Skip to main content
Top

2021 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

4. Stakeholder Analysis

Authors : Robbert Kivits, Sukanlaya Sawang

Published in: The Dynamism of Stakeholder Engagement

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The previous chapters on stakeholder theory, stakeholder engagement and communicative planning have shown that stakeholders are important to any decision-making and planning process. This is particularly true for contentious projects where significant problems demand solutions, yet where stakeholders are not satisfied with their options by working alone, and where acceptable solutions are not emerging from traditional decision-making processes (Booher and Innes 2002). These problems often coincide with a complex social, economic and environmental setting. Such contentious projects attract large numbers of stakeholders, each with different backgrounds, perspectives, and objectives (Crocker 2007). This leads to a complex set of stakeholders holding many different positions with respect to the problem itself, and with respect to other stakeholders. A simple polarized dichotomy of for and against does not, as a consequence, exist in these contexts. This complicates the analysis and, subsequently, the classification and categorization of the stakeholders (Ashworth and Skelcher 2005; Achterkamp and Vos 2007; Greenwood 2007). The question thus becomes: how can these stakeholders be differentiated from each other and different attention be given to different stakeholders? In other words, how can the stakeholders be analysed to understand the uniqueness of each stakeholder. By examining the available literature on the topic, three main components that define a stakeholder will be identified: stakeholder salience, stakeholder interests, and stakeholder relations with each other.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Footnotes
1
The actual techniques used to engage in meaningful dialogue are outside the scope of this book, as the primary focus is on the stakeholder analysis framework
 
Literature
go back to reference Abers RN, Keck ME (2006) Muddy waters: the political construction of deliberative River basin governance in Brazil. Int J Urban Reg Res 30(3):601–622CrossRef Abers RN, Keck ME (2006) Muddy waters: the political construction of deliberative River basin governance in Brazil. Int J Urban Reg Res 30(3):601–622CrossRef
go back to reference Agle BR, Mitchell RK, Sonnenfeld JA (1999) Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Acad Manag J 42(5):507–525CrossRef Agle BR, Mitchell RK, Sonnenfeld JA (1999) Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Acad Manag J 42(5):507–525CrossRef
go back to reference Agle BR, Donaldson T, Freeman RE, Jensen MC, Mitchell RK, Wood DJ (2008) Dialogue: toward superior stakeholder theory. Bus Ethics Q 18(2):153–190CrossRef Agle BR, Donaldson T, Freeman RE, Jensen MC, Mitchell RK, Wood DJ (2008) Dialogue: toward superior stakeholder theory. Bus Ethics Q 18(2):153–190CrossRef
go back to reference Amaeshi KM, Crane A (2006) Stakeholder engagement: a mechanism for sustainable aviation. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 13(5):245–260CrossRef Amaeshi KM, Crane A (2006) Stakeholder engagement: a mechanism for sustainable aviation. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 13(5):245–260CrossRef
go back to reference Ashworth R, Skelcher C (2005) Meta-evaluation of the local government modernisation agenda: progress report on stakeholder engagement with local government. ODPM Publications, London Ashworth R, Skelcher C (2005) Meta-evaluation of the local government modernisation agenda: progress report on stakeholder engagement with local government. ODPM Publications, London
go back to reference Bardach E (1998) Getting agencies to work together. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC Bardach E (1998) Getting agencies to work together. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
go back to reference Barry J, Proops J (1999) Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology. Ecol Econ 28(3):337–345CrossRef Barry J, Proops J (1999) Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology. Ecol Econ 28(3):337–345CrossRef
go back to reference Biggs S, Matsaert H (1999) An actor-oriented approach for strengthening research and development capabilities in natural resource systems. Public Adm Dev 19(3):231–262CrossRef Biggs S, Matsaert H (1999) An actor-oriented approach for strengthening research and development capabilities in natural resource systems. Public Adm Dev 19(3):231–262CrossRef
go back to reference Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) UCINET 6 version 6.232: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, Natick Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) UCINET 6 version 6.232: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, Natick
go back to reference Bryson JM, Patton MQ, Bowman R (2011) Working with evaluation stakeholders: a rationale, step-wise approach and toolkit. Eval Program Plann 34:1–12CrossRef Bryson JM, Patton MQ, Bowman R (2011) Working with evaluation stakeholders: a rationale, step-wise approach and toolkit. Eval Program Plann 34:1–12CrossRef
go back to reference Cameron BG, Crawley EF, Loureiro G, Rebentisch ES (2008) Value flow mapping: using networks to inform stakeholder analysis. Acta Astronaut 62(4–5):324–333CrossRef Cameron BG, Crawley EF, Loureiro G, Rebentisch ES (2008) Value flow mapping: using networks to inform stakeholder analysis. Acta Astronaut 62(4–5):324–333CrossRef
go back to reference Crocker JT (2007) Organizational arrangements for the provision of cross-boundary transport infrastructure and services. (Doctor of philosophy). Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Crocker JT (2007) Organizational arrangements for the provision of cross-boundary transport infrastructure and services. (Doctor of philosophy). Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
go back to reference Dale AP, Lane MB (1994) Strategic perspectives analysis: a procedure for participatory and political social impact assessment. Soc Nat Resour 7:253–267CrossRef Dale AP, Lane MB (1994) Strategic perspectives analysis: a procedure for participatory and political social impact assessment. Soc Nat Resour 7:253–267CrossRef
go back to reference de Bruijn H, ten Heuvelhof E (2000) Networks and decision making, 1st edn. Utrecht, Lemma de Bruijn H, ten Heuvelhof E (2000) Networks and decision making, 1st edn. Utrecht, Lemma
go back to reference de Bruijn H, ten Heuvelhof E (2004) Process arrangements for variety, retention, and selection. Knowl Technol Policy 16(4):91–108CrossRef de Bruijn H, ten Heuvelhof E (2004) Process arrangements for variety, retention, and selection. Knowl Technol Policy 16(4):91–108CrossRef
go back to reference de Haan ARC (2007) Aircraft Technology’s contribution to sustainable development. (Doctor of philosophy). Delft University of Technology, Delft de Haan ARC (2007) Aircraft Technology’s contribution to sustainable development. (Doctor of philosophy). Delft University of Technology, Delft
go back to reference De Lopez TT (2001) Stakeholder management for conservation projects: a case study of ream National Park, Cambodia. Environ Manag 28:47–60CrossRef De Lopez TT (2001) Stakeholder management for conservation projects: a case study of ream National Park, Cambodia. Environ Manag 28:47–60CrossRef
go back to reference Dryzek JS, Berejikian J (1993) Reconstructive democratic theory. Am Polit Sci Rev 87(1):48–60CrossRef Dryzek JS, Berejikian J (1993) Reconstructive democratic theory. Am Polit Sci Rev 87(1):48–60CrossRef
go back to reference Eden C, Ackermann F (1998) Making strategy: the journey of strategic management. Sage, LondonCrossRef Eden C, Ackermann F (1998) Making strategy: the journey of strategic management. Sage, LondonCrossRef
go back to reference Etzioni A (1964) Modern organizations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ Etzioni A (1964) Modern organizations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
go back to reference Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston, MA Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston, MA
go back to reference Frooman J (1999) Stakeholder influence strategies. Acad Manag J 24:191–205 Frooman J (1999) Stakeholder influence strategies. Acad Manag J 24:191–205
go back to reference Gasper D, Apthorpe R (1996) Introduction: discourse analysis and policy discourse. Eur J Dev Res 8(1):1–15CrossRef Gasper D, Apthorpe R (1996) Introduction: discourse analysis and policy discourse. Eur J Dev Res 8(1):1–15CrossRef
go back to reference Gioia DA (1999) Practicability, paradigms, and problems in stakeholder theorizing. Acad Manag Rev 24(2):228–232 Gioia DA (1999) Practicability, paradigms, and problems in stakeholder theorizing. Acad Manag Rev 24(2):228–232
go back to reference Gomes RC, Gomes L (2008) Who is supposed to be regarded as a stakeholder for public organizations in developing countries? Public Manag Rev 10(2):263–275CrossRef Gomes RC, Gomes L (2008) Who is supposed to be regarded as a stakeholder for public organizations in developing countries? Public Manag Rev 10(2):263–275CrossRef
go back to reference Graham S, Healey P (1999) Relational concepts of space and place: issues for planning theory and practice. Eur Plan Stud 7(5):623–646CrossRef Graham S, Healey P (1999) Relational concepts of space and place: issues for planning theory and practice. Eur Plan Stud 7(5):623–646CrossRef
go back to reference Greenwood M (2007) Stakeholder engagement: beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. J Bus Ethics 74(4):315–327CrossRef Greenwood M (2007) Stakeholder engagement: beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. J Bus Ethics 74(4):315–327CrossRef
go back to reference Hames RD (1999) Governance and the global knowledge economy: some issues for Australia. In: Peters BG, Savioe DJ (eds) Reforming the public sector. Alan & Unwin, Crows Nest, pp 285–309 Hames RD (1999) Governance and the global knowledge economy: some issues for Australia. In: Peters BG, Savioe DJ (eds) Reforming the public sector. Alan & Unwin, Crows Nest, pp 285–309
go back to reference Hare M, Pahl-Wostl C (2002) Stakeholder categorization in participatory integrated assessment processes. Integr Assess 3(1):50–62CrossRef Hare M, Pahl-Wostl C (2002) Stakeholder categorization in participatory integrated assessment processes. Integr Assess 3(1):50–62CrossRef
go back to reference Jones TM (1993) Ethical decision-making by individuals in organizations: an issue-contingent model. Acad Manag Rev 16:366–395CrossRef Jones TM (1993) Ethical decision-making by individuals in organizations: an issue-contingent model. Acad Manag Rev 16:366–395CrossRef
go back to reference Jonker J, Foster D (2002) Stakeholder excellence? Framing the evolution and complexity of a stakeholder perspective of the firm. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 9:187–195CrossRef Jonker J, Foster D (2002) Stakeholder excellence? Framing the evolution and complexity of a stakeholder perspective of the firm. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 9:187–195CrossRef
go back to reference Keast RL, Hampson K (2007) Building constructive innovation networks: role of relationship management. J Constr Eng Manag 133(5):364–373CrossRef Keast RL, Hampson K (2007) Building constructive innovation networks: role of relationship management. J Constr Eng Manag 133(5):364–373CrossRef
go back to reference Keast RL, Mandell MP, Brown KA, Woolcock G (2004) Network structures: working differently and changing expectations. Public Adm Rev 64(3):363–371CrossRef Keast RL, Mandell MP, Brown KA, Woolcock G (2004) Network structures: working differently and changing expectations. Public Adm Rev 64(3):363–371CrossRef
go back to reference Key S (1999) Toward a new theory of the firm: a critique of stakeholder ‘theory’. Manag Decis 37(3/4):317CrossRef Key S (1999) Toward a new theory of the firm: a critique of stakeholder ‘theory’. Manag Decis 37(3/4):317CrossRef
