Do companies care about sustainable land governance? An empirical assessment of company land policies

References

• Arezki R, Deininger K, Selod H. 2011. What drives the global land rush? Washington (DC): World Bank. Policy Research Working Paper 5864.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein S, Cashore B. 2007. Can non-state global governance be legitimate? An analytical framework. Regul Gov. 1:4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boudreaux K. 2015. Land governance as a corporate performance standard: opportunities, challenges and recommended next steps. Bonn (Germany): Global Donor Platform for Rural Development.
   Google Scholar
• Boudreaux K, Neyman, Y. 2014. Responsible land-based investment: A practical guide for the private sector. Washington (DC):USAID.
   Google Scholar
• Bunte J, Desai H, Gbala K, Parks B, Runfola DM. 2017. Natural resource sector FDI and growth in post-conflict settings: subnational evidence from Liberia. Williamsburg (VA): AidData.
   Google Scholar
• Chen L, Lee HL. 2014. Mitigate supplier responsibility risk in emerging economies: an ethical sourcing framework. Semantic scholar. [accessed 2019 Oct 14]: [38 p.] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/87b9/4605005025dff055b34767ce11022517d403.pdf?_ga=2.244310594.638475660.1571086035-1281261340.1571086035.
   Google Scholar
• Climate Advisors.2014 New York declaration on forests. New York (NY): Climate Summit 2014. [accessed 2014 Sept 23]. https://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/Environment%20and%20Energy/Forests/New%20York%20Declaration%20on%20Forests_DAA.pdf
   Google Scholar
• [FAO] UN Food and Agriculture Organization. 2012. Voluntary guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security. [accessed 2019 Aug 10]. https://www.refworld.org/docid/5322b79e4.html.
   Google Scholar
• Cotula L. 2012. The international political economy of the global land rush: A critical appraisal of trends, scale, geography and drivers. J Peasant Stud. 39(3–4):649–680.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotula L. 2017. International soft-law instruments and global resource governance: reflections on the voluntary guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure. Law Environ Dev J. 13(2):117–132. [accessed 2019 Oct 16]. http://www.lead-journal.org/content/17115.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• De Leon R, Garcia T, Kummel G, Munden L, Murday S, Pradela L. 2013. Global capital, local concessions: A data-driven examination of land tenure risk and industrial concessions in emerging market economies. London (UK): Munden Project.
   Google Scholar
• Eberlein B, Abbott KW, Black J, Meidinger E, Wood S. 2013. Transnational business governance interactions: conceptualization and framework for analysis. Regul Gov. 8(1):1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eller K. 2017. Private governance of global value chains from within: lessons from and for transnational law. Trans Legal Theory. 8:296–329.
   Google Scholar
• [IFC] International Finance Corporation. 2012. Performance standards on environmental and social sustainability, performance standard 5: land acquisition and involuntary resettlement. Washington (DC):IFC.
   Google Scholar
• Feyertag J, Benedick B. 2019. The tenure risk tool: helping investors meet environmental, social and governance criteria. ODI and TMP Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Forest Trends. 2014 Sept. Consumer goods and deforestation: an analysis of the extent and nature of illegality in forest conversation for agriculture and timber plantations. Washington (DC): Forest Trends.
   Google Scholar
• Fortin E, Richardson B. 2013. Certification schemes and the governance of land: enforcing standards or enabling scrutiny? Globalizations. 10(1):141–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghoul S, Guedhami O, Nash R, Patel A. 2019. New evidence on the role of the media in corporate social responsibility. J Bus Ethics. 154(4):1051–1079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Interlaken Group. 2015. Respecting land and forest rights: a guide for companies. Washington (DC): Interlaken Group.
   Google Scholar
• Klabbers J. 1998. Undesirability of soft law. Nordic J Int Law. 67(4):381–391.
   Google Scholar
• Klabbers J. 2005. Reflections on soft international law in a privatized world. Finnish Yearbook Int Law. 16:313.
   Google Scholar
• Koh HH. 1996. Transnational legal process. Neb Law Rev. 75:181–207.
   Google Scholar
• Koh HH. 2001. The globalization of freedom. Yale J Int Law. 26:305–312.
   Google Scholar
• Krisch N, Kingsbury B. 2006. Introduction: global governance and global administrative law in the international legal order. Eur J Int Law. 17(1):1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List J, Momeni F. 2017 Dec. When corporate social responsibility backfires: theory and evidence from a natural field experiment. (NBER Working Paper No. 24169). [accessed 2019 Oct 16]. http://www.nber.org/papers/w24169.
   Google Scholar
• Locke A, Munden L, Feyertag J, Bowie B. 2019. Assessing the costs of tenure risks to agribusinesses. ODI and TMP Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Margulis M. 2014. Emergent global land governance. In: Seto KC, Reenberg A, editors. Rethinking global land use in an urban era. Cambridge (MA): MIT University Press; p. 183–200.
   Google Scholar
• Margulis M, Porter T. 2013. Governing the global land grab: multipolarity, ideas, and complexity in transnational governance. Globalizations. 10(1):65–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx A. 2017. The public-private distinction in global governance: how relevant is it in the case of voluntary sustainability standards? Chin J Global Governance. 3(1):1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Meidinger E. 2006. The administrative law of global private-public regulation: the case of forestry. Eur J Int Law. 17(1):47–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munden Project. 2012. The financial risks of insecure land tenure: an investment view. London (UK): Munden Project.
   Google Scholar
• Munro-Faure P, Palmer D. 2012. An overview of the voluntary guidelines on the governance of tenure. Land Tenure J. 1(12):5–18.
   Google Scholar
• Narula S. 2013. The global land rush: markets, rights, and the politics of food. New York, NY: New York University School of Law. (Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series No. 13–42).
   Google Scholar
• Oxfam. 2016. Behind the brands: company scorecard. Oxfam. [accessed 2019 Oct 16]. https://www.behindthebrands.org/company-scorecard/.
   Google Scholar
• Palmer D, Arial A, Metzner R, Willmann R, Müller E, Kafeero F, Crowley E. 2012a. Improving the governance of tenure of land, fisheries, and forests. Land Tenure J. 1(12):39–62.
   Google Scholar
• Palmer D, Törhönen MP, Munro-Faure P, Arial A. 2012b. Fostering a new global consensus: the voluntary guidelines on the governance of tenure. Land Tenure J. 1(12):19–38.
   Google Scholar
• Potter E. 2014. Reflections on our land rights journey. Coca Cola human and workplace rights. The Coca Cola Company. [accessed 2019 Oct 16]. https://www.coca-colacompany.com/stories/reflections-on-our-land-rights-journey.
   Google Scholar
• [RSPO] Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. 2018. Principles and criteria for the production of sustainable palm oil. [accessed 2019 Oct 16]. https://rspo.org/principles-and-criteria-review.
   Google Scholar
• Rutherford B. 2017. Land governance and land deals in Africa: opportunities and challenges in advancing community rights. J Sustainable Dev Law Policy. 8(1):235–258.
   Google Scholar
• Seufert P. 2013. The FAO voluntary guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests. Globalizations. 10(1):181–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sievänen R, Rita H, Scholtens B. 2013. The drivers of responsible investment: the case of European pension funds. J Bus Ethics. 117(1):137–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiro P. 2013. Constraining global corporate power: a short introduction. Vanderbilt J Transnational Law. 46:1101–1118.
   Google Scholar
• Thorlaksona T, de Zegherb J, Lambinc, E. 2018. Companies’ contribution to sustainability through global supply chains. PNAS. 115(9):2072–2077.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorpe J. 2013. Sugar rush: land rights and the supply chains of the biggest food and beverage businesses. London (UK): Oxfam. (Oxfam Briefing Note).
   Google Scholar
• USAID. 2017 Oct 4. Factsheet: USAID’s responsible land-based investment pilots. USAID. [accessed 2019 Oct 16]. https://www.land-links.org/document/factsheet-usaids-responsible-land-based-investment-pilots/.
   Google Scholar
• USAID. 2018. Investor survey on land rights. Washington (DC):USAID.
   Google Scholar
• Vhugen D. 2012a. Large-scale commercial investments in land: seeking to secure land tenure and improve livelihoods. Haramaya Law Rev. 1(1):1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Vhugen D. 2012b. Next steps to put voluntary guidelines into action to address the global land rush. Landesa. [accessed 2019 Oct 16]. http://www.landesa.org/voluntary-guidelines-next-steps-blog/.
   Google Scholar
• Vhugen D. 2016. Responsible governance of tenure: a technical guide for investors. Italy (Rome): FAO. (The FAO Governance of Tenure Technical Guide 7).
   Google Scholar
• von Geibler J. 2013. Market-based governance for sustainability in value chains: conditions for successful standard setting in the palm oil sector. J Cleaner Prod. 56(56):39–53.
   Google Scholar
• Windfuhr M. 2017. Safeguarding human rights in land related investments: comparison of the voluntary guidelines land with the IFC performance standards and the World Bank environmental and social safeguard framework. Berlin (Germany): German Institute for Human Rights.
   Google Scholar