The multiple boomerang strategy : constructing corporate responsibility for microplastic pollution : exploring the indirect influencing strategies of ‘Beat the Microbead’ advocacy network for changing industry practices

(1)

THE MULTIPLE BOOMERANG STRATEGY:

CONSTRUCTING CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR

MICROPLASTIC POLLUTION

Exploring the indirect influencing strategies of ‘Beat the Microbead’ advocacy

network for changing industry practices to phase out microplastics

Master thesis

Political Science (MSc) International relations

Iiris Kouhia (11118164) July 2019

Research project: Transnational Sustainability Governance

Supervisor: Dr. Philip Schleifer Second reader: Dr. Conny Roggeband

(2)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BTMB Beat the Microbead

CSR Corporate social responsibility ECHA European Chemical Agency EU European Union

IO Intergovernmental organization MNC Multinational corporation NGO Non-governmental organization PSF Plastic Soup Foundation

SM Social movement

TNA Transnational advocacy network TNC Transnational corporation

(5)

4

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Problem of plastic pollution

Plastic pollution is a contemporary environmental challenge, potentially risking ‘near permanent contamination of natural environment’ (Taylor, 2018). WWF identifies plastic pollution as one of the main issues with respect to ocean conservation (WWF, 2017). It has been estimated that every year between 4.8 and 12.7 million tons of plastic waste ends up in marine environments (Jambek et al., 2015). According to some estimates, 94% of plastic debris in ocean environments are microplastics (Pettipas et al., 2016). Nevertheless, the consumption of plastics is still increasing (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017). If the current trends continue, by 2050 in a business-as-usual scenario, the ocean environments will contain more plastics than fish (Ibid.).

Plastic pollution resulting from human activity is an inherently transnational environmental issue – the problems are not confined within a specific territory or under a certain sovereign authority. For the complexity and pervasive nature of the problem, it has been suggested that the current plastic crisis cannot be solved by a single solution, but problem-solving necessitates holistic and collaborative multi-level approaches (Vince & Hardesty, 2018). Although many scholars recognise the need for an international agreement and legal constraints for plastic pollution (see for example Haward, 2018; Vince & Stoett, 2018; Löhr et al., 2017; Simon & Schulte, 2017; Xanthos & Walker, 2017; Tibbetts, 2015; Gold et al., 2013), developing an international instrument or regulatory framework is timely and requires unanimity, and therefore cannot offer a solution quickly enough to answer to the growing problem. In the meantime, non-state actors, CSR initiatives and community-driven efforts play a crucial role for curbing the plastic problem (Vince & Hardesty, 2018). Increasingly, businesses are assuming regulatory roles and emerging as sources of environmental governance by setting up voluntary standards and corporate responsibility initiatives. However, some argue that most business-driven 'solutions' only focus on initiatives that are profitable or increase brand-value (Dauvergne & Lister, 2012).

Simultaneously, NGOs and social movements are calling out companies to take on more responsibility for the plastic problem (Schleeter, 2018). Many scholars recognise community-driven methods as important factors for driving business to take action against plastic pollution (Locritani et al., 2019; Vince & Hardesty, 2018; Vince & Stoett, 2018; Gold et al., 2018; Simon & Schulte, 2017; Vince & Hardesty, 2017). With respect to microplastic

(6)

pollution and activism against microplastic ingredients in consumer goods, the advocacy network around ’Beat the Microbead’ campaign has been considered rather successful at catalysing both private regulation and legislative efforts (Dauvergne 2018a; Dauvergne, 2018b; Xanthos & Walker, 2018).

1.2. Research puzzle and research question

The research puzzle of this thesis emerges from the observation that over the past few years, many multinational corporations have rather suddenly began to take steps to curb plastic pollution. By the end of 2018, over 70 multinational brands have set up voluntary initiatives to curb plastics (European Commission, 2019). Falkner argues that private governance, such as voluntary plastic pledges or CSR initiatives tackling plastic pollution, is "a direct result of pressure exerted by activist groups on corporations" (Falkner, 2003: 74). Following this line of argument, this thesis investigates the relationship between activist strategies and corporate responsibility initiatives regarding plastic pollution, aiming to explain how transnational advocacy networks can catalyse corporate responsibility for environmental problems.

Often, advocacy groups make use of different influencing strategies against the same firm simultaneously, sometimes even focusing on the same concern. (Van Huijstee & Glasbergen, 2010: 592). However, sometimes the direct route of influence to the company becomes ‘blocked’ and in order to steer corporate action, the advocacy group needs to find alternative ways to gain leverage over the corporation. In order to gain influence over the target, the advocacy group uses intermediate actors or stakeholders, through which it is able to get to the target indirectly. This process of indirect influencing through intermediaries could be understood as the 'boomerang pattern' of strategic influence. Keck and Sikkink (1998) developed the so-called ‘boomerang model’ to explain how TNAs influence their ultimate target indirectly via preliminary targets, when the direct route to the ultimate target is blocked. MacAteer and Pulver (2009) applied this model further to TNA-corporate relationships, explaining how TNAs can influence corporate behaviour through intermediate actors and by using local NGOs, exert leverage on the company. Furthermore, Den Hond and De Bakker (2012) theorized that the ‘boomerang politics’ of TNAs aiming to influence corporate conduct relies on the stakeholders through which the advocacy group aims to influence the MNCs indirectly. More recently, Reinecke and Ansari (2016) argued that by using strategic framing practices, activist groups can increase corporate responsibilisation for social and environmental problems. This thesis aims to take the academic debate one step

(7)

6

further, by exploring the ways in which TNAs can construct corporate responsibility by influencing the field in which these companies operate. More specifically, this thesis will focus on explaining how advocacy groups can increase corporate responsibility for microplastic pollution by influencing the major stakeholders of the industry. This translates into a research question, stipulated as follows:

"How transnational advocacy networks can catalyse corporate responsibility for microplastics through multiple ‘boomerang strategy’ by influencing the field in which companies operate?"

1.3. Research approach and key findings

The research focuses on the relationship between transnational activism and corporate responsibility initiatives regarding plastics, focusing on the issue of microplastic pollution. The research question is approached by a case study analysis, focusing on the advocacy network around ‘Beat the Microbead’ campaign. ‘Beat the Microbead’ has been recognised as an influential campaign by several scholars (Dauvegrne, 2018a; Dauvergne, 2018b; Xanthos & Walker, 2018; Schnurr et al., 2018), and therefore has been chosen as a representative case for the empirical analysis of this research. Whilst measuring the 'real' impact of influencing strategies especially with qualitative research methods is rather problematic, this thesis has identified and highlighted some patterns in the relationship between TNAs and CSR, exposing how transnational advocacy networks can ‘construct’ corporate responsibility for pervasive environmental issues, such as plastic pollution.

