BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//pretalx//conferences.acspri.org.au//2022//talk//ZSDK8J BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:AEST BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:20000326T040000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=3;UNTIL=20050326T170000Z TZNAME:AEST TZOFFSETFROM:+1100 TZOFFSETTO:+1000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:20060402T040000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=4;UNTIL=20060401T170000Z TZNAME:AEST TZOFFSETFROM:+1100 TZOFFSETTO:+1000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:20070325T040000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=4SU;BYMONTH=3;UNTIL=20070324T170000Z TZNAME:AEST TZOFFSETFROM:+1100 TZOFFSETTO:+1000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:20080406T040000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=4 TZNAME:AEST TZOFFSETFROM:+1100 TZOFFSETTO:+1000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:20000827T030000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=4SU;BYMONTH=8;UNTIL=20000826T170000Z TZNAME:AEDT TZOFFSETFROM:+1000 TZOFFSETTO:+1100 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:20011028T030000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=10;UNTIL=20071027T170000Z TZNAME:AEDT TZOFFSETFROM:+1000 TZOFFSETTO:+1100 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:20081005T030000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=10 TZNAME:AEDT TZOFFSETFROM:+1000 TZOFFSETTO:+1100 END:DAYLIGHT END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT UID:pretalx-2022-ZSDK8J@conferences.acspri.org.au DTSTART;TZID=AEST:20221123T121500 DTEND;TZID=AEST:20221123T122000 DESCRIPTION: \nThe global mining sector operates in a context of historical\, recurring\, and unresolved community -level grievances. Evidence suggests this ‘grievance landscape’ is expan ding\, with more allegations and claims making their way into the public d omain. While community-level grievances in mining have become more visible \, little is known about how companies handle these within the organisatio n. Over the last few decades\, specific high-profile incidents and issues have been handled by mining companies through inquiry processes with a del iberate public interface. This type of company-initiated\, public-facing i nquiry process – which I refer to as “company-commissioned public inquir ies” (CPIs) – is extremely rare. The circumstances that push some compan ies to embark on a public-facing process are unknown. Also unknown are the circumstances preventing companies from using this approach in similar ca ses. My thesis presents one substantial research question and three sub qu estions:\n\n1. Under what circumstances do private mining companies commis sion public inquiries?\n\na. What are the pre-cursor conditions for commis sioning these inquiries?\n\nb. What organisational systems and processes e nable the commissioning?\n\nc. Do a) and b) deviate from the norm? If so\, how?\n\nThis is a social science thesis in the nature of exploratory rese arch\, employing qualitative methods. The research questions are framed by a collection of sociological concepts such as ‘thresholds’ for going pu blic and ‘deviance’ from normative processes. The research is designed t o be executed across four phases: 1) Preparatory research\; 2) Identificat ion of cases\; 3) Key informant interviews\; and 4) Consolidation of findi ngs. Here\, I focus on Phase two: Identification of cases. Little is avail able through research on CPIs as mining companies rarely subject themselve s to a public process of inquiry. While the body of knowledge on governmen t inquiries is extensive as a ‘proxy’ literature\, the pre-cursors to in itiating a public inquiry are not well studied. An analytical set of CPIs in the mining sector was identified to learn as much as possible about the context in which this type of inquiry has occurred in the past. The proce ss of collecting and identifying the set began with existing knowledge and resources within my research team. Next\, I conducted an in-depth\, exhau stive review of academic literature\, global reporting databases\, and off icial records. When a ‘lead’ was identified\, such as an incident or gri evance\, it was cross-referenced with other source materials. Cases were t hen screened using a broad criteria and sorted using a narrow criteria. Th e selection process was systematic\, with the criteria and case set tested and confirmed by other researchers. Over eighty cases were collected\, sc reened and finally sorted into four groups: Core\, secondary\, outlying an d periphery. Establishing the sub groups was not a linear process. Not onl y did it require adjusting and deliberating the criteria but testing socio logical concepts. A method was established to analyse the core set through a comprehensive read of the inquiry final reports. Information related to pre-cursor conditions\, grievances\, initiation\, and triggers was then c oded using the NVivo software. Key themes and gaps identified in the core set are highlighted against the outer sets. This will inform the interview s in Phase three of my research. This thesis will provide new insights int o how mining companies approach community-level grievances and why they ad dress some issues in public and others in private.\n\n*Co-winner of the sh ort video competition DTSTAMP:20260809T221134Z LOCATION:Short video submissions (View anytime) SUMMARY:Public Displays of Attention: Exploring a Rare Form of Community Gr ievance Handling in the Global Mining Sector - Kathryn Kochan URL:https://conferences.acspri.org.au/2022/talk/ZSDK8J/ END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR