, Utami Putri, 2021. "Challenges faced by smallholders in achieving sustainable palm oil certification in Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    7. Michael O. Erdiaw‐Kwasie & Khorshed Alam & Enamul Kabir, 2017. "Modelling Corporate Stakeholder Orientation: Does the Relationship Between Stakeholder Background Characteristics and Corporate Social Performance Matter?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 465-479, May.
    8. Geiguen Shin, 2022. "How Ostrom's design principles apply to large‐scale commons: Cooperation over international river basins," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(5), pages 674-697, September.
    9. Killian, Bernadeta & Hyle, Maija, 2020. "Women's marginalization in participatory forest management: Impacts of responsibilization in Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Carl Österlin & Peter Schlyter & Ingrid Stjernquist, 2020. "Different Worldviews as Impediments to Integrated Nature and Cultural Heritage Conservation Management: Experiences from Protected Areas in Northern Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, April.
    11. Walsh, Bríd & van der Plank, Sien & Behrens, Paul, 2017. "The effect of community consultation on perceptions of a proposed mine: A case study from southeast Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 163-171.
    12. Anne Elizabeth Fordham & Guy M. Robinson, 2018. "Mapping meanings of corporate social responsibility – an Australian case study," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Kwame Awuah-Offei & Sisi Que & Atta Ur Rehman, 2021. "Evaluating Mine Design Alternatives for Social Risks Using Discrete Choice Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-15, August.
    14. Stephen Wyatt & Sara Teitelbaum, 2020. "Certifying a state forestry agency in Quebec: Complementarity and conflict around government responsibilities, indigenous rights, and certification of the state as forest manager," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 551-567, July.
    15. Inge Stupak & Jamie Joudrey & C. Tattersall Smith & Luc Pelkmans & Helena Chum & Annette Cowie & Oskar Englund & Chun Sheng Goh & Martin Junginger, 2016. "A global survey of stakeholder views and experiences for systems needed to effectively and efficiently govern sustainability of bioenergy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 89-118, January.
    16. Tysiachniouk, Maria & McDermott, Constance L., 2016. "Certification with Russian characteristics: Implications for social and environmental equity," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 43-53.
    17. Almut Schilling‐Vacaflor & Jessika Eichler, 2017. "The Shady Side of Consultation and Compensation: ‘Divide‐and‐Rule’ Tactics in Bolivia's Extraction Sector," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 48(6), pages 1439-1463, November.
    18. Tysiachniouk, Maria S. & McDermott, Constance L. & Kulyasova, Antonina A. & Teitelbaum, Sara & Elbakidze, Marine, 2021. "The politics of scale in global governance: Do more stringent international forest certification standards protect local rights in Russia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    19. Merino, Roger, 2018. "Re-politicizing participation or reframing environmental governance? Beyond indigenous’ prior consultation and citizen participation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 75-83.
    20. Jean Grugel & Pia Riggirozzi, 2023. "Facing the Future: The Legacies of Post‐Neoliberalism in Latin America: Introduction to Development and Change Virtual Issue," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 54(2), pages 1-17, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:109:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721003549. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.