Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Introducing Corporate Water Stewardship in the Context of Global Water Governance Read chapter Read first chapter

2019 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

2. Understanding the Enabling Environment

Author : Thérèse Rudebeck

Published in: Corporations as Custodians of the Public Good?

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This chapter explores the emergence of corporate water stewardship. It puts forth the argument that it can be understood as an outcome of two wide trends: (a) the growing discontent with state-mandated water resources management, and (b) the concurrent renegotiation of businesses’ role in society. This conclusion is drawn through a comprehensive literature review of conventional water management practices, and the criticisms to which they have been subjected. Through these critiques, the rationale emerges for opening a debate on the renegotiation at the global level of the position of businesses, introducing this sector as stakeholders in water governance. Intrinsically linked to this is the co-propagation of the use of market mechanisms to rectify societal and environmental problems. Consequently, this chapter will also analyse the emergence of market environmentalism and argue that it is through corporate water stewardship that this trend has materialised within the water sector. Furthermore, the chapter sets up the framework to theorise corporate participation in global governance, understand how it operates, and explain how new ideas are generated and established in the political context.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Introducing Corporate Water Stewardship in the Context of Global Water Governance
next chapter The Rise of Corporate Water Stewardship
Footnotes
1
The Dublin Principles were later also integrated into Agenda 21 of the 1992 Earth Summit.
 
2
Although not explicitly referenced, the idea of environmental flows has, for example, been integrated into the European Water Framework Directive as it requires member states to achieve good ecological status in all waterbodies (Acreman and Ferguson 2010).
 
3
Kubiszewski et al. 2017 estimate that between 1997 and 2011, the global value of ecosystem services has decreased by an estimated USD 20 trillion/yr.
 
4
The Global Compact is a voluntary partnership initiative between the UN and businesses. A business signs up to align its practices with ten principles in the areas of human rights, labour, the environment, and anti-corruption in order to act ‘as a force for good’. Self-reporting is carried out annually through The Global Reporting Initiative; the leading scheme in the field.
 
5
Legitimacy granted by UN endorsement.
 
6
The budget deficit was due to the US Congress having failed to approve the US contribution to the UN budget, which accounted for roughly 30% of the UN’s revenue. This resulted in substantial budget cuts for the organisation (Utting 2000). Simultaneously, the world was also experiencing a global aid crisis. Between 1992 and 1997, levels of Official Development Assistance (ODA) declined by one-third as a percentage of gross national income of donor countries – from 0.33 to 0.22% – or $61 billion to $48 billion dollars (ibid). However, during this same period, “corporate capitalism was enjoying a heyday” (Utting and Zammit 2009: 44), making partnerships seem beneficial.
 
7
It has to be noted that CSV is not a novel idea; there are earlier concepts that encapsulate the same aspiration, e.g. Elkington’s (1994; 1998) ‘Triple Bottom Line’ or Emerson’s (2000) ‘Blended Finance.’ Similarly to Porter and Kramer, Emerson argues that it is necessary to move beyond the historic definition of investment and return as a purely financial activity, and expand the notion to include social, as well as financial value. Thus, like Porter and Kramer, Emerson holds that the ultimate aim of any corporate activity is to advance a blended finance proposition “that integrates and affirms the greatest maximization of social and economic value” (Emerson 2000: 26).
 
8
The Washington Consensus refers to a set of broad free market economic ideas (e.g. free trade, floating exchange rates, and unregulated markets), supported by prominent international financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank.
 
9
This denotes the provision of water by utilities, (public or private), communities, or individuals, usually via systems of pumps and pipes.
 
10
This denotes the activities of planning, developing, distributing, and managing water resources. It thus includes a wider set of activities, and a different set of actors from water services provision.
 
11
Following Keohane (2011), the theory’s principal thesis is that variations in the institutionalisation of world politics exert significant impacts on the behaviour of governments. In particular, patterns of cooperation and disagreement can be understood only in the context of the institutions that help define the meaning and importance of state action.
 
