Search results

Digital influencers, besides being a personal branding phenomenon, constitute, nowadays, important partners for brands in the digital environment. Despite the benefits for both parties, the brand and the endorser, there is a risk when the individuals or the brand take part in some scandal or questionable activity, which causes a loss of credibility and reputation. The contagious effect of personal or corporate brand crisis with the partners is well reported in the literature. However, there are no studies about such occurrence in the digital environment, considering that the phenomenon of digital influence has some particularities differing from traditional celebrity endorsement. This chapter focuses on the research of the consequences of a change in the credibility of influencers or brands, after the occurrence of a negative situation, and the way in which this change affects the two parties involved, the brand and the influencer. We conducted a netnographic study of the social media pages of three digital influencers and the social media pages of a recognized fast fashion brand recognized in the digital world. We analyzed 1500 social media comments from their audiences and found that influencers suffer from a loss in sympathy and credibility by scandals while crisis communication strategies in corporate brands can prevent such damages. Strategic implications for brand managers and digital influencers managing their endorsements are addressed in the discussion.

This chapter analyzes the link between the digital divide, infrastructure regulation, and disaster planning and relief through a case study of the flood in San Jose, California triggered by the Anderson dam’s overtopping in February 2017 and an examination of communication failures during the 2018 wildfire in Paradise, California. This chapter theorizes that regulatory decisions construct social and disaster vulnerability. Rooted in the Whole Community approach to disaster planning and relief espoused by the United Nations and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, this chapter calls for leadership to end the digital divide. It highlights the imperative of understanding community information needs and argues for linking strategies to close the digital divide with infrastructure and emergency planning. As the Internet’s integration into society increases, the digital divide diminishes access to societal resources including disaster aid, and exacerbates wildfire, flood, pandemic, and other risks. To mitigate climate change, climate-induced disaster, protect access to social services and the economy, and safeguard democracy, it argues for digital inclusion strategies as a centerpiece of community-centered infrastructure regulation and disaster relief.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected entire humanity, sustainable development and international trade. Even if international trade is in the recovery phase, COVID-19 pandemic's adverse effects on sustainable development and trade continue to be experienced globally. Furthermore, break out of the war in Ukraine (WIU) further affected not only Ukraine and Russia but also other countries. Countries have started to experience adverse impacts of the WIU more deeply as this war continues. From the global sustainable development and trade perspectives, the WIU impacts' magnitude is affected by the significance of Ukraine and Russia's role in and contribution to the global economy and trade (e.g. agriculture, energy). All countries, including developed, developing and under-developed countries, have started to be affected at different levels due to the adverse impacts of this war. Based on an in-depth literature review, this chapter aims to investigate the WIU's impacts on global sustainable development and international trade. Furthermore, effects of the WIU on climate change and on the fight against climate change are investigated within the scope of this chapter. This chapter is expected to be useful to all stakeholders of sustainable development including politicians and researchers.

This study investigates how firms’ awareness of sustainability affects the revision of their internationalization strategy. Adopting a resource-based view (RBV) approach, the authors argue that sustainable-oriented firms have a higher propensity to de-internationalize (i.e., to go back to their home country) when confronted with the need to relocate foreign manufacturing subsidiaries, as the shortening of value chains would allow the reduction of transportation emissions and enhanced corporate image as green-oriented entities. Furthermore, the authors explore the role exerted by a stringent regulatory setting in the home country on the likelihood of de-internationalization. The empirical test conducted on a sample of relocations performed across European nations in 2002–2014 reveals that multinational enterprises (MNEs) – regardless of their sustainability orientation – have a higher probability to de-internationalize when their home countries have strict institutional contexts in place.

Alain Verbeke is one of the world’s leading thinkers on international business (IB) and globalization, a renowned scholar and educator who contributes to creating a better global business environment by addressing some of today’s most critical challenges. He was one of the first scholars to advance a theoretically rigorous and practically significant perspective on international corporate social responsibility (CSR). Verbeke’s work on international CSR is particularly impactful because it is rooted in IB theory and based on a realistic set of assumptions about the behavior of managers, policymakers, and other market and nonmarket stakeholders. In this chapter, the authors apply theoretical principles central to Verbeke’s research – most notably behavioral assumptions of bounded rationality and bounded reliability – to analyze businesses’ and societies’ pace of progress in relation to stated environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals. The authors argue that bounded rationality and reliability challenges create misalignment between stated/imposed commitments toward ESG performance, and economic actors’ ability to deliver on these commitments. The authors discuss examples of such misalignment, focusing on tensions among stakeholders, between stakeholder organizations and firms, and within firms. The authors propose that to be relevant for policy and practice, the sustainability research should be based on realistic microfoundational assumptions.