اکتشاف انگیزه، درایور ها و موانع مدیریت کربنی: سهام FTSE 100بریتانیا
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|20080||2007||12 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : European Management Journal, Volume 25, Issue 6, December 2007, Pages 475–486
This paper explores the motivations, drivers and barriers to carbon management, using the companies of the FTSE 100 as the empirical case. After giving an overview of climate change activities undertaken by FTSE 100 companies, the paper attempts to distinguish between motivations and drivers for corporate carbon management. Motivations are regarded as those factors that closely relate to the innate concern of business for profit and comparative advantage while drivers are considered to be the factors that are rooted in wider societal pressures and concern for the environment. Based on the UK study, the paper presents five motivations and five drivers for corporate activity on climate change. Finally, current barriers to corporate activity on climate change are discussed and issues identified that should be explored in greater depth in order to generate a more precise understanding of the carbon management activities of corporate actors.
Over the last few years, some interesting research on the climate strategy of corporate actors has begun to emerge (Skjaerseth and Skodvin, 2003, Levy and Newell, 2000, Levy and Newell, 2005, Hofman, 2001, Kolk and Levy, 2001, Dunn, 2002, Kolk and Pinkse, 2004 and Hoffman, 2006). The growth in the academic interest on corporate climate strategy is related to the seeming shift in the position of corporate actors with respect to international action on climate change. This shift is firstly in the form of a movement away from an essentially oppositional stance towards a more co-operative relationship with the actors that are supporting strong action against climate change. Perhaps the most striking evidence of this shift is in the recent proliferation of Business-NGO partnerships for climate action, including those involving historically antagonistic environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth (Cowe, 2004 and Drake et al., 2004). The second and related shift is that many companies are no longer merely concentrating on attempts to influence policy debates but are also now pursuing varieties of firm-specific practical actions against climate change within the framework of a corporate climate strategy. Although there have been commitments made by industries in the past (e.g. 1997 Keidanren voluntary action plan in Japan), there is now, arguably, a critical mass of activity with numerous businesses actively engaging in various kinds of programs and measures to address climate change (Levy and Newell, 2000, Kolk and Levy, 2001, Kolk and Pinkse, 2004 and Hoffman, 2006). In the literature, attempts to understand the actual dynamics of corporate emissions reduction programs and the key factors that either drive or inhibit action have been relatively sparse (exceptions are Kolk and Levy, 2001, Kolk and Pinkse, 2004 and Hoffman, 2006). Kolk and Pinkse (2004, 305) recently pointed to this gap when they observe that whilst there has been an immense increase in the range and depth of corporate climate activities in the past decade, existing classifications for climate change strategies remain somewhat rooted in the ‘corporate (political) activity’ in the early stages of the international climate regime development and are therefore ‘not yet able to grasp the new realities properly.’ Some studies have already sought to fill this gap (e.g. Kolk and Pinkse, 2005); this paper aims to contribute by exploring the motivations, drivers and barriers to climate action among the UK FTSE 100 companies based on a range of different desk sources. The expectation is that the exploration should generate insights into the actual dynamics of corporate carbon reduction programmes and in particular lead to a better understanding of the specific factor-policy blend needed to further leverage corporate action against climate change. Moreover, it is expected that such insights would prove helpful in terms of a better appreciation of the critical underlying motive behind the recent apparent shift in the stance of corporate actors on climate change. The paper first briefly examines some conceptual issues around the notion of corporate climate strategy with some indications of their relevance to the main focus of the paper. Next, an overview is given of the specific activities that UK FTSE 100 companies are taking to tackle climate change. The rest of the paper focuses on the exploration of the different factors that motivate, drive and/or inhibit business climate actions. Finally, the paper indicates some of the critical issues that need to be further explored in the context of understanding the likely actions of corporate actors in the context of a future international climate co-operative arrangement.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Disclosure by the top UK companies suggests a considerable awareness that climate change has become a matter of strategic choice for business and industry. A number of UK FTSE 100 companies has begun reporting notable steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by means of specific firm and market-based actions. Ten years after the Kyoto Protocol was agreed and two years after it came into force, there are signs indicating the maturation and diversification of corporate climate strategy among major UK companies. From an initial oppositional stance and political lobbying, companies are now engaging in a wide range of positive actions including basic technological change, behavioural change, product and process-based innovations, emissions trading and public education. This paper has explored why companies may choose to undertake carbon management programs as well as the obstacles they may face. The analysis reveals that companies are prompted to take climate actions for a wide variety of reasons. These range from self-interest and profit oriented reasons through to governmental and public pressure to ethical considerations. There is cause to believe that these reasons are not mutually exclusive. Rather, they appear to interact in different mixes to influence companies’ carbon strategic choices. Moreover, the actual reasoning and particular factor-mix that underpin companies’ carbon management programmes are determined by several factors including location, sector, area of operation, historical experience, area of focus and the unique challenges being faced by the companies. It is not clear to what extent managers are aware of the exact factor-mix that drive their climate actions and how these should affect their focus as well the style of communicating their carbon management programmes. What seems more likely is that companies are willing to justify their actions on the basis of the reasons that appear popular per time. This is clearly reflected in companies’ mixed messages on whether carbon management is a matter of corporate social responsibility or strategic business decision. Although over 86% of the UK FTSE companies report their carbon management programmes under the corporate social responsibility section of their websites, they tend to indicate, at the same time, that they no longer perceive climate change as matter of peripheral business concern but as one that could radically alter the very nature of business operations. It has been suggested that these mixed messages point to a lack of precise understanding of the critical logic behind the recent shift in the stance corporate actors on climate change. Whilst recognising the existence of some important overlaps, this paper has suggested that the underpinning logic of business actors could be divided between factors that relate to the inherent tendency of business to maximise profit and those that are closely connected to the wider societal environmental concerns and pressure on business. A better recognition of this distinction may be important because it not only provides a means of gaining insight into the internal dynamics of corporate climate strategy but may also be helpful in designing a good policy mix that would serve to realise optimal involvement of business in both national and international action against climate change. A good understanding of the motivations, drivers and barriers to corporate climate actions on its own adds enormous value to global climate policy development. However, there is a need to go beyond this level to actually contemplating how these various factors might interact with notional key features of the emerging climate regime and what such various degrees of interaction might mean for policy design and implementation. For example, in-depth studies would be required to establish the veracity of this differentiation and any interdependent linkages that might exist. It is also desirable to probe the relative importance of the factors as well as the existence (if any) of even deeper causal categories. Finally, in-depth studies would be helpful in understanding the expectations and preferences of actors with respect to different existing and future options for a global climate regime and how corporate actors might be expected to respond to various policies in future climate regimes.