Public and Private Institutional Responses to Advocacy Attacks: The Case of the Global Cocoa Industry and Child Labour Abuse
Over the past decade the global agri-food industry has come under increasing attack by advocacy groups related to their production and marketing processes (Bowmar and Gow, 2009). Advocacy groups have used these attacks to exploit the growing intergenerational disconnect between consumers and farming to campaign for narrowly defined political ideals while challenging traditional agricultural practices (Olin, 1999). This disconnect has provided advocacy groups the opportunity to use boycotts and other media attacks to severely adverse impact not only branded manufacturers and retailers, but their farmer suppliers. The agri-food industry’s challenge is to understand how to develop appropriate individual and collective responses to these attacks that minimize their current and future adverse impact and provide mutually beneficial outcomes for all of the channel members. Using an instrumental case study of the international cocoa and chocolate industry’s response to the child labour abuse and trafficking claims, we analyse and evaluate the alternative individual and collective responses that firms can implement to minimize their current and future adverse impact from advocacy attacks and provide mutually beneficial outcomes for all of the channel members. This paper follows a comparative institutional analysis methodology to analyse the multiple nested case studies and evaluate the impact and implications of each alternative.
|Date of creation:||2011|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202|
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:104726. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.