Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
The environmental conduct of multinational companies (MNCs) is very controversial. On the one hand, it has been argued that MNCs exploit cross-country differences in environmental regula tions by locating dirty operations in countries with lax environmental regulations and by adapting their subsidiaries' environmental policies, technol ogies, and standards to local country conditions (Gladwin, 1987; K?rten, 1995; Vernon, 1998). On the other hand, it has been suggested that MNCs increasingly self-regulate their environmental con duct (Christmann Rappaport United Nations, 1993). Self-regulation refers to a firm's adoption of environmental poli cies or performance standards that exceed the re quirements of government regulations. MNCs can self-regulate their environmental conduct by stan dardizing their environmental policies worldwide, thus reducing their ability to exploit cross-country differences in environmental regulations. Although evidence from the 1970s and 1980s supports the adaptation of MNCs' environmental policies and standards to local conditions (Gladwin, 1987; United Nations, 1988), more recent evidence sug gests that MNCs are increasingly implementing more globally uniform environmental policies (Brown, Derr, Renn, Dowell, Hart, Rappaport Prahalad Yip, 1992). Empirical studies have analyzed determinants of global standardization for MNCs' overall strategies as well as for different functional strategies (Hannon, Huang, Johansson Kobrin, 1991; Laroche, Kirpalani, Pons, Arora Christmann Hen riques Sharma, 2000). Both ex ternal stakeholders and internal firm characteris tics have been identified as determinants of firms'
Petra Christmann (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: