Dorothy Thornton

Explaining Corporate Environmental Performance: How Does Regulation Matter?

Explaining Corporate Environmental Performance: How Does Regulation Matter? Robert A. Kagan Dorothy Thornton Neil Gunningham How and to what extent does regulation matter in shaping corporate behavior? How important is it compared to other incentives and mechanisms of social control, and how does it interact with those mechanisms? How might we explain variation in corporate responses to law and other external pressures? This article addresses these questions through an study of environmental performance in 14 pulp and paper manufacturing mills in Australia, New Zealand, British Columbia, and the states of Washington and Georgia in the United States. Over the last three decades, we find tightening regulatory requirements and intensifying political pressures have brought about large improvements and considerable convergence in environmental performance by pulp manufacturers, most of which have gone ‘‘beyond compliance’’ in several ways. But regulation does not account for remaining differences in environmental performance across facilities. Rather, ‘‘social license’’ pressures (particularly from local communities and environmental activists) and corporate environmental management style prod some firms toward better performance compliance than others. At the same time, economic pressures impose limits on ‘‘beyond performance’’ investments. In producing large gains in environmental performance, however, regulation still matters greatly, but less as a system of hierarchically imposed, uniformly enforced rules than as a coordinative mechanism, routinely interacting with market pressures, local and national environmental activists, and the culture of corporate management in generating environmental improvement while narrowing the spread between corporate leaders and laggards. I. Introduction I n what ways and to what extent does regulation matter in shaping corporate behavior? How important is it compared to The authors are grateful to scores of pulp mill managers, regulatory officials, industry consultants, and environmental activistsFall of whom must remain anonymousFfor their cooperation and insight. David Sonnenfeld, Kathryn Harrison, Peter May, and anonymous reviewers all gave us valuable advice on earlier drafts. Biyi Abesina provided valuable research assistance. The Center for the Study of Law and Society, University of California, Berkeley, provided space, administrative assistance, and social support for the research project that led to this article, and the Smith Richardson Foundation funded our research. Please direct correspondence to Robert A. Kagan, Center for the Study of Law & Society, University of California, 2240 Piedmont Ave., Berkeley, CA 94720; tel: (510) 642-4038; email: rak@uclink4.berkeley.edu. Law & Society Review, Volume 37, Number 1 (2003) r 2003 by The Law and Society Association. All rights reserved.

Sources of Corporate Environmental Performance

What motivates business firms to significantly improve their environmental performance? Why do some companies achieve better environmental performance than others? Through a study of 14 pulp mills in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, this article shows that more stringent regulatory requirements and increasing political pressure have brought about large improvements and convergence in environmental performance over the last 30 years, with many mills exceeding compliance requirements. In addition, corporate environmental management style and social license pressures from local communities and environmental activists have prodded some facilities further beyond compliance than others, while economic pressures have limited just how far ahead facilities have been willing to move.

Social Disparities in Maternal Morbidity During Labor and Delivery Between Mexican-Born and US-Born White Californians, 1996–1998

OBJECTIVES To assess maternal health disparities, we compared maternal morbidities during labor and delivery among Mexican-born and US-born White, non-Latina women residing in California. METHODS This population-based study used linked hospital discharge and birth certificate data for 1996-1998 (862,723 deliveries). We calculated the frequency, and observed and adjusted odds ratios for obstetric complications. Covariates included maternal age, parity, education, prenatal care initiation and payment source, and hospital quality of care. RESULTS Approximately 1 in 5 deliveries resulted in a obstetric complication. After control for covariates, Mexican-born women were significantly less likely to have 1 or more maternal morbidities than White, non-Latina women but more likely to have complications that reflect the quality of intrapartum care. CONCLUSIONS Maternal morbidities during labor and delivery are a substantial burden for women in California. The favorable overall outcome of Mexican-born women over US-born White, non-Latinas is surprising given their lower educational attainment, relative poverty, and greater barriers to health care access. The favorable outcomes obscure vulnerabilities in those complications that are sensitive to the quality of intrapartum care.

Obstetric complications in women with diagnosed mental illness: the relative success of California's county mental health system.

OBJECTIVE To examine disparities in serious obstetric complications and quality of obstetric care during labor and delivery for women with and without mental illness. DATA SOURCE Linked California hospital discharge (2000-2001), birth, fetal death, and county mental health system (CMHS) records. STUDY DESIGN This population-based, cross-sectional study of 915,568 deliveries in California, calculated adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for obstetric complication rates for women with a mental illness diagnosis (treated and not treated in the CMHS) compared with women with no mental illness diagnosis, controlling for sociodemographic, delivery hospital type, and clinical factors. RESULTS Compared with deliveries in the general non-mentally ill population, deliveries to women with mental illness stand a higher adjusted risk of obstetric complication: AOR=1.32 (95 percent confidence interval [CI]=1.25, 1.39) for women treated in the CMHS and AOR=1.72 (95 percent CI=1.66, 1.79) for women not treated in the CMHS. Mentally ill women treated in the CMHS are at lower risk than non-CMHS mentally ill women of experiencing conditions associated with suboptimal intrapartum care (postpartum hemorrhage, major puerperal infections) and inadequate prenatal care (acute pyelonephritis). CONCLUSION Since mental disorders during pregnancy adversely affect mothers and their infants, care of the mentally ill pregnant woman by mental health and primary care providers warrants special attention.

Birthplace, Language Use, and Body Size among Mexican American Women and Men: Findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2001–2006

Introduction. Mexican immigrant status has been associated with decreased obesity, but this pattern may be changing. We draw from 2001–2006 NHANES data on Mexican Americans to examine whether body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference vary by country of birth and among the U.S.-born by language. Results. Among women, U.S.-born Spanish speakers had the highest mean BMI, followed by immigrant women, while U.S.-born English speakers had the lowest mean BMI. Immigrant men had a lower mean BMI than U.S.-born men. These patterns were similar for waist circumference and persisted after adjusting for socioeconomic status (SES) and other covariates. Conclusion. Immigrant women do not appear to be protected against a large body size, compared with immigrant men. Among the U.S.-born, women who retain Spanish are at higher risk for larger body size than exclusive English speakers. Initiatives targeting obesity should address differentials in body size patterns among immigrant and U.S.-born Mexican American men and women.

Preterm delivery among first-time Mexico-born mothers: a binational population-based comparison of deliveries in California and Mexico

Background While studies have attributed the favourable birth outcomes of Mexico-born mothers in the USA to a ‘healthy immigrant effect’ that confers protection to immigrants, a comparison of immigrants with the source population in Mexico has been lacking. We compared preterm delivery (PTD) rates of Mexico-born immigrants who delivered in California with Mexico-born women who delivered in Mexico (WIMX) and with a subgroup who delivered in the five top immigrant sending states in Mexico. Methods Using 2009 birth records, we selected all live-born singletons of primiparous WIMX (699 129) and immigrants in California (33 251). We examined the unadjusted and adjusted association between place of delivery and any PTD (<37 weeks gestation), including PTD subcategories (early, moderate, late), using relative risks (RR) and 95% CIs. Multivariate models controlled for demographic and health system characteristics. Results PTD rates were higher among immigrants in California (6.7%) than WIMX (5.8%) and compared to women in the sending states (5.5%). The unadjusted risk of any PTD (RR=1.17 (1.12 to 1.22)), early/moderate PTD (<34 weeks gestation; RR=1.27 (1.18 to 1.38)) and late PTD (34–36 weeks; RR=1.14 (1.08 to 1.19)) was higher for immigrants than for WIMX and remained higher when controlling for age, education and healthcare variables. Birth weight <1500 g was also higher among immigrants (RR=1.27 (1.14 to 1.44)). Similar patterns were observed when comparing women in the sending states. Conclusions We found no evidence of a ‘healthy immigrant effect’. Further research must assess the comparability of gestational-age data in Mexican and Californian birth certificates.

The effect of risk notification on mood in long-term survivors of Hodgkin's disease

Risk notification was the initial step in a larger study to determine (1) the prevalence of cardiovascular disease as a late effect of mediastinal irradiation, and (2) whether a brief support group intervention would mitigate any negative effects of risk notification. 323 HD survivors attended a 45 minute risk notification session prior to a routine follow-up medical visit. When they arrived at the clinic and following the risk notification session, they completed surveys that included measures of mood dysphoria, sense of coherence, knowledge of late effects of treatment, and demographic factors. Two analytic models were proposed to look at the effects of risk notification: (1) psychosocial state when arriving at the clinic, and (2) psychosocial change in state following risk notification session. Pre-intervention mood distress was not significantly affected by time since the initial diagnosis, age, education, or gender. Persons who worked and those with better coping skills had lower initial mood distress. Knowledge of the late effects of treatment was not related to mood distress. Following the intervention, the more distressed a person was initially, the better the coping skills, the greater the decrease in mood distress. Partnered survivors experienced less of a decrease in distress. Knowledge of the late effects of treatment (regardless of their knowledge of cardiovascular disease as a consequence), did not effect change in mood distress. Findings were contrary to expectations. Findings are consistent with Self-Regulation theory and the Health Belief Model and are not explained by anxiety related to the medical visit itself. Limitations of the study design are discussed. The method through which risks are conveyed can reduce the psychosocial impact of risk notification.