case study on shipbuilding

• Find out more: Contact SSI

Software, services, and expertise for the business of shipbuilding.

Shipbuilding Challenges

The unique nature of shipbuilding demands industry-specific expertise and solutions.

• Achieve a Quick ROI

Sliced implementations and our expertise means a benefit from day one, without a lengthy setup.

• Integrate, Collaborate, Re-use

SSI’s Open Shipbuilding Platform gives you a future-proof source of truth for your shipbuilding projects.

• Change Management

Get visibility into changes, understand the impacts, and have the right information at the right time to execute the change.

• Adapt and Innovate

Create a local or virtualized shipbuilding environment for your global distributed workforce.

• Changing from Another Solution

SSI makes it easy to switch from other platforms and keep your existing data.

• Shipbuilding Solutions

Throughout each stage of a shipbuilding project, it’s crucial that an organization has the information they need, visibility into every process, and control over all the information that emerges from a shipyard.

The most significant opportunities to impact the cost of building and operating a ship are found in the design and engineering phase.

Initial Design   |  Basic Design   |  Detailed Design

Even a smaller shipbuilding project is immense in scope and scale. Manage the challenges that are unique to ship construction.

Prepare   |   Fabricate   |   Assemble

With the majority of a ship’s life taking place after it’s been built, it’s crucial to ensure that the organization has a clear picture of the vessel at all times.

Digital Twin   |  Repair / Refit   |  Operations

• SSI Learning

SSI Learning is your hub for answers to any question you have about our software, technical challenges, or the future of shipbuilding.

SSI Nexus is a community for users, creators, & implementers of SSI software.

• SSI Certified Training

SSI Certified Training allows SSI users to access detailed training exercises, materials, courses, and certifications.

The SSI blogs are your place to get insights from our CEO into the intersection of shipbuilding and technology, see how shipbuilding is moving forward, and keep up with SSI news.

Lighthouse  |  Waveform   |   Shipbuilding Solutions

Shipbuilding’s unique challenges require solutions that were developed specifically with shipbuilding in mind.

• ShipConstructor

A complete line of solutions for the design, engineering, and construction of ships and offshore projects.

• EnterprisePlatform

Tools to connect and share data across every system in the shipyard and make information available.

• ShipbuildingPLM

The only truly shipbuilding-specific product lifecycle management (PLM) platform.

Your hub for everything shipbuilding and SSI. You can get access to technical support, updates and downloads, demos, videos, case studies, articles, papers, and more.

• Resource Center

Find answers to your shipbuilding challenges through insights, case studies, eBooks, webinars, and more.

Presentations | eBooks   |  Case Studies   |  Demos & Videos   |  Diagrams   |  Articles & Papers

• Get a Trial

Already sold? Get access to a trial of our solution.

• Technical Support

Have a problem? Our technical support team is ready to help.

• Releases, Updates, & Downloads

See what’s new and access current and past releases of SSI software.

• PLM ROI Assessment

This 2-minute assessment can help your shipyard identify inefficiencies and improve ROI.

• Digital Shipbuilding Innovation Assessment

Quickly get a snapshot of your organization’s digital innovation through a 2-minute assessment.

We make it easy to solve shipbuilding’s biggest problems, empower shipbuilders with the tools they need, and give organizations the freedom to focus on shipbuilding. That’s why SSI is the shipbuilder’s solution. Learn more about our company, contact us, or join our team.

Learn more about SSI and our leadership.

• Locations & Contact

You need a partner with a global presence.

The latest on SSI and shipbuilding.

Join us at our next event, conference, or trade show.

• Engineering Industries eXcellence

Learn more about our Platform and Development Partners.

See the industry leaders who trust SSI.

Help us make the business of shipbuilding possible.

Case Studies

See how we’ve solved some of shipbuilding’s toughest challenges.

Shipbuilding is evolving quicker than ever. The changes each organization are seeing are linked through common threads, but every situation is different. See for yourself how SSI’s solutions have solved some of the most important challenges shipbuilders face.

C&C Marine and Repair propels innovation and automation with SSI and ShipConstructor

Challenges Solutions Products Used How can a yard think differently and use technology and innovation to build more vessels faster and with less rework? Starting with a culture of efficiency is how C&C Marine and Repair tackles the challenge.  As a fast-growing shipyard, C&C Marine needs access to the latest digital innovations that enable their […]

ECS Empowers Productivity with ShipConstructor in the Cloud 

Shipbuilding today is more global than ever. Depending on the project, individuals, teams, contractors, and sub-contractors can be in the office next door or on the other side of the world. Who your shipyard or design office chooses to work with shouldn’t be limited by their location.   ECS is an American engineering services firm in […]

Navalista Combines 3D Scanning with ShipConstructor to Speed Up Refit Designs

Every day a vessel is in drydock is a day of lost revenue for the ship’s owner. Minimizing the time a ship is off the water is becoming even more important to solve as ships have longer service lives and require an increasing number of repairs and refits to meet environmental and other regulations. Navalista […]

Increasing Uptime by Quickly Comparing As-Designed, As-Built, and As-In-Service Models 

Innovation story.

In a perfect world, our vessels would be built exactly as they were designed, and the digital twin would always reflect the ship as it sits on the water. The complexity of shipbuilding and the concurrent way in which ships are built makes this a challenging goal to achieve, but every step we make towards […]

KD Marine Design Implements AR and VR Innovations to Streamline Ship Design

KD Marine Design incorporated the latest AR, VR, and laser scanning innovations into their design workflow, significantly improving communication and information flow between them and the shipyard.

Ship Design Office Implements Leading Onboarding Program

Genoa design international.

In 2012, as Genoa was set to play a crucial role in Canada’s National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS), they identified the need to expand and onboard in large numbers rapidly. With not many designers previously familiar with shipbuilding and a large number of projects ahead, it was going to be a challenge to ramp up quickly and ensure everyone was on equal footing.

Incremental Implementation of 3D

Miho shipyard.

Miho understood that it was critical to look for a next-generation system, and after evaluating numerous solutions, introduced ShipConstructor as their primary hull production design solution in 2010. The tangible benefits of 3D were clear; however, a key consideration was that the implemented solution needed to be introduced quickly and without disrupting ongoing projects or established processes.

3D Design in Japanese Shipbuilding

Lpt and inamasu.

Japanese shipbuilders lead the world in quality, but many are now experiencing the consequences of outdated processes, systems, and workflows. The Japanese Laboratory of Practical Technology (LPT) and Inamasu Shipbuilding have combatted this by using advanced 3D technology to improve on Inamasu’s sophisticated shipbuilding techniques.

