Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBenn, Suzanne
dc.contributor.authorJones, Richard
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T15:42:50Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T15:42:50Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.date.modified2012-06-12T22:30:44Z
dc.identifier.issn03014797
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.05.014
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/37887
dc.description.abstractThis paper examines almost thirty years of disputation concerning the disposal of the world's largest stockpile of the toxic organochlorine, hexachlorbenzene. It describes the study of a chemicals company in its attempt to manage the disposal of the toxic waste in a collaborative fashion with government, environmentalists and the local community. The study describes the new processes and structures specifically designed to address the decision-making and the issues of stakeholder perception and identity construction which have influenced the outcomes. Decision-making in such disputes is often theorized from the perspective of the emergence of highly individualized and reflexive risk communities and changing modes and expectations of corporate responsibility as a result of detraditionalization. We argue that the stakeholder interaction in this study reflects competing discourses in which corporate actors prioritize the building and maintaining of identity and symbolic capital rather than an active collaboration to solve the ongoing issue of the waste. As well, issues of access to expert knowledge highlight the relationship between conditions of uncertainty, technoscientific expertise and identity. The events of the study highlight the challenges faced by contemporary technoscientific corporations such as chemicals companies as they must deliver on requirements of transparency and openness, while maintaining technoscientific capacity and strong internal identity. We conclude that the study demonstrates the co-existence of social processes of individualization and detraditionalization with quasi-traditions which maintain authority, thus challenging the radical distinctions made in the literature between modernity and late or reflexive modernity
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.description.publicationstatusYes
dc.format.extent155994 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.publisher.placeAmsterdam, NL
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationN
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom1593
dc.relation.ispartofpageto1604
dc.relation.ispartofissue4
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Environmental Management
dc.relation.ispartofvolume90
dc.rights.retentionY
dc.subject.fieldofresearchCorporate Governance and Stakeholder Engagement
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode150303
dc.titleThe Role of Symbolic Capital in Stakeholder Disputes: Decision-making concerning intractable wastes
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
gro.rights.copyright© 2009 Elsevier. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
gro.date.issued2009
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorGyrd-Jones, Richard


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record