This thesis is about Global Water Governance (GWG) – an overarching normative framework by which water management practices across all scales may be guided. More specifically, it seeks to develop an understanding of how Corporate Water Stewardship (CWS), and its facilitation of the inclusion of companies’ perspectives to address water issues, affects GWG. Understood as a form of market environmentalism – a doctrine premised on mutual synergies between environmental conservation and economic growth – CWS provides a channel for companies to participate in, as well as spearhead, a quest for more sustainable water management within and beyond their own operations. Despite a proliferation of activities undertaken by companies, CWS has attracted limited scholarly attention, and an overarching analysis of the effects that mounting corporate involvement has had on the global water discourse has so far been absent from scholarly debates. This research draws on over 500 documents published by companies, NGOs, and other organisations, alongside 50 interviews with key practitioners. It specifically questions: (i) the empirical context through which CWS emerged; (ii) the manner in which companies from various sectors conceptualise water and its management; (iii) the way CWS endeavours are legitimised and; (iv) the mechanisms through which companies exert influence. Chapters 4 to 8 comprise an analysis of the main research findings. Chapter 4 investigates why companies are interested in water issues, how companies frame them, and how CWS could materialise. Chapters 5 and 6 address how companies from different sectors engage in CWS in the contexts of water resources management, and Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH). Chapter 7 turns attention to how companies draw on non-conventional sources of authority to legitimise their activities, and Chapter 8 analyses how CWS influences GWG. When taken holistically, the thesis attests to the key point that the inclusion of companies in solving water issues matters; their presence changes the status quo of water governance. More importantly, the thesis goes beyond such assertions by pointing towards how it matters. It finds that, as a result of corporate involvement, water is being reconceptualised from an environmental and social risk to society, to an economic risk for businesses. Moreover, although companies may not be doing this in an ill-intentioned way, the research suggests that when they participate in water interventions, they alter GWG by promoting the commercialisation of water management, the valuation of water risk, and the liberalisation of water governance. Thus, although the involvement of companies may contribute to improving the management and governance of water across all scales, their involvement has to be matched with proper ‘checks and balances’ to ensure that CWS serves the public good, rather than simply contributing to private profit.

This thesis aims to understand the role of public governance (national laws and regulations) in addressing poor working conditions on South African fruit farms connected to global production networks (GPN), at the intersection of global private (codes of conduct) and local civil society organisation (CSO) initiatives. A particular objective of the investigation is to understand the extent to which public governance is able to address working conditions on South African fruit export farms, taking into account wider global commercial pressures inherent in fruit GPNs. Much analysis of global private and governance by local CSOs has not sufficiently addressed the role of public governance. Research focusing on public governance in addressing working conditions in South African fruit has not sufficiently accounted for the multi-scalar interactions between lead firm supermarkets, national suppliers and local fruit producers. These interactions are positioned to shape and influence regulatory outcomes for different groups of permanent and casual farmworkers. The thesis seeks to address the following central research question: ‘To what extent do multi-scalar tensions in global production networks (GPNs) challenge the public governance of working conditions, and what are the lessons from labour operating in South African fruit production?’This research draws upon the GPN analytical framework and public governance research, in order to conceptualise the multi-scalar commercial and governance processes that play out in the South African fruit export sector. In doing so, this research seeks to contribute to existing GPN and public governance literatures. Previous GPN research has not sufficiently investigated the role of public governance (laws and regulations) in addressing working conditions, partly due to an assumption that neoliberal policies have eroded the ability of developing states to regulate labour incorporated into global production. This problematic is beginning to be addressed, due to increasing academic acknowledgement of the central regulatory role nation states continue to play in addressing working conditions in global production, at the intersection of global private (codes of conduct) initiatives and governance by local CSOs (NGO and trade union activity). Additionally, this thesis seeks to bring together two separate strands of ‘governance’ research in global production networks, which have thus far been investigated separately; the governance of commercial interactions on the one hand, and the governance of labour on the other. A key theoretical argument is that understanding challenges facing the public governance of labour requires a broader conceptualisation of the governance of multi-scalar commercial interactions in global production, which shape and influence workforce composition at local farm level. This thesis argues that an inherent multi-scalar tension exists on the one hand between ‘global commercial pressures’ exerted by global lead firms over national suppliers and local producers driving workforce casualisation, and on the other hand a ‘global governance deficit’ at the core of which lies a public governance deficit facing increasing numbers of casual workers, characterised by minimum wages insufficient to meet living costs and a lack of trade union representation. This tension, it is argued, underpinned the crisis in South African fruit in 2012/13, when casual workers mobilised to demand an increase in the agricultural minimum wage, and threatened the fruit value chain by blocking the main arterial routes to Cape Town port. The policy implications of this thesis are that nation states are required to adopt multi-scalar interventions which transcend traditional forms of governance, in order to address the global commercial pressures inherent in GPNs and protect increasing numbers of casual workers in this context.

