• No results found

5. Conclusion and Discussion

5.1 Final propositions derived from findings

70

71 Moreover, the stories and articles relevant to the Ga-Mampa, Chiadzwa and Ruashi communities do contain more references to violent incidents and protests than the other communities. Subsequently, the reported communication by the Ga-Mampa and Chiadzwa communities involves both violent direct withholding and resistance tactics and

communication strategies whereas the Ruashi community solely reports direct withholding and resistance tactics. Therefore, the violence is not only categorized as a violent

communication strategy but also as direct resistance and withholding tactics. A similarity in these communities is that they are all located near an SOE. It seems that violent

communication strategies are not specifically related to the institutional void level, but more to the ownership structure.

Opposing working proposition three, domestic SOEs do not initiate more developmental projects. This lack of absence does not necessarily explain the violent communication strategies, because not all the influence tactics are related to developmental projects. Most of the violent incidents happen during protests and demonstrations to raise awareness for issues caused by mining, whereas other violent incidents happen between security guards and the community, such as the Chiadzwa community in Zimbabwe.

Therefore, it is proposed that fewer developmental projects are initiated by SOEs and that the local community engages more in violent communication strategies and violent direct

resistance and withholding strategies. Nevertheless, a direct relationship between these two propositions is not suggested based on the findings which result in the construction of two separate propositions.

The Ruashi community supports proposition four that a foreign SOE indeed initiates

fewer projects. On the same premise as with proposition three, a direct relationship is not

proposed between the violent direct resistance and withholding tactics and the absence of

72 developmental projects. Important to mention is that the Ruashi community only engaged in direct resistance and withholding tactics, not in violent communication strategies.

To conclude, it seems that POEs initiate more developmental projects than SOEs opposing working proposition five. It also seems that communities near POEs use less direct usage and negotiation tactics in comparison to their state-owned counterparts. However, a direct relationship between more developmental projects and fewer usage and negotiation tactics cannot be derived.

In line with proposition six, developmental projects seem to be initiated more after a threat or danger to the community occurred. This is caused by communication strategies such as raising awareness and protests, and indirect withholding and resistance tactics, such as litigation and pressuring firms through the media. Unfortunately, this does not automatically result in more direct usage and negotiation tactics after the initiation of the projects because the community is often not involved in the initiation of these projects or the development of solutions, as is the case with the Moatize and Sakania community. Additionally, the reported effectiveness of all these projects differs when looking at the different perspectives from the community, company and newspaper. This shows that it is important to include the

community perspective in addition to the company perspective when community development

and engagement are assessed. The final propositions are presented in Table 10.

73 Table 10

Final propositions

Working Propositions Final Propositions

Working proposition 1: Communities located in countries with a weak institutional environment are more likely to use direct usage and negotiation tactics, such as multi-stakeholder dialogue and partnerships, compared to countries with a stronger institutional environment

Proposition 1: Communities located in countries with a weak institutional environment are more likely to use indirect resistance and withholding tactics, such as litigation, compared to countries with a stronger institutional environment

Working proposition 2: Communities located in countries with a weak institutional environment are more likely to use violent communication strategies, such as protests and blockades, compared to countries with a stronger institutional environment

Proposition 2: Communities located in countries with a weak institutional environment are more likely to use communication strategies, such as report production, compared to countries with a stronger institutional environment

Working proposition 3: In the case of a domestic SOE, it is expected that the negative effect of a weak institutional environment is mitigated by the initiation of developmental projects, which results in less violent communication strategies and direct usage and negotiation tactics.

Proposition 3a: In the case of a domestic SOE it is expected that fewer developmental projects are initiated.

Proposition 3b: In the case of a domestic SOE it is expected that more violent communication strategies and violent direct resistance and withholding strategies are used by the community

Working proposition 4: In the case of a foreign SOE it is expected that the negative effect of a weak institutional environment is enhanced by the lack of developmental projects, which results in more violent communication strategies and direct usage and negotiation tactic

Proposition 4a: In the case of a foreign SOE it is expected that fewer developmental projects initiated

Proposition 4b: In the case of a foreign SOE it is expected more violent direct resistance and withholding strategies used by the community

Working proposition 5: In the case of an POE, it is expected that fewer developmental projects are initiated and therefore less direct usage and negotiation tactics and more violent communication strategies are used.

Proposition 5a: In the case of an POE it is expected that more developmental projects are initiated

Proposition 5b: In the case of an POE it is expected that fewer direct usage and negotiation tactics and less violent communication strategies are used.

Working proposition 6: In the case of an POE it is expected that developmental projects are initiated after a threat or danger to the community occurs, afterwards more direct usage and negotiation tactics and less violent communication strategies are used.

Proposition 6a: In the case of an POE it is expected that more communication strategies and indirect resistance and withholding tactics are used when a threat or danger to the community occurs

Proposition 6b: In the case of an POE it is expected that developmental projects are initiated after a threat or danger to the community occurs