IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v8y2019i6p101-d241700.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptualizing Company Response to Community Protest: Principles to Achieve a Social License to Operate

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Vanclay

    (Urban and Regional Studies Institute, Faculty of Spatial Sciences, University of Groningen, 9700 Groningen, The Netherlands)

  • Philippe Hanna

    (Urban and Regional Studies Institute, Faculty of Spatial Sciences, University of Groningen, 9700 Groningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

To gain a social license to operate and grow, companies should have effective community engagement activities, social impact assessment processes, environmental and social impact management procedures, and human rights-compatible grievance redress mechanisms in place. In this way, environmental impacts and social impacts would likely be identified and addressed before issues escalate and social risk amplifies. Companies also need to treat communities with respect and be mindful of local culture. Where these things are not done, there will be no social license to operate. Protests are mechanisms by which affected communities express their concerns and signal there is no social license. As argued in our previous work on conceptualizing social protests, protests are warning signs, as well as opportunities for companies to improve. Rather than let protest actions escalate, leading to violent confrontation and considerable cost and harm, companies should engage in meaningful dialogue with protesters. Unfortunately, company response is often inadequate or inappropriate. In this paper, we identify around 175 actions companies might take in relation to community protest, and we discuss how these actions variously have the potential to escalate or de-escalate conflict, depending on whether the company engages in appropriate and genuine interaction with protesters or if repressive measures are used. While effective engagement will likely de-escalate conflict, ignoring or repressing protests tends to provoke stronger reactions from groups seeking to have their concerns heard. When companies address community concerns early, their social license to operate is enhanced. We also outline the primary international standards companies are expected to comply with, and we identify the key environmental, social, and governance issues (ESG principles) that should be respected.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Vanclay & Philippe Hanna, 2019. "Conceptualizing Company Response to Community Protest: Principles to Achieve a Social License to Operate," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-31, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:6:p:101-:d:241700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/6/101/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/6/101/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Busscher, Nienke & Parra, Constanza & Vanclay, Frank, 2018. "Land grabbing within a protected area: The experience of local communities with conservation and forestry activities in Los Esteros del Iberá, Argentina," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 572-582.
    2. Kemp, Deanna & Worden, Sandy & Owen, John R., 2016. "Differentiated social risk: Rebound dynamics and sustainability performance in mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 19-26.
    3. Suellen Lambert Lazarus, 2015. "The Equator Principles: Retaining the Gold Standard – A Strategic Vision at 10 Years," CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, in: Karen Wendt (ed.), Responsible Investment Banking, edition 127, pages 123-141, Springer.
    4. van der Ploeg, Lidewij & Vanclay, Frank, 2018. "Challenges in implementing the corporate responsibility to respect human rights in the context of project-induced displacement and resettlement," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 210-222.
    5. Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna, 2013. "Social licence and mining: A critical perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 29-35.
    6. Kemp, Deanna & Owen, John R., 2013. "Community relations and mining: Core to business but not “core business”," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 523-531.
    7. Parsons, Richard & Lacey, Justine & Moffat, Kieren, 2014. "Maintaining legitimacy of a contested practice: How the minerals industry understands its ‘social licence to operate’," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 83-90.
    8. Lidewij Van Der Ploeg & Frank Vanclay, 2013. "Credible Claim Or Corporate Spin?: A Checklist To Evaluate Corporate Sustainability Reports," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-21.
    9. Tom Ogwang & Frank Vanclay & Arjan van den Assem, 2019. "Rent-Seeking Practices, Local Resource Curse, and Social Conflict in Uganda’s Emerging Oil Economy," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Meesters, Marieke Evelien & Behagel, Jelle Hendrik, 2017. "The Social Licence to Operate: Ambiguities and the neutralization of harm in Mongolia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 274-282.
    11. Cernea, Michael, 1997. "The risks and reconstruction model for resettling displaced populations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(10), pages 1569-1587, October.
    12. KEMP, Deanna & OWEN, John R, 2017. "Corporate Readiness and the Human Rights Risks of Applying FPIC in the Global Mining Industry," Business and Human Rights Journal, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 163-169, January.
    13. Lisa Calvano, 2008. "Multinational Corporations and Local Communities: A Critical Analysis of Conflict," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 793-805, November.
    14. Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna, 2014. "‘Free prior and informed consent’, social complexity and the mining industry: Establishing a knowledge base," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 91-100.
    15. Prno, Jason, 2013. "An analysis of factors leading to the establishment of a social licence to operate in the mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 577-590.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Stephany Iriana Pasaribu & Frank Vanclay, 2021. "Children’s Rights in the Indonesian Oil Palm Industry: Improving Company Respect for the Rights of the Child," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    2. Woźniak, Justyna, 2022. "Corporate vs. Corporate foundation as a support tool in the area of social responsibility strategy – Polish mining case," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Stephany I Pasaribu & Frank Vanclay & Yongjun Zhao, 2020. "Challenges to Implementing Socially-Sustainable Community Development in Oil Palm and Forestry Operations in Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Stuart, Alice & Bond, Alan & Franco, Aldina M.A. & Baker, Julia & Gerrard, Chris & Danino, Vittoria & Jones, Kylie, 2023. "Conceptualising social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    5. Alexandra Köves & Tamás Veress & Judit Gáspár & Réka Matolay, 2021. "Conceptualizing Cuvée Organizations: Characteristics Leading towards Sustainable Decision-Making Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-24, December.
    6. Woźniak, Justyna & Jurczyk, Weronika, 2022. "SLO in CSR perspective - A comparative case study from Poland (2018–2020)," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    7. Anika Trebbin, 2021. "Land Grabbing and Jatropha in India: An Analysis of ‘Hyped’ Discourse on the Subject," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, October.
    8. Roy, Vivek & Silvestre, Bruno S. & Singh, Shubham, 2020. "Reactive and proactive pathways to sustainable apparel supply chains: Manufacturer's perspective on stakeholder salience and organizational learning toward responsible management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    9. Kerstin Schopp, 2020. "Analyzing Coping Strategies and Adaptation after Resettlement—Case Study of Ekondo Kondo, Cameroon and Ekondo Kondo Model of Adaptation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-29, November.
    10. Upadhyay, Saurabh, 2023. "Impact of the formal and informal institutions on the performance of Indian mining companies: A fuzzy set QCA analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    11. Karina Castro-Arce & Frank Vanclay, 2020. "Community-Led Green Land Acquisition: Social Innovative Initiatives for Forest Protection and Regional Development," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, April.
    12. Ayele, Seife & Shen, Wei & Mulugetta, Yacob & Worako, Tadesse Kuma, 2024. "Governance of renewable energy procurement via private suppliers: The Ethiopian experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    13. Tom Ogwang & Frank Vanclay, 2021. "Resource-Financed Infrastructure: Thoughts on Four Chinese-Financed Projects in Uganda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, March.
    14. Blesia, Jhon Urasti & Dixon, Keith & Lord, Beverley Rae, 2023. "Indigenous experiences and perspectives on a mining corporation's community relations and development activities," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    15. Chen, Chen & Frank, Vanclay, 2020. "University social responsibility in the context of economic displacement from the proposed upgrading of a higher education institution: The case of the University of Groningen Yantai campus," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    16. Alberto Diantini & Salvatore Eugenio Pappalardo & Tim Edwards Powers & Daniele Codato & Giuseppe Della Fera & Marco Heredia-R & Francesco Facchinelli & Edoardo Crescini & Massimo De Marchi, 2020. "Is this a Real Choice? Critical Exploration of the Social License to Operate in the Oil Extraction Context of the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    17. Abosede Ijabadeniyi & Frank Vanclay, 2020. "Socially-Tolerated Practices in Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Reporting: Discourses, Displacement, and Impoverishment," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, January.
    18. Pablo Aznar-Crespo & Antonio Aledo & Joaquín Melgarejo-Moreno & Arturo Vallejos-Romero, 2021. "Adapting Social Impact Assessment to Flood Risk Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-27, March.
    19. Tai Abdulrahman Alshammari & Khalid Mhasan Alshammary & Fahad Maiyah Alshammari, 2022. "Green Product and Process Innovation, Corporate Environmental Ethics and Competitive Advantages among Manufacturing Firms in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 14(2), pages 51-61.
    20. Tom Ogwang & Frank Vanclay, 2019. "Social Impacts of Land Acquisition for Oil and Gas Development in Uganda," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-15, July.
    21. Amoako, Kwame Oduro & Lord, Beverley R. & Dixon, Keith, 2021. "Narrative accounting for mining in Ghana: An old defence against a new threat?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).

