Search results

This study aims to explore the challenges and complexities of interaction in international stakeholder networks within the context of projects focused on the implementation of sustainable development goals (SDGs). In particular, it examines the challenges faced by stakeholders in a network from a developed country during interaction in the context of a developing country.

Using a qualitative approach, this study analyses interview data collected from the key managers of an international consulting company in charge of a water supply and sanitation project in Nepal. The primary data is triangulated with secondary data, such as project reports and related academic articles.

This study illustrates how interaction in international stakeholder networks affects and is interrelated with SDGs, as well as how aiming to achieve one specific goal can stimulate the implementation of other sustainable goals. Further, this research shows how project managers from a developed country had to adapt to the specifics of the developing country context and how their sustainability project influenced the well-being of local communities by improving environmental and social sustainability.

The research suggests that challenges in stakeholder interaction may arise because of differences in process management methods used by the international stakeholders involved in the project and country-context specifics, such as corruption, imperfect national regulations, cultural specifics, effects of climate change, etc.

The paper contributes to the literature on international multi-stakeholder interaction between actors from developed and developing countries. Furthermore, it adds to the literature on stakeholder networking by highlighting the importance of engaging in a dialogue with local communities during the conceptualisation stages of both sustainability and SDG implementation because of diverging worldviews and practices.

This paper examines the accountability and governance mechanisms and the challenges in a multi-stakeholder partnership seeking to implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a developing country (DC), namely Tanzania.

The paper draws on work on the shift from government to governance to meta-governance to examine the SDGs framework's governance regime. The data stems from documentation, focussed group discussions and face-to-face interviews with key stakeholders involved in the localisation of SDGs in Tanzania.

Despite the emphasis given by promoters of SDGs on the need for multi-stakeholder engagement, and network and market-based governance, Tanzania's hierarchical governance framed in national legislations dominated the localisation of the SDGs. The national-level meta-governance structures were somewhat dysfunctional, partly due to a lack of well-designed coordination mechanisms for collaborative engagement with key stakeholders. The limited involvement of different meta-governors, and particularly network and market-based governance arrangements, has had severe implications for achieving the SDGs in DCs in general and Tanzania, in particular.

The paper calls for a more explicit SDG policy and strategy, alongside strengthening institutional structures and related governance arrangements in Tanzania, to promote the realisation of the SDGs. For the SDGs framework to succeed, the authors suggest that, in addition to adopting SDG friendly policies, the Tanzanian government should devise plans for financial resources, strategies for empowering and engaging with key stakeholders and promote an integrative governance system that underpins accountability at the local level.

Focussing on Tanzania, the paper sheds light on how context in DCs, interactions between state and non-state actors, modes of governance and accountability mechanisms shape the localisation of SDGs and realising the SDGs' agenda. The implementation in Tanzania focussed on priorities in the development plan, thereby neglecting some important SDGs. This raises doubts about the possibility of meeting the SDGs by 2030. The localisation of SDGs remained within the top-down governance structure, as Tanzania's government failed to enact the policy and strategy for multi-stakeholder partnership consistent with the SDGs' principle of “leave no-one behind”. Consequently, meta-governors' efforts and ability to monitor and demand accountability from the government was constrained by the political context, the governance system and regulations enacted to side-line them.

The purpose of this paper is to address school–NGO interactions by analyzing the power of foundations – a specific type of third sector organization or NGO in education.

Data are collected through a quantitative survey, qualitative interviews, official documents, reports and websites. Social network analysis and grounded theory are used to analyze the data with the aim to develop a theoretical approach.

The study identifies three dimensions, i.e. relational, structural and discursive dimensions of power. Based on the analysis of an illustrative multi-stakeholder initiative, the paper highlights the role of foundations in framing educational settings, concepts and structures of the education system as such.

The three-dimensional power perspective offered in this paper is particularly useful for scholars investigating school–NGO interactions or multi-stakeholder partnerships in education. Furthermore, it is of crucial importance for practitioners, school principals and education administrators dealing with school–NGO interactions given that foundations seem to be increasingly able to draw on new sources of power in these interactions.

