To gain a social license to operate and grow, companies should have effective community engagement activities, social impact assessment processes, environmental and social impact management procedures, and human rights-compatible grievance redress mechanisms in place. In this way, environmental impacts and social impacts would likely be identified and addressed before issues escalate and social risk amplifies. Companies also need to treat communities with respect and be mindful of local culture. Where these things are not done, there will be no social license to operate. Protests are mechanisms by which affected communities express their concerns and signal there is no social license. As argued in our previous work on conceptualizing social protests, protests are warning signs, as well as opportunities for companies to improve. Rather than let protest actions escalate, leading to violent confrontation and considerable cost and harm, companies should engage in meaningful dialogue with protesters. Unfortunately, company response is often inadequate or inappropriate. In this paper, we identify around 175 actions companies might take in relation to community protest, and we discuss how these actions variously have the potential to escalate or de-escalate conflict, depending on whether the company engages in appropriate and genuine interaction with protesters or if repressive measures are used. While effective engagement will likely de-escalate conflict, ignoring or repressing protests tends to provoke stronger reactions from groups seeking to have their concerns heard. When companies address community concerns early, their social license to operate is enhanced. We also outline the primary international standards companies are expected to comply with, and we identify the key environmental, social, and governance issues (ESG principles) that should be respected.proactively undertake actions to address the issues of concern and reduce the likelihood of protest. In this paper, we examine the wide range of reactive and proactive actions companies might take in relation to community protest, and we reflect on how these actions might affect the level of conflict with their host communities and the company's and project's social license to operate.Companies need to consider their actions and reactions carefully. If company reaction leads to escalation, this increases the amount of community protest and/or changes the type of protest action, which could lead to harmful outcomes to the company and community. Furthermore, communities and individuals have rights, and should companies use repressive actions, companies run the risk of violating the rights of local people, which could lead to reputational harm and legal action against the company well into the future [5][6][7]. The many legal actions the oil company, Shell, has had to face because of its actions (and inaction) in Nigeria in the 1990s is proof of this [8]. The negative publicity surrounding conflict can be harmful to the company's reputation and social license to op...

No abstract

In democratic societies, protest is a legitimate and necessary way for communities to seek redress for issues that are ignored by decision-makers. In the wake of large projects, communities often find they need to mobilize to achieve respect for their rights and to influence the decision-making processes affecting their lives. Protest action can take many forms (e.g. blockades, rallies, boycotts) constituting a repertoire of contention, which is subject to continuous innovation. With new information and communication technologies (ICTs), digital repertoires of contention are also being enacted (social media, online petitions, digital sit-ins, twittering). This paper integrates the fields of performance theory, social movements, and impact assessment to conceptualize social protest. We identify over 200 forms of protest and related terms and provide a conceptual model to comprehend the contemporary role of protest. We consider that protest is part of the broader unfolding of social dramas, and is a mechanism to seek redressive action in contentious situations, especially between impacted communities and project proponents. Companies and governments that respect the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and meaningfully engage with local people are less likely to experience protest and are more successful in establishing a social licence to operate.

No abstract

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.