Jul 2026· Environment and Planning E Nature and Space· 0 citations· 39 references
Abstract
Sustainability certification has become a central instrument of governance across commodity frontiers, yet its persistence under conditions of uneven implementation, unresolved conflict, and limited transformation remains analytically underexplained. Existing scholarship documents these limitations but largely assumes that legitimacy derives from performance, leaving the endurance of governance insufficiently theorized. This article addresses that gap by conceptualizing certification as
hegemony through inclusion
. It treats inclusion not as a normative objective or outcome, but as a political rationality that stabilizes legitimacy by redistributing responsibility, moralizing inequality, and deferring transformation through future-oriented commitments. Empirically, the analysis draws on a documentary corpus spanning foundational legal frameworks and contemporary certification-based governance in Indonesia's palm oil sector. Documents—laws, certification standards, corporate disclosures, and civil society reports—are analyzed as relational sites through which authority, responsibility, and legitimate futures are configured. The findings identify five mechanisms—auditability, scalar disjunction, responsibility shifting, moralization of dispossession, and anticipatory discipline—through which inclusion operates as an infrastructure of rule. These mechanisms do not resolve inequality or conflict; they recast them as auditable gaps, distributed obligations, and deferred trajectories. The article contributes by explaining governance endurance as an effect of how incompleteness is organized, shifting analysis from policy effectiveness to the political conditions under which legitimacy persists despite acknowledged limitations.
Changes in corporate governance have marked a significant shift from rule-based compliance toward a commitment to sustainability. Sustainability disclosure is increasingly regarded as a measure of corporate integrity. In practice, however, sustainability reporting often remains symbolic, serving as a means for companies to project an image of social responsibility without being fully accompanied by substantive changes in internal practices. Drawing upon legitimacy theory and the distinction between symbolic and substantive actions, this article examines the limitations of governance approaches that rely excessively on legitimacy and formal compliance. Using a normative-critical conceptual paper approach, the study reconstructs the concept of ethical governance by positioning dignity as its foundational value. Dignity is understood as respect for the intrinsic worth of human beings, the environment, and future generations, thereby transforming sustainability disclosure from a mere reputational instrument into an expression of authentic moral commitment. Reflecting on the Indonesian context, including the practices of PT Unilever Indonesia Tbk, the article demonstrates that the transition from symbolic legitimacy to substantive dignity has significant implications for strengthening good corporate governance in emerging markets. This transformation underscores that the ultimate objective of ethical governance is no longer merely to secure social legitimacy, but to establish substantive dignity as the moral foundation of corporate governance. From an axiological perspective, sustainability disclosure is positioned as a manifestation of ethical responsibility that respects the dignity of human beings, the environment, and future generations, enabling governance to achieve not only compliance but also enduring institutional integrity.
Greenwashing has emerged as a significant challenge in environmental governance, as sustainability claims made by business actors do not always reflect their actual environmental performance. In Indonesia, this problem is further complicated by regulatory gaps, fragmented environmental oversight, and the changing distribution of authority between central and local governments. This study examines how the principle of substantive justice can provide a normative foundation for strengthening local governments’ authority to oversee greenwashing practices and analyses its implementation within Indonesia’s regional autonomy framework. The research employs a doctrinal legal method employing statutory, conceptual, case, and interpretive approaches. Primary and secondary legal materials are analysed qualitatively by examining constitutional principles, environmental legislation, regional government regulations, and theories of substantive justice, responsive law, and environmental governance. The study finds that greenwashing is not merely a problem of misleading corporate communication, but also represents a distortion of environmental information that may undermine the constitutional right to a good and healthy environment. From the perspective of substantive justice, environmental supervision should extend beyond formal and administrative compliance toward factual verification of environmental claims, ecological impacts, and corporate practices. Local governments possess strategic advantages because of their proximity to local communities, ecosystems, and business activities, yet their supervisory role remains constrained by increasingly centralised environmental approval mechanisms. Strengthening local authority should therefore be pursued through functional decentralisation and collaborative governance rather than a complete transfer of regulatory power. Local governments should be empowered to conduct on-site verification, validate environmental information, assess socio-ecological impacts, involve affected communities, and issue binding technical recommendations within environmental supervision processes. The study contributes a legal framework that integrates substantive justice, regional autonomy, and greenwashing oversight – positioning local governments as key actors in ensuring environmental transparency, accountability, and the substantive protection of ecological and community interests.
