IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/buspol/v16y2014i1p31-63n6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Socializing the C-suite: why some big-box retailers are “greener” than others

Author

Listed:
  • van der Ven Hamish

    (University of Toronto, Political Science, Sidney Smith Hall, Room 3018, 100 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada)

Abstract

Despite a considerable push by policy-makers to incentivize green business practices, take-up of environmental initiatives amongst North American retailers has been highly uneven. While some “big-box” retailers have launched ambitious environmental initiatives, others continue to conduct business as usual. This paper asks: why do some mega-retailers commit to ambitious environmental agendas while others in the same sector do not? And how can the answer to this question improve public policy? I investigate these questions using comparative case studies of four North American big-box retailers: Wal-Mart, Target, Costco and Kroger. My findings suggest that the socialization of senior executives through multi-stakeholder sustainability networks is the critical variable accounting for progressive environmental practices in some corporations and not others. This finding suggests that existing public policies that focus on making the business case for sustainability are based on incomplete assumptions about why companies “go green.” It further suggests that socialization theory can help explain broader instances of corporate social responsibility and proposes that scholars in this field should devote more attention to the composition of socializing groups.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Ven Hamish, 2014. "Socializing the C-suite: why some big-box retailers are “greener” than others," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 31-63, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:buspol:v:16:y:2014:i:1:p:31-63:n:6
    DOI: 10.1515/bap-2013-0024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/bap-2013-0024
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/bap-2013-0024?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susan Park, 2005. "How Transnational Environmental Advocacy Networks Socialize International Financial Institutions: A Case Study of the International Finance Corporation," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 5(4), pages 95-119, November.
    2. Börzel, Tanja A. & Hönke, Jana & Thauer, Christian R., 2012. "Does it really take the state?," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 1-34, October.
    3. Schaper, Marcus, 2007. "Leveraging Green Power: Environmental Rules for Project Finance," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Manuel Branco & Lúcia Rodrigues, 2006. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 111-132, December.
    5. Brown, Dana L. & Vetterlein, Antje & Roemer-Mahler, Anne, 2010. "Theorizing Transnational Corporations as Social Actors: An Analysis of Corporate Motivations," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, April.
    6. Judy Brown & Michael Fraser, 2006. "Approaches and perspectives in social and environmental accounting: an overview of the conceptual landscape," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 103-117, March.
    7. Bernhagen, Patrick & Mitchell, Neil J. & Thissen-Smits, Marianne, 2013. "Corporate citizens and the UN Global Compact: explaining cross-national variations in turnout," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 63-85, April.
    8. Aseem Prakash, 2001. "Why do firms adopt ‘beyond‐compliance’ environmental policies?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(5), pages 286-299, September.
    9. Forest Reinhardt, 1999. "Market Failure and the Environmental Policies of Firms: Economic Rationales for “Beyond Compliance” Behavior," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 3(1), pages 9-21, January.
    10. Newell,Peter & Paterson,Matthew, 2010. "Climate Capitalism," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521194853, September.
    11. Checkel, Jeffrey T., 2005. "International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(4), pages 801-826, October.
    12. Ven van de, B. & Graafland, J.J., 2006. "Strategic and moral motivation for corporate social responsibility," MPRA Paper 20278, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Bernhagen Patrick & Mitchell Neil J. & Thissen-Smits Marianne, 2013. "Corporate citizens and the UN Global Compact: explaining cross-national variations in turnout," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 63-85, March.
    14. Mares,Isabela, 2003. "The Politics of Social Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521534772, September.
    15. Brown Dana L & Vetterlein Antje & Roemer-Mahler Anne, 2010. "Theorizing Transnational Corporations as Social Actors: An Analysis of Corporate Motivations," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-39, April.
    16. Lijphart, Arend, 1971. "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 682-693, September.
    17. Amir Barnea & Amir Rubin, 2010. "Corporate Social Responsibility as a Conflict Between Shareholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 71-86, November.
    18. Ruggie, John Gerard, 2004. "Reconstituting the Global Public Domain: Issues, Actors and Practices," Working Paper Series rwp04-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    19. Finnemore, Martha, 1996. "Norms, culture, and world politics: insights from sociology's institutionalism," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 325-347, April.