    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. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    2. Demajorovic, Jacques & Lopes, Juliana Campos & Santiago, Ana Lucia Frezzatti, 2019. "The Samarco dam disaster: A grave challenge to social license to operate discourse," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 273-282.
    3. Alberto Diantini & Salvatore Eugenio Pappalardo & Tim Edwards Powers & Daniele Codato & Giuseppe Della Fera & Marco Heredia-R & Francesco Facchinelli & Edoardo Crescini & Massimo De Marchi, 2020. "Is this a Real Choice? Critical Exploration of the Social License to Operate in the Oil Extraction Context of the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    4. Zanini, Marco Tulio Fundão & Migueles, Carmen Pires & Gambirage, Cinara & Silva, Jaison, 2023. "Barriers to local community participation in mining projects: The eroding role of power imbalance and information asymmetry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PB).
    5. Santiago, Ana Lúcia & Demajorovic, Jacques & Rossetto, Dennys Eduardo & Luke, Hanabeth, 2021. "Understanding the fundamentals of the Social Licence to Operate: Its evolution, current state of development and future avenues for research," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Heffron, Raphael J. & Downes, Lauren & Ramirez Rodriguez, Oscar M. & McCauley, Darren, 2021. "The emergence of the ‘social licence to operate’ in the extractive industries?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    7. Voyer, Dr Michelle & van Leeuwen, Dr Judith, 2019. "‘Social license to operate’ in the Blue Economy," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 102-113.
    8. Saes, Beatriz Macchione & Muradian, Roldan, 2021. "What misguides environmental risk perceptions in corporations? Explaining the failure of Vale to prevent the two largest mining disasters in Brazil," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    9. Devenin, Verónica, 2021. "Collaborative community development in mining regions: The Calama Plus and Creo Antofagasta programs in Chile," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. Leena Suopajärvi & Karin Beland Lindahl & Toni Eerola & Gregory Poelzer, 2023. "Social aspects of business risk in the mineral industry—political, reputational, and local acceptability risks facing mineral exploration and mining," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 36(2), pages 321-331, June.
    11. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Moffat, Kieren & Louis, Winnifred, 2017. "Conceptualising the role of dialogue in social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 137-146.
    12. Tom Ogwang & Frank Vanclay, 2019. "Social Impacts of Land Acquisition for Oil and Gas Development in Uganda," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Richert, Claire & Rogers, Abbie & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Measuring the extent of a Social License to Operate: The influence of marine biodiversity offsets in the oil and gas sector in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 121-129.
    14. Walsh, Bríd & van der Plank, Sien & Behrens, Paul, 2017. "The effect of community consultation on perceptions of a proposed mine: A case study from southeast Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 163-171.
    15. Olivier Boiral & Iñaki Heras‐Saizarbitoria & Marie‐Christine Brotherton, 2023. "Sustainability management and social license to operate in the extractive industry: The cross‐cultural gap with Indigenous communities," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 125-137, February.
    16. Frederiksen, Tomas, 2018. "Corporate social responsibility, risk and development in the mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 495-505.
    17. Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna, 2017. "Social management capability, human migration and the global mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 259-266.
    18. Leeuwerik, R.N.C. & Rozemeijer, M.J.C. & van Leeuwen, J., 2021. "Conceptualizing the interaction of context, process and status in the Social License to operate: The case of marine diamond mining in Namibia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    19. Brueckner, Martin & Eabrasu, Marian, 2018. "Pinning down the social license to operate (SLO): The problem of normative complexity," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 217-226.
    20. Amoako, Kwame Oduro & Lord, Beverley R. & Dixon, Keith, 2021. "Narrative accounting for mining in Ghana: An old defence against a new threat?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).

    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:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:6:p:101-:d:241700. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.