Digital Transition in Defense Case Study

Huntington ingalls.

For more than a century, Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) has built more ships in more ship classes than any other U.S. naval shipbuilder. Seventy percent of the US Naval combatants have been built by Huntington Ingalls Industries.

Laser Scanning Case Study

21 Knots Design and Consulting is an emerging design, engineering and consulting firm providing services to Global Maritime and Oil & Gas industry. Their team of Naval Architects, Structural Engineers and Marine Engineers, along with industry experts, combines industry experience and knowledge with enthusiasm, creativity and dedication to develop and deliver custom-made solutions.

Search Case Studies

• All Challenges
• Shipbuilding is a global industry
• Shipbuilding is a unique industry
• Shipbuilding projects are at a massive scale
• Ships have a lifecycle measured in decades
• Shipyards are focused on today

Vessel Type

• All Vessel Types
• Ferry and Cruise Ship
• Offshore Platform

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.

• Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Workers around the World: Case Studies 1950-2010

In this Book

• Edited by Raquel Varela, Hugh Murphy, and Marcel van der Linden
• Published by: Amsterdam University Press

Table of Contents

• Title page, Copyright
• 1. Introduction
• Marcel van der Linden, Hugh Murphy, Raquel Varela
• North-western Europe
• 2. Labour in the British shipbuilding and ship repairing industries in the twentieth century
• Hugh Murphy
• 3. Bremer Vulkan: A case study of the West German shipbuilding industry and its narratives in the second half of the twentieth century
• Johanna Wolf
• pp. 117-142
• 4. From boom to bust: Kockums, Malmö (Sweden), 1950-1986
• Tobias Karlsson
• pp. 143-164
• 5. The Norwegian shipbuilding industry after 1945: Production systems, rationalisation, and labour relations, with special reference to Bergens Mekaniske Verksteder and Aker Stord
• Hans-Jakob Ågotnes, Jan Heiret
• pp. 165-192
• 6. From war reparations to luxury cruise liners: Production changes and labour relations at the Turku shipyard (Finland) between 1950 and 2010
• pp. 193-220
• 7. The Dutch shipbuilding industry, 1950-2012
• Sjaak van der Velden
• pp. 221-246
• Southern and Eastern Europe
• 8. Always on the verge of sinking: Labour and production in the Sestri Ponente shipyard, Genoa (Italy), 1950-2014
• Giulia Strippoli, Davide Tabor, Luciano Villani
• pp. 249-280
• 9. Work, workers, and labour conflicts in the shipyard Bazán/Navantia-Ferrol, Galicia (Spain), 1950-2014
• José Gómez Alén
• pp. 281-304
• 10. Against market rules: A Spanish shipyard nobody wanted (except workers)
• Rubén Vega García
• pp. 305-318
• 11. Labour relations in a Portuguese shipyard: The case of Setenave
• Jorge Fontes
• pp. 319-338
• 12. Work in the Portuguese shipyards of Lisnave: From the right to work to precariousness of employment
• Raquel Varela, Ana Rajado
• pp. 339-364
• 13. The Gdańsk Shipyard: Production regime and workers’ conflicts in the 1970s and 1980s in the People’s Republic of Poland
• Sarah Graber Majchrzak
• pp. 365-396
• 14. The shipbuilding industry in Galați (Romania) under communism, 1948-1989
• Constantin Ardeleanu
• pp. 397-418
• The Americas and Australia
• 15. Charting a new course: US shipbuilding labour, 1950-2014
• Robin Dearmon Muhammad
• pp. 421-436
• 16. The Argentinean shipbuilding industry: Workers’ struggles in a state shipyard
• Cintia Russo
• pp. 437-456
• 17. Production and labour of a state-owned enterprise: A case study of an Argentinean shipyard, Astillero Río Santiago
• Juliana Frassa
• pp. 457-476
• 18. Labour in the Brazilian shipbuilding industry: A contribution to an analysis of the recovery period
• Claudiana Guedes de Jesus
• pp. 477-490
• 19. Brazilian shipbuilding and workers between tradition and innovation: Shipyards Caneco/Rio Nave and Mauá – Rio de Janeiro, 1950-2014
• Elina G. da Fonte Pessanha, Luisa Barbosa Pereira
• pp. 491-518
• 20. Cockatoo Island, Australia: Industry, labour, and protest culture
• Lisa Milner
• pp. 519-544
• 21. Evolution and development of the shipbuilding industry in Bharati Shipyard Ltd, Maharashtra (India), from the 1970s to 2010: Employer, employee, and production perspectives
• S.M. Fahimuddin Pasha
• pp. 547-562
• 22. Shipbuilding and shipbuilders in Thailand
• Nicola Mocci
• pp. 563-590
• 23. The lower labour market and the development of the post-war Japanese shipbuilding industry
• Takeshi Haraguchi, Kazuya Sakurada
• pp. 591-614
• 24. The evolution of labour relations in the South Korean shipbuilding industry: A case study of Hanjin Heavy Industries, 1950-2014
• Wonchul Shin
• pp. 615-636
• 25. China, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, and Vietnam
• pp. 637-656
• 26. Some final observations
• Hugh Murphy, Marcel van der Linden
• pp. 657-664
• Appendix 1: The effects of the oil price shocks on shipbuilding in the 1970s / Hugh Murphy and Stig Tenold
• pp. 665-674
• Appendix 2: Shipbuilding in 2013: an analysis of shipbuilding statistics / Victoria Culkin
• pp. 675-682
• Glossary of shipping and shipbuilding terms
• pp. 683-698
• Collective bibliography
• pp. 699-730
• Notes on contributors
• pp. 731-740
• pp. 741-748

Additional Information

Project muse mission.

Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

+1 (410) 516-6989 [email protected]

©2024 Project MUSE. Produced by Johns Hopkins University Press in collaboration with The Sheridan Libraries.

