This section of the site describes the project methodology in detail. These project pages are aimed primarily at sustainability standards practitioners. They explain the logic of the project’s approach, and present interim findings and outputs. If you want you can find more info here.
1. Standards and Certification: Situation Assessment
The project’s first major piece of work was an analysis of the language that sustainability standards practitioners and others use to describe standards and certification, using the theoretical framework of ‘cognitive linguistic analysis’ (see What is Framing?). The analysis by the specialist, not-for-profit group Real Reason is summarized, together with a link to the full report.
2. Pocantico Meeting
The results of the initial ‘situation assessment’ were then reviewed and debated by standards system practitioners and civil society organizations at a two-day retreat in Pocantico, USA, in October 2009. The retreat was structured to foster dialogue between participants, and aimed to identify and build consensus around the roles, challenges and limitations of standards systems in the delivery of global sustainability. Key themes for further development were identified, and it was agreed to re-convene for a second meeting with the aim of identifying a shared vision for the future role of ‘ethical standards systems’ and agreeing collective actions that participants could then implement to achieve this vision.
3. Theories of Change and Emerging Issues
In preparation for a second meeting the Pacific Institute and the ISEAL Alliance carried out a series of interviews with participants from the Pocantico retreat, focusing on two major questions:
- How do certification systems bring about desired social and environmental change?
- What are the major issues and trends facing the standards community?
These interviews built on the findings from the earlier meeting, and on subsequent work by the ISEAL Alliance in the development of its scaling up strategy and ‘Ten Trends’ report. The resulting report provided the context for the development of a shared vision and collective action strategy at the second meeting.
4. London Meeting
The second meeting took place in London, England in June 2011. The meeting attempted to build on the two sets of preparatory material – major issues and trends, and the sustainability standards system ‘theory of change’- to create a basis for collective action.
The meeting articulated eight major themes for effective collective action, ranging from the identification of points of fundamental agreement through to the articulation of challenges to be overcome.
Two specific work streams were initiated as a result of the meeting:
- Firstly, the commissioning of in-depth research into the interface between private sustainability standards and public governance. The intent of this work would be to understand better the relationship, but also if possible to develop guidelines that could ensure that the standards movements reinforces and does not undermine good governance, and so build confidence of civil society in ‘legitimate’ sustainability standards.
- Secondly, the development of a ‘meta-narrative’ that would summarise the sustainability standards community’s common vision and its theory of change, identify the key questions that the community needs to answer, and propose a set of common responses. The intent of this work stream would be to establish a shared platform that could provide the basis for a coordinated approach to communication.
5. Sustainability Standards and Public Governance
This work stream was led by the Pacific Institute and the Foundation for Democracy and Sustainable Development.
a: Literature Review
The Pacific Institute’s Research Associate, Mai-Lan Ha, carried out an in-depth, comprehensive literature review on voluntary social and environmental standards and their relationship with public policy, public governance, democracy, and the role of the state. The literature review examined over 60 academic articles, studies, and reports. The review focused on how scholars and practitioners have understood the emergence of standards systems, the types of standards in existence, the interaction between these systems and public policy, standards’ role in multilateral trade, and finally their relationship with democracy.
b: Analysis and Principles
Building on the literature review, Halina Ward, Director of The Foundation for Democracy and Sustainable Development was then commissioned to investigate and put forward recommendations so that the standards movement could understand and better address the inter-relationship between standards, public policy, governance and legitimacy in relation to sustainability.
The results of the research are summarized, together with a set of preliminary ‘principles’ to guide the sustainability standards movement and ensure that its work strengthens, and does not undermine, good public governance.
6. Developing a Shared Narrative
Over the two years of the project participants debated the role of sustainability standards in contributing to sustainability, and in doing so developed and refined an understanding of the key elements that allow standards to contribute, as well as key technical, political or strategic challenges that stand in the way of further progress.
The result of this work was the development of what we called a ‘meta-narrative’ – a narrative that we believe articulates a common platform that is shared by the many members of the community of sustainability standards practitioners.
The meta-narrative aims to express consensus where it exists, but also to recognize challenges and areas of disagreement. The intent is that it can provide a consistent underlying framework to help the standards movement develop a coherent, coordinated response to the challenges it faces.
7. Framing the Narrative
Having worked with practitioners and civil society to develop and articulate a better understanding of the roles, limitations and potential of sustainability standards in achieving sustainability, the Pacific Institute worked with Real Reason again to develop a set of tools to communicate this shared understanding more effectively to policy makers and the general public.
The result of this work is a ‘toolkit’ of framing elements including metaphors, vocabulary, and guidance for their use in combination with the underlying framework provided by the ‘meta-narrative’.
8. Sharing the Project Results
The final stages of the project focussed on making the project’s findings as widely available as possible. Rather than produce and circulate a project report, it was decided to develop two websites.
The first site (this one) is written mainly for sustainability standards practitioners – people who are directly involved in developing, researching, implementing or promoting the use of sustainability standards systems. This site has a technical role – it describes the project, explains our methodology, and presents our results.
The demonstration site Sustainability Standards 101 is intended to be a sustainability standards communications website.
We will be seeking feedback, and if there is enough support we hope to build on this demonstration site and, ultimately, create a public resource that can tell the ‘story of sustainability standards’ on behalf of the whole movement.
9. Project Partners, Funders and Participants
Finally, it remains to thank all the people and organizations that made this project possible. The work could not have been completed without the commitment and support of the project’s partners, funders and participants over the last three years. We would like to express our heartfelt thanks.
Pacific Institute Framing International Standards Project Overview.pdf
View post