Capacity Building Workshop

One of the key elements of this project is "capacity building in research and development" among key partners. The term itself is broad and can be achieved in various ways. In achieving this commitment with the Australian Government (and our research partners), we organised a capacity building workshop in Bangkok on 25-26 November 2013.

Our special guests are Jen Tyrell (Counsellor in Education and Science) and Watinee Karnwong (Deputy Director, Australian Educaton International) from the Australian embassy. They joined our first session and discussed roles of education and research in development. This project is clearly one of many initiatives from the Australian Government to promote educational and developmental links among Australia and developing countries in South East Asia.

  

We invited our in-country partners from Lao PDR (National University of Laos and Burnet Institute) and Thailand (Thammasat University) to participate in this inaugural capacity building workshop at Swissotel Nailert Park.

Associate Professor Sengdeuane Wayakone, the director of international relations  and Prof. Somkiat, the Director of Research from the National University of Laos presented their ideas on research and process and protocal of research in Lao PDR to the team.  A number of interesting issues, such as dealing with local stakeholders, language and manners in the data collection process, dissemination of research in Laos, were discussed among our team members.

From Thailand, Assistant Professor Suphat Supachalasai and his team from Thammasat University discussed issues on dealing with mining industry in Thailand, data collection in the Thai business environment, and promotion and dissemination of research project at Thammasat and their academic and industrial partners.


Our team members from the Nossal Institute of Global Health, Dr. Timothy Moore and Brigitte Tenni, presented the roles of Australian AID and research under ADRA scheme.  We also discussed plan for the data collection and responsibilities among team members in the next 16 months.

We ended our workshop with discussion on plans for capacity building for students and young researchers in both countries, women associations, and mining workers in Lao PDR and Thailand.

In my opinion, the workshop promotes strong engagement and the flow of research ideas among team members from Australia, Lao PDR and Thailand. We really hope that young researchers who participated in the workshop will gain some ideas on research and gender equity.

Meeting with the Team: Laos

We travel to Vientiane to meet with our key partners: National University of Laos, MMG and Burnet Institute. As the principal investigator of this project, I hope to foster our relationship and to discuss key objectives of the project. 

The National University of Laos was established in 1997 and it is the largest University in Lao PDR. The amalgamations of academic from various disciplines make this University a real interdisciplinary academic institution. We met with Associate Professor Saengdeone Wayakone, the Director of the international affairs of the university and we discussed a number of ideas in terms of the management of this research project, expected outcomes and potential capacity building activities with postgraduate students and/or novice researchers from the National University of Laos.  

From this meeting we have achieved three important learning points:

1) Understanding research protocal in the host country is very important. New knowledge regarding research protocal in any institutions, country must be learnt, with your partners.

2) Engaging research team members from various academic backgrounds will add more views and value to your research in terms of methodology, vigor, and research approaches.

3) The values of your research project must be clearly communicated and commonly understood by all research partners. We learn from this process that we need to communicate the values/benefits of the project to the public. This will give a true meaning of our research project to the communities in Lao PDR, Thailand and Australia.

                                               The Monument of Prince Anuvong

 

 

 

 

Project Plan for November: Capacity building workshop and visiting our Partners

This month is an important month for the project since it is time for the capacity building workshop. We are traveling to visit our partners (the National University of Laos, MMG and the Burnet Institute) in Vientiane for 3-4 days and will discuss actions for 2014 with them.

Then, the capacity building workshop is scheduled on 25 and 26 November in Bangkok at Swissotel Nailert Park. The aims of the workshop include team meeting and discussion on the progress and plan of the project as well as capacity building training on data collection for our local RAs from Thailand and Lao PDR.

We will update the actions in November very frequently and will send around our newsletter to all project members. IF you are interested to receive an e-newsletter from this project, please leave your comments and email address in the blog.  

Comparing Corporate Social Responsibilities in Lao PDR and Thailand: International Business and Poverty Alleviation

As part of our AusAID Development Research Award Scheme (ADRAS) project, we have focused on the condition of economic poverty, and how corporate social responsibility from MNCs support such tragic conditions in Thailand and Lao PDR.  So far, we have conducted the literature review in international business and community studies. 

We have recently published a paper on CSR and poverty in Thailand and Lao PDR in the International Journal of Studies in Thai Business, Society & Culture, an open access Thai studies journal. We hope that the public will be able to read this paper and consider new ways of their poverty-related CSR activities. This is the abstract of the paper. 

Abstract:

Poverty has long been one of the major social problems in Thailand and Laos. By examining the geopolitics of poverty and international business, this paper argues that although corporate social responsibility (CSR) in developing countries has been increasingly gaining attention, issues of particular concern to stakeholders in the West are those which dominate the poverty-related CSR  agenda. This is partly because Multinational corporations (MNCs)’ primary stakeholders are located in the West and CSR initiatives in Thailand and Laos are targeted at  these audiences rather than oriented towards their beneficiaries in the host countries. Local Thai and Laotian factors promoting poverty alleviation activities among MNCs seem to be missing in the literature. Some practical CSR points from the literature confirm that poverty-related CSR activities must be integrated with social issues such as health, education and governance in Thailand and Lao PDR. 

Full paper can be accessed here.

MINING AND DEVELOPMENT IN THAILAND

The  key actors who promote social responsibility among mining MNCs in Thailand include the Thai Ministry of Industry, MNCs and local and international NGOs. The literature from Thai governance and international business sources show 7 aspects of contribution by mining MNCs in Thailand.

The data from existing literature raise a number of interesting issues in terms of the contributions from mining MNCs in Thailand. As a hub for foreign direct investment in the region, Thailand attracts a high number of MNCs and consequently, exhibits higher penetration of CSR activities. 

They include (1) environment (pollution and global warming prevention, sustainable consumption and land use, preservation and restoration of ecosystems and the natural environment, respect for future generation), (2) human rights (civil and political rights, economics, cultural and social rights, fundamental labor rights, community rights), (3) labour standards (occupational health and safety, working conditions, human resources development, worker as a human being), (4) organisational governance (inclusiveness, ethical conduct, disclosure of information, respect for rule of law, accountability), (5) fair business practices (promotion of ethical and transparent activities, promotion of free composition, application of fair and ethical supply and after-supply practice, intellectual and property rights, anti-corruption), (6) community involvement/ social development (development impacts, community involvement, philanthropy), and (7) consumer issues (providing consumer with accurate and adequate information, Provision and development of socially-beneficial services and products, provision and development of safe and reliable products and services, protection of consumers’ privacy). One interesting point from the literature is the focus on ‘transparency’ in actions of mining MNCs. It is confirmed that CSR activities can be easily achieved when transparency is witnessed and practiced by all key stakeholders.

The key issue from mining industry includes the fact that it involves a number of environmental issues. Three mining MNCs, that we examined their annual reports, focus on ‘sustainability’ concept in the CSR actions.  Strategies that lead to sustainability concept include health and safety of the workers, fair and rewarding work relationships and a healthy living environment. Although it is complex to achieve the sustainability concept, the literature in international business (i.e. Esteves and Barcly, 2011; Pimpa, 2013) argue that approaches in relationship management among stakeholders in mining industry in Thailand is very crucial. Multi-stakeholder participation can enhance the quality of relationship and contributions by mining MNCs in Thailand in various forms. When participations among different stakeholders take place, key community’s demands will be discussed and mining MNCs can eventually response to the community needs, which may go beyond MNCs’ centralization approach in development.

Academy of Management (II)

As the theme for the 73rd annual meeting of the Academy of Management is capital in question, most discussions and debates are about the cause-effect and impacts of capitalism in the contemporary economy. Many aspects of these debates are directyly relevant to the practice of management and therefore to our scholarship. Indeed, if, as researchers and teachers in international business (or community development), we assume the inevitability of the prevailing modern economic system which we are a part of as well as emerging issues posed by capitalism.

