動的再調整：気候変動とエネルギー転移に対する国際石油会社の戦略的対応

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:正当性理論と制度理論を統合し、企業の気候対応を動的プロセスとして捉える枠組みを提供する。

🏢実務担当者:象徴的・実質的対応の往復を自社の移行開示・ステークホルダー対応の設計に活かせる。

🏛政策担当者:実質的脱炭素を促す制度設計には、文脈依存で変化する正当性と時間的トレードオフの理解が不可欠。

This thesis examines how International Oil Companies (IOCs) respond to climate change and the energy transition, with a focus on how they navigate legitimacy challenges shaped by institutional factors, stakeholder expectations, and uncertainty. Using ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalEnergies as case studies, the research investigates three questions: (1) How have IOCs responded strategically to climate and transition pressures? (2) How have they legitimised performance and aligned strategies with evolving narratives? (3) How have external narratives and stakeholder expectations influenced their responses? A qualitative multi-case study design draws on annual reports, sustainability disclosures, investor presentations, proxy statements, and external narratives from news media, NGOs, and think-tanks covering 2015–2024. These sources were triangulated to capture both corporate self-presentation and how stakeholders interpreted or contested it. Analysed through legitimacy theory (Ashforth & Gibbs, 1990; Suchman, 1995) and informed by institutional theory and strategic management under uncertainty, the study identifies three phases in IOC responses: early recognition (2015–2016), strengthening commitments (2017–2019), and acceleration (2020–2024). The findings offer three theoretical contributions. First, the thesis provides new empirical evidence drawn from a decade-long longitudinal study. The evidence reveals persistent tensions between moral and pragmatic legitimacy, particularly where decarbonisation imperatives collide with shareholder returns and energy security demands. Second, the thesis develops the concept of dynamic recalibration, explaining the nature, speed and pace of response to capture how firms shift between symbolic and substantive strategies as pressures evolve. Third, it advances portfolio legitimacy management, demonstrating how firms tailor responses to multiple, often conflicting, stakeholder audiences. The novelty of the contribution lies in the development of a framework to explain the nature of corporate responses, the accelerating pace of strategic adjustment, and the increasing speed of firms' strategic adjustment. The research has implications for scholarship and practice. It extends legitimacy theory by integrating institutional complexity and strategic trade-offs in the context of uncertainty. For policymakers, investors, and practitioners, it underscores legitimacy as a dynamic process shaped by shifting contexts, competing expectations, and temporal trade-offs. Recognising these interdependencies enables the design of frameworks that incentivise substantive decarbonisation while guiding organisations to align strategic decision-making and governance with long-term resilience in the energy transition.

• openalex https://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/201907/1/WRAP_Theses_Thomas_2025.pdffirst seen 2026-10-10 04:59:15