Scholarlink

<p>This article explores the interaction between market-based due diligence regulations and local development realities in agricultural commodity-exporting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Drawing from qualitative research involving over 200 stakeholder interviews in Argentina (beef), Botswana (beef), and Costa Rica (coffee and palm oil), it investigates how the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and Regulation on Deforestation-Free Products (EUDR) translate into local contexts, the implications of these regulations for development challenges, and their potential to deliver meaningful improvements in livelihoods, environmental protection, and inclusive development. Findings reveal five structural constraints—or “risk-development gaps”—infrastructural exclusion, legal ambiguity, institutional fragmentation, market asymmetries, and environmental resilience gaps—that hinder effective compliance. The analysis underscores that while market-based due diligence introduces vital sustainability norms, addressing these deeper structural gaps through adaptive governance and integrated, multi-level approaches is essential for achieving genuinely equitable and sustainable development outcomes.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Can market-based social and environmental due diligence drive development? Examining local development challenges and responsible sourcing among agri-food businesses in low-and-middle-income economies

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月29日

查看全文
  • Tomislav Ivančić,
  • Claire Bright

摘要

This article explores the interaction between market-based due diligence regulations and local development realities in agricultural commodity-exporting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Drawing from qualitative research involving over 200 stakeholder interviews in Argentina (beef), Botswana (beef), and Costa Rica (coffee and palm oil), it investigates how the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and Regulation on Deforestation-Free Products (EUDR) translate into local contexts, the implications of these regulations for development challenges, and their potential to deliver meaningful improvements in livelihoods, environmental protection, and inclusive development. Findings reveal five structural constraints—or “risk-development gaps”—infrastructural exclusion, legal ambiguity, institutional fragmentation, market asymmetries, and environmental resilience gaps—that hinder effective compliance. The analysis underscores that while market-based due diligence introduces vital sustainability norms, addressing these deeper structural gaps through adaptive governance and integrated, multi-level approaches is essential for achieving genuinely equitable and sustainable development outcomes.