Mega Corporations: Power, Profit, and the Planet

By Michael Quartermain, C.I.M., C.Mgr. | Chartered Managers Canada

As our world struggles with the escalating impacts of sustainability, it has become increasingly evident that progress in mitigating climate threats remains challenging. With growing public pressure and mounting legal actions to compel organizations to act, an argument can be made that businesses, particularly large, resource-rich corporations, are best positioned to lead the fight against climate change. With their investments in innovation, global reach, and influence over supply chains and consumer behaviour, these organizations possess the tools necessary to drive meaningful environmental improvements.

Organizations, particularly large multinational corporations (MNEs), have the resources and influence to lead the sustainability drive globally (Roach, 2023). On the other hand, Glynn and Dearden (2023) describe how corporate consolidation can undermine sustainability by prioritizing short-term profits over long-term ecological and social well-being. The environmental degradation caused by monopolistic agribusiness and fossil fuel companies represents how unchecked corporate power can be misaligned with sustainable development goals (Glynn & Dearden, 2023).

The Growth of Mega Corporations

Mega corporations can be defined as multinational companies (MNEs) with substantial market value and global sales. Their economic power overshadows entire nations (see Figure 1). For instance, some organizations' market value exceeds several countries' GDP (Anderson & Cavanagh, 2000). Mega corporations adopt various international strategies to expand their global footprint and consolidate market share. These include:

• A multinational strategy involves operating in multiple countries with a decentralized structure, allowing subsidiaries to adapt to local markets.
• A global strategy emphasizes standardization and efficiency, offering uniform products worldwide to achieve economies of scale.
• A transnational strategy seeks to combine global integration with local responsiveness, coordinating operations across borders while adapting to local needs.
• A multi-domestic strategy prioritizes responsiveness to local preferences over cost efficiency, tailoring products and services to fit each market's cultural and regulatory environments (Virginia Tech Libraries, n.d.).

These business strategies enable mega corporations to establish their influence across global regions. They can shape consumer behaviour, influence policy, and reduce competition on a global scale, often intensifying inequality and injustices (Virginia Tech Libraries, n.d).

The report “Monopoly capitalism; What is it and how do we fight it?” by Glynn and Dearden (2023) introduces another frame for the discussion: monopoly capitalism, which is defined as an economic system dominated by a small number of powerful corporations that exercise disproportionate control over markets, politics, and society. Glynn and Dearden (2023) argue that this concentration of corporate power undermines democracy, worsens inequality, and accelerates environmental impacts.

Figure 1: Top 20 Poorest Counties by GDP & Mega Corporations by Global Sales

Comparing GDP with corporate metrics such as market value and global sales presents several challenges. GDP measures a country's economic output, while market value reflects the stock market valuation of a corporation. These differences in measurement and scope complicate direct comparisons (Roach, 2007). This critique of GDP aligns closely with the broader discussion of the economic power of mega-corporations and their role in sustainability. Just as GDP fails to capture national well-being, corporate success measured solely by market value or sales overlooks business operations' environmental and social costs.

The Impact and Influence of Mega Corporations in the Global Economy

Mega corporations' scale, reach, and concentration of power have significant implications for global markets:

1