How do certain ways of knowing and acting upon objects gain prominence over others, in an era where governing unfolds through more collaborative and inclusive forms? By drawing on the concept of “co-production”, this thesis investigates how object constitution unfolds within concrete sites, tools, and practices across three processes of governance: “delimiting pathways”, “ordering evidence” and “negotiating dissensus”. As a main contribution, this thesis argues that the practices that shape global governance objects are increasingly detached from circles of issue-based professionals or “backstage” processes such as quantification or scientific abstraction. Instead, the practices that shape governance objects are intertwined within increasingly visible, plural, and hybrid networks. These networks, which often escape any sort of accountability, do not derive their authority from traditional forms of expertise such as substantial knowledge, intra-professional regulation, or their capacity to interpret nature. Rather, their authority stems from their capacity to operate across sectors and orchestrate the procedural techniques of governing. Through an in-depth examination of the object of food and nutrition governance, this thesis sheds light on how aspects such as hunger, malnutrition, and diets have been disconnected from their broader determinants and problematized as medicalized dimensions requiring product-based “solutions”. By critically examining object-making within these “middle spaces”, this research sheds light on how contemporary governing works in a landscape that thrives on heightened politicization, hybridity as well as less triumphalist claims about what expertise can achieve.