Abstract
This doctoral dissertation contributes to the academic literature on diakonia science and diakonia management by exploring global diakonia in the palm oil industry in Indonesia. Palm oil for almost three decades has become the backbone of the Indonesian economy. In the Indonesian context, this industry's nature is characterized by the dominance of private transnational corporations, which causes the community, indigenous people, laborers, and smallholders, cornered and face serious unintended social, cultural, economic, and environmental implications. Palm oil brings not only positive but also negative impacts. Even though the industry is taking place in Indonesia, the global supply chain links this sector worldwide. On the basis of this observation, churches are called to practice diakonia in this industry, globally.
Data for this research were obtained through library research and empirical study. Interviews were conducted with the community in Baidub, Papua, together with church workers, governments, and NGO activists. Findings indicate that the community faces food access challenges, land grabbing, unfair payment, and forced lifestyle and cultural change. The study details the historical evolution and contemporary palm oil industry in Indonesia and worldwide. A thorough analysis of the palm oil industry and global market demands, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), and palm oil sustainability certifications, enrich the interdisciplinary finding in this thesis.
Towards a more sustainable palm oil industry: maximizing the development benefits to the community while minimizing the negative social, cultural and ecological impacts, the nature of a free-market economy will be replaced with embedded economics to bring the relations back to their place. One outcome of the research is global diakonia with a go-between role, to bring the embeddedness to the state, business, and society. The projected ecclesiological model from this dissertation is interdisciplinary and multirationality.
Keywords:
Palm oil industry, Global value chain, Global diakonia, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Regulatory ethics, Communication, Economic ethics.
Reformation heute
(2018)
An den zentralen Begriffen von „Schuld“ und „Schulden“ lotet diese Arbeit die Systemkonkurrenz von Religion und Geld aus. Ausgehend vom ökonomischen Paradigma des „homo oeconomicus“ wird dazu zunächst die Differenz von Schuld und Schulden anhand von vier Dimensionen (soziale, temporale, mediale und soteriologische Dimension) untersucht. In einem zweiten Schritt werden systemkonforme Unterbrechungen der Reziprozitätslogik in geldwirtschaftlichen und – anhand ausgewählter biblischer Referenzen – biblisch-theologischen Zusammenhängen dargestellt und auf ihre Auswirkungen im Hinblick auf die Bewältigung von Systemmängeln untersucht. Es ergibt sich eine systemimmanente Notwendigkeit systemfremd begründeter Systemunterbrechungen für Schuldendynamiken. Im Zusammenhang von Schuld und Sünde wird die Unterbrechung auch einer theologischen Reziprozitätslogik durch soziomorphe Symboliken in der Rede vom Kreuz präzisiert. Ergebnis ist eine gabe- und anerkennungs-theologische Deutung des Kreuzesgeschehens im Sinne einer „relationalen Soteriologie“, die in ihrer Befreiungsdynamik der auf Autonomie gerichteten geldwirtschaftlichen Schuldendynamik exakt entgegen läuft und auf eine (allerdings kommunikative) Freiheit gerichtet ist.
English:
Master-Thesis: ‘Watch out, money! Praise of debt - favour of the gift. God and money in conflict’
Using the central concepts of ‘guilt’ and ‘debt’, this master thesis explores the systemic competition between religion and money. Based on the economic paradigm of ‘homo oeconomicus’, the difference between guilt and debt is first analysed on the basis of four dimensions (social, temporal, medial and soteriological dimensions). In a second step, system-compliant interruptions of the logic of reciprocity in monetary and - on the basis of selected biblical references - biblical-theological contexts are presented and analysed for their effects with regard to overcoming system deficiencies. The result is a system-immanent necessity of system interruptions for debt dynamics that are not system-immanent. In the context of guilt and sin, the interruption of a theological logic of reciprocity is also specified through sociomorphic symbolism in the theology of the cross. The result is a theological interpretation of Jesus’ crucifixion in terms of gift and recognition in the sense of a ‘relational soteriology’, which in its liberation dynamic runs exactly counter to the monetary debt dynamic aimed at autonomy, and which is directed towards (albeit communicative) freedom.
