4.3 Article

The Drivers of Corporate Climate Change Strategies and Public Policy: A New Resource-Based View Perspective

Journal

BUSINESS & SOCIETY
Volume 56, Issue 4, Pages 545-575

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0007650315578450

Keywords

public policy; Carbon Disclosure Project; climate change; resource-based view; GISTe model; walk the talk; walk I; walk II

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Effective public policy to mitigate climate change footprints should build on data-driven analysis of firm-level strategies. This article's conceptual approach augments the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm and identifies investments in four firm-level resource domains (Governance, Information management, Systems, and Technology [GISTe]) to develop capabilities in climate change impact mitigation. The authors denote the resulting framework as the GISTe model, which frames their analysis and public policy recommendations. This research uses the 2008 Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) database, with high-quality information on firm-level climate change strategies for 552 companies from North America and Europe. In contrast to the widely accepted myth that European firms are performing better than North American ones, the authors find a different result. Many firms, whether European or North American, do not just talk about climate change impact mitigation, but actually do walk the talk. European firms appear to be better than their North American counterparts in walk I, denoting attention to governance, information management, and systems. But when it comes down to walk II, meaning actual Technology-related investments, North American firms' performance is equal or superior to that of the European companies. The authors formulate public policy recommendations to accelerate firm-level, sector-level, and cluster-level implementation of climate change strategies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available