The future of transparency: power, pitfalls and promises
Open accessAbstract
The growing attention to transparency is not an accidental and fashionable wave, soon to be replaced by another timely topic in environmental governance. Transparency is here to stay and to further develop in environmental politics, as it piggy-backs on a number of wider social developments. In assessing the achievements of transparency to date, this article concludes that it has on balance been positive for democracy. But this overall positive past assessment does not automatically extend into the future, as new challenges (and thus new research agendas) lie ahead. The growing importance attached to transparency in environmental politics ensures that it becomes a central object of power struggles, with uncertain outcomes in terms of democracy as well as environmental effects. Markets and states seek to capture transparency arrangements for their own goals, which may not necessarily be in line with assumed normative linkages between transparency, democracy and participation.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Transparency has evolved as a key element of environmental governance over the last decades.
“Over the last decades, transparency has evolved as a key element of environmental governance (Fung et al., 2007;Mol, 2010).”
From Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil (2020) · cites this paper as Mol, 2010
The available indexed passages contain the paper’s title, keywords and citation metadata, but no substantive discussion of transparency’s role in environmental governance. Searches for its claimed rise in importance over recent decades returned no passage that addresses that point. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTransparency does not always lead to the desired positive outcomes and may lead to reverse impacts.
“Transparency does not always lead to the desired positive outcomes and may lead to reverse impacts (Mol, 2010;Garrett et al., 2016;Gardner et al., 2018;van der Ven et al., 2018).”
From Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil (2020) · cites this paper as Mol, 2010
The available passages contain bibliographic metadata and the title, but no discussion of transparency’s outcomes. Searches for unintended negative consequences and adverse effects returned no substantive passage, so our copy cannot verify the claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTransparency is associated with positive outcomes in terms of sustainability, legitimacy, and fairness.
“Respectively, transparency is associated with positive outcomes in terms of sustainability, legitimacy, and fairness.”
From Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil (2020) · cites this paper as Mol, 2010
The available indexed passages contain the paper’s title, keywords, and citation metadata, but no discussion of outcomes. Searches for sustainability, legitimacy, and fairness found no passage linking transparency to those outcomes, so the claim cannot be verified from our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTransparency may result in reverse impacts as information is often produced and controlled by already powerful actors that may use this information to strengthen their position in the supply chain, adding vulnerability to already vulnerable actors.
“Third, transparency may result in reverse impacts as information is often produced and controlled by already powerful actors that may use this information to strengthen their position in the supply chain, for example with regard to price bargaining.This adds vulnerability to already vulnerable actors in the chain (Mol, 2010).”
From Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil (2020) · cites this paper as Mol, 2010
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredFor supply chains, the extent to which transparency leads to sustainability outcomes is particularly contested in cases of leakage, scope, and level of traceability.
“For supply chains, the extent to which transparency leads to sustainability outcomes is particularly contested in cases of leakage, scope, and level of traceability (Mason, 2008;Mol, 2010).”
From Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil (2020) · cites this paper as Mol, 2010
Our indexed copy contains bibliographic metadata under the Abstract label, but no substantive passage about supply chains or sustainability outcomes. Searches for leakage, scope, and traceability found no passage that could verify the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Dingwerth, K., & Eichinger, M. (2010) · Global Environmental Politics · doi:10.1162/glep_a_00015 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dingwerth, K., & Eichinger, M. (2010) · Global Environmental Politics · doi:10.1162/glep_a_00015 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil
Mammadova, A., Behagel, J., & Masiero, M. (2020) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.03.008 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mol, A. P. J.
- Affiliations
- Wageningen University & Research (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Mol, Arthur P. J.
- ORCID
- Mol, Arthur P. J.
- Venue
- Global Environmental Politics
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2010-08
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 132-143
- ISSN
- 1526-3800 (ISSN-L)
- 1536-0091
- OpenAlex
- W2145064078
- Cited by
- 100
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 29.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.wur.nl
- Locations
- Global Environmental Politics (publishedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Administrative Law and Governance
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Regulation and Compliance Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Keywords
- transparency, environmental governance, environmental politics, democracy, power struggles, market capture, state capture, participation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
