Wesley Longhofer

Associate Professor of Organization & Management; Senior Director, Center for Faculty Development and Excellence; Assistant Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs Emory University, Goizueta Business School

  • Atlanta GA

Contact

Emory University, Goizueta Business School

View more experts managed by Emory University, Goizueta Business School

Social

Biography

Wesley Longhofer joined the Goizueta Business School in 2012 after receiving his PhD in sociology from the University of Minnesota. in addition to his faculty role, he serves as senior director ofthe Center for Faculty Development and Excellence and assistant vice provost for Faculty Affairs. He previously served as the executive academic director of Goizueta's Business & Society Institute, an academic research center that addresses complex challenges facing people and the planet through academic discovery and purposeful action.

Some of his published work on charitable organizations, environmental protection, and international law has appeared in the American Sociological Review, American Journal of Sociology, Administrative Science Quarterly, Nature Communications, Social Forces, Sociological Science, and Scientific Reports. His research on climate change and the energy sector has been funded by the National Science Foundation and featured in the Washington Post and Nature Climate Change.

Wes has received a number of awards for his teaching, including the 2018 Emory Williams Distinguished Undergraduate Teaching Award and the 2016 Marc F. Adler Prize for Excellence in Teaching. He was once named one of the 40 Best Business Professors Under 40 by Poets & Quants. His most recent co-authored book, Super Polluters: Tackling the World's Largest Sites of Climate-Disrupting Emissions, was published by Columbia University Press in 2020.

Education

Texas Christian University

BA

Sociology

2003

University of Minnesota

PhD

Sociology

2011

Areas of Expertise

Organizational Sociology
Business and Society
Social Enterprise
Philanthropy and Non-Profits
Climate Change
Human Rights

Publications

A Worldwide Analysis of Stranded Fossil Fuel Assets' Impact on Power Plants' CO2 Emissions

Nature Communications

Don Grant, Tyler Hansen, Andrew Jorgenson, Wesley Longhofer

2025-01-08

Will power plants emit less or more CO2 in anticipation of stronger climate policies that would strand fossil fuel reserves? Here, using a worldwide data source on individual power plants’ CO2 emissions and the value of countries’ at-risk fossil fuel assets, we show that between 2009 and 2018, plants emitted more CO2 in countries where more assets would be devalued under a 1.5 °C scenario, which we theorize is due to these countries’ regulatory leniency and plants’ vested interest in long-term fossil fuel contracts. Although the extra amount of carbon emitted each year trigged by imperiled assets is relatively small, it would exhaust a sizable portion of the electricity sector’s remaining carbon budget when added up over time. This is especially true in the U.S. and Russia where up to 16% and 12% of their budgets, respectively, could be spent within ten years due solely to the stranded asset effect.

View more

Structural Pathways to Carbon Pollution: The Conjoint Effects of Organizational, World System, and World Society Factors on Power Plants’ CO2 Emissions

Sociological Science

Don Grant, Andrew Jorgenson, and Wesley Longhofer

Climate change is arguably the greatest threat to society as power plants, the single largest human source of heat-trapping pollution, continue to emit massive amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. Sociologists have identified several possible structural determinants of electricity-based CO2 emissions, including international trade and global normative regimes, national political–legal systems, and organizational size and age. But because they treat these factors as competing predictors, scholars have yet to examine how they might work together to explain why some power plants emit vastly more pollutants than others. Using a worldwide data set of utility facilities and fuzzy-set methods, we analyze the conjoint effects of global, political, and organizational conditions on fossil-fueled plants’ CO2 emissions. Findings reveal that hyperpolluters’ emission rates are a function of four distinct causal recipes, which we label coercive, quiescent, expropriative, and inertial configurations, and these same sets of conditions also increase plants’ emission levels.

View more

NGOs and International Development: A Review of Thirty-Five Years of Scholarship

World Development

Jennifer Brass, Wesley longhofer, Rachel Sullivan Robinson, and Allison Schnable

Since 1980, the number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in developing countries has exploded. Published research on NGOs has paralleled this growth, yet there exists scant synthesis of the literature. This article presents a synthesis, while also introducing a collaborative research platform, the NGO Knowledge Collective. We ask four questions: first, who studies NGOs, and how do they study them? Second, what issues, sectors and places are studied when NGOs are the focus? Third, what effect do NGO activities have on specific development outcomes? And fourth, what path should the NGO research agenda take? To answer these questions, we conduct a mixed-method systematic review of social science publications on NGOs, which includes computer-assisted content analysis of 3336 English-language journal articles (1980–2014), alongside a close, qualitative analysis of 300 randomly selected articles. We find, first, that interdisciplinary journals dominate NGO publishing, that research on NGOs is more qualitative than quantitative, and that practitioners publish, but Northern academics create most published knowledge. Second, we find the literature is framed around six overarching questions regarding: the nature of NGOs; their emergence and development; how they conduct their work; their impacts; how they relate to other actors; and how they contribute to the (re)production of cultural dynamics. Articles also focus disproportionately on the most populated and/or politically salient countries, and on the governance and health sectors. Third, we find that scholars generally report favorable effects of NGOs on health and governance outcomes. Fourth, we propose a research agenda calling for scholars to: address neglected sectors, geographies, and contextual conditions; increase author representativeness; improve research designs to include counterfactuals or comparison groups; and better share data and findings, including results from additional, focused NGO-related systematic reviews. Implementing this agenda will help reduce bias in decisions by donors, governments, and other development actors, which should improve development outcomes.

View more

Show All +

Research Spotlight

2 min

Taking on Super Polluters to Reduce Greenhouse Gases

If just the top five percent of carbon-emitting plants in the U.S. reduced emissions to the average intensity of all plants, overall emissions from the electricity sector would fall 22 percent. A new book co-authored by Wesley Longhofer, associate professor of organization and management at Goizueta Business School, offers new insights into a persistent problem—how to curb carbon emissions from top-polluting power plants around the world. In Super Polluters: Tackling the World’s Largest Sites of Climate-Disrupting Emissions (Columbia University Press), Longhofer and co-authors Don Grant and Andrew Jorgenson argue that reducing pollution from fossil-fueled power plants should start with the dirtiest producers. From data they gathered over eight years on the carbon emissions of every power plant in the world, they found that a small number of plants contribute the lion’s share of pollution. For instance, if just the top five percent of carbon-emitting plants in the U.S. reduced emissions to the average intensity of all plants, overall emissions from the electricity sector would fall 22 percent. The book also questions claims that improvements in technical efficiency will always reduce greenhouse gases. “It’s the paradox of efficiency,” Longhofer says. “Just because a plant produces power more efficiently doesn’t mean they’ll pollute less. It just becomes cheaper to produce.” As sociologists, the authors are the first to put the problem into context, investigating global, organizational, and political conditions that explain super-polluter behavior. They demonstrate energy and climate policies most effective at curbing power-plant pollution and show how mobilized citizen activism shapes those outcomes. “Climate change is fundamentally an organizational problem. Even if you think about the Paris Accords, it’s the power plants and the cars within those states that produce the emissions, not the states themselves,” Longhofer says. “What do we do with what we already know? How do we develop policies to help us achieve our climate goals?” If you’re a journalist looking to speak with Wesley Longhofer about his book or discuss big pollution and how to cut carb emissions then let us help. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

Wesley Longhofer

1 min

Focus on extreme polluters

In recent years, several scholars have recommended that countries reduce their energy-related CO2 emissions by setting carbon intensity targets for their electricity generating plants. Other research suggests that countries could substantially cut their emissions simply by focusing on lowering the carbon emissions of the most extreme polluters. Using a unique international data source on power plants, researchers Don Grant (U. Colorado); Wesley Longhofer, assistant professor of organization and management; and Andrew Jorgenson (U. Utah) inform this issue by analyzing the distribution of CO2 emissions and intensities within the electricity sectors of 20 countries. They find that the dirtiest 5 percent of power plants are responsible for huge shares of their sectors’ total emissions, noting that “if these plants continued generating the same amount of electricity but met particular intensity targets, the world’s total electricity-based CO2 emissions could be reduced by as much as 44 percent.” Source:

Wesley Longhofer

1 min

The impact of corporate vs. independent foundations

Debate continues as to whether corporate or independent foundations are more impactful, despite the shared interest in supporting charitable services. In research from Justin Koushyar, doctoral candidate in organization and management (2017), Wesley Longhofer, assistant professor of organization and management, and Peter Roberts, professor of organization and management, the trio determines that the answer is mixed. They used data from a matched random sample of corporate and independent foundations that operated across the United States in 2005 and 2009. With deeper pockets, corporate foundations were able to raise more funds than their nonprofit counterparts. Company sponsorship of a philanthropic foundation also meant that they could operate with lower overhead. However, Koushyar, Longhofer, and Roberts found that corporate foundations are “more dispersed and less relational, and they tend to be governed by more ephemeral groups of officers and trustees.” Simply put, corporate foundations have fewer longterm attachments to the charitable organizations they support. Additionally, “market-based motivations” may influence how they give. Corporate foundations do tend to provide smaller individual grant amounts than independent foundations. These “stakeholder effects” are even more dramatic for the foundations linked to larger publicly traded companies. Source:

Wesley LonghoferPeter Roberts
Show More +

In the News

Why some ads for the new movie ‘Migration’ are promoting a nonprofit bird rescue

Fast Company  online

2023-12-19

Ahead of the film’s December 22 release, NBCUniversal’s Creative Impact Lab partnered on a campaign with the International Bird Rescue.

View More

Provocative ads use voting law to target Coke on labor, obesity

Atlanta Journal Constitution  online

2021-08-11

Wesley Longhofer, a professor at Emory’s Goizueta Business School focused on the intersection of business and society, said some organizations like Greenpeace have found success using provocative ads to force major changes at companies. They’ve done this by compiling compelling evidence and working with corporations to clean up their supply chains, he said. “But if you’re too antagonistic it’s easy for a corporation to either ignore you or play defense,” he said. “That tends to be less effective than getting corporations to engage in the kinds of change that you’re calling for.”

View More

Coca-Cola is at the center of a debate over corporate social justice, with an anti-affirmative-action activist threatening to sue over its supplier diversity program

Business Insider  online

2021-05-08

Wesley Longhofer, a professor of organization and management at Emory University Goizueta Business School, said Coca-Cola is no stranger to taking stances on racial-justice issues, going back to 1964, when it got white Atlantans to turn out for an event in honor of Martin Luther King Jr. He said the company’s cachet can make it a focus for activists. “Social-movement organizations oftentimes will target these iconic brands because they know these brands care about reputation, but also just to raise awareness,” he said.

View More

Show All +

Answers

Earth Day and Super Polluters
Wesley Longhofer

As we approach Earth Day 2021, the world continues to struggle to address climate change and its causes. Goizueta Business School professor Wes Longhofer says there are ten coal-burning power plants worldwide that are major causes of global warming. He labels these “super polluters” and suggests that targeting these plants for change can have a significant impact.The top ten polluting plants are in Taiwan (#1 and #8), South Korea (#2, #3, #5, #6), Poland (#4), Germany (#7), India (#6), and South Africa (#10). Pollution isn’t just an economic or an engineering issue. Plants pollute at extremely high levels and rates due to a host of interconnected social structures such activism, political-legal systems, and social conditions.Longhofer can discuss the energy and climate policies that can most effectively combat power-plant pollution.It’s important to shift the conversation from consumers of carbon items and services to their producers, in much the same way that cancer caused by smoking was originally attributed to individuals’ lack of self-control, but later attributed to cigarette companies themselvesNone of the Top Ten plants are in the US, but our coal burning power plants are still a major contributor of carbon emissions. Plants that operate “more efficiently” can see a “backfire” effect where they actually emit more pollution.More at http://cup.columbia.edu/book/super-polluters/9780231192170.