12
Dating back to thinkers like Adam Smith and Immanuel Kant, liberalism as a theory in international relations rejects anarchy as the ‘natural’ state of the world, and instead focuses on the role of international organisations and nongovernmental actors in shaping state preferences and policy choices (see Snyder 2004).
 
13
The theory points towards how certain aspects of international relations are historically and socially constructed, rather than inevitable consequences of human nature or other essential characteristics of world politics (see, e.g., Wendt 1992).
 
14
Compulsory power also includes symbolic and normative resources.
 
Literature
Aakhus, M., & Bzdak, M. (2012). Revisiting the role of “shared value” in the business-society relationship. Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 31(2), 231–246.CrossRef
Acreman, M. C., & Ferguson, A. J. D. (2010). Environmental flows and the European Water Framework Directive. Freshwater Biology, 55(1), 32–48.CrossRef
Ainuson, K. (2009). An advocacy coalition approach to water policy change in Ghana: A look at belief systems and policy oriented learning. Journal of African Studies and Development, 1(2), 16–27.
Andonova, L. B. (2010). Public-private partnerships for the earth: Politics and patterns of hybrid authority in the multilateral system. Global Environmental Politics, 10(2), 25–53.CrossRef
Backer, L. C. (2011). Private actors and public governance beyond the state: The multinational corporation, the financial stability board, and the global governance order. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 18(2), 751–802.CrossRef
Bäckstrand, K. (2006). Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. European Environment, 16(5), 290–306.CrossRef
Bäckstrand, K., & Kylsäter, M. (2014). Old wine in new bottles? The legitimation and delegitimation of UN public–private partnerships for sustainable development from the Johannesburg summit to the Rio +20 summit. Globalizations, 11(3), 331–347.CrossRef
Bakker, K. (2005). Neoliberalizing nature? Market environmentalism in water supply in England and Wales. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 95(3), 542–565.CrossRef
Bakker, K. (2014). The business of water: Market environmentalism in the water sector. The Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 39, 469–494.CrossRef
Balmford, A., Bruner, A., Cooper, P., Costanza, R., Farber, S., Green, R. E., Jenkins, M., Jefferiss, P., Jessamy, V., Madden, J., Munro, K., Myers, N., Naeem, S., Paavola, J., Rayment, M., Rosendo, S., Roughgarden, J., Trumper, K., & Turner, R. K. (2002). Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science, 297(5583), 950–953.CrossRef
Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in global governance. In M. Barnett & R. Duvall (Eds.), Power in global governance (pp. 1–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.
Beck, U. (1996). World risk society as cosmopolitan society? Ecological questions in a framework of manufactured uncertainties. Theory, Culture & Society, 13(4), 1–32.CrossRef
Beck, U. (2006). Living in the world risk society. Economy and Society, 35(3), 329–345.CrossRef
Beisheim, M. (2012). Partnerships for sustainable development: Why and how Rio+20 must improve the framework for multi-stakeholder partnerships (SWP Research Paper). Berlin.
Bernauer, T., & Gampfer, R. (2013). Effects of civil society involvement on popular legitimacy of global environmental governance. Global Environmental Change, 23(2), 439–449.CrossRef
Bhaskar, R. (1979). The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press.
Biswas, A. K. (2009). Integrated water resources management: A reassessment. Water International, 29(2), 248–256.CrossRef
Blowers, A. (1997). Environmental policy: Ecological modernisation or the risk society? Urban Studies, 34(5–6), 845–871.CrossRef
Blowfield, M. (2004). CSR and development: Is business appropriating global justice? Development, 47(3), 61–68.CrossRef
Blowfield, M. (2005a). Corporate social responsibility: reinventing the meaning of development? International Affairs, 81(3), 515–524.CrossRef
Blowfield, M. (2005b). Going global: How to identify and manage societal expectations in supply chains (and the consequences of failure). Corporate Governance International Journal of Business in Society, 5(3), 119–128.CrossRef
Blowfield, M. (2005c). Corporate social responsibility – The failing discipline and why it matters for international relations. International Relations, 19(2), 173–191.CrossRef
