University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

contribution to innovation, development and change; Burns (2001) and Curran and
Stanworth (1991) agree.
783
Curran and Stanworth (1991) go on to identify that the economic impact of SMEs
has grown since the 1970s and this growth was at odds with the outlined predictions
of Bolton (1971); Bolton having investigated the sector at that time in order to
identify impacts and trends. Burns (2001, p12) supports the ongoing impact and role
of SMEs and suggests that this has resulted from a number of factors, but in
particular:
• an overall move from manufacturing to service industries and thus a
changing market-place and opportunities; and
• structural changes in organisations, plus downsizing an other supplychain
based reasons, which have led to an increase in the contracting
out of work and services.
The above highlights how smaller, often niche, producers can operate within the
overall economy and, in doing so, how they offer an alternative source of
employment and growth. It also provides an initial outline of the potential influence
and responsibilities that organisations who ‘contract out’ have. Such responsibilities
may be further supported in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR as
discussed by, for example: McWilliams et al, 2006; Pedersen, 2006; Porter and
Kramer, 2002; Smith, 2002; Windsor, 2006). Thus customers/a customer may be
seen to have role in affecting the behaviour of their suppliers as a result of their
‘contracted out’ impacts and their responsibilities linked to CSR.
SME-Environment Attitudes and Behaviour (and affecting these)
Fay (2000: 9) agrees with the above and goes on to note that SMEs: ‘also account for
their share of pollution, waste and other unsustainable practices’
Interestingly, and in this context, it has been observed that SMEs have a ‘head in the
sand’ attitude and approach when it comes to engaging and addressing their
environmental impacts (Netregs, 2003); impacts which would otherwise appear to
demand a change in behaviour (i.e. by SMEs). SMEs per se are, therefore, of interest
to researchers and interventionists and it is evident from current theory and practice
that SMEs can, and do, face both internal and external drivers for, and barriers to,
behaviour and conduct change; a finding widely supported in literature (E.g.
ECOTEC, 2000; ETBPP, 1998; Groundwork, 1995 and 1998; Hillary, 1999 and
2000; Merritt, 1998; Netregs, 2003 and 2005; Petts et al, 1998 and 1999; Tilley,
1999).
This situation and the concern associated with current SME-environment behaviour
comes despite the time since the ‘SME problem’ 19 and solutions were identified (E.g.
by Groundwork, 1995; Tilley, 1999; Welford, 1994). Tilley (1999) in particular
19 Merritt (1998) suggests the ‘problem’ may be one of activity resulting from intervention and SME management
(as compared to larger business) not necessarily performance per se.