The Role of Multistakeholder Initiatives in the Radicalization of Resistance: The Forest Stewardship Council and the Mapuche Conflict in Chile

IF 7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Management Studies Pub Date : 2023-11-02 DOI:10.1111/joms.13015
Rajiv Maher, Nicolás Pedemonte-Rojas, Diego Gálvez, Subhabrata Bobby Banerjee
{"title":"The Role of Multistakeholder Initiatives in the Radicalization of Resistance: The Forest Stewardship Council and the Mapuche Conflict in Chile","authors":"Rajiv Maher,&nbsp;Nicolás Pedemonte-Rojas,&nbsp;Diego Gálvez,&nbsp;Subhabrata Bobby Banerjee","doi":"10.1111/joms.13015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) that address sustainability concerns have grown in importance in recent years. These private governance measures involving market, state and civil society actors aim to resolve disagreements between stakeholders through stakeholder engagement practices. However, our empirical study of the Mapuche conflict in Chile shows how a multi-stakeholder initiative contributed to the radicalization of a protest movement leading to an escalation of violence that left all actors worse off. The implementation of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification scheme, perhaps the best known MSI, exacerbated existing political discontent among the Indigenous Mapuche peoples who were resisting the expansion of industrial forest on their lands in southern Chile. Our findings indicate that MSIs cannot address the needs of marginalized stakeholders and may further undermine their interests. Our analysis enhances our understanding of the outcomes of MSIs by describing processes of radicalization as well as the role of the state in conflicts. The FSC certification scheme was incapable of addressing the key Mapuche demand for land rights. Instead, it raised false expectations, which coupled with corporate irresponsibility and state repression led to an escalation of violence. The increasing reliance on private governance measures in natural resource management, especially in countries of the so-called Global South, can further exacerbate existing conflicts and hence it is important to understand how and why MSIs lead to negative outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"61 7","pages":"2961-2991"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joms.13015","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joms.13015","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) that address sustainability concerns have grown in importance in recent years. These private governance measures involving market, state and civil society actors aim to resolve disagreements between stakeholders through stakeholder engagement practices. However, our empirical study of the Mapuche conflict in Chile shows how a multi-stakeholder initiative contributed to the radicalization of a protest movement leading to an escalation of violence that left all actors worse off. The implementation of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification scheme, perhaps the best known MSI, exacerbated existing political discontent among the Indigenous Mapuche peoples who were resisting the expansion of industrial forest on their lands in southern Chile. Our findings indicate that MSIs cannot address the needs of marginalized stakeholders and may further undermine their interests. Our analysis enhances our understanding of the outcomes of MSIs by describing processes of radicalization as well as the role of the state in conflicts. The FSC certification scheme was incapable of addressing the key Mapuche demand for land rights. Instead, it raised false expectations, which coupled with corporate irresponsibility and state repression led to an escalation of violence. The increasing reliance on private governance measures in natural resource management, especially in countries of the so-called Global South, can further exacerbate existing conflicts and hence it is important to understand how and why MSIs lead to negative outcomes.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多方利益相关者倡议在抵制激进化中的作用:森林管理委员会与智利马普切冲突
近年来,解决可持续发展问题的多方利益相关者倡议(MSIs)的重要性与日俱增。这些涉及市场、国家和民间社会行为者的私人治理措施旨在通过利益相关者参与实践来解决利益相关者之间的分歧。然而,我们对智利马普切人冲突的实证研究表明,多方利益相关者倡议如何助长了抗议运动的激进化,导致暴力升级,使所有参与者的处境更加糟糕。森林管理委员会(FSC)认证计划可能是最著名的 MSI,它的实施加剧了土著马普切人现有的政治不满情绪,他们正在抵制在智利南部的土地上扩大工业森林。我们的研究结果表明,MSI 无法满足边缘化利益相关者的需求,还可能进一步损害他们的利益。我们的分析通过描述激进化的过程以及国家在冲突中的作用,加深了我们对 MSIs 结果的理解。森林管理委员会认证计划无法满足马普切人对土地权的关键需求。相反,它引发了错误的期望,再加上企业的不负责任和国家的镇压,导致了暴力的升级。在自然资源管理中越来越多地依赖私人治理措施,尤其是在所谓的全球南部国家,可能会进一步加剧现有冲突,因此,了解微观管理举措如何以及为何会导致负面结果非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management Studies is a prestigious publication that specializes in multidisciplinary research in the field of business and management. With a rich history of excellence, we are dedicated to publishing innovative articles that contribute to the advancement of management and organization studies. Our journal welcomes empirical and conceptual contributions that are relevant to various areas including organization theory, organizational behavior, human resource management, strategy, international business, entrepreneurship, innovation, and critical management studies. We embrace diversity and are open to a wide range of methodological approaches and philosophical perspectives.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information - Notes for Contributors Issue Information Issue Information - Notes for Contributors Business, Conflict, and Peace: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1