Symposium on multiplicity and plurality in the world of standards

Globalization is often described as a chaotic process which signals the end of national institutions' ability to regulate markets. However, a closer look reveals a new world of standards and regulations, often with a transnational scope and reach. Contemporary rule making and rule monitoring increasingly take place in the context of transnational arenas that bring around the table many different types of actors, all of whom have or feel to have a "stake" in the regulatory project at hand, yet often for quite diverse reasons and with varying interests. While standardization would seem to suggest regularity, rationalization, and a reduction of diversity if not the advance of homogeneity and convergence, we can easily document a surprising multiplicity and plurality in our transnational world of standards. In most industries, fields and arenas, we find multiple standards and standard setting coalitions. Even so, scholars have only barely started to explore this multiplicity and plurality. Building upon what we know on technical standards, this Symposium describes and explains important patterns in the world of transnational standard-setting, revealing the nature of this plurality and the ways in which it impacts upon and is impacted by different groups of actors involved

How transnational stakeholders impact multinational corporations in the context of globalization

Stakeholder theory faces two closely related challenges in the light of globalization. On the one hand, globalization has not only led many firms to explore and expand into different parts of the world, it has also created possibilities for non-traditional stakeholders to ‘knock on the doors’ of firms and make their concerns heard. On the other hand, the context of the multitude and complexity of novel stakeholder relationships that were not usually considered in stakeholder mappings renders the issue of corporate responsibility even more ‘political’ than stakeholder relationships have always been. However, exactly how such non-traditional stakeholders knock on the firms’ doors has insufficiently been explored in stakeholder theorizing. Stakeholder theory appears to have difficulty in explaining the potential leverage that stakeholder groups without a clear and direct stake in a firm may exert over that particular firm. We propose to speak of ‘boomerang politics’ as a general and overarching term in order to advance stakeholder theory in the light of the challenges from globalization by exploring how non-traditional stakeholders knock on firms’ doors

A strategic-interaction analysis of an urgent appeal system and its outcomes for garment workers

Within the global garment industry, an urgent appeal is a request for action to Western activist groups for support in a specific case of labor rights violations. The urgent appeal system has become an important strategy for the transnational anti-sweatshop movement. It is distinct from the movement’s other strategies, because it directly supports garment workers in their struggle for improved labor conditions, while simultaneously informing and mobilizing Western consumers about substandard labor conditions in the garment industry. This paper explores how reflexivity in the use of this particular strategy, strategic choice in its implementation, and interaction with allies and targets affect outcomes for garment workers. It confirms the relevance of the emerging strategic-interaction perspective in explaining movement outcomes

A multi-case integration across the coffee, forestry and textile sectors

Amid concerns for a regulatory void in transnational fields, the principle of private regulation has become institutionalized. Many sectors have seen the emergence of multiple and overlapping standards. When comparing the sectors, there is considerable variation in standard multiplicity. We build on three institutional perspectives that have been put forward to explain the emergence of sustainability standards—the economic, idealist and political-institutional perspectives—to analyze the phenomenon of standard multiplicity. Each perspective reflects a different kind of action logic and is simultaneously present and accessible to various parties involved. Based on a cross-sector analysis of standards multiplicity in the forestry, coffee and textile sectors, this article seeks to make two contributions. First, whereas these three perspectives have been presented as competing, we propose that they are complementary in offering partial explanations for different episodes in the dynamics underlying standards multiplicity in different sectors. Second, whereas most studies have analyzed standard setting in single sectors and thus have understood it as being an intra-sector phenomenon, our cross-sector analysis of the dynamics of standard setting suggests that it is propelled by both sector-specific contingencies and experiences as well as by the experiences from other sectors

Activism in the global sports apparel industry

F. den Hond, F.G.A. de Bakker, P. de Haan (2010), The sequential patterning of tactics: Activism in the global sports apparel industry, 1988–2002, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy Vol.30, No.11, pp.648-66

Taking Stock and Looking Ahead

F.G.A. de Bakker, F. den Hond, B.G. King, K. Weber (2013), Social Movements, Civil Society and Corporations: Taking Stock and Looking Ahead, Organization Studies Vol.34, No.3, pp.573-593 The relationships between social movements and civil society on the one hand, and the corporate world on the other hand, are often shaped by conflict over the domination of economic, cultural and social life. How this conflict plays out, in current as well as in historical times and places, is the central question that unites the papers in this special issue. In this essay, we review the differences and points of contact between the study of social movements, civil society and corporations, and offer an agenda for future research at this intersection that also frames the papers in the special issue. We suggest that three research areas are becoming increasingly important: the blurring of the three empirical domains and corresponding opportunities for theoretical integration, the institutional and cultural embeddedness of strategic interaction processes between agents, and the consequences of contestation and collaboration. The papers in this special issue are introduced in how they speak to these questions

IHC Caland in Burma

IHC Caland designed, built and operated material, ships and complete systems for offshore oil and gas, dredging and shipping industries. The relatively strong economic growth in Southeast Asia offered opportunities for IHC Caland and other specialised suppliers. In the summer of 1998, an IHC Caland subsidiary contracted for an offshore project in Burma’s territorial waters. The order was for several hundreds of millions euros, hence of considerable interest to the company. The contract led to public stir because it involved work in a country controversial for its human rights situation. Many human rights, environmental and union organisations expressed their outrage and tried to move IHC Caland to cancel the contract. A controversy was born. It took IHC Caland long resisted the claims made by the NGOs. It maintained that the morality of commercial agents is limited to abiding with all legal laws and regulations. It therefore argued that it had not committed any moral wrong and was allowed to do business with the Burma government

The interplay of agency, culture and networks in field evolution

We examine organizational field change instigated by activists. Contrary to existing views emphasizing incumbent resistance, we suggest that collaboration between incumbents and challenger movements may emerge when a movement's cultural and relational fabric becomes moderately structured, creating threats and market opportunities but remaining permeable to external influence. We also elucidate how lead incumbents' attempts at movement cooptation may be deflected through distributed brokerage. The resulting confluence of cultural and relational "structuration" between movement and field accelerates the pace but dilutes the radicalness of institutional innovation, ensuring ongoing, incremental field change. Overall, this article contributes to the emergent literature on field dynamics by uncovering the evolution and outcomes of collaborative work at the intersection of social movements and incumbent fields