Influence tactics used by the local community

46

47 used instead of dialogue, negotiation or other usage strategies. Therefore, this code is direct and categorized in the withholding and resistance category.

For the Partnership code, additional explanation is needed, something is coded as a partnership when a partnership with an NGO or Community Service Organization (CSO) is mentioned or an event occurs in which this partnership cooperates. These events can be litigation, symposiums or workshops. This means that sometimes one partnership is coded multiple times. It also occurred that partnerships happened which were initiated by the

enterprise. Since this results in community interaction but is not initiated by the community it is coded as Partnerships initiated by the enterprise. The succeeding code, Multi-stakeholder dialogue, entails every occasion in which different stakeholders engage in dialogue, this can be virtual, at a meeting or a conference.

Another code was altered from Directly speaking with the ‘boss’ to Directly speaking with the enterprise. It was unclear if conversations or interactions between community

members and the enterprise happened directly with the ‘boss’ or other employees working for the mine. Therefore, this original code was altered to make it more conclusive.

The following additions were made to complete the original code Report production, the additions are based on the different kinds of reports. In the Community Monitors database several articles mention phrases such as ‘a cry for help’ which try to raise awareness for the situation of the community and directly reference the mine or the company in their articles.

The articles in which a problem and the mine are specifically mentioned, to raise awareness for the problems caused by mining, are coded as Report production: raising awareness.

Besides these reports, there are official reports, such as reports, research or assessments published by organisations. These reports are coded as Report production: official not by the enterprise. Some mining enterprises conducted surveys, assessments or research by

themselves. These types of reports are coded as Report production: official by the enterprise.

48 Another code that was altered was Lobbying: visiting congressmen, into Lobbying: targeting government officials / authorities / traditional leaders. This code was more relevant and inclusive since different types of government officials or representatives were contacted.

Moreover, the following code was added in the direct usage and negotiation tactics category: Initiation of developmental projects, directly by the enterprise. This code refers to initiatives by the company with developmental projects in which the community directly communicates with the company. The code Developmental project initiated by the enterprise, but results are not as expected, refers to projects initiated by the company but where the community does not experience the result as sufficient or as expected. These projects can also be perceived as examples of greenwashing when the community states they do not see any effects.

The following codes all relate to compensation given to the communities but differ in several ways. The first code: Making proposals such as land for land, company stocks, infrastructure refers to land given by the community in exchange for land or any other form of compensation. This can occur in the case of a relocation where company stocks are given, other land is given or infrastructure is built, as compensation for giving up the resources in possession by the community. Negotiating for cash, including payments and salaries refers to negotiations in which cash is involved. This can be when negotiations about cash are done in exchange for land, but also refers to salaries paid. The next code, Reaching settlements out of court: initiation of projects, refers to projects initiated by the enterprise as a direct response to a conflict with the community. The very similar code, Reaching settlements out of court: no project, refers to occasions where the initiation of settlement out of court occurred, but no project was initiated. The last code specifically related to compensation is Proposing

compromises win-win, which relates to solutions where both the mine and community benefit.

49 The final code added refers to occasions when communities receive training or

education on how to communicate with the enterprise or empower themselves. These are often initiated by an NGO, but since it is more than solely a partnership the following separate code was developed: Training / educating the community, not initiated by the enterprise

The complete list of codes can be seen in Table 9.

Table 9

Overview codes for influence tactics used by the local community

Usage & Negotiation Withholding & Resistance

Direct Partnerships

Partnerships initiated by the enterprise Multi-Stakeholder dialogue

Directly speaking with the enterprise Making proposals such as land for land, company stocks, infrastructure Negotiating for cash

Proposing compromises win-win Reaching settlements out of court:

initiation of projects

Reaching settlements out of court: no project

Initiation of developmental projects, directly by the enterprise.

Developmental project initiated by the enterprise, but results are not as expected

Blockade

Reports of violence between community members and security guards of mining enterprises and the police

Indirect Letter-writing campaign

Shareholder resolution

Training / educating the community, not initiated by the enterprise

Boycott

Litigation: suing the company in court Lobbying: targeting government officials / authorities / traditional leaders

Pressuring firms through the media Rejecting / Revoking agreements Communication Strategies

Protest Blockade

Report production: raise awareness Report production: official not by the enterprise

Report production: official by the enterprise Shareholder resolution

Note. Overview of codes is based on the codes from the overviews and tables present in Arenas et al. (2020) and Hendry (2005).(Arenas, D.

Daniel, Murphy, M. Matthew, &, Jauregui, K. Kety, 2020, Organization Studies, 41(6), p. 746; Hendry, J. R. Jamie, 2005, Journal of Business Ethics. 61, p. 96.).

50