The theme is obviously appropriate with my research project since Mining MNCs, the theme of these project, focuses on behaviour, actions and contributions by the local community. I attended a number of CSR presentations since I need to make sense of what has been done in international business and business ethics areas. In particular, when we look at CSR from companies locating in different countries. It strikes my thought that CSR in developing countries can be regarded as distinct from CSR in developed countries for a number of reasons.

                 Capitalism in Question: Theme for the 73rd Annual Meeting in Orlando

First, developing countries represent growing economies and thus lucrative markets. At the conference, the power of emerging markets such as BRICS have been discussed widely and the practices and challenges of CSR were commonly discussed. Second, social and environmental crises are felt most strongly in the developing world. Third, developing countries are likely to experience the strongest environmental and social impacts. As a result, developing countries present companies with a unique set of CSR challenges that are different to those faced by MNCs in developed countries.

In the case of international mining industry, if we look at stakeholder theory (Freeman, 1984) that explains relationship among various institutions and suggests that the purpose of a business (in this case international mining) is to create as much value as possible for stakeholders. In order to succeed and be sustainable over time, executives must keep the interests of customers, suppliers, employees, communities and shareholders aligned and going in the same direction. We may argue that value-creation from mining to stakeholders can be different according to circumstances and needs or expectations from each stakeholder. Beside, I have made it clear in my paper that I presented at the academy that, in defining stakeholders, mining MNCs need to move beyond corporate-centric approach to community-centric system. If we take example of Lao PDR from this research, you will see the power of communitarian-base approach in doing corporate social activities.

                  Professor Ed Freeman, Father of Stakeholder Theory at 2013 AOM meeting

 I attended a few session by Professor R. Edward Freeman from the University of Virginia who argues that in the traditional view of the firm, the shareholder view, the shareholders or stockholders are the owners of the company, and the firm has a binding financial obligation to put their needs first, to increase value for them.

 However, stakeholder theory argues that there are other parties involved, including governmental bodies, political groups, trade associations, trade unions, communities, financiers, suppliers, employees, and customers. Sometimes even competitors are counted as stakeholders—their status being derived from their capacity to affect the firm and its other stakeholders. I also argue that, perhaps, in the mining context, stakeholders can and should be a part of value-creation in their own community, not only as consumers, or recipients of  the benefits of mining, but also the creators of value for themselves and the community.

References:

Freeman, R. Edward (1984). Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman. ISBN 0-273-01913-9.

Academy of Management (I)

I am currently attending the annual Academy of Management (AOM) Conference in Orlando, Florida. One of the aims for this trip is to discuss the points from my research on sustainability and management by Mining MNCs in Thailand and Laos. As I did similar presentation for scholars from Mekong region last month at the International Conference on Sciences and Social Sciences, I plan to collaborate more with scholars from the Americas at AOM.

The Academy of Management's vision statement says that we aim "to inspire and enable a better world through our scholarship and teaching about management and organizations." The recent economic and financial crises, austerity, and unemployment, and the emergence of many economic, social, and environmental protest movements around the world have put back on the agenda some big questions about this vision: What kind of economic system would this better world be built on? Would it be a capitalist one? If so, what kind of capitalism? If not, what are the alternatives? Although most of our work does not usually ask such "big" questions, the assumptions we make about the corresponding answers deeply influence our research, teaching, and service.

Three features differentiate capitalism from previous economic systems in history: (a) market competition among profit-driven firms, (b) wage employment within these firms, and (c) limited government over them. Each of these features is associated with important benefits but also with important economic, social, and environmental costs.

Partly in response to these costs, some countries have evolved variants of capitalism that differ from the canonical "free market" form, and some people argue that these differences should be enlarged - broadening the objectives of the firm to encompass social and environmental goals, deepening the participation of employees in management decision-making, and strengthening government's regulatory role. More radical critics argue that these reforms are insufficient: they urge replacing competition with collaboration, wage employment with cooperative ownership, and limited government with economic planning. Proponents of free-market capitalism respond that such reforms, whether more modest or more radical, endanger both economic growth and individual liberty.

