Exploring the environmental strategy of big energy companies to drive sustainability

• Date: 01 November 2019
• Published date: 01 November 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2297
• Author: Mona Rashidirad,Anna Ruka

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Exploring the environmental strategy of big energy companies

to drive sustainability

Anna Ruka

1

| Mona Rashidirad

2

1

Organic Farming Company Z/S “Rietumi”,

Viresi, Latvia

2

Sussex Business School, University of Sussex,

United Kingdom

Correspondence

Mona Rashidirad, Sussex Business School,

University of Sussex, UK.

Email: m.rashidirad@sussex.ac.uk

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to provide an in-depth evaluation of the environmen-

tal strategy of the biggest energy companies to drive sustainability, i.e., for both busi-

ness and the environment as a collective entity. Rooted in the theory of Corporate

Social Responsibility (CSR), a secondary data analysis was conducted on the top five

energy companies (i.e., British Petroleum (BP), Exxon Mobil, Gazprom, Sinopec and

Saudi Aramco) as published by Enercom (2016) to investigate their approach to sus-

tainable development. To do so, each company's environmental strategy was evalu-

ated in order to gain a clear understanding of their implemented procedures for

sustainable development towards future. This research paper gives an insight into

the main energy companies' impact on nature and assesses how sustainable their

strategies are towards environmental issues. Through this evaluation, we clearly iden-

tified how climate change forces companies to be responsible towards society, the

economy, and the environment. This study's finding contributes to the present body

of knowledge and highlights how the big energy companies have taken responsibility

for their actions towards environmental issues.

1|INTRODUCTION

Big corporations, such as energy industry companies are constantly

under a loupe from environmental activists and interest organizations

(Guo, Tao, Bingxin, & Wang, 2017). According to Goldenberg (2013),

there are fewer than 100 companies in the world which have caused

two thirds of greenhouse gas emissions generated since the beginning

of the industrial era. Most of these businesses are in the energy sec-

tor, which is why it is unsurprising that energy companies are also the

biggest gas emission and pollution producers in the world (Heede,

2014) developed the initiative for this research article. An

environment-focused online platform called One Green Planet has

published a list of top energy companies leaving the worst impact on

the planet (Kantamneni, 2014). All of these companies work in the oil

and gas industry, which makes this research clearly focused on the

comparison of the biggest oil and gas companies in the world.

The international agreement of the Kyoto Protocol commits coun-

tries to setting internationally binding emission reduction targets

(United Nations, 2014). As demonstrated in the Framework Conven-

tion published by United Nations (2014), developed countries bear

the greatest responsibility for the current situation of high emission

levels, and are the countries of origin for the biggest oil and gas com-

panies. This summarizes the decision to choose five leader companies

in the oil and gas industry sector located in different parts of the

world. These companies are Exxon Mobile (USA), British Petroleum

(UK), Saudi Aramco (Saudi Arabia), Sinopec (China), and Gazprom

(Russia). To address environmental concerns in the context of strat-

egy, one of the fundamental theories which is widely used by scholars

(e.g., Lindgreen & Swaen, 2009; McWilliams, Siegel, & Wright, 2006)

is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) theory (Aggerholm & Trapp,

2014; Carroll, 2015; Moir, 2001). In addition to the environmental

aspect, CSR looks into economic, ethical, and legal aspects

(Schwartz & Carroll, 2003).

Although for decades there have been multiple CSR models that

could be applied to investigate this matter, this topic has not been as

relevant as it is now since environmental issues have become increas-

ingly aggravated (Agan, Kuzey, Acar, & Acikgoz, 2016). Thus, in this

research, we have chosen to use CSR Triple Bottom Line model by

JEL classification codes: K32, Q42, Q48, Q53, Q56.

DOI: 10.1002/jsc.2297

Strategic Change. 2019;28:435–443. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jsc © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 435