A Framework to Assess Possible Sources of Stakeholder Exploitation: A Developing Country Case

Kamran Shafique; Syed Shams; Tapan Sarker

doi:10.1007/s13753-024-00538-w

Volume 15 Issue 1

Feb. 2024

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > International Journal of Disaster Risk Science > 2024 > 15(1): 32-44

Kamran Shafique, Syed Shams, Tapan Sarker. A Framework to Assess Possible Sources of Stakeholder Exploitation: A Developing Country Case[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2024, 15(1): 32-44. doi: 10.1007/s13753-024-00538-w

Citation:

Kamran Shafique, Syed Shams, Tapan Sarker. A Framework to Assess Possible Sources of Stakeholder Exploitation: A Developing Country Case[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2024, 15(1): 32-44. doi: 10.1007/s13753-024-00538-w

Citation:

PDF

A Framework to Assess Possible Sources of Stakeholder Exploitation: A Developing Country Case

doi: 10.1007/s13753-024-00538-w

1. School of Business, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield, QLD, 4300, Australia;
2. Business School, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia

Accepted Date: 2024-01-22

Available Online: 2024-03-14

Publish Date: 2024-02-19

Abstract

Abstract

Solving complex post-disaster reconstruction challenges requires the altruistic involvement of heterogeneous stakeholder groups. However, small, more organized groups, such as government parastatals, private developers, and contractors often exploit large, unorganized groups, such as affected communities, leaving them more vulnerable to future disasters. Based on data collected from a case study in Pakistan, this study proposed a framework to assess, anticipate, and mitigate the exploitation of vulnerable stakeholders in post-disaster reconstruction projects. The framework draws on influential management theories and utilizes reciprocal relationships between stakeholder attributes (power, legitimacy, and urgency), participation, and exploitation. The study also argued for non-binary treatment of stakeholder attributes. The framework will allow practitioners to address issues around the exploitation of stakeholder interests in future post-disaster reconstruction projects.
- Collective action,
- Pakistan,
- Post-disaster reconstruction,
- Stakeholder participation,
- Stakeholder exploitation

FullText(HTML)

References(49)

References

[1]	Aase, M. 2020. Listing for change? Exploring the politics of relief lists in Bangladesh after Cyclone Sidr. Disasters 44(4): 666–686.
[2]	Anilkumar, S., and H. Banerji. 2021. An inquiry into success factors for post-disaster housing reconstruction projects: A case of Kerala, South India. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 12(1): 24–39.
[3]	Arnstein, S.R. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35(4): 216–224.
[4]	Baker, S.E., R. Edwards, and M. Doidge. 2012. How many qualitative interviews is enough? Expert voices and early career reflections on sampling and cases in qualitative research. Southampton: Economic & Social Research Council.
[5]	Boje, D.M. 2001. Narrative methods for organizational & communication research. London: Sage.
[6]	Boyatzis, R.E. 1998. Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. London: Sage.
[7]	Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.
[8]	Bridoux, F., and J.W. Stoelhorst. 2022. Stakeholder governance: Solving the collective action problems in joint value creation. Academy of Management Review 47(2): 214–236.
[9]	Brown, R.S. 2018. Franchise systems and lobbying: Implications for Olsonian collective action theory. Management Decision 56(11): 2357–2372.
[10]	Chandra Lal, P. 2019. Making communities disaster resilient: Challenges and prospects for community engagement in Nepal. Disaster Prevention and Management 28(1): 106–118.
[11]	Civera, C., S. De Colle, and C. Casalegno. 2019. Stakeholder engagement through empowerment: The case of coffee farmers. Business Ethics: A European Review 28(2): 156–174.
[12]	Curato, N. 2018. From authoritarian enclave to deliberative space: Governance logics in post-disaster reconstruction. Disasters 42(4): 635–654.
[13]	Davidson, C.H., C. Johnson, G. Lizarralde, N. Dikmen, and A. Sliwinski. 2007. Truths and myths about community participation in post-disaster housing projects. Habitat International 31(1): 100–115.
[14]	Davis, K. 2014. Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success. International Journal of Project Management 32(2): 189–201.
[15]	De Bruycker, I., J. Berkhout, and M. Hanegraaff. 2019. The paradox of collective action: Linking interest aggregation and interest articulation in EU legislative lobbying. Governance 32(2): 295–312.
[16]	Eisenhardt, K.M., and M.E. Graebner. 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal 50(1): 25–32.
[17]	Elo, S., M. Kääriäinen, O. Kanste, T. Pölkki, K. Utriainen, and H. Kyngäs. 2014. Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. Sage Open 4(1): 1–10.
[18]	EM-DAT (Emergency Events Database). 2021. The International Disaster Database EM-DAT by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). Brussels: Université catholique de Louvain.
[19]	Freeman, R.E. 1984. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
[20]	Gul, S., and T.K. McGee. 2022. Women’s participation in disaster recovery after the Kashmir, Pakistan earthquake. Disasters 46(4): 1007–1026.
[21]	Herrmann-Lunecke, M.G., and P. Villagra. 2020. Community resilience and urban planning in tsunami-prone settlements in Chile. Disasters 44(1): 103–124.
[22]	Hilbolling, S., F. Deken, H. Berends, and P. Tuertscher. 2022. Process-based temporal coordination in multiparty collaboration for societal challenges. Strategic Organization 20(1): 135–163.
[23]	Hülssiep, M., T. Thaler, and S. Fuchs. 2021. The impact of humanitarian assistance on post-disaster social vulnerabilities: Some early reflections on the Nepal earthquake in 2015. Disasters 45(3): 577–603.
[24]	Ika, L.A., A. Diallo, and D. Thuillier. 2012. Critical success factors for World Bank projects: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Project Management 30(1): 105–116.
[25]	Jordan, E., A. Javernick-Will, and B. Amadei. 2015. Post-disaster reconstruction: Lessons from Nagapattinam district. India. Development in Practice 25(4): 518–534.
[26]	Khan, A.M. 2007. Disaster preparedness for natural hazards: Current status in Pakistan. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD).
[27]	Khurram, S., F. Pestre, and S. Charreire-Petit. 2019. Taking stock of the stakeholder salience tradition: Renewing the research agenda. M@n@gement 22(2): 141–175.
[28]	Maly, E. 2018. Building back better with people centered housing recovery. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 29: 84–93.
[29]	Merriam-Webster. 2023. Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Springfield: Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc.
[30]	Miles, S. 2017. Stakeholder theory classification: A theoretical and empirical evaluation of definitions. Journal of Business Ethics 142(3): 437–459.
[31]	Mitchell, R.K., B.R. Agle, and D.J. Wood. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review 22(4): 853–886.
[32]	Olson, M. 1965. The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
[33]	Opdyke, A., A. Javernick-Will, and M. Koschmann. 2019. Assessing the impact of household participation on satisfaction and safe design in humanitarian shelter projects. Disasters 43(4): 926–953.
[34]	Poteete, A.R., M.A. Jansen, and E. Ostrom. 2010. Working Together: Collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in Practice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[35]	Quzai, U. 2010. Pakistan: Implementing people-centred reconstruction in urban and rural areas. In Building back better, ed. M. Lyons, and T. Schilderman, 113–134. Warwickshire: Practical Action Publishing.
[36]	Rayamajhee, V., and A.K. Bohara. 2021. Social capital, trust, and collective action in post-earthquake Nepal. Natural Hazards 105(2): 1491–1519.
[37]	Ryan, B., K.A. Johnston, M. Taylor, and R. McAndrew. 2020. Community engagement for disaster preparedness: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 49: Article101655.
[38]	Sadaqat, M. 2012. Balakot City: A tale of the forgotten town. The Express Tribune, 8 October 2012. http://tribune.com.pk/story/448530/balakot-city-a-tale-of-the-forgotten-town/. Accessed 9 May 2023.
[39]	Sadiqi, Z., B. Trigunarsyah, and V. Coffey. 2017. A framework for community participation in post-disaster housing reconstruction projects: A case of Afghanistan. International Journal of Project Management 35(5): 900–912.
[40]	Safapour, E., S. Kermanshachi, and A. Pamidimukkala. 2021. Post-disaster recovery in urban and rural communities: Challenges and strategies. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 64: Article 102535.
[41]	Sarasvathy, S.D., and A. Ramesh. 2019. An effectual model of collective action for addressing sustainability challenges. Academy of Management Perspectives 33(4): 405–424.
[42]	Schembera, S., and A.G. Scherer. 2017. Organizational strategies in the context of legitimacy loss: Radical versus gradual responses to disclosed corruption. Strategic Organization 15(3): 301–337.
[43]	Shafique, K. 2022. Addressing community participation barriers using emic-etic perspectives. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 81: Article 103270.
[44]	Shafique, K., and C.-A. Gabriel. 2022. Vulnerable stakeholders’ engagement: Advancing stakeholder theory with new attribute and salience framework. Sustainability 14(18): Article 11765.
[45]	Shafique, K., and C.M.J. Warren. 2018. Empowerment and legitimization of affected communities in post-disaster reconstruction. Procedia Engineering 212: 1171–1178.
[46]	Shmueli, D.F., C.P. Ozawa, and S. Kaufman. 2021. Collaborative planning principles for disaster preparedness. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52: Article 101981.
[47]	Sufri, S., F. Dwirahmadi, D. Phung, and S. Rutherford. 2020. Enhancing community engagement in disaster early warning system in Aceh, Indonesia: Opportunities and challenges. Natural Hazards 103(3): 2691–2709.
[48]	Williams, A., and G. Whiteman. 2021. A call for deep engagement for impact: Addressing the planetary emergency. Strategic Organization 19(3): 526–537.
[49]	Wood, D.J., R.K. Mitchell, B.R. Agle, and L.M. Bryan. 2018. Stakeholder identification and salience after 20 years: Progress, problems, and prospects. Business & Society 60(1): 196–245.