Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

U.S. non-governmental organizations’ cross-sectoral entrepreneurial strategies in energy efficiency

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Regional Environmental Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When established institutional pathways for energy efficiency policies necessary to mitigate climate change are blocked at the federal level, how do entrepreneurs in the NGO sector innovate new approaches? What strategies do they employ? In this paper, we look at the strategies used by leaders of U.S. energy efficiency NGOs that have found new ways to work across sectors and at state and regional levels to increase appliance efficiency. Using 15 interviews with NGO leaders, organizational materials, and historical archives in the energy efficiency field, we explore strategies nonprofit leaders have used to establish new cross-sectoral arrangements to advance their appliance efficiency goals. Situating them in a dynamic political context, we identify four key strategies particularly important for cross-sectoral entrepreneurship: (1) performing legitimacy across sectors, (2) creating a collective action frame, (3) institutionalizing the diffusion of the collective action frame, and (4) coordinating new patterns of action in existing institutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Battilana J, Leca B, Boxenbaum E (2009) How actors change institutions: towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Acad Manag Ann 3(1):65–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520903053598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boasson EL (2014) National Climate Policy: a multi-field approach vol 7. Routledge,

  • Boasson EL, Wettestad J (2014) Policy invention and entrepreneurship: bankrolling the burying of carbon in the EU. Glob Environ Chang 29:404–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.09.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce AB, Shwom RL (2015) Friend or foe? Why US energy efficiency nonprofits collaborate with business and government. Environ Sociol 1(1):48–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2014.993796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brulle RJ (2000) Agency, democracy, and nature: the US environmental movement from a critical theory perspective. MIT Press

  • DiMaggio, PJ (1988) Interest and agency in institutional theory. In Zucker LG (ed) Institutional patterns and organizations. Ballinger, Cambridge, pp 3–22

  • Eckman T, Benner N, Gordon F (1992) It’s 2002: Do You Know Where Your Demand Side Management Policies and Programs Are? In: Proceedings of the 1992 ACEEE Summer Study. pp 5.1–5.18

  • Eisenstadt SN (1980) Cultural orientations, institutional entrepreneurs, and social change: comparative analysis of traditional civilizations. Am J Sociol 85(4):840–869. https://doi.org/10.1086/227091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enkvist P, Nauclér T, Rosander J (2007) A cost curve for greenhouse gas reduction McKinsey Quarterly 1:34

  • Falkner R (2003) Private environmental governance and international relations: exploring the links. Global Environ Polit 3(2):72–87. https://doi.org/10.1162/152638003322068227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein N (1997) Social skill and institutional theory. Am Behav Sci 40(4):397–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764297040004003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garud R, Jain S, Kumaraswamy A (2002) Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: the case of sun microsystems and java. Acad Manag J 45(1):196–214. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geller H, Nadel S (1994) Market transformation strategies to promote end-use efficiency. Annu Rev Energy Environ 19(1):301–346. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.eg.19.110194.001505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein DB (2010) Invisible energy: strategies to rescue the economy and save the planet. Bay Tree Pub,

  • Green JF (2013) Rethinking private authority: agents and entrepreneurs in global environmental governance. Princeton University Press, Princeton

  • Hardy C, Maguire S (2008) Institutional entrepreneurship The Sage Handbook of Org Inst:198–217, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200387.n8

  • Hess DJ (2005) Technology-and product-oriented movements: approximating social movement studies and science and technology studies. Sci Technol Hum Values 30(4):515–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243905276499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollomon B, Ledbetter M, Sandahl L, Shoemaker T (2002) Seven years since SERP: successes and setbacks in technology procurement. In: Proceedings of ACEEE 2000 Summer Study on energy efficiency in buildings, Citeseer,

  • den Hond F, de Bakker FG, Doh J (2015) What prompts companies to collaboration with NGOs? Recent evidence from the Netherlands. Business Soc 54(2):187–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650312439549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan AJ, Huitema D, Hildén M, van Asselt H, Rayner TJ, Schoenefeld JJ, Tosun J, Forster J, Boasson EL (2015) Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects. Nat Clim Chang 5(11):977–982. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keating K, Goldstein DB, Eckman T, Miller P (1998) Wheat, chaff and conflicting definitions in market transformation. In: 1998 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Pacific Grove, CA (US)

  • Kingdon JW, Thurber JA (1984) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies vol 45. Little, Brown Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach D, Rotmans J (2010) The practice of transition management: examples and lessons from four distinct cases. Futures 42(3):237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2009.11.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutzenhiser L (2001) The contours of US climate non-policy. Soc Nat Resour 14(6):511–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920121404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyakhov A, Gliedt T (2016) Understanding collaborative value creation by environmental nonprofit and renewable energy business partnerships VOLUNTAS: international journal of voluntary and nonprofit organizations:1-25 doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-016-9691-6

  • Lyon TP (2010) Good cop/bad cop: environmental NGOs and their strategies toward business. Routledge,

  • McAdam D (1982) Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930–1970. University of Chicago Press,

  • Meyer DS, Staggenborg S (1996) Movements, countermovements, and the structure of political opportunity. Am J Sociol 101(6):1628–1660. https://doi.org/10.1086/230869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer AD, Gaba V, Colwell KA (2005) Organizing far from equilibrium: nonlinear change in organizational fields. Organ Sci 16(5):456–473. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller AS (1995) Energy policy from Nixon to Clinton: from grand provider to market facilitator. Envtl L 25:715

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver AL, Montgomery K (2008) Using field-configuring events for sense-making: a cognitive network approach. J Manag Stud 45(6):1147–1167. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00786.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pursell C (1993) The rise and fall of the appropriate technology movement in the United States, 1965-1985. Technol Cult 34(3):629–637. https://doi.org/10.2307/3106707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld AH (1999) The art of energy efficiency: protecting the Environment with Better Technology. Annu Rev Energy Environ 24(1):33–82. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.24.1.33

  • Shwom RL (2011) A middle range theorization of energy politics: the struggle for energy efficient appliances. Environ Polit 20(5):705–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2011.608535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shwom R (2015) Nonprofit-business partnering dynamics in the energy efficiency field. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q 44(3):564–586. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764014527174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sine WD, Lee BH (2009) Tilting at windmills? The environmental movement and the emergence of the US wind energy sector. Adm Sci Q 54(1):123–155. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.1.123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow DA, Rochford EB Jr, Worden SK, Benford RD (1986) Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. Am Sociol Rev 51(4):464–481

  • Vietor RH (1987) Energy policy in America since 1945: a study of business-government relations. Cambridge University Press

  • Zald MN (1996) Culture, ideology, and strategic framing. In: Comparative perspectives on social movements: political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 261–274

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University, 55 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA

    Rachael Shwom

  2. School of Public Health- Bloomington, Indiana University, 1025 East Seventh Street, PH 133, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

    Analena Bruce

Authors
  1. Rachael Shwom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Analena Bruce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachael Shwom.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shwom, R., Bruce, A. U.S. non-governmental organizations’ cross-sectoral entrepreneurial strategies in energy efficiency. Reg Environ Change 18, 1309–1321 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1278-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1278-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation