2. Background: The Challenge of Deforestation-Free Supply Chains
2.1. Commodity-Driven Deforestation
2.2. The ‘Watchdog’ Role of NGOs
2.3. The New Forest Economy
2.4. The Neoliberal Discourse, North-South Asymmetries and Alternative Economic Concepts
- an equitable downscaling of production and consumption that increases human wellbeing and enhances ecological conditions at the local and global level, in the short and long term  (p. 512).
3. New Efforts of Coordination and Cooperation for Deforestation-Free Supply Chains
3.1. The Accountability Framework Initiative (AFi)
3.2. Transparency for Sustainable Economies (Trase)
4. Analysing Power with and Power over
4.1. Power with: Collaborative Efforts to Protect Global Forests
- No one company or sector can do it alone. We have a shared vision and the way to getting us there is through the strength of partnerships and joint impactful actions  (p. 1).
- AFi representative, interviewed on 15 November 2017:We recognize that they [the MNCs] are partners (…) I see the willingness of companies to turn rhetoric into action. Some companies already have had an impact. There is clear evidence of that.
- Trase representative, interviewed on 1 December 2017:Our approach assumes that companies play a leading role in this, as well as governments but companies and governments together are key to the solution. And that companies are willing to take action—this is a premised partially. We assume that companies will act on this information.
- AFi representative, cited after  (p. 1):It [the AFi] will accelerate progress, foster transparency and better enable companies to track their progress as they accomplish important milestones.
- Trase representative, interviewed on 1 December 2017:At the core of Trase is the belief that the platform is an enabling tool (…) a tool that is able to help others do what they are aiming to do better.
- AFi representative, interviewed on 4 October 2018:Their [the MNC representatives’] feedback was very helpful, in terms of telling us where the guidance resonated with them, where they found it helpful, where they wanted to see additional information and where it needed to be more detailed.
- Trase representative, interviewed on 1 December 2017:The tool can be used for quite different purposes, it can be used as an accountability tool to hold companies accountable but (…) it can also be used to highlight progress and performance and show that certain companies are performing better than others.
- Statement by Unilever:[S]ince making our commitment to zero net deforestation, we’ve increased our work with industry partners, governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), advocating for change across the entire tropical forest commodities sector  (p. 1).
- Statement by Procter & Gamble (P&G):At P&G, we are unequivocally committed to zero deforestation in our palm supply chain and are using our innovation strength to drive positive change in the industry  (p. 1).
4.2. Power over: Power Asymmetries through Deforestation-Free Supply Chains
- NGO representative, interviewed on 10 July 2018:Deforestation-free supply chains are not a concept but a fundraising tool. This tool only works in the Western world where NGOs and companies use it for advertising and campaigning.
- NGO representative, interviewed on 15 July 2018:[C]ompanies in a capitalist system cannot accept limits to growth as they need to foster growth strategies to ensure returns on their investments. So while they can and often do accept policy measures that improve the quality of their production, they can never accept policy measures that limit the overall quantity of their production.
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Conflicts of Interest
References and Notes
- UN. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. A/RES/70/1. 2015. Available online: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf (accessed on 26 July 2018).
- Persson, M.; Henders, S.; Kastner, T. Trading Forests: Quantifying the Contribution of Global Commodity Markets to Emissions from Tropical Deforestation. Working Paper 384. 2014. Available online: https://www.cgdev.org/publication/trading-forests-quantifying-contribution-global-commodity-markets-emissions-tropical (accessed on 26 July 2018).[Green Version]
- Forest Trends. Company Profiles. 2018. Available online: http://supply-change.org/#company-profiles (accessed on 6 October 2018).
- Streck, C.; Lee, D. Partnering for Results: Public-Private Collaboration on Deforestation-Free Supply Chains. 2016. Available online: https://climatefocus.com/publications/partnering-results-public-private-collaboration-deforestation-free-supply-chains (accessed on 4 June 2018).
- Fuchs, D.; Di Giulio, A.; Glaab, K.; Lorek, S.; Maniates, M.; Princen, T.; Røpke, I. Power: The missing element in sustainable consumption and absolute reductions research and action. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 132, 298–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Partzsch, L. ‘Power with’ and ‘power to’ in environmental politics and the transition to sustainability. Environ. Politics 2017, 26, 193–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arendt, H. On Violence; Harcourt, Brace & World: New York, NY, USA, 1970. [Google Scholar]
- AFi. Introduction for Public Consultation Period: October 10–11 December 2017. 2017. Available online: https://accountability-framework.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/AFi-Slide-Deck-for-e-consultation-2017-10-10.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2018).
- Trase. A Vision for Trase, 2016–2020. 2016. Available online: http://resources.trase.earth/documents/Trase-vision-for-2020.pdf (accessed on 30 May 2018).
- Weber, M. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology; Guenther, R., Wittich, C., Eds.; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Levidow, L. EU criteria for sustainable biofuels: Accounting for carbon, depoliticizing plunder. Geoforum 2013, 44, 211–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Participant observation was conducted at three sessions of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), namely COP21, COP22 and COP23, and at three sessions of the Subsidiary Bodies to the Convention, namely SB42, SB43 and SB44. At each session, the authors attended numerous side events and meetings on deforestation and forest degradation with a particular focus on supply chain management. The speeches and statements were not recorded; however, detailed notes were taken.
- The authors interviewed corporate representatives, members from the NGO community as well as representatives of AFi and Trase. The interviews were conducted in July 2017, December 2017, July 2018 and October 2018 via phone as well as in November 2017 at COP23.
- Seymour, F.; Forwand, E. Governing sustainable forest management in the new climate regime. Clim. Chang. 2010, 1, 803–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Griscom, B.; Adams, J.; Ellis, P.; Houghton, R.; Lomax, G.; Miteva, D.; Schlesinger, W.; Shoch, D.; Siikamäki, J. Natural climate solutions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 11645–11650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Seymour, F.; Busch, J. Why Forests? Why Now? The Science, Economics and Politics of Tropical Forests and Climate Change; Center for Global Development: Washington, DC, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Kanninen, M.; Murdiyarso, D.; Seymour, F.; Angelsen, A.; Wunder, S.; German, L. Do Trees Grow on Money? The Implications of Deforestation Research for Policies to Promote REDD; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- The acronym REDD+ stands for ‘reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries’.
- Ferretti-Gallon, K.; Busch, J. What Drives Deforestation and What Stops It? A Meta-Analysis of Spatially Explicit Econometric Studies. Working Paper 361. 2014. Available online: https://www.cgdev.org/publication/what-drives-deforestation-and-what-stops-it-meta-analysis-spatially-explicit-econometric (accessed on 25 July 2018).
- Boucher, D.; Elias, P.; Lininger, K.; May-Tobin, C.; Roquemore, S.; Saxon, E. The Root of the Problem: What’s Driving Tropical Deforestation Today; Union of Concerned Scientists: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Donofrio, S.; Rothrock, P.; Leonard, J. Supply Change: Tracking Corporate Commitments to Deforestation-Free Supply Chains, 2017; Forest Trends: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Fern. Company Promises: How Businesses are Meeting Commitments to End Deforestation. 2017. Available online: http://fern.org/sites/default/files/news-pdf/Company%20promises.pdf (accessed on 29 May 2018).
- Haupt, F.; Streck, C.; Bakhtary, H.; Behm, K. Zero-Deforestation Commodity Supply Chains by 2020: Are We on Track? Background Paper Prepared for the Prince of Wales’ International Sustainability Unit. 2017. Available online: http://www.climatefocus.com/sites/default/files/20171106%20ISU%20Background%20Paper.pdf (accessed on 29 May 2018).
- Teegen, H.; Doh, J.; Vachani, S. The importance of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: An international business research agenda. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2004, 35, 463–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corell, E.; Betsill, M. A comparative look at NGO influence in international environmental negotiations: Desertification and climate change. Glob. Environ. Politics 2001, 1, 86–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasiritousi, N.; Hjerpe, M.; Linnér, B.-O. The roles of non-state actors in climate change governance: Understanding agency through governance profiles. Int. Environ. Agreem. Politics Law Econ. 2016, 16, 109–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsoukas, H. David and Goliath in the risk society: Making sense of the conflict between Shell and Greenpeace in the North Sea. Organization 1999, 6, 499–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murphy, D.; Bendell, J. In the Company of Partners: Business, Environmental Groups and Sustainable Development Post-Rio; The Policy Press: Bristol, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Heap, S. NGO-business partnerships. Research-in-progress. Public Manag. Int. J. Res. Theory 2000, 2, 555–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edwards, M. Just Another Emperor? Demos: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Baur, D.; Palazzo, G. The moral legitimacy of NGOs as partners of corporations. Bus. Ethics Q. 2011, 21, 579–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baur, D.; Schmitz, H. Corporations and NGOs: When accountability leads to co-optation. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 106, 9–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bosso, C. Environment, Inc.: From Grassroots to Beltway; University Press of Kansas: Lawrence, KS, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Duwe, M. The climate action network: A glance behind the curtains of a transnational NGO network. Rev. Eur. Community Int. Environ. Law 2001, 10, 177–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moosmayer, D.; Davis, S. Staking cosmopolitan claims: How firms and NGOs talk about supply chain responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics 2016, 135, 403–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Bank representative, speaking at the Marrakech Partnership for Global Climate Action’s Forests Day at COP23, 12 November 2017.
- Authors’ interviews with corporate representatives and members of the NGO community (July 2017; November 2017; July 2018) as well as participant observation at COP23 (November 2017).
- Consumer Goods Forum. Low-Carbon Solutions for a Sustainable Consumer Goods Sector. 2017. Available online: https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/low-carbon-solutions-sustainable-consumer-goods.pdf (accessed on 25 July 2018).
- The Climate Group. Removing Deforestation from Supply Chains Makes Business Sense, Says New Report. 2016. Available online: https://www.theclimategroup.org/news/removing-deforestation-supply-chains-makes-business-sense-says-new-report (accessed on 9 July 2018).
- Clay, J. Businesses Are Increasingly Seeing Sustainability as a Precompetitive Issue. 2011. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/precompetition-collaboration-do-more-with-less (accessed on 11 July 2018).
- Mark Kenber. Ambitious Corporate-NGO Partnerships will Benefit Business, the Environment and the Economy. Available online: https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/sponsored/2025553/ambitious-corporate-ngo-partnerships-benefit-business-environment-economy (accessed on 24 July 2018).
- Mansfield, B. Neoliberalism in the oceans: ‘Rationalization’, property rights, and the commons question. Geoforum 2004, 35, 313–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderson, T.; Leal, D. Free Market Environmentalism; Palgrave: New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Bakker, K. Neoliberalizing nature? Market environmentalism in water supply in England and Wales. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2005, 95, 542–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McElwee, P. Payments for environmental services as neoliberal market-based forest conservation in Vietnam: Panacea or problem? Geoforum 2012, 43, 412–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Igoe, J.; Brockington, D. Neoliberal conservation: A brief introduction. Conserv. Soc. 2007, 5, 432–449. [Google Scholar]
- Phillips, N. Power and inequality in the global political economy. Int. Aff. 2017, 93, 429–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Okereke, C. Global Justice and Neoliberal Environmental Governance: Ethics, Sustainable Development and International Co-Operation; Routledge: Abingdon, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Deacon, R. Deforestation and the rule of law in a cross-section of countries. Land Econ. 1994, 70, 414–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barbier, E.; Damania, R.; Léonard, D. Corruption, trade and resource conversion. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2005, 50, 276–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dingwerth, K. North-South parity in global governance: The affirmative procedures of the Forest Stewardship Council. Glob. Gov. 2008, 14, 53–71. [Google Scholar]
- Forest Stewardship Council. Governance. Understanding How FSC Makes Decisions. 2018. Available online: https://ic.fsc.org/en/what-is-fsc/governance (accessed on 3 October 2018).
- Meadows, D.; Meadows, D.; Randers, J.; Behrens, W. The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome’s Project on the Predicament of Mankind; Universe Books: New York, NY, USA, 1972. [Google Scholar]
- Paech, N. Die Postwachstumsökonomie—Ein Vademecum. Z. Sozialökonomie 2009, 46, 28–31. [Google Scholar]
- Schneider, F.; Kallis, G.; Martinez-Alier, J. Crisis or opportunity? Economic degrowth for social equity and ecological sustainability. Introduction to this special issue. J. Clean. Prod. 2010, 18, 511–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demaria, F. Why Economic Growth Is Not Compatible with Environmental Sustainability. 2018. Available online: https://theecologist.org/2018/feb/22/why-economic-growth-not-compatible-environmental-sustainability (accessed on 24 July 2018).
- AFi. About the Accountability Framework Initiative. 2018. Available online: https://accountability-framework.org/about-us/ (accessed on 7 June 2018).
- AFi. Core Document: Draft for Public Consultation. 2017. Available online: https://accountability-framework.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/accountability-framework-core-document_english_2017-11-3.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2018).
