9.3 The Research Implications
135
tools necessary for developing social investment that is genuinely community-centred
and participatory.
9.3.2 Implication 2: Reframing Communities’ Roles
in the Community-Driven Development Principles
Participants’ discursive constructions of O&G social investment were likely shaped
not only by the expectations of communities, governments, and O&G companies, but
also by the international banks within the World Bank Group, the major funding institution of O&G activities (for more, see Chapter 2). Taken-for-granted understandings
that funding institutions (such as international banks, O&G companies, and NGOs)
know what is best for communities, implies a top-down approach to social investment. Specifically, the Community-Driven Development Principles drew on working
on discourses when referring to funding institutions, such as governments and NGOs,
as the planners of development programmes. Although the Community-Driven document portrayed communities as central actors in relation to their own development
processes, the document still framed communities as, initially, the recipients of social
investments. This could hinder communities’ sense of empowerment in relation to
social investment programmes, possibly compromising any possibility of working
with communities in a genuinely participatory way. In this sense, the CommunityDriven documents could acknowledge that communities have the expertise and abilities not only to drive the social investment programme, but also to initiate and shape
it according to their needs and knowledge.
9.3.3 Implication 3: Including and Acknowledging
the Challenges of Social Investment in the Guideline
Documents
The IFC Performance Standards and the World Bank Group Community-Driven
Principles do not acknowledge the possible obstacles that companies could encounter
when developing social investment, particularly through a participatory approach.
Guideline documents should acknowledge the main challenges associated with
social investment, and outline possible practical solutions. As an example, guideline documents could acknowledge upfront the conundrum of focussing on profit
versus communities’ actual aspirations and needs, and identify possible ways to
address this conundrum. In this way, social investment experts may find additional
support in the guideline documents on how to overcome some of the most common
and recurrent challenges associated with social investment, or at least, transparent
acknowledgement of the complexities associated with their work.
135
tools necessary for developing social investment that is genuinely community-centred
and participatory.
9.3.2 Implication 2: Reframing Communities’ Roles
in the Community-Driven Development Principles
Participants’ discursive constructions of O&G social investment were likely shaped
not only by the expectations of communities, governments, and O&G companies, but
also by the international banks within the World Bank Group, the major funding institution of O&G activities (for more, see Chapter 2). Taken-for-granted understandings
that funding institutions (such as international banks, O&G companies, and NGOs)
know what is best for communities, implies a top-down approach to social investment. Specifically, the Community-Driven Development Principles drew on working
on discourses when referring to funding institutions, such as governments and NGOs,
as the planners of development programmes. Although the Community-Driven document portrayed communities as central actors in relation to their own development
processes, the document still framed communities as, initially, the recipients of social
investments. This could hinder communities’ sense of empowerment in relation to
social investment programmes, possibly compromising any possibility of working
with communities in a genuinely participatory way. In this sense, the CommunityDriven documents could acknowledge that communities have the expertise and abilities not only to drive the social investment programme, but also to initiate and shape
it according to their needs and knowledge.
9.3.3 Implication 3: Including and Acknowledging
the Challenges of Social Investment in the Guideline
Documents
The IFC Performance Standards and the World Bank Group Community-Driven
Principles do not acknowledge the possible obstacles that companies could encounter
when developing social investment, particularly through a participatory approach.
Guideline documents should acknowledge the main challenges associated with
social investment, and outline possible practical solutions. As an example, guideline documents could acknowledge upfront the conundrum of focussing on profit
versus communities’ actual aspirations and needs, and identify possible ways to
address this conundrum. In this way, social investment experts may find additional
support in the guideline documents on how to overcome some of the most common
and recurrent challenges associated with social investment, or at least, transparent
acknowledgement of the complexities associated with their work.