CSR in Extractive Industries: Critical Analysis through Social Constructivism, Hegemony, and Political Ecology
Kata Kunci:
CSR, Social Constructivism, Hegemony, Political Ecology, Extractive Industries, PT Berau Coal, Environmental JusticeAbstrak
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in the extractive industry is often positioned as a form of corporate concern and an instrument of sustainable development. However, practices in the field are usually paradoxical: on the one hand, they provide social benefits, on the other, they accompany environmental damage and society's dependence on companies. This article critically examines CSR practices in Indonesia's mining sector by highlighting the case of PT Berau Coal in East Kalimantan. The research uses a critical literature review that combines three theoretical lenses: Berger & Luckmann's social constructivism, Gramsci's hegemony, and political ecology. The analysis shows that CSR is a contested socio-political arena: (1) CSR is built as a social reality through externalization-objectification-internalization to normalize the role of corporations; (2) CSR functions as a hegemonic strategy that builds legitimacy, creates consensus, and dampens resistance through symbolic-institutional co-optation; and (3) from a political ecology perspective, CSR tends to depoliticize environmental issues and reproduce ecological injustice. The article concludes that CSR needs to be understood as a governance culture technology that works at a symbolic, ideological, and ecological level. The article's contribution lies in offering a critical integrative framework for assessing CSR in Indonesia's extractive sector and recommending a reorientation towards a community-based participatory model that is environmentally just
Referensi
Alkatiri, A., & Kiwang, M. (2023). Agama, korporasi, dan legitimasi sosial: Studi tentang CSR dan hegemonisasi perusahaan tambang. Jurnal Antropologi Indonesia, 44(1), 21–37.
Andrews, N. (2015). Elites, extractive industries, and low-income people in Africa: Perspectives from Ghana. Routledge.
Banerjee, S. B. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Critical So-ciology, 34(1), 51–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920507084623Bebbington, A., Hickey, S., & Mitlin, D. (2008). Can NGOs make a difference? The challenge of development alter-natives. Zed Books.
Berau Coal Energy Tbk. (2023). Annual Report 2022: Strengthening sustainability foundation. https://beraucoalenergy.co.id
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books.
Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: Critical perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81(3), 499–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00465.x
Bryant, R. L. (1998). A review of power, knowledge, and political ecology in the Third World. Pro-gress in Physical Geography, 22(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913339802200104
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039903800303
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. (Q. Hoare & G. Nowell Smith, Eds. & Trans.). International Publishers.
Hoff, A. (2020). CSR as performative governance: Corporate social responsibility and the reproduc-tion of extractive capitalism in Colombia. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 3(3), 750–771. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619878846
Kalt, T. (2024). Fossil capital and the myth of a green transition: Political ecology of CSR in global energy regimes. Global Environmental Politics, 24(1), 36–59.
Kementerian ESDM. 2018. Kepmen ESDM No. 1824K/ 30/ MEM/ 2018 tentang Pedoman Pelaksa-naan Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat. Jakarta.
Kovacic, Z. (2015). Cultural responsibility in CSR: Reinterpreting corporate involvement in cultural sustainability. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(2), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12057
Li, T. M. (2007). The will to improve: Governmentality, development, and the practice of politics. Duke University Press.
Levy, D. L., & Egan, D. (2003). A neo‐Gramscian approach to corporate political strategy: Conflict and accommodation in the climate change negotiations. Journal of Management Studies, 40(4), 803–829. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00361
Martinez-Alier, J. (2002). The environmentalism of low-income people: A study of ecological con-flicts and valuation. Edward Elgar.
Pemerintah Indonesia. 2007. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas. Jakarta.
Pemerintah Indonesia. 2020. UU No. 3 Tahun 2020 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang No-mor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara. Jakarta.
Pemerintah Indonesia. 2012. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 47 Tahun 2012 tentang Tanggung Jawab Sosial dan Lingkungan Perseroan Terbatas. Jakarta.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive ad-vantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.
Prno, J., & Slocombe, D. S. (2012). Exploring the origins of “social license to operate” in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories. Resources Policy, 37(3), 346–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2012.04.002
Robbins, P. (2012). Political ecology: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