The thesis finds that by influencing the major stakeholders of the corporations, TNAs are capable of catalysing corporate responsibility even if they are not directly engaging with the ultimate targets, the corporations themselves. By using indirect influencing routes or ‘boomerang patterns’ through stakeholders, TNAs are able to ‘craft resonance’ with the most important stakeholders. By crafting resonance with the stakeholders, advocacy groups are able to influence the way we recognize the responsibilities of private actors in a society. In essence, this thesis holds that TNAs can steer corporate behaviour through changing the field in which the firms operate by targeting their major stakeholders, thus increasing corporate responsibility efforts for environmental issues.

Emerging from the empirical analysis, the thesis finds Beat the Microbead has made use of multiple indirect routes of influence, or ‘multiple boomerang strategy’ in order to

(8)

catalyse field-level change, namely changing the industry practices to phase out microplastics. Essential to the effectiveness of the indirect influencing routes was 'crafting resonance' with stakeholders by means of strategic framing. Reframing the microplastic issue from a global environmental concern to a health hazard affecting our everyday lives reinforced the tangibility and salience of the issue, consequently resulting to increased pressure on the industry to solve it. The empirical analysis highlights that by reframing an environmental issue as a matter of public health, advocacy groups are able to construct corporate responsibilisation. More specifically, from the case of Beat the Microbead, it appears that the strategic reframing of the microplastic issue as a matter of public health has increased consumer support, facilitated regulatory modification and enforced norm diffusion regarding microplastics, thus increasing the public pressure for increased corporate responsibility action.

1.4. Academic and societal relevance

The findings of the research have both societal and theoretical implications. Firstly, the thesis aims to expand the current academic debate around TNAs and CSR. Keck and Sikkink (1998) theorized that in order to catalyse policy change, transnational advocacy networks can make use of indirect influencing routes through preliminary targets, when the direct route to their ultimate target becomes blocked. Furthermore, MacAteer & Pulver (2009) have investigated how local NGOs in a transnational advocacy network make use of ‘boomerang politics’ to target MNCs. Moreover, Den Hond and De Bakker (2012) have further investigated how advocacy groups can influence corporations by targeting their stakeholders. The thesis proposes that instead of one ‘boomerang pattern’, there are multiple simultaneous ‘boomerang patterns’ through which TNAs can influence their ultimate target, thus forming a ‘multiple boomerang strategy’.

More recently, Reinecke and Ansari (2016) have explained how advocacy groups can make use of strategic framing to catalyse corporate responsibilisation for pervasive social and environmental problems. According to Reinecke and Ansari, "while political CSR scholarship has enlightened us about how regulatory voids have led to a political role for business, we know less about the process of how business is made responsible for societal problems." (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016: 300). Moreover, Pahl and Wyles (2017: 1404) state that "whilst people are central to marine litter and microplastics, research on the human dimension is underresearched." Following these notions, this thesis aims to take the academic

(9)

8

research further, by explaining how TNAs can make use of multiple simultaneous indirect influencing routes, or ‘boomerang patterns’, changing the field in which firms operate in order to catalyse corporate responsibility for microplastics. The research aims to further explain the dynamic relationship between TNAs and CSR. Moreover, the findings of the research could have also further societal implications. More specifically, the research highlights the ways in which corporate responsibility for environmental problems is constructed through strategic and dynamic interaction of activist groups and the major stakeholders of the industry. By emphasizing how corporate responsibility is constructed through indirect influencing strategies, the thesis aims to expose novel avenues for increasing corporate responsibility efforts for environmental problems, such as plastic pollution. This notion could have further implications for other environmental advocacy networks, suggesting that by reframing the issue as a matter of health rather than an environmental concern could increase the salience of their grievances and consequently advance their activist efforts.

1.5. Roadmap of the thesis

Firstly, the first chapter introduces the problem of plastic pollution and the global advocacy against plastic pollution as well as the emerging research puzzle of corporate plastic pledges, giving rise to the research question of: "How transnational advocacy networks can catalyse

corporate responsibility for microplastics through multiple ‘boomerang strategy’ by influencing the field in which companies operate?" The chapter will also discuss the

academic and societal contribution this thesis aims to provide.

The second chapter focuses on the existing academic research from the field, providing a literature review on transnational advocacy networks. The chapter will also explain the relevance of non-state actors in IR scholarship and their current role in solving the problem. The chapter explains the role of corporations and private governance in solving the plastic pollution issue, thus, justifying the focus of the thesis research. The chapter concludes by explaining how this thesis aims to further expand the academic debate and our understandings of the relationship between environmentally focused TNAs and MNCs.

Chapter 3 will lay down the theoretical framework of the thesis, by discussing the theoretical framework by Georgallis (2017), explaining how social movements drive CSR initiatives. The chapter also discusses the limitations of his framework, and aims to enhance his notions by combining it with other academic contributions from MacAteer and Pulver

(10)

(2009) and Den Hon and De Bakker (2012). The chapter synthesises these theoretical findings and creates a framework for explaining the indirect influencing strategies of TNAs as a ‘multiple boomerang strategy’, which serves the basis for the empirical analysis.

Chapter 4 will provide an overview of the methods used in this thesis. The chapter will explain the research approach and design more in detail, and how the case was chosen. The chapter will also explain the methods used for the data collection. Lastly, the chapter will discuss the inherent methodological limitations associated with qualitative research relying on a single-case analysis, and how the thesis has aimed to overcome those methodological challenges.

