The substitution of hazardous substances with safer alternatives is being driven by policy pressures and business demands. As a result, scientific techniques for chemical alternatives assessment (CAA) have been established and communities of practice are emerging. Interest in safer chemical substitution is widely shared throughout a range of stakeholder groups across science, industry, public policy, and advocacy. Yet there is an unmet need for intentionally designed public information infrastructure to support the highly knowledge-intensive nature of CAA. We report here on the process of developing the Chemical Hazard Data Commons, an experimental project intended to support a diverse community of practitioners by providing publicly accessible chemical hazard data and tools for understanding it. In an arena where market forces and regulatory regimes have largely failed to generate the necessary knowledge, this project represents a novel application of a commons-based approach emphasizing building shared intellectual and technical capacity for CAA. The Data Commons—now a part of the related Pharos Project—includes an online portal providing simultaneous access to many different sources of information and enabling effective interactions with it. Foremost among these interactions are search and retrieval of hazard information about chemical substances, uniform display of the most relevant information, and the ability to automatically screen substances against consistent and transparent hazard-based criteria. We describe the motivation for the project and report on the principles and key considerations that guided its design as a participatory information infrastructure. We present our approach to organizing chemical information; the process of community engagement and planning; and how we constructed the system to provide functional tools. We discuss the outcomes of the project and highlight important challenges—such as fostering active participation and planning for long-term governance. With this article, we hope to inform future efforts for the collaborative development of knowledge resources for chemical alternatives assessment.

People in contemporary industrial societies encounter countless novel materials that did not exist previously, many of which present risks to health and environment. In this article, we build on the concept of “materials sovereignty” as the right of people to use and be surrounded by environmentally benign, non-toxic, and renewing materials in their everyday lives. As a rights-based approach, materials sovereignty may help change the politics of governing materials. We suggest that social movements that explicitly base interventions into design on materials sovereignty may be better able to gain traction in changing industrial production. We consider the case of nanotechnology as a particularly challenging field for social movement intervention. We review several pathways that have been used by social movement organizations in attempts to influence the development of nanomaterials, but which have met with limited success. We more closely examine three participatory pathways through which social movements could intervene more directly into material design: participatory technology assessment, collaboration with industry, and co-design. We identify three key elements of materials sovereignty: participatory knowledge systems, which create multi-directional flows of knowledge and agency; the embedding of citizen voices into design processes; and building accountability systems. Of the pathways we examine here, co-design appears to be the most promising from a theoretical and ethical perspective, but there remain significant institutional and organizational challenges for bringing it into practice.

This report describes the evolution of a qualitative research design used in a study that integrated academic and non-academic expertise and involved multiple stakeholders concerned with the diversion of human urine from the waste stream for its re-use in agriculture. The study took place in two regions of the U.S., New England and the Upper Midwest (most specifically Vermont and Michigan) and suggests the importance of ethnographic perspectives in a participatory action research framework going forward. This manuscript presents a novel mix of researchers, from a grassroots organization to R1 University teams, and explores the perspectives of a wide range of research participants with whom we conferred to understand whether and how fertilizers made from nutrients recovered from diverted urine might be accepted, adapted, and scaled in agricultural use. Our manuscript thus articulates new territory for such interpretive social science work (focus groups, interviews and participant observations) neither within basic ethnographic research, nor within the kind of “rapid ethnography” widely used in business, engineering and international development fields. We describe how our research process entailed the modifications of our methods, and we consider the overlapping and sometimes opposed knowledges and attitudes of multiple stakeholders who are crucial to the uptake and scale of such new technologies for closing loops in our waste and water processing infrastructures and our food production systems. To best leverage these diverse knowledges, we suggest incremental steps for teams like ours towards an inclusive research process.

The purpose of this article is to explore the role of multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) in sustainable supply chains. I argue that MSIs are needed to help establish and institutionalize the natural and social thresholds in which a sustainable supply chain must operate. While a multitude of MSIs relevant to supply chains already exist, they do not yet adequately address sustainability thresholds. Building on theory and literature, I elaborate on four interrelated roles for MSIs in this area: (1) providing learning platforms, (2) developing standards, (3) developing enforcement mechanisms, and (4) issuing labels and certifications. All four roles emphasize the need for supply chains to operate within the thresholds set by nature and society. Staying within thresholds is what distinguishes between sustainable and unsustainable supply chains. The four roles form part of a broader conceptual framework outlining a way forward for MSIs in sustainable supply chains. Different MSIs could address one or more of these roles. I argue that all MSIs must be developed with special attention to their input and output legitimacy. Stakeholders from both within and beyond the supply chain must be involved in developing and implementing a MSI for it to be viewed as legitimate. I note that the conceptual framework presented here is a starting point. It would benefit from further testing and refinement. For example, future work could add further specificity to the four roles I discuss. Future research could also focus on integrating economic thresholds for sustainable supply chains into the framework.

Using a social movement perspective, we propose a framework that includes nonprofit actors as members of supply chains in a context that we call sustainable supply chain facilitation, particularly within multi-stakeholder supply chain sustainability initiatives. In this framework, certain nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) work alongside other supply chain firms, going beyond technical roles to serve as coordinators, conveners, organizers, brokers, and negotiators who facilitate multiparty agreement on sustainability issues within and across supply chains. We describe a set of roles consisting of third-party facilitators (3PF), fourth-party facilitators (4PF), and fifth-party facilitators (5PF) serving in increasingly strategic roles with increasing numbers of actors, and with increasing potential for co-creation of value in global supply chains. Reframing nongovernmental organizations as members of supply chains instead of outsiders provides a dramatically different perspective. This explicit acknowledgement of membership can help business and NGO managers to rethink their own roles and motivations and to find collaborative solutions in the steady transition to more sustainable supply chains.

This article documents the degree of noncompliance of soy producers in the Amazon portion of Mato Grosso with Brazil’s Forest Code and addresses the importance of market demands in shifting agricultural production and land occupation towards zero deforestation. By using a sample composed of the boundaries of 9,113 properties (72.5% of soy in the region) we assessed: a) compliance with Forest Code legal reserve requirements (a percentage of the property must have its original vegetation kept undisturbed); and compared it to b) compliance with the zero deforestation criterion of the soy moratorium. We found that 82% of the sampled properties have not deforested since 2008, thus complying with the soy moratorium. However, approximately 65% out of these 82% are noncompliant with Forest Code legal reserve requirements. This situation is even worse in the Cerrado portion of Mato Grosso. Even though the soy moratorium criterion is only applicable to the Amazon biome, the Forest Code is applicable nationwide. Despite legal reserve requirements being much lower (35% of the property in the Cerrado, as opposed to 80% in the Amazon), almost 70% of sampled properties were noncompliant with the Forest Code. From this analysis we concluded that while there was a role for consumer-driven market demand for zero deforestation soy production, there is still a need (and opportunity) to implement purchasing and financing criteria to promote compliance with Forest Code requirements in regards to legal reserve deficits. We believe that if this succeeds, it will drive a process of restoration and compensation of Forest Code deficits, strengthening public policy as well as reducing economic distortions between those who have and have not complied with Forest Code requirements.