Blowfield, M. (2008). Poverty’s case for business: The evidence, misconceptions, conceits and deceit surrounding the business case (BDS working paper series no. 5). Copenhagen: The Business, Development and Society Network, Copenhagen Business School.
Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: Critical perspectives on corporate social responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81(3), 499–513.CrossRef
Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2005). Public-private partnerships. Effective and legitimate tools of transnational governance? In E. Grande & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Complex sovereignty: Reconstituting political authority in the twenty first century (pp. 195–216). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Brühl, T., & Hofferberth, M. (2013). Global companies as social actors: Constructing private business in global governance. In J. Mikler (Ed.), The handbook of global companies (pp. 351–370). Chichester: Wiley.CrossRef
Bull, B., Bøås, M., & McNeill, D. (2004). Private sector influence in the multilateral system: A changing structure of world governance. Global Governance, 10, 481–498.CrossRef
Burkhard, B., Petrosillo, I., & Costanza, R. (2010). Ecosystem services – Bridging ecology, economy and social sciences. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 257–259.CrossRef
Butler, J. (2010). Frames of war: When is life grievable? London: Verso.
Campbell, L. M., Corson, C., Gray, N. J., MacDonald, K. I., & Brosius, J. P. (2014). Studying global environmental meetings to understand global environmental governance: Collaborative event ethnography at the tenth conference of the parties to the convention on biological diversity. Global Environmental Politics, 14(3), 1–20.CrossRef
Carrozza, C. (2015). Democratizing expertise and environmental governance: Different approaches to the politics of science and their relevance for policy analysis. Environmental Policy and Planning, 17(1), 108–126.CrossRef
Castells, M. (2008). The new public sphere: Global civil society, communication networks, and global governance. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 78–93.CrossRef
CEO Water Mandate, WWF & WaterAid. (2015). Serving the public interest: Corporate water stewardship and sustainable development. Oakland: UNCG, Pacific Institute.
Chapagain, A. K., & Tickner, D. (2012). Water footprint: Help or hindrance? Water Alternatives, 5(3), 563–581.
Cienki, A., & Yanow, D. (2013). Why metaphor and other tropes? Linguistic approaches to analysing policies and the political. Journal of International Relations and Development, 16(2), 167–176.CrossRef
Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P., & van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253–260.CrossRef
Cox, R. W. (1992). Multilateralism and world order. Review of International Studies, 18(2), 161–181.CrossRef
Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of “creating shared value”. California Management Review, 56(2), 130–153.CrossRef
Cronon, W. (2008). Foreword. In T. R. Dunlap (Ed.), DDT, silent spring, and the rise of environmentalism: Classic texts (pp. ix–xii). Washington: University of Washington Press.
Dahl, R. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Sciences, 2(3), 201–215.CrossRef
Dany, C. (2013). Global governance and NGO participation: Shaping the information society in the United Nations. London/New York: Routledge.
Death, C. (2011). Summit theatre: Exemplary governmentality and environmental diplomacy in Johannesburg and Copenhagen. Environmental Politics, 20(1), 1–19.CrossRef
Delmas, M. A., & Young, O. R. (2009). Introduction: new perspectives on governance for sustainable development. In M. A. Delmas & O. R. Young (Eds.), Governance for the environment: New perspectives (pp. 3–11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Dingwerth, K. (2005). The democratic legitimacy of public-private rule making: What can we learn from the World Commission on Dams? Global Governance, 11(1), 65–83.CrossRef
Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The politics of the earth (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36(2), 90–100.CrossRef
Emerson, J. (2000). The nature of returns: a social capital markets inquiry into elements of investment and the blended value proposition (Social enterprise series 1 No. 17, Harvard Business School’s Working Paper Series). Boston: Harvard Business School.
