Global corporate environmentalism: Theoretical expectations and empirical experience

Abstract

Since the mid-1980s the concept of corporate environmentalism has taken hold among global stakeholders, promising improved environmental health and safety (EH&S) performance at multinational (MNC) facilities in less developed countries. In this article we examine corporate environmentalism through two lenses: (1) our own empirical case studies of three Third World subsidiaries of USA-based multinationals; (2) evolving theories on EH&S performance at MNC subsidiaries in less developed countries. We suggest that over the past decade there has been a convergence of three theoretical perspectives -neoclassical, radical and ecological -toward consistent predictions of improved EH&S performances and relations with host country governments. However, important differences among the three perspectives remain in how each interprets improved EH&S performance in the context of long-term benefits to corporations, host countries, workers, local publics and the global community. While we find that the neoclassical economic perspective is most consistent with the empirical findings of our three case studies, we also note some debatable neoclassical assumptions concerning whether all stakeholders benefit mutually from superior CCC 09644733 / 951

Tracing the connections between international business and communicable diseases

“…A recent JIBS Perspective urged international business scholars to research the link between grand challenges and international business via an interdisciplinary approach (Buckley, Doh, & Benischke, 2017). Yet, despite a potential link between international business activities and communicable diseases, we rarely observe international business studies addressing this particular relationship, other than studies examining occupational health and safety (Arnold & Bowie, 2003Collings, Scullion, & Morley, 2007;Himmelberger & Brown, 1995) or other issues where health directly affects the financial bottom line, including accessibility to medicines and healthcare services in the global pharmaceutical industry (Flanagan & Whiteman, 2007;Ghauri & Rao, 2009;Leisinger, 2005Leisinger, , 2009, multinationals' activities designed to enhance local community health in poor host countries (Gifford & Kestler, 2008;Gold, Hahn, & Seuring, 2013;Van Cranenburgh & Arenas, 2014), the role of food and tobacco multinationals in addressing noncommunicable diseases (Gertner & Rifkin, 2018;Mukherjee & Ekanayake, 2009;Palazzo & Richter, 2005;Tempels, Blok, & Verweij, 2020), and product safety assurance in global value chains (Bapuji & Beamish, 2019;Scruggs & Van Buren, 2016). Coincidentally, public health researchers have already engaged in these conversations, mostly questioning multinationals' role in global health from a critical perspective (Baum, Sanders, Fisher, Anaf, Freudenberg, & Friel, 2016;Baum & Anaf, 2015;Freudenberg, 2014;Kadandale, Marten, & Smith, 2019;Kickbusch, Allen, & Franz, 2016;Moodie, Stuckler, Monteiro, Sheron, Neal, & Thamarangsi, 2013;Mu ¨ller et al, 2021;Stuckler, McKee, Ebrahim, & Basu, 2012).…”

Twitch the Corporate Green Tale - An Empirical Study on the Learning Styles to Enhance Green Supply Chain Practices

“…'Ecological literacy' invites organizations to conceive change for better environmental performance in a more holistic context (Espinosa and Porter, 2011;Himmelberger and Brown, 1995). This vision prioritizes the development of ecological practices by recognizing the precise role of learning in constructing change (Fiksel, 1997).…”

Saints and sinners: the environmental stance of multinationals in eastern and western Europe

“…(i) environmental strategy: factors influencing strategy formulation in general and environmental strategy in particular; threat/ response analysis; external versus internal drivers (Roome, 1992;Welford and Gouldson, 1993;Porter and Van der Linde, 1995;Starik et al, 1996) and (ii) ethical behaviour of MNCs: the ethical stance of MNCs overseas; business ethics and corporate environmental performance; corporate legitimacy (Himmelberger and Brown, 1995;Dobson, 1992;Welford, 1995;Sutton, 1993).…”