Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
doi.org/10.1108/JGR-06-2017-0039
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JGR-06-2017-0039
Downloaded on: 24 February 2018, At: 03:21 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 41 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 77 times since 2018*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2014),"Exploring corporate social responsibility values of millennial job-seeking students", Education
+ Training, Vol. 56 Iss 1 pp. 21-34 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-11-2012-0121">https://
doi.org/10.1108/ET-11-2012-0121</a>
(2015),"Millennials’ work values: differences across the school to work transition", Personnel
Review, Vol. 44 Iss 6 pp. 991-1009 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-01-2014-0024">https://
doi.org/10.1108/PR-01-2014-0024</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:320271 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
JGR
9,1 Environmental responsibility:
millennial values and
cultural dimensions
6 Nancy J. Hanson-Rasmussen and Kristy J. Lauver
Department of Management and Marketing, University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire,
Received 27 June 2017 Eau Claire, Wisconsin, USA
Revised 10 October 2017
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND (AUS) At 03:21 24 February 2018 (PT)
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to examine how students in business colleges across three countries, the United
States, India and China, interpret environmental sustainability. This study also explores where students from
different cultures believe responsibility lies in caring for the environment and how these beliefs represent their
cultural and millennial values. The purpose of this study, then, is to investigate millennial business students’
perspectives toward the environment across the three countries holding the largest ecological footprint.
Design/methodology/approach – College of business students from the United States, India and China
were surveyed. Student responses regarding environmental sustainability were compared to values of the
millennial generation and placement of responsibility compared to national culture dimensions.
Findings – An average of 66.3 per cent of the coded responses reflect the optimism of the generation.
Concern for future generations was a frequent theme. Most responses assigned responsibility for
environmental sustainability to “all”. Results support the work of Husted (2005) and Park et al. (2007) as well
as the expectations of the millennial generation’s values related to environmental sustainability.
Originality/value – The authors connect national cultural research to environmental sustainability. This
study explores where students from different cultures believe responsibility lies in caring for the environment
and how these beliefs represent their cultural and millennial values. National cultural combined with
millennial opinion is an important area of research for understanding the assignment of responsibility related
to environmental sustainability.
Keywords Responsibility, Global, Environmental sustainability, Millennials, Cultural dimensions
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The World Population Clock has calculated the global population to be 8.5 billion people
(Worldometer, 2017), a populace putting pressure on deteriorating and fragile ecosystems.
While the effects of humans on the environment are explored, there is an acknowledgement
that global efforts are needed to increase environmental resiliency and sustain our earth
systems (WWF, 2016). Defining who is responsible for these efforts is difficult and without
consensus.
Most populations are cognizant of environmental issues, yet, there are different
interpretations of environmental sustainability (Jandt, 2009), and the exploration of these
interpretations across cultures and generations has been limited. Research has established
that an individual’s education level is related to their environmental awareness (NEEF, 2015;
Onder, 2006), and length of time in school results in increased knowledge about
Journal of Global Responsibility
environmental issues (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). More specifically, students in global
Vol. 9 No. 1, 2018
pp. 6-20
business colleges tend to be a more educated population, aware of social and environmental
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2041-2568
issues that exist (Abbas and Singh, 2014). The student population is also typically from the
DOI 10.1108/JGR-06-2017-0039 millennial generation, a generation known for its optimism, engagement and willingness to
take action (Howe and Strauss, 2000). It is also a generation that has the potential to make a Millennial
large impact on environmental policies and practices. Therefore, this study explores how values and
millennials interpret environmental sustainability and responsibility across the three
countries with the largest combined ecological footprint – the USA, India and China (Global
cultural
Footprint Network, 2016; WWF, 2014). dimensions
Literature review 7
The following literature review frames the concept of responsibility for the earth, defines
environmental sustainability and looks at the current environmental impact of the USA,
India and China. The review next looks at millennial student values toward environmental
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND (AUS) At 03:21 24 February 2018 (PT)
sustainability and then uses Geert Hofstede’s national culture research and his identification
of cultural dimensions (Hofstede, 1980, 1997, 2011) to explore millennial placement of
environmental responsibility within each of the three countries.
the environment. Critics of millennials say their personal comfort and convenience are more
important to them than the environment and that millennials do not feel they are personally
responsible to change their habits or purchases to help the environment (Head, 2013).
Researchers have found that millennials are more engaged in political and volunteer
activities; yet, as a group, their energy conservation practices are not as strong as the
conservation practices of baby boomers (NEEF, 2015).
The Pew Research Center (Fry, 2015) has looked at generational divides in America in
respect to the environment. In their study, they found that 71 per cent of millennials
prioritized the development of alternative sources of energy, yet 25 per cent of those
surveyed prioritized the expansion of exploration and production of fossil fuels like oil, coal
and natural gas (more than the next older generation, Gen X). Ottman (2011) looked at
generational views of the environment within the USA, declaring that students today have
lived through Hurricane Katrina and the BP oil spill and, therefore, are aware of damage
being done to the environment. While the environment is important to this generation, she
states they will not “sacrifice for the almighty dollar” and, in turn, want to balance “quality
of life with the quest for wealth” (Ottman, 2011, p. 6).
Values of the millennial generation may be attributed to the global increase in awareness
of both environmental and social responsibility issues. Previous scholars have begun
investigating millennial values in different cultures. One study reported that American
millennials tend to have more concern or reverence for the environment and less interest in
acquiring things than other generations (Winograd and Hais, 2014). In respect to corporate
social responsibility (CSR) and environmental sustainability, a study of Australian
millennials explored which aspects of CSR were most important to them in their job choice
(Leveson and Joiner, 2014), while a study in Canada explored how millennials ranked their
affinity for five different components of CSR, one of which was environmental practices
(Bednarz, 2006). A very large millennial study by the Higher Education Academy and
National Student Union in the United Kingdom explored the extent to which millennials
considering future work options would be willing to make a salary sacrifice to work for a
company with a positive environmental and social record (Drayson, 2015).
category of people from others”. He has defined and classified national cultures by utilizing
a large global database (50 countries and over 117,000 subjects) and, thus, creating a
collection of Global Cultural Values (Hofstede, 1980; Hofstede et al., 2010). Analyzing by
country, he observed emerging patterns and found correlations among the data (Hofstede,
2011). Cultural values researchers acknowledge Hofstede’s work as the standard by which to
compare other cultural work (Triandis, 2004).
Hofstede utilized his data to categorize national culture into five initial and distinct
dimensions: power/distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism/collectivism,
masculinity/femininity and long-/short-term orientation (Hofstede, 2001). Researchers have
specifically looked at connections between his dimensions, cultures and environmental
sustainability. Husted’s (2005) research on global sustainability has utilized power/distance,
individualism/collectivism and masculinity/femininity. Park et al.’s (2007) work on
sustainabilty focused on two value dimensions: individualism/collectivism and masculinity/
feminity. Thus, this current study focuses on the three cultural dimensions of Hofstede’s
that have been most closely aligned to environmental sustainability by the Husted (2005)
and Park et al. (2007) research studies: low power distance vs high power distance,
individualism vs collectivism, and masculinity vs femininity.
Relationships between values and environmental sustainability. Hofstede considered
cultural dimensions conducive to caring for the environment and Husted (2005) expanded on
Hofstede’s work, comparing the cultural categories to the Social and Institutional Capacity
index, a measurement of capacity for sustainability (World Economic Forum, 2016). In his
work, Husted (2005, p. 363) found that egalitarian (low power distance), individualistic and
feminine values are more likely to be associated with sustainable values and that countries
with these values have a higher social and institutional capacity for environmental
sustainability. He also found that economic development is “the main driver of social and
institutional capacity for environmental sustainability”.
A similar study by Park et al. (2007) found a significant negative relationship between
power distance and masculinity. They also found a positive relationship between education
and scores on the Environmental Performance Index (EPI), which ranks a country’s
performance on the protection of human health and ecosystems (Hsu, 2016).
Table II summarizes Hofstede et al.’s (2010) applicable dimension scores of the USA,
India and China, as well as the EPI for 2016 (Hsu, 2016).
According to Husted (2005), the USA’s scores of low power and high individualism
should correlate with a high level of concern for the environment. However, the relatively
high score on masculinity would represent reduced concern for the environment. The EPI
index placed the USA rather high, indicating progress toward sustainability.
When considering scores on the cultural dimensions, India is not a culture expected to
emphasize environmental sustainability efforts. India falls in the center of individualism and
collectivism, with relationships within groups being important as is taking personal
JGR responsibility for the greater good. Although India is in the midpoint of a continuum for
9,1 femininity vs masculinity with a score of 56, it is the most feminine of the three cultures and
may represent care and concern for the environment. However, Husted (2005) proposed that
poorer countries are less likely to invest in environmental research and enforcement.
Cultural dimension scores for China suggest that it is less environmentally oriented than
the other two countries. High power distance with collectivist views indicates less likelihood
10 for individuals to view environmental sustainability as their personal responsibility. There
is an expectation in China that the government will solve environmental issues (Wong,
2010). The score of 65.1 of 100 on the EPI (Hsu, 2016) indicates progress toward
sustainability.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND (AUS) At 03:21 24 February 2018 (PT)
Research purpose
There is a sense of urgency in understanding global views related to the care of the planet,
as degradation of natural resources can result in permanent detrimental change affecting
future generations. The ecological footprint and negative biocapacity found in the USA,
India and China are of specific concern. With the populace of millennials making up one-
third of the current work force, their impact on the future direction of the environment comes
to the forefront (Fry, 2015).
Limited research examining the perspectives of millennial business leaders and their
potential impact on the environment has been conducted. Additionally, while researchers have
begun to look at potential relationships between Hofstede’s ratings and environmental
sustainability (Husted, 2005; Park et al., 2007), studies exploring these relationships are limited.
The purpose of this study, then, is to investigate millennial business students’ perspectives
toward the environment and to understand where they place responsibility for protecting the
environment and how these viewpoints differ across the three countries holding the largest
ecological footprint. Millennial opinion combined with national culture is an important area of
research for understanding future efforts toward environmental sustainability.
Research questions
Two primary research questions frame this research of national cultural dimensions related
to millennial college students’ opinions regarding environmental sustainability and
responsibility.
RQ1. How do millennial business students in the USA, India and China perceive
environmental sustainability?
RQ2. Where do millennial business students in the USA, India and China place
responsibility for the environment and does this placement fit within the
the completion of a survey developed in Qualtrics software and written in English (all three
schools were English-speaking). Both the school in India and the school in China have
international study programs with the school in the US Instructors at each school were
helpful in encouraging current students to complete the surveys, but left participation
voluntary. There were 338 surveys received from students in the USA with an average age
of 22.86 years, 74 surveys from students in India with an average age of 21.9 years and 343
surveys from students in China with an average age of 20.2 years.
To investigate the two research questions, the survey instrument began with an open-
ended question asking, “What do you think of when someone discusses environmental
responsibility”. The other key open-ended question used in this research has two parts,
“Who do you believe is responsible for environmental sustainability and what role should
they play (e.g. individual, business and government)?”
Results
This study compares student responses regarding environmental sustainability to values of
the millennial generation and national culture dimensions. The volume of responses (755)
allowed for diversity in examples. The following provides a representation of student
responses defining environmental sustainability and their thoughts on who is responsible
for sustaining the environment.
becoming more and more popular. People have awarded the importance of environmental
sustainability because it affects our health and has great influence on our daily life” (Ch370).
This positivity aligns with Howe and Strauss’ (2000) contention that this generation is
known for its optimism and belief in the future.
Neutral codes were assigned to responses that used catch phrases or jargon without
additional descriptors. For example, a number of responses from the USA included the
words “going green” and “eco-friendly.” Frequent jargon in responses from students in India
included, “judicious” and “wastage”. Students from China often used the terms “this guy” or
“this person” referencing the “someone” in the research question.
Twenty-six responses described feeling helpless in regards to the environment.
Examples of these statements are, “Something really far away and it’s not directly related to
my life. I don’t know how I can impact on this issue” (US3), “He or she is really conscious
about our environment but actually what we can do is little” (Ch415), and “They are just
talking about something which is the need of the hour but they are not or will not take any
step towards it” (In715).
Additionally, there were a few responses to the question indicating disinterest or
negative feelings. Examples of these include, “I usually tune out because I hear about it all
the time” (US83) and “It’s good but who cares?” (Ch357). There were no responses from
students in India that were coded as disinterested or negative.
A few students addressed the concern of finances as noted by Ottman (2011), saying, “In
China, few people appear to care about environmental sustainability. In contrary, most of
them concern about how much money they can obtain” (Ch406). A student from the USA
mentioned a concern about consumer expenses, writing, “Going Green. I think this can be
difficult for households to do because it can cost extra money to go green” (US212).
Developing alternative energies was seen as a priority for millennials (Fry, 2015).
Alternative energy was addressed in several narratives, such as this one from a student in
India when describing their concept of environmental sustainability, “Using methods that
reduce wastage and ensure a usage by the future generations. Using alternative resources
under stricter norms by the Environment Ministry” (In740). A student in the USA answered
the same question with, “I think of using alternative energies in order to preserve the
Table III. USA (%) India (%) China (%) Response type
Percentage of
59.6 67.9 71.4 Response is either positive or hopeful
responses – thoughts 28.7 21.4 14.9 Response is neutral
when discussing 3.6 7.1 7.4 Response indicates a feeling of helplessness
environmental 8.1 0.0 3.4 Response shows disinterest or negative feeling
sustainability 0.0 3.6 2.9 Response is unrelated to the question
environment such as recycling, using natural lighting, and using highly technological forms Millennial
of saving energy” (US97). values and
Although not often mentioned, a student from the USA took a very generational view
when writing:
cultural
dimensions
I believe that environmental sustainability is extremely important. I come from a very
conservative family. My parents think it’s a big lie. I think of my future children’s lives and want
to preserve the world the best way I can for them (US169). 13
(Ch369). Another said, “Government. They play the role of the manager” (Ch380).
It is difficult to include the stories of so many students. However, this quote by a student
in China reflects the “all” response of many students:
Actually everyone is responsible for environmental sustainability. 1. Individual: do their part and
protect the environment from little things. 2. Business: work as a role model and put more money
on supporting environmental sustainability. 3. Government: legislation. Penalties (Ch383).
as members of groups, and assume the opinions of the groups (Arrindell et al., 1997). In this
culture, the expectation would be responses to include the word “we” more than “I”. A
response from a student in China representing collectivism is as follows:
There is no doubt that everyone in the world are responsible for environmental sustainability,
because it is this earth where we live in and all of us should take actions to protect the only earth
(Ch604).
Masculinity vs femininity. A culture that scores high on the dimension of masculinity
focuses on achievement, heroism, assertiveness and material rewards for success (Hofstede
et al., 2010). Cultures high on masculinity are also considered competitive. On the other side
of the dimension, femininity is characterized by a concern for quality of life, cooperation and
caring for the weak. The countries investigated have similar scores on this dimension, with
the USA scoring 62, India 56 and China 66. This dimension was most apparent in answers
describing environmental sustainability. One student from the USA was competitive in
saying, “America should be leading the way” (US294). A student from India responded by
showing concern for quality of life with, “It shall not be included only for namesake but to
make a meaningful contribution” (In690).