Recent developments around the sharing economy bring to the fore questions of governability and broader societal Benefit-and subsequently the need to explore effective means of public governance, from nurturing, on the one hand, to restriction, on the other. As sharing is a predominately urban phenomenon in modern societies, cities around the globe have become both locus of action and central actor in the debates over the nature and organization of the sharing economy. However, cities vary substantially in the interpretation of potential opportunities and challenges, as well as in their governance responses. Building on a qualitative comparative analysis of 16 leading global cities, our findings reveal four framings of the sharing economy: "societal endangerment","societal enhancement", "market disruption", and "ecological Transition". Such framings go hand in hand with patterned governance responses: although there is considerable heterogeneity in the combination of public governance strategies, we find specific configurations of framings and public governance strategies. Our work reflects the political and ethical debates on various economic, social, and moral issues related to the sharing economy, and contrib-utes to a better understanding of the field-level institutional Arrangements-a prerequisite for examining moral behavior of sharing economy organizations.

The central argument that I advance in this dissertation is that the influence of the Rockefeller Foundation (RF) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) in the governance of global health and agricultural development has been derived from their ability to advance knowledge structures crafted to accommodate the preferences of the dominant states operating within the contexts where they have sought to catalyze change. Consequently, this dissertation provides a new way of conceptualizing knowledge power broadly conceived as well as private governance as it relates to the provision of public goods. In the first half of the twentieth-century, RF funds drove scientific research that produced tangible solutions, such as vaccines and high-yielding seed varieties, to longstanding problems undermining the health and wealth of developing countries emerging from the clutches of colonialism. At the country-level, the Foundation provided advanced training to a generation of agricultural scientists and health practitioners, and RF expertise was also pivotal to the creation of specialized International Organizations (IOs) for health (e.g. the League of Nations Health Organization) and agriculture (e.g. the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research) as well as many informal international networks of experts working to solve common problems. Finally in the neo-liberal era, RF effectively demonstrated how the public-private partnership paradigm could provide public goods in the face of externally imposed austerity constraining public sector capacity and the failure of the free-market to meet the needs of populations with limited purchasing power. Since its inception, the BMGF has demonstrated a similar commitment to underwriting innovation through science oriented towards reducing global health disparities and increasing agricultural productivity in poor countries, and has greatly expanded the application of the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) approach in both health and agriculture. Unlike its intellectual forebear, BMGF has been far more focused on end-points and silver bullets than investing directly in the training of human resources. Moreover whereas RF has for most of its history decentralized its staff, those of BMGF have been concentrated mainly at its headquarters in Seattle. With no operational programs of its own, BMGF has instead relied heavily on external consultants to inform its programs and remains dependent on intermediary organizations to implement its grants. Despite these and other differences, both RF and BMGF have exhibited a common capacity to catalyse institutional innovation that has benefited historically marginalized populations in the absence of structural changes to the dominant global power structure. A preference for compromise over contestation, coupled with a capacity for enabling innovation in science and governance, has resulted in broad acceptance for RF and BMGF knowledge structures within both state and international policy arenas. This acceptance has translated into both Foundations having direct influence over (i) how major challenges related to disease and agriculture facing the global south are understood (i.e. the determinants and viable solutions); (ii) what types of knowledge matters for solving said problems (i.e. who leads); and (iii) how collective action focused on addressing these problems is structured (i.e. the institutional frameworks).

This work discusses the change in Indian position in international relations during the Cold War. It is a qualitative case study, which is also dedicated to finding influences that caused the change in the Indian position. Work includes the following sections. The first part describes the theory of international relations relevant to the study of the Indian position within the great power relations. Next part analyzes India's economic development and historical development of India's foreign policy and relations with the most important global actors. The final chapter is a study of global governance institutions and policies of BRICS and its position to the institutions of global governance.