OEWaterand Business

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/274187414
Water and Business: A Taxonomy and Review of the Research
Article in Organization & Environment · September 2010

DOI: 10.1177/1086026610382627
CITATIONS READS
35 610
2 authors:
Nancy B. Kurland Deone Zell

Franklin and Marshall College California State University, Northridge
66 PUBLICATIONS 3,993 CITATIONS 23 PUBLICATIONS 449 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
The public benefit corporation, accountability, and organizational identity: The journey of a purpose-led organization View project
Public markets View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Nancy B. Kurland on 26 May 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Organization & Environment
Water and Business: 23(3) 316–353

© 2010 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permission: http://www.
A Taxonomy and Review sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1086026610382627
of the Research http://oae.sagepub.com
Nancy B. Kurland1 and Deone Zell2
Abstract
Why should business care about water? Water is a common-pool resource, critical to many
business operations, which faces depletion if not sustainably managed. Based on popular
and trade press and academic business research, the authors develop a taxonomy of water
issues (water quality, quantity, use, sustainable resource management, company and industry
management). Through a review of 135 water-related articles published in 49 leading business
journals, the authors examine the degree to which business scholars address these issues. They
discuss intersections, diversions, and gaps and conclude with insights for future research.
Keywords
corporate environmentalism, sustainable business, sustainable resource management, water
and agriculture, water quality, water pollution, water scarcity, water management
Introduction
Pepsi strives for positive water balance where its company operates in water-stressed areas;
water conservation is central to Coca-Cola’s partnership with the World Wildlife Fund; Johnson
& Johnson is committed to reducing water use and eliminating water waste.1 In this way, corpo-
rations and other business organization are assuming major responsibility in addressing environ-
mental problems (Jermier, Forbes, Benn, & Orsato, 2006). While business has begun to move
environmental issues into boardroom decision making (Jermier et al., 2006), others call for them
to be brought into the center of organizational studies (e.g., Gladwin, 1993, as cited in Jermier
et al., 2006; Shrivastava 1994, 1995, as cited in Jermier et al., 2006). Indeed, Organization &
Environment (O&E) devoted half of its December 2006 issue to this topic (Starik, 2006). Yet
several scholars have noted that while the absolute amount of O&E research on environmental
issues is growing quickly (e.g., Jermier et al., 2006; Kallio & Nordberg, 2006) that number com-
pared with all O&E research is not (Jermier et al., 2006).
In this article, we examine the state of the research in business around water. O&E scholars
need to assess where we are in order to determine where we need to go (Jermier et al., 2006).
How are business scholars talking about water? To answer this question, we review 135 water-
related research articles in 49 business journals.
1
Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA, USA
2
California State University, Northridge, Northridge, CA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Nancy B. Kurland, Department of Business, Organizations, and Society, Franklin & Marshall College,
P.O. Box 3003, Lancaster, PA 17604-3003, USA
Email: nancy.kurland@fandm.edu
Kurland and Zell 317
Why water? Water is vital to life. That would be a cliché if it were not so true. We can live a
month without food but only a week without water. According to the UN Vital Climate Graphics,
only 2.5% of earth’s water is fresh, and of that, only 0.3% is easily accessible in surface sources
(UN Environmental Programme, 20022).
Water is vital to business. Business uses water for energy, in upstream and manufacturing
processes, for drinking, landscaping, and waste. For some, it is their business (bottled water, bulk
water exports) or critical to it (agriculture, water purification, water conservation processes and
tools, pools and spas, landscaping, computer chips, beverages). But freshwater is becoming
scarcer, raising red flags for business (see, e.g., Brown, 2001).3 The authors of the recent report
Water for Business (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2009) observe that
“water constraints pose a potential multi-billion dollar risk for businesses worldwide” as busi-
nesses realize that water constraints can lead to increased production costs, poor brand image (if
companies are perceived to abuse water rights), and even loss of licenses to operate when there
is not enough to go around.
Our contribution in the present article is to provide a taxonomy of water issues and water
research for business scholars. This taxonomy helps organize the vast amount of water-related
research published in top business journals in order to identify opportunities for future research.
Specifically, we searched 49 top-ranked business journals, yielding 135 water-related articles
and supplemented with research from the popular and trade press. We discuss intersections,
diversions, and gaps, and conclude with insights for future research.
Method
Popular and Trade Press
Our interest in water issues began in 2007 in a study of water privatization and rate increases
(Kurland & Zell, 2009). For 2½ years during and subsequent to this research, we used a snowball
technique to gather additional information about water issues. We read relevant trade books
(e.g., Carle, 2004; Ward, 2002), government and nongovernmental organization (NGO) newslet-
ters and reports (e.g., the weekly California Water Plan News,4 the World Business Council for
Sustainable Development on water,5 Food & Water Watch,6 Climate Crisis Coalition7), scholarly
reports (e.g., Gleick et al., 2009), newspaper and popular magazine articles (mostly from the New
York Times, Los Angeles Times, Scientific American, Discover, National Geographic), and fic-
tion (e.g., Abbey, 1975); viewed documentaries (e.g., Cadillac Desert, Blue Gold, Thirst, Are We
Running Dry?); engaged in formal and informal conversations with water experts (e.g., from
wastewater treatment, groundwater management, municipal water districts, and a private water
company); and attended lectures by water-related businesses (e.g., WeatherTrak8), the govern-
ment (Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California), and NGOs (e.g., TreePeople9).
Academic Research in Business and

Management Top-Ranked Journals
We also examined how business scholars talk about and research water to determine the preva-
lence of water-related topics on their agendas. Specifically, we examined academic research
devoted in some way to water for the years 1959 to 2009.10 We relied on two ranking sources,
ISI Web of Knowledge (Journal Citation Reports) and RedJasper, a business and technology
consultancy (http://www.journal-ranking.com/), and found 49 journals.11 We first searched the
top 20 business and management journals as ranked for impact by RedJasper. We eliminated
318 Organization & Environment 23(3)
marketing and economics journals to result in 27 journals. Wanting to expand our search, we
continued down the list of rankings to include additional management-focused journals: British
Journal of Management, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Harvard Business Review,
Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Business Research, Long Range Planning. We also
included journals that were more likely to publish articles focused on business and the natural
environment, though not formally ranked: Organization & Environment; Business, Strategy, &
the Environment; Business & Society. And, in response to a reviewer’s concern, we searched
the top 20 “business” and “management” journals as ranked for impact by ISI. We again excluded
marketing- and economics-focused journals, leading us to include an additional 17 journals. In
Table 1 we list these 49 journals with their ranking and incidences of water-related articles.
Using the ABI/Inform database of the United States and international articles on business and
management, we searched abstracts and citations of each journal for the term water. Neither the
Journal of Production Analysis nor Technological Forecasting and Social Change appears to be
indexed in ABI/Inform. Canadian Journal of Administrative Science (but not Canadian Journal
of Administrative Review) is indexed and therefore included. Also, we searched for Journal of
International Business Studies (instead of Journal of International Business, since the latter did
not seem to exist). We eliminated articles that appeared in the search because the author’s name
was Water or the term water was used in a metaphorical way such as in “troubled waters.” We
included only full-length academic articles (so excluded editorials, movie and book reviews) and
excluded articles that only mention water rather than focus on it (e.g., an article that mentioned
that worldwide investment has increased in water power but then did not explore the impacts of
this investment further [Roosevelt, 2007] or one that examined the safety of waterways for the
U.S. Coast Guard [Merrick & Harrald, 2007]). We also excluded articles that focused on man-
agement of fisheries rather than water specifically (e.g., Blackford, 2009). Furthermore, if the
role of water was not apparent in the abstract, we downloaded the article and searched for the
term water before deciding to include it.
The result was 135 journal articles. In the text below and in Table 2, we present these
findings.
Results: A Water Taxonomy

Six water-related research foci emerged from these reviews of the popular/trade press and
business/management academic research: water quality, water quantity, water use, sustainable
resource management, company management, and industry management. Paramount among dis-
cussions relating to water is its quality: Is it clean? Polluted? Full of salt? Other discussions focus
on water quantity: Is there too little, enough, or too much? And how can we develop or limit
these amounts? Water use refers to how we use water: domestic, power plants, industrial, and
agriculture. Sustainable Resource Management refers to the sustainable management of a given
water resource. Finally, many academic papers center on company management and industry
management, focusing on a water company or an industry rather than the resource itself. We
discuss each of these six foci in greater detail below. Together, they make up one dimension of
our water taxonomy.
Attention given to these academic foci has changed over time. As shown in Figure 1, a dra-
matic relative increase can be seen in articles focusing on water quality, sustainable resource
management, industry management, and, to a lesser but still significant degree, company man-
agement. Articles on water quantity and water use have declined. We discuss possible reasons
for these trends in the conclusions and future research section.
Based on Wilson (1977), Wood (1990) coined the SEPTember mnemonic to help business
identify the environments it encounters: social, economic, political, and technological.12 Social
Table 1. Water-Related Articles Found in the Top 20 Business and Management Journals as Ranked by ISI Web of Knowledge and RedJasper
ISI-Ranked RedJasper-Ranked ISI-Ranked RedJasper-Ranked Number of Water-Related
Publication Name Management Management Business Business Articles Found (1959-2009)
Academy of Management Journal 2 3 2 4 1
Academy of Management Perspectives (formerly Academy 19 0
of Management Executive)
Academy of Management Review 1 2 1 0
Administrative Science Quarterly 9 1 8 1 0
British Journal of Management 36 3
Business & Society 2
Business History Review 16 1
Business Strategy & the Environment 6
California Management Review 13 25 12 4
Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 41 1
Columbia Journal of World Business 14 8
Corporate Governance 22 0
Decision Sciences 18 1
Family Business Review 26 0
Harvard Business Review 59 6
Human Relations 11 0
Human Resource Management 16 0
Interfaces 17 15
International Journal of Management Reviews 20 18 0
Journal of Business 24 3 0
Journal of Business Ethics 44 4
Journal of Business Economics and Management 23 NI
Journal of Business Research 42 2
Journal of Business Venturing 19 2
Journal of Consumer Affairs 21 0
(continued)
319
320
Table 1. (continued)
ISI-Ranked RedJasper-Ranked ISI-Ranked RedJasper-Ranked Number of Water-Related
Publication Name Management Management Business Business Articles Found (1959-2009)
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 8 NI
Journal of Forecasting 18 8
Journal of International Business Studies 10 10 0
Journal of Management 5 10 6 0
Journal of Management Information Systems 14 0
Journal of Management Studies 14 13 20 3
Journal of Operations Management 11 0
Leadership Quarterly 20 20
Long Range Planning 34 8
Management Science 4 21
MIS Quarterly 3 5 1
Omega—International Journal of Management Studies 13 3
Organization & Environment 9 7
Organization Science 12 9 0
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 15 6 1
Organizational Research Methods 16 0
Personnel Psychology 7 0
Research in Organizational Behavior 6 0
Research Policy 15 2
Strategic Management Journal 4 7 5 0
Strategic Organization 8 7 NI
Supply Chain Management 19 17 1
Technological Forecast and Social Change 28 NI
Technovation 17 11
Total articles included 135
Note: NI = not indexed in ABIinform.
Table 2. Taxonomy of Water
Water Focus SEPT Model Popular/Trade Academic Research

Water quality Environmental Pollution FDI impact on water pollution (Jorgenson, 2009)
Operations research tools to help EPA counter drinking water contamination threats (Murray et al., 2009)
Determinants of organic pollution in poor nations (Shandra et al., 2008)
Fertilizer runoff into nearby river from new housing development (Woolsey, 2008)
FDI on water and air (Jorgenson, 2007)
Secondary transmissions of infection in drinking water systems (Chick et al., 2003)
Historical view of how chemical companies, pollution experts, and government agencies defined problems
of water pollution (J. K. Smith, 2000)
Measures to minimize water pollution from a pig slaughterhouse (Stoop, 1999)
Forecast lake algal dynamics (van Straten & Keesman, 1991)
Forecast structural changes to understand bulking sludge in biological treatment of wastewater (Seixas et al., 1991)
Carbon, phosphorous cycles from anthropogenic influences (Beck & Halfon, 1991)
Soil movement impact on water channels and reservoirs (Bouzaher et al., 1990)
Water pollution control of the Huangpu River in the Peoples’ Republic of China (Pollock & Chen, 1986)
Water treatment for stream-dissolved oxygen (Ecker, 1975)
Saltwater Management of river salinity (Jakeman et al., 1991)
intrusion
Economic Costs to treat FDI impact on water pollution (Jorgenson, 2009)
water to Large-scale study (4,000 surveys over 4 years) of reference dependence on people’s choices between areas
eliminate that differ on cost of living and quality of the lakes and rivers to determine valuation of a nonmarket
pollution good (Huber et al., 2008)
China environmental risks overwhelm opportunities? (Economy & Lieberthal, 2007)
Increase profits by changing view of pollution (Royston, 1980)
Cost impact of meeting standards of stream-dissolved oxygen (Ecker, 1975)
Model an efficient water quality program within a river basin (Taylor, 1973)
Waste treatment requirements to achieve (at minimum cost) stream-dissolved oxygen standards (Loucks,
Revelle, & Lynn, 1967)
Social Impact on Determinants of organic pollution in poor nations (Jorgenson, 2009)
poorer Social equity in China (Cai, 2008)
communities Collaboration trends over time in the field of membrane use for water treatment (Butcher & Jeffrey, 2005)
Political/legal Water quality Growth of environmental groups in response to USSR reports of water pollution (French, 1991)
law/regulation Evaluation of agriculture sediment control policies (Wade & Heady, 1978)
321
Meet standards of stream-dissolved oxygen (Ecker, 1975)
(continued)
322
Technology Used to reduce Impact on water quality and process efficiency of the adoption of new technology for use in wastewater
pollution treatment (Clark, Jeffrey, & Stephenson, 2000)
Technological assessment of palm oil production and the concomitant waste water in Nigeria
(Taiwo et al., 2000)
Third World needs high-tech science (Pitroda, 1993)
Historical, modern water pollution technology (McKee, 1972)
Water quantity Environmental Overuse None
(resource of water
development) resources
Undesirable Modeling to determine future county water supply (B.V. Dean et al., 1994)
allocation Predicting when to initiate water resource development projects (Erlenkotter et al., 1989)
Feasibility of 300-foot breach in lake to prevent flooding (Chesteen & Baird, 1985)
Flood and low water problems (Parker & Farley, 1980)
Sustainable resource allocation (Burt, 1964)
Time dimension Modeling to determine future county water supply (B.V. Dean et al., 1994)
Economic Cost to extract Multiple-criteria decision aid and screening in water-supply planning (Chen, Kilgour, & Hipel, 2008)
more difficult China: Do environmental risks overwhelm opportunities? (Economy & Lieberthal, 2007)
sources or to Economic feasibility of desalinization versus groundwater extraction (El-Geriani et al., 1998)
alter current Economic feasibility of developing marginal groundwater sources (Brimberg et al., 1994)
distribution of Predicting when to initiate water resource development projects (Erlenkotter et al., 1989)
water Pricing models to discourage excessive consumption (Widrick, 1985)
Economic implications of irrigation system development over a depleting aquifer (Stoecker et al., 1985)
Optimal size and number of pumping stations, pipes, and reservoirs, and so on, for a water reservoir to
supply an agricultural irrigation system in Algeria (Wyman, 1978)
Game theoretic fair distribution of costs/ benefits (Suzuki & Nakayama, 1976)
How to best operate dam to speed economic growth (Thomas & Revelle, 1966)
Social Social inequities Community enterprise to improve water provision (Nwanko et al., 2007)
of water Ancient Greek contribution to property management of water supplies (Zanakis et al., 2003)
distribution Inadequate infrastructure for large-scale irrigation projects in Nigeria (Adekalu & Ogunjimi, 2003)
Environmental assessment of a mega-dam and water distribution project on India’s river Narmada (Appa &
Sridharan, 2000)
Need for water to help feed a growing world population (Cook, 1975)
(continued)

Political/legal Water rights Lack of stable political process impedes economic progress to implement a pipeline from Turkey through
Syria to Israel and Jordan (Retzky, 1995)
Impact on water shortages in the United States and Mexico of a US–Mexico free trade agreement
(Kelly et al., 1991)
Technology To enable Third World needs high-tech science (Pitroda, 1993)
conservation
Water use Environmental Domestic use Operations research tools to help EPA counter contamination threats to 50,000 U.S. drinking water
utilities (Murray et al., 2009)
Secondary transmissions of infection in drinking water systems (Chick et al., 2003)
Implications of coping strategies to supplement piped water in modeling domestic water demand in
southwestern Nigeria (Adekalu, Osunbita, & Ojo, 2002)
Demand for potable water supplies in England’s Severn Trent Water Authority (Archibald, 1983)
Power plants Nuclear reactor water cooling system (C. W. Hamilton & Bingham, 1979)
Agriculture Irrigation-related studies (Alminana et al., 2010; Champion & Glaser, 1967; Hallsworth, 1992; D.V. Smith, 1973)
Optimal size and number of pumping stations, pipes, and reservoirs, and so on, for a water reservoir to
supply an agricultural irrigation system in Algeria (Wyman, 1978)
Domestic sewage as an inoculum for methane generation (Rajor, Garg, Sharma, & Kothari, 1994)
Industrial use Use of integral chain management production systems to minimize problems caused by production
processes in developing countries (Stoop, 2003)
Economic Agricultural Efficiency pricing for electricity generation (Efthymoglou, 1987)
interests pay Energy used to transport water—how to optimize energy use to decrease costs (Sarin & El Benni, 1982)
less for water; Cost savings in nuclear reactor water cooling system design (C. W. Hamilton & Bingham, 1979)
private water Investment in irrigation (Champion & Glaser, 1967; D.V. Smith, 1973)
users pay Optimal use of water for a hydroelectric installation (Gessford, 1959)
more
Social Can (should) None
water be
owned?
Political/legal Water use laws Policy for a water management system to preserve resource for irrigation (Hallsworth, 1992)
Technology Improve water Range-adjusted measure of efficiency used to evaluate water supply entities in Japan (Aida, Cooper, Paster,
recycling & Sueyoshi, 1998)
quality; develop Water management system to preserve resource for irrigation (Hallsworth, 1992)
323
salt-less water Decision tools to design nuclear reactor water cooling system (C. W. Hamilton & Bingham, 1979)
softeners
(continued)
324
Sustainable Environmental Sustainable development discourse evolution (Tregidga & Milne, 2006)
resource Rethink how market treats natural resources (Perelman, 2003)
management Ensure sustainable interactions between humans and nature (Clark & Howard, 2003)
(resource Impact on shellfish’s food availability (Klepper et al., 1991)
control) Carbon dioxide impact on hydrological response of forested catchment (Wolock & Hornberger, 1991)
What to do when well runs dry? (R. A. Hamilton, 1984)
Resource planning in England and Wales (Perret, 1977)
Water resource management poses a challenge to developing synthetic fuel (Carpenter, 1974)
Sustainable resource allocation (Burt, 1964)
Economic Simple equal flow problem (Ahuja et al., 1999)
How much water to release each month from a reservoir (White, 1998)
Maximize expected return on energy given certain constraints (Rabinowitz et al., 1988; Rabinowitz et al., 1992)
Minimize network cost flows (Jensen & Bhaumik, 1977)
Investment and allocation decisions (Armstrong & Willie, 1977)
Social Hawaiian values around water (MacLennan, 2007)
Social values around nature and culture (Cohen, 2005)
Rethink how market treats farm labor (Perelman, 2003)
Ecofeminism (Gaard, 2001)
Humanity’s interconnectedness with nature (Suntree & Williamson, 1999)
Impact ecologists’ “missions” have on how they approach environmental problems (Cramer, 1988)
In the 1980s, people have become more concerned about conservation of fresh water sources (Speth, 1984)
Political/legal Regulators management (Kurland & Zell, 2009)
U.K. formal regulation (Cashman & Lewis, 2007)
Government and NGO partnership (Sinh, 2002)
Political will to impose duties on industrial polluters (Rock, 2002)
Develop national water management policy (Goeller, 1985)
Differences between United Kingdom and United States (Morse, 1983)
Impact of public policy re a newly constructed dam on river flow rate (Downing et al., 1983)
Government incentives for sustainable development (Reilly, 1979)
Cooperation taxes versus taxes in water management (Van Dam, 1978)
Water rights and planning (Erickson et al., 1975)
Technology Decision making for administrative planning inform water resource management for public agencies
(Erickson et al., 1975)
(continued)

Company Environmental None
management Economic Strategic planning versus privatization for wastewater organizations (Dominguez et al., 2009)
(of water or Knowledge management (Ivory et al., 2007)
wastewater Wastewater organization management, feasibility of bulk exports (Ayoubi & McNiven, 2006)
utility) Recognizing pollution as waste, values-based measurements (Francis & Minchington, 2002)
Stakeholder management (Harvey & Schaefer, 2001; Ogden & Watson, 1999)
Solve water leaks on shop floors of automotive assembly plants (MacDuffie, 1997)
Strategies (Ogden & Glaister, 1996)
Companies, such as Nestle, must rely on market mechanisms to price commodities such as water
(Maucher, 1995)
Privatization (Meredith, 1992)
Economic investment alternatives with a water system (Rabinowitz, Mehrev, & Oron, 1988)
Special event data to manage a water divisions’ performance measures (Gorr, 1986)
How well does the water company manage its concerns, developing economy (Mohanty, 1984)
Marketing (Gronhaug, 1977)
Social Water utility’s value change (Tregidga & Milne, 2006)
Historical facts (Hunter, 1990)
Pricing to manage excessive consumption (Widrick, 1985)
Political/legal Impact of privatization (Meredith, 1992; Schaefer, 2009)
Understanding manufacturers’ and water treatment companies’ responses to meet new (U.K.) Environmental
Agency standards to improve effluent quality (Burgess, Longhurst, Quarmby, & Stephenson, 2000b)
Private property rights (Block, 1998)
Yellow fever outbreak (Hunter, 1990)
U.K. versus U.S. regulatory process; participation through voting to impact strategic planning of a water
utility (Dyson, 1978)
Hawaiian water rights (Adler, 1960)
Technology Impact conflict over a pulp mill’s water emissions on technology choices (Söderholm, 2009)
Sociotechnical issues around the adoption and diffusion of small-scale technology in wastewater treatment
plants (Panebianco & Pahl-Wostl, 2005)
Process of learning in industrial systems (Bangens & Aroujo, 2002)
Performance measurement and goal setting to help water utility operating companies continuously improve
(Andrews et al., 2001)
325
(continued)
326

