Toward an institutional theory of escalation of commitment within sport management: A review and future directions

Institutional Theory and City Council as a Driver for Urban Sustainability

“…Such processes of globalization operate within an institutional environment, as an institution, or formal structure, does not just conform as a standard property but also as a mutual process. An important council of institutional theory and institutionalization, defined as a central process in the creation and perpetuation of long-lasting social groups, as in the case of two states in an international environment, especially exposed to the need for partnership between their actors, as suggested by SDG17 (Zhang 2020;Nite et al 2019).…”

“…In this sense, entities are influenced by the networks, fields, and societies in which they operate, in a process called "institutional contexts." Some are more susceptible to various pressures from these institutional contexts than others, especially those who do not have a high status in a given conjunctural scenario or related to a particular institutional arrangement (Nite et al 2019).…”

“…Therefore, in the asymmetry of costs, in the imbalance of an interdependent relationship, that the power of influence of certain actors stands out before others and tensions are generated in the international arena; it is this asymmetry that causes one country to "discipline" itself against the will of another and that sometimes encourages states to adopt positions based on pressure from international nongovernmental organizations. Such discipline, in terms of power, is achieved by one actor in relation to another when the former controls directly or (more often) indirectly the results to be achieved or desired by the latter (Virutamasen et al 2015;Geels 2020;Nite et al 2019). Hamilton (2003) in this same sense, but when citing the influence of civil society at a global level, indicates that the alternative to be fostered amid the complex interdependence of the actors as proposed by Keohane and Nye (1988) links material need and ethical objectives for freedom and the strengthening of citizens' participation and power.…”

“…Hamilton (2003) in this same sense, but when citing the influence of civil society at a global level, indicates that the alternative to be fostered amid the complex interdependence of the actors as proposed by Keohane and Nye (1988) links material need and ethical objectives for freedom and the strengthening of citizens' participation and power. Hamilton (2003) indicates that global transactions, institutions, and regional practices affect local resources, conditions, and possibilities, and in this way affect the assessment and satisfaction of local needs, but care must be taken with the transposition of certain solutions to the world level so that conflicts are avoided (Hamilton 2003;Nite et al 2019).…”

“…Still in relation to the interface with institutional theory, the multiplicity of international actors' agendas ends up meeting the fact that governance regimes are normally conducted to solve certain problems (Breitmeier et al 2006;Pourchot and Stivachtis 2014). The incentive to create specific regimes arises in connection with efforts to resolve relatively defined problems, as is the case with issues related to international monetary relations or maritime relations, among others (Nite et al 2019). In addition, there are cases in which key actors disagree about the nature or importance of the problem (as it does to some extent on issues related to the environment) or have diverging views on how the problem evolves or changes over time (Breitmeier et al 2006;Pourchot and Stivachtis 2014).…”