The cultural framework suggested by Husted (2005) and Park et al. (2007) created
expectations that students in the USA would have a high level of concern for and interest in
the environment because of the cultural scores of low power distance, high individualism
and relatively high masculinity, as well as a rather high EPI. A majority of students in the
USA (59.6 per cent) responded as positive or hopeful in their response to the question, but
this percentage was lower than both India (67.9 per cent) and China (71.4 per cent). However,
more of the US students (28.7 per cent) responded in a neutral/non-negative sense.
The framework also created expectations that the second most concerned and interested
students would be from India. This is because of the high power distance, mid-range
collectivism and lower masculinity scores assigned to India. No Indian students responded
negatively to the question asking them to describe sustainability. The results from the
Indian students were more positive than the expectations framed by the Husted (2005) and
Park et al. (2007) studies.
With China scoring high on collectivism (20), very high on power distance (80) and the
highest on the masculinity dimension (66), the expectation was that students in China would
be the least environmentally oriented. However, students from China expressed the highest
percentage of positive and hopeful responses toward the environment, with only 7.4 per cent
of the students indicating feelings of helplessness regarding the subject.
Regarding the assignment of responsibility within the theories of Husted (2005) and Park
et al. (2007), it was expected that the students from China would place the greatest
responsibility for environmental sustainability on the government. It was also expected that
the individual would be viewed as having the most responsibility in India. The national
JGR cultural value would not establish the expectation that students from all three countries
9,1 would place their highest assignment of responsibility for the environment on “all” (a
combination of government, business and the individual), but this is what happened.
The expectation that millennial respondents would not feel personally responsible is
reflected in responses from the USA, India and China, which assigned responsibility to
individuals only 11.4, 21.1 and 7.8 per cent, respectively. However, millennials from each of
16 the three countries view their responsibility as shared with both government and business.
Discussion
Millennial students are both interested in and thoughtful of values and their relationship to
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND (AUS) At 03:21 24 February 2018 (PT)
Millennial perspectives
This study also confirmed that many of the previously found millennial values toward the
environment were held consistently by students in business schools around the globe.
Beyond being millennials, the commonalities between these students were the fact they were
business/commerce students nearing graduation, and each lives in a country that is one of
three comprising the largest ecological footprint (WWF, 2014).
The global business students in this study indicate an interest in environmental
sustainability as would be expected (Abbas and Singh, 2014). The research subjects
described sustainability through a majority of positive and/or hopeful responses in each of
the three countries. Millennials believe in their future (Howe and Strauss, 2000) and
understand the role of environmental sustainability. While they are aware of the urgency of
taking action, the researchers noted the absence of any comments addressing knowledge of
or concern over their country having one of the largest ecological footprints and biocapacity
deficits. Only a small number of students indicated a feeling of helplessness when it comes
to the environment. An interesting finding is that none of the students from India expressed
disinterest or negative feelings about environmental sustainability.
Overall, findings were supportive of the literature on millennial values, indicating
positive responses to the descriptions of environmental sustainability. An average of
66.3 per cent of the coded responses reflect the optimism of the generation and the positive
responses were in the majority for each country, especially China. In fact, concern for future
generations was a frequent theme in narratives as was the millennial priority to develop
alternative energies (Fry, 2015). With “future generations” being the term used in the
Brundtland definition of sustainable development and alternative energy alluding to the
technical advances addressed by Jonas, we see members of this generation placing
responsibility for the environment in a long-term more contemporary view. This aspect of
being able to look forward and make changes draw from the ethical lens suggested by Jonas
(1984) and Robinson (2016) that man now believes he can affect the environment.
of Husted (2005) and Park et al. (2007) set the expectation that students in China would
express a belief in the strong role of government, as they did. Students in India emphasized
both the individual and “all” as well as a combination of “all” and government, which is
surprising only because of the emphasis on the individual in a high power distance culture.
The students from the USA answered the question in a more egalitarian manner
distributing responsibility among the nine possible choices.
The country with the most feminine cultural dimension was India and, as expected,
students spoke of the quality of life more than did students in the USA or China. Husted
(2005) and Park et al. (2007) suggest the cultures of India and China will emphasize group
decisions and harmony, while the USA culture takes an “I” tone, stressing personal freedom.
The narratives in this study endorse this aspect of both theories.
The results of this investigation support the work of Husted (2005) and Park et al. (2007)
as well as the expectations of the millennial generation’s values related to environmental
sustainability. The one exception is that the students in India express more concern for the
environment and the future than the national culture values would predict. With the
students in India expressing concern for future generations, they hold potential to become
leaders in India’s practices and policies supporting the global environment.
Conclusion
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND (AUS) At 03:21 24 February 2018 (PT)
This exploratory, qualitative study has laid some important groundwork in examining
national culture and millennial perspectives of environmental sustainability and where
responsibility is placed across cultures. By examining millennial responses across three
countries within the context of Hofstede’s national culture and Husted (2005) and Park
et al.’s (2007) selected dimensions, this study has provided a better understanding of the role
of culture and generation in relation to environmental sustainability and how responsibility
for the environment is assigned. Although cultural differences remain, it is heartening to see
that the majority of millennials surveyed across the three countries with the largest
combined ecological footprint view environmental sustainability as important and see
themselves as partially responsible. Continued exploration of cultural and generational
influences on environmental sustainability is important in understanding global
perspectives in business and citizenship. With millennials’ positive perspective and
optimism toward environmental sustainability, companies and policymakers may need to
look to them to lead and influence needed change in environmental sustainability practices.
Companies also need to be aware of the importance millennials place on environmental
sustainability, as environmental friendly policies may both encourage millennials to work
for them and attract consumers, as these consumers become primarily millennials as well. It
is also important for companies to understand differences in cultures and adjust their
environmentally sustainable practices and expectations by the various countries where they
are based. The optimism, engagement and willingness of millennials across cultures to take
action will contribute to the confidence of future generations to persist in making earth
systems resilient and sustained.
References
Abbas, M. and Singh, R. (2014), “A survey of environmental awareness, attitude, and participation
amongst university students: a case study”, International Journal of Science and Research, Vol. 3
No. 5, pp. 1755-1760.
Arrindell, W., Hatzichristou, C., Wensink, J., Rosenberg, E., van Twillert, B., Stedema, J. and Meijer, D.
(1997), “Dimensions of national culture as predictors of cross-national differences in subjective
well-being”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 37-53.
Baskerville, R. (2003), “Hofstede never studied culture”, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 28
No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Bednarz, S.B. (2006), Millennial Perceptions on Dimensions of Corporate Responsibility: A Qualitative
Study, SeanLyons, CA.
Drayson, R. (2015), “Summary 4: sustainability, skills and employability”, Student attitudes towards,
and skills for, sustainable development, avaialble at: www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/
summary4-sustainability-skills-and-employability.pd
Fowler, F. (2002), Survey Research Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Fry, R. (2015), Millenials Surpass Gen Xers as the Largest Generation in US Labor Force, Pew Research Millennial
Center, Washington, DC.
values and
Global Footprint Network (2016), World Footprint, Global Footprint Network, Oakland, available at:
www.footprintnetwork.org/content/documents/ecological_footprint_nations/ecological.html cultural
Head, L. (2013), Millennials Are Greener! Really?, Shelton Group – Eco Study, Knoxville, avaialble at: dimensions
http://sheltongrp.com/millennials-are-greener-really/
Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, Sage,
Beverly Hill, CA.
19
Hofstede, G. (1997), Culture and Organization: Software of the Mind, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Geert Hofstede, Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND (AUS) At 03:21 24 February 2018 (PT)
Worldometer (2017), World Population, United Nations Population Division, avaialble at: www.
worldometers.info/world-population/#sources
Further reading
Hofstede, G. (1998), “Attitudes, values, and organizational culture: disentangling the concepts”,
Organization Studies, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 477-492.
SEDAC (2005), 2005 Environmental Sustainability Index, Yale Center for Environmental Law and
Policy, London.
Corresponding author
Nancy J. Hanson-Rasmussen can be contacted at: hansonrn@uwec.edu
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com