Now and Always, The Trusted Content Your Research Requires

Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus

A growth theory perspective on the competitive landscape of shipbuilding: a comparative study of Japan, Korea, and China

• Policy Perspectives
• Published: 09 January 2024

Cite this article

• Paul C. Hong 1 ,
• Young Soo Park 2 ,
• David W. Hwang 3 &
• Mehrdad Jalali Sepehr 1  

186 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The global shipbuilding industry has undergone profound transformations, diversifying in terms of scope, complexity, and trade impact. This study explores these shifts by analyzing the evolving patterns within shipbuilding firms from Japan, Korea, and China. We embark on a historical journey, tracing the transition of industry leadership from Europe to Asia. As a case study, we present a detailed examination of the five stages of the Korean shipbuilding industry's transformation, spanning from domestic advantage to global prominence. To establish a comparative framework encompassing the shipbuilding industries of Japan, Korea, and China, we introduce two critical parameters: innovative value delivery capabilities and global market positioning. These parameters illuminate the distinctive evolutionary paths taken by the three Asian countries within the realm of shipbuilding. Our findings underscore that in an environment characterized by intensifying competition and shifting geopolitical dynamics, leading companies strategically leverage their national manufacturing strengths and logistical infrastructure while adeptly navigating the complexities of global politics and the industrial policies pursued by their respective nations. This research offers invaluable insights and implications for future investigations of the global shipbuilding industry in the post-pandemic world.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Source Author’s own based on data from Clarkson Research and the Shipbuilders’ Association of Japan

Source Adapted from Haralambides ( 2019 ) and Tenold ( 2019 )

Source Author’s own

Source The Shipbuilders’ Association of Japan

Source Authors

Similar content being viewed by others

The Cost of Missions: Lessons from Brazilian Shipbuilding

The Asia-Pacific Region: The New Center of Gravity for International Business

Introduction — Comparative Perspectives on Globalization: Historical Reflections on British and Japanese Enterprises

Data availability.

Data available upon request.

Agostinis, G., and F. Urdinez. 2022. The nexus between authoritarian and environmental regionalism: An analysis of China’s driving role in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Problems of Post-Communism 69 (4–5): 330–344.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ashbee, E. 2021. The Blue Dot Network, economic power, and China’s Belt & Road Initiative. Asian Affairs: An American Review 48 (2): 133–149.

Audretsch, D.B., A. Coad, and A. Segarra. 2014. Firm growth and innovation. Small Business Economics 43 (4): 743–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-014-9560-x .

Baek, S., S. Lee, and D. Lee. 2018. Analysis on product architecture and organizational capability of shipbuilding industry in South Korea and China. Journal of Technology Innovation 26 (2): 69–93.

Barthwal-Datta, M., and P. Chacko. 2020. The politics of strategic narratives of regional order in the Indo-Pacific: Free, open, prosperous, inclusive? Australian Journal of International Affairs 74 (3): 244–263.

Bavassano, G., C. Ferrari, and A. Tei. 2020. Blockchain: How shipping industry is dealing with the ultimate technological leap. Research in Transportation Business & Management . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100428 .

Bauer, F., M.A. Dao, K. Matzler, and S.Y. Tarba. 2017. How industry lifecycle sets boundary Conditions for M&A integration. Long Range Planning 50 (4): 501–517.

Bothe, K., and C. Decker-Lange. 2022. Globalization from below: Labor inequality in the German shipbuilding industry, 1960–2000. Enterprise & Society . https://doi.org/10.1017/eso.2022.27 .

Boyd, R., and S. Nagamori. 1991. Industrial policy-making in practice: Electoral, diplomatic and other adjustments to crisis in the Japanese shipbuilding industry. In The promotion and regulation of industry in Japan , 167–204. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Google Scholar  

Bruno, L., and S. Tenold. 2011. The basis for South Korea’s ascent in the shipbuilding industry, 1970–1990. The Mariner’s Mirror 97 (3): 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/00253359.2011.10708948 .

Calder, K. 2004. Securing security through prosperity: The San Francisco System in comparative perspective. The Pacific Review 17 (1): 135–157.

Chang, S.J. 2003. Financial crisis and transformation of Korean business groups: The rise and fall of chaebols . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Chao, W.C. 2022. The political economy of China’s rising role in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO): Leading with balance. The Chinese Economy 55 (4): 293–302.

Chao, S.L., and Y.H. Yeh. 2020. Comparing the productivity of major shipyards in China, South Korea, and Japan: An application of a metafrontier framework. Maritime Business Review 5 (2): 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1108/MABR-12-2019-0060 .

Chen, Y., M. Ma, and J.J. Mi. 2023. The impact of R&D investment on the new orders received by the shipbuilding enterprises under the background of innovation-driven development. Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology . https://doi.org/10.1080/20464177.2023.2266885 .

Cheng, J.M.S., C. Blankson, P.C. Wu, and S.S. Chen. 2005. A stage model of international brand development: The Perspectives of manufacturers from two newly industrialized economies—South Korea and Taiwan. Industrial Marketing Management 34 (5): 504–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.009 .

Cheng, M. 2022. AUKUS: The changing dynamic and its regional implications. European Journal of Development Studies 2 (1): 1–7.

Cho, D.S. 1994. A dynamic approach to international competitiveness: The case of Korea. Asia Pacific Business Review 1 (1): 17–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602389400000002 .

Choe, S., and C. Pattnaik. 2007. The transformation of Korean business groups after the Asian crisis. Journal of Contemporary Asia 37 (2): 232–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472330701254062 .

Chung, D., and D. Shin. 2021. When do firms invest in R&D? Two types of performance feedback and organizational search in the Korean shipbuilding industry. Asian Business & Management 20: 583–617. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-019-00102-1 .

Cossa, R.A. 2000. US-ROK-Japan: Why a “virtual alliance” makes sense. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis 12 (1): 67–86.

de Moura, D.A. 2017. Toyota production system-one example to shipbuilding industry. Independent Journal of Management & Production 8 (3): 874–897.

Ding, Y., T. Li, and Y. Song. 2019. System dynamics study on pathways to sharpen shipbuilding competitiveness in China. Journal of Coastal Research 97 (SI): 42–54. https://doi.org/10.2112/SI97-007.1 .

Dong, Z. 2019. A study on the transformation and upgrading of Zhejiang marine economic industrial structure based on the analysis and evaluation of scientific and technological innovation. Journal of Coastal Research 98 (SI): 231–234.

Envall, H.D.P., and T.S. Wilkins. 2022. Japan and the new Indo-Pacific order: The rise of an entrepreneurial power. The Pacific Review 36 (4): 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2033820 .

Feng, F., C. Zhai, X. Yang, and K. Feng. 2023a. China’s marine manufacturing export growth: Policy, status, and driving components. Marine Policy 149: 105495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105495 .

Feng, K., Y. Guo, Y. Ji, and Y. Wang. 2023b. Impact of the internet on the exports in ocean-based manufacturing: Firm-level evidence from China. Journal of Asian Economics 84: 101572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2022.101572 .

Feng, H., J. Wu, and V.R. Squires. 2021. China looks to ASEAN for closer ties, freer trade, and more harmonious relations: A commentary. Archives of Business Research 9 (12): 91–103. https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.912.11344 .

Ferreira, F.D.A.L., L.F. Scavarda, P.S. Ceryno, and A. Leiras. 2018. Supply chain risk analysis: A shipbuilding industry case. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 21 (5): 542–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2018.1472748 .

Foo, N., H.H. Lean, and R. Salim. 2020. The impact of China’s One Belt One Road Initiative on international trade in the ASEAN region. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance 54: 101089.

Gavalas, D., T. Syriopoulos, and M. Tsatsaronis. 2022. Assessing key performance indicators in the shipbuilding industry: An MCDM approach. Maritime Policy & Management 49 (4): 463–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.1876939 .

Glassman, J., and Y.J. Choi. 2014. The Chaebol and the US military—Industrial complex: Cold war geopolitical economy and South Korean industrialization. Environment and Planning A 46 (5): 1160–1180. https://doi.org/10.1068/a130025p .

Gong, X. 2020. Non-traditional security cooperation between China and South-east Asia: Implications for Indo-Pacific geopolitics. International Affairs 96 (1): 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz225 .

Goulielmos, A.M. 2023. Shipbuilding: The neglected industry among those of shipping, maritime & marine: The case-studies of UK, Japan & S Korea. Modern Economy 14 (2): 196–229. https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2023.142013 .

Greve, H.R. 2003. A behavioral theory of R&D expenditures and innovations: Evidence from shipbuilding. Academy of Management Journal 46 (6): 685–702. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040661 .

Haralambides, H.E. 2019. Gigantism in container shipping, ports and global logistics: A time-lapse into the future. Maritime Economics & Logistics 21: 1–60. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-018-00116-0 .

Harold, Scott W., Derek Grossman, Brian Harding, Jeffrey W. Hornung, Gregory Poling, Jeffrey Smith, and Meagan L. Smith. 1919 . The Thickening Web of Asian Security Cooperation: Deepening Defense Ties Among U.S. Allies and Partners in the Indo-Pacific . Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

Hassink, R., and D.H. Shin. 2005. South Korea’s shipbuilding industry: From a couple of cathedrals in the desert to an innovative cluster. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 13 (2): 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/19761597.2005.9668611 .

Hauge, J. 2020. Industrial policy in the era of global value chains: Towards a developmentalist framework drawing on the industrialization experiences of South Korea and Taiwan. The World Economy 43 (8): 2070–2092. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12922 .

Henderson, R., and K. Clark. 1990. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 9–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393549 .

Hirama, Y. 1991. Japanese naval preparations for World War ll. Naval War College Review 44 (2): 63–81.

Hong, P., T. Kallaraka, M. Moina, and M. Hopkins. 2019. Managing change, growth and transformation: Case studies of organizations in an emerging economy. Journal of Management Development 38 (4): 298–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-01-2018-0011 .

Hong, P., and Y.W. Park. 2014. Building network capabilities in turbulent competitive environments: Business success stories from the BRICS . Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Hong, P., and Y.W. Park. 2020. Rising Asia and American Hegemony: Case of competitive firms from Japan, Korea, China and India , 39–58. Singapore: Springer.

Hosoya, Y. 2019. FOIP 2.0: The evolution of Japan’s free and open Indo-Pacific strategy. Asia-Pacific Review 26 (1): 18–28.

Hwang, I., and J.H. Park. 2018. The international competitive relationships of three leading countries in the global shipbuilding industry. Journal of Policy Studies 33 (3): 73–91. https://doi.org/10.52372/kjps33304 .

Insisa, A., and G. Pugliese. 2022. The free and open Indo-Pacific versus the belt and road: Spheres of influence and Sino-Japanese relations. The Pacific Review 35 (3): 557–585.

Jiang, L., E. Bastiansen, and S.P. Strandenes. 2013. The international competitiveness of China’s shipbuilding industry. Transportation Research Part e: Logistics and Transportation Review 60: 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2013.10.001 .

Jiang, L., and S.P. Strandenes. 2012. Assessing the cost competitiveness of China’s shipbuilding industry. Maritime Economics & Logistics 14 (4): 480–497. https://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2012.17 .

Jin, R., Y. Cao, and F. Li. 2020. Comprehensive evaluation on the development level of shipbuilding industry and analysis of spatial distribution. Journal of Coastal Research 108 (SI): 161–165.

Jo, S., and E. D’agostini. 2020. Disrupting technologies in the shipping industry: How will MASS development affect the maritime workforce in Korea. Marine Policy 120: 104139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104139 .

Kedong, Y., Z. Liu, C. Zhang, S. Huang, J. Li, L. Lv, and R. Zhang. 2022. Analysis and forecast of marine economy development in China. Marine Economics and Management 5 (1): 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAEM-10-2021-0009 .

Kim, M., T.H. Joung, B. Jeong, and H.S. Park. 2020. Autonomous shipping and its impact on regulations, technologies, and industries. Journal of International Maritime Safety, Environmental Affairs, and Shipping 4 (2): 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/25725084.2020.1779427 .

Kirton, J., and M. Larionova. 2022. Contagious convergent cumulative cooperation: The dynamic development of the G20, BRICS and SCO. International Politics . https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-022-00407-7 .

Klepper, S. 1997. Industry life cycles. Industrial and Corporate Change 6 (1): 145–182. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/6.1.145 .

Kodama, F. 1986. Technological diversification of Japanese industry. Science 233 (4761): 291–296.

Koenig, P.C., H. Narita, and K. Baba. 2002. Lean production in the Japanese shipbuilding industry? Journal of Ship Production 18 (03): 167–174. https://doi.org/10.5957/jsp.2002.18.3.167 .

Koga, K. 2023. Struggle for coalition-building: Japan, South Korea, and the Indo-Pacific. Asian Politics & Policy 15 (1): 63–82.

Krishnan, S.N. 2011. Analysis of Chinese shipbuilding industry: Strategic lessons for India. Maritime Affairs: Journal of the National Maritime Foundation of India 7 (2): 66–84.

Krupakar, J. 2017. China’s naval base(s) in the Indian Ocean—Signs of a maritime grand strategy? Strategic Analysis 41 (3): 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/09700161.2017.1296622 .

Kulkarni, P.R. 2015. Review of global naval shipbuilding trends and lessons for Indian shipbuilding industry. Maritime Affairs: Journal of the National Maritime Foundation of India 11 (1): 116–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/09733159.2015.1027076 .

Kuo, S.Y., P.C. Lin, and C.S. Lu. 2017. The effects of dynamic capabilities, service capabilities, competitive advantage, and organizational performance in container shipping. Transportation Research Part a: Policy and Practice 95: 356–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.11.015 .