go back to reference Kivits RA (2011) Three component stakeholder analysis. Int J Mult Res Approaches 5(3):67–98 Kivits RA (2011) Three component stakeholder analysis. Int J Mult Res Approaches 5(3):67–98
go back to reference Klijn E-H, Koppenjan JMF (2000) Public management and policy networks: foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Manag Rev 2(2):135–158 Klijn E-H, Koppenjan JMF (2000) Public management and policy networks: foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Manag Rev 2(2):135–158
go back to reference Klijn E-H, Koppenjan JFM, Termeer K (1995) Managing networks in the public sector: a theoretical study of management strategies in policy networks. Public Adm 73(3):437–454CrossRef Klijn E-H, Koppenjan JFM, Termeer K (1995) Managing networks in the public sector: a theoretical study of management strategies in policy networks. Public Adm 73(3):437–454CrossRef
go back to reference Kroesen M, Broer C (2009) Policy discourse, people’s internal frames, and declared aircraft noise annoyance: an application of Q-methodology. J Acoust Soc Am 126(1):195–207CrossRef Kroesen M, Broer C (2009) Policy discourse, people’s internal frames, and declared aircraft noise annoyance: an application of Q-methodology. J Acoust Soc Am 126(1):195–207CrossRef
go back to reference Laplume AO, Sonpar K, Litz RA (2008) Stakeholder theory: reviewing a theory that moves us. J Manag 34(6):1152–1189 Laplume AO, Sonpar K, Litz RA (2008) Stakeholder theory: reviewing a theory that moves us. J Manag 34(6):1152–1189
go back to reference Lynn L (1996) Public management as art, science and profession. Chatham House, Chatham, NJ Lynn L (1996) Public management as art, science and profession. Chatham House, Chatham, NJ
go back to reference Mainardes EW, Alves H, Raposo M (2011) Stakeholder theory: issues to resolve. Manag Decis 49(2):226–252CrossRef Mainardes EW, Alves H, Raposo M (2011) Stakeholder theory: issues to resolve. Manag Decis 49(2):226–252CrossRef
go back to reference Marin B, Mayntz R (1991) Policy networks: empirical evidence and theoretical considerations. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt-am-Main Marin B, Mayntz R (1991) Policy networks: empirical evidence and theoretical considerations. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt-am-Main
go back to reference Marsden PV (1990) Network data and measurement. In: Scott WR, Blake J (eds) Annual review of sociology, vol 16. Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, CA, pp 435–463 Marsden PV (1990) Network data and measurement. In: Scott WR, Blake J (eds) Annual review of sociology, vol 16. Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, CA, pp 435–463
go back to reference Mattingly JE, Greening DW (2002) Public-interest groups as stakeholders: a ‘stakeholder salience’ explanation of activism. In: Andriof J, Waddock S, Husted B, Rahman SS (eds) Unfolding stakeholder thinking: theory, responsibility and engagement. Greenleaf, Sheffield, pp 266–279 Mattingly JE, Greening DW (2002) Public-interest groups as stakeholders: a ‘stakeholder salience’ explanation of activism. In: Andriof J, Waddock S, Husted B, Rahman SS (eds) Unfolding stakeholder thinking: theory, responsibility and engagement. Greenleaf, Sheffield, pp 266–279
go back to reference Mayer I, Edelenbos J, Monnikhof R (2005) Interactive policy development: undermining or sustaining democracy? Public Adm 83(1):179–199CrossRef Mayer I, Edelenbos J, Monnikhof R (2005) Interactive policy development: undermining or sustaining democracy? Public Adm 83(1):179–199CrossRef
go back to reference McLaughlin MW (2005) Listening and learning from the field: tales of policy implementation and situated practice. In: Lieberman A (ed) The roots of educational change. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 58–72CrossRef McLaughlin MW (2005) Listening and learning from the field: tales of policy implementation and situated practice. In: Lieberman A (ed) The roots of educational change. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 58–72CrossRef
