Corporate environmentalism (CE) pertains to firm-level efforts to reduce pollution and resource use along with protecting natural habitats. Importantly, firms pledge to undertake these actions beyond the requirements of the law. Although historically CE efforts focused on resource conservation, their contemporary focus is on pollution reduction to reduce direct harm to humans and their communities and on the protection of environmental sinks. We review two broad categories of CE: direct CE and indirect CE. Direct CE, whether undertaken unilaterally or collectively, pertains to firms themselves adopting policies that reduce the environmental impact of their activities, or disclosing information about their environmental performance. Indirect CE refers to policies of actors (such as financial institutions) that encourage firms seeking their resources (through loans, venture capital, etc.) to commit to environmental stewardship policies. Three key lessons emerge. First, firm-level characteristics, particularly size and economic performance, encourage CE. Second, although pressure from external stakeholders, especially environmental nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), has played an important role in discouraging policies that harm the environment, its effect on encouraging proenvironmental activities remains unclear. Third, the literature is ripe with serious methodological issues. The endogeneity between firms' economic and environmental record and their CE efforts poses difficulty in drawing causal inferences.
While many scholars have studied “urban bias” in public policy, the potential for bias in the private provision of public goods has received little attention. Private certification is a mechanism encouraging private provision of environmental public goods. We show that within countries, there are often wide disparities in certification rates between firms located in urban and non-urban areas. However, these disparities can be mitigated if there is a countervailing force: scrutiny of firms' practices by key stakeholders. We suggest that the presence of strong civil society, independent media, a functioning state regulatory apparatus, and multinational owners can ameliorate the urban bias in certification uptakes. We test this argument with global, firm-level data covering over 40,000 firms in ninety-three countries. Our analyses suggest that an urban bias is mitigated when stakeholders—both public and private—have the freedom and capacity to scrutinize firms' activities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.