The Journal of Environment & Development

Four trends would seem to be empowering environmentalists who target corporations with global brands: the increasing reach of social media, growing numbers of campaigns, the corporate turn toward “sustainability” to create brand value and manage supply chains, and the spread of eco-consumerism. Campaigns since 2007 to demand that brands stop buying palm oil linked to tropical deforestation confirm the rising influence over corporate policies and market demand. Many activists are portraying the outcomes as “victories” toward saving rainforests. Yet, three factors are limiting the value for improving on-the-ground management: industry influence over, and governance limits of, palm oil certification; ongoing sales of uncertified palm oil as demand shifts to nonbrand buyers; and illegalities and weak regulatory enforcement in producer countries, notably Indonesia and Malaysia. Theoretically, this analysis demonstrates the importance, when evaluating activist campaigns, of distinguishing between the influence on corporate policies and markets and the effectiveness for environmental outcomes.

The European Union plays a globally influential role in environmental legislation, with policies and regulation rooted in particular norms. Through a narrative on regulatory capitalism, ecological modernization, and diffusion, we trace how the promotion of renewable energy in transport through subsidies, mandatory targets, and prescriptive criteria for liquid biofuels mobilize social forces for its market development. The study identifies prevailing norms, mechanisms of decision making, and the network of actors involved in this regulatory regime and also identifies where and through whom its expansion influenced decisions in Tanzania. The findings show how this regime emphasizes systematic eco-innovation of energy technologies, has a substitutable approach to natural capital, and subordinates social concerns to economic efficiency. The analysis shows how this regime mobilized a broader network of actors with similar interests, who mediated the political space of liquid biofuels in Tanzania in ways which conflicted with a domestic critique concerning land use.

Transboundary water resources management in the Equatorial Nile Basin (EQNB) is a politically contested issue. There is a growing body of literature examining water-related discourses which identifies the ability of powerful actors and institutions to influence policy. Concern about the effects of future climate change has featured strongly in research on the Nile River for several decades. It is therefore timely to consider whether and how these concerns are reflected in regional policy documents and policy discourse. This study analyzes discourse framings of water resources management and climate change in policy documents (27, published between 2001 and 2013) and as elicited in interviews (38) with water managers in the EQNB. Three main discursive framings are identified which are present in the discourses on both subjects: a problem-oriented environmental risk frame and two solution-oriented frames, on governance and infrastructure development. Climate change discourse only emerges as a common topic around 2007. The framings found in the water resources management discourse and the climate change discourse are almost identical, suggesting that discursive framings were adopted from the former for use in the latter. We infer that the climate change discourse may have offered a less politically sensitive route to circumvent political sensitivities around water allocation and distribution between riparian countries in the EQNB. However, the climate change discourse does not offer a lasting solution to the more fundamental political dispute over water allocation. Moreover, in cases where the climate change discourse is subsumed within a water resources management discourse, there are dangers that it will not fully address the needs of effective adaptation.

We propose that national governments could issue bonds whose interest payments are linked to green net national product (gNNP) or, almost equivalently, to inclusive wealth. The main intention of this new financial instrument is to entice investors and the national government to invest in human and natural capital for which the corresponding financial assets currently do not exist. As the concept of wealth expands to include human and natural capital, so should the corresponding assets side in the balance sheet of nations. While the argument for gross national product (GNP)–linked bonds focuses on trimming public debt toward fiscal sustainability, the proposed bonds aim to ensure long-term sustainability. The theoretical link associated with welfare economics is also more plausible. Moreover, it could lead to the virtuous cycle of increased government expenditure directed toward inclusive wealth, expanding tax revenue, increased coupon payment to investors, and increased social well-being.