Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to advance a proactive perspective on business exit and develop a typology of exit strategies.Design/methodology/approachThis is a research paper, which builds on extant theoretical and empirical research.FindingsBusiness exit, along with entry, is an integral part of corporate strategy that a firm could utilize to reshuffle its business portfolio and embrace new opportunities. In today's changing environment characterized by high uncertainty and high velocity, it becomes increasingly important for firms to manage business exit deliberately and proficiently. The traditional perspective which generally perceives exits as failures or responses to failures is no longer sufficient. A proactive perspective on exit could be advanced to better inform exit research and practice. Adopting the dynamic capabilities approach, this paper develops a typology of four exit strategies – retreat, redeploy, realign, and reconfigure – and examines the essential tasks of these strategies as well as the corresponding dynamic capabilities required for their successful implementation.Originality/valueThe proactive perspective advanced in this paper systematically coalesces and elaborates on extant research and formally advocates the importance and feasibility of proactive exit. The typology offered not only helps integrate the dynamic capabilities approach with exit research but also helps better inform exit practice.

This study examines whether and how institutions matter in shaping firms' decoupling or symbolic actions through analysis of the adoption of substantive vs. symbolic restructuring programs by Chinese listed firms that are subject to delisting pressure in the period of 1998-2004. We argue that firms' decision to pursue more or less substantive restructuring would depend on the institutional environment within which they operate. The higher the level of institutional incongruence, the more likely it is for firms to decouple. In this case, decoupling is driven by firms' ability to arbitrage between local and central institutions. We conduct empirical analysis to investigate how firms' choice of substantive vs. symbolic restructuring is affected by (1) provincial-level legal environment, constructed by contract law, property law and enforcement, (2) provincial-level government support in terms of subsidies, preferential credit access, and local protectionism, and (3) the interaction of the two forms of institutions at the provincial level and the independence of auditors at the firm level. Results confirm the significant effects of local institutions on firms' restructuring decisions.

Abstract. Sustainable flood risk management (SFRM) has become popular since the 1980s. Many governmental and non-governmental organisations have been keen on implementing the SFRM strategies by integrating social, ecological, and economic themes into their flood risk management (FRM) practices. However, the justifications for SFRM are still somewhat embryonic, and it is not yet clear whether this concept is influencing current policies in different countries. This paper reviews the past and current flood management experiences from flood defence to SFRM in four developed countries to highlight lessons for coastal megacities in development. The paper explores recent strategies such as "Making Space for Water", Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25), and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in the UK and "Room for the River" in the Netherlands, which were implemented to mitigate flooding, integrate FRM with sustainability concepts, and deliver sound FRM practice for future generations. In this context, the United States has also established a National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and in a different approach, Japan has developed an advanced flood warning and evacuation contingency system to prepare for climatic extremes. These case studies give good lessons in achieving long-term SFRM to deliver sound flood management practices considering socio-economic and environmental concerns. Most developing coastal megacities especially in Asia are still heavily reliant on a traditional hard-engineering approach, which may not be enough to mitigate substantial risks due to human factors (e.g. large population, rapid socio-economic growth, subsidence from excessive groundwater extraction) and natural factors (e.g. climate change including sea-level rise and land subsidence). It is clear that different countries and cities have their interpretation of SFRM, but this paper explores how policymakers can adopt "mixed options" to move towards long-term thinking about sustainability with social, economic, and environmental considerations.

Sustainable flood risk management (SFRM) has become popular since the 1980s. Many governmental and non-governmental organisations have been keen on implementing the SFRM strategies by integrating social, ecological and economic themes into their flood risk management (FRM) practices. However, justifications for SFRM are still embryonic and it is not yet clear whether this concept is influencing the current policies in different countries. This paper reviews the past and present flood management approaches and experiences from flood defence to FRM in four developed countries with the aim of highlighting lessons for developing mega deltas. The paper explored recent strategies such as " Making Space for Water, PPS 25, and NPPF " in the UK; " Room for Rivers " in the Netherlands which was promoted to cope with flooding, integrate FRM with ideas on sustainability, and deliver good FRM practice for next generations. The United States has also established a sound National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and Japan has developed an advanced flood warning and evacuation contingency system to prepare for climatic extremes. These case studies showed some good lessons to achieve long term SFRM direction to deliver flood management practices with social-economic and environmental concerns. Most of developing coastal megacities especially in Asia are still heavily reliant on traditional hard-engineering approach, that may not be enough to mitigate substantial risks due to human (exist huge populations, rapid socio-economic growth, subsidence) and natural (climate change) factors. We understand different countries and cities have their own interpretation on SFRM, but recommend policy makers to adopt "mixed options" towards thinking about long term and sustainability that with social, economic and environmental considerations.