Chapters 5, 6 and 7 are forming the empirical part of this research. The empirical analysis of this research will investigate the plastic pollution phenomenon and the global advocacy against microplastics, aimed at catalysing corporate responsibility for the issue. The empirical part of this research is organized as follows. Firstly, Chapter 5 will provide an overview of the plastic pollution problem and the global movement against plastic pollution, introducing the 'Beat the Microbead' campaign, which is the focus in the case study analysis, situating the campaign in the global movement against plastic pollution. Subsequently, Chapter 6 will explore the emergence of this movement and why the campaign changed its initial strategy, moving from direct action to indirect influencing strategies, consequently formulating a 'boomerang strategy'. This

Later, Chapter 7 will provide a more detailed analysis of this 'boomerang strategy'; exploring how BTMB has influenced the major stakeholders – public policy, the industry, consumers, and the public opinion – in order to catalyse corporate action against microplastics. The chapter will conclude that a combination of indirect routes decoupled with a successful reframing of the issue, framing it as no longer only an environmental issue but also a concern for public health, has increased the issue salience and consequently corporate responsiveness. Later on, the chapter will reflect what implications these findings could have, suggesting that the results have both academic and social relevance in advancing our understanding of how corporate responsibility is constructed by advocacy groups. Lastly, Chapter 8 will conclude with a discussion of the findings of the thesis and their implications. The concluding chapter will also consider the limitations of this thesis and suggestions for future research.

(11)

10

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter focuses on providing a short literature review on the academic debate in IR scholarship and social movement literature surrounding non-state actors, TNAs and corporations. Firstly, the chapter focuses on explaining and defining transnational advocacy networks and social movements, laying down the conceptual framework for this research. Then, the chapter briefly explains the role of non-state actors in plastic pollution governance and the relationship between advocacy groups and private governance, holding that advocacy groups are an important driver of CSR efforts. Lastly, the chapter explains how this thesis aims to further this debate and our understanding about the relationship between TNAs and private environmental governance.

2.1. Transnational advocacy networks

Keck and Sikkink (1998) define transnational advocacy networks as "networks of activists, distinguishable largely by the centrality of principled ideas or values in motivating their formation" (Keck & Sikkink, 1998: 1). They recognise that "A transnational advocacy network includes those relevant actors working internationally on an issue, who are bound together by shared values, a common discourse, and dense exchanges of information and services" (1998: 2). Traditionally, advocacy groups and social movement campaigns calling for social change have mainly targeted the state government and the domestic political decision-making. According to the early scholarly research on these networks, their main aim was to influence and change the behaviour of states and international organizations (Keck & Sikkink, 1998: 2). Over the recent decades, activists especially in human rights and environmental issues have expanded their scope of influence to include a large variety of non-domestic targets, such as international organizations and multinational corporations (MacAteer & Pulver, 2009). Schurman (2004: 247) calls this phenomena the 'decentering of the state,' indicating that domestic political arenas are becoming less central targets of social movement influencing, whilst other institutions and arenas are becoming increasingly important. Simultaneously, multinational corporations are becoming increasingly powerful in global political economy and consequently important targets of advocacy. Consequently, as corporations and other non-state actors have become increasingly influential in global politics, emerging as powerful actors assuming regulatory roles, transnational advocacy networks are also aiming to influence and transform their behaviour and practices.

(12)

2.1.1. Conceptualising advocacy groups, networks & social movements

Whilst recognising that social sciences research does provide more nuanced understandings between the central concepts relating to advocacy, differentiating advocacy networks, activism and social movements, this research focuses on their shared characteristics and not their differences. Therefore, for the purposes of this research, this thesis considers the terms

'transnational advocacy group'; 'transnational activist group'; and 'social movement'

conceptually similar enough to used interchangeably. Following the definition of Den Hond and De Bakker, activist groups can be understood as "stakeholder groups that represent a social movement or that claim to do so" (Den Hond & De Bakker, 2007: 903). Accordingly, as activist groups are considered representatives of a social movement, referring to a 'social movement' also incorporates a reference to the specific activist groups within that movement. Moreover, this paper considers the terms advocacy group and activist group conceptually similar enough to be used synonymously for the purposes of this research. Moreover, the thesis does define the understanding of a group according to its size, organization, hierarchy or any other factor, but considers them a loosely organized unit with a shared understanding of the subject matter of the issue at hand. Thus, the definition of a group could be understood very much in similar terms as Keck and Sikkink define networks, as "forms of organization characterized by voluntary, reciprocal, and horizontal patterns of communication and exchange" (Keck & Sikkink, 1998: 8). Therefore, for the purposes of this research, focusing on not the definitions of the constellations of activists but instead their strategies, this thesis has made the conscious choice to use the words group and network interchangeably.

Furthermore, the thesis understands advocacy groups and social movements in similar terms, built around ideas or ideologies. Keck and Sikkink consider the ideologies as the core of these loosely organized networks, as "they are organized to promote causes, principled ideas, and norms,'" (Keck & Sikkink, 1998: 8-9). By using different strategies, such as public shaming or framing public debate, they are capable of mobilizing people around new norms and ideas (Risse, 2013: 434). Thus, shared ideas play a central role in the formation of a transnational advocacy network.

Simultaneously, similarly to advocacy groups or networks, social movements are also built "ideas about how society should be, and this includes ideas about the role of business" (Georgallis, 2017: 765). Social movements could be defined as "conscious, concerted and sustained efforts by ordinary people to change some aspect of their society by using extra-institutional means" (Goodwin & Jasper, 2003: 3). Also in social movement action, ideas and shared beliefs play a key role: "ideology shapes many of the processes involved in social

(13)

12

movement activity-from the choice of coalition partners and alliance formation, to understanding the choice of tactics, to understanding the latitude of sympathizers' acceptance of these" (Zald, 2000: 13). Thus, both social movements and advocacy groups are founded on the shared ideas or ideologies, which then in turn steer their objectives, actions and strategies. Also, as Zald (2000: 13) recognises, "interest groups are often born of social movements and embody their ideologies." Thus, with respect to global grievances, transnational advocacy networks and global social movements are often intertwined and can be built around the same ideas.

Compared to social movements, transnational advocacy networks are often considered much loosely organized and dynamic constellations of different actors advocating for a shared cause (Keck & Sikkink, 1998). Social movements, on the other hand, are much more organized and focused on a certain issue of grievance. Accordingly, transnational advocacy networks are much broader interactions that social movements of activist groups, incorporating not only non-governmental actors and local social movements, but also for example intergovernmental organizations; governmental actors; unions and consumer organizations; academics; and the media (Keck & Sikkink, 1998: 9). That being said, not all of these stakeholder groups are represented in all TNAs. Accordingly, activist groups and social movements are smaller sections or groups of actors, that are often located and operate within a transnational advocacy network. However, in the complex environment of global environmental politics, where globalization and social media have contributed to the growing global civil society, the lines between organized activist groups and unorganized advocacy networks are becoming increasingly blurred. Therefore, this thesis recognises these concepts the materially similar enough to be used interchangeably for the purposes of this research. Also, this allows for the research to synthesise theories from both social movement literature and transnational advocacy networks, in order to better explain how corporate responsibility for social and environmental issues is strategically constructed by activist groups, as a result of influencing the field in which corporations operate.

