How Do States Benefit from Nonstate Governance? Evidence from Forest Sustainability Certification
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest sustainability certification is emblematic of governance mechanisms associated with neoliberal state reforms. Despite being conceived as a means of compensating for the unwillingness or inability of states to regulate forest practices, in practice, forest certification has come to entail complex and hybrid relationships between private-sector, civil society, and government actors. Indeed, states have increasingly embraced certification as a means of complementing or even supplanting traditional forms of governmental regulation of the forest sector. Yet processes of neoliberalization imply both an expansion of opportunities for hybrid governance and a weakening of the state capacity that is often needed for successful implementation of certification initiatives. We analyze the complex relationships between neoliberalization, state capacity, and certification through two contrasting cases in Wisconsin, United States, and Entre Ríos, Argentina. Our findings illustrate the tensions within broadly neoliberal and postneoliberal regimes and highlight the persistence of long-standing patterns of state-led environmental governance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it