While some aspects of these debates may be beyond our professional expertise, much of our work on organization, strategy, human resources, and behavior is directly relevant. Conversely, many aspects of these debates are directly relevant to the practice of management and therefore to our scholarship. Indeed, if, as researchers and teachers, we assume the inevitability of the prevailing economic system, we blind ourselves to the important issues posed by that system and turn our backs on debates prompted by calls to change it.

An economy based on market competition also engenders some distinctive dynamics. Four stand out. First, competition often leads to concentration, as large firms achieve economies of scale and scope and accumulate market power. Second, competition paradoxically stimulates efforts among firms to cooperate in the race to develop new products and processes, in alliances, partnerships, industrial districts, and standard-setting bodies. Third, competition drives firms to expand regionally and internationally. This globalizes both the benefits and the costs of capitalism, and in the process, it pits nations against each other in economic rivalry, which is sometimes productive and sometimes not. Finally, recent decades have seen a dramatic shift towards a financialized form of capitalism. Scholars are still divided over whether this is a long-term, structural mutation of capitalism or a symptom of the decline of one world power awaiting the ascent of another. Nevertheless, financialization, like globalization, poses important questions in our field.

I hope that I will be able to share some points for discussion from this interesting conference.

ICSSS Conference

The 3rd International Conference on Sciences and Social Sciences was held at Rajabhat Mahasarakham University, Maha Sarakham in Thailand. One of our colleagues from Phetchaburi Rajabhat University strongly recommended me to participate in this lively inter-disciplinary conference. Certainly, I took her idea and  see this international conference as our first opportunity to discuss our project on mining and international development in Mekong with international academic community in Mekong region. Another reason to participate in this conference, the keynote speaker, Prof. Jira Hongladarom, is one of the most inspiring academics whom I have been following since my university time. 

When I arrived Rajabhat Mahasakham University, I felt like home since the organiser team members and a number of Professors from the University warmly welcomed me anywhere I went, from the airport to Rajabhat campus. The conference is truly an international conference.... not only in its form, but also the quality of presenters and participants from over 10 countries!

The President of the University, Assoc.Prof. Somchai Wongkasem, welcomed us at the opening ceremony of the conference on 18 July 2013. Nothing was better than his warm and sincere welcoming speech to all delegates. His interpretation of the conference theme, research and development for sustainable life quality, is extremely interesting. I can 'feel' his enthusiasm in the promotion of academic regional development by education from early to life-long education.

The keynote speaker, Prof. Jira Hongladarom, started the conference conversation by discussing his ideas on development by focusing upon roles of various social stakeholders in South East Asia. More importantly,  he firmly believes that universities must work with the real world concept, not a mere ivory-tower style, if  the reality of development is expected. Sustainability! Sustainability! Sustainability! This term clearly is the heart of this conference.I recorded an interesting part of his and love to share it with you here.

An interesting aspect of the conference is the opening ceremony. I have been to many places in my life and time as an academic. However, the opening of this conference is truly unique!! The lively dance of ASEAN and sustainability development, which was well performed by students from the dramatic arts department from Rajabhat Mahasarakham University. Entertaining and Educative!!

Through out this conference, I met and discussed various aspects of  development research with a number of delegates from Indiana State University, Arizona State University, Florida Atlantic University, the National University of Laos, Massey University, University of the Philippines, Mahasarakham University, and Vinh University from Vietnam. Again, we seem to focus on how to integrate our ideas and resources for the concept of research in sustainability and community development.

I presented 2 papers at the conference, focusing on mining and development and corporate social responsibility from mining companies in Mekong region. Our AusAID project was presented and well-received by the international participants. The focus on criticisms of mining in Asia was among management and social development academics from Vietnam and the USA. The concept of mining and development was not a brand new idea here. However, participants were very keen to share their experiences on this important issues. If you need to read a full paper on mining and development in Mekong from the conference, please click here.  I also presented the second paper on CSR in Vietnam and Cambodia and the full paper can be accessed here.