Engel, S., Pagiola, S., & Wunder, S. (2008). Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological Economics, 65, 663–674.CrossRef
Engel, S., & Schaefer, M. (2013). Ecosystem services – A useful concept for addressing water challenges? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(6), 696–707.CrossRef
Falkner, R. (2003). Private environmental governance and international relations: Exploring the links. Global Environmental Politics, 3(2), 72–87.CrossRef
Falkner, R. (2012). Global environmentalism and the greening of international society. International Affairs, 88(3), 503–522.CrossRef
Finlayson, C. M., Davidson, N., Pritchard, D., Randy, M., & MacKacy, H. (2011). The Ramsar convention and ecosystem-based approaches to the wise use and sustainable development of wetlands. Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy, 14(3–4), 176–198.
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16, 253–267.CrossRef
Forman, S., & Segaar, D. (2006). New coalitions for global governance: the changing dynamics of multilateralism. Global Governance, 12(2), 205–225.CrossRef
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: selected interviews & other writings 1972–1977. New York: Vintage.
Fyke, J. P., Feldner, B. S., & May, S. K. (2016). Discourses about righting the business ←→ society relationship. Business and Society Review, 121(2), 217–245.CrossRef
Gill, S., & Law, D. (1989). Global hegemony and the structural power of capital. International Studies Quarterly, 33(4), 475–499.CrossRef
Gilpin, R. (2002). A realist perspective on international governance. In D. Held & A. McGrew (Eds.), Governing globalization: Power, authority, and governance (pp. 237–248). New York: Polity.
Giordano, M., & Shah, T. (2014). From IWRM back to integrated water resources management. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 30(3), 364–376.CrossRef
Glasbergen, P. (2011). Mechanisms of private meta-governance: An analysis of global private governance for sustainable development. International Journal of Strategic Business Alliances, 2(3), 189–206.CrossRef
Glicken, J. (2000). Getting stakeholder participation ‘right’: A discussion of participatory processes and possible pitfalls. Environmental Science & Policy, 3(6), 305–310.CrossRef
Goodman, N. (1978). Ways of worldmaking. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Grigg, N. S. (2014). Integrated water resources management: unified process or debate forum? International Journal of Water Resources Development, 30(3), 409–422.CrossRef
Grundmann, R. (2009). The role of expertise in governance processes. Forest Policy and Economics, 11(5–6), 398–403.CrossRef
Gunderson, L. H. (2000). Ecological resilience – In theory and application. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 31, 425–439.CrossRef
GWP. (2000). Integrated water resources management (TAC background papers No. 4). Stockholm: GWPO.
Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.CrossRef
Hajer, M. A. (1993). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalisation of practice: The case of acid rain in Britain. In F. Fischer & J. Forester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning (pp. 43–76). Durham: Duke University Press.
Hajer, M., & Versteeg, W. (2005). Performing governance through networks. European Political Science, 3, 340–347.CrossRef
Hale, T. N., & Mauzerall, D. L. (2004). Thinking globally and acting locally: Can the Johannesburg partnerships coordinate action on sustainable development? The Journal of Environment and Development, 13(3), 220–239.CrossRef
Hargrove, E. C. (1992). Weak anthropocentric intrinsic value. The Monist, 75(2), 183–207.CrossRef
Hart, S. L. (1997). Beyond greening: Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review. January–February 1997
Heclo, H. (1974). Social policy in Britain and Sweden. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Hepworth, N. (2012). Open for business or opening Pandora’s box? A constructive critique of corporate engagement in water policy: An introduction. Water Alternatives, 5(3), 543–562.
Hepworth, N. D., & Orr, S. (2013). Corporate water stewardship: New paradigms in private sector water engagement. In B. A. Lankford, K. Bakker, M. Zeitoun, & D. Conway (Eds.), Water security: Principles, perspectives and practices (pp. 220–238). London: Earthscan.