Scenario planning (Hankinson, 1986; Phelps, Chan, & Kapsalis, 2001)
Problem analysis techniques to avoid expensive mistakes around environmental quality (Amara &
Schmid, 1982)
Computer simulation techniques can better designs of wastewater treatment plants (Mellichamp &
Weaver, 1977)
Industry Environmental None
Management Economic Business feasibility of bulk water exports (Ayoubi & McNiven, 2006)
Firms’ supply chain priorities in privatized U.K. water utilities bias toward controlling costs (Smart, 2005)
Punctuated change (A. Dean et al., 1999)
Social Empowerment (Ogden et al., 2006)
Political/Legal Regulatory adherence (Stray, 2008)
Adaptation of U.K. water and wastewater industries to new environment agency toxicity-based consents
(Burgess, Longhurst, Quarmby, & Stephenson, 2000a)
Technology Adoption of EMSs (Schaefer, 2007)
Strategic planning processes (Dominguez et al., 2009)
Note: SEPT = social, economic, political, technology; FDI = foreign direct investment; EPA = environmental protection agency; NGO = nongovernmental agency.
16
14
12
Number of Articles
Water Quality
10
Water Quantity
8 Water Use
Sustainable Res Mgt
6
Company Management
4 Industry Management
0
60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 00-09
Decade
Figure 1. Number of scholarly articles by research foci over time
refers to the impact the issue has on the cultural patterns, beliefs, and welfare of the organiza-
tion’s community. Economic refers to costs associated with effectively managing the issue.
Political refers to any government or legal action that emerges in response to the issue. And
technology encompasses technology involved in aggravating or diminishing the issue’s impact.
We extended this latter category to indicate not only machinery but also processes designed to
increase efficiency or effectiveness such as strategic planning or environmental management
systems (EMSs). And we add e for environmental, which refers to the issue’s impacts on the
natural environment. (Wood, 1990, placed environmental issues under social to highlight that
some people value for example, ecological purity over economic development. We decenter this
focus on the anthropocentric view of the natural environment to make it its own category worthy
of consideration.)
While the SEPT analysis is typically applied from business’ point of view, we use it to iden-
tify water-related issues, trends, and forces in general that can potentially affect either business
or society. These elements add the second dimension to the water issue taxonomy, which we
discuss below.
Figure 2 shows the number of articles that have addressed each of these types of impacts over
time. The greatest steady increase can be seen in the number of articles focusing on the environ-
mental impact of water issues, while the largest spike is those focusing on the political implica-
tions. Slower but steady increases are seen in numbers of articles focusing on social, economic,
and technology impacts.
In the remainder of the article, we take the six issues we found predominant in the literature
and apply the SEPTEmber aspects to each of them.
Water Quality
Environmental. Paramount among discussions relating to water is its quality. These discussions
include pollution and saltwater intrusion in both groundwater and surface water.
Pollution. In the trade press, conversations around pollution focus on groundwater pollution (e.g.,
seepage from acid mine drainage from abandoned coal mines in the eastern United States13) and
surface pollution from, for example, agricultural runoff14 or from dumping directly into surface
water sources (Ward, 2002; for a historical account, see Markham, 1993). Such water pollution
16
14
12
Number of Articles
10
Environmental
8 Economic
6 Social
Political
4
Technology
2
0
60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 00-09
Decade
Figure 2. Number of scholarly articles by type of impact over time
includes the concern around pharmaceuticals showing up in supposed pristine mountain waters
(e.g., Daughton & Ternes, 1999), which has prompted companies such as Johnson & Johnson to
directly address this problem (see Johnson & Johnson’s Corporate Social Responsibility Report
2008, retrieved from http://www.myvirtualpaper.com/doc/jnj/JnJ_2008/2009060901/JNJ.com).
We identified 14 relevant academic studies. These examined anthropogenic causes of pollu-
tion (Beck & Halfon, 1991; Chick, Soorapanth, & Koopman, 2003; Jorgenson, 2007, 2009; Pollock
& Chen, 1986; Shandra, Shor, & London, 2008; J. K. Smith, 2000; Stoop, 1999; Woolsey, 2008)
and developed tools to help assess or counter pollution (Bouzaher, Braden, & Johnson, 1990;
Ecker, 1975; Murray et al., 2009; Seixas, Camara, Antunes, & Pinheiro, 1991; Stoop, 1999; van
Straten & Keesman, 1991). One in particular revealed the differences in the impact manufactur-
ing industries, such as primary metals and paper and pulp, have on developing versus developed
nations, with the latter experiencing little to no impact and the former experiencing high levels
of organic water pollution (Jorgensen, 2009; see also Jorgensen, 2006). Jorgenson (2009) con-
cludes that the presence or existence of environmental international nongovernmental organiza-
tions and environmental ministries attenuate such harm while state strength does not.
Academic studies of water pollution thus focus on why it is happening and how we can effectively
manage the causes to reduce the negative impacts, which includes social equity considerations.
Saltwater intrusion. Global warming, agricultural practices, domestic treatment of water, and
water use decisions can increase the salinity of otherwise freshwater sources. From the trade press,
we learn that evidence of saltwater intrusion can be found in the San Francisco Bay (Cathcart &
Bolonkin, 2007), historically in the failed agricultural practices of the Sumerians in 6th century
bce (Pearce, 2007), from the contemporary practice of softening water (C. Rogers, personal com-
munication, 2007), and in reclaimed water (Thompson et al., 2005).
In the articles on academic research, we found only one study that addresses salinity issues.
In that study, Jakeman, Thomas, and Dietrich (1991) create a dynamic model of a hydrologic
process that involves solute transport in streams subject to aquifer interaction and unsteady
flows. There is room here for business scholars to examine anthropogenic causes of water pollu-
tion and how to manage these causes to reduce negative social and ecological impacts.
Economic. Economic implications come into play in discussions of cost. How much does it cost
to treat the water to eliminate the pollution? As one waste treatment executive commented,
We’re constantly monitoring some things; some things we just test on a regular basis. But
others, they fine [the waste treatment facility] $3000 for a violation. The state doesn’t tell
you how to achieve something. They just say, “achieve it.” And so you go out and evaluate
the particular technologies. [There are best practices.] But it’s a lot of choice. And a lot has
to do with money. What kind of money do you have to achieve that? (C. Rogers, personal
communication, 2007)
We identified six relevant academic studies, three of which were more than three decades old.
Economy and Lieberthal (2007) summarize the concern around water in their potent question:
Do China’s environmental risks overwhelm its opportunities? Somewhat differently, and in one
of the few scholarly studies that employs micro-organizational behavior theory, Huber, Viscusi,
and Bell (2008) examine reference dependence on people’s choices between areas that differ on
cost of living and quality of the lakes and rivers to estimate individuals’ monetary value for
water quality in lakes and rivers. In other words, how much did people value healthy lakes and
rivers? Predictably, anchoring information biases respondents’ decisions: Respondents responded
more negatively or positively about water quality when they were informed of the national water
quality and whether that quality level was bad or good, respectively. The authors note that Hsee
(1996) demonstrates that difficult-to-evaluate attributes need such anchors to help gauge the
importance of a particular attribute level. These results raise questions and possible strategies to
address the bounded rationality of managers’ decisions that seem to pit cost against quality.
Social. The economic implications eat into social equity, as so often is the case. The communi-
ties with the funds can install state-of-the-art technology to eliminate the highest amounts of
pollution. Poorer communities are unable to do so (e.g., Cai, 2008), resulting in environmental
racism (e.g., Gaard, 2001). Along these lines, Jorgenson (2009) asks to what extent industrial
organic pollution affects infant and child mortality rates in less developed countries. The paucity
of studies on social inequities points to the need for more business research to address such ques-
tions, especially those that move beyond economic calculations, such as Huber et al. (2008) do
with prospect theory.
Political/Legal. National and international legislation regulates water quality (e.g., U.S. Clean
Water Act; U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act; for information on international water law, see http://
www.internationalwaterlaw.org/; Ward, 2002). In highlighted cases, some argue that the World
Bank pressures countries to privatize their water sources. This pressure contributes to social
equity issues—providing jobs to the well connected, charging absorbent prices for water, and
making it so unaffordable that citizens are forced to drink water from contaminated sources (see,
e.g., Barlow & Clarke, 2007; Bozzo, 2008; Schalch, 2003). The popular/trade press thus dis-
cusses both current and proposed legislation as well as the social equity implications of these
laws. In contrast, the academic research in our search sought to provide scientific confirmation
of policies for controlling sediment from agriculture (Wade & Heady, 1978) and standards of
stream-dissolved oxygen along a stream (Ecker, 1975) and recognized that the number of envi-
ronmental groups grew in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics after the country had released
reports of extensive water (and other environmental) pollution (French, 1991).
An interesting avenue of research might be to use social network analysis (e.g., Cross &
Parker, 2004) to examine how to enhance the number of those “well-connected” or to determine
the impact national and international policies has on the social network around water manage-
ment. This idea links with Ostrom’s (1990) work around self-governed common-pool resource
management.15 In other words, how does the social network reinforce or detract from effective
water management?
Technological. Technology can be used to increase quality by reducing point and nonpoint source
pollution16 through advances in wastewater treatment plants as well as by educating people on
how to properly dispose of hazards such as medical waste and batteries. Our search revealed only
four academic articles that we would categorize here: two essays about the role technology can
and should play to solve water quality issues (McKee, 1972; Pitroda, 1993) and two that examine
the impact of specific technologies on wastewater treatment (Clark, Jeffrey, & Stephenson,
2000; Taiwo et al., 2000). There would seem abundant opportunity then for business research to
examine the social, economic, and political implications of advanced technology to solve water
quality issues.
In summary, the academic research approaches water quality issues in three ways: (a) What
impacts does investment in certain countries have on water quality? (b) What tools, such as fore-
casting and operations research, can we use to assess water quality issues? (c) What can we learn
about the anthropogenic influences on water quality so that we can reverse them?
We also examined each category for the years in which the research appeared (see Table 3).
Fifteen water quality studies were published between the years 2000 and 2009, eight in the 1990s,
and nine earlier. Seven of the recent studies focused on environmental quality issues, three on
social equity issues, three on economic implications, two on technological implications, and none
on political/legal implications, indicating increasing interest in environmental quality foci.
Water Quantity
Environmental. Water quantity issues focus on the overuse of water resources and the undesir-
able allocation of it, and these issues vary by time. We explain each below.
Overuse of water resources. The Population Reference Bureau17 estimates human population
will reach nine billion by 2050. With increased human population come increased needs for
water to grow food, to manufacture products, for recreation, and so on. (And worse is greater
population in Western—especially the United States—nations because of our greater consump-
tion.) As the need for water increases, we start overpumping aquifers (e.g., the San Joaquin
Valley, California [U.S. Department of the Interior, 2009]; and the Ogallala Aquifer [Slogget &
Dickason, 1986]) and surface waters (e.g., the Aral Sea).
We found no business articles relating to the overuse of water resources, which is unfortunate
given the enormous impact such action will have. Research can examine the work that compa-
nies are doing to respond to reduced water availability. For example, Senge, Smith, Kruschwitz,
Laur, and Schley (2008) write about Coca-Cola’s partnership with World Wildlife Fund to
understand global water issues better.
Undesirable allocation: Too much or too little. Coupled with overuse, some areas of the world
receive too much water (floods, mudslides, rising sea levels—e.g., Maldives, Bangladesh, Florida
Keys, Manhattan, Hurricane Katrina, etc.) or too little (e.g., drought in Atlanta, Georgia; Darfur;
southern California).
We found five related academic articles. Two focused on flooding or low water problems
(Chesteen & Baird, 1985; Parker & Farley, 1980), and two modeled anticipated water demand
and supply (B. V. Dean, Salstrom, Fiedler, Molnar, & Haake, 1994; Erlenkotter, Sethi, & Okada,
1989). Only one, written more than 40 years ago, considered the question of sustainable resource
allocation, pointing to the need for more research here.
The dimension of time. Water quantity issues also vary by time. Annually, for example, India
deals with monsoons. Water is available or it is not. Its excess or lack becomes a life-and-death
issue (see, e.g., Corbett, 2009). On a multiyear basis, to ensure supplies of freshwater, California
worries about the Eastern Sierra snowpack level18 or South Florida about the restoration of the
greater Everglades ecosystem19 or India about the Himalayan snowpack (Ward, 2002). Bleeding
into decades are concerns about the depletion of, for example, the Ogallala Aquifer on which
depends $20 billion each year in food and fiber (corn, wheat, sorghum) and which, if depleted,
Table 3. Summary of Issues and Academic Article Counts Addressing Each Type of Issue and Year Published
Type of Issue the Focus Raises

Focus of Article Environmental Economic Social Political/Legal Technological Total
Quality Pollution Costs to treat water to Impact on poorer Water quality law/ Technology used to
eliminate pollution communities regulation reduce pollution
Saltwater intrusion
15 7 3 3 4 32
2009—2 2009 2009 1991 2000—2
2008—2 2008 2008 1978 1993
2007 2007 2005 1975 1972
2003 1980
2000 1975
1999 1973
1991—4 1967
1990
1986
1975
Quantity Overuse of water Cost to extract more Social inequities of Water rights Technology to enable
resources difficult sources water distribution conservation
or to alter current
distribution of water
Undesirable allocation
Time dimension
6 10 5 2 1 24
1994—2 2008 2007 1995 1993
1989 2007 2003—2 1991
1985 1998 2000
1980 1994 1975
1964 1989
1985 -2
1978
1976
1966
331
(continued)
332
Use Domestic use Agricultural interests Whether water can be Water use laws Technology to improve
pay less for water; owned water recycling quality;
private water users develop saltless water
pay more softeners
Power plants
Agriculture
Industrial use
12 6 0 1 3 22
2010 1987 1992 1998
2009 1982 1992
2003—2 1979 1979
2002 1973
1994 1967
1992 1959
1983
1979
1978
1973
1967
Sustainable resource Managing water as a Economics of water Values around water Regulations around Technology to improve
management finite resource management management water management water management
9 6 7 10 1 33
2006 1999 2007 2009 1975
2003—2 1992 2005 2007
1991—2 1998 2003 2002-2
1984 1992 2001 1985
1977 1988 1999 1983—2
1974 1977—2 1988 1979
1964 1984 1978
1975
(continued)