 Apart from the quality of international papers, I must admit that the integration of ideas from sciences and social sciences was the key features of this conference. Issues on management of resources, community and environmental development,and disaster management were discussed with sensation. Sustainability is an issue that interfaces with sciences, economics, culture as well as other social and environmental consequences of economic and technological activities. This conference clearly confirms that researchers need to integrate resources and ideas from different disciplines if we need to clearly understand complex issues of sustainability.

I would like to thank the organisers of the conference for this wonderful event and I look forward to participating in the next ICSSS conference.

Overview

Mining and Equitable Employment for Women in Lao PDR and Thailand

Overview

Mining is one of the key industries in many countries. The mining sector has considerable potential to improve quality of living, help reduce poverty, accelerate human development, promote economic growth, and support progress towards the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals (MDG). International mining can also generate economic and social opportunities, directly through employment of workers, through taxes, rents, community development, royalty payments and social responsibility programs, and indirectly by contributing to economic growth and private sector development.

Management of mining impacts in developing countries, however, can be complex and challenging for all stakeholders. Extraction of natural resources such as mining is limited within a particular geographical area. Often its activities are conducted in or near communities and have direct or indirect impacts on community resources, capabilities and well-being, thus leading to a state of poverty, violent behavior, and resentment by communities towards businesses, and other forms of human deprivation such as water and air pollution, land access, farming and toxicity.

Moreover, mining has long been a male-dominated industry, which women continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions. In order to achieve substantive gender equality, and the economic benefits of women in leadership, we need to understand how to increase the representation of women, and how to strengthen the pipeline of female talent in the mining industry, particularly in the developing countries.

Project Objectives

This project aims to investigate issues on socio-economic impacts of international mining industry on women in two developing countries in South East Asia, Laos and Thailand. With current rapid growth in mining development in Laos and Thailand, aid agencies want to understand more about how the activities of mining companies' affect women, particularly in regard to employment opportunities, gender equity, and health and safety issues.

Furthermore, this project will explore relationships among members of mining community, local government agencies, international organizations, and women association in Laos and Thailand, and factors contributing to success in empowering women and girls in the mining community. Key questions for this research project include:

1) In what ways are mining workplaces providing equitable employment for women?

2) What are the social and economic development impacts, particularly in rural areas, of women’s engagement in the mining industry?

3) What changes in policy and practice could be taken by the mining industry to support gender equity and safeguard women stakeholders?

Potential Outcomes

This project is a blend of academic and developmental research. The outcomes of the project will potentially lead to development in policies and practices for women in mining community in Laos and Thailand. Potential outcomes from this project include:

1) Reports for Policy Makers (including AusAID) in governance and International Mining;

2) Reports for Mining Community ;

3) Reports on Socio-Economic Impacts of the Project;

4) Public Seminars;

5) Conference Presentations and Publications;

6) Academic Publications in Community Development, International Management, and Asian Studies;

Country for Research

Lao PDR, Thailand

Research Partners

This project is supported by the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) through AusAID Development Research Award Scheme 2012 (ADRAS).

AusAID's Mining for Development

Mining for development is one of the key developmental themes from AusAID. This project is funded by AusAID (through AusAID Development Research Awards Scheme- ADRAS) and it aims to investigate soci-oeconomic impacts of the mining on women and girls in Lao PDR and Thailand.

This clip from AusAID will give you a clear overview on why mining for development becomes one of the priorities, and to what extent can 'good management' promote long-term development and sustainability in all communities.

Project Team

Dr. Nattavud Pimpa

Natt is a senior lecturer in international business at the School of Management, RMIT University. He is interested in corporate social responsibility by multinational corporations in South East Asia, Mekong region and South America. He is also interested in education and development for poverty alleviation in Asia.

