Search result: 3 articles

x
Year 2013 x
Article

Access_open Better Access to Remedy in Company-Community Conflicts in the Field of CSR

A Model for Company-Based Grievance Mechanisms

Journal The Dovenschmidt Quarterly, Issue 4 2013
Keywords CSR, human rights, grievance mechanism, interest-based approach, rights-based approach
Authors Cristina Cedillo
AbstractAuthor's information

    The Special Representative to the UN Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, John Ruggie, establishes access to remedy as one of the three pillars of the UN ‘Protect, Respect, Remedy’ Framework. In this Framework, Ruggie prescribes that company-based grievance mechanisms can be one effective means of enabling remediation to those potentially being impacted by business enterprises’ activities. This report proposes a model for company-based grievance mechanisms that follow a combination of interest-based and rights-compatible approaches to conflict resolution of all corporate social responsibility issues in company–stakeholder relationships.


Cristina Cedillo
Cristina Cedillo (MA, LLM) participated in the master’s programme in International Business Law and Globalization at the Utrecht University School of Law, Economics and Governance, Utrecht (The Netherlands). The author is very grateful to Serge Bronkhorst and Tineke Lambooy for their guidance and helpful comments on earlier drafts.
Article

Is There a Theory of Radical Disagreement?

Journal International Journal of Conflict Engagement and Resolution, Issue 1 2013
Keywords Radical disagreement, linguistic intractability, agonistic dialogue, conflict engagement
Authors Oliver Ramsbotham
AbstractAuthor's information

    This article concerns linguistic intractability, the verbal aspect of those conflicts that so far cannot be settled or transformed. At its heart lies the phenomenon of radical disagreement. This is generally discounted in conflict resolution as positional or adversarial debate. It is seen as a terminus to dialogue that must from the outset be transformed, not learnt from. In this article the refusal to take radical disagreement seriously is traced back to the way radical disagreement is described and explained in the third party theories that frame attempts at settlement and resolution in the first place.
    On pp. 58-60 a theory of radical disagreement is contrasted with an example. In the theory radical disagreement is described as a juxtaposition of equivalent subjective narratives that do not ‘reflect truth’ but merely serve as ‘motivational tools’ for group survival. In the example, it can be seen that neither speaker is saying that. The Palestinian claim (A) is not about a subjective narrative or motivational tool, but about a lived reality endured for 60 years. And the Israeli claim (B) is not about a juxtaposition of equivalent accounts, but a fierce refutation of faults and misrepresentations in what the other says. This mismatch between third party theory and participant example explains a great deal about why third party interventions based on those theoretical assumptions fail.
    The rest of the article looks at a range of putative theories invoked in conflict analysis and conflict resolution. This is a search for third party descriptions and explanations that are adequate to examples of what they purport to describe and explain. Surprisingly the net is hauled in empty. The interim conclusion to this article is that there is no adequate theory of radical disagreement.
    In the first issue of the International Journal of Conflict Engagement and Resolution, this article sets the scene for an exploration of the relationship between engagement and resolution that it is hoped will be developed in future issues. It will be argued there that the practical implication of the discovery that there is no adequate theory of radical disagreement is that in intractable conflicts it is a mistake to ignore this phenomenon. Radical disagreement is not all too familiar but perhaps the least familiar feature of intense political conflict. What is required in the face of linguistic intractability, therefore, is not less radical disagreement but more – namely promotion of a ‘strategic engagement of discourses’. Only then is it possible to move from engagement to resolution and to create the space for a future revival of attempts at settlement and transformation in the linguistic sphere.


Oliver Ramsbotham
Emeritus Professor of Conflict Resolution, University of Bradford. Paper first presented at the Conflict Research Society Annual Conference, Coventry, September 2012.
Article

Continuous Mixed Forestry and the Citizens Forest Model

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 1 2013
Keywords continuous mixed forestry in Europe, citizen forest society, forest law reform, climate change, social forest ethics
Authors J.W. Simon and W. Bode
AbstractAuthor's information

    Climate change, air pollution and especially short-rotation forestry are the main causes for increasing detrimental effects on forests. Therefore, it is urgently necessary to find effective counteractions to this damage so that forests will become resistant, grow sustainably and are more economically effective and thus contribute optimally to the common welfare for all citizens. ‘Continuous mixed forestry’, in contrast to the normally used short-rotation or age-classed-forestry, is one suitable model to counteract climate change and air pollution in this way on both the local and national level. It is forestry without clear-cuts, biocides and with soft logging by continuous thinning and natural regeneration.The necessary change to this sustainable cultivation model is generally possible and necessary all over Europe and in other areas of the world. A very good chance for this type of forestry is available now within the framework of selling state-owned forests to private investors. This selling is planned by governments in some countries like the Great Britain1xThe Guardian, 22 December 2010, For sale: all of our forests. Not some of them, nor most of them – the whole lot, 11:55 GMT; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (2011), In love of the forest (Aus Liebe zum Forst), 4 February, No. 29, p. 5. But the British Government has apparently changed its view, see: The Guardian, 17 February 2011, Timber! Cameron in U-turn over forests sell-off, p. 1. and has been partly realised on a large scale in Germany.2xE.g. Lower House of the German Parliament (2009), answer of the Federal Government to the small question … Privatisation of forests by the Federal Institute of Real Estate Tasks, 16. Election period, Drucks. 16/14115, 30 September 2009. This article proposes selling the state-owned forests to a central, private national heritage foundation as a first step instead of transferring them with their traditional, mismanaged short rotation or age-classed forestry to private investors who would continue the state mismanagement. The task of the foundation would be to organize the ‘citizen forest society’ as a social-ethics–based society that is privately owned by citizens and the foundation. This would generate ecological advantages for the forest and moreover long-lasting profits for citizens, because the foundation would establish other organizations where the citizens become responsible owners of ‘their’ forest without any governmental or third-party influence.This proposal describes a solution to the demands of social-oriented ethics, which are primarily focused on the cooperation of responsible persons, represented by the private ownership of the forests, and directed by a responsible foundation.

Noten

  • 1 The Guardian, 22 December 2010, For sale: all of our forests. Not some of them, nor most of them – the whole lot, 11:55 GMT; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (2011), In love of the forest (Aus Liebe zum Forst), 4 February, No. 29, p. 5. But the British Government has apparently changed its view, see: The Guardian, 17 February 2011, Timber! Cameron in U-turn over forests sell-off, p. 1.

  • 2 E.g. Lower House of the German Parliament (2009), answer of the Federal Government to the small question … Privatisation of forests by the Federal Institute of Real Estate Tasks, 16. Election period, Drucks. 16/14115, 30 September 2009.


J.W. Simon
University of London, Institute for Advanced Legal Studies/Centre for Ethics and Law in the Life Sciences, Medical University Hannover.

W. Bode
Leit.Min.R., Ministerium für Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz/Saarland, 66121 Saarbrücken, Germany.
Showing all 3 results
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.