Corporate social irresponsibility, hostile organisations and global resource extraction

Kemp, Deanna; Owen, John R.

doi:10.1002/csr.2329

Cited by 14 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While we remain cognisant of the drivers for non-judicial, operational-level grievance mechanisms through voluntary safeguards such as the UNGPs, we are interested in actual workings and less in ideal systems and abstract norms (Kemp & Owen, 2022). Almost two decades ago, Ballard and Banks (2003) challenged convention by suggesting that the inside workings of companies represented an "ethnographic gap" in the anthropology of mining.…”

Section: Inner Workings As a Focus For Social Scientific Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Responses to Community Grievance: Voluntarism and Pathologies of Practice

Owen

Kemp

2023

J Bus Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grievance landscapes form in rapidly industrialising contexts where social and environmental impacts are inevitable. This paper focuses on the complex operational and organisational settings in which grievances arise and the industrial pathologies that form around resource development projects. The arguments draw on classic and contemporary literature on “grievance”, “right” and “entitlement”, and the authors’ own sustained engagement with global mining companies and local communities. Our contention is that the grievance landscape is far more critical to understanding environmental, human rights, and mining interactions than the managerial systems that companies construct to signal compliance with voluntary international norms. These managerial systems, or operational-level grievance mechanisms, map the procedural contours of how a local grievance would travel once it is made visible to the company. In practice, however, it is fiction, illegibility and invisibility that dominate. Across the pathologies, the common denominator is the corporate propensity to avoid recognising the legitimacy of a local grievance and the source of its cause.

show abstract

Section: Inner Workings As a Focus For Social Scientific Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Responses to Community Grievance: Voluntarism and Pathologies of Practice

Owen

Kemp

2023

J Bus Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Exacerbating the structural reality of inequality, those most adversely affected by major developments are often the most marginalised and vulnerable. For example, mining operations typically harm those most vulnerable (Downing, 2002), leading to the view that the dominant, normative discourse of corporate social responsibility conflicts with empirical practices of corporate social irresponsibility (CSI; Kemp and Owen, 2022).…”

Section: Sia Equity and Vulnerabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While regulation might seem to offer a countervailing force to these structural inequities, Owen and Kemp (2017) propose that the ‘industrial ethic’ overwhelms the capacity of governments and communities. Their resolution is for shared control over assets and workings of projects, plus addressing the conditions of risk and vulnerability (Kemp and Owen, 2022).…”

Section: Sia Equity and Vulnerabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring equity in social impact assessment

Parsons,

Mottee

2023

Current Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social impact assessment as a concept and practice is generally framed as a process for delivering socially equitable outcomes, and in particular, a vehicle for improving the lives of society’s most vulnerable and marginalised people. For example, the International Association for Impact Assessment 2015 guidance document makes the normative statement that projects should benefit local communities and be a ‘force for positive social change and beneficial social development’. Yet most guidance provides little prescription for what this looks like in practice. More recently, the New South Wales 2021 guideline includes distributive equity as a principle for social impact assessment, but its application is yet to be tested. This article discusses key dimensions of equity concepts, drawing on international social impact assessment guidance documents, academic literature on equity, fairness and justice, and case studies in Australia. We elaborate process/procedural/participative and outcome/distributive dimensions of equity. We further argue that, to reflect the International Association for Impact Assessment position, social impact assessment needs to defend its normative purpose of advancing equity, rather than simply ‘considering’ equity impacts.

show abstract

“…CSI, -i.e. corporate acts that intentionally cause harm (Clark et al, 2022;Kemp and Owen, 2022) -has relevant social, environmental and economic consequences impacting companies, communities and people worldwide. As Iborra and Riera (2023) state, there is empirical evidence that CSI provoked enormous consequences, between others, in CEO's narcissism and irresponsible behavior consumers-in emotions, attitudes or purchase intentions-(e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking at the darker side of the mirror: the impact of CEO's narcissism on corporate social irresponsibility

Riera,

Iborra

2023

EJMBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe aim of this article is to highlight the major part played by executives in the escalation of corporate social irresponsibility (CSI). Based on the upper echelons theory, the authors developed a model which shows the essential role of CEOs in explaining CSI. The authors proposed that the key personality traits of CEOs—narcissism—, as well as their power, could explain the degree of CSI.Design/methodology/approachDue to the significant methodological challenges when investigating CSI, the authors explored a novel method for measuring CSI in order to assess the degree of irresponsible behaviors. The authors build a CSI scale based on the perceptions of key informants, i.e. experts with diverse professional backgrounds. The authors apply CSI scale in a sample of 84 Spanish companies that were involved in CSI.FindingsThe results of the authors’ empirical study show the positive and significant influence of CEO narcissism and CEO power on the degree of CSI.Research limitations/implicationsOn the one hand, corporate irresponsibility scandals have relevant social consequences and practical implications. On the other hand, narcissism is a natural feature of managers in top positions that is increasing in societies.Practical implicationsThe authors’ findings may help CEOs, TMTs and corporate boards to acknowledge potential sources of CSI decreasing its likelihood through counterbalancing CEO's power and considering the dark side of narcissism.Social implicationsOn the one hand, corporate scandals have relevant social and practical implications. On the other hand, narcissism is a natural feature of managers in top positions that is increasing in societies.Originality/valueIn this paper, the authors highlight the role of CEOs characteristics and their firms as the key actors for explaining and understanding the degree of CSI.

show abstract

Corporate social irresponsibility, hostile organisations and global resource extraction

Cited by 14 publications

References 49 publications

Corporate Responses to Community Grievance: Voluntarism and Pathologies of Practice

Corporate Responses to Community Grievance: Voluntarism and Pathologies of Practice

Exploring equity in social impact assessment

Looking at the darker side of the mirror: the impact of CEO's narcissism on corporate social irresponsibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About