- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
This study aims to theorise and foster a better understanding of the strategies organisations adopt to respond to the risks and opportunities emerging from changing government climate change policies and the supporting management accounting adopted. Data include interviews and archival documents from five New Zealand electricity generators. We construct a theoretical framework that links climate change risks and opportunities to strategic responses. Climate change risk exposure increased during the period due to changes in the estimation/perception of climate change risks, market opportunities and regulatory uncertainty. Organisations' strategies changed in response, moving from a stable strategy to different combinations of anticipatory, proactive, and creative strategies, and finally regressing to a reactive strategy. Carbon management accounting changed to support the new strategy adopted in each time period. Long term physical and monetarised accounts for sustainability and extensive use of carbon information were prevalent during periods when the companies employed a proactive or creative strategy. In contrast, short-term physical accounts for unsustainability and limited use in decision-making were observed when the companies adopted stable, anticipatory or reactive strategies. Regulatory uncertainty was found to be the major constraint to a proactive strategy and carbon management accounting development in response to climate change.
This study develops a theoretical framework (Table 2), based on a literature review, to examine five New Zealand electricity generators by way of a case study based on indepth interviews and archival data. We specifically focus on i) the strategies generators adopt to respond to CC risks, and ii) consequent changes in carbon management accounting. Our case study informs the original framework and leads to a revised theoretical framework (Table 9). In addition, we modify our original metaview of causal effects (Figure 1) to emphasise the important role we found regulatory uncertainty to play (Figure 2). The study makes several contributions to the literature. First, we develop a framework that connects CC risks and opportunities with appropriate strategic responses. This framework essentially builds on the idea that the mixture of CC risks and market opportunities is the key driver of an organisation’s risk management strategy. Using this framework, our findings suggest contingency fit between CC exposure and risk management strategies. As the CC exposure increases, companies move from stable and anticipatory strategies to proactive strategies. Further, there was a shift over time from internal to external functions in implementing these strategies, reflecting the fact that the CC exposure was primarily driven by external stakeholder pressures and policy changes. However, companies revert to reactive strategies as CC exposure reduces. The modified framework based on our empirical findings also connects CC exposure with regulatory uncertainty and CMA design and use. This framework helps to theorise, explain, and predict the strategic and CMA responses of organisations exposed to different combinations of CC risk, opportunity and uncertainty.