trends and future of sustainable development - TransEco

Union expressed its’ support to the project stating that Botnia is an innocent victim of the disputebetween Uruguay and Argentina.In addition to opposing and supporting stakeholders, groups that did not have a clear stance in thecase were involved, mainly due to the opposing stakeholders’ requests for them to interfere with or solvethe conflict. These neutral stakeholders can be categorised into conciliators (the Brazilian government,church representatives, king of Spain, the Finnish government and the embassy, and the Green CrossInternational), courts of justice (the Hague ICJ and the Mercosur tribunals) and financiers (the WorldBank’s IFC). These stakeholders did not have relationships with each other.Second, the salience analysis was performed. The salience analysis was used to examine thestakeholder relations in the case, and the analysis was based on the attributes of power, legitimacy andurgency. High salience stakeholders possess all three attributes and are termed definitive stakeholders.Moderately salient stakeholders, i.e. expectant stakeholders, possess two of the attributes and lowsalience stakeholders, who possess only one of the attributes, are called latent stakeholders. (Mitchell etal., 1997). The results of the salience analysis are presented in table 3.Table 3.Stakeholder salience and involvement in the case.Definitive stakeholdersExpectantstakeholdersLatent stakeholdersSupportingstakeholdersBotnia’ managementUruguayan governmentCitizens of Fray BentosEuropean UnionOpposingstakeholdersArgentineangovernmentCEAGNGOsOpposing ArgentineansLocal governmentNeutralstakeholdersFinnish governmentHague ICJBrazilian governmentChurchIFCFinnish embassyKing of SpainMercosur tribunalsWorld BankIn table 3 the stakeholders are categorized into definitive, expectant and latent stakeholdersaccording to the attributes that they possess. In addition, the stakeholders are categorized intosupporting, opposing and neutral stakeholder to illustrate their different roles in the case. Thestakeholders of the case can be almost entirely categorized as definite stakeholders possessing power,legitimacy and urgency or as expectant stakeholders possessing legitimacy and urgency. The only latentstakeholder, the European Union (EU) possessed only one attribute, legitimacy.The definitive, supportive stakeholders, Botnia’s management and the government of Uruguay hadan interest to ensure the continuation of the construction works of the mill. The interest of themanagement was legitimate and urgent, as they had a deadline for starting up the operations. Thegovernment of Uruguay had an interest to have the pulp mill ready, but it did not want to do so at theexpense of the economy and international relations. The government had power to influence Botnia and366