Trust-building and leadership in multi-stakeholder forums

Lessons from Indonesia

Bibliographic Data

ID21719924
AuthorsA R Tamara, A Tamara, N M Heise Vigil, N Liswanti (0000-0002-5367-2527), S Arwida, S D Arwida, Allan Larson (0000-0002-2950-8583), A M Larson (0000-0001-7172-2228), Sarmiento Barletti (0000-0003-4808-4787), J P Sarmiento Barletti
Year2021
Volume23
Issue1
Pages43-58
Publication date2021-07-26
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe International Forestry Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1465-5489 • E-ISSN: 2053-7778
PublisherCommonwealth Forestry Association (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1505/146554821833466068
OpenAlexW3152602660
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited30

Multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs) are coordination spaces that enable discussions, negotiations, and joint planning between different kinds of actors. Proponents of MSFs claim that bringing different actors to the same table may help solve complex problems. Nevertheless, an MSF's process and outcomes are affected by its leadership and whether participants are able to trust each other. This paper examines the influence of trust and leadership in three MSFs addressing land and resource use in three subnational jurisdictions in Indonesia. The comparative analysis of semi-structured and Q-methodology interviews carried out with MSF participants and non-participants demonstrates the following. First, that the presence of conflicting interests of different stakeholders can hinder trust-building and cooperation. Understanding the historical relationships between stakeholders, including any positive informal relationships, is necessary to build a better strategy to handle antagonism and improve collaboration. Second, different challenges within MSFs require different kinds of leadership. A shared leadership may work in an MSF with participants with a history of positive relationships. A charismatic leader is preferable in MSFs with conflicts of interest or where participants are yet to trust each other

Charisma · Charismatic authority · Negotiation · Political science · Public relations · Social science · Sociology · Stakeholder · Computer Science · Psychology · Q Methodology Applications · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access