2.2. Non-state actors and plastic pollution governance

In the recent years, non-state actors including transnational corporations and transnational non-governmental organizations have become increasingly important players in global environmental governance (Dauvergne & Lister, 2012). The 'governance turn' IR research has meant that instead of focusing solely on governments and state-led politics, the scholarship is

(14)

increasingly interested in non-state actors in transnational governance (Risse, 2013: 426). In other words, alongside state-driven regulatory approaches, current scholarly perspectives on global environmental governance recognise also the importance of state actors and non-traditional governance approaches. Non-state driven governance involves not only private initiatives by transnational corporations (TNCs), but also the "governance from below" by social movements and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including direct action as well as attempts to steer corporate behaviour and power (Paterson et al., 2003: 2). Accordingly, non-state actors, referring to both multinational corporations and activist groups, are recognised as vital actors in global environmental governance. This ‘governance turn’ and increased focus on non-state actors is also visible in the governance solutions related to plastic pollution, thus justifying the scope and focus of this research.

The current governance of plastic pollution is complex, fragmented and builds on the strong involvement of non-state actors. Campbell et al. recognise that the governance of plastics comprises a multitude of actors, including "governments that provide and/or regulate waste management infrastructure, the private sector that uses plastics for products and packaging, consumers who make purchasing and disposal decisions, and NGOs that have led efforts to raise public awareness and galvanize national and international action" (Campbell et al., 2016). Due to the fragmentation of the global governance and the transboundary effects and pervasive nature of plastic pollution, also non-legislative interventions are crucial for solving the plastic problem (Schnurr et al., 2018). Accordingly, non-state actors are emerging as alternative sources of governance alongside governmental actors and international instruments and play a key role for catalysing change.

2.2.1. Private actors and activism as the driver of corporate action

Traditionally, corporations have often seen as opponents to increased regulation and delimiting business practices, also regarding environmental problems. Instead, large multinationals have often profited from taking advantage of regulatory gaps and lax environmental laws, and opposed any limitations to their autonomy (Bartley, 2018: 152). Falkner argues that private governance is "a direct result of pressure exerted by activist groups on corporations" (Falkner, 2003: 74). As a result of many societal and environmental challenges are becoming increasingly debated issues, also the discussion about corporate behaviour and responsibilities with respect to these dilemmas has amplified.

Due to limitations in international and domestic law, corporate social responsibility has an important role in minimising and governing plastic pollution (Landon-Lane, 2018).

(15)

14

Accordingly, multinational companies and global brands have began to progressively frame the governance of plastics by establishing internal governance principles of responsibility and sustainability (Dauvergne, 2018b: 28). From the perspective of the civil society, corporations are increasingly called out to assume responsibility for plastic waste by expanding producer responsibility (Ocharoenchai, 2017; Tibbetts, 2015). Although many academics call for setting up an international instrument to manage plastic pollution (Haward, 2018; Raubenheimer et al., 2018; Walker, 2018; Worm et al., 2017; Xanthos & Walker, 2017; Tibbetts, 2015; Gold et al., 2013), all of them find that non-state actors play an important role in the current system surrounding the plastic problem. Whilst some scholars are critical about business-driven solutions (Dauvergne, 2018a; Dauvergne, 2018b; Dauvergne & Lister, 2012) many academics still recognise corporations and market-driven methods as a vital component of plastic governance, either explicitly by emphasising the role of corporate responsibility (Landon-Lane, 2018; Vince & Hardesty, 2018; Löhr et al., 2017) or implicitly by discussing their importance as a part of holistic multi-governance solutions (Schnurr et al., 2018; Vince & Stoett, 2018; Vince & Hardesty, 2017; Campbell et al., 2016) or by suggesting solutions based on circular economy approaches and redesigning value chains, production and packaging (Jambek et al., 2018; Geyer et al., 2017; MacArthur et al., 2016). Löhr et al. recognise that successful solutions argue that "successful solutions to the plastic pollution crisis necessitate the inclusion of private actors (Löhr et al., 2017: 97). In a similar manner, Haward (2018: 2) finds that "the engagement of business and community organizations" is essential for the managing plastic pollution.

Simultaneously, social movements and advocacy campaigns have influenced corporate conduct and catalysed corporate responsibility for plastic pollution by conducting brand audits of plastic pollution waste and shaming corporations whose products contribute most to the plastic soup (Schleeter, 2018). Consequently, as the public opinion and debate is more concerned of corporate behaviour, the pressure from activist groups against corporations has become more commonplace (Den Hond & De Bakker, 2007). Social movements, built around ideologies they both reflect and diffuse, steer the organizational behaviour on both the internal and external level (Georgallis, 2017: 1). Social movement campaigns can influence corporate behaviour both directly, focusing on a specific firm, and indirectly through major stakeholders, such as consumers, (potential) employees, public policy and general public opinion (Ibid.). As Den Hond et al. state, "NGOs have both a direct and indirect role in defining, shaping, and measuring the social responsibilities of a firm" (Den Hond et al., 2015: 188). Thus, advocacy groups can shape the way companies’ role is

(16)

perceived and can in this way construct corporate responsibility for social and environmental issues. Accordingly, advocacy groups constitute one of the driving factors behind corporate initiatives targeting plastic pollution, such as the initiatives curbing the proliferation of microbeads (Dauvergne, 2018a). However, there is no empirical scholarly research explaining how the advocacy networks have influenced corporations to curb microplastics. Thus, it becomes interesting for policy development and research to investigate how transnational advocacy networks can make use of indirect avenues to corporations in order to catalyse corporate responsibilisation for the plastic pollution problem, for example by phasing out microbeads.

