Search results

The chapter aims to explore the corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy domain at EU decision-making level, aiming to understand the nature of the participation shaping the CSR policy agenda co-design.

Building on a conceptual framework of participation, the chapter highlights the literature and policy views around the importance of EU CSR policy and how EU envisage the framework of the CSR policy co-design. By highlighting conceptual dimensions of the participatory governance, different levels of participation that shape the policy are evidenced. In particular, a case analysis emphasising the predominant role of the consultation approach in the decision-making process of the CSR policy is undertaken.

The findings shed light on the shift from the traditional passive participation in EU CSR policy decision making, based on purely communications towards consultation and multi-stakeholders participation. From the multi-stakeholder perspective, the EU Multi-Stakeholder Forum’s strategic relevance is observed, however, with no clear mechanisms to enforce its aims. Although the CSR policy is a core priority on the policy agenda, its voluntary approach justifies its early stages of implementation and fragmented use.

The research is qualitative, based on literature review and policy view. Further research directions could enrich the chapter.

The research contributes to the theoretical discussion around participation in a supranational context. Our insights shed light on the levels of participation and CSR policy goals and call for a critical debate on the EU policy co-design processes. Furthermore, through the lens of a case analysis, it sheds light on how EU CSR forum fits in with the current EU structure and its ‘principle of subsidiarity’, which states that decisions must be taken close to its citizens.

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.

This paper aims to examine the governance structures and models adopted by diverse types of social enterprises (SEs) in China, a rarely studied topic of theoretical and practical importance.

The analysis is based on a comparative case study of 38 typical social enterprises. Empirical data are drawn from secondary sources (bylaws, annual reports, board meeting minutes and other relevant documents) and in-depth interviews with multiple stakeholders (founders, board members, general managers and beneficiaries).

Although SEs in China are registered in various forms, their ownership frameworks nevertheless commonly lack a legislatively defined community or multi-stakeholder orientation. According to their registration status and the participation of their multiple stakeholders, SEs normally adopt three forms of governance structures: government-supervised, shareholder-controlled and member-regulated. Currently, the hybrid of stewardship and co-optation or stakeholder approach is becoming the predominant governance model among SEs in China.

This paper is based primarily on the qualitative case method to make a preliminary assessment of the governance dynamics of SEs in China. Compared with large-N quantitative methods, case studies may have limitations in terms of insufficient quantification, objectivity and generalisability of findings.

The paper sheds light on the governance issues of SEs in China, emphasising contextual effects specific to China and providing an empirical base to extend and refine previous theoretical perspectives on the governance of SEs.

The Sustainable Development Goal 12 (SDG 12) that aims at ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns is dependent on efficient and effective transport infrastructure. But many new transport infrastructure projects are delayed due to complex conflicts between multiple stakeholders with different stakes. This chapter illustrates how a multi-stakeholder participation process based on systems thinking can be used to generate a shared mental model of stakeholders in conflict. Using the systems thinking and modelling methodology, the complex problem situation is first structured by identifying and analysing the stakeholders. Then a participative approach is employed to develop a systems model that captures the underlying structure responsible for the problem situation. Finally, three strategic interventions are formulated by the stakeholders to improve the system behaviour in the long term. In this chapter, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected using structured interviews, focus groups and secondary sources. Using a New Zealand transport infrastructure project, the chapter shows that effective multi-stakeholder participation, capable of leading to some form of multi-stakeholder partnership, can help reduce delays in a transport infrastructure project. Practically, the chapter provides a framework that can reach an accommodation between conflicting stakeholders. Overall, this chapter contributes New Zealand–based empirical research to the literature on multi-stakeholder participation for achieving SDG 12 within the context of Agenda 2030.

Over recent years, the multi-stakeholder role in sustainable ecotourism within Asia has emerged as a crucial narrative for sustainable ecotourism management across countries on the continent. This trend is perhaps due to the fact that ecotourism is one of the most rapidly growing sectors within the tourism industry. However, to date, no reviews have provided a comprehensive analysis related to the role of multi-stakeholders in the achievement of ecotourism sustainability, particularly in the Asian context. This study aims to fill this knowledge gap by examining the current knowledge regarding multi-stakeholder involvement in sustainable ecotourism within Asia.

A systematic review procedure was followed. 320 articles were finalized, from which 34 related pieces of research were selected from the Scopus and Web of Science databases.

Three themes emerged from this paper. Recommendations were highlighted to enhance sustainable ecotourism. The study concluded that a more enabling research environment should be provided to improve discourse and encourage policy interventions.

No previous studies have explored the multi-stakeholder's role in achieving Asian sustainable ecotourism, indicating a critical gap to be fulfilled. This paper uniquely contributes to the field by providing a comprehensive review of the roles and challenges of multiple stakeholders in sustainable ecotourism across Asia and proposing innovative policy solutions tailored to the region's unique socio-economic and cultural context. Moreover, it puts forward potential solutions to bolster sustainable ecotourism within Asia, benefiting both stakeholders and the destination.

Co-creation of knowledge offers significant opportunities for innovation. This chapter seeks to gain understanding of the process of co-creation of knowledge for innovation and public relations in multi-stakeholder projects by exploring current insights in academic literature. The research questions look at how co-creation of knowledge for innovation has been investigated in the scholarly literature; the roles of end-users; and the modes and challenges of end-user participation and in collaboration relating to communication.

The method of this chapter is a structured literature review, following a series of rigorous steps: a search of databases, analysis of 33 articles found, summarising relevant content using a data extraction table and a data extraction continuum as analysis tools to show the range of projects discussed in the literature to create a comprehensive overview.

The findings indicate that multi-stakeholder networks can be structured for different aims. In the articles found different types of projects were investigated. Four categories of projects were found: (1) co-creation projects benefiting one company; (2) co-creation projects benefiting business-to-business value chain networks; (3) co-creation projects benefiting public entities; and (4) co-creation projects benefiting innovation network stakeholders.

Complexity is highest for multiple stakeholder co-creation projects benefiting innovation network stakeholders, where the roles between stakeholders are fluid and changing constantly. Solving common issues motivates the stakeholders to collaborate and build trust. Open innovation environments may facilitate communication and interaction.

Co-creation of knowledge requires intensive collaboration. Knowing the main challenges to address will help the functioning of co-creation collaboration networks and their public relations.

This chapter analyses the multiple embeddedness of MNEs, and their participation in solving contemporary societal issues. We aim to increase understanding on the relational processes and network dynamics present in MNEs’ participation in cross-sector partnerships.

Our study addresses the issue of the poor ecological state of the Baltic Sea and illustrates the early developments in cross-sector collaboration. We build on a single exploratory case study of the cooperation of one MNE (IBM) with an environmental NGO (BSAG) in Finland. We analyse how participation in the cross-sector collaboration manifests itself in the external and internal networks of the MNE.

We show that an initiative by the NGO to participate in environmental work was actively adopted within the MNE and led to network changes. These changes concerned both the activation of existing links and the establishment of new links with such actors as authorities and research institutes. The NGO acted as a catalyser and cultural mediator to create a bridge between the MNE and governmental actors.

There is a need to investigate cross-sector collaboration in other contexts – particularly from the perspective of MNEs and (international) business networks. Questions such as how do enduring (business and socio-political) relationships emerge from MNE’s participation in issue networks and how technology that has been developed to solve a specific societal issue may be translated into commercial solutions are especially promising. We also urge scholars to investigate the ties, texture and dynamics (including tensions) of business relationships with those of public actors and civil society.

Participation in cross-sector initiatives may grant an MNE a forerunner position in the creation of new sustainable markets and technologies. It may also create an opportunity to influence policymakers and build new socio-political networks. From the perspective of a subsidiary of an MNE, engagement with cross-sector partnerships may strengthen its voice within the MNE network.

Our study contributes to the understanding of the relationship dynamics between actors in cross-sector collaboration around a societal (environmental) issue. Our analysis illustrates the embeddedness of MNE networks, where actions in the regional and global networks (the representatives of the headquarters) overlap with and strengthen the local actions of the subsidiary.

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of key issues and concepts related to discussions of the internet, its governance, and its multi-stakeholder model.

The method adopted is to discuss definitions of internet, to identify the key characteristics of internet, to define the multi-stakeholder approach, and to discuss the results it has achieved.

The article finds that the internet is different from other networks, albeit not exactly in the ways that are commonly mentioned, and it finds that the internet's current governance mechanisms can be improved, in particular by increasing the role of more traditional governance mechanisms such as intergovernmental organizations.

The analysis and conclusions are not found in previous literature, and they are meant to provoke further research and discussion.