Herrfahrdt-Pähle, E. (2010). South African water governance between administrative and hydrological boundaries. Climate and Development, 2(2), 111–127.CrossRef
Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems, 4(5), 390–405.CrossRef
Holling, C. S., & Meffe, G. K. (1996). Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conservation Biology, 10(2), 328–337.CrossRef
ICMM. (2015). A practical guide to catchment-based water management for the mining and metals industry. London: ICMM.
Isaac, J. (1987). Power and Marxist theory: A realist view. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Jessop, B. (2000). The dynamics of partnership and governance failure. In G. Stoker (Ed.), The new politics of local governance in Britain (pp. 11–32). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Jonch-Clausen, T., & Fugl, J. (2001). Firming up the conceptual basis of integrated water resources management. Water Resources Development, 17(4), 501–510.CrossRef
Kallis, G. (2010). Coevolution in water resource development: The vicious cycle of water supply and demand in Athens, Greece. Ecological Economics, 69(4), 796–809.CrossRef
Karkkainen, B. C. (2004). Post-sovereign environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 4(1), 72–96.CrossRef
Keohane, R. (2011). Neoliberal institutionalism. In C. W. Hughes & L. Y. Meng (Eds.), Security studies: A reader (pp. 157–164). New York: Routledge.
King, J. M., & Louw, D. (1998). Instream flow assessments for regulated rivers in South Africa using the Building Block Methodology. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 1(2), 109–124.CrossRef
King, J. M., Tharme, R. E., & de Villiers, M.S. (2008) Environmental flow assessment for Rivers: Manual for the building block methodology. Water Research Commission Report No TT 354/08.
Kroll, G. (2001). The “Silent Springs” of Rachel Carson: Mass media and the origins of modern environmentalism. Public Understanding of Science, 10, 403–420.CrossRef
Kubiszewski, I., Costanza, R., Anderson, S., & Sutton, P. (2017). The future value of ecosystem services: Global scenarios and national implications. Ecosystem Services, 26, 289–301.CrossRef
Laws, D., & Rein, M. (2003). Reframing practice. In M. A. Hajer & H. Wagenaar (Eds.), Deliberative poliy analysis: Understanding Governance in the network society (pp. 172–208). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Luetkenhorst, W. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and the development agenda: The case for actively involving small and medium enterprises. Intereconomics, 39(3), 157–166.CrossRef
McKinsey Global Institute. (2017). Bridging infrastructure gaps: Has the world made progress? McKinsey & Company.
Medema, W., McIntosh, B. S., & Jeffrey, P. J. (2008). From premise to practice: A critical assessment of integrated water resources management and adaptive management approaches in the water sector. Ecology and Society, 13(2), 29–43.CrossRef
Mert, A. (2012). Partnerships and the privatisation of environmental governance: On myths, forces of nature and other inevitabilities. Environmental Values, 21(4), 475–498.CrossRef
Mol, A. P. J., & Spaargaren, G. (1993). Environment, modernity, and the risk society: The apocalyptic horizon of environmental reform. International Sociology, 8(4), 431–459.CrossRef
Molle, F. (2008). Nirvana concepts, narratives and policy models: Insights from the water sector. Water Alternatives, 1(1), 131–156.
Molle, F. (2009). Water, politics, and river basin governance: Repoliticizing approaches to river basin management. Water International, 34(1), 62–70.CrossRef
Moon, J., Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2005). Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(3), 429–453.CrossRef
Munang, R., Thiaw, I., Alverson, K., Mumba, M., Liu, J., & Rivington, M. (2013). Climate change and ecosystem-based adaptation: A new pragmatic approach to buffering climate change impacts. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(1), 67–71.CrossRef
Nelson, S. H. (2017). Containing environmentalism: risk, rationality, and value in the wake of the Exxon Valdez. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 28(1), 118–136.CrossRef
Neumann, I., & Welsh, J. (1991). The other in European self-definition: An addendum to the literature on International society. Review of International Studies, 17(4), 327–348.CrossRef
Newborne, P., & Dalton, J. (2016). Water management and stewardship: Taking stock of corporate water behaviour. Gland/London: IUCN/ODI.CrossRef
O’Neill, O. (1997). Environmental values anthropocentrism and speciesism. Environmental Values, 6(2), 127–142.CrossRef
Orr, S., & Cartwright, A. (2010). Water scarcity risks: Experience of the private sector. In L. Martinez-Cortina, A. Garrido, & E. Lopez-Gunn (Eds.), Re-thinking water and food security: Fourth Botin Foundation water workshop (pp. 181–189). Florida: CRS Press Taylor & Francis Group.CrossRef
Orr, S., & Sarni, W. (2015). Does the concept of “creating shared value” hold water? Journal of Business Strategy, 36(3), 18–29.CrossRef
Owens, S. (2008). Why conserve marine environments? Environmental Conservation, 35(1), 1–4.CrossRef
Owens, S. (2015). Knowledge, policy, and expertise: the UK Royal Commission on environmental pollution 1970–2011. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Owens, S., & Cowell, R. (2011). Land and limits: Interpreting sustainability in the planning process. New York: Routledge.CrossRef
Pahl-Wostl, C., Gupta, J., & Petry, D. (2008). Governance and the Global water system: A theoretical exploration. Global Governance, 14(4), 419–435.CrossRef
Pahl-Wostl, C., Arthington, A., Bogardi, J., Bunn, S. E., Hoff, H., Lebel, L., Nikitina, E., Palmer, M., Poff, N. L., Richards, K., Schlüter, M., Schulze, R., St-Hilaire, A., Tharme, R., Tockner, K., & Tsegai, D. (2013). Environmental flows and water governance: Managing sustainable water uses. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(3–4), 341–351.CrossRef
Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 71–88.CrossRef
Poff, N. L., & Matthews, J. H. (2013). Environmental flows in the Anthropocene: Past progress and future prospects. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(6), 667–675.CrossRef
Pollack, M. A. (1997). Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community. International Organization, 51(1), 99–134.CrossRef
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011, January–February). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 62–77.
Post, J. E. (2000). Moving from geographic to virtual communities: Global corporate citizenship in a Dot.com world. Business and Society Review, 105(1), 27–46.CrossRef
Reed, M. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417–2431.CrossRef
Robertson, M. (2012). Measurement and alienation: Making a world of ecosystem services. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(3), 386–401.CrossRef
Rockström, J., Falkenmark, M., Folke, C., Lannerstad, M., Barron, J., Enfors, E., Gordon, L., Heinke, J., Hoff, H., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2014). Water resilience for human prosperity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Rodriguez, M. A., Ricart, J. E., & Sanchez, P. (2002). Sustainable development and the sustainability of competitive advantage: A dynamic and sustainable view of the firm. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11(3), 135–146.CrossRef
Roe, E. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRef
Sabatier, P. A. (1987). Knowledge, policy-oriented learning, and policy change. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 8(4), 649–692.CrossRef
Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2/3), 129–168.CrossRef
Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1994). Evaluating the advocacy coalition framework. Journal of Public Policy, 14(2), 175–203.CrossRef
Sattler, C., & Matzdorf, B. (2013). PES in a nutshell: From definitions and origins to PES in practice –Approaches, design process and innovative aspects. Ecosystem Services, 6, 2–11.CrossRef
Schäferhoff, M., Campe, S., & Kaan, C. (2009). Transnational public-private partnerships in international relations: Making sense of concepts, research frameworks, and results. International Studies Review, 11(3), 451–474.CrossRef
Schmidt, V. A. (2008). Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326.CrossRef
Schmidt, V. A. (2010). Taking ideas and discourse seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. European Political Science Review, 2(1), 1–25.CrossRef
Schoeman, J., Allan, C., & Finlayson, M. (2014). A new paradigm for water? A comparative review of integrated, adaptive and ecosystem-based water management in the Anthropocene. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 30(3), 377–390.CrossRef
