IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bco/mbraaa/v4y2017p100-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam to meet the societal challenges of horizon 2020

Author

Listed:
  • Nibedita Saha

    (University Institute, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Nad OvÄ Ã­rnou 3685, 76001 Zlín, Czech Republic)

  • Do Le Nhu Quynh

    (University Institute, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Nad OvÄ Ã­rnou 3685, 76001 Zlín, Czech Republic)

  • Tomas Sáha

    (University Institute, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Nad OvÄ Ã­rnou 3685, 76001 Zlín, Czech Republic)

  • Petr Sáha

    (University Institute, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Nad OvÄ Ã­rnou 3685, 76001 Zlín, Czech Republic)

Abstract

This paper aimed at enlightening the emergence of multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam that enable individuals, businesses, and civic societies to undertake the complex sustainability issues in the international business environment. Currently, the philosophy of involving multi-stakeholder initiatives groups in Vietnam for resource management seems overwhelming. Equally, the motive for studying a phenomenon like multi-stakeholder dialogue is a novel outlook that did not catch various researchers’ eye earlier. Nowadays, the European multi-stakeholder innovation platform tries to address the European societal challenges and policies due to their roles in the upcoming new program of Horizon 2020. National policy makers using them as building blocks for implementing different strategies such as research and development and regional policies. The approach of multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam is to respond to the limited capacity and resources of individuals, societal sectors, governments, businesses, and civic societies. Thus, this study was conducted to demonstrate the significance of multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam that create a broad multi-stakeholder (science, policy, business, society, including SMEs, public and private investors) and multi-level (local, regional, national, and Europe) innovation platforms to meet a range of societal challenges through Horizon 2020 in order to facilitate the development of committed innovation partnerships and identify how different types of firms, people, and knowledge at national and international levels making civil society organizations, non-governmental organizations, and individuals and institutions more innovative and competitive. Finally, this paper proposed some recommendations based on assumptions underlying research questions that added value to promote dialogue and collaboration across levels and with key international partners.

Suggested Citation

  • Nibedita Saha & Do Le Nhu Quynh & Tomas Sáha & Petr Sáha, 2017. "Multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam to meet the societal challenges of horizon 2020," Marketing and Branding Research, EUROKD, vol. 4(1), pages 100-111.
    • Handle: RePEc:bco:mbraaa::v:4:y:2017:p:100-111
    DOI: 10.33844/mbr.2017.60373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://api.eurokd.com/Uploads/Article/838/mbr.2017.60373.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.33844/mbr.2017.60373?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mena, Sébastien & Palazzo, Guido, 2012. "Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 527-556, July.
    2. Jason Konefal, 2015. "Governing Sustainability Transitions: Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives and Regime Change in United States Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    4. Anica Zeyen & Markus Beckmann & Stella Wolters, 2016. "Actor and Institutional Dynamics in the Development of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 341-360, May.
    5. Aseem Prakash & Mary Kay Gugerty, 2010. "Trust but verify? Voluntary regulation programs in the nonprofit sector," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), pages 22-47, March.
    6. Philipp Pattberg, 2005. "What Role for Private Rule-Making in Global Environmental Governance? Analysing the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 175-189, June.
    7. Nicolas Faysse, 2006. "Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi‐stakeholder platforms," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 219-229, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Domenico Dentoni & Verena Bitzer & Greetje Schouten, 2018. "Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 333-356, June.
    2. Szoke-Burke, Sam & Werker, Eric, 2021. "Benefit sharing, power, and the performance of multi-stakeholder institutions at Ghana's Ahafo mine," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Sandra Moog & André Spicer & Steffen Böhm, 2015. "The Politics of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: The Crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 469-493, May.
    4. Verena Bitzer & Alessia Marazzi, 2021. "Southern sustainability initiatives in agricultural value chains: a question of enhanced inclusiveness? The case of Trustea in India," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(2), pages 381-395, June.
    5. Anica Zeyen & Markus Beckmann & Stella Wolters, 2016. "Actor and Institutional Dynamics in the Development of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 341-360, May.
    6. Jens Heidingsfelder & Markus Beckmann, 2020. "A governance puzzle to be solved? A systematic literature review of fragmented sustainability governance," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 355-390, August.
    7. Deborah Martens & Annelien Gansemans & Jan Orbie & Marijke D'Haese, 2018. "Trade Unions in Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: What Shapes Their Participation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, November.
    8. Natalia Aguilar Delgado & Paola Perez-Aleman, 2021. "Inclusion in Global Environmental Governance: Sustained Access, Engagement and Influence in Decisive Spaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-24, September.
    9. Manon Eikelenboom & Thomas B. Long, 2023. "Breaking the Cycle of Marginalization: How to Involve Local Communities in Multi-stakeholder Initiatives?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 31-62, August.
    10. Norma Schönherr, 2022. "Same Same but Different? A Quantitative Exploration of Voluntary Sustainability Standards in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Janina Grabs & Rachael D. Garrett, 2023. "Goal-Based Private Sustainability Governance and Its Paradoxes in the Indonesian Palm Oil Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(3), pages 467-507, December.
    12. Gallemore, Caleb & Guisinger, Amy & Kruuse, Mikkel & Ruysschaert, Denis & Jespersen, Kristjan, 2018. "Escaping the “Teenage” Years: The Politics of Rigor and the Evolution of Private Environmental Standards," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 76-87.
    13. Jespersen, Kristjan & Grabs, Janina & Gallemore, Caleb, 2024. "Ratcheting up private standards by exploiting coopetition: The curious case of RSPO’s adoption of zero-deforestation criteria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    14. Martin Fougère & Nikodemus Solitander, 2020. "Dissent in Consensusland: An Agonistic Problematization of Multi-stakeholder Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(4), pages 683-699, July.
    15. Heidingsfelder, Jens, 2019. "Private sustainability governance in the making – A case study analysis of the fragmentation of sustainability governance for the gold sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Olga Malets, 2017. "Recursivity by Organizational Design: The Case of the Forest Stewardship Council," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(3), pages 343-352, September.
    17. Thomas Maak & Nicola M. Pless & Christian Voegtlin, 2016. "Business Statesman or Shareholder Advocate? CEO Responsible Leadership Styles and the Micro-Foundations of Political CSR," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 463-493, May.
    18. Vivek Pandey & Natalia Vidal & Rajat Panwar & Lubna Nafees, 2019. "Characterization of Sustainability Leaders and Laggards in the Global Food Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-14, September.
    19. Sharifah R.S. DAWOOD, 2023. "The Use Of Quadruple Helix Model In Smart Cities Development: Evidence From Bandar Cassia Township In Penang, Malaysia," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 18(2), pages 78-100, May.
    20. Vincent-Paul Sanon & Raymond Ouedraogo & Patrice Toé & Hamid El Bilali & Erwin Lautsch & Stefan Vogel & Andreas H. Melcher, 2021. "Socio-Economic Perspectives of Transition in Inland Fisheries and Fish Farming in a Least Developed Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-34, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bco:mbraaa::v:4:y:2017:p:100-111. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sara Gunen (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.