Democratic legitimacy is rarely associated with private governance. After all, private actors are not legitimized through elections by a demos. Instead of abandoning democratic principles when entering the private sphere of governance, however, this article argues in favour of employing alternative criteria of democracy in assessments. Specifically, this article uses the criteria of participation, transparency and accountability to evaluate the democratic legitimacy of private food retail governance institutions. It pursues this evaluation of the democratic legitimacy of these institutions against the background of their ambivalent impact on the sustainability of the global agrifood system. The paper refers to a range of cases of private retail standards with different governance structures and substantial foci to illustrate its argument.

As a salutogenic concept, “consumption corridors” aims to support what is necessary for sustainable wellbeing to be achieved in relation to the Earth system, with a deep consideration for justice and equity. Living in consumption corridors is a representation of everyday life whereby people live within limits, so that all people – now and in the future – can access what is needed to live a good life. In this special issue, a series of scholars and practitioners have come together to further develop the concept, engage with its methodological implications, and relate it to consumption domains and policy implications. We begin by introducing how the concept emerged, in relation to the complexity of grappling with the societal transformations required for achieving more sustainable forms of consumption. We then present the different contributions, which demonstrate the importance of considering both maximum and minimum consumption standards, the relevance of human-need theories, as well as the difference between achieving wellbeing and the means necessary for doing so. We conclude by opening up to areas that merit further deliberation: how to relate consumption corridors to everyday-life dynamics, but also to the critical question of power relations at play in implementing consumption corridors.

This article examines limits to per capita living space (i.e. living smaller and/or sharing living space) as a measure for achieving sufficiency in housing. It studies the acceptance, motivation and side-effects of voluntarily reducing living space in five European Union countries: Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Spain and Sweden. Insights are derived from an extensive collection of qualitative empirical material collected from citizen and stakeholder ‘thinking labs’ across the five case countries. Overall, the data reveal an initial reluctance among citizens to reduce living space voluntarily. They also point to some major structural barriers: the housing market and its regulatory framework, social inequality, or dominant societal norms regarding ‘the ideal home’. Enhanced community amenities can compensate for reduced private living space, though contingent upon a clear allocation of rights and responsibilities. Participants also reported positive effects to living smaller, including increased time for leisure activities and proximity to services. This was often coupled with urbanization, which may also be part of living smaller in the future. Policy relevance Despite many challenges, European Union citizens can accept and embrace smaller living, given the right conditions. In particular, meaningful social contacts, good shared amenities and attractive neighbourhoods can lead to high satisfaction with smaller living conditions. Urbanization can serve as a major driving force to achieve this transformation, but it must be guided. Policy interventions are necessary to ensure a changing housing stock and more flexible use of the existing housing stock. Support for downsizing necessitates a reconfiguration of regulatory norms and economic incentives for building and planning. Equally important, ‘soft’ values of good community and mutual respect need to be fostered in a denser, smaller housing reality. Good governance becomes essential for housing to allow for flexibility in living situations and to manage conflicts. A shift in norms and values towards community and sharing is necessary and this requires active policymaking and good governance of urban spaces.

A number of scholars have started to investigate issues specifically associated with financialization in the agrifood sector. This article draws on this literature to map the dimensions of financialization and their interaction at different levels. In contrast to studies that have emphasized the economic preconditions and consequences of the financialization of agrifood, we are interested in the political forces and processes behind these developments. Our argument intends to demonstrate that the politics of financialization take a pervasive and multi-faceted form. Indeed, if one wants to identify and assess what drives and facilitates financialization and its diffusion, one needs to study political developments at all societal and political levels and in a variety of shapes and forms. In consequence, this analysis also serves to highlight the challenges involved for anyone aiming to foster a definancialization of the global agrifood system or of the global economic system as such.