Creating Participatory Spaces for the Poor:
Reconceptualizing Corporate Social Responsibility as Deliberative Processes
Canan Corus and Julie L. Ozanne
Canan Corus is Assistant Professor of Marketing, The Tobin College of Business, St. John’s
University (corusc@stjohns.edu). Julie L. Ozanne is the Sonny Merryman Professor of
Marketing, R. B. Pamplin College of Business, Virginia Tech (jozanne@vt.edu).
We present the methods of deliberative democracy as an approach to improve corporate
social responsibility particularly when firms work within host communities with subsistence
markets. Deliberative democratic theory is a governance structure where citizens, policy makers,
businesses, and any key stakeholders can come together in a non-coercive environment to
identify and discuss common problems and possible solutions. We focus on the issues pertaining
to the poor, marginalized communities in developing countries as parties who might particularly
benefit from the more equitable and inclusive processes of deliberative democracy.
Socially responsible corporate strategies offer long-term benefits for both firms and the
communities in which they operate (Laczniak and Murphy 2006). Unfortunately, corporate
social responsibility (CSR) efforts are often reactive and driven by modest legal and financial
accountability objectives like abiding with the law to avoid penalty or gaining consumer
endorsement to maintain demand. Far too often, firm actions are based on limited input from
communities (Garvey and Newell 2004) and are insensitive to local priorities (Lund-Thomsen
2005). Long-term ramifications are reflected in the narrowing down of livelihood options (Ger
1997) and increased community dependency as well as its consequences for sustainable
development (Margolis and Walsh 2003). Even when corporations do get involved in socially
responsible endeavors, their efforts may be undermined unless their intentions are preemptively
communicated and shared by constituents (Frynas 2005).
As opposed to reactive, top down approaches to CSR, we propose a shift toward
democratization of CSR efforts through greater stakeholder dialogue and participative forms of
decision making. Inclusive, preemptive social responsibility efforts are needed in order to
increase the long-term legitimacy of corporate decisions, particularly in contexts where rights of
citizens are insufficiently protected through legal or other formal channels, which is often the
case for poor people in subsistence contexts. Giving greater voice to communities at the preset of
corporate operations can help reverse trends of waning confidence as well as guide more
efficient operations. Toward this end, we present a deliberative democratic approach to CSR.
Deliberative inclusive processes (DIPs) are proposed as beneficial methods for gaining
insight to multifaceted interests of stakeholders (Ozanne, Corus, and Saatcioglu 2009). These
methods are grounded in the theory of deliberative democracy, which advocates for “reflective
and reasonably open-ended discussion under conditions of general equality (Button and Mattson
1999, 609).” Deliberative theorists advocate for unforced rational dialogue among free and equal
participants. Deliberation should be inclusive (i.e., every citizen has the right to participate in
discussion on pertinent issues), non-coercive (i.e., participants can freely engage in argument
without being oppressed or intimidated by other parties) and open (i.e., no topic of discussion is
off limits as long as it is related to the issue at hand, including the discussion process itself).
Deliberative and inclusive processes are designed to realize the conditions favorable for
effective deliberation (e.g., inclusive forums, well informed deliberators, face-to-face interaction)
and the procedural principles prescribed by deliberative democratic theory (e.g., reign of
reasonable arguments, respectful interaction, equal opportunity). We discuss some of the widely
used forms of DIPs: consensus conferences, deliberative mapping, scenario workshops, citizen
juries, study circles, and planning cells. We include multiple cases from developing countries, as
well as critiques of these cases and an assessment of the efficacy of various DIPs (Ozanne and
Saatcioglu 2008). These initiatives bring together citizens, policy makers, and business people to
reflect their perspectives and knowledge. We elaborate on the potential benefits of deliberative
processes for CSR, through constructing proactive, transparent, and inclusive dialogue
characterized by two-way information exchange and shared decisions between business and its
stakeholders. We also highlight the challenges that exist in terms of getting poor people to
participate in public discourses and some that have been used to overcome these problems.
References available upon request