2.3. Expanding the academic debate

Although the research on 'boomerang politics' of advocacy networks is relatively broad regarding state-focused politics and international organizations, there is relatively little literature on corporate-focused boomerang politics. The research by MacAteer and Pulver (2009) investigates corporate-focused transnational networks in the context of sustainable development efforts in the Ecuadorian Amazon, and how boomerang politics occur through local NGOs in third countries. They develop the 'corporate boomerang' theory to "explain the processes by which local activists link with domestic and international NGOs and other groups to exert leverage over corporate behavior." (MacAteer & Pulver, 2009: 25). Moreover, Den Hond and De Bakker (2012) explore the boomerang politics between MNCs and TNAs and how transnational stakeholders impact multinational corporations, finding that ‘boomerang politics’ exist also in private politics between advocacy groups and MNCs. However, Den Hond and De Bakker focus on how boomerang politics exist for advocacy groups targeting specific firms, but not when the ultimate target is the whole industry itself. Thus, by taking this debate further, there is an opportunity for this research to expand our understanding of how advocacy groups make use of boomerang politics to target the whole industry in order to catalyse corporate responsibility and field-level change.

Moreover, during the past decade social media has become to play a crucial role in modern activist, which is not accounted for in the aforementioned works. Reinecke and Ansari (2016) discussed the role of framing of in the media, in the context of creating corporate responsibility for conflict minerals. They investigated how advocacy groups can construct corporate responsibility form social and environmental problems by strategic framing. That being said, strategic framing as a way of diffusing norms is only one of the

(17)

16

ways in which advocacy groups can craft resonance on the field-level (Georgallis, 2017). This thesis aims to take this debate one step further, by synthesising these understandings of how private boomerang politics flow through the stakeholders (MacAteer&Pulver, 2009; Den Hond & De Bakker, 2012); how advocacy groups can facilitate field-level change by crafting resonance with the major stakeholders (Georgallis, 2017); and how corporate responsibility can be constructed by strategic framing (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016), investigating them empirically in the context of plastic pollution advocacy and the transnational campaign network ‘Beat the Microbead’, aiming to change the industry practices to ban microplastics. This, in turn, could expose new avenues for the plastic pollution advocacy at large, and potentially provide solutions for the global plastic crisis by finding ways to facilitate field-level change in the industry.

(18)

3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The previous chapter introduced the academic debate surrounding TNAs and how they can influence private actors to increase corporate responsibility for environmental problems. This chapter will provide a theoretical framework for analysing this relationship further. Firstly, the chapter will provide a more general theoretical framework on how social movements influence companies to further corporate responsibility, recognising that strategic influencing can take either direct or indirect routes. Subsequently, the chapter will go more in detail into the ways in which TNAs use indirect routes to influence corporate behaviour through their stakeholders, thus changing the field in which corporations operate. Lastly, the chapter explains that there can be multiple simultaneous indirect routes of influence, forming a ‘multiple boomerang strategy’ when utilizing multiple indirect routes is the main strategic choice of the advocacy group. This theoretical framework is then used as a basis for the empirical analysis in Chapters 5, 6 and 7.

3.1. Activist strategies for influencing corporate behaviour

Georgallis (2017) provides a framework for understanding the influencing strategies that social movements, or activist groups, make use of in order to steer corporate social responsibility. Georgallis divides the influencing strategies to three level-based categories (see Figure 1). Firstly, on the field level, activist groups can influence stakeholder perception about the social responsibility of the firm, thus making CSR initiatives more attractive to business. Secondly, on the firm level, they shape corporate reputation and legitimacy through confrontational and collaborative efforts. Thirdly, they can also aim to influence CSR through individuals within the organization. On the individual level, the ideologies of social movements steer behaviour inside the corporation through internal activism, when the activist ideology becomes embedded within the organizational culture, values and managerial cognition. (Georgallis, 2017: 1).

The framework, depicted below this paragraph, provides a structured and conceptualised overview of the relationship between social movements and corporate social responsibility, and how social movements influence CSR practices on multiple levels. As Georgallis (2017: 747) proposes, the framework could be utilized as "a guide toward a fuller understanding of the causal link between social movements and corporate social initiative." Therefore, this framework is used as a theoretical base for the empirical research. That being

(19)

18

said, this thesis research does not focus on the levels of influence, but instead investigates the indirect routes through which social movements can influence firm behaviour and to construct corporate responsibility. In essence, advocacy groups can aim to influence corporate social responsibility both by engaging with the company directly, or indirectly through their stakeholders. This thesis is focused on the indirect influencing methods activist groups make use of in order to 'craft resonance' with internal and external stakeholders, when the direct route to the ultimate target (the company) is blocked. Thus, the research focuses on the ways in which advocacy groups influence norm diffusion; consumer support; regulatory modification and employee attitudes in order to catalyse corporate action (see 'field level' dynamics on the figure below).1

According to Georgallis, indirect influencing through external stakeholders occurs when "social movements influence business decisions by shaping the organizational field in which firms operate." (2017: 739). This means that the activists aim to influence the field in which these firms operate by shaping the ideas and beliefs of stakeholders such as governments, policy-makers, potential employees, consumers and competitors. Indirect influencing strategies on the field-level are essentially aimed at changing the prevailing societal norms and understandings of a certain issue (Georgallis, 2017). Field-level influencing, especially when targeting policy makers and governmental actors, aims to facilitate regulatory modification. Lobbying for regulatory modification can occur not only on the state-level, but also for example on the EU level, thus resulting to broader regulatory impact beyond just single national jurisdiction. The objective of field-level is to change the normative and ideological context in which the corporation operates. Field-level influencing strategies are essentially aimed at changing the prevailing societal norms and understandings of a certain issue (Georgallis, 2017).

1

Influencing (potential) employee attitudes is in essence similar to the process on the individual level, aiming to influence the individuals within the firm(i.e. employees) by 'activating values' and shaping cognition. Thus, 'crafting resonance' of field level affects also contributes to 'crafting resonance' of the individual level (and vice versa). Therefore, categorising and analysing the influencing strategies through the three influencing levels is rather ambiguous, because they are intertwined, dynamic and simultaneous.

(20)

Figure 1: The relationship between social movements and CSR (Georgallis, 2017).

3.1.1. Limitations of the framework

The framework by Georgallis (2017) aims to summarize the influencing strategies of advocacy groups, but fails to go deeper into detail of how these mechanisms and dynamics within the different levels between the different actors function in practice. The aforementioned categorization of strategies to three levels of influencing appears neat and systematic, but in reality the processes are much more complex and intertwined. Already in 2007 Den Hond and De Bakker (2007) argued that advocacy groups can use two complementary and simultaneous avenues for facilitating field-level change. On the one hand, activists can promote field-level changes through advocacy on the field level itself, by aiming to influence for example governmental regulation and framing public opinion. On the other hand, influencing corporate behaviour on the organizational level of the individual firm can also facilitate and catalyse field-level change (Den Hond & De Bakker, 2007: 902). Firm-level influencing can result to field-Firm-level changes, especially if the advocacy groups targets multiple companies individually or the targeted companies internalise the ideology of the advocacy group. Furthermore, these dynamics are also visible on the individual level. If the organizational-level influencing is successful at changing the core ideology of the company, it can result to individual-level changes, as the company starts to attract like-minded employees and managers. The other way around, internal activism of managers and key employees can also stimulate changes in the organizational culture of the specific firm.

