Refining the preconditions of a social licence to operate (SLO): reflections on citizens’ attitudes towards mining in two Finnish regions

Litmanen, Tapio; Jartti, Tuija; Rantala, Eero

doi:10.1016/j.exis.2016.04.003

Cited by 33 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Research indicates many factors contribute to SLO, including trust, fairness, legitimacy, and credibility Litmanen et al, 2016;Zhang et al, 2015). Stakeholder perceptions may be influenced by the engagement stakeholders have with a given company.…”

Section: Dialogue As 'Meaningful' Stakeholder Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other factors have been shown to drive trust and acceptance in similar contexts, including social identity (e.g., Ross et al, 2014); legitimacy and credibility (e.g., ; governance capacity and distributive fairness (e.g., ; perceptions of impacts and familiarity with mining (e.g., Litmanen et al, 2016); and perceived risk (Eiser et al, 2002;Siegrist, 2000). Future research will be important in examining how the factors examined here interact with these other factors in the context of SLO.…”

Section: Study Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…perceptions of impacts and familiarity with or proximity to mining (Evensen & Stedman, 2016;Litmanen, Jartti, & Rantala, 2016); and perceived risk . Three factors across the social licence literature, however, stand out as being important across various studies and contexts: trust, fairness, and relationships.…”

Section: Gaining a Social Licencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Increasing amounts of research have focused on how to attain and maintain a social licence and social acceptance (International Council on Mining and Metals, 2015a; Litmanen et al, 2016;Ross et al, 2014;. Across these models, the development of social acceptance (used as the most predominant proxy for social licence) has been linked to factors such as perceptions of trust, fairness (procedural and distributive), governance capacity, familiarity with development, legitimacy, credibility, respect, compatibility of interests, impacts, contact quality, contact quantity, identity, and risk.…”

Section: Drivers Of Social Licence To Operatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various models and studies, theoretically and empirically based, have been developed to map or measure the development of a social licence (e.g., International Council on Mining and Metals, 2015b;Litmanen et al, 2016;Ross et al, 2014;. Many factors are important in driving SLO, with three factors emerging as particularly significant: trust in mining, fairness of procedures around mining, and social acceptance of mining.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 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: Dialogue As 'Meaningful' Stakeholder Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gaining a Social Licencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Drivers Of Social Licence To Operatementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

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

show abstract

Corporate social irresponsibility, hostile organisations and global resource extraction

Kemp

Owen

2022

Corp Soc Responsibility Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a fundamentally normative construction. It speaks to what social responsibility should look like, who it should apply to, and how it should be demonstrated. By contrast, the analytic position of the corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) discourse is evidence-based, and objects to the notion that companies can claim to be responsible while at the same time act irresponsibly. This paper supports a clear separation between (i) the critique of company performance within the dominant discursive construct of CSR and (ii) CSI as an evidence-based approach to reading and documenting corporate performance. A conceptually distinct CSI discourse removes the need for researchers to disprove CSR rhetoric before engaging with responsibility problems. Rather than organising studies around CSR claims and commitments, we suggest that researchers of global resource extraction put their energies towards capturing the form and function of 'organised irresponsibility' in locations where mining takes place.

show abstract

Healthy mistrust or complacent confidence? Civic vigilance in the reporting by leading newspapers on nuclear waste disposal in Finland and France

Lehtonen

Kojo

Kari

et al. 2021

Risk Hazard & Crisis Pub Pol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust and confidence have been identified as crucial for efforts at solving the conundrum of high‐level radioactive waste management (RWM). However, mistrust has its virtues, especially in the form of “civic vigilance”—healthy suspicion towards the powers that be. This article examines civic vigilance in the form of “watchdog journalism,” as practiced by the leading Finnish and French newspapers—Helsingin Sanomat (HS) and Le Monde (LM)—in their RWM reporting. Although both countries are forerunners in RWM, Finland constitutes a Nordic “high‐trust society” while France has been characterized as a “society of mistrust.” Employing the methods of frame analysis, key RWM‐related news frames were identified, consisting of varying combinations of confidence, skepticism, trust, and mistrust. LM's mistrust‐skepticism‐oriented framings reflect the classical watchdog role, in sharp contrast with the confidence oriented framings of HS, which tends to reproduce government and industry framings. Explanations for the observed differences can be sought in historically constituted political and media cultures, as well as national nuclear “regimes”. For further research, we suggest two alternative hypotheses concerning the implications that these distinct models of civic vigilance have for democracy.

show abstract

Refining the preconditions of a social licence to operate (SLO): reflections on citizens’ attitudes towards mining in two Finnish regions

Cited by 33 publications

References 38 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

Corporate social irresponsibility, hostile organisations and global resource extraction

Healthy mistrust or complacent confidence? Civic vigilance in the reporting by leading newspapers on nuclear waste disposal in Finland and France

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About