Power in global value chains

Abstract

This version of the article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the publisher's final version AKA Version of Record.

Environmental Upgrading and Suppliers’ Agency in the Leather Global Value Chain

“…However, reducing EnvU to a top-down approach initiated by a lead firm would be misleading. Mimicking the terminology adopted by [54] to describe power in GVCs, we could say that our results reflect the importance of adopting a multipolarity approach to EnvU, which allows the disclosure of the agency of the actors that engaged in the GVC, each with different motives to go green, different understandings of what green is, and different competences to pursue that direction.…”

From “obligated embeddedness” to “obligated Chineseness”? Bargaining processes and evolution of international automotive firms in China's New Energy Vehicle sector

“…The value in the typologies of power outlined by Dallas et al. (2017) for this study lies in its categorization of distinguishable expressions of power which emerge in different bargaining scenarios and institutional contexts. While Dallas et al thought of those categories primarily as an evolution of predominant types of power‐relationships which one value chain goes though as it develops (Dallas et al., 2017), it is also clear that different actor constellations and power transmission mechanisms occur simultaneously.…”

“…(2017) for this study lies in its categorization of distinguishable expressions of power which emerge in different bargaining scenarios and institutional contexts. While Dallas et al thought of those categories primarily as an evolution of predominant types of power‐relationships which one value chain goes though as it develops (Dallas et al., 2017), it is also clear that different actor constellations and power transmission mechanisms occur simultaneously. The example of China illustrates that decisions impacting the evolution of a GPN can be explained with the attributes (such as power balances and institutional context) of the bargaining processes that precede them.…”

“…In a more recent conceptualization by Dallas et al, both of these perspectives are adapted in a two‐dimensional scheme in which the authors distinguish between direct and diffuse transmissions of power which can take place in a dyadic (between two bargaining parties) or collective (multiple‐actor) context. The resulting matrix describes four different ways in which power expresses itself as a determinant for interrelationships and bargaining outcomes (Table 1; Dallas, Ponte, & Sturgeon, 2017).…”

Political Economy, Markets, and Institutions: Preference Formation as a Point of Entry

“…It is also about learning and the growth of firms and organizations. Social relations also provide the clues to how complex global value chains resolve their internal governance problems through arm's-length or intrafirm internalized relationships (Gereffi, Humphrey, and Sturgeon 2005;Dallas, Ponte, and Sturgeon 2019).…”