G. Ayu, Eviani Yuliantari· Jurnal Hukum Progresif· 0 citations
Corporate governance in India is undergoing a paradigm shift from traditional shareholder primacy to a pluralistic accountability model, statutorily mandated by Section 166(2) of the Companies Act, 2013. This provision theoretically elevates the interests of stakeholders such as employees, communities, and the environment to the same legal footing as shareholder returns. However, a critical dichotomy exists between this statutory mandate and its practical enforcement; the lack of direct legal remedies for non-shareholders creates an enforcement gap that threatens to render the pluralist duty a "paper tiger". To understand how stakeholder protection is operationalized de facto, this paper analyses the existing regulatory infrastructure, emphasizing the shift toward mandatory, quantitative transparency through SEBI’s Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR) framework. Additionally, it evaluates internal board-level institutional mechanisms and landmark judicial interventions, such as the Vedanta v. Orissa Mining Corp. judgment, which highlights the strategic and financial imperative of securing local community consent. The research concludes that while mandatory disclosure and judicial activism currently serve as the primary drivers of corporate accountability, statutory reforms such as expanding class-action standing to affected communities are necessary to close the enforcement gap and fully transform directors into genuine mediators of stakeholder interests.
Maryam Khalid, Kavya Chandel· ILE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW· 0 citations
National school feeding programs are increasingly positioned as instruments of inclusive green economic transformation. In Indonesia, the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) program integrates nutritional provision, local supplier inclusion, and sustainability-oriented procurement within a single national platform. Prevailing policy narratives assume that expanding inclusive green procurement strengthens food security and local economic development in mutually reinforcing ways. This article challenges that linear assumption by conceptualizing MBG as a structurally tensioned governance system. Drawing on institutional complexity, paradox theory, and collaborative governance literature, the study develops a configurational governance framework that examines the interaction among inclusion intensity, control mechanisms, operational scale, and institutional capacity. The analysis argues that inclusion generates heterogeneity, which increases monitoring demands; intensified control, in turn, may constrain participation. Moreover, scaling transforms risk from localized operational exposure into systemic vulnerability, producing non-linear stability effects. Rather than proposing harmonization, the article identifies threshold dynamics and boundary conditions under which inclusive green procurement enhances food system stability—or amplifies fragility. Food security, particularly its stability dimension, is reframed as a derivative of governance alignment rather than aggregate provision. By repositioning procurement as a strategic arena of paradox, the study contributes to food security scholarship, inclusive green economy discourse, and public management theory. The findings suggest that resilience in national feeding systems depends less on normative inclusion ambitions and more on adaptive calibration under persistent structural tension.
Reny Sumarni, Pawirosumarto Suharno, Dyna Setyorini et al.· The International Conference...· 0 citations
Indonesia’s economy is currently positioned at a decisive crossroads, facing the dual pressures of global market volatility and domestic structural transformation. Within this context, state-owned enterprises (BUMN) remain central actors, historically tasked with advancing national development objectives while simultaneously serving as instruments of fiscal stability and political legitimacy. Yet, their future role is increasingly contested as Indonesia seeks to reconcile efficiency, transparency, and competitiveness with broader goals of social equity and sustainable growth. This article critically examines the evolving position of BUMN in Indonesia’s transforming economy by integrating economic performance data, governance reforms, and comparative international perspectives. The analysis highlights a paradox: while BUMN continue to drive infrastructure expansion, energy provision, and financial intermediation, they also generate fiscal vulnerabilities through inefficiency, rent-seeking practices, and governance deficits. Regulatory reforms have sought to modernize corporate structures and enhance accountability, but enforcement remains uneven and institutional fragmentation persists. Drawing on socio-legal and political economy frameworks, the study argues that Indonesia’s economic sustainability depends on reorienting BUMN from state-centric instruments toward engines of innovation, competitiveness, and public value creation. By situating Indonesia’s experience within global debates on state capitalism, corporate governance, and developmental economics, the article contributes to understanding how emerging economies can navigate the tension between market liberalization and state intervention. It emphasizes that the future of BUMN will determine whether Indonesia can transform its current economic crossroads into a pathway toward inclusive, resilient, and globally competitive development. Ultimately, the study underscores that accountability, efficiency, and victim-centered governance are not optional reforms but essential conditions for Indonesia’s long-term economic transformation.
Aldehita Purnasanti Maulida, Indah Sri Utari, Yustina Dhian Novita et al.· Indonesian Journal of Advoca...· 0 citations
Within corporate social responsibility (CSR) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG), there is a gap. This paper aims to fill that gap by building on a previous empirical study. It introduces the Land Governance Materiality Framework (LGMF), which redefines land governance as a critical governance skill that impacts ESG performance, supply‐chain resilience, responsible investment, and long‐term corporate value. The paper relies on Institutional Theory, Political Ecology, Stakeholder Theory, and Strategic CSR. It argues that secure land tenure, institutional legitimacy, participatory governance, and conflict‐sensitive resource management are essential skills, not just outside factors. Instead of presenting new empirical evidence, it interprets the findings to create a wider theoretical and policy framework for responsible agribusiness. This framework broadens ESG materiality by including territorial institutions in sustainability assessments. It also offers practical advice for governments, businesses, investors, and development partners looking to support resilient, conflict‐sensitive, and sustainable agricultural systems.
Ifedayo Grace Malachi, Reza Eslamipoor· Corporate Social Responsibil...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
