在线利益相关者参与的影响:持不同意见的观点

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q2 BUSINESS
Itziar Castelló, David López-Berzosa
{"title":"在线利益相关者参与的影响:持不同意见的观点","authors":"Itziar Castelló, David López-Berzosa","doi":"10.1017/beq.2021.35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A predominant assumption in studies of deliberative democracy is that stakeholder engagements will lead to rational consensus and to a common discourse on corporate social and environmental responsibilities. Challenging this assumption, we show that conflict is ineradicable and important and that affects constitute the dynamics of change of the discourses of responsibilities. On the basis of an analysis of social media engagements in the context of the grand challenge of plastic pollution, we argue that civil society actors use mobilization strategies with their peers and inclusive-dissensus strategies with corporations to convert them to a new discourse. These strategies use moral affects to blame and shame corporations and solidarity affects to create feelings of identification with the group and to avoid disengagement and polarization. Our research contributes to the literature on deliberative democracy and stakeholder engagement in social media in the collective constructions of discourses on grand challenges.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"180 - 215"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Affects in Online Stakeholder Engagement: A Dissensus Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Itziar Castelló, David López-Berzosa\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/beq.2021.35\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A predominant assumption in studies of deliberative democracy is that stakeholder engagements will lead to rational consensus and to a common discourse on corporate social and environmental responsibilities. Challenging this assumption, we show that conflict is ineradicable and important and that affects constitute the dynamics of change of the discourses of responsibilities. On the basis of an analysis of social media engagements in the context of the grand challenge of plastic pollution, we argue that civil society actors use mobilization strategies with their peers and inclusive-dissensus strategies with corporations to convert them to a new discourse. These strategies use moral affects to blame and shame corporations and solidarity affects to create feelings of identification with the group and to avoid disengagement and polarization. Our research contributes to the literature on deliberative democracy and stakeholder engagement in social media in the collective constructions of discourses on grand challenges.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Business Ethics Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"180 - 215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Business Ethics Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2021.35\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Ethics Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2021.35","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

协商民主研究中的一个主要假设是,利益相关者的参与将导致理性共识,并导致对企业社会和环境责任的共同讨论。挑战这一假设,我们表明冲突是不可消除的和重要的,它的影响构成了责任话语变化的动力。在对塑料污染这一重大挑战背景下的社交媒体参与进行分析的基础上,我们认为,公民社会行动者与同伴一起使用动员策略,与企业一起使用包容性异议策略,将它们转化为一种新的话语。这些策略利用道德效应来指责和羞辱企业,利用团结效应来创造对群体的认同感,避免脱离和两极分化。我们的研究为关于协商民主和利益相关者参与社会媒体的文献做出了贡献,这些文献是关于重大挑战的话语的集体建构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Affects in Online Stakeholder Engagement: A Dissensus Perspective
A predominant assumption in studies of deliberative democracy is that stakeholder engagements will lead to rational consensus and to a common discourse on corporate social and environmental responsibilities. Challenging this assumption, we show that conflict is ineradicable and important and that affects constitute the dynamics of change of the discourses of responsibilities. On the basis of an analysis of social media engagements in the context of the grand challenge of plastic pollution, we argue that civil society actors use mobilization strategies with their peers and inclusive-dissensus strategies with corporations to convert them to a new discourse. These strategies use moral affects to blame and shame corporations and solidarity affects to create feelings of identification with the group and to avoid disengagement and polarization. Our research contributes to the literature on deliberative democracy and stakeholder engagement in social media in the collective constructions of discourses on grand challenges.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Business Ethics Quarterly (BEQ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes theoretical and empirical research relevant to the ethics of business. Since 1991 this multidisciplinary journal has published articles and reviews on a broad range of topics, including the internal ethics of business organizations, the role of business organizations in larger social, political and cultural frameworks, and the ethical quality of market-based societies and market-based relationships. It recognizes that contributions to the better understanding of business ethics can come from any quarter and therefore publishes scholarship rooted in the humanities, social sciences, and professional fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信