While the number and power of the third sector in education continues to rise worldwide, there is wide consensus that NGO power in education has, to date, hardly been researched. This paper contributes to this dearth of research by uncovering foundations’ different sources of power and by developing a theoretical approach for analyzing the power of third-sector organizations in education.

Drawing on the service-dominant logic and taking a multi-stakeholder brand value co-creation perspective, this paper aims to investigate whether positioning a place brand around sustainability helps or hinders stakeholders’ ability to co-create value for themselves and the brand.

This paper is based on a case study of Bristol’s city branding following its award of European Green Capital, drawing on 29 in-depth interviews with key informants from multiple stakeholder groups. These interviews are supported by secondary material and field observations.

The findings evidence a “tale of two cities”. When sustainability is used as a positioning device, tensions are identified across three elements of brand co-creation: brand meanings; extraordinary versus mundane brand performances; and empowerment and disempowerment in branding governance. These tensions create stakeholder experiences of both engagement and estrangement.

This paper is based on one case study and evaluates face-to-face stakeholder interactions. Future research could access further stakeholders, across multiple cities and also examine their digital engagement.

Positioning a brand as sustainable (i.e. green) requires strong commitment to other ethical principles in practice. Brand practitioners and marketers may benefit from advancing stakeholders’ everyday brand performances to reduce disillusionment.

Rallying around virtuous associations, i.e. sustainability, does not in itself facilitate the generation of value for stakeholders and the brand, but instead can illuminate power imbalances and tensions in stakeholder interactions that result in a co-destruction of value.

Past integrated marketing communications (IMC) frameworks have established brand contacts as important sources of information and feedback. This paper aims to discuss how the presence of multiple brand stakeholders and the proliferation of digital media increase the amount of brand information generated exponentially. When a firm fails to harness this information, it risks misalignment between brand identity and brand image, which, in turn, tarnishes brand-equity.

Past IMC frameworks are reviewed and extended to identify specific brand contact points between multiple stakeholders that hold significant potential to dynamically reconfigure brand identity. Theoretical propositions regarding the IMC function’s role in managing these contact points to generate brand-equity are offered.

The brand contacts described and their successful integration into a firm’s brand-equity strategy extend current IMC-based brand-equity models and suggest fruitful, novel avenues for creating brand-equity. Further, these brand contacts offer practical examples of how the scope of marketing communications can be redefined.

This paper contributes to the body of research on the elevation of IMC to a strategic level function. In addition to the synergistic communication of the brand offering, IMC needs to play a pivotal role in coordinating the contacts between the brand and stakeholders, and in extrapolating relevant brand insights from these contacts.

This chapter examines factors that maximize collaboration among various stakeholders with the purpose of health policy making in Turkey. The field research reveals that policy networks have been formed in the sub-areas of public health, healthcare construction, and health tourism in the years between 2011 and 2015. Content analysis of 24 semi-structured interviews with policy and professional experts is conducted to assess Network Collaborative Capacity, built upon three dimensions, namely, structural, relational, and institutional. The findings reveal that networks differ in their capacity to collaborate as well as their impact on policy making resulting in three distinct models of network policy making. In the cases under investigation, network impact takes the form of (a) policy innovation through expertise sharing and evidence-based policy making associated with particularly high levels of relational capacity; (b) policy effectiveness through contract enforcement within a clear legal framework associated with particularly high levels of institutional capacity; and (c) policy coherence through organizational-knowledge-sharing and actor coordination. Findings also suggest that institutionalization in the form of network embeddedness in the surrounding political and economic environment is crucial for maintaining a collaborative momentum as well as achieving policy effectiveness at the stage of policy implementation. Based on these findings, further studies should focus on the institutionalization of policy networks, particularly in those middle-income countries such as Turkey that aim and often fail to address various policy challenges through short-lived practices of multi-stakeholder action. Finally, this study emphasizes the importance of incorporating neo-institutional approaches to network analysis.

This paper aims to propose a framework to map partnerships as practiced in higher education institutions (HEIs) and trace the current mode of engagement between HEIs and their partners. This paper reflects on the alignment between current practices and what is understood in the literature as “true” partnerships. We are interested in the different modes of engagement that are labeled by the HEIs as partnerships and consider the plasticity of the term. The interest is in how the term is operationalized by HEIs and how variations in approach can be accounted for while still maintaining some stability and common understanding of the term partnership.

Drawing on extant literature in the field of cross-sector partnerships, a three-dimensional framework is proposed to map partnerships as practiced in HEIs. Furthermore, this paper draws on insights gained from the partnership stories of 13 leading principles of responsible management education (PRME) signatories to evidence examples of how this framework can help us to categorize the different types of engagement that the HEIs call partnerships. These case stories were gathered in the fall of 2019, based on a brief inquiry form sent to the 39 PRME signatories who were part of the PRME Champions Cycle 2018–2019.

This paper sees cases where faculty drive interaction on sustainable development goal-related issues with external stakeholders, but where the impact of these interactions seems to reside within the main business of the HEI (teaching and research). In contrast, much partnering work addresses broader social impacts. Of particular, interest in partnerships that seek to address a specific local issue, first and foremost and doing so in such a way as to apply the unique resources of the HEI working in multi-stakeholder networks. This paper also notes important variation between individual faculty-driven initiatives and initiatives where the school provides a strategic framework to support these efforts.

By focusing on the academic sector and its stakeholder partnerships, this paper contributes to the literature on cross-sector partnerships. In particular, the specifics of this context and the importance of, for example, academic freedom have been under-researched in this field. Furthermore, the framework presented is novel in that it helps us to grasp the nuances of external university partnerships that can form out of individual, programmatic and other institutional levels.

From a practice perspective, the framework offers a useable tool for HEI partnership managers to position themselves and their activities and reflect more on how they organize external partnerships. Further, this tool offers a more precise framework for the discussion on partnerships within the PRME to sharpen the partnership instrument and bring more clarity about what is meant by the partnership for the goals.

The paper offers a novel partnership portfolio framework that contributes both to theory and practice. The framework aids in mapping the locus of benefits/outcomes and the material and affective commitments made by the HEI to bring these collaborations about. In dimensionalizing partnerships in this way, this paper can conceptualize a balanced portfolio in an HEI’s partnerships for the goals.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how value co-creation in the Indonesian Organic Community overcomes the resource limitations of small enterprises through the integration of collective resources to drive innovation. A framework is derived and developed from service-dominant logic (SDL) and supported by consumer culture theory (CCT). It also offers a specific strategy that is required for the growth and sustainability of the organic-products entrepreneurship.

Applied thematic analysis was performed by combining observation and in-depth interviews to multi-actors in the community.

The result shows that a collaboration network with external actors and the dynamic interaction within the community drive resource integration forming value co-creation platform and lead to innovation in product, process, marketing and organization.

A combination of SDL and CCT provides a new marketing perspective of value co-creation concept. SDL offers an understanding of multi-actor value co-creation that is built from the knowledge and skills-based resources. CCT unveils the roles of the community in developing the positive perception of organic products in the market ecosystem.

While Chapter 3 highlights contextual conditions that foster the formation of policy networks, Chapter 5 highlights contextual conditions that impede the formation of policy networks. The overarching question of this chapter is the following: What are the factors that hinder cross-sectoral arrangements from becoming collaborative in complex policy settings such as low- and middle-income countries with a tradition in centralized policy making? In an attempt to address this question, this study provides a detailed assessment of all cross-sectoral arrangements within the Turkish health sector focusing on the post-2003 period. Within this framework, three types of networks will be examined including (a) consultative networks where stakeholders come together primarily to legitimize certain government policies within national level health policy platforms; (b) cluster networks where stakeholder interaction falls short of becoming collaborative due to diverging interests and persistent competition at the regional level; and (c) patronage networks where governmental actors and a selected number of NGOs linked by clientelism serve as a bridge between the ruling party and its constituency at the community level. Unlike policy networks, these actor constellations observed at different levels of governance do not serve the purpose of policy collaboration. On the contrary, they have the potential to trigger politicization, fragmentation, and even polarization at the social level, especially through the distribution of selective benefits. Ultimately, this chapter aims to rise to the challenge of policy collaboration by assessing the impediments to network collaboration based on insights from the Turkish case.