Lee, J.M., Y.K. Jeong, and J.H. Woo. 2018. Development of an evaluation framework of production planning for the shipbuilding industry. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 31 (9): 831–847. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2018.1449968 .

Lee, K., and F. Malerba. 2017. Catch-up cycles and changes in industrial leadership: Windows of opportunity and responses of firms and countries in the evolution of sectoral systems. Research Policy 46 (2): 338–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.09.006 .

Lee, T.W. 1999. Restructuring of the economy and its impacts on the Korean maritime industry. Maritime Policy & Management 26 (4): 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/030888399286763 .

Lee, T., and H. Nam. 2017. A study on green shipping in major countries: In the view of shipyards, shipping companies, ports, and policies. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics 33 (4): 253–262.

Li, D.D., and E.S. Maskin. 2021. Government and economics: An emerging field of study. Journal of Government and Economics 1: 100005.

Li, F., W. Xing, M. Su, and J. Xu. 2021. The evolution of China’s marine economic policy and the labor productivity growth momentum of marine economy and its three economic industries. Marine Policy 134: 104777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104777 .

Lim, C., Y. Kim, and K. Lee. 2017. Changes in industrial leadership and catch-up by latecomers in shipbuilding industry. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 25 (1): 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/19761597.2017.1302537 .

Liu, F. 2020. The recalibration of Chinese assertiveness: China’s responses to the Indo-Pacific challenge. International Affairs 96 (1): 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz226 .

Magnusson, T., and V. Werner. 2023. Conceptualisations of incumbent firms in sustainability transitions: Insights from organization theory and a systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment 32 (2): 903–919. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3081 .

McKelvie, A., and J. Wiklund. 2010. Advancing firm growth research: A focus on growth mode instead of growth rate. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 34 (2): 261–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.003 .

Mickeviciene, R. 2011. Global shipbuilding competition: Trends and challenges for Europe. In The economic geography of globalization, 201–222. https://doi.org/10.5772/17215 .

Mitsuhashi, H., and H.R. Greve. 2004. Powerful and free: Intraorganizational power and the dynamics of corporate strategy. Strategic Organization 2 (2): 107–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127004042841 .

Mukai, Y., Y.W. Park, P. Hong, and G.C. Shin. 2019. The impact of design architecture choices on competitiveness: Comparison of Korean and Japanese shipbuilding firms. International Journal of Technology Management 79 (2): 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2019.097522 .

Mukherjee, R. 2018. Japan’s strategic outreach to India and the prospects of a Japan-India alliance. International Affairs 94 (4): 835–859. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiy030 .

Munim, Z.H. 2019. Autonomous ships: A review, innovative applications and future maritime business models. Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal 20 (4): 266–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2019.1631714 .

Oh, J., and S.K. Rhee. 2008. The influence of supplier capabilities and technology uncertainty on manufacturer-supplier collaboration: A study of the Korean automotive industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 28 (6): 490–517. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570810875331 .

Panda, J.P. 2020. India, the Blue Dot Network, and the “Quad Plus” calculus. Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs 3 (3): 3–21.

Park, J.K., and D.Y. Jeong. 2012. Success factors of collaboration systems in the shipbuilding industry. The Journal of Information Systems 21 (1): 19–46.

Park, S., J. Kwon, and T. Kim. 2021. An analysis of the dynamic relationship between the global macroeconomy and shipping and shipbuilding industries. Sustainability 13 (24): 13982. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413982 .

Park, T., and I. Ji. 2020. Evidence of latecomers’ catch-up in CoPS industries: A systematic review. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 32 (8): 968–983. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2020.1732339 .

Park, Y.W., and P. Hong. 2012. Building network capabilities in turbulent competitive environments: Practices of global firms from Korea and Japan . Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Park, Y.W. 2022. Ambidextrous product development strategy: Case study of Korean shipbuilding firms. In Ambidextrous global strategy in the era of digital transformation , 131–145. Singapore: Springer

Park, Y.W., P. Hong, and G.C. Shin. 2022. Rising and thriving in the post COVID-19 era: A case study of COSMAX, a leader of the Korean cosmetic industry. Asia Pacific Business Review . https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2022.2059955 .

Phogat, S. 2013. An introduction to applicability of lean in shipbuilding. International Journal of Latest Research in Science and Technology 2 (6): 85–89.

Roh, T., K. Lee, and J.Y. Yang. 2021. How do intellectual property rights and government support drive a firm’s green innovation? The mediating role of open innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production 317 (2): 128422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128422 .

Ruuska, I., T. Ahola, M. Martinsuo, and T. Westerholm. 2013. Supplier capabilities in large shipbuilding projects. International Journal of Project Management 31 (4): 542–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.09.017 .

Schaller, M. 2004. The Korean War: The economic and strategic impact on Japan, 1950–1953. In The Korean War in world history , ed. William Stueck, 145–176. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.

Scott-Smith, G. 2020. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. In The changing global order: Challenges and prospects , 177–191.

Seo, Y.J., J. Dinwoodie, and M. Roe. 2016. The influence of supply chain collaboration on collaborative advantage and port performance in maritime logistics. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 19 (6): 562–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2015.1135237 .

Sharma, S., and P.J. Gandhi. 2017. Scope and impact of implementing lean principles & practices in shipbuilding. Procedia Engineering 194: 232–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.140 .

Shin, D.H., and R. Hassink. 2011. Cluster life cycles: The case of the shipbuilding industry cluster in South Korea. Regional Studies 45 (10): 1387–1402. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.579594 .

Song, D.W., K. Cullinane, and M. Roe. 2017. The productive efficiency of container terminals: An application to Korea and the UK . London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237596 .

Sugita, Y. 2016. The Yoshida Doctrine as a myth. The Japanese Journal of American Studies 27: 123–143.

Suzuki, Y. 2020. The competitive advantage of Japanese industries: Developments, dimensions and directions. In The competitive advantages of far eastern business , 37–51. New York: Routledge.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Tan, S.S. 2020. Consigned to hedge: South-east Asia and America’s ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ strategy. International Affairs 96 (1): 131–148.

Tenold, S. 2019. The declining role of western Europe in shipping and shipbuilding. In Shipping and globalization in the post-war era. Palgrave studies in maritime economics , ed. N. Petersson, S. Tenold, and N. White, 1900–2000. London: Palgrave Macmillan Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26002-6_2 .

Thangam, K.M., and D. Sureshkumar. 2015. Competitiveness of Indian shipbuilding industry. International Journal of Innovative Research & Development 4 (7): 18–25.

Thanopoulou, H.A., D.K. Ryoo, and T.W. Lee. 1999. Korean liner shipping in the era of global alliances. Maritime Policy & Management 26 (3): 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/030888399286853 .

Todd, D. 1984. Strategies of growth, diversification and rationalization in the evolution of concentration in British shipbuilding. Regional Studies 18 (1): 55–67.

Todd, D. 2019. The world shipbuilding industry . London: Routledge.

Totten, G.O. 2019. The reconstruction of the Japanese shipbuilding industry. In Japan and the New Ocean Regime , 130–172. London: Routledge.

Van Klink, A., and P. De Langen. 2001. Cycles in industrial clusters: The case of the shipbuilding industry in the Northern Netherlands. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie 92 (4): 449–463.

Yang, Y.C., and S.L. Chen. 2016. Determinants of global logistics hub ports: Comparison of the port development policies of Taiwan, Korea, and Japan. Transport Policy 45: 179–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.10.005 .

Ye, F., Y. Quan, Y. He, and X. Lin. 2021. The impact of government preferences and environmental regulations on green development of China’s marine economy. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 87: 106522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106522 .

Yu, Y., and E. Lee. 2021. A strategy for localization and commercialization of equipment and materials: The crux of the paradigm shift in shipbuilding. Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade Research Paper 21: 10-01.

Yum, J. 2022. Korea’s green shipping pathways: The Korean shipping landscape and policy recommendations for ocean-climate leadership in shipping. Solutions for Our Climate (SFOC) 1-60.

Zoltai, A., and P. Klemensits. 2020. What do China and the BRI mean to ASEAN economies? Foreign Policy Review 13: 7–23.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our sincere appreciation for the invaluable feedback and detailed suggestions provided by the editors and referees regarding on our paper. Their comments and insights have been immensely helpful in shaping the quality and clarity of our manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Information Systems and Supply Chain Management, Neff College of Business and Innovation, University of Toledo, 2801 W. Bancroft St., Toledo, OH, 43606-3390, USA

Paul C. Hong & Mehrdad Jalali Sepehr

Department of Business and Leadership, Midwest University, 851 Parr Road, Wentzville, MO, 63385, USA

Young Soo Park

Finance and Supply Chain Management, Shippensburg University, 1871 Old Main Dr., Shippensburg, PA, 17257, USA

David W. Hwang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul C. Hong .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Hong, P.C., Park, Y.S., Hwang, D.W. et al. A growth theory perspective on the competitive landscape of shipbuilding: a comparative study of Japan, Korea, and China. Marit Econ Logist (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-023-00279-5

Download citation

Accepted : 25 November 2023

Published : 09 January 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-023-00279-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Shipbuilding industry
• Comparative studies
• Competitive landscape
• Growth theory
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Accessibility Links

• Skip to content
• Skip to search IOPscience
• Skip to Journals list
• Accessibility help
• Accessibility Help

Click here to close this panel.

Purpose-led Publishing is a coalition of three not-for-profit publishers in the field of physical sciences: AIP Publishing, the American Physical Society and IOP Publishing.

Together, as publishers that will always put purpose above profit, we have defined a set of industry standards that underpin high-quality, ethical scholarly communications.

We are proudly declaring that science is our only shareholder.

Supply chain production planning of a manufacturing project system 4.0: case study: Shipbuilding

M Ramirez 1 , V Pérez 1 , A Gómez 1 , R Montaño 1 and M Batista 1

Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering , Volume 1193 , 9th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference (MESIC 2021) 23rd-25th June 2021, Gijόn, Spain Citation M Ramirez et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 1193 012051 DOI 10.1088/1757-899X/1193/1/012051

Article metrics

220 Total downloads

Share this article

Author e-mails.

[email protected]

Author affiliations

1 School of Engineering, Universidad de Cádiz, Av. Universidad de Cádiz, 10, 11519, Puerto Real (Cádiz), Spain

Buy this article in print

Projects characterized by high difficulty in terms of planning and administrative control, require the strategies facilitated by Manufacturing Project Systems (MPS). Among them is an adequate management of the Supply Chain used as a competitive strategy. It could be said that in the case of shipbuilding, the Supply Chain is much more complicated due to the number of intervening parties and many shipyards have opted to include Concurrent Engineering with the implication of considering all the elements that make up the product life cycle. The objective of this article is based on the study of the existing applications for the integration of the companies' management as well as the technological contributions that can collaborate to the integration of the Supply Chain production planning. Getting to identify the seven key technologies of Industry 4.0 that most contribute to the sustainability of shipbuilding.

Export citation and abstract BibTeX RIS

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence . Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.

Department of Defense Management

Case study: us coast guard shipbuilding - department of defense management, upcoming events, case study: us coast guard shipbuilding.

Join Professor Robert Mortlock, PhD, for an in-depth exploration of an acquisition shipbuilding challenge the US Coast Guard had to navigate. Participants will review the case study, work in teams to determine how they would proceed, then review findings with the larger group.  Case study builds skills in decision making and problem solving, stakeholder management, resource management, and critical thinking. 

This webinar is open to defense acquisition professionals at the unclassified level.

Visit the event website to learn more and register. 

Previous Events

Case Studies

Real Life Incidents: Near Miss In Open Water And Good Visibility

A loaded LNG tanker was underway at about a speed of approximately 18 knots in good visibility..

Real Life Incident: Poor Situational Awareness Leads to Collision

A general cargo vessel was proceeding in a Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) at reduced power due to engine problems, making 4.5 knots at dead slow ahead.

Real Life Incident: Monkey’s Fist Knocks on Office Window

A tanker was approaching a jetty for berthing, While still some distance from the jetty the first heaving line was thrown…

Real Life Incident: Paint Storage Slip-Up On Ship

During a Class inspection, the crew were surprised to find that the lower compartment of a crane pedestal contained many sealed paint cans..

Real Life Incident: Checklist Mentality Is A Burning Problem

The accident investigation revealed that the crewmember had loosened the filter cover without first releasing the system pressure from the vent cock.

Real Life Incident: Vessel Speed Exacerbates Bank Suction

A general cargo vessel under pilotage was up-bound in a canal waterway under reduced speed in anticipation of meeting several down-bound vessels.

The Gruesome Amoco Cadiz Oil Spill Incident

The Amoco Cadiz Oil Spill is one of the worst maritime disasters which resulted in the single largest loss of marine life.

Real Life Incident: Vessel Collision in Good Visibility

An LNG tanker was proceeding in the open sea at a speed of approximately 21 knots in good visibility..