    20. Kantz, Carola, 2007. "The Power of Socialization: Engaging the Diamond Industry in the Kimberley Process," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 1-20, December.
    21. Börzel Tanja A. & Hönke Jana & Thauer Christian R., 2012. "Does it really take the state?," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(3), pages 1-34, October.
    22. Newell,Peter & Paterson,Matthew, 2010. "Climate Capitalism," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521127288, September.
    23. Mares,Isabela, 2003. "The Politics of Social Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521827416, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel Witte, 2020. "Business for Climate: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Policy Support from Transnational Companies," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(4), pages 167-191, Autumn.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brown Dana L & Vetterlein Antje & Roemer-Mahler Anne, 2010. "Theorizing Transnational Corporations as Social Actors: An Analysis of Corporate Motivations," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-39, April.
    2. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Private Regulation in the Global Economy: A (P)Review," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-40, October.
    3. Ben Lahouel, Béchir & Ben Zaied, Younes & Managi, Shunsuke & Taleb, Lotfi, 2022. "Re-thinking about U: The relevance of regime-switching model in the relationship between environmental corporate social responsibility and financial performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 498-519.
    4. Corrie Mazereeuw-van der Duijn Schouten & Johan Graafland & Muel Kaptein, 2014. "Religiosity, CSR Attitudes, and CSR Behavior: An Empirical Study of Executives’ Religiosity and CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 437-459, September.
    5. Hofferberth Matthias, 2011. "The Binding Dynamics of Non-Binding Governance Arrangements. The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights and the Cases of BP and Chevron," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(4), pages 1-32, December.
    6. Andrew Bryant & Jennifer J. Griffin & Vanessa G. Perry, 2020. "Mitigating climate change: A role for regulations and risk‐taking," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 605-618, February.
    7. Steven Bernstein & Benjamin Cashore, 2007. "Can non‐state global governance be legitimate? An analytical framework," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(4), pages 347-371, December.
    8. Adela Toscano-Valle & Antonio Sianes & Francisco Santos-Carrillo & Luis A. Fernández-Portillo, 2022. "Can the Rational Design of International Institutions Solve Cooperation Problems? Insights from a Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, June.
    9. Lindsey M. Bier & Candace L. White, 2021. "Cultural diplomacy as corporate strategy: an analysis of Pasona Group’s “New Tohoku” program in Japan," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(2), pages 180-192, June.
    10. May-Britt Stumbaum, 2015. "The diffusion of norms in security-related fields: views from China, India and the EU," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 331-347, September.
    11. Francesco Gangi & Antonio Meles & Eugenio D'Angelo & Lucia Michela Daniele, 2019. "Sustainable development and corporate governance in the financial system: Are environmentally friendly banks less risky?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 529-547, May.
    12. Höpner, Martin & Waclawczyk, Maximilian, 2012. "Opportunismus oder Ungewissheit? Mitbestimmte Unternehmen zwischen Klassenkampf und Produktionsregime," MPIfG Discussion Paper 12/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    13. Zhaoyang Guo & Siyu Hou & Qingchang Li, 2020. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Value: The Moderating Effects of Financial Flexibility and R&D Investment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Arouri, Mohamed & Gomes, Mathieu & Pukthuanthong, Kuntara, 2019. "Corporate social responsibility and M&A uncertainty," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 176-198.
    15. Busemeyer, Marius R., 2011. "Varieties of cross-class coalitions in the politics of dualization: Insights from the case of vocational training in Germany," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/13, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    16. Li, WeiWei & Padmanabhan, Prasad & Huang, Chia-Hsing, 2024. "ESG and debt structure: Is the nature of this relationship nonlinear?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    17. Wonik Kim, 2007. "Social Insurance Expansion and Political Regime Dynamics in Europe, 1880–1945," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 88(2), pages 494-514, June.
    18. Andrea Vacca & Antonio Iazzi & Demetris Vrontis & Monica Fait, 2020. "The Role of Gender Diversity on Tax Aggressiveness and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Italian Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    19. Sylvain Marsat & Guillaume Pijourlet & Muhammad Ullah, 2021. "Is there a trade‐off between environmental performance and financial resilience? International evidence from the subprime crisis," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(3), pages 4061-4084, September.
    20. repec:zbw:rwirep:0364 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Kinderman, Daniel, 2014. "Challenging varieties of capitalism's account of business interests: The new social market initiative and German employers' quest for liberalization, 2000-2014," MPIfG Discussion Paper 14/16, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:buspol:v:16:y:2014:i:1:p:31-63:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.