DEVELOPING STRATEGIC CSR AND NEGOTIATION ARCHITECTURE FOR THE ENX–FISHERMEN CONFLICT IN EAST KALIMANTAN
Published:
2026-07-29Downloads
Abstract
There are still unresolved mediation issues between oil & gas operators in offshore areas where there are coastal communities depending on marine resources for their livelihood. The purpose of this research is to investigate mediation between the ENX oil and gas company and local fishermen who have been impacted negatively from the offshore operations of the ENX. This research will seek to determine both internal and external factors creating/ driving these negotiations and create strategies related to CSR and negotiating. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with Company personnel, Government personnel, Fishermen and one independent informant. Thematic coding was used, however, the data analysis also utilized the frameworks of Stakeholder Theory, Legitimacy Theory, BATNA / ZOPA, PESTEL, SWOT, and TOWS. The results showed that compensation dominated the negotiations; whereas other integrative aspects including livelihood assurances, clarifying access to fishing areas and developing monitoring programs remained underdeveloped. Politics, society and economics were shown to be the major external factors contributing to the conflict. Based on the determination of the above factors, an Integrated CSR negotiation Model was proposed to include joint fact finding procedures, transparency within compensation arrangements, livelihood guarantees, formalized protocols for access to fishing areas and established monitoring mechanisms.
References
Aguilar, F. J. (1967). Scanning the business environment. Macmillan.
Akporiaye, A., & Webster, D. G. (2022). Social license and CSR in extractive industries: A failed approach to governance. Global Studies Quarterly, 2(3), Article ksac041. https://doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksac041
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.
Brinkmann, S. (2013). Qualitative interviewing. Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Davis, R., & Franks, D. M. (2014). Costs of company-community conflict in the extractive sector. Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative, Harvard Kennedy School.
Du, S., & Vieira, E. T., Jr. (2012). Striving for legitimacy through corporate social responsibility: Insights from oil companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 413–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1490-4
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in (Updated ed.). Penguin Books.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
Frynas, J. G. (2009). Beyond corporate social responsibility? Oil multinationals and social challenges. Cambridge University Press.
Helms, M. M., & Nixon, J. (2010). Exploring SWOT analysis: Where are we now? Journal of Strategy and Management, 3(3), 215–251. https://doi.org/10.1108/17554251011064837
Hill, T., & Westbrook, R. (1997). SWOT analysis: It's time for a product recall. Long Range Planning, 30(1), 46–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(96)00095-7
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1986). The manager as negotiator: Bargaining for cooperation and competitive gain. Free Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (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. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row.
Pomeroy, R., & Douvere, F. (2008). The engagement of stakeholders in the marine spatial planning process. Marine Policy, 32(5), 816–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.03.017
Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation. Harvard University Press.
Raufflet, E., Cruz, L. B., & Bres, L. (2014). An assessment of corporate social responsibility practices in the mining and oil and gas industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 84, 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.077
Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Susskind, L., & Cruikshank, J. (1987). Breaking the impasse: Consensual approaches to resolving public disputes. Basic Books.
Susskind, L. E., & Crump, L. (Eds.). (2008). Multiparty negotiation. SAGE Publications.
Weihrich, H. (1982). The TOWS matrix: A tool for situational analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Yüksel, I. (2012). Developing a multi-criteria decision making model for PESTEL analysis. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(24), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v7n24p52
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Movina Nasriati, Utomo Sarjono Putro
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