Real Life Incident: Severe Injury To Deck Crew While Leaving Berth

A RoRo ferry had finished loading and was leaving the berth. A strong onshore wind was pushing the ferry against the quay, and two bow thrusters were working at 100% to push the bow off the berth…

Subscribe to Marine Insight Daily Newsletter

" * " indicates required fields

Marine Engineering

Marine Engine Air Compressor Marine Boiler Oily Water Separator Marine Electrical Ship Generator Ship Stabilizer

Nautical Science

Mooring Bridge Watchkeeping Ship Manoeuvring Nautical Charts  Anchoring Nautical Equipment Shipboard Guidelines

Explore 

Free Maritime eBooks Premium Maritime eBooks Marine Safety Financial Planning Marine Careers Maritime Law Ship Dry Dock

Shipping News Maritime Reports Videos Maritime Piracy Offshore Safety Of Life At Sea (SOLAS) MARPOL

• Work & Careers
• Life & Arts
• Currently reading: Business school teaching case study: Unilever chief signals rethink on ESG
• Business school teaching case study: can green hydrogen’s potential be realised?
• Business school teaching case study: how electric vehicles pose tricky trade dilemmas
• Business school teaching case study: is private equity responsible for child labour violations?

Business school teaching case study: Unilever chief signals rethink on ESG

• Business school teaching case study: Unilever chief signals rethink on ESG on x (opens in a new window)
• Business school teaching case study: Unilever chief signals rethink on ESG on facebook (opens in a new window)
• Business school teaching case study: Unilever chief signals rethink on ESG on linkedin (opens in a new window)
• Business school teaching case study: Unilever chief signals rethink on ESG on whatsapp (opens in a new window)

Gabriela Salinas and Jeeva Somasundaram

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

In April this year, Hein Schumacher, chief executive of Unilever, announced that the company was entering a “new era for sustainability leadership”, and signalled a shift from the central priority promoted under his predecessor , Alan Jope.

While Jope saw lack of social purpose or environmental sustainability as the way to prune brands from the portfolio, Schumacher has adopted a more balanced approach between purpose and profit. He stresses that Unilever should deliver on both sustainability commitments and financial goals. This approach, which we dub “realistic sustainability”, aims to balance long- and short-term environmental goals, ambition, and delivery.

As a result, Unilever’s refreshed sustainability agenda focuses harder on fewer commitments that the company says remain “very stretching”. In practice, this entails extending deadlines for taking action as well as reducing the scale of its targets for environmental, social and governance measures.

Such backpedalling is becoming widespread — with many companies retracting their commitments to climate targets , for example. According to FactSet, a US financial data and software provider, the number of US companies in the S&P 500 index mentioning “ESG” on their earnings calls has declined sharply : from a peak of 155 in the fourth quarter 2021 to just 29 two years later. This trend towards playing down a company’s ESG efforts, from fear of greater scrutiny or of accusations of empty claims, even has a name: “greenhushing”.

Test yourself

This is the fourth in a series of monthly business school-style teaching case studies devoted to the responsible business dilemmas faced by organisations. Read the piece and FT articles suggested at the end before considering the questions raised.

About the authors: Gabriela Salinas is an adjunct professor of marketing at IE University; Jeeva Somasundaram is an assistant professor of decision sciences in operations and technology at IE University.

The series forms part of a wider collection of FT ‘instant teaching case studies ’, featured across our Business Education publications, that explore management challenges.

The change in approach is not limited to regulatory compliance and corporate reporting; it also affects consumer communications. While Jope believed that brands sold more when “guided by a purpose”, Schumacher argues that “we don’t want to force fit [purpose] on brands unnecessarily”.

His more nuanced view aligns with evidence that consumers’ responses to the sustainability and purpose communication attached to brand names depend on two key variables: the type of industry in which the brand operates; and the specific aspect of sustainability being communicated.

In terms of the sustainability message, research in the Journal of Business Ethics found consumers can be less interested when product functionality is key. Furthermore, a UK survey in 2022 found that about 15 per cent of consumers believed brands should support social causes, but nearly 60 per cent said they would rather see brand owners pay taxes and treat people fairly.

Among investors, too, “anti-purpose” and “anti-ESG” sentiment is growing. One (unnamed) leading bond fund manager even suggested to the FT that “ESG will be dead in five years”.

Media reports on the adverse impact of ESG controversies on investment are certainly now more frequent. For example, while Jope was still at the helm, the FT reported criticism of Unilever by influential fund manager Terry Smith for displaying sustainability credentials at the expense of managing the business.

Yet some executives feel under pressure to take a stand on environmental and social issues — in many cases believing they are morally obliged to do so or through a desire to improve their own reputations. This pressure may lead to a conflict with shareholders if sustainability becomes a promotional tool for managers, or for their personal social responsibility agenda, rather than creating business value .

Such opportunistic behaviours may lead to a perception that corporate sustainability policies are pursued only because of public image concerns.

Alison Taylor, at NYU Stern School of Business, recently described Unilever’s old materiality map — a visual representation of how companies assess which social and environmental factors matter most to them — to Sustainability magazine. She depicted it as an example of “baggy, vague, overambitious goals and self-aggrandising commitments that make little sense and falsely suggest a mayonnaise and soap company can solve intractable societal problems”.

In contrast, the “realism” approach of Schumacher is being promulgated as both more honest and more feasible. Former investment banker Alex Edmans, at London Business School, has coined the term “rational sustainability” to describe an approach that integrates financial principles into decision-making, and avoids using sustainability primarily for enhancing social image and reputation.

Such “rational sustainability” encompasses any business activity that creates long-term value — including product innovation, productivity enhancements, or corporate culture initiatives, regardless of whether they fall under the traditional ESG framework.

Similarly, Schumacher’s approach aims for fewer targets with greater impact, all while keeping financial objectives in sight.

Complex objectives, such as having a positive impact on the world, may be best achieved indirectly, as expounded by economist John Kay in his book, Obliquity . Schumacher’s “realistic sustainability” approach means focusing on long-term value creation, placing customers and investors to the fore. Saving the planet begins with meaningfully helping a company’s consumers and investors. Without their support, broader sustainability efforts risk failure.

Questions for discussion

Read: Unilever has ‘lost the plot’ by fixating on sustainability, says Terry Smith

Companies take step back from making climate target promises

The real impact of the ESG backlash

Unilever’s new chief says corporate purpose can be ‘unwelcome distraction ’

Unilever says new laxer environmental targets aim for ‘realism’

How should business executives incorporate ESG criteria in their commercial, investor, internal, and external communications? How can they strike a balance between purpose and profits?