Thus, the all the levels of influencing are interconnected and dynamic. Influencing strategies on all the three levels have the possibility to not only result to changes directly on

(21)

20

that specific level, but also indirect changes on the other levels. Accordingly, the influencing strategies of advocacy organizations on one level can have a 'spill-over' effect to other levels. As Georgallis (2017: 744) recognises, "each individual actor is embedded within an organization, and each organization is part of an organizational field, all of which interact with one another." Accordingly, "as social movements’ ideologically motivated action transcends levels of analysis, a fuller understanding of how it leads firms to engage with social initiatives requires that the three levels are considered in tandem." (Georgallis, 2017: 744). Therefore, the empirical analysis of this research focuses not on the levels of the influencing, but the routes through which activists manage to influence corporations. More specifically, the thesis focuses on the indirect routes or the ways in which activists 'craft resonance' with the stakeholders in order to catalyse CSR.

The framework has also other limitations in its explanatory power, due to the lack of empirical evidence of how activist groups ‘craft resonance’ in practice, which present a gap in literature that this research aims to at least partially fulfil. Moreover, the framework does not account for external variables or contextual factors that affect the impact and influence of social movements on CSR, such as the regulatory context, the public opinion, or the consumer trends. These contextual factors are often referred to as 'opportunity structures', that is, the "structural or cultural factors that affect the likelihood of activism, in part because of perceptions about the likelihood of activist success" (Briscoe & Gupta, 2016: 5). Accordingly, the success of environmental advocacy catalysing organizational change depends not only on their influencing strategies or a combination of these, but also relies heavily on the broader context and the dependence relations between and within the stakeholders (Van Huijstee & Glasbergen, 2010). For that reason, each specific case of an advocacy strategy has inherently different characteristics due to changing dynamics and opportunity structures, and therefore exploring one case can only provide partial, context-specific explanations for the functioning of TNA strategies. That being said, this thesis will aim to explain how these dynamics function in practice in the context of global plastic pollution advocacy and the strategies of Beat the Microbead campaign, hoping to uncover some patterns and characteristics that could further our understanding of the relationship between TNAs and CSR action and how, by crafting resonance on the field-level, advocacy groups are able to construct corporate responsibility.

(22)

3.2. Direct and indirect influencing strategies

As noted before, advocacy groups can influence corporations both directly and indirectly. In general, direct influencing strategies can be roughly divided to confronting or collaborating efforts (Den Hond & De Bakker, 2007). On the one hand. confrontational efforts, such as protests and boycotts influence corporate behaviour on the organizational level, thus enforcing engagement with CSR efforts (Georgallis, 2017). On the other hand, collaborative efforts or NGO-firm partnerships are also situated in the firm level, which are not only methods for NGOs to influence CSR, but from the firm perspective constitute a strategy for organizing CSR activities (Auld et al,, 2008). In some cases, NGOs may engage in cooperative and confrontational activities concurrently, sometimes in relation to the same company (Yaziji & Doh, 2009). In the recent years, collaborative efforts between corporations and nongovernmental organizations have become more prominent (Van Huijstee & Glasbergen, 2010). That being said, some advocacy groups fundamentally oppose and refrain from collaboration with business actors, and instead choose to engage in more confrontational strategies against corporations (Ählström & Sjöström, 2005). Collaborative and confrontational efforts are strategic tools social movements or advocacy groups can use on the organizational level, targeting a specific corporation directly and aiming to influence their CSR approaches or change their behaviour. That being said, influencing strategies at the organizational level can be aimed at not only steering the activities of a specific company, but also stimulating field-level changes. (Den Hond & De Bakker, 2007: 902). Thus, whilst observably directed at a specific company, they have also repercussions for the field in which the companies operate, and thus cannot be considered in isolation from advocacy efforts aimed at catalysing field-level change.

Alongside direct methods of influencing, advocacy groups can aim to influence business strategically through intermediate actors, such as policy-makers, consumers and employees. These actors are the company's primary stakeholders, meaning that the said business would not exist without their support. Because the firm needs their support for its own existence, it needs to adapt its behaviour to meet the expectations and desires of the primary stakeholders. Because the role of corporations is to create value for stakeholders, they are also accountable for their stakeholders (Freeman et al., 2004). Therefore, by 'crafting resonance' with the firm's' internal and external stakeholders, advocacy groups are able to exert leverage and influence company behaviour without engaging with the company directly

(23)

22

(Georgallis, 2017). In other words, by targeting the key stakeholders, activists are able to steer corporate behaviour through indirect influencing (Den Hond & De Bakker, 2007).

3.3. The boomerang politics of indirect influence

In order to gain influence over the target, the advocacy group uses intermediate actors or stakeholders, through which it is able to get to the target indirectly. This process of indirect influencing through intermediaries could be understood as the 'boomerang pattern' of strategic influence, or simply 'boomerang politics'. The conceptualisation of direct and indirect routes of advocacy influencing stems from the scholarly work of Keck and Sikkink (1998) and their theory on the 'boomerang pattern' of influencing. The 'boomerang pattern' is a conceptualisation of "how domestic groups draw on international linkages to mobilize external pressure for changing a state's domestic policies" (Prakash & Gugerty, 2010: 17). In other words, it is a model for explaining how advocacy groups can influence state governments indirectly through international organizations, when the direct route to the government is blocked. Following the more traditional approach in IR scholarship and social movement theory of their time, Keck and Sikkink (1998) consider state governments as the primary targets of the strategic influencing of transnational advocacy groups. The 'boomerang pattern' of influence occurs where TNAs aim to influence governments through IOs, when the direct route to state actors or the government is blocked. By crafting resonance with international organizations or allies outside the state, the domestic advocacy groups are able to bypass the state. In other words, by influencing IOs directly, which then they pressurise the state governments, advocacy groups are able to influence the state indirectly, through mediating actors. (Keck & Sikkink, 1998: 12).

