Abstract
Table 7.1 below sets out the performance of each of the governance systems investigated. FSC is the highest achiever of the four systems investigated, scoring highest in each of the P&C. At the indicator level, it consistently ranks the highest, or joint highest, of the other systems. With a score of 17 out of 25 at the principle level for meaningful participation, FSC achieves 68 per cent, exceeding the threshold value of 50 per cent, and for productive deliberation 22 out of 30, or 73 per cent. With a cumulative score of 39 out of a total of 55, or 71 per cent, FSC’s overall performance could be seen as creditable. ISO is the second strongest performer at both the principle and criterion levels. And at the indicator level, it consistently ranks the second highest, or equal second of the systems. With a score of 13 out of 25, or 52 per cent, it just exceeds the threshold required for meaningful participation at the principle level, and scores 17 out of 30 or about 57 per cent for productive deliberation, also placing it second after FSC. With a total score of 30 out of 55, or 55 per cent, ISO’s performance could be described as satisfactory
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2011 Timothy Cadman
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cadman, T. (2011). Comparative Analysis. In: Quality and Legitimacy of Global Governance. International Political Economy Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230306462_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230306462_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-31849-0
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-30646-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)