Dr. Timothy Moore

He currently heads the Nossal's International Health Education and Learning Unit. He has spent most of the past two decades in South-East Asia focusing on refugee health and HIV prevention. He has worked in the NGO, government, private and UN sectors, most notably with MSF in Hong Kong, WHO in Indonesia (harm reduction), the Burnet Institute in the AusAID-funded Asia Regional HIV/AIDS Project, and more recently as Program Coordinator for the Thailand Burma Border Consortium’s program with refugee partners from Burma.

Associate Professor Christopher Ziguras

Christopher Ziguras's research focuses on international and comparative education, particularly in the Asia Pacific region. He has written widely on cross border higher education and international dimensions of education and training policy. He is currently is Deputy Dean, Learning & Teaching, International in RMIT’s School of Global, Urban and Social Studies and is a Board Member of the International Education Association of Australia.

Ms. Brigitte Tenni

Brigitte is a public health practitioner with focus and expertise in HIV & AIDS strategic planning, programming, capacity building, social research and monitoring and evaluation. She has particular interest and experience in HIV with relation to sex work and IDU, drug policy, treatment preparedness, advocacy, gender, the greater involvement of people living with HIV & AIDS (GIPA), youth and access to medicines. Before joining the Nossal, Brigitte worked for a Thai PLHIV network coordinating advocacy efforts with regard to GIPA and access to medicine campaigns in addition to providing technical assistance to the regional training initiative and managing capacity building and care and support projects.

Dr.Pimrawee Rochrungsat

Pimrawee is the Vice president of Phetchaburi Rajabhat University in Thailand. she is interested in community-based tourism, capacity building for community, and management of international tourism industry.

Women in Male-Dominated Industries

In 2010, the Australian Human Rights Commission examined the key reforms required to achieve gender equality in Australia in a report entitled Gender Equality Blueprint 2010.

Promoting Women in Leadership: Key to Success

In 2010, the Australian Human Rights Commission examined the key reforms required to achieve gender equality in Australia in a report entitled Gender Equality Blueprint 2010.

The report sets out recommendations in five priority areas which significantly affect both the public and private lives of women and men. One of the priority areas identified is promoting women in leadership.

The report actively promotes the importance of women’s representation in decision-making roles in the community, government and business sectors. In addition to the evident need for substantive gender equality, research has confirmed there are a number of advantages in promoting women in leadership:

Narrowing the gap between male and female employment rates will boost GDP in Australia by 11%.[1]

Minimising the gender productivity gap, for example, by increasing the number of women in leadership positions, will boost the level of economic activity in Australia by 20%.[2]

Economic incentives such as these will have flow-on effects for wider society including to address the problem of pension sustainability, thereby reducing the dependency ratio, lifting household savings rates and increasing tax received by the government.[3]

In virtually all sectors of Australia’s paid workforce, women continue to be underrepresented in senior leadership positions. In some industries, women are underrepresented at all levels of the organisation. These are known as ‘male-dominated industries’.

With this in mind, the Commonwealth Office for Women has funded the Australian Human Rights Commission to identify mechanisms for improving women’s representation and leadership in male-dominated roles in male-dominated industries.

Some backgrounds

Despite a healthy pipeline of female talent, women continue to be underrepresented in senior leadership positions in Australia. The Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency (EOWA) reports that in 2011 over 33% of managers in reporting companies were women[4]. However, in these same organisations, less than 8% of executive managers were women[5]. The pipeline of women narrows dramatically the more senior the level in the organisation.

In male-dominated industries, including mining, construction and utilities, not only are women underrepresented in executive manager roles, they are also underrepresented in junior and mid-level positions. For example, in 2011 EOWA reported[6] that women represented only:

13% of managers in mining (and only 15.1% of total employees)

16% of managers in construction (and only 11.8% of total employees)

16% of managers in utilities (and only 22.6% of total employees)

To achieve substantive gender equality, and the economic benefits of women in leadership, Australia needs to increase the representation of women, and to strengthen the pipeline of female talent within these industries.

Source: http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/women-male-dominated-industries-2012

International Mining: Development?

Australian mining industry: development or detriment?

Mining is one of the most sensitive industries, due to its economic and environmental impacts. Clearly, it is significant to Australia. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), total industry gross value added of the mining industry increased by 21% over the period 2005–06 to 2009–10. More importantly, the mining industry's contribution to Australian GDP was 8.4% in 2009–10. In the period 2006–07 and 2010–11, the value of exports from the mining industry more than doubled.

The growth of Australian mining industry is evident. We, however, still question the roles of mining multinational corporations (MNCs) from Australia in the host countries, mostly developing nations in South East Asia, Africa and South America. The dialogue on the relationship between social and economic conditions and international mining activities is ongoing and robust. Current debate on the contributions of mining MNCs from Australia, in the form of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the host countries, is one of the most critical issues of government and international business.

Described as an 'almost truism', CSR by most Australian mining MNCs is perceived as a set of taken-for-granted ideas within society or institution but requires further attention among stakeholders in international mining industry.

It might be fair to claim that Australian mining MNCs in developing countries contribute to economic growth and, perhaps, better quality of life. However, we still wonder if mining MNCs can really do something 'better' to improve some chronic socio-economic conditions, such as poverty, equity or health, in the host countries.

Mining MNCs often operate in areas of developing countries which are characterized by limited governmental presence, a high incidence of poverty, a lack of basic social infrastructure, and other social and political problems. Financial assistance from mining MNCs alone to such countries – some $2.5 trillion has been provided in the last 50 years – has often not helped the neediest of citizens. In fact, it may have worsened their plight by sustaining corrupt or otherwise inefficient governments which contribute to their misery, by leaving nations with mountainous debt.

Clearly, Australian mining companies have the unmatched power and competence to work with various other stakeholders on socio-economic issues in the host countries. Increasingly world opinion, as well as the inclinations of their own managers and staff, urges Australian mining MNCs to use that power more effectively and fairly. However, mining MNCs lack a vehicle to make that transition in a sustainable and legitimate way. From the international business perspective, their involvement in development issue is limited due to a lack of clarity regarding their role, and the absence of detailed exploration of the links between socio-economic issues and Australian mining companies. There is an acute absence of research at the level of mining community in terms of the role Australian mining business can perform in social issues such as child labour, prostitution and human trafficking, corruption or poverty alleviation.

A study by a research team at RMIT University pointed that it is critical for Australian mining MNCs to engage with local and international stakeholders in the host countries prior to the execution of business strategy to 'contribute' back to the local community. We, however, learn that not all Australia companies do well when they try to engage with local stakeholders.

Occasional interaction with the local communities and stakeholders, persistent reliance on International Governmental Organisations (IGOs), Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), and considerable autonomy by Australian mining MNCs in the allocation and decision-making of various social projects in developing countries have lead to the failure to identify committed partners, engage them in authentic dialogue, and learn from each other. Several poverty alleviation programs conducted by Australian mining companies have degenerated into global 'charity' rather than serving to build local and sustainable community entrepreneurship development and fail to support long-term development among groups such as women, minorities or different religious groups.

In terms of social groups that Australian mining MNCs need to understand how they operate, it also includes a number of informal groups such as housewives group, influential families in the local villages, or religious leaders in the community. Some of them control the economic and political situation of the local community. They also play significant roles in supporting, promoting or demoting the contributions from Australian mining MNCs. Therefore, Australian companies must understand what role to play in different circumstances and cultural and managerial contexts.

Although it is technically difficult and time-consuming to revolutionize from business strategy to developmental strategy, we can argue that international mining industry can drive social change through their business operations. With political and technical support from various local and international stakeholders in international business, Australian mining industry will be able to act as a key change agent in some socio-economic problems in the host countries. I believe that is how Australian business should behave.

** The orginal version of this paper was published in Online Opinion at this link