Company Managing water from Economics of managing Values around company Political/legal issues Technology devised to
management company point of water from company water use around company improve company
view point of view water use management of water
0 14 3 7 8 32
2009 2006 2009 2009
2007 1990 2000 2005
2006 1985 1998 2002
2002 1990 2001
2001 1992 1991
1999 1978 1986
1997 1960 1982
1996 1977
1995
1992
1988
1986
1984
1977
Industry Managing water from Economics of managing Values around managing Regulatory issues Technology used to
management industry point of water from industry water from industry around industry improve industry
view point of view point of view management of water management of water
0 3 1 2 2 8
2006 2006 2008 2009
2005 2000 2007
1999
Total 31 40 16 21 14 151
333
will take 6,000 years to replenish (Little, 2009). And from decades we move into centuries and
to concerns of melting glaciers that will lead to rising sea levels (and saltwater intrusion) and
rising temperatures (and drought).
Only one academic article specifically addressed the issue of water quantity varying by time
(B. V. Dean et al., 1994). More business research needs to focus on the impact climate change, for
example, will have on water availability for business needs.
Economic. The economic implications of water quantity–related issues address the cost of tech-
nology to extract increasingly difficult sources or alter the current distribution of water.20
We found 10 relevant academic articles. The majority of these studies focused on the economic
implications of developing new water sources (Brimberg, Mehrez, & Oron, 1994; El-Geriani,
Essamin, & Loucks, 1998; Erlenkotter et al., 1989; Stoecker, Seidmann, & Lloyd, 1985; Suzuki
& Nakayama, 1976; Wyman, 1978); one developed a model to regulate consumption (Widrick,
1985) and modeled the best way to operate a dam to speed economic growth (Thomas & Revelle,
1966) or for water supply planning (Chen, Kilgour, & Hipel, 2008). These studies appeared over
24 years, with the most recent in 1994. However, more recent was an essay questioning whether
China’s environmental risks would overwhelm its opportunities (Economy & Lieberthal, 2007).
Economy and Lieberthal (2007) observe that while the Chinese press talks about how China’s
environmental risks, including a lack of water, will constrain GDP growth, “multinationals may
be more concerned with intellectual property rights violations, corruption, and potential political
instability,” and how this latter approach is a mistake. They conclude that
multinationals face clear risks to their operations, their workers’ health, and their reputa-
tions. In factoring environmental issues into their China strategies, foreign firms need to be
both defensive, taking steps to reduce harm, and proactive, investing in environmental
protection efforts.
Their article is a clear call, along the lines of Widrick (1985), for more research to focus on how
to effectively manage increasingly scarce resources.
Social. The essence of the social equity concerns relevant to water quantity is that those with the
money and power get the water; those without do not. The history of Los Angeles, for example,
rests on William Mulholland’s procurement (some say “stealing”) of water from the Owens
Valley (Kahrl, 1983; Reisner, 1993). The United States is host to 2,000,000 dams (Ward, 2002).
Dams provide energy and a secure source of water—for those upstream. For example, just before
the Colorado crosses the United States–Mexico border 75% of its flow is diverted into the All-
American Canal.21 And in many developing nations, procuring water is the woman’s job. As
access to clean water declines, it is women who travel farther and work harder to secure it (see,
e.g., Bennett, Dávila-Poblete, & Rico, 2008; www.worldbank.org/gender).
Regarding the social implications of water quantity, our search revealed five academic articles.
Nwankwo, Phillips, and Tracey (2007) examined multinationals’ involvement in developing Nige-
rian water resources through community enterprise. Adekalu and Ogunjimi (2003) discuss the inad-
equate infrastructure for large-scale irrigation projects in Nigeria. Appa and Sridharan (2000)
discuss their environmental assessment of a megadam and water distribution project on India’s
river Namada. Their report led the World Bank to withdraw from the project and the Supreme
Court of India to ban construction until problems associated with human rehabilitation and reset-
tlement could be solved. Cook (1975) recognized the need for more water to help feed a growing
world population. And, somewhat differently, Zanakis, Theofanides, Kontaratos, and Tassios
(2003) detail Ancient Greek ingenuity to build a 1-kilometer water supply tunnel in Samos Island.
More research can examine social equity of water distribution in other parts of the world, includ-
ing in the United States, among, for example, Native Americans (see, e.g., Thebaut, 2009).
Political/Legal. Water rights are complex. In California, for example, landowners own the ground-
water under their land (Kanazawa, 1998). Theoretically, residents can each secure a permit to
build a well in their backyard. But as they stick more “straws” in the ground to suck up water, they
collectively drain the underground aquifers (J. Ruch, personal communication, 2007). Water poli-
tics are global and highlight conflicts in the Middle East and Africa (see, e.g., Barlow & Clarke,
2007; Orr, 2008; Ward, 2002; Wihbey & Berman, 2007).
We found no relevant academic articles that relate to water rights per se. It might be that this
type of research resides in political science journals. However, water politics affect water man-
agement and therefore become a management issue. For example, business scholars can ask:
What are the implications of water politics on business’s decisions to operate or not in a specific
country? Along these lines, two articles recognized the impact of (unstable) political situations on
the ability to develop water resources to encourage economic development in the Middle East
(Retzky, 1995) and between the United States and Mexico (Kelly, Kamp, Gregory, & Rich, 1991).
Technological. Technology here focuses on the need to conserve. For example, Israel is leading
on knowledge-intensive practices of developing new hydroponic agricultural methods (e.g.,
Weller, 2005). Technology also looks to increase supplies through building dams (which them-
selves bring a host of environmental and social equity issues; see, e.g., Reisner, 1993; Ward,
2002), seeding clouds (which may then prevent the next town from getting the water), and identi-
fying new underground water sources through Global Positioning System technology (Beiser,
2009). In the academic research, we found only one relevant article. Pitroda (1993) argues that
“High technology is already an essential element [for the Third World] in effective water sourc-
ing, sanitation, construction, agriculture, and other development activities (emphasis in original).”
(p.66). As with water quality above, there would then seem abundant opportunity for business
research to examine the social, economic, and political implications of advanced technology to
solve water quantity issues.
In summary, the academic research around water quantity did not address the overuse of
water and only minimally addressed the time dimension, but the articles did seek to optimally
allocate and predict water resources and plan development and prevention projects. Also, the
majority of the academic articles in this section focused on the economic implications of such
projects. Some addressed the social equity implications of too much or too little water, but cer-
tainly there appears to be room for more research here.
In terms of when this research appeared, however, the most recent (2000-2009) were 4 studies
that examined social equity and 2 on economic implications. There are no others. Indeed, of the
24 studies focused on water quantity, 11 appeared before or during 1989, indicating a trend
toward a focus on social equity implications of water quantity. Two articles addressed political/
legal issues, and only one, an essay, addressed the technological implications, pointing to oppor-
tunities for research in each of these areas.
Water Use. Water use issues concern how we use water. We use water to wash and drink, to
provide energy, for aesthetics, and for recreation. North America and Japan use more water per
capita (400 liters per day) compared with Europe (200 liters per day) and sub-Saharan Africa
(10-20 liters per day).22 In the United States, we use 43 billion gallons a day for domestic pur-
poses, 136 billion gallons in power plants, 142 billion gallons in agriculture, and 20 billion gal-
lons23 for industrial and mining purposes, which we discuss below.
Environmental
Domestic use. We drink water. The global soft drink and bottled water manufacturing industry
was estimated to reach $147 billion in 2008 (Fishman, 2007) despite bottled water, for example,
being an environmentally inferior choice to convey water. Single-use water and water bottles deplete
local natural sources, are not as well regulated as municipal water, and take energy and water to cre-
ate the bottle container, and only a small percentage of them get recycled; the rest become litter (and
may end up in the North Pacific Gyre as “food” for marine life) or go to the landfill.24
We soften our hard water by adding salt so it tastes better, cleans better, and extends the life
of our appliances. In return, we increase the salinity of our effluent, which leads to harming of
the larger ecosystem (see, e.g., Thompson et al., 2005).
We swim and play water games and water our lawns and golf courses. In turn, we add pressure
to water-poor lands such as Arizona or Las Vegas or Palm Springs (see, e.g., Thebaut, 2009).
The four academic studies included in this review related to domestic use focused on counter-
ing contamination (Murray et al., 2009), secondary transmissions of infection (Chick et al.,
2003), and demand (Adekalu, Osunbitan, & Ojo, 2002; Archibald, 1983) of potable water sup-
plies. Academic research opportunities exist to investigate the environmental implications of
bottled water, golf courses, water softeners, and so on.
Power plants. We use water to create and cool energy, and we use energy to move water around
(see, e.g., Carle, 2004; Leslie, 2005; Ward, 2002; Weber, 2008).
In the academic research, C. W. Hamilton and Bingham (1979) detail their efforts to use man-
agement science tools to design the water cooling system at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
System near Phoenix, Arizona. Research can update these efforts and apply insights to creating
and moving energy.
Agricultural use. We use water to feed and clothe ourselves—on water-intensive crops such as
cotton and corn. Cotton and corn have been commoditized, and politics around it force forested
countries to raze their forests and divert water sources to plant cotton and corn for export (e.g.,
De Fraiture, 2007; Aral Sea Loss and Cotton, retrieved from http://www1.american.edu/ted/aral.
htm). Kenya’s Lake Niavasha is withering under use by international flower farms (Foodandwa-
terwatch.org; Bozzo, 2008). Agriculture is depleting the Ogallala aquifer and the San Joaquin
Valley groundwater.
Five academic studies focused directly (Alminana et al., 2010; Champion & Glaser, 1967;
Hallsworth, 1992; Smith, 1973; Wyman, 1978) and one tangentially (Rajor, Garg, Sharma, &
Kothari, 1994) on agricultural use. This seems quite small given the enormous demand agri-
culture has on our world’s water supplies and the fact that, except for the most recent, these are
almost two decades old. Business research can examine more extensively how well agriculture
manages the water it uses and the reasons behind these use patterns.
Industrial use. Beverage and semiconductor are two examples of water-intensive industries.
Without water, Coca-Cola does not have a product. To produce just one eight-inch silicon wafer
requires upward of 2,000 gallons of ultrapure water (Carle, 2004). Accordingly, Gleick et al.
(2009) suggest 10 key actions for sustainable corporate water management. These actions begin
with measuring current use and end with forming strategic partnerships with stakeholders to
promote watershed protection.25
Notably, only 1 article focused on industrial use of water. It examined the use of integral chain
management production systems in developing countries to minimize problems caused by pro-
duction processes (Stoop, 2003).
Equally troubling is that of the other 12 studies that do focus on the environmental implica-
tions of water use, nearly half appeared before 1989. Research can examine the extent to which
business has begun to successfully embrace Gleick et al.’s (2009) key actions for sustainable
corporate water management.
Economic. Economic implications include the situation when agriculture pays less for water (to
ensure lower food prices, which however leads to less incentive to conserve) and private water
ratepayers pay more (to ensure a rate of return to shareholders; see Kurland & Zell, 2009), or
water extraction costs increase (see, e.g., Merrett, 1999), or water utilities face exorbitant costs
to upgrade aging infrastructure (Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, 2009).
In the academic search, researchers modeled questions related to the use of water for electricity
generation (Efthymoglou, 1987), investment in irrigation (Champion & Glaser, 1967; D. V. Smith,
1973), hydroelectric installation (Gessford, 1959), and cost savings in a nuclear reactor cooling
system design (C. W. Hamilton & Bingham, 1979) and to energy use in water distribution (Sarin
& El Benni, 1982). There seemed to be a disconnect between these studies and the economic
implications–-related concerns found in the trade press: the latter focuses on consumption, extrac-
tion, and investment costs while the former focuses on investment and water distribution costs.
One reason could be attributed to the age of the academic studies—all six appeared before 1989.
More research can target the economic implications of consumption and extraction.
Social. Social issues focus on power and corruption of private water companies—on the idea that
water can be owned (e.g., Barlow & Clarke, 1993). We found no relevant academic articles, and
thus this topic appears to be a research opportunity for business scholars.
Political/Legal. In California, for example, farmers must adhere to the “use it or lose it” law for
water use. That is, a farmer has access to a certain amount of water. If the farmer does not use all
this water, then it gets reallocated to other stakeholders. The farmer’s incentive, therefore, is to
use it; this often leads to overwatering and therefore wastage (see e.g., Thebaut, 2009).
We found one academic article that touches on the political/legal implications of water use.
Hallsworth (1992) details policy objectives for a water management system that would preserve
the resource for use in irrigation. More research should study the business implications of water
policy.
Technological. To solve the problem of use, we use technological solutions, for example, to
develop water softeners that do not rely on salt, improve water recycling quality (Hines, 2009),
find additional sources of water (Beiser, 2009), and improve water conservation with advanced
irrigation techniques, hydroponics, low-flow showerheads, and waterless urinals.
As we mentioned earlier, to locate relevant academic articles here, we relied on the broadened
definition of technology to include processes as well as physical machines. Aida, Cooper, Pastor,
and Sueyoshi (1998) evaluate water supply entities in Japan. Hallsworth (1992) develops a pol-
icy for a water management system to preserve the resource for irrigation. C. W. Hamilton and
Bingham (1979) use management science tools to design the water cooling system at the Palo
Verde Nuclear Generating System near Phoenix, Arizona. Given the opportunity of technology
to improve the negative impacts of how we use water or the impact that new technology itself
can have on water, we need more study here.
In summary, we found academic research around water use relevant to domestic use, power
plants, and agriculture, with the largest number focusing on the latter. Certainly this focus makes
sense since some sources argue that agriculture consumes nearly 67% of the world’s daily fresh-
water and up to 90% in more arid countries.26 Moreover, of the 22 studies we categorize here, 8
(36%) appeared before 1989. A ripe area for exploration would be to examine water use with
respect to industrial use as well as the social implications of such use.
The review of the popular and trade press yielded the three water issues of quality, quantity,
and use. Emerging from the academic research were three additional themes: sustainable resource
management, company management, and industry management, which we discuss below using
the SEPTEmber classifications.
Sustainable Resource Management (Resource Control)