How does purpose affect business and brand value? Under what circumstances or conditions can the impact of purpose be positive, neutral, or negative?

Are brands vehicles by which to drive social or environmental change? Is this the primary role of brands in the 21st century or do profits and clients’ needs come first?

Which categories or sectors might benefit most from strongly articulating and communicating a corporate purpose? Are there instances in which it might backfire?

In your opinion, is it necessary for brands to take a stance on social issues? Why or why not, and when?

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here .

Are you curious about the FT’s environmental sustainability commitments? Find out more about our science-based targets here

Promoted Content

Explore the series.

Follow the topics in this article

• Sustainability Add to myFT
• Impact investing Add to myFT
• Corporate governance Add to myFT
• Corporate social responsibility Add to myFT
• Business school case Add to myFT

International Edition

• History, Facts & Figures
• YSM Dean & Deputy Deans
• YSM Administration
• Department Chairs
• YSM Executive Group
• YSM Board of Permanent Officers
• FAC Documents
• Current FAC Members
• Appointments & Promotions Committees
• Ad Hoc Committees and Working Groups
• Chair Searches
• Leadership Searches
• Organization Charts
• Faculty Demographic Data
• Professionalism Reporting Data
• 2022 Diversity Engagement Survey
• State of the School Archive
• Faculty Climate Survey: YSM Results
• Strategic Planning
• Mission Statement & Process
• Beyond Sterling Hall
• COVID-19 Series Workshops
• Previous Workshops
• Departments & Centers
• Find People
• Biomedical Data Science
• Health Equity
• Inflammation
• Neuroscience
• Global Health
• Diabetes and Metabolism
• Policies & Procedures
• Media Relations
• A to Z YSM Lab Websites
• A-Z Faculty List
• A-Z Staff List
• A to Z Abbreviations
• Dept. Diversity Vice Chairs & Champions
• Dean’s Advisory Council on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex Affairs Website
• Minority Organization for Retention and Expansion Website
• Office for Women in Medicine and Science
• Committee on the Status of Women in Medicine Website
• Director of Scientist Diversity and Inclusion
• Diversity Supplements
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Recruitment
• By Department & Program
• News & Events
• Executive Committee
• Aperture: Women in Medicine
• Self-Reflection
• Portraits of Strength
• Mindful: Mental Health Through Art
• Event Photo Galleries
• Additional Support
• MD-PhD Program
• PA Online Program
• Joint MD Programs
• How to Apply
• Advanced Health Sciences Research
• Clinical Informatics & Data Science
• Clinical Investigation
• Medical Education
• Visiting Student Programs
• Special Programs & Student Opportunities
• Residency & Fellowship Programs
• Center for Med Ed
• Organizational Chart
• Leadership & Staff
• Committee Procedural Info (Login Required)
• Faculty Affairs Department Teams
• Recent Appointments & Promotions
• Academic Clinician Track
• Clinician Educator-Scholar Track
• Clinican-Scientist Track
• Investigator Track
• Traditional Track
• Research Ranks
• Instructor/Lecturer
• Social Work Ranks
• Voluntary Ranks
• Adjunct Ranks
• Other Appt Types
• Appointments
• Reappointments
• Transfer of Track
• Term Extensions
• Timeline for A&P Processes
• Interfolio Faculty Search
• Interfolio A&P Processes
• Yale CV Part 1 (CV1)
• Yale CV Part 2 (CV2)
• Samples of Scholarship
• Teaching Evaluations
• Letters of Evaluation
• Dept A&P Narrative
• A&P Voting
• Faculty Affairs Staff Pages
• OAPD Faculty Workshops
• Leadership & Development Seminars
• List of Faculty Mentors
• Incoming Faculty Orientation
• Faculty Onboarding
• Past YSM Award Recipients
• Past PA Award Recipients
• Past YM Award Recipients
• International Award Recipients
• Nominations Calendar
• OAPD Newsletter
• Fostering a Shared Vision of Professionalism
• Academic Integrity
• Addressing Professionalism Concerns
• Consultation Support for Chairs & Section Chiefs
• Policies & Codes of Conduct
• First Fridays
• Fund for Physician-Scientist Mentorship
• Grant Library
• Grant Writing Course
• Mock Study Section
• Research Paper Writing
• Establishing a Thriving Research Program
• Funding Opportunities
• Join Our Voluntary Faculty
• Child Mental Health: Fostering Wellness in Children
• Faculty Resources
• Research by Keyword
• Research by Department
• Research by Global Location
• Translational Research
• Research Cores & Services
• Program for the Promotion of Interdisciplinary Team Science (POINTS)
• CEnR Steering Committee
• Experiential Learning Subcommittee
• Goals & Objectives
• Issues List
• Print Magazine PDFs
• Print Newsletter PDFs
• YSM Events Newsletter
• Social Media
• Patient Care

INFORMATION FOR

• Residents & Fellows
• Researchers

Black Youth Mental Health Clinical Case Conference Series to Conclude on June 12

The Yale Child Study Center's (YCSC) inaugural Black Youth Mental Health Clinical Case Conference Series will conclude with an interactive roundtable discussion on Wednesday, June 12 , from 6 p.m. to 8:15 p.m. The series has consisted of six mental health clinical case conferences taking place from January through June 2024.

The expert discussants for the June 12 session will be as follows.

• Monique Rainford, MD
• Danielle Hairston, MD
• Kali Cyrus, MD, MPH
• Char Coombs, MSN

Register for the June 12 conference.

Read more about the event.

During the conference series, invited expert discussants from within Yale and beyond have been weighing in on complex clinical cases involving Black youth presented by YCSC trainees. The series is interactive, and attendees engage in a roundtable discussion. Dinner is provided, and registration is required for each session.

Local participants are strongly encouraged to attend in person, though a virtual option will be made available.

Directed by YCSC Chief Resident and Child Psychiatry Fellow Amanda J. Calhoun, MD, MPH, under the advisement of YCSC Research Scientist Mark Beitel, PhD, the series has also been co-endorsed by YCSC Chair Linda Mayes, MD; YCSC Vice Chair for Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Tara Davila; and Darin Latimore, MD, who serves as the deputy dean for diversity and inclusion and chief diversity officer at Yale School of Medicine.

The series is supported by funding from the YCSC Viola W. Bernard Social Justice and Health Equity Fellowship , the Yale School of Medicine Office of Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion , and the AMA – SHLI Medical Justice in Advocacy Fellowship Program .