Using environmental report cards to encourage constructive stakeholder relationships in natural resource management: developing a participatory report carding process

Kung, Anthony

doi:10.14264/uql.2017.403

Cited by 2 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 146 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research in collaborative approaches to NRM has found that relationships among stakeholders can promote a common vision, trust, and reciprocity (Kung, 2016;Rudd, 2000;WadeBenzoni et al, 2002), as well as creating a sense of shared ownership (Bryan, 2004). This body of evidence aligns with current findings that indicate that dialogue, as intertwined with relationshipbuilding, can result in shared understandings among stakeholders, co-ownership, and trust.…”

Section: Constructive Relationships As Fundamentalsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…This body of evidence aligns with current findings that indicate that dialogue, as intertwined with relationshipbuilding, can result in shared understandings among stakeholders, co-ownership, and trust. Pero (2007) and Kung (2016), in the context of NRM, state that frequent face-to-face communication is central to the building of constructive stakeholder relationships and to the development of mutual understanding and common ground. These two factors were also important outcomes of dialogue in our results.…”

Section: Constructive Relationships As Fundamentalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some research has conceptualised and explored positive links between dialogue and trust (Kung, 2016;Yankelovich, 2001); between dialogue and relationships (Kung, 2016;Pero, 2007;; and between dialogue and fairness (Maoz, 2001). This research has, however, been primarily small-scale, qualitative, and case-study based, and it primarily has been in contexts outside SLO related to NRM.…”

Section: Company-community Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pero (2007), in the context of NRM, found that frequent face-to-face communication is central to the building of positive interpersonal relationships. Similarly, Kung (2016) found that, from the perspective of environmental managers in government and industry, dialogue and communication were "critical to encouraging constructive stakeholder relationships" (p. 113). One study in the context of SLO found that stakeholder engagement practitioners see dialogue as one mechanism that builds relationships at the company-community interface (Mercer-Mapstone et al, 2017, Chapter 4).…”

Section: Procedural Fairnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The role of dialogue in social licence to operate in the extractives sector

Mercer-Mapstone¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thesis explores the multifaceted role of dialogue in the context of social licence to operate (SLO) in the extractives sector (including mining and gas extraction). SLO is a concept that describes the ongoing and dynamic social acceptance of a resource development by local communities and other stakeholders who have the power to influence company operations. There has been discourse by extractives companies and in academia about the importance of 'meaningful dialogue' as one form of engagement that contributes to developing and maintaining a social licence. The relationship between dialogue and SLO, however, has undergone relatively little explicit, in-depth examination. I use a mixed methods approach to address this gap by exploring the role of dialogue in social licence from three standpoints: (a) a theoretical perspective, drawing on literature from multiple disciplines; (b) stakeholder engagement practitioner perspectives using qualitative, semi-structured interviews; and (c) perceptions of residents in Australian mining communities through a quantitative, social psychological survey.Through this body of work, I make five contributions to the SLO field of knowledge. The first is an interdisciplinary conceptual framework considering the role of dialogue in SLO. The second is a coherent understanding of dialogue and potential outcomes from dialogue specific to SLO. The third is a reconceptualisation of two core factors that have previously been established as central to SLO: trust and procedural fairness, bringing conceptual depth to an under-theorised field.The fourth is an analysis of how dialogue can potentially reinforce the illegitimate power asymmetries it may seek to redress with implications for stakeholder identification and engagement processes. The fifth is a model establishing empirical relationships between community members' experiences of dialogue and other factors central to SLO including company-community relationship, perceptions of procedural fairness, company-community trust, and social acceptance.I argue, based on these theoretical and empirical findings, that dialogue has a critical but complex role to play in the processes of social licence engagement. I discuss each set of results in relation to the SLO literature. Implications for theory are highlighted, pointing to areas of future research that might usefully build on current findings. Implications for industry also are drawn to propose evidence-based considerations for the design, implementation, and evaluation of current and future engagement strategies used by companies to engage stakeholders in meaningful dialogue in attempts to establish and maintain a social licence.3

show abstract

Section: Constructive Relationships As Fundamentalsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Constructive Relationships As Fundamentalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Company-community Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Procedural Fairnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The role of dialogue in social licence to operate in the extractives sector

Mercer-Mapstone¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study, then, seeks to explicitly explore how dialogue relates to other core factors driving social acceptance as a metric for SLO in the resources sector. Some research has conceptualised and explored positive links between dialogue and trust (Kung, 2016;Yankelovich, 2001); dialogue and relationships (Kung, 2016;Pero, 2007;Prno, 2013) (Kung, 2016;Pero, 2007;Prno, 2013); and between dialogue and fairness (Maoz, 2001). This research has, however, been primarily small-scale, qualitative and case-study based, and it primarily has been in contexts outside SLO related to natural resources management.…”

Section: Company-community Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Company-community dialogue builds relationships, fairness, and trust leading to social acceptance of Australian mining developments

Mercer-Mapstone

Rifkin

Louis

et al. 2018

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights Examine key drivers of social acceptance of mining in Australian regional areas  Community members' experiences of dialogue are integral in predicting relationship quality and procedural fairness  Relationship quality and procedural fairness predicted trust which drove acceptance  Indirect effect of dialogue on acceptance indicates the importance of engagement strategies in mining

show abstract

Using environmental report cards to encourage constructive stakeholder relationships in natural resource management: developing a participatory report carding process

Cited by 2 publications

References 146 publications

The role of dialogue in social licence to operate in the extractives sector

The role of dialogue in social licence to operate in the extractives sector

Company-community dialogue builds relationships, fairness, and trust leading to social acceptance of Australian mining developments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About