Pulling back the curtain of environmental accountability: How boundaries shape environmental identities in the SKI industry

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to explore the important role boundaries play in back-office framing of environmental engagement. This is of particular interest because it is not clear how organizations in an industry without standardized environmental reporting navigate their boundaries behind the scenes and why they engage with the environment the way they do. This element of their environmental identity offers important insights into the emergence of sustainability reporting.Design/methodology/approachGuided by Miles and Ringham (2019) the authors conduct an ethnography of the Montana ski industry. The ethnography includes extensive on-site observations at nine Montana ski areas and interviews with 16 ski area executives, two regulators and a land development executive.FindingsThe authors find three key boundaries – accountability structure, degree of regulatory burden and impact measurement approach – that shape the back-office economic and environmental framing of ski executives (Goffman, 1959, 1974). From these back-office frames the authors identify four front-office cultural performances – community ecosystem, quantitative ownership, approval seeking and advocacy platform – that represent the environmental engagement strategies at these resorts.Practical implicationsUnderstanding the relationships between boundaries and environmental engagement is an important step in developing appropriate industry-wide environmental accountability and sustainability expectations. The study’s findings extend to other industries that are both highly dependent on the environment and are in the early stages of developing environmental reporting standards.Originality/valueSki resorts operate in an industry that is impacted by changes in the natural environment. The authors chronicle the process by which boundaries lead to framing which leads to environmental engagement in this weather-dependent industry. The authors explain the process of environmental identity building, the result of which both precedes environmental reporting and puts such reporting into context. In this sense, the authors show how boundaries are set and maintained in the ski resort industry, and how fundamental these boundaries are to the development of individual companies' environmental engagement strategies.

Introduction to special issue on ethnographies of accountability

“…The authors argue that the resorts' accountability structures (linked to organisational aim and type) explain their response to industry regulation and impact measurement approach. Further, these accountability structures assist in explaining the different cultural types of environmental practices that Gamble and Caton (2022) observed. Family businesses and other partnerships were likelier to engage deeply with community ecosystems.…”

“…We received 20 submissions, six of which have been contained in the special issue and the authors of four submissions were invited to resubmit for consideration in other issues of AAAJ. The six papers' order of appearance are: Gamble and Caton (2022), Azambuja et al (2023), Arikan (2023), Besson et al (2023), Goncharenko (2022) and Torchia et al (2023).…”

“…In an ethnographic examination of ski executives' back-office economic and environmental framing, Gamble and Caton (2022) spotlight three boundaries and four front-office environmental engagement strategies used within nine Montana ski resorts. This study sheds light on how these resorts balance their economic objectives alongside their ideas about (what they perceive as) the physical environment.…”