Sanktioner, Certifiering och CSR - En idéanalys av Världsbankens och UNECA:s syn på hanteringen av Kongos konfliktmineraler
(2019) FKVA22 20182Department of Political Science
- Abstract (Swedish)
- The trade in conflict minerals in eastern Congo contributes to the duration of the intrastate conflict. This essay will analyze documents of two organizations, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa and the World Bank, in relative to the question regarding trade in conflict minerals. Views of accountability and ideas of how to deal with conflict minerals differ between the organizations. The questions asked are therefore how much they differ, and what their views on accountability are. The documents will be analyzed through a critical perspective with a method of qualitative analysis of ideas. The analysis will focus on three aspects; sanctions, certification and Corporate Social Responsibility and will be exemplified by trade in... (More)
- The trade in conflict minerals in eastern Congo contributes to the duration of the intrastate conflict. This essay will analyze documents of two organizations, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa and the World Bank, in relative to the question regarding trade in conflict minerals. Views of accountability and ideas of how to deal with conflict minerals differ between the organizations. The questions asked are therefore how much they differ, and what their views on accountability are. The documents will be analyzed through a critical perspective with a method of qualitative analysis of ideas. The analysis will focus on three aspects; sanctions, certification and Corporate Social Responsibility and will be exemplified by trade in eastern Congo. The critical perspective will be drawn upon theories of Kuntala Lahiri Dutt (2006) and Roland Dannreuther (2013) and exemplified in practice of a report of the non-governmental organization Global Witness. The essay finds that the World Bank and UNECA differ from Global Witness and critical theory in their views of sanctions, certification, CSR, and accountability. Although UNECA manages to combine a problem-solving theory with elements of critical theory to a greater extent than the World Bank. Another dividing line can also be seen between the views on mandatory measures in both CSR, certification and sanctions. The willingness to compromise on fundamental values is also a clear watershed as UNECA and the World Bank are more pragmatic while Global Witness values its commitment to its core values. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8966566
- author
- Prestgaard, Elin LU and Blomgren Strinnvik, Saga LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- FKVA22 20182
- year
- 2019
- type
- L2 - 2nd term paper (old degree order)
- subject
- keywords
- Demokratiska Republiken Kongo, Konfliktmineraler, Världsbanken, UNECA, Idéanalys, Sanktioner, Certifieringar, CSR.
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8966566
- date added to LUP
- 2019-02-22 15:41:26
- date last changed
- 2019-02-22 15:41:26
@misc{8966566, abstract = {{The trade in conflict minerals in eastern Congo contributes to the duration of the intrastate conflict. This essay will analyze documents of two organizations, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa and the World Bank, in relative to the question regarding trade in conflict minerals. Views of accountability and ideas of how to deal with conflict minerals differ between the organizations. The questions asked are therefore how much they differ, and what their views on accountability are. The documents will be analyzed through a critical perspective with a method of qualitative analysis of ideas. The analysis will focus on three aspects; sanctions, certification and Corporate Social Responsibility and will be exemplified by trade in eastern Congo. The critical perspective will be drawn upon theories of Kuntala Lahiri Dutt (2006) and Roland Dannreuther (2013) and exemplified in practice of a report of the non-governmental organization Global Witness. The essay finds that the World Bank and UNECA differ from Global Witness and critical theory in their views of sanctions, certification, CSR, and accountability. Although UNECA manages to combine a problem-solving theory with elements of critical theory to a greater extent than the World Bank. Another dividing line can also be seen between the views on mandatory measures in both CSR, certification and sanctions. The willingness to compromise on fundamental values is also a clear watershed as UNECA and the World Bank are more pragmatic while Global Witness values its commitment to its core values.}}, author = {{Prestgaard, Elin and Blomgren Strinnvik, Saga}}, language = {{swe}}, note = {{Student Paper}}, title = {{Sanktioner, Certifiering och CSR - En idéanalys av Världsbankens och UNECA:s syn på hanteringen av Kongos konfliktmineraler}}, year = {{2019}}, }