CSR and shared value in multi-stakeholder relationships in South African mining context

Abstract

Purpose

Mining is surrounded by controversy, in spite of corporate social responsibility (CSR) projects. This study aims to explore the theory on CSR and shared value (SV) and identified a gap in an approach to implementing CSR and SV. Perceptions of multi-stakeholder relationships in the South African mining context were elicited.

Design/methodology/approach

A qualitative research design included 17 semi-structured interviews with 3 stakeholder groups, including members of the community, government representatives and mining management and secondary data of company documents on CSR.

Findings

The qualitative research revealed important gaps between CSR and SV theoretical frameworks, normative ethical approaches and operationalizing of these at the mine to the detriment of effective multi-stakeholder relationships.

Practical implications

Mines have to engage with the community and government stakeholders proactively and build relationships.

Social implications

Ethical normative approaches have to be considered. Government has to take note of this study’s findings with regards to negative consequences of institutionalized CSR for trust between mines and communities.

Originality/value

The literature review differentiates theoretically between normative and instrumental stakeholder theory, philanthropic and business case CSR, SV and their implicit normative ethical approaches. The semi-structured interviews revealed legacy issues and lack of engagement between mine and community as main barriers to multi-stakeholder relationships and raised important questions on normative ethical approaches to CSR and SV. The direct and indirect barriers by government, community and mine management are identified and differentiated.

Citation

Buddu, A. and Scheepers, C.B. (2022), "CSR and shared value in multi-stakeholder relationships in South African mining context", Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 368-387. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-04-2020-0129