Scholte, J. A. (2002). Civil society and democracy in global governance. Global Governance, 8(3), 281–304.CrossRef
Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2008). Integrating and unifying competing and complementary frameworks: The search for a common core in the business and society field. Business & Society, 47(2), 148–186.CrossRef
Scrase, J. I., & Ockwell, D. G. (2010). The role of discourse and linguistic framing effects in sustaining high carbon energy policy –An accessible introduction. Energy Policy, 38(5), 2225–2233.CrossRef
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Shrivastava, P. (1995). Ecocentric management for a risk society. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 118–137.CrossRef
Siltaoja, M. E., & Onkila, T. J. (2013). Business in society or business and society: The construction of business–society relations in responsibility reports from a critical discursive perspective. Business Ethics: An European Review, 22(4), 357–373.CrossRef
Snyder, J. (2004). One world, rival theories. Foreign Policy, 145, 52–62.CrossRef
Sohn, H. F. (1982). Prevailing rationales in the corporate social responsibility debate. Journal of Business Ethics, 1(2), 139–144.CrossRef
Stern, N. H. (2007). The economics of climate change: The stern review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Teegen, H., Doh, J. P., & Vachani, S. (2004). The importance of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: An international business research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6), 463–483.CrossRef
Tierney, K. J. (1994). Sociology’s unique contributions to the study of risk. Paper presented at the 13th World Congress of Sociology, Bielefeld, Germany, July 18–23, 1994.
UNEP. (2006). Ecosystem-based management: Markers for assessing progress. The Hague: UNEP/GPA.
Utting, P. (2000). UN-Business partnerships: Whose agenda counts? Geneva: UNRISD.
Utting, P. (2005). Corporate responsibility and the movement of business. Development in Practice, 15(3/4), 375–388.CrossRef
Utting, P., & Zammit, A. (2009). United Nations-business partnerships: Good intentions and contradictory agendas. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(1), 39–56.CrossRef
Varis, O., Enckell, K., & Keskinen, M. (2014). Integrated water resources management: horizontal and vertical explorations and the ‘water in all policies’ approach. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 30(3), 433–444.CrossRef
Walker, B., & Salt, D. (2006). Resilience thinking: Sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world. Washington: Island Press.
Wallerstein, I. (1998). The new world disorder: If the states collapse, can the nations be united? In A. Paolini, A. Jarvis, & C. Reus-Smit (Eds.), Between sovereignty and global governance: The United Nations, the state and civil society (pp. 171–185). New York: Palgrave.CrossRef
Warhurst, A. (2005). Future roles of business in society: The expanding boundaries of corporate responsibility and a compelling case for partnership. Futures, 37(2–3), 151–168.CrossRef
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.CrossRef
Wesselink, A., Paavola, J., Fritsch, O., & Renn, O. (2011). Rationales for public participation in environmental policy and governance: Practitioners’ perspectives. Environment and Planning A, 43(11), 2688–2704.CrossRef
Whetten, D. A., Rands, G., & Godfrey, P. (2002). What are the responsibilities of business to society? In A. Pettigrew, H. Thomas, & R. Whittington (Eds.), Handbook of strategy and management (pp. 373–408). London: Sage.
Wilks, S. (2013). The political power of the business corporation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRef
Wunder, S., Engel, S., & Pagiola, S. (2008). Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics, 65(4), 834–852.CrossRef
WWF. (2011). Assessing water risk: A practical approach for financial institutions. Berlin: WWF Deutschland.
WWI. (2014). Corporate engagement on water: Risks, opportunities and priorities for development studies research. Presentation given at UEA, 16th January 2014.
Metadata
Title
Understanding the Enabling Environment
Author
Thérèse Rudebeck
Copyright Year
2019
Book
Corporations as Custodians of the Public Good?

Print ISBN: 978-3-030-13224-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-13225-5

Copyright Year: 2019

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13225-5_2