FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W50268106> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W50268106 abstract "Large, profit-seeking corporations are today expected to apply principles of sustainability and socialresponsibility to their business operations, and to be publicly accountable for their social andenvironmental impacts. This expectation appears to be a response to public concern regardingcorporationsr perceived power and their control over peoplers lives and the environment, as thesecorporations have extended their influence globally. In turn, corporations have sought todemonstrate that they can be responsible with this power and control, and concurrently to persuadegovernments that regulating corporate responsibilities is unnecessary (Conley, 2005; Sklair, 2001).Thus, corporate discourses have evolved to accommodate the notion of lcommunity engagementr.The outcome is a dynamic landscape of ongoing, interdiscursive tensions between the profit-driven,individualistic focus of capitalism, and social concerns relating to notions of community andenvironment.Few companies must navigate these tensions as carefully as minerals companies, whose operationsare commonly in socially and environmentally sensitive locations, often interacting with Indigenouscommunities (Ballard a Banks, 2003; Danielson, 2006; Whiteman a Mamen, 2002). Mineralscompanies, therefore, appear to be embracing notions antithetical to traditional industry discourses.However, macrostructural rationalities inherent in the ideology of capitalism may constrain theceding of control and power. Thus, social initiatives are generally rationalised on the basis ofpresumed, but unproven, economic benefits (Margolis a Walsh, 2003; McWilliams, Siegel, aWright, 2006), implicitly privileging the dominant economic paradigm (Korhonen, 2002).Meanwhile, lcommunity engagementr metaphorically suggests a consensual, social union of twoparties, with the promise of enduring partnership, mutual dedication, and perhaps sharing ofresources. However, apparent consensus can hide subtle forms of power, especially as it operatesthrough language (Fairclough, 1989, p. 2; van Dijk, 1997a, pp. 17-20). The task of this study,therefore, is to unpack the emerging discourse of lcommunity engagementr, to consider what itmeans to the people concerned, and how it is socially and discursively constructed.This study concentrates on two case studies of large minerals processing sites in Australia. Thecentral research question, addressed from interpretive and critical perspectives, is: How do thepeople concerned understand lcommunity engagementr, and what shapes these understandings?Firstly, I explore how the people concernedmrelevant site personnel and local communitymembersmunderstand, experience, and interpret lcommunity engagementr at a local level.Secondly, I investigate how competing discourses construct these understandings, experiences, andinterpretations. At each site, I focus on a contentious issue: relations with the local Indigenouscommunity at Site A, and artesian water use at Site B.This study also contributes to literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and stakeholdertheory. CSR conventionally represents the idea that corporations have moral responsibilities tosociety, beyond legal or contractual responsibilities (Jones, 1980; McWilliams et al., 2006).Stakeholder theory conventionally examines how corporations can affect, and be affected by,several groups of people (Freeman, 1984). While these definitions are contestable, the dominantperspectives appear to be those that adopt a utilitarian, instrumental, and economic worldview.lCommunity engagementr seems to exemplify interdiscursivity, in which sociopolitical struggleschallenge existing hegemonic relations, and where different discourses, genres, or whole systems oflanguage overlap into new discursive orders (Fairclough, 1992, pp. 115-120; 1995, p. 94; Wodak,2001, pp. 66-67). Interdiscursivity represents ongoing contestation, which legitimates and preservessome elements of dominant discourses while accommodating some elements of opposing discourses(Livesey, 2002).My methodological approach triangulates phenomenography and critical discourse analysis, withina case study framework. Phenomenography is an interpretive methodology that investigates thedifferent ways in which people experience, perceive, understand, and conceptualise variousphenomena (Marton, 1994). Critical discourse studies, meanwhile, are explicitly committed tojustice, democracy, equality, and fairness (McKenna, 2004; van Dijk, 1993), by considering howhistorical and cultural systems of power and knowledge constitute people, their worlds, and socialpractice, and how, in return, practice is constitutive of discourse (Alvesson a Karreman, 2000;Fairclough, 1992, 1995; Gubrium a Holstein, 2000).The empirical analysis begins by analysing how companies construct community engagementdiscourse, via the verbal and visual texts in lsustainabilityr reports and company websites. I findthat company literature appears to assert lfactsr, and implicitly privileges corporate and managerial,economic values. It also appears to deny the companiesr agency role in constructing reality,presents an impression of harmony and congruence between company and community interests, andtends to marginalise dissent.For the case studies themselves, I describe, analyse, and interpret the empirical material gainedfrom three visits to each site. Firstly, from documentary research and observation, I describe thecontext at each site in terms of discursive tensions. Within the companies, I observed tensionsbetween social concern and cultural sensitivity on the one hand, versus functionality and control onthe other. Within the communities, I observed tensions between dissent and social concern, versusacquiescence and individualism. Secondly, I derive phenomenographic conceptions of communityengagement based on interviews with company staff and community members. Conceptions varyfrom lmaximising self-interestr to lculturally sensitive relationship-buildingr and la process ofcollaborative dialoguer. Thirdly, I use textual analysis to interrogate these conceptions, and toinvestigate their discursive construction. I find that conceptions appear to be more comprehensivewhen participants articulate statements in relatively collectivist, dialogic, ethical/normative, andheteroglossic ways. I then find that both company and community participantsr worldviews areconstructed by multiple, sometimes oppositional, discourses, but that the most influential discourseis Business and management. Where the issue is Indigenous relations, company and communityparticipants discourses are more oppositional, apparently based upon conflicting worldviews.Integrating the findings, I develop a new model of community engagement as socially constructedthrough discourse." @default.
• W50268106 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W50268106 creator A5081271330 @default.
• W50268106 date "2008-06-01" @default.
• W50268106 modified "2023-10-05" @default.
• W50268106 title "Constructions of ‘community engagement’ in the Australian minerals industry: A critical study" @default.
• W50268106 cites W1073794991 @default.
• W50268106 cites W116231786 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1242564121 @default.
• W50268106 cites W132276886 @default.
• W50268106 cites W147512136 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1479796334 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1480315268 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1481483215 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1482211996 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1482286954 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1482305568 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1482984915 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1486870811 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1492039495 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1498069509 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1498488428 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1500312903 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1501156570 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1508383183 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1509341271 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1513233845 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1515277068 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1515810707 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1516437194 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1520749229 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1520920886 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1520944543 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1521439116 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1522654972 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1523105692 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1528113760 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1532083114 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1532436217 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1536888678 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1536953681 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1539410358 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1545106979 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1547073616 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1554983744 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1555675111 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1559307069 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1559924327 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1560518751 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1566172004 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1567172554 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1569468819 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1570770032 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1571009574 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1571471337 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1572302632 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1581762975 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1584307459 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1589405932 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1590154464 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1592279276 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1595051401 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1595311378 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1597729013 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1597750586 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1597981688 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1608089142 @default.
• W50268106 cites W166315768 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1666523419 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1681673286 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1686678914 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1715455929 @default.
• W50268106 cites W172274565 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1728979049 @default.
• W50268106 cites W176584825 @default.
• W50268106 cites W177514235 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1785140710 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1826567579 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1828617744 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1831297970 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1854257937 @default.
• W50268106 cites W186312732 @default.
• W50268106 cites W195377675 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1964099523 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1964798260 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1966138051 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1967270938 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1967541354 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1970602918 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1971205166 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1971208991 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1971796048 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1971801029 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1976063135 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1976431771 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1977485890 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1977527039 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1978399955 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1978521871 @default.
• W50268106 cites W1981242024 @default.

• next