CSR, co-optation and resistance: the emergence of new agnostic relations between business and civil society

This article examines the theoretical implications of the changing relationships between NGOs and businesses that have emerged as a response to the evolving agenda around CSR and sustainable development. In particular, it focuses upon examining whether greater engagement from non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in this area reflects a process of appropriation and co-optation of protest by the business community. To examine this process, the article considers two forms of appropriation—appropriation of language and appropriation via participation—as a basis for discussion. While co-optation pressures are identified within both areas, the article argues that co-optation is identified almost as an inevitable outcome of engagement without significant consideration of the ability of movements to identify and respond to these processes. In identifying an alternative approach, the article utilises Mouffe’s framework of agonistic pluralism. Mouffe’s framework, it is argued, provides an understanding of the way in which agonistic relationships are emerging between NGOs and businesses while highlighting the continuance of conflict between parties struggling to influence the contested interpretations of responsible business

Exploring the formal and informal roles of regulatory intermediaries in transnational multi-stakeholder regulation

Research on regulation and regulatory processes has traditionally focused on two prominent roles: rule -making and rule -taking. Recently, the mediating role of third party actors, intermediaries, has started to be explored – notably by Abbott and colleagues in a dedicated special issue of the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. The present special issue extends this line of research by elaborating the distinction between formal and informal modes of regulatory intermediation, in the specific context of transnational multi- stakeholder regulat ion. In this introduction, we identify two key dimensions of inte rmediation (in)formalism: officialization and formalization. This allows us to develop a typology of intermediation in multi-stakeholder regulatory processes: formal, interpretive, alternative and emergent. Leveraging examples from the papers for this special issue, we discuss how these four types of intermediation co-exist and evolve over time. Finally, we elaborate on the implications of our typology for regulatory processes and outcomes