Why do companies’ institutional strategies differ across cities? A cross-case analysis of bike sharing in Shanghai & Amsterdam
Publication date
2020
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
cc_by
Abstract
Bike sharing has the potential to contribute to more sustainable urban mobility. Companies providing this service need to generate legitimacy for their venture when entering new cities. They may have to change formal and informal institutions in cities they want to operate. In this paper we explore how and why companies’ institutional strategies differ across cities. We compare strategies of emerging free-floating bike sharing companies in Shanghai and Amsterdam. These cities provide a counterintuitive starting point: Shanghai is a car-dominant city which has embraced bike sharing, whereas in Amsterdam – a typical cycling city – it was banned soon after its introduction. We find that companies use similar launching strategies, but different institutional strategies as they respond to varying spatial conditions consisting of local institutions (e.g. rules, norms and cultures) physical place specific elements (e.g. infrastructures and urban mobility challenges) and issues of power (e.g. support and resistance).
Keywords
Bike sharing, Business strategy, Institutional work, Micromobility, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment, Environmental Science (miscellaneous), Social Sciences (miscellaneous), SDG 9 - Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure, SDG 11 - Sustainable Cities and Communities
Citation
van Waes, A, Farla, J & Raven, R 2020, 'Why do companies’ institutional strategies differ across cities? A cross-case analysis of bike sharing in Shanghai & Amsterdam', Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, vol. 36, pp. 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.06.002