That being said, although the early scholarship on advocacy networks only discusses TNAs influencing governmental and intergovernmental actors, the more recent scholarly research has began to consider the effects of TNAs on corporations. Elaborating the theory of Keck and Sikkink, the boomerang influencing pattern could be also applicable to interactions between TNAs and MNCs. Accordingly, MacAteer and Pulver (2009) conceptualised a 'corporate boomerang' to explain how advocacy groups pressurise and exert leverage on multinational corporations. In a similar manner, Den Hond and De Bakker (2012) also argue that the boomerang model has much greater relevance beyond the realm of contentious politics, applicable also in NGO-firm relations or 'private politics'. Thus, they propose to use the 'boomerang politics' as a general theoretical model, referring to situations in which NGOs

(24)

or advocacy groups "exert pressure on primary targets in order for them to influence the ultimate target." (Den Hond & Den Bakker, 2012: 12). Thus, indirect influencing of corporations (ultimate target) through stakeholders (primary targets) in order to change corporate behaviour and CSR could be considered to fall within this concept of 'boomerang politics'. As Den Hond and De Bakker recognise, "both ultimate and primary targets can be states or firms or, for that matter, any authority" (De Hond & De Bakker, 2012: 12).

Figure 2 below presents a simplified version of the boomerang pattern in advocacy influencing strategy. The round shape demonstrates the advocacy group aiming to influence the ultimate target A, represented by the star shape. The ultimate target could be either a state or a company. The arrows in the figure represent routes of influence. When the direct route to the ultimate target A becomes blocked or hindered, advocacy group can aim to influence the ultimate target A, be it a state or a company, through an intermediate actor or stakeholder, the primary target B. The primary target B could be for example an international organization, consumer group, labour union, the EU or public opinion in general. In this manner, the advocacy groups can bypass the blockade in the direct route and influence the ultimate target A indirectly through influencing B, which in turn would exert pressure on A. When the ultimate target is a company, the indirect influencing occurs essentially through its stakeholders (Den Hond & De Bakker, 2012).

Figure 2: The 'Boomerang pattern' of advocacy influencing through intermediate actors

The lack of the direct route of influence can be a result of many factors. On the one hand, the company might be resistant or hesitant to change. On the other hand, refraining from direct influencing and using only indirect loops of influencing through intermediaries might be a conscious strategy of the advocacy group. Also, it could be possible that the direct

(25)

24

route to the company has existed previously, but has later on become blocked or less efficient, for example as a result of the NGO-Firm collaboration coming to an end. Where the direct influencing route to the corporate social responsibility does not exist, meaning that for any reason the activist group refrains from direct conflicting or collaborative action, the activist group focuses on influencing the major stakeholders of the firm, such as consumers, policy-makers, employees or the general public opinion, in order to influence the corporation indirectly (Georgallis, 2017).

3.3.1. 'Boomerang pattern': influencing through preliminary targets

As discussed earlier, advocacy networks focusing can target the multinational companies via their stakeholders, through multiple indirect routes of influence. For example, consumer awareness campaigns directed against a certain product ingredient or manufacturing method can be used to change corporate behaviour through the leverage exerted by the customers. Moreover, transnational advocacy groups can also steer corporate behaviour by engaging the public and the affected local communities, which in turn can drive change and pressurise corporations through legal action. Moreover, the shareholder structure enables leverage mechanisms for publicly held corporations, where the investors steer corporate behaviour through shareholder advocacy. Additionally, advocacy groups can also make use of inside strategies to target certain key employees specifically, in an attempt to change the corporate behaviour through internal activism. (MacAteer & Pulver, 2009). ‘Internal activism' targets the key individuals within and inside the specific firm, such as managers or employees in key positions (Georgallis, 2017) Internal activism aims to influence the ideologies of the employees, consequently contributing to organizational changes via the shared organizational culture. However, the distinction between ‘internal’ and ‘external’ stakeholder is somewhat blurred, when current members of the public could simultaneously be future employees, or current managers are simultaneously consumers. Moreover, the shareholder structure of MNCs makes the distinction between internal and external stakeholder even more ambiguous. Therefore, this thesis has made the conscious choice to focus on simply ‘stakeholders’ on the field-level.

3.3.2. 'Boomerang strategy': indirect routes as the strategic choice

Due to the fact that there are many potential intermediate actors (or in the case of private politics multiple stakeholders), there are also multiple possible routes or avenues for the boomerang pattern to be formed. Because there are multiple routes to affect the company, the

(26)

advocacy group can make use of 'venue shopping' practices to choose between the most effective routes or combinations of influencing strategies. Often, advocacy groups focus on multiple routes and preliminary targets simultaneously, building their advocacy strategy relying on the indirect routes of influence. Essentially, advocacy groups can have a company or an industry as their ultimate target, without engaging with them directly. This would formulate a 'Boomerang strategy' where the influence is mediated through primary targets. Whilst their ultimate target A is a company or an industry (with the objective to change corporate behaviour), they refrain from targeting the company directly, and instead choose to focus on the company's stakeholders to exert leverage. Moreover, the advocacy group can decide to adopt an influencing strategy relying primarily on the indirect routes, forming a ‘boomerang strategy’. In essence, this influencing strategy (stylised in the Figure 3 below) could be then a strategic choice of the advocacy group. The 'multiple boomerang' strategy has been said to exist in human rights advocacy (Rodríguez-Garavito, 2015). This notion is the starting point of this research, investigating whether this 'multiple boomerangs' strategy exists for advocacy groups aiming to influence corporate responsibility on plastic pollution and how does it function in practice.

Figure 3: Multiple simultaneous boomerang patterns or 'Multiple Boomerang Strategy'

3.4. Conclusion

As discussed earlier, the 'boomerang strategy', or an influencing strategy building on multiple simultaneous boomerang patterns, flows through various preliminary targets. In order to gain

(27)

26

leverage over the ultimate target, advocacy groups need to 'craft resonance' with these preliminary targets. The way in which advocacy groups craft resonance depends on the nature and characteristics of the preliminary target in question. Thus, if the advocacy group targets multiple intermediate actors simultaneously, it also makes use of multiple influencing strategies simultaneously. Each of these indirect routes or boomerangs then forms in itself an individual influencing strategy. The combined effect of multiple simultaneous strategies is expected to be greater than if the advocacy group would rely on solely one indirect route. Arguably, the most effective 'boomerang strategy' would be the one encompassing all the major stakeholders and simultaneously making use of all different influencing strategies or methods, which would translate into the widest leverage and influence. Hypothetically, because the advocacy group does not have to rely on the success of one influencing route but can make use of a combination of influencing strategies, it is in the end more effective at reaching its goals or objectives. The empirical part of this research will investigate how multiple 'boomerang strategy' functions in practice, and how advocacy groups can make use of these simultaneous indirect routes to assert corporate responsibility.

(28)

4. METHODS

This chapter will focus on elaborating the research methods used in this thesis. Firstly, this chapter will outline the research approach and the research design. Thereafter, the chapter will present the methods used for data collection as well as the inherent methodological limitations associated with qualitative research. Later on, the empirical chapters of the research will make use of this methodology, exploring the case on microplastic pollution advocacy and the strategies of the transnational advocacy network around the 'Beat the Microbead' campaign.

4.1. Research approach

The aim of the research is exploratory, seeking to develop an explanation or a deeper understanding about a specific issue or phenomenon. In essence, this thesis aims to further investigate the ways in which transnational advocacy group, focused on environmental issues such as microplastics, can influence corporate behaviour and catalyse corporate responsibility by influencing the corporations indirectly through stakeholders. More specifically, the thesis focuses on indirect routes of influence, aiming to advance our understanding of how transnational advocacy networks can catalyse corporate responsibility for environmental issues, by focusing on the 'Beat the Microbead' activist network against microplastic pollution. Thus, the level of analysis is international, focusing on the strategies of a transnational advocacy network. That being said, the research also involves the national level elements, as the main 'core' of the TNA in question, most of its members and also its founding NGO 'Plastic Soup Foundation' are based in the Netherlands.

This thesis aims to explain further "how" advocacy groups influence private governance of plastic pollution, meaning that it aims to explore and further investigate an existing phenomena. The research approach is deductive, meaning that the research first lays down the theoretical framework and discusses the limitations of current understandings, and then goes on to explain the specific phenomenon based on the aforementioned framework in order to refine the existing theory.

The thesis approaches the topic of microplastic pollution advocacy in a two-fold manner. On the one hand, the research includes a more descriptive examination of the plastic pollution issue and the ways in which advocacy groups have aimed to catalyse both regulatory and corporate action. On the other hand, the thesis provides also a more

(29)

process-28

oriented investigation of the methods and strategies of 'Beat the Microbead' campaign and the corporate response to these. The research approach of investigating the TNA strategies is interpretive, meaning that the processing of primary data requires interpretation. The role of the researcher in interpretive research is "to understand behaviour from the actor’s point of view" (Gerring, 2007: 71). However, the interpretative elements associated with qualitative research raises some challenges for generalizability and validity of findings, which are discussed more in detail in section 4.5.

4.2 Research design

The thesis makes use of qualitative research methods. Pahl and Wyles recognise that qualitative methods are useful for researching emerging issues, and especially corning the research on microplastic pollution, "qualitative methods make a valuable complementary contribution" alongside current quantitative and science-based approaches (Pahl & Wyles, 2017: 1405). Whilst humans suffer from the negative impacts of plastic pollution, humans are simultaneously both the source and the solution to the plastic pollution problem. Pahl and Wyles describe this as the 'human dimension' of microplastic problem. Therefore, in order to explore the plastic pollution problem and to find suitable and scalable solutions for the problem, this 'human dimension' should be addressed by applying social sciences research methods (Pahl & Wyles, 2017).

The research design of this thesis focuses on a single case study, constructing its observations from a one case. Single case study focuses on one specific case in order to provide an insight into a causal relationship that could be applied also across a wider population of cases (Gerring, 2007: 86). Single case study approach is relevant for researching complex phenomena, as focusing on a single case makes it possible to scrutinize and analyse the complexity of the situation. That being said, the issue of plastic pollution is identified as highly complex phenomenon (Vince & Hardesty, 2018). Moreover, case study is a useful method for a hypothesis generating research, "when insight into causal mechanisms is prioritized over insight into causal effects" (Gerring, 2007: 66). As the focus of the research is to explain the 'how' TNAs are able to catalyse corporate action, focusing on a single case allows for analysing these dynamics in more detail and shedding light on the underlying dynamics in the strategies of TNAs and their role in crafting corporate responsibility.

(30)

The research focuses on an idiographic case-study analysis, which "aim to describe, explain, or interpret a particular 'case'" (Levy, 2008: 3). The idiographic case study in this research is theory-guided, following the theoretical framework presented in Chapter 3 and aiming to further advance our understanding of the boomerang politics of transnational advocacy networks. In essence, in theory-guided case studies as presented in this research, "a theory guides an empirical analysis of a case, which is then used to suggest refinements in the theory, which can then be tested on other cases." (Levy, 2008: 5).

The case study is treated as a plausibility probe, which Levy (2008: 3) defines as "an intermediary step between hypothesis generation and hypothesis testing and which include “illustrative” case studies." As Levy phrases, "plausibility probes can serve an important function in theory development" (Levy, 2008: 7). Because the relationship between TNAs and MNCs especially with respect to global environmental activism is less extensively studied empirically than TNA strategies for influencing state politics or international organizations, this case study serves to further refine the academic debate on boomerang politics of transnational advocacy networks, when the ultimate target is a private actor or the industry.

4.3. Case selection

The case study of the research focuses on an advocacy network campaign, concentrating on the plastic pollution issue and aiming to change the industry practices. There are multiple social movements enacted by global networks of NGOs and individuals that are actively working on the issue and trying to contribute to change, pressuring both governments and corporations as well as educating individuals. Thus, the universe of cases could include all transnational advocacy networks focusing on (micro)plastic pollution activism and targeting corporations indirectly. As the plastic issue is very 'hot topic' at the moment, there are several TNAs that focus either specifically on activism against microplastics and plastic pollution, or more in general to broader environmental hazards related to plastic pollution, such as conserving the endangered marine environments. That being said, this research focuses on a single case study, in order to analyse the mechanisms and processes in more detail. The research focuses on the 'Beat the Microbead' campaign, which is a transnational advocacy network, powered by the Dutch NGO called 'the Plastic Soup Foundation'. Beat the Microbead forms an advocacy network of 100 NGOS worldwide, which has had a substantial contribution to the activist efforts against microplastic pollution, both with respect to public

The multiple boomerang strategy : constructing corporate responsibility for microplastic pollution : exploring the indirect influencing strategies of ‘Beat the Microbead’ advocacy network for changing industry practices