Purpose Using neo-institutional theory (three institutional mechanisms and Oliver’s strategic responses framework), this study aims to critically examine the strategic responses of English public universities to institutional pressures for carbon management (CM). Design/methodology/approach Diverse universities were selected to reflect institutional variation. Data were collected through 20 semistructured interviews with key sustainability-related managers responsible for CM. Approximately 800 documents were also analyzed. Findings This paper reveals how universities navigate complex and changing stakeholder demands through a combination of acquiescence, compromise, avoidance, defiance and manipulation strategies. The findings highlight the predominance of superficial adaptation over substantive transformation, driven by the weakening of institutional pressures, universities’ strategic resistance and power asymmetries. Practical implications The evidence suggests universities should create internal incentive systems, be cautious of highly visible but superficial initiatives, and democratize sustainability governance. Social implications Demonstrating credible and transparent CM progress not only reduces universities’ footprints but also influences public attitudes and professional behaviors through graduates, staff and community partnerships. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is among the first to apply Oliver’s strategic responses framework to analyze universities’ CM engagement, providing new insights into the embedded strategic agency of universities. It challenges traditional interpretations of mimetic behavior as a passive acquiescence response and reconceptualizes imitation as an active strategic tool. It also addresses the underexplored role of power dynamics in shaping institutional processes.
Zhang et al. (Wed,) studied this question.