Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Recent regulatory interventions are beginning to mandate climate disclosure in listed firms. Although compelling, prior studies demonstrate that firms can symbolically commit to climate and environmental disclosures yet not undertake action. Neo-institutional theory (NIT) suggests that two strategies exist: the legitimacy perspective, which manifests in symbolic efforts, and the efficiency perspective, which is more consistent with substantive efforts. In this article, we apply NIT to assess the climate transition efforts in large, publicly traded firms in five countries with similar regulatory and economic profiles (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States). We gauge climate efforts by membership in corporate climate initiatives (CCIs) and the integration of climate action plans (CAPs). Of the eight CCIs and three CAPs investigated, we find that only two CCIs and one CAP help to improve emissions performance. The majority of firms in our sample, therefore, demonstrate the legitimacy perspective of NIT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Herman et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: