This chapter introduces the politics and policy of urban nature and nature-based solutions, stemming from a diversity of flexible governance modes and novel financial arrangements with a strong involvement of local communities. It opens with a discussion of the different visions of nature that are present in cities, followed by a more detailed examination of two particularly conflicting visions: the extent to which nature is to be mobilised as a tool for public welfare versus one for private profit. Then the chapter situates nature-based solutions in the context of three specific debates that illustrate their political and contested nature. First, the extent to which the drive for multi-functionality of urban nature can be a double-edged sword. Second, the tensions between green growth and gentrification and the pitfalls of greening exclusionary urban change. And finally, the need to consider issues of justice and equity within nature-based solutions. Through case studies of innovative park management in Newcastle, the United Kingdom, and East-Boston rail-to-trail Greenway in Boston, the United States, the chapter highlights enabling conditions that can drive systemic, just, ecologically sustainable and genuine integration of nature into urban life and policy.

As touched upon in Chapter 1, contemporary commentary on corporate governance can be divided into two main approaches: stakeholder primacy, and the narrower shareholder primacy. This chapter focuses on the first of these objectives. We commence the chapter by pointing out that an approach that accentuates the differences between a shareholder versus a stakeholder theory of the corporation is probably a contradiction and a false dichotomy. We then deal with the important aspect of corporate social responsibility (‘CSR’) and the related issue of disclosure of and reporting on non-financial matters. As part of this discussion we focus on the controversial and highly topical issue of companies exaggerating their image as environmentally friendly corporations (greenwashing) to please investors and to attract more investments, as well as smartening their image on other issues (greenscreening). This chapter then looks at the ‘social licence to operate’ before shifting to CSR and directors’ duties. The chapter concludes by considering the meaning of ‘stakeholders’ and how all corporate stakeholders have vested interests in the sustainability of corporations.

As scholars and activists seek to define and promote greater corporate political responsibility (CPR), they will benefit from understanding practitioner perspectives and how executives are responding to rising scrutiny of their political influences, reputational risk and pressure from employees, customers and investors to get involved in civic, political, and societal issues. This chapter draws on firsthand conversations with practitioners, including executives in government affairs; sustainability; senior leadership; and diversity, equity and inclusion, during the launch of a university-based CPR initiative. I summarize practitioner motivations, interests, barriers and challenges related to engaging in conversations about CPR, as well as committing or acting to improve CPR. Following the summary, I present implications for further research and several possible paths forward, including leveraging practitioners’ value on accountability, sustaining external calls for transparency, strengthening awareness of systems, and reframing CPR as part of a larger dialogue around society’s “social contract.”

A green product is differentiated from similar products through an augmented sustainability feature, such as being produced with less environmental harm of having a smaller environmental impact upon disposal. The case of Stonyfield organic yogurt and the company’s founders, Samuel Kaymen and Gary Hirshberg, illustrate the challenges of selling green products. Green products need to offer co-benefits to garner consumer demands. A co-benefit is a functional, emotional, or social value that a recipient receives along with the product’s environmental benefits. Stonyfield’s organic yogurt offered consumers health and warm-glow emotional co-benefits stemming from the lower pesticides used in its production. Certifications and brands can play important roles in assuring customers that a green product’s promised benefits are genuine. Stonyfield used organic certification and its own quirky brand to solve these credibility challenges.

There are four basic arguments in favor of stakeholder capitalism. (1) It is a necessary response to the externalities generated by corporations. (2) Society expects business to solve problems when governments will not. (3) Corporations have too much power. (4) Millennials will only work for woke corporations. None of these arguments proves persuasive.

Development finance actors and the private sector will need to work cohesively to reduce the funding gap, reorient current financing, and increase capital resources for food-system transformation. Utilising innovative financing instruments and mechanisms, such as blended finance structures, to create attractive investment opportunities can catalyse food-system transformation through both public and private sector capital. Building the capacity of financial intermediaries to accurately assess risk and deploy appropriate risk-mitigation mechanisms can improve risk perception and lower the transaction cost for deploying capital. Robust, science-based metrics, cost-effective data collection, and monitoring systems are critical to mobilising capital and safeguarding sustainable finance against ‘greenwashing’, engaging in behaviour or activities that make people believe a company is doing more to protect the environment than it really is.

Although private actors are generally depicted as profit maximizers with little concern for social impact or inclusion, this chapter shows how this assumption can be relaxed with the emergence of private owners with socially oriented preferences. Yet the chapter also acknowledges that such owners may not accept the inherent financial trade-offs in activities with critical service attributes or that target highly vulnerable beneficiaries. Private investors may also misrepresent their social contributions, leading to what is known as the practice of greenwashing. The chapter concludes by reinforcing the importance of corporate owners as ultimate decision makers pursuing and supporting socially oriented strategies that reduce the potential hazards of private delivery.