go back to reference Mendelow A (1991) Proposed model on stakeholder ranking. Paper presented at the second international conference on information systems, Cambridge, MA Mendelow A (1991) Proposed model on stakeholder ranking. Paper presented at the second international conference on information systems, Cambridge, MA
go back to reference Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag J 22(4):853–886 Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag J 22(4):853–886
go back to reference Muir J, Rhodes ML (2008) Vision and reality: community involvement in Irish urban regeneration. Policy Polit 36(4):497–520CrossRef Muir J, Rhodes ML (2008) Vision and reality: community involvement in Irish urban regeneration. Policy Polit 36(4):497–520CrossRef
go back to reference Olander S, Landin A (2008) A comparative study of factors affecting the external stakeholder management process. Constr Manag Econ 26(6):553–561CrossRef Olander S, Landin A (2008) A comparative study of factors affecting the external stakeholder management process. Constr Manag Econ 26(6):553–561CrossRef
go back to reference Oliver C (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. Acad Manag Rev 16(1):145–179CrossRef Oliver C (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. Acad Manag Rev 16(1):145–179CrossRef
go back to reference Parent M, Deephouse D (2007) A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers. J Bus Ethics 75(1):1–23CrossRef Parent M, Deephouse D (2007) A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers. J Bus Ethics 75(1):1–23CrossRef
go back to reference Pfeffer J (1981) Power in organisation. Pitman, Marshfield, MA Pfeffer J (1981) Power in organisation. Pitman, Marshfield, MA
go back to reference Prell C, Hubacek K, Reed M (2007) Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Sustain Res Ins 22:1–21 Prell C, Hubacek K, Reed M (2007) Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Sustain Res Ins 22:1–21
go back to reference Reed MS, Graves A, Dandy N, Posthumus H, Hubacek K, Morris J, Stringer LC (2009) Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J Environ Manag 90(5):1933–1949CrossRef Reed MS, Graves A, Dandy N, Posthumus H, Hubacek K, Morris J, Stringer LC (2009) Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J Environ Manag 90(5):1933–1949CrossRef
go back to reference Rowley TJ (1997) Moving beyond dyadic ties: a network theory of stakeholder influences. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):887–910CrossRef Rowley TJ (1997) Moving beyond dyadic ties: a network theory of stakeholder influences. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):887–910CrossRef
go back to reference Rowley TJ (2000) Does relational context matter? An empirical test of a network theory of stakeholder influences. In: Logsdon J, Wood D, Benson L (eds) Research in stakeholder theory, 1997–1998: the Sloan Foundation Minigrant project. The Sloan Foundation Minigrant Project, Clarkson Centre for Business Ethics, Toronto Rowley TJ (2000) Does relational context matter? An empirical test of a network theory of stakeholder influences. In: Logsdon J, Wood D, Benson L (eds) Research in stakeholder theory, 1997–1998: the Sloan Foundation Minigrant project. The Sloan Foundation Minigrant Project, Clarkson Centre for Business Ethics, Toronto
go back to reference Ryan NF, Head B, Keast RL, Brown KA (2006) Engaging indigenous communities: towards a policy framework for indigenous community justice programs. Soc Policy Adm 40(3):304–321CrossRef Ryan NF, Head B, Keast RL, Brown KA (2006) Engaging indigenous communities: towards a policy framework for indigenous community justice programs. Soc Policy Adm 40(3):304–321CrossRef
go back to reference Savage GT, Nix TH, Whitehead CJ, Blair JD (1991) Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Acad Manag Exec 5:61–75 Savage GT, Nix TH, Whitehead CJ, Blair JD (1991) Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Acad Manag Exec 5:61–75
