PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 4, 2018Strategic Management Journal102 citations

Scale matters: T he scale of environmental issues in corporate collective actions

View Full Paper
FBFrances BowenPBPratima BansalNSNatalie Slawinski

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Research Summary: Much of the research on corporate collective action to manage common pool resources is focused on coordinated actions, such as voluntary programs, rather than collaborative actions, such as technology sharing. In this article, we examine inductively the collective actions taken by a consortium of 12 oil sands companies to address three environmental issues of different scale. We identified a set of organizing rules that determined whether the relationship among industry members would be collaborative or competitive, and found that the organizing rules for collaborative collective action were more effective for smaller scale issues (i.e., tailings ponds and water) than the larger scale issue (i.e., greenhouse gas emissions). Our findings contribute to research on the competitive dynamics of collaborating with competitors and on industry self‐regulation. Managerial Summary: Many environmental issues, such as climate change, water quality, and contaminated land, are caused by the overexploitation of commonly shared natural resources. Firms will often overuse resources because their cost of use is less than the benefit that accrues. In Alberta’s oil sands, 12 of the major oil sands operators, all competitors, have agreed to collaborate by sharing technology, which goes against the received wisdom of competition. This multiparty collaboration among competitors, while still relatively rare, is becoming increasingly commonplace. In this article, we outline the rules that allow this collaboration to flourish. Our most important finding is that the rules are shaped by the scale of the issue being managed, not the size of the collaboration.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bowen et al. (2018) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1f391dd03d2b72e723310fhttps://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2764
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The Importance of Spatial Effects for Environmental Health Policy and Research2002 · 18 citations
  2. 2Oil sands development contributes elements toxic at low concentrations to the Athabasca River and its tributaries2010 · 488 citations
  3. 3Nested externalities and polycentric institutions: must we wait for global solutions to climate change before taking actions at other scales?2010 · 469 citations
  4. 4Competitor Analysis and Interfirm Rivalry: Toward a Theoretical Integration1996 · 660 citations
  5. 5Reconceptualizing the Competition— Cooperation Relationship2008 · 332 citations