Climate Change and the Oil Industry: Common Problems, Different Strategies

The primary focus of most academic climate policy studies has been the robustness of climate science and the development of international negotiations and institutions, in which states, and sometimes societies, have been pinpointed as the key players. Systematic comparative studies of multinational and even global non-governmental actors have been in short supply. This research lacuna is particularly glaring since the position of a major non-state actorthe oil industrymay be crucial to the viability of the climate regime. This analysis shows that there are striking differences in the ways European-based and US-based oil companies have responded to the climate issuehere represented by the Royal Dutch/Shell Group and Exxon Mobiland that one major source of explanation for this difference is found in the national political contexts of the companies' home-base countries. The importance of political context implies that the conditions for changing oil companies' climate strategies are likely to be located in the political context rather than in the companies themselves.

[1]  Vladimir M Wolpert Environmental policy and industrial innovation: Strategies in Europe, the US and Japan: David Wallace The Royal Institute of International Affairs, London and Earthscan Publications Ltd, June 1995, 304 pp , 1996 .

[2]  J. B. Skjærseth North Sea Cooperation: Linking International and Domestic Pollution Control , 2000 .

[3]  David Vogel,et al.  National Styles of Regulation: Environmental Policy in Great Britain and the United States , 1986 .

[4]  Nigel Roome,et al.  Developing environmental management strategies , 1992 .

[5]  Abby Ghobadian,et al.  Extending linear approaches to mapping corporate environmental behaviour , 1998 .

[6]  E. Skolnikoff Same science, differing policies : the saga of global climate change , 1997 .

[7]  Paul N. Doremus The Myth of the Global Corporation , 1998 .

[8]  Alan Neale Organisational learning in contested environments: lessons from Brent Spar , 1997 .

[9]  Shades of Green: Political Parties and Dutch Environmental Policy , 1993 .

[10]  Julie L. Hass ENVIRONMENTAL (‘GREEN’) MANAGEMENT TYPOLOGIES: AN EVALUATION, OPERATIONALIZATION AND EMPIRICAL DEVELOPMENT , 1996 .

[11]  Wolfgang Lutz,et al.  The Kyoto Protocol: A Guide and Assessment , 1999 .

[12]  S. Agrawala,et al.  Indispensability and Indefensibility? The United States in the Climate Treaty Negotiations , 1999 .

[13]  David Wallace,et al.  Environmental policy and industrial innovation , 1995 .

[14]  T. Ketola The seven sisters: Snow whites, dwarfs or evil queens? A comparison of the official environmental policies of the largest oil corporations in the world , 1993 .

[15]  I. Rowlands Beauty and the Beast? BP's and Exxon's Positions on Global Climate Change , 2000 .

[16]  Thomas Risse-Kappen,et al.  Bringing Transnational Relations Back in: Non-State Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions , 1995 .

[17]  Kenneth Hanf,et al.  International Environmental Agreements and Domestic Politics , 2000 .

[18]  Simon Reich,et al.  National structures and multinational corporate behavior: enduring differences in the age of globalization , 1997, International Organization.

[19]  J. B. Skjærseth Environmental “Voluntary” Agreements: Conditions for Making Them Work , 2000 .

[20]  Martin Jänicke,et al.  Conditions for environmental policy success: An international comparison , 1992 .

[21]  J. Severinghaus,et al.  Global climate change. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  Javier Estrada,et al.  Environmental Challenges Confronting the Oil Industry , 1998 .