go back to reference Scharpf FW (1994) Games real actors could play: positive and negative coordination in embedded negotiations. J Theor Polit 6(1):27–53CrossRef Scharpf FW (1994) Games real actors could play: positive and negative coordination in embedded negotiations. J Theor Polit 6(1):27–53CrossRef
go back to reference Scott J (1991) Social network analysis: a handbook. Sage, London Scott J (1991) Social network analysis: a handbook. Sage, London
go back to reference Shandas V, Messer WB (2008) Fostering green communities through civic engagement: community-based environmental stewardship in the Portland area. J Am Plan Assoc 74(4):408–418CrossRef Shandas V, Messer WB (2008) Fostering green communities through civic engagement: community-based environmental stewardship in the Portland area. J Am Plan Assoc 74(4):408–418CrossRef
go back to reference Skelcher C, Mathur N, Smith M (2005) The public governance of collaborative spaces: discourse, design and democracy. Public Adm 83(3):573–596CrossRef Skelcher C, Mathur N, Smith M (2005) The public governance of collaborative spaces: discourse, design and democracy. Public Adm 83(3):573–596CrossRef
go back to reference Swift T (2001) Trust, reputation and corporate accountability to stakeholders. Bus Ethics Eur Rev 10(1):16–26CrossRef Swift T (2001) Trust, reputation and corporate accountability to stakeholders. Bus Ethics Eur Rev 10(1):16–26CrossRef
go back to reference Torfing J (2005) Governance network theory: towards a second generation. Eur Polit Sci 4(3):305–315CrossRef Torfing J (2005) Governance network theory: towards a second generation. Eur Polit Sci 4(3):305–315CrossRef
go back to reference Uhl-Bien M, Marion R, McKelvey B (2007) Complexity leadership theory: shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Q Leadership Complex 18(4):298–318 Uhl-Bien M, Marion R, McKelvey B (2007) Complexity leadership theory: shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Q Leadership Complex 18(4):298–318
go back to reference van de Riet OAWT (2003) Policy analysis in multi-actor policy settings: navigating between negotiated nonsense and superfluous knowledge, 1st edn. Eburon, Delft van de Riet OAWT (2003) Policy analysis in multi-actor policy settings: navigating between negotiated nonsense and superfluous knowledge, 1st edn. Eburon, Delft
go back to reference van Eeten MJG (2001) Recasting intractable policy issues: the wider implications of the Netherlands civil aviation controversy. J Policy Anal Manage 20(3):391–414CrossRef van Eeten MJG (2001) Recasting intractable policy issues: the wider implications of the Netherlands civil aviation controversy. J Policy Anal Manage 20(3):391–414CrossRef
go back to reference van Eeten MJG, Loucks D, Roe E (2002) Bringing actors together around large-scale water systems: participatory modeling and other innovations. Know Technol Policy 14(4):94–108CrossRef van Eeten MJG, Loucks D, Roe E (2002) Bringing actors together around large-scale water systems: participatory modeling and other innovations. Know Technol Policy 14(4):94–108CrossRef
go back to reference Verbong GPJ, Geels FW, Raven RPJM (2008) Multi-niche analysis of dynamics and policies in Dutch renewable energy innovation journeys (1970-2006): hype-cycles, closed networks and technology-focused learning. Tech Anal Strat Manag 20(5):555–573CrossRef Verbong GPJ, Geels FW, Raven RPJM (2008) Multi-niche analysis of dynamics and policies in Dutch renewable energy innovation journeys (1970-2006): hype-cycles, closed networks and technology-focused learning. Tech Anal Strat Manag 20(5):555–573CrossRef
go back to reference Watts DJ (2003) Small worlds: the dynamics of networks between order and randomness. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ Watts DJ (2003) Small worlds: the dynamics of networks between order and randomness. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
go back to reference Achterkamp M, Vos J (2007) Critically identifying stakeholders. Syst Res Behav Sci 24(1):3–14CrossRef Achterkamp M, Vos J (2007) Critically identifying stakeholders. Syst Res Behav Sci 24(1):3–14CrossRef
