Corporate Strategy under Water and Energy Constraints

1. Research problem

How do resource constraints change location and growth decisions? The project would examine this question within strategy & scenarios, where institutional arrangements, measurable outcomes and the costs of implementation may point in different directions. It is designed as a falsifiable research programme rather than a claim that the proposed mechanism has already been demonstrated.

2. Working proposition

Early integration of water and electricity stress into site selection may lower stranded-investment risk. This is a testable proposition, not an established result. Competing explanations and contexts in which the mechanism fails should be specified before data collection begins.

3. Research theses for examination

1. Mechanism: Early integration of water and electricity stress into site selection may lower stranded-investment risk.
2. Boundary conditions: Assess whether the proposition remains plausible when jurisdiction, organisational maturity, resource constraints or stakeholder interests change.
3. Disconfirmation: Record which observations would favour an alternative explanation or show that the proposed approach adds no meaningful value.

4. Research design and methods

Combine energy scenarios, resource exposure and plant-level economics. The initial protocol should establish sampling criteria, the unit of analysis, definitions of variables or legal concepts, a transparent source register, and access and ethics approvals where necessary.

5. Evidence horizon and relevant developments

IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2025 places energy security, critical minerals and electricity-system vulnerability at the centre of economic planning. Its modelled pathways are conditional scenarios.

UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report 2025 identifies a continuing divergence between announced climate action and pathways consistent with the Paris Agreement. This is a policy-relevant risk indicator, not a forecast for any one firm.

The cited publications provide current institutional context and candidate sources for the literature review. They do not certify the proposed hypothesis; original empirical work, careful comparison and jurisdiction-specific validation would still be required.

6. Planned work packages

1. Conceptual groundwork: Define the research object, terminology, competing frameworks and decision context.
2. Evidence mapping: Create an auditable inventory of relevant primary evidence, with dates, definitions, strengths and limitations.
3. Evaluation: Combine energy scenarios, resource exposure and plant-level economics; contrast results with alternative specifications, control cases or rival interpretations.
4. Critical review: Report missing observations, conflicting evidence, implementation costs and circumstances that limit transferability.
5. Translation into practice: Prepare the intended practical output and an independent review checklist.

7. Anticipated research product

Resource-constrained capital allocation guide. The deliverable will be evaluated against the research question and the evidence collected.

8. Limitations, ethics and scholarly integrity

At this stage no original sample, statistical test, clinical cohort or experimental result is claimed. Any future research involving human participants, proprietary data, medical outcomes or regulated activities must obtain the applicable permissions. Publicly accessible official publications are cited for context only; their findings are not represented as findings of BBARTI.

9. Selected institutional reading

• IEA · World Energy Outlook 2025 ↗2025
• UNEP · Emissions Gap Report 2025 ↗4 November 2025