Terrorism as an external threat factor in global value chains

Abstract

Global terrorism incidents and business-related threats have intensified in scale and scope over the past 17 years. Multinational corporations are thus exposed to direct and indirect negative impacts on their international activities. Previous research lacks thorough theoretical frameworks to analyze these impacts. The global value chain (GVC) framework offers a perspective that is both comprehensive and quantifiable for the evaluation and expansion of this prior research. The GVC enables us to assess terrorism impacts on international business overall and at each stage of the value chain. On this basis, we develop a "terrorism resilience theory") that can be used in future theoretical and managerial analyses of the response to terrorism risk. K E Y W O R D Sglobal terrorism, global value chain, multinational corporations (MNCs), risk, terrorism resilience theory, terrorism risk, uncertainty

European Cities Prone to Terrorist Threats: Phenomenological Analysis of Historical Events towards Risk Matrices and an Early Parameterization of Urban Built Environment Outdoor Areas

“…It is clear that the political, religious and/or economical relevance of States influence the potential risk exposure [37,38] but this represents a reference parameter when describing and comparing it at the international level. Due to the aims of the work, the risk assessment of terrorism in UBE and UBEOAs requires independence from international relevance, scaling the analysis at the local level.…”

Exploiting bullets: international business and the dynamics of war

“…Despite the continual spread of MNEs across the globe with greater exposure to state and non-state violent actors, IB research has historically dedicated more attention to non-violent political risks such as government expropriation risk and weak formal institutions. Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the USA, however, new interest has emerged in the risks of terrorism on IB (Czinkota et al , 2010; Bader et al , 2020). This terrorism-IB literature clearly depicts the vulnerability of MNEs and employees to political violence and significantly reminds IB scholars of the violent side of political risk.…”

“…Despite the war being the most lethal and enduring form of political violence for business (Witte et al , 2017), research on international business (IB) and war remains small and selective, focusing on war and foreign direct investment (FDI) (Li, 2008; Li and Vashchilko, 2010; Driffield et al , 2013; Skovoroda et al , 2019) and corporate responsibility (Oetzel et al , 2010; Getz and Oetzel, 2010; Katsos and AlKafaji, 2019; Jamali and Mirshak, 2010). Then, because of the strongly functionalist and managerial nature of IB research (Roberts and Dorrenbacher, 2012, 2014), not surprisingly, IB literature on war and political violence predominately views conflict as a business risk factor and focuses on how organizations can mitigate this risk (Li, 2008; Li and Vashchilko, 2010; Dai et al , 2017; Driffield et al , 2013; Skovoroda et al , 2019; Bader et al , 2020). The prevailing thinking is that war affects MNE operations, their transaction costs and legitimacy.…”

Managing global value chain triversity and innovation performance using social mechanisms

“…Managers should realize that engaging in GVC and gaining IP improvements is not straightforward (Bader, Suder, & Grosse, 2020; Gentile‐Lüdecke, Halaszovich, & Lundan, 2019). First and foremost, managers need to assess the optimum level of triversity that they should deploy and can manage efficiently to generate the desired gains in IP.…”