go back to reference Crosby BC, Bryson JM (2005) A leadership framework for cross-sector collaboration. Public Manag Rev 7(2):177–201CrossRef Crosby BC, Bryson JM (2005) A leadership framework for cross-sector collaboration. Public Manag Rev 7(2):177–201CrossRef
go back to reference Lukes S (1974) Power: a radical view, 1st edn. Palgrave Macmillan, New YorkCrossRef Lukes S (1974) Power: a radical view, 1st edn. Palgrave Macmillan, New YorkCrossRef
go back to reference Lukes S (2004) Power: a radical view, 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, New York Lukes S (2004) Power: a radical view, 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, New York
go back to reference Young RA (1978) Steven Lukes’s radical view of power. Société Québécoise de Science Politique / Can J Polit Sci 11(3):639–649CrossRef Young RA (1978) Steven Lukes’s radical view of power. Société Québécoise de Science Politique / Can J Polit Sci 11(3):639–649CrossRef
go back to reference Gallie WB (1978) Contested concepts. Can J Polit Sci 11(3):635–638 Gallie WB (1978) Contested concepts. Can J Polit Sci 11(3):635–638
go back to reference Butts CT (2008) A relational event framework for social action. Sociol Methodol 38(1):155–200CrossRef Butts CT (2008) A relational event framework for social action. Sociol Methodol 38(1):155–200CrossRef
go back to reference Marsh D (1998) The utility and future of policy network analysis. In: Marsh D (ed) Comparing policy networks. Open University Press, Buckingham, pp 185–198 Marsh D (1998) The utility and future of policy network analysis. In: Marsh D (ed) Comparing policy networks. Open University Press, Buckingham, pp 185–198
go back to reference Ostrom E (2000) Collective action and the evolution of social norms. J Econ Perspect 14(3):137–158CrossRef Ostrom E (2000) Collective action and the evolution of social norms. J Econ Perspect 14(3):137–158CrossRef
go back to reference Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Chrisman JJ, Spence LJ (2011) Toward a theory of stakeholder salience in family firms. Bus Ethics Q 21(2):235–255CrossRef Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Chrisman JJ, Spence LJ (2011) Toward a theory of stakeholder salience in family firms. Bus Ethics Q 21(2):235–255CrossRef
go back to reference Stoney C, Winstanley D (2001) Stakeholding: confusion or utopia? Mapping the conceptual terrain. J Manag Stud 38(5):603–626CrossRef Stoney C, Winstanley D (2001) Stakeholding: confusion or utopia? Mapping the conceptual terrain. J Manag Stud 38(5):603–626CrossRef
go back to reference Bonacich P (1987) Power and centrality: a family of measures. Am J Sociol 92(5):1170–1182CrossRef Bonacich P (1987) Power and centrality: a family of measures. Am J Sociol 92(5):1170–1182CrossRef
go back to reference Klijn E-H, Skelcher C (2007) Democracy and governance networks: compatible or not? Public Adm 85(3):587–608CrossRef Klijn E-H, Skelcher C (2007) Democracy and governance networks: compatible or not? Public Adm 85(3):587–608CrossRef
go back to reference Waxenberger B, Spence LJ (2003) Reinterpretation of a metaphor: from stakes to claims. Strateg Chang 12:239–249CrossRef Waxenberger B, Spence LJ (2003) Reinterpretation of a metaphor: from stakes to claims. Strateg Chang 12:239–249CrossRef
go back to reference Fassin Y (2009) The stakeholder model refined. J Bus Ethics 84(1):113–135CrossRef Fassin Y (2009) The stakeholder model refined. J Bus Ethics 84(1):113–135CrossRef
go back to reference Phillips RA (1997) Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Bus Ethics Q 7(1):51–66CrossRef Phillips RA (1997) Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Bus Ethics Q 7(1):51–66CrossRef
go back to reference Trevino LK, Weaver GR (1999) The stakeholder research tradition: converging theorists – not convergent theory. Acad Manag Rev 24(2):222–227 Trevino LK, Weaver GR (1999) The stakeholder research tradition: converging theorists – not convergent theory. Acad Manag Rev 24(2):222–227
Metadata
Title
Stakeholder Analysis
Authors
Robbert Kivits
Sukanlaya Sawang
Copyright Year
2021
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70428-5_4