Institutional Voids and Green Ambitions: Sociological Perspectives on Sustainability Management in the Global South

Abstract

Firms in the Global South face a paradox. They are asked to decarbonize, report ESG performance, and enable “just transitions,” yet they operate where accredited labs, credible enforcement, technical assistance, and green finance are thin on the ground. Drawing on neo-institutionalism, field theory, practice theory, and the sociology of development, this article explains how sustainability management takes shape under such institutional voids. We synthesize evidence from Bangladesh’s apparel industry, India’s renewable-energy build-out, and Kenyan horticulture to show when sustainability routines become substantive rather than symbolic. Four families of institutional work recur-assurance substitution, capability socialization, voice institutionalization, and template hybridization, and they are most credible in co-regulatory fields where state agencies, industry associations, labor, and civil society share roles. We contribute a multi-level model linking field configuration to organizational routines and distributional outcomes; a mechanism- focused typology for weak-capacity settings; and a policy roadmap that aligns export compliance with local development needs (see Table 1; see Table 2; see Table 3). We close by outlining designs for mixed-methods testing of our propositions and by arguing for decentering Northern templates in sustainability scholarship.
Keywords: Sustainability management, Institutional voids, ESG, Co-regulation, Neo-institutionaltheory, Field theory, Practice theory, Global South, Bangladesh