- AFi. The Accountability Framework Initiative. Delivering on Ethical Supply Chain Commitments: Overview Presentation. 2018. Available online: https://accountability-framework.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/AFi-overview-deck-May-2018.pdf (accessed on 5 July 2018).
- AFi. Steering Group Terms of Reference. 2017. Available online: https://accountability-framework.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Steering-Group-TOR.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2018).
- Gita Syahrani, Executive Director of Lingkar Temu Kabupaten Lestari (a Collaborative Districts Association in Indonesia) and Former WRI Staff. Available online: http://www.lampost.co/berita-deklarasi-lingkar-temu-kabupaten-lestari and http://www.wri.org/profile/gita-syahrani (accessed on 23 July 2018).
- Silas Siakor, Director of the Sustainable Development Institute in Liberia. Available online: https://foe.org/2014-11-disease-deforestation-and-development-ebola-and-extr/ (accessed on 23 July 2018).
- AFi. Frequently Asked Questions. 2018. Available online: https://accountability-framework.org/resources/faqs/ (accessed on 4 July 2018).
- Trase. Data Download. 2018. Available online: https://trase.earth/data?lang=en (accessed on 30 May 2018).
- SEI. Trase: Bringing ‘Radical Transparency’ to Global Supply Chains. 2016. Available online: https://www.sei-international.org/-news-archive/3585 (accessed on 29 May 2018).
- Trase. Frequently Asked Questions. 2017. Available online: https://demo.trase.earth/about/faq?lang=en (accessed on 30 May 2018).
- Linhares-Juvenal, T.; Neeff, T. Definitions matter: Zero deforestation concepts and performance indicators. In Zero Deforestation: A Commitment to Change; Pasiecznik, N., Savenije, H., Eds.; Tropenbos International: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 3–10. [Google Scholar]
- Streck, C. Where Do We Go from Here? What Private Sector Progress on Zero-Deforestation Commitments Really Means. 2017. Available online: https://www.tfa2020.org/en/go-private-sector-progress-zero-deforestation-commitments-really-means/ (accessed on 11 June 2018).
- Gaventa, J. Finding spaces for change: A power analysis. IDS Bull. 2006, 37, 23–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Eyben, R.; Harris, C.; Pettit, J. Introduction: Exploring power for change. IDS Bull. 2006, 37, 1–10. Available online: http://www.powercube.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/exploring_power_for_change_intro.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2018). [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Allen, A. Rethinking power. Hypatia 1998, 13, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Authors’ interview with a representative of AFi (4 October 2018).
- Authors’ interview with a representative of Trase (1 December 2017).
- Representatives from MNCs, NGOs, research institutions and governments speaking at the official launch of Trase at COP22 (9 November 2016) as well at the Marrakech Partnership for Global Climate Action’s Forests Day at COP23 (12 November 2017).
- Gardner, T.; Benzie, M.; Börner, J.; Dawkins, E.; Fick, S.; Garrett, R.; Godar, J.; Grimard, A.; Lake, S.; Larsen, R.K.; et al. Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains. World Dev. 2018, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Authors’ participant observation at COP21, COP22, COP3, SB42, SB43 and SB44.
- Rainforest Alliance. Public Consultation Period Opens on New Accountability Framework. 2017. Available online: https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/press-releases/accountability-framework-public-consultation-open (accessed on 1 October, 2018).
- Authors’ interview with a representative of Trase (12 July 2018).
- Innovation Forum. Can the New Accountability Framework Deliver Business Value? 2017. Available online: https://innovation-forum.co.uk/analysis.php?s=can-the-new-accountability-framework-deliver-business-value (accessed on 4 June 2018).
- Pearce, F. How Data Holds Businesses Accountable for Deforestation. 2016. Available online: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-data-holds-businesses-accountable-deforestation (accessed on 13 June 2018).
- Authors’ interview with MNC representative (13 November 2017).
- Unilever. Protecting Our Forests. 2018. Available online: https://www.unilever.com/sustainable-living/reducing-environmental-impact/greenhouse-gases/protecting-our-forests/ (accessed on 25 July 2018).
- Procter & Gamble. Environmental Quality. 2018. Available online: https://us.pg.com/policies-and-practices/environmental-policies-and-practices/ (accessed on 7 October 2018).
- Hofferberth, M. “And of course our major contribution remains to run a decent business”. Making sense of Shell’s sense-making in Nigeria during the 1990s. Bus. Politics 2017, 19, 135–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Authors’ interview with a representative of AFi (15 November 2017).
- TFA 2020. Partners. 2018. Available online: https://www.tfa2020.org/en/about-tfa/partners/ (accessed on 24 July 2018).
- TFA 2020. Objectives. 2018. Available online: https://www.tfa2020.org/en/about-tfa/ objectives/ (accessed on 24 July 2018).
- TFA 2020. Forests Day at COP23 Highlights Climate Action, Opportunities. 2017. Available online: https://www.tfa2020.org/en/forests-day-cop23-highlights-climate-action-opportunities/ (accessed on 24 July 2018).
- Dahl, R.A. The concept of power. Behav. Sci. 1957, 2, 201–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ProForest. Supporting Nestlé’s Global Implementation of Responsible Sourcing Guidelines for Sugar. 2012. Available online: https://www.proforest.net/en/news/supporting-nestle2019s-global-implementation-of-responsible-sourcing-guidelines-for-sugar (accessed on 12 July 2018).
- The Nature Conservancy. Working with Cargill. 2018. Available online: https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/who-we-are/how-we-work/working-with-companies/advancing-our-priorities/cargill-and-conservancy/ (accessed on 12 July 2018).
- WWF. Corporate Partnerships Report. FY17. 2018. Available online: https://c402277.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/publications/743/files/original/World_Wildlife_Fund_FY17_Corporate_Report.pdf?1531238031 (accessed on 25 July 2018).
- Clapp, J.; Meckling, J. Business as a global actor. In The Handbook of Global Climate Governance and Environment Policy; Falkner, R., Ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 2013; pp. 286–303. [Google Scholar]
- Fuchs, D. Business Power in Global Governance; Lynne Rienner Publishers: Boulder, CO, USA; London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Authors’ interview with NGO representative (10 July 2018).
- Pacheco, P.; Gnych, S. Why ‘Zero Deforestation’ Is Only One Piece of the Sustainability Puzzle. 2016. Available online: https://forestsnews.cifor.org/40617/why-zero-deforestation-is-only-one-piece-of-the-sustainability-puzzle?fnl=en (accessed on 20 June 2018).
- Zwick, S. Can ‘Radical Transparency’ Save Forests and Slow Climate Change? 2016. Available online: https://www.forest-trends.org/ecosystem_marketplace/trase/ (accessed on 29 May 2018).
- Taylor, R. As More Companies Go ‘Deforestation-Free’ What Does It Mean for Heavily Forested Nations? 2018. Available online: http://www.wri.org/blog/2018/02/more-companies-go-deforestation-free-what-does-it-mean-heavily-forested-nations (accessed on 20 June 2018).
- Hill, T.; Higman, S. Tackling smallholder-driven deforestation. In Zero Deforestation: A Commitment to Change; Pasiecznik, N., Savenije, H., Eds.; Tropenbos International: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 69–76. [Google Scholar]
- Pacheco, P.; Komarudin, H. Implementing commitments in the Indonesian palm oil sector. In Zero Deforestation: A Commitment to Change; Pasiecznik, N., Savenije, H., Eds.; Tropenbos International: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 184–190. [Google Scholar]
- Mol, A. Transparency and value chain sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 107, 154–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campbell, J. New modes of production are possible. In Zero Deforestation: A Commitment to Change; Pasiecznik, N., Savenije, H., Eds.; Tropenbos International: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 84–85. [Google Scholar]
- Lukes, S. Power: A Radical View; Palgrave MacMillan: London, UK, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Guzzini, S. The concept of power. A constructivist analysis. In Power in World Politics; Berenskoetter, F., Williams, M., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2007; pp. 23–42. [Google Scholar]
- Authors’ interview with NGO representative (15 July 2018).
- Foucault, M. The subject and power. Crit. Inq. 1982, 8, 777–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bourdieu, P. Sozialer Sinn: Kritik der Theoretischen Vernunft; Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Cornell, S.; Berkhout, F.; Tuinstra, W.; Tàbara, J.D.; Jäger, J.; Chabay, I.; de Wit, B.; Langlais, R.; Mills, D.; Moll, P. Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global environmental change. Environ. Sci. Policy 2013, 28, 60–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|Type of actors involved||Environmental and social NGOs||Environmental NGOs and research institutions|
|Actors involved in decision-making processes||Members of the Steering Group (SG):|
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).