IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v30y2020i2p169-199_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contestation in Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: Enhancing the Democratic Quality of Transnational Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Arenas, Daniel
  • Albareda, Laura
  • Goodman, Jennifer

Abstract

This article studies multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) as spaces for both deliberation and contestation between constituencies with competing discourses and disputed values, beliefs, and preferences. We review different theoretical perspectives on MSIs, which see them mainly as spaces to find solutions to market problems (economic approach), as spaces of conflict and bargaining (political approach), or as spaces of consensus (deliberative approach). In contrast, we build on a contestatory deliberative perspective, which gives equal value to both contestation and consensus. We identify four types of internal contestation which can be present in MSIs—procedural, inclusiveness, epistemic, and ultimate-goal—and argue that embracing contestation and engaging in ongoing revision of provisional agreements, criteria, and goals can enhance the democratic quality of MSIs. Finally, we explore the implications of this perspective for theorizing about the democratic quality in MSIs and about the role of corporations in transnational governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Arenas, Daniel & Albareda, Laura & Goodman, Jennifer, 2020. "Contestation in Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: Enhancing the Democratic Quality of Transnational Governance," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 169-199, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:30:y:2020:i:2:p:169-199_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X19000290/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kelly Gerard, 2023. "Doing aid chains differently: Evaluating the potential of Multi‐Stakeholder Partnerships," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(1), January.
    2. 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.
    3. Jennifer Goodman & Jukka Mäkinen, 2022. "Democracy in Political Corporate Social Responsibility: A Dynamic, Multilevel Account," Post-Print hal-04002327, HAL.
    4. Lucie Baudoin & Daniel Arenas, 2023. "“Everyone Has a Truth”: Forms of Ecological Embeddedness in an Interorganizational Context," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 185(2), pages 263-280, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Leopoldo Gutierrez & Ivan Montiel & Jordi A. Surroca & Josep A. Tribo, 2022. "Rainbow Wash or Rainbow Revolution? Dynamic Stakeholder Engagement for SDG-Driven Responsible Innovation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(4), pages 1113-1136, November.
    7. Josep F. Mària & Jennifer Goodman, 2023. "Conflicts in the framing of conflicts: The case of community investment in a mining company in the Democratic Republic of the Congo," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(5), pages 671-687, July.
    8. Huw Thomas & Mark Anner, 2023. "Dissensus and Deadlock in the Evolution of Labour Governance: Global Supply Chains and the International Labour Organization (ILO)," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 33-49, April.
    9. Rajiv Maher, 2022. "Deliberating or Stalling for Justice? Dynamics of Corporate Remediation and Victim Resistance Through the Lens of Parentalism: The Fundão dam Collapse and the Renova Foundation in Brazil," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 15-36, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Roland W. Scholz & Gerald Steiner, 2022. "The role of transdisciplinarity for mineral economics and mineral resource management: coping with fallacies related to phosphorus in science and practice," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 35(3), pages 745-763, December.

    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:cup:buetqu:v:30:y:2020:i:2:p:169-199_1. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    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.