Water is a common-pool resource because, like other public goods such as air and radio, it is
very difficult to prevent others from using it (Ostrom, 1990). However, unlike these public
goods, one person’s consumption diminishes another’s potential use because the goods’ supply
is finite. In this section we examine the SEPTEmber dimensions around sustainable resource
management.27
Environmental. All nine articles, either through essays or specific research questions, investi-
gate the need to ensure sustainable interactions between humans and nature (Clark & Howard,
2003; Burt, 1964; Carpenter, 1994; R. A. Hamilton, 1984; Klepper, Scholten, & Van de Kamer,
1991; Perelman, 2003; Perret, 1977; Tregidga & Milne, 2006; Wolock & Hornberger, 1991).
These articles appeared evenly distributed between recent and older articles, suggesting that the
concern about sustainable interactions is a long-standing issue.
Economic. In the academic articles here, economic issues often translated into efficiency. Schol-
ars model a water resource system (Ahuja, Orlin, Sechi, & Zuddas, 1999) to maximize the
expected return on energy generated by the system given constraints such as storage capacity
(Rabinowitz, Mehrez, & Rabina, 1992; Rabinowitz, Mehrez, & Ravivi, 1988), to minimize net-
work cost flows in water resource–planning problems (Jensen & Bhaumik, 1977), to simultane-
ously consider investment and allocation decisions in water planning (Armstrong & Willie,
1977), and to determine, in part, how much dammed-up water companies should release each
month (White, 1998). Two studies were more than a decade old, and three appeared before 1989.
Obviously, more recent research around the economics of water management is called for.
Social. Seven articles focus on social values around nature and culture (Cohen, 2005; Cramer,
1988; Gaard, 2001; MacLennan, 2007; Perelman, 2003; Speth, 1984; Suntree & Williamson,
1999). More research can examine how managers value water and how that differs by industry
or national culture.
Political/Legal. Ten studies, either more recent or appearing before 1989, focus on the implica-
tions of government regulation to manage water (Cashman & Lewis, 2007; Downing, Pack, &
Westley, 1983; Erickson, Groves, & Kahalas, 1975; Goeller, 1985; Kurland & Zell, 2009; Morse,
1983; Reilly, 1999; Rock, 2002; Sinh, 2002; Van Dam, 1978). Most recently, Kurland and Zell
(2009) examined the degree to which California’s use of the General Rate Case process ensured
careful water management of private water companies in that state. More research can examine
the impact that government regulatory processes have on sustainable water management.
Technology. Only one article fell in this category, and again we applied the broadened definition
that included decision making. Erickson et al. (1975) examine the degree to which decision mak-
ing for administrative planning can inform water resource management for public agencies.
In summary, academic research related to sustainable resource management focused on plan-
ning and control, efficient use of resources, implications of regulation on sustainable manage-
ment, and assessment of underlying value assumptions about human interaction with nature. Very
few articles employed technology as a tool for improved sustainable resource management. More-
over, concern about sustainable resource management appears consistently in the journal research.
Eleven articles appeared in the 2000s, 6 in the 1990s, and 16 before between 1964 and 1988.
Company Management
Articles here ask the question: How well does the water utility manage itself and/or changes in
regulation? The focus centers on management of the water company itself as opposed to how
well the company manages its water concerns.
Environmental. We found no academic articles devoted to examining a company’s environ-
mental impact. Business scholars can begin to study questions such as: How do water companies
impact the environment? How do they view these impacts? What strategies do they take to miti-
gate negative impacts? And so on
Economic. Fourteen academic studies examine the economics of managing water from the com-
pany’s point of view, with the majority of these studies examining the water utility’s (typically the
postprivatized U.K. water utility) ability to manage its stakeholders (Harvey & Schaefer, 2001;
Ogden & Watson, 1999) and market (Gronhaug, 1977), develop corporate strategy (Ogden & Glaister,
1996; nonutility—Maucher, 1995), and manage knowledge (Ivory, Alderman, Thwaites, McLough-
lin, & Vaughan, 2007). These studies appeared consistently from 1977 to 2009 and indicate a
strong bias in business scholars’ topic preference.
Social. Three studies examine value use around company water use. For example, Hunter (1990)
examined implicit value assumptions underlying water through the story of how Manhattan
Bank (which became Chase Manhattan Bank) began as an 18th-century water company devoted
to delivering yellow fever–free water, and Tregidga and Milne (2006), over time, did the same
by detailing a water utility’s value change in sustainable development. More research examining
how water has shaped various companies or industries would be interesting.
Political/Legal. Seven articles examined political/legal issues around company water use, with
the greatest focus on the impact of privatization (Adler, 1960; Block, 1998; A. Dean, Carlisle, &
Baden-Fuller, 1999; Meredith, 1992; Schaefer, 2009) or reactions to new regulatory standards
(Burgess et al., 2000b). For example, in an intriguing application of organizational change theo-
ries, A. Dean et al. (1999) examine the degree to which the United Kingdom’s Water Act of 1989
(privatization) created punctuated change responses in 10 U.K. water companies. Water privati-
zation is an ongoing debate and warrants additional research and extending this focus to social,
ethical, and environmental implications of such policy (see, e.g., Barlow & Clarke, 2003; Kurland
& Zell, 2009).
Technological. Seven studies examined how technology can improve company management of
water through, for example, scenario planning to analyze water use (Hankinson, 1986; Phelps
et al., 2001) and performance measurement and goal setting to help water utility companies con-
tinuously improve (Andrews, Carpentier, & Gowen, 2001) or to design improved wastewater
treatment plants (Mellichamp & Weaver, 1977). One study focused on the sociotechnical issues
around the adoption and diffusion of small-scale technology in wastewater treatment plants
(Panebianco & Pahl-Wostl, 2005). These studies appeared consistently from 1982 to 2009. More
research is warranted here to help companies conserve and preserve water resources more
efficiently.
In summary, articles that focus on company management lean toward improving efficiency in
water utilities, the value systems of water utilities, the impact of privatization on water utility
performance, and the use of technologies to improve decision-making and goal-setting processes
around water usage. No articles focused on the environmental impact of companies, suggesting
that this is an area of future study. Moreover, 12 studies appeared since 2000, 10 during the
1990s, and 10 before 1989, suggesting that company management of water has been a consistent
focus of researchers’ attention.
Industry Management
Academic articles here expanded their focus from the water company itself to consider impacts
on the privatized water industry (A. Dean et al., 1999; Ogden, Glaister, & Marginson, 2006; Smart,
2005; Stray, 2008) or wastewater industry (Dominguez, Worch, Markard, Truffer, & Gujer, 2009;
Schaefer, 2007).
Environmental. We coded no articles examining the environmental impact of these industries
as a whole. Business research would be welcome here to investigate these impacts.
Economic. Here Ayoubi and McNiven (2006) examine the business feasibility of bulk water exp
orts. Smart (2005) assesses firms’ supply chain priorities in privatized U.K. water utilities, finding
they have a bias toward controlling costs. And A. Dean et al. (1999) question the degree to which
punctuated change (Gersick, 1991) characterized U.K. water utilities’ responses to privatization.
Social. We found one article in this category that examined empowerment and accountability in
the private water industry (Ogden et al., 2006). More research is warranted here.
Political/Legal. Here, academic articles examined environmental reporting in the water and energy
industries (Stray, 2008) and the adaptation of U.K. water and wastewater industries to new envi-
ronment agency toxicity-based consents (Burgess et al., 2000a).
Technological. Academic articles here examined the adoption of EMSs (Schaefer, 2007) and the
utility of strategic planning processes for wastewater organizations (Dominguez et al., 2009).
Research examining the implications that public reporting of corporate water impacts has on
perceived accountability and actions might be interesting here.
In summary, the industry-level issues received the least attention from scholars. Articles
focused on change in the water industry over time, empowerment and accountability, environ-
mental reporting, and the adoption of EMSs. None focused on the environmental impacts of
these industries, and most focused on the water industry itself versus other water-intensive indus-
tries such as agriculture or semiconductors. However, six of the eight articles we categorized
here appeared in the past 5 years, suggesting that the industry level is an area capturing scholars’
attention.
Limitations
This study provides one perspective of water-related research. Many of these water-related top-
ics may have received attention in journals not included in this review.28 In order to be manage-
able, we needed to restrict the number of journals we focused on, and even by focusing only on
business journals, we necessarily excluded many. For example, we did not include book chap-
ters, such as those found in Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy; books, such
as by Tang (1992); journal articles outside the top 20; or articles in other disciplines such as in
the Journal of Environmental Economics. Also, many of the older journal issues were not avail-
able electronically, and so we relied exclusively on the abstracts to classify them in our
taxonomy.
Conclusions and Future Research

In this study, we examined 49 journal publications for the term water to yield 135 water-related
articles. We relied on two different ranking sources—ISI and RedJasper—to choose the focal
publications. It is interesting to note that these sources both ranked the following journals in their
top 5 for impact for 2009 (for management and/or business): Academy of Management Journal,
Academy of Management Review, MIS Quarterly. The journals that only one or the other ranked
in its top 5 were Administrative Science Quarterly (RedJasper ranked it 1; ISI ranked it 8 and 9),
Journal of Management (RedJasper ranked it 10; ISI ranked it 5 and 6), Strategic Management
Journal (RedJasper ranked it 7; ISI ranked it 4 and 5), and Management Science (RedJasper
ranked it 4; it did not appear in ISI’s top 20).
If we expand that set to the top 10, the two ranking sources share all of the aforementioned
journals except for Management Science. Of interest is the number of water-related articles pub-
lished in these 10 top-ranked journals. The 5 top ranked (by both sources) published only two
water-related articles. The 10 top ranked (by both sources) still published only two water-related
articles. These two studies are Gorr (1986) and Ogden and Watson (1999), both classified as
“company management” and “economic.” Gorr (1986) appears in MIS Quarterly and Ogden and
Watson (1999) in Academy of Management Journal. However, Management Science alone con-
tributed 21 water-related articles or 15% of the articles included in this study.
Why is there a paucity of water-related articles in these top journals?
Perhaps these top-ranked journals are not publishing water-related research because the
research does not meet their quality expectations, their focus expectations (i.e., the research does
not sufficiently develop the link between management theory and the natural environment),
scholars are not submitting their work to these publications, or scholars are not working on this
type of research. As one reviewer sagely commented,
Many of these issues and concerns will have received coverage in journals of other related
disciplines. There is a bias toward publishing articles in one’s own discipline and it is
something of an exception for authors to stray outside their subject areas. So the apparent
deficit in some areas may have more to do with where authors publish than an actual lack
of research or interest.
Based on the number of studies published elsewhere, it seems reasonable to suggest that resear
chers are talking about water issues, albeit in a fractured way, leaving the other three possibilities
open for speculation. Indeed, it may be that scholars submit their work to more specialized journals
such as Water Policy and Water Research. So the gaps in our water-related research are well
filled in journals outside of business/management, such as in geography and political science.
However, we argue that it is critical for management publications to publish more water-related
research, given the call for corporations and other business organizations to take increasingly
more responsibility to solve environmental issues (see Jermier et al., 2006).
That said, we observe that the water-related articles included in this study seem to fall into
three categories: qualitative case studies, quantitative theoretical modeling, and essays. At a
meta level, it would be interesting to examine if certain types of scholars publish certain of
these three, if there is a relationship between the scholars’ backgrounds and the questions they
ask about water, and what impact this research is having on practice. Notably, the trade and
popular press are more accessible; they provide broader considerations of the topic, often meld-
ing the political with the social with the economic implications, and so would seem to have
greater impact.
Water Research Trends Over Time

Since the first “business” article on water reviewed here appeared by Adler (1960), a trickle of
“business” research on water strengthened and became a consistent stream from 2006 on, the
year Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth appeared in theaters. This growing number of academic
articles from top-rated journals have focused on six main topics revealed by our taxonomy: sus-
tainable resource management (33 articles), water company management (32 articles), water
quality (32 articles), water quantity (24 articles), water use (22 articles), and water or wastewa-
ter industry management (8 articles).
Increased focus on water issues is also revealed by the trends shown in Figures 1 and 2. From
Figure 1 we see a dramatic increase in articles focusing on water quality, sustainable resource
management, and industry management. Articles focusing on company management remain
numerous, while those focusing on water quantity and water use have declined. We surmise that
increased interest in water quality issues and sustainable resource management stem from greater
awareness of pollutants entering the water stream and increased recognition of corporations’ role
in being stewards of the environment and fundamentally intertwined with nature.
Indeed, Jermier et al. (2006) distinguish three trends in contemporary environmentalism: the
dominant social paradigm that “accepts human domination of the rest of nature,” human stew-
ardship in which humanity acts as environmental stewards, and the new ecological paradigm
that “emphasizes holistic balance among the elements of nature, careful protection of the non-
human environment . . . and comprehensive environmental and social justice” (pp. 624-625)
Also, Frederick (1995) places corporations as part of nature.
In contrast, the relative decrease in articles focusing on water quality and use may have
occurred because, over time, these topics became subsumed under sustainable resource manage-
ment. The increase in numbers of articles focusing on industry management may reflect greater
awareness that water management is a network problem that one single organization cannot
tackle alone.
From Figure 2 we see a dramatic rise in the number of articles focusing on social impact. The
number of articles focusing on the environment, the economy, the political/legal, and technologi-
cal dimensions also rose. Together these suggest a collective trend signaling greater awareness
of the impact water issues have on numerous dimensions of the society. This increase may have
occurred along with greater awareness of the importance of corporate social responsibility, the
“going green” movement, growth of NGOs that help companies measure water usage, increas-
ingly sophisticated technologies such as Google Earth that reveal water supply shortages, as well
as general acceptance of the “People, Planet, Profit” triple bottom line. (See Jermier et al., 2006,
for a cogent overview of the growth of corporate environmentalism as green politics.)
The emerging focus on water is an encouraging recognition by business scholars that we can-
not take water for granted. In one sense, this marks a return to how some originally conceptual-
ized water. Before industrialization in early societies, for example, Hawaii, the prevalent concept
was “water as sacred and shared by a community of agriculturalists” (MacLennan, 2007, p. 497).
With industrialization of the sugar plantations, however, this quickly moved to “the Euro-Amer-
ican vision of water as property and utility in service to industrial development” (p. 497). By
1920, “the Hawaiian concept of wai as a shared resource to be equitably distributed among agri-
culturalists had all but disappeared” (p. 497). The view that water is property that can be bought
and sold has dominated ever since.
Today, societal and corporate awareness that water is finite is growing. Businesses realize that
water constraints can pose a variety of risks, including the loss of license to operate, increased
production costs, increased community and regulatory pressure, threatened brand image, and
concerns about health of employees and consumer markets (World Business Council for Sustain-
able Development, 2009). Businesses are not sitting idle. A quick read of the business press finds
that corporations are already addressing water issues—for instance, by partnering with NGOs to
develop sustainable business models, reducing water pollution, or positioning water constraints
strategically as opportunities for growth (e.g., GreenBiz Staff, 2008), though perhaps not to the
extent that sustainable management warrants (Barton, 2010).
Findings from the present study suggest a host of continued research opportunities for busi-
ness scholars. The majority of articles focusing on company and industry management looked at
water companies rather than the broad range of companies that rely on water for their products
and services. Most of the articles on sustainable resource management are written from a techni-
cal or operations research standpoint and are based on computer models or simulations. Applica-
tion of theories from the fields of organization behavior and organization theory are largely
missing from the research. This suggests that sustainable resource management has not yet entered
the collective psyche of business scholars. (One exception is Huber et al., 2008.) Opportunities
therefore exist for business scholars to fill this gap.
Specific areas in need of research identified by gaps in the taxonomy include the environmen-
tal impact of the overuse of water resources; the implications for business of too much or too
little water supply (e.g., hurricanes or the impact of drought on the beverage or semiconductor
industries); historical analyses of water use over time; what happens when businesses must battle
local communities and governments for water (see Esty & Winston, 2006); the social, political,
and legal implications of constrained water supplies (e.g., how companies can and should respond
to water-related activism or legal reporting requirements—see Gleick et al., 2009); the implications
of water scarcity in China and other developing nations; the role of technology in improving
water distribution; patterns of water use in diverse industries; to broaden the scope beyond water
and wastewater industries, industry-level analyses that examine water-intensive industries other
than water (e.g., agriculture, beverage, semiconductor); the impact of industries and their value
chains on the environment, such as that resulting from offshore drilling; the impact of industry
and national water standards; and the role of innovation in solving water problems. (For a more
complete list of future research ideas, see Table 4.)
Moreover, interdisciplinary research can link management/organization concepts to the litera-
ture on water in disciplines such as political science, geography, and economics. An alternative
to this would be to show, from an interdisciplinary perspective, how water has been treated
across different disciplines and therefore where management/organization research might con-
tribute or complement.29
It is also interesting that not many articles targeted water holistically (i.e., consider use, qual-
ity, and quantity together), and it might be a way to consolidate the literature. Similarly, on the
impact side, we can study how “People, Planet, and Profit” implications of water tie together; they
are, and they need to be studied as such.
One of the richest research opportunities is continued investigation into the role that busi-
ness can and should play in managing common-pool resources such as water. To this end,
Jermier et al. (2006) observe, “The [New Corporate Environmentalism] is, first and foremost,
about control. It is focused on who should control the impact of production on the environment”
(p. 627).
Here business scholars have the unique opportunity to apply our years of understanding
around these topics to foster better sustainable resource management. Ostrom (1990), for exam-
ple, predicts that successful management of common-pool resources will require active engage-
ment from businesses while solving three puzzles: how to develop rules and regulations that all
consider fair, how to keep commitments in the face of temptation when breaking them would go
undetected, and how to engage in mutual monitoring to avoid the free rider tendency. Similarly,
Stern, Dietz, Dolsak, Ostrom, and Stonich (2002) argue that
an increasing need exists to understand the dynamics of resource management institutions—

their evolution and adaptation, the ways they respond to problems of decision making and
internal conflict, and the mechanisms that govern change in the institutions and in how
they relate to resources. (pp. 469-472)
Applications of organizational change theories would inform these considerations.

Moreover, Stern et al. (2002) identify key understudied areas of sustainable resource manage-
ment and urge scholars to “develop causal models that can explain why certain conditions favor
or impede the effective operation of institutions in particular contexts” (p. 469). Here the focus
would move from the resource itself to understanding the dynamics of the institution in manag-
ing the resource (see also Jermier et al., 2006). Similarly, to understand the drivers of corporate
greening, Jermier et al. (2006) urge “that the most promising approach . . . involves formulating
models that can estimate the relative importance of several different factors (and their interaction
effects) in different contexts” (p. 633).
At the heart of the common-pool resources view is the recognition that water is neither a pub-
lic good nor property but a common-pool resource. What would traditional business research
look like if it adopted this view, initiating from the value assumption that “water is sacred” rather
than “water is property”? And thus move from an ecological paradigm based on humans as
dominant to or stewards of the natural environment to humans as an equal part of it (see Jermier
et al., 2006)? What if, rather than relying only on customer satisfaction to define customer per-
formance (see Ogden & Watson, 1999), we revised our assumptions and asked, “How well does
customer satisfaction predict a company’s or industry’s sustainable resource management”? In
other words, how can sustainable resource management define company performance?30
Table 4. Summary of Opportunities for Future Research
Water as an independent variable

How can we meta-analyze the organizational factors, such as collaboration, of the water sector?
What are the implications of global social inequity of water distribution on business?
What is the impact of water politics on water management, including the impact it has on a business’s
decision to operate in a specific country?
What is/will be the impact of climate change on water available for business needs?
To what extent has business begun to successfully embrace Gleick et al.’s (2009) key actions for
sustainable corporate water management?
What are the economics of water management? And how is this changing?
How do water companies affect the environment? What actions do they take to mitigate negative
impacts?
Water as a dependent variable
What is the role NGOs play in attenuating environmental degradation?
What are the value trade-offs of domestic use of water softeners?
How can we apply micro-OB (and psychology) theories to understand businesses’ impact and managers’
decisions about water?
What impact do anchoring biases have on managers’ decision criteria around water impacts?
What are the social equity implications of business’s use of water globally?
What are the social equity implications of current and proposed water-related legislation?
How can social network analysis illuminate the relationship between the well connected and (in)equities
around water?
What are the social, economic, and political implications of technology to solve water quality issues?
What are the implications of business’s overuse of water resources?
How do managers’ decision-making processes hinder or help considerations around water?
How are companies and managers changing how they think about overuse of the resource?
How can the world, business, and managers more effectively manage increasingly scarce resources?
What are the social, economic, and political implications of using advanced technology to solve water
quantity issues?
What are the management implications of why people still drink bottled water?
How do consumers’ choices change with additional information about impacts of choices around water?
How well does agriculture manage water? What incentives motivate its use patterns? How does such
management differ within the industry?
What are the economic implications of consumption and extraction of water?
To what degree are private water companies managing water sustainably?
What are the business implications of water policy?
What are the ethical, social, economic, and environmental implications of technological solutions offered
to improve water use?
How do managers value water, and how do these values differ by industry or national culture?
What is the impact of government regulatory processes on sustainable water management?
How do water companies affect the environment? What actions do they take to mitigate negative
impacts?
How has water shaped various companies or industries?
What are the social, ethical, and environmental implications of water policy?
How does management of technology improve companies’ ability to conserve and preserve water
resources?
What are industry-level impacts on water resources?
To what degree is the private water industry held accountable and to whom, and how might this change
with greater transparency?
How do we manage water at an ecosystem or watershed level?
Note: NGO = nongovernmental agency; OB = organizational behavior.
Business scholars need to continue and expand their focus on research that places water cen-
tral, as an independent or dependent variable (joining other corporate goals such as company
profit or customer satisfaction), in order to focus on the long-term sustainability of the resource.
Research that places water as central rather than take it for granted will help make business
research relevant to an increasingly water-constrained planet.
Acknowledgment
We would like to thank John Jermier, Bryan Stinchfield, Douglas Hill, and the three anonymous reviewers
for their comments on earlier drafts of this article. All errors are our own.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of
this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
Notes
1. http://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/PepsiCo-Marks-World-Water-Day-2010-with-Global-Water-
Goals03192010.html, http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/conservation_partnership.
html, http://www.investor.jnj.com/2009annualreport/citizenship/index.html.
2. http://www.unep.org/dewa/vitalwater/.
3. Freshwater is becoming scarcer, because the existing water is becoming polluted and demand for it is
greater. So, while the absolute amount of water on earth may not be changing, what is available for
human consumption is.
4. To subscribe, e-mail: wpenews@water.ca.gov.
5. http://www.wbcsd.org/templates/TemplateWBCSD5/layout.asp?type=p&MenuId=ODI&doOpen=1&
ClickMenu=LeftMenu.
6. www.foodandwaterwatch.org.
7. www.climatecrisiscoalition.org.
8. www.weathertrak.com.
9. www.treepeople.org.
10. We restricted our dates by the availability of articles online through ABIinform.
11. ISI estimates impact based on the absolute number of citations and underweights indirect citations. By
contrast, RedJasper allows that “A citation by a paper in a top journal may far outweigh many citations
by papers published in unremarkable journals” (www.journal-ranking.com). Notably, however, Red-
Jasper restricts the journals it ranks to those listed in the ISI. (See www.journal-ranking.com for more
information.)
12. The SEPT analysis is also known as PEST and has evolved into many variations including SLEPT,
PESTEL, and even STEER (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEST_analysis). Here we use the tradi-
tional four categories as a base, combine political with legal, and build on it to include environmental.
13. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_mine_drainage.
14. http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/Ag_Runoff_Fact_Sheet.pdf.
15. Water can also be managed as a private-property resource, as a state-controlled resource or as an open-
access resource (see Ostrom 1990). We thank the reviewer who provided this insight.
16. Point source pollution refers to pollution that can, and nonpoint source pollution to pollution that can-
not, be traced back to a single origin or source such as storm water runoff, water runoff from urban
areas, and failed septic systems (www.water-technology.net).
17. www.prb.org.
18. http://wsoweb.ladwp.com/Aqueduct/snow/.
19. http://www.evergladescoalition.org/.
20. Ayoubi and McNiven (2006) identify three types of water exports: small (bottled-water sales), medium
(bulk transfers of water from one location to another using tankers), and large (watershed diversions).
21. http://www.counterpunch.org/colorado.html.
22. http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/.
23. http://www.epa.gov/WaterSense/water/save/use.htm.
24. www.foodandwaterwatch.org.
25. The 10 actions are the following: measure current water use, assess water conditions and water risks,
consult and engage stakeholders, engage the supply chain, establish a water policy, set corollary goals
and targets, implement best available technology, factor water risk into relevant business decisions, re-
port performance, and form strategic partnerships (Gleick et al., 2009). They conclude that while water
reporting is inconsistent across sectors, those that “use water as a main ingredient of their product or
require high-quality water for production tend to undertake water reporting more comprehensively than
other water-intensive industries” (Gleick et al., 2009p. 33).
26. http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0511sp2.htm.
27. One might argue that “sustainable resource management” is the same as ecosystem management (see
Memon & Selsky 2004; Selsky & Memon 1995; the former is a freshwater-related case study). We
thank the reviewer who provided us with these references.
28. We thank the reviewer who raised this point.
29. We thank the reviewer who provided this insight.
30. Similarly, as one reviewer observed, what if managers and business scholars treated water as a sustain-
able resource management rather than as a private or state-controlled resource?
References
Abbey, E. (1975). The monkey wrench gang. New York, NY: Harper Perennial Classics.
Adekalu, K.O. and Ogunjimi, L. A. O. (2003). Cost recovery strategy for large-scale irrigation projects in
Nigeria. Technovation, 23(1), 77-83.
Adekalu, K. O., Osunbitan, J. A., & Ojo, O. E. (2002). Water sources and demand in south western Nigeria:
Implications for water development planners and scientists. Technovation, 22, 799-805.
Adler, J. (1960). Water rights and cabinet shuffles: How Claus Spreckels’ Hawaiian career began. Business
History Review, 34, 50.
Ahuja, R. K., Orlin, J. B., Sechi, G. M., & Zuddas, P. (1999). Algorithms for the simple equal flow problem.
Management Science, 45, 1440-1455.
Aida, K., Cooper, W. W., Pastor, J. T., & Sueyoshi, T. (1998). Evaluating water supply services in Japan
with RAM: A range-adjusted measure of inefficiency. Omega, 26, 207-232.
Alminana, M., Escudero, L. F., Landete, M., Monge, J. F., Rabasa, A., & Sanchez-Soriano, J. (2010).
WISCHE: A DSS for water irrigation scheduling. Omega, 38, 492-500.
Amara, R., & Schmid, G. (1982). Case of the suspicious scientist. Harvard Business Review, 60(5), 6.
Andrews, B. H., Carpentier, J. J., & Gowen, T. L. (2001). A new approach to performance measurement
and goal setting. Interfaces, 31(3), 44-54.
Appa, G., & Sridharan, R. (2000). OR helps the poor in a controversial irrigation project. Interfaces, 30(2),
13-28.
Archibald, G. G. (1983). Forecasting water demand—A disaggregated approach. Journal of Forecasting,
2, 181-192.
Armstrong, R. D., & Willie, C. E. (1977). Simultaneous investment and allocation decisions applied to
water planning. Management Science, 23, 1080-1088.
Ayoubi, F. E., & McNiven, J. (2006). Political, environmental and business aspects of bulk water exports:
A Canadian perspective. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 23, 1-16.
Bangens, L., & Araujo, L. (2002). The structures and processes of learning. A case study. Journal of Busi-
ness Research, 55, 571-581.
Barlow, M., & Clarke, T. (2003). Blue gold: The fight to stop the corporate theft of the world’s water.
New York, NY: New Press.
Barton, B. (2010). Murky waters? Corporate reporting on water risk: A benchmarking study of 100 com-
panies (CERES Report). Retrieved from http://www.ceres.org/waterreport
Beck, M. B., & Halfon, E. (1991). Uncertainty, identifiability and the propagation of prediction errors: A
case study of Lake Ontario. Journal of Forecasting, 10, 135-161.
Beiser, V. (2009, November/December). The space dowser. Miller-McCune, 2009, 28-39.
Bennett, V., Dávila-Poblete, S., & Rico, M. N. (2008). Water and gender: The unexpected connection that
really matters. Journal of International Affairs, 61, 107-130.
Blackford, M. (2009). Fishers, fishing, and overfishing: American experiences in global perspective, 1976-
2006. Business History Review, 83, 239-266.
Block, W. (1998). Environmentalism and economic freedom: The case for private property rights. Journal
of Business Ethics, 17, 1887-1899.
Bouzaher, A., Braden, J. B., & Johnson, G. V. (1990). A dynamic programming approach to a class of
nonpoint source pollution control problems. Management Science, 36, 1-15.
Bozzo, S. (Director). (2008). Blue gold: World water wars [Documentary film]. Arlington, VA: PBS.
Brimberg, J., Mehrez, A., & Oron, G. (1994). Economic development of groundwater in arid zones with
applications to the Negev Desert, Israel. Management Science, 40, 353-363.
Brown, L. (2001). Eco-economy: Building an economy for the earth. New York: W. W. Norton.
Burgess, J. Longhurst, P. Quarmby, J., Stephenson, T. (2000a) Innovational adaptation in the UK water and
wastewater industry: A case study of introducing DTA. Technovation, 20(1), 37-45.
Burgess, J., Longhurst, P. Quarmy, J. Stephenson, T. (2000b) Direct toxicity assessment: Adaptation and the
proactive roles of regulators and operators. Technovation, 20(6), 313-320.
Burt, O. R. (1964). Optimal resource use over time with an application to ground water. Management Sci-
ence, 11, 80-93.
Butcher, J., & Jeffrey, P. (2005). The use of bibliometric indicators to explore industry-academia col-
laboration trends over time in the field of membrane use for water treatment. Technovation. 25,
1273-1280.
Cai, X. (2008). Water stress, water transfer and social equity in Northern China—Implications for policy
reforms. Journal of Environmental Management, 87, 14-25.
Carle, D. (2004). Introduction to water in California. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Carpenter, R. M. (1974). Economic & technical challenge of developing synthetic fuel. Columbia Journal
of World Business, 9(3), 3.
Cashman, A., & Lewis, L. (2007). Topping up or watering down? Sustainable development in the priva-
tized UK water industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16, 93-105.
Cathcart, R. B., & Bolonkin, A. A. (2007). The Golden Gate textile barrier: Preserving California’s Bay of
San Francisco from a rising North Pacific Ocean. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0702030v1
Champion, R. R., & Glaser, R. G. (1967). Sugar cane irrigation: A case study in capital budgeting. Manage-
ment Science, 13, B781-B796.
Chen, Y., Kilgour, D. M., & Hipel, K. W. (2008). A case-based distance method for screening in multiple-
criteria decision aid. Omega, 36, 373-383.
Chesteen, S. A., & Baird, B. F. (1985). Breaching the Great Salt Lake causeway: An addendum. Interfaces,
15(4), 48-51.
Chick, S. E., Soorapanth, S., & Koopman, J. S. (2003). Inferring infection transmission parameters that
influence water treatment decisions. Management Science, 49, 920-935.
Clark, B. and Howard, E. (2003). Ebenezer Howard and the Marriage of Town and Country: An Introduc-
tion to Howard’s “Garden Cities of Tomorrow” Organization & Environment, 16(1), 87-107.
Clark, T., & Jeffrey, P., & Stephenson, T. (2000). Complex agendas for new technology adoption in the UK
water industry. Technovation, 20, 247-257.
Cohen, B. R. (2005). Escaping the false binary of nature and culture through connection: Richard White’s
The Organic Machine: The Remaking of the Columbia River. Organization & Environment, 18, 445-457.
Cook, C. W. (1975). World food problems: An overview. Columbia Journal of World Business. 10(3), 5.
Corbett, S. (2009). A harvest of water. National Geographic, November, 110-127.
Cramer, J. (1988). Options for mission-orientation in ecology. Research Policy, 17, 75-88.
Cross, R., & Parker, A. (2004). The hidden power of social networks: Understanding how work really gets
done in organizations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Daughton, C. G., & Ternes, T. A. (1999). Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in the environment:
Agents of subtle change? Environmental Health Perspectives Supplements, 107(S6). Retrieved from
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/1999/suppl-6/907-938daughton/daughton-full.html
Dean, A., Carlisle, Y., & Baden-Fuller, C. (1999). Punctuated and continuous change: The UK water indus-
try. British Journal of Management, 10, 3-18.
Dean, B. V., Salstrom, R. L., Fiedler, J., Molnar, B., & Haake, K. (1994). Statistical and simulation analysis
assists Santa Clara Valley water district planning. Interfaces, 24(6), 82-99.
De Fraiture, C. (2007). Biofuel crops could drain the developing world dry. Appropriate technology. Hemel
Hempstead, 34(3), 9-10.
Dominguez, D., Worch, H., Markard, J., Truffer, B., & Gujer, W. (2009). Closing the capability gap: Stra-
tegic planning for the infrastructure sector. California Management Review, 51(2), 30-50.
Downing, D. J., Pack, D. J., & Westley, G. W. (1983). A diverting structure’s effects on a river flow time
series. Management Science, 29, 225-236.
Dyson, R. G. (1978). Participation in planning—A study of two organizations in the Netherlands. Long
Range Planning, 11(4), 61-69.
Ecker, J. G. (1975). A geometric programming model for optimal allocation of stream dissolved oxygen.
Economy, E., & Lieberthal, K. (2007). Scorched earth: Will environmental risks in China overwhelm its
opportunities? Harvard Business Review, 85(6), 88-96.
Efthymoglou, P. G. (1987). Optimal use and the value of water resources in electricity generation. Manage-
ment Science, 33, 1622-1634.
El-Geriani, A. M., Essamin, O., & Loucks, D. P. (1998). Water from the desert: Minimizing costs of meet-
ing Libya’s water demands. Interfaces, 28(6), 23-35.
Erickson, D. L., Groves, D. L., & Kahalas, H. (1975). Water rights, conservation and recreation planning.
Long Range Planning, 8, 75-80.
Erlenkotter, D., Sethi, S., & Okada, N. (1989). Planning for surprise: Water resources development under
demand and supply uncertainty I. The general model. Management Science, 35, 149-163.
Esty, D. C., & Winston, A. S. (2006). Green to gold: How smart companies use environmental strategy to
innovate, create value, and build competitive advantage. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Fishman, C. (2007, July 1). Message in a bottle. Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/117/
features-message-in-a-bottle.html?page=0%2C1
Francis, G., & Minchington, C. (2002). Regulating shareholder value: A case study of the introduction of
value-based measures in a water company. British Journal of Management, 13, 233-247.
Frederick, W. C. (1995). Values, nature, and culture in the American Corporation. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
French, H. F. (1991). Green revolutions: Environmental reconstruction in Eastern Europe and the Soviet
Union. Columbia Journal of World Business, 26, 28-51.
Gaard, G. (2001). Women, water, energy: An ecofeminist approach. Organization & Environment, 14, 157-172.
Gersick, C. (1991). Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel explanation of the punctuated equilibrium
paradigm. Academy of Management Review, 16, 10-36.
Gessford, J. (1959). Scheduling the use of water power. Management Science, 5, 179-191.
Gleick, P. H., Cooley, H., Cohen, M. J., Morikawa, M., Morrison, J., & Palaniappan, M. (2009). The
world’s water 2008-2009: The biennial report on freshwater resources. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Goeller, B. F. (1985). Planning the Netherlands’ water resources. Interfaces, 15, 3-33.
Gorr, W. L. (1986). Special event data in shared databases. MIS Quarterly, 10, 238-255.
GreenBiz Staff. (2008, October 30). Coca-Cola taps WWF to cut water use and emissions. Retrieved from
http://www.greenbiz.com/news/2008/10/30/coca-cola-taps-wwf-cut-water-use-and-emissions
Gronhaug, K. (1977). “Water to Spain”—An export decision analyzed in the context of organizational
learning. Journal of Management Studies, 14, 26-33.
Hallsworth, E. G. (1982). Research priorities and science policy objectives for the management of soils in
arid lands. Research Policy, 11, 373-383.
Hamilton, C. W., & Bingham, W. G. (1979). Management science applications in the planning and design
of a water supply system for a nuclear power plant. Interfaces, 9(5), 50-62.
Hamilton, R. A. (1984). What will we do when the well runs dry? Harvard Business Review, 62(6), 28-30.
Hankinson, G. A. (1986). Energy scenarios—The Sizewell experience. Long Range Planning, 19(5), 94-101.
Harvey, B., & Schaefer, A. (2001). Managing relationships with environmental stakeholders: A study of
U.K. water and electricity utilities. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 243-260.
Hines, J. (2009, October). Water recycling. Paper presented at the Institute for Sustainability’s Water Day
Conference, California State University, Northridge.
Hsee, C. K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation of preference reversals between joint and
separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 247-257.
Huber, J., Viscusi, W., & Bell, J. (2008). Reference dependence in iterative choices. Organizational Behav-
ior and Human Decision Processes, 106, 143-152.
Hunter, G. S. (1990). The water company that turned to money. Harvard Business Review, 68, 204-205.
Ivory, C. J., Alderman, N., Thwaites, A. T., McLoughlin, I. P., & Vaughan, R. (2007). Working around the
barriers to creating and sharing knowledge in capital goods projects: The client’s perspective. British
Journal of Management, 18, 224-240.
Jakeman, A. J., Thomas, G. A., & Dietrich, C. R. (1991). System identification and validation for output
prediction of a dynamic hydrologic process. Journal of Forecasting, 10, 319-346.
Jensen, P. A., & Bhaumik, G. (1977). A flow augmentation approach to the network with gains minimum
cost flow problem. Management Science, 23, 631-643.
Jermier, J., Forbes, L. C., Benn, S., & Orsato, R. J. (2006). The new corporate environmentalism and green
politics. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organization
studies (2nd ed., pp. 618-643). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jorgenson, A. K. (2006). The transnational organization of production and environmental degradation: A
cross-national study of the effects of foreign capital penetration on water pollution intensity, 1980-1995.
Social Science Quarterly, 87, 711-730.
Jorgenson, A. K. (2007). Does foreign investment harm the air we breathe and the water we drink? A cross-
national study of carbon dioxide emissions and organic water pollution in less-developed countries,
1975 to 2000. Organization & Environment, 20, 137-156.
Jorgenson, A. K. (2009). Foreign direct investment and the environment, the mitigating influence of institu-
tional and civil society factors, and relationships between industrial pollution and human health: A panel
study of less-developed countries. Organization & Environment, 22, 135-157.
Kahrl, W. (1983). Water and power: The conflict over Los Angeles water supply in the Owens Valley.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kallio, T. J., & Nordberg, P. (2006). The evolution of organizations and natural environment discourse.
Organization & Environment, 19, 439-457.
Kanazawa, M. T. (1998). Efficiency in western water law: The development of the California Doctrine,
1850-1911. Journal of Legal Studies, 27, 159-185.
Kelly, M. E., Kamp, D., Gregory, M., and Rich, J. (1991) US-Mexico Free Trade Agreements: Exploring
the Issues. Columbia Journal of World Business, 26(2), 42-58.
Klepper, O., Scholten, H., & Van de Kamer, J. P. G. (1991). Prediction uncertainty in an ecological model
of the Oosterschelde estuary. Journal of Forecasting, 10, 191-209.
Kurland, N.B. and Zell, D. 2009. “Regulating water: A naturological analysis among company, town, and
state.” Business & Society. January 26 (published first online February; IN PRESS).
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. (2009), California water system—Wtr sys rev bonds ser
2009B & C (Fitch Report). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Leslie, J. (2005). Deep water: The epic struggle over dams, displaced people, and the environment. New York,
NY: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Little, J. B. (2009). The Ogallala aquifer: Saving a vital U.S. water source. Scientific American: Earth 3.0,
March, 32-39.
Loucks, D. P., Revelle, C. S., & Lynn, W. R. (1967). Linear progamming models for water pollution con-
trol. Management Science, 14, 166-181.
MacDuffie, J. P. (1997). The road to “root cause”: Shop-floor problem-solving at three auto assembly
plants. Management Science, 43, 479-502.
MacLennan, C. (2007). An introduction to WAI: Indigenous water, Industrial water in Hawai’i. Organiza-
tion & Environment, 20, 497-505.
Markham, A. (1993). A brief history of pollution. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Maucher, H. (1993). Industry and the environment: The views of an industrialist. Columbia Journal of
World Business, 28(2), 6-10.
McKee, J. E. (1972). Water pollution control: A task for technology. California Management Review, 14,
88-91.
Mellichamp, J. M., & Weaver, C. P. (1977). Simulation and sewage. Decision Sciences, 8, 584-597.
Memon, P. A., & Selsky, J. (2004). Stakeholders and the management of freshwater resources in New Zealand:
A critical commons perspective. In S. Sharma & M. Starik (Eds.), Stakeholders, the environment and soci-
ety (pp. 23-61). London, England: Edward Elgar.
Meredith, S. (1992). Water privatization: The dangers and the benefits. Long Range Planning, 25(4), 72-81.
Merrett, S. (1999). The political economy of water extraction charges. Review of Political Economy, 11,
431-442.
Merrick, J. R. W., & Harrald, J. R. (2007). Making decisions about safety in US ports and waterways.
Interfaces, 37(3), 240-252.
Mohanty, R. P. (1984). Strategic planning for water—A case history. Long Range Planning, 17(5), 79-87.
Morse, C. W. (1983). Environmental regulation: Some lessons from British policy. California Management
Review, 26, 25-36.
Murray, R., Hart, W., Phillips, C., Berry, J., Boman, E., Carr, R., . . . Morley, K. (2009). US Environmental
Protection Agency uses operations research to reduce contamination risks in drinking water. Interfaces,
39(1), 57-68.
Nwankwo, E., Phillips, N., & Tracey, P. (2007). Social investment through community enterprise: The case
of multinational corporations involvement in the development of Nigerian water resources. Journal of
Business Ethics, 73, 91-101.
Ogden, S., & Glaister, K. W. (1996). The cautious monopolists—Strategies of Britain’s privatized water
companies. Long Range Planning, 29, 663-674.
Ogden, S., Glaister, K. W., & Marginson, D. (2006). Empowerment and accountability: Evidence from the
UK privatized water industry. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 521-555.
Ogden, S., & Watson, R. (1999). Corporate performance and stakeholder management: Balancing shareholder
and customer interests in the U.K. privatized water industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 526-538.
Orr, P. (2008). Water issues in the Middle East: Israeli-Palestinian water issues—From conflict to coopera-
tion. Journal of International Affairs, 61, 294.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Panebianco, S., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2006). Modeling socio-technical transformations in wastewater treat-
ment—A methodological proposal. Technovation, 26, 1090-1100.
Parker, L., & Farley, D. W. (1980). The hydro configuration modeling system: Its application on the Ottawa
River. Interfaces, 10(4), 79-85.
Pearce, P. (2007). When the rivers run dry: Water—The defining crisis of the twenty-first century. Boston,
MA: Beacon Press.
Perelman, M. (2003). Myths of the market. Organization & Environment, 16, 168-226.
Perret, D. (1977). Planning for water resources. Long Range Planning, 10(2), 65-72.
Phelps, R., Chan, C., & Kapsalis, S. C. (2001). Does scenario planning affect performance? Two explor-
atory studies. Journal of Business Research, 51, 223-232.
Pitroda, S. (1993). Development, democracy, and the village telephone. Harvard Business Review, 71(6),
66-75.
Pollock, S. M., & Chen, K. (1986). Strive to conquer the black stink: Decision analysis in the People’s
Republic of China. Interfaces, 16(2), 31-37.
Rabinowitz, G., Mehrez, A., & Oron, G. (1988). A nonlinear optimization model of water allocation for
hydroelectric energy production and irrigation. Management Science, 34, 973-990.
Rabinowitz, G., Mehrez, A., & Rabina, A. (1992). A nonlinear heuristic short-term model for hydroelectric
energy production: The case of the Hazbani-Dan water system. Management Science, 38, 419-438.
Rabinowitz, G., Mehrez, A., & Ravivi, M. (1988). An economic evaluation model of investment alterna-
tives in water supply systems. Interfaces, 18(6), 1-13.
Rajor, A., Garg, R. P., Sharma, R.K., and Kothari, R. M. (1994). Anaerobic recycling of prehydrolysate
generated during the manufacture of rayon grade pulp. Technovation, 14(8), 549-557.
Reilly, W. K. (1999). Private enterprises and public obligations: Achieving sustainable development. Cali-
fornia Management Review, 41(4), 17-26.
Reisner, M. (1993). Cadillac desert: The American West and its disappearing water (Rev. ed.). New York,
NY: Penguin Books.
Retzky, A. (1995). Peace in the Middle East: What does it really mean for Israeli business? Columbia Jour-
nal of World Business, 30(3), 26-32.
Rock, M. T. (2002). Pathways to industrial environmental improvement in the East Asian newly industrial-
izing economies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11, 90-102.
Roosevelt, L. (2007). Investors hungry for clean energy. Harvard Business Review, 85(10), 38-40.
Royston, M. G. (1980). Making pollution prevention pay. Harvard Business Review, 58(6), 6-27.
Sarin, S. C., & El Benni, W. (1982). Determination of optimal pumping policy of a municipal water plant.
Interfaces, 12(2), 43-49.
Schaefer, A. (2007). Contrasting institutional and performance accounts of environmental management
systems: Three case studies in the UK water & sewerage industry. Journal of Management Studies, 44,
506-535.
Schaefer, A. (2009). Corporate greening and changing regulatory regimes: The UK water industry. Busi-
ness Strategy and the Environment, 18, 320-333.
Schalch, K. (2003, January 7). World Bank, IMF: Privatize water utilities. Retrieved from http://www.npr
.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=906163
Seixas, M. J. F., Camara, A., Antunes, M. P., & Pinheiro, M. (1991). Accommodating structural change in
environmental systems: The approach of qualitative simulation. Journal of Forecasting, 10, 211-230.
Selsky, J., & Memon, P. A. (1995). Managing complex common property resource systems: Implications
of recent institutional reforms in New Zealand. In J. E. Post (Ed.), Research in Corporate Social Perfor-
mance and Policy (Suppl. 1, pp. 259-290). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Senge, P., Smith, B., Kruschwitz, N., Laur, J., & Schley, S. (2008). The necessary revolution: How individ-
uals and organizations are working together to create a sustainable world. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Shandra, J., Shor, E., & London, B. (2008). Debt, structural adjustment, and organic water pollution. Orga-
nization & Environment, 21, 38-55.
Sinh, B. T. (2002). Government and NGO partnership in managing community-based water resources in
Vietnam: A case study of Thai Long Dam Project. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11, 119-129.
Sloggett, G., & Dickason, C. (1986). Ground-water mining in the United States (Economic Research Ser-
vice Report No. 555). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Smart, A. (2005). Exploring supply chain opportunities in the UK utilities sector and the supporting role of
emarketplaces. Supply Chain Management, 10, 264-271.
Smith, D. V. (1973). Decision rules in chance-constrained programming: Some experimental comparisons.
Smith, J. K. (2000). Turning silk purses into sow’s ears: Environmental history and the chemical industry.
Enterprise & Society, 1, 785-812.
Söderholm, K. (2009). Environmental awakening in the Swedish pulp and paper industry: Pollution resis-
tance and firm responses in the early 20th century. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18, 32-42.
Speth, J. G. (1984). Questions for a critical decade. Columbia Journal of World Business. 19(1), 5-9.
Starik, M. (2006). In search of relevance and impact: Introduction to a special feature on the state of orga-
nizations and the natural environment research. Organization & Environment, 19, 431-438.
Stern, P., Dietz, T., Dolsak, N., Ostrom, E., & Stonich, S. (2002). Knowledge and questions after 15 years
of research. In E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolsak, P. C. Stern, S. Stonich, & E. U. Weber (Eds.), The drama
of the commons (pp. 445-489). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Stoecker, A. L., Seidmann, A., & Lloyd, G. S. (1985). A linear dynamic programming approach to irriga-
tion system management with depleting groundwater. Management Science, 31, 422-434.
Stoop, M.L.M. (1999). Application of a mathematical calculation model to reduce slaughterhouse (water)
pollution in developing countries. Technovation, 19(5), 323-331.
Stoop, M. L. M. (2003). Water management of production systems optimised by environmentally oriented
integral chain management: Case study of leather manufacturing in developing countries. Technovation,
23, 265-273.
Stray, S. (2008). Environmental reporting: The U.K. Water and energy industries: A research note. Journal
of Business Ethics, 80, 697-710.
Suntree, S., & Williamson, J. (1999). Earth water air Los Angeles. Organization & Environment, 12,
308-319.
Suzuki, M. & Nakayama, M. (1976). The cost assignment of the cooperative water resource development:
A game theoretical approach. Management Science, 22, 1081-1086.
Taiwo, K.A., Owolarafe, O.K., Sanni, L. A., Jeje, J.O., Adeloye, K., and Ajibola, O.O. (2000). Technologi-
cal assessment of palm oil production in Osun and Ondo states of Nigeria. Technovation, 20(4), 215-223.
Tang, S. Y. 1992. Institutions and collective action: Self-governance in irrigation, 1992, Richmond, CA:
ICS Press.
Taylor, A. C. (1973). A planning model for a water quality management agency. Management Science, 20,
675-685.
Thebaut, J. (Director). (2009). Are we running dry? [Documentary film]. Available at www.runningdry.org
Thomas, H. A., Jr., & Revelle, R. (1966). On the efficient use of high Aswan Dam for hydropower and
irrigation. Management Science, 12, B296.
Thompson, K., Christofferson, W., Robinette, D., Curl, J., Baker, L., Brereton, J., & Reich, K. (2005).
Characterizing and managing salinity loadings in reclaimed water systems (Project No. 2744). Denver,
CO: Water Research Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.waterresearchfoundation.org/research/
TopicsAndProjects/projectProfile.aspx?pn=2744
Tregidga, H., & Milne, M. J. (2006). From sustainable management to sustainable development: A longi-
tudinal analysis of a leading New Zealand environmental reporter. Business Strategy and the Environ-
ment, 15, 219-241.
UN Environmental Programme. (2002). Vital water graphics. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/dewa/

assessments/ecosystems/water/vitalwater/
U.S. Department of the Interior. (2009). Central Valley subsidence study launched: USGS will track cause
and extent of ground sinking near California Aqueduct. Retrieved from http://www.usgs.gov/news
room/article.asp?ID=2300
Van Dam, A. (1978). Water supply—The case for joint planning. Long Range Planning, 11(1), 69-71.
van Straten, G., & Keesman, K. J. (1991). Uncertainty propagation and speculation in projective forecasts
of environmental change: A lake-eutrophication example. Journal of Forecasting, 10, 163-190.
Wade, J. C., & Heady, E. O. (1978). A spatial equilibrium model for evaluating alternative policies for
controlling sediment from agriculture. Management Science, 24, 633-644.
Ward, D. R. (2002). Water wars: Drought, flood, folly, and the politics of thirst. New York, NY: Riverhead
Books.
Weber, M. E. (2008). Energy versus water: Solving both crises together. Scientific American: Earth 3.0,
October. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-future-of-fuel
Weller, T. (Ed.). (2005). The best of the Growing Edge International, 2000-2005. Corvalis, OR: New Moon.
White, D. J. (1988). Further real applications of Markov decision processes. Interfaces, 18(5), 55-61.
Widrick, S. M. (1985). Quantity surcharge—Quantity discount: Pricing as it relates to quantity purchased.
Business and Society, 1, 1-17.
Wihbey, P. M., & Berman, I. (2007). The geopolitics of water. New England Journal of Public Policy, 21,
95-97.
Wilson, I. H. (1977). Socio-political forecasting: A new dimension of strategic planning. In A. B. Carroll
(Ed.), Managing corporate social responsibility (pp. 159-169). Boston, BA: Little, Brown.
Wolock, D. M., & Hornberger, G. M. (1991). Hydrological effects of changes in levels of atmospheric
carbon dioxide. Journal of Forecasting, 10, 105.
Wood, D. J. (1990). Business and society. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman/Little, Brown Higher Education.
Woolsey, G. (2008). The fifth column: The case of the confounded water model or all streams do not flow
north. Interfaces, 38(3), 210-211.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2009, August). Water for business: Initiatives
guiding sustainable water management in the private sector. Available at www.wbcsd.org
Wyman, F. P. (1978). The use of geometric programming in the design of an Algerian water conveyance
system. Interfaces, 8(3), 1-6.
Zanakis, S. H., Theofanides, S., Kontaratos, A. N., & Tassios, T. P. (2003). Ancient Greeks’ practices and
contributions in public and entrepreneurship decision making. Interfaces, 33(6), 72-88.
Bios
Nancy Kurland, PhD (University of Pittsburgh) is on the faculty of the Department of Business, Organiza-
tion, and Society at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, PA. Previously, she taught at California
State University Northridge, where she helped found the university’s Institute for Sustainability and Core
Green Team, and at University of Southern California and Pepperdine University. She also spent five years
writing fiction full-time. She’s published over 25 peer-reviewed articles and book chapters on topics rang-
ing from corporate sustainability to ethics in the financial services industry.
Deone Zell is a professor of management at California State University, Northridge. Her research interests
include organizational change, social networks, the diffusion of innovations, and the transition to a sustain-
able economy. She has authored three books on organizational change in various industries and various
articles that have appeared in Sloan Management Review, Business & Society, Journal of Applied Behav-
ioral Science, Organizational Dynamics, and Journal of Management Inquiry. She received her PhD from
UCLA in 1994.
View publication stats

OEWaterand Business

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OEWaterand Business

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Water and Business: A Taxonomy and Review of the Research

Article in Organization & Environment · September 2010

Nancy B. Kurland Deone Zell

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Public markets View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Water and Business: 23(3) 316­–353

of the Research http://oae.sagepub.com

Nancy B. Kurland1 and Deone Zell2

Academic Research in Business and

Results: A Water Taxonomy

Water Focus SEPT Model Popular/Trade Academic Research

Water Focus SEPT Model Popular/Trade Academic Research

Water Focus SEPT Model Popular/Trade Academic Research

Water Focus SEPT Model Popular/Trade Academic Research

Figure 1. Number of scholarly articles by research foci over time

Figure 2. Number of scholarly articles by type of impact over time

Type of Issue the Focus Raises

Type of Issue the Focus Raises

Sustainable Resource Management (Resource Control)

Conclusions and Future Research

Water Research Trends Over Time

an increasing need exists to understand the dynamics of resource management institutions—

Applications of organizational change theories would inform these considerations.

Table 4. Summary of Opportunities for Future Research

Water as an independent variable

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

UN Environmental Programme. (2002). Vital water graphics. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/dewa/

View publication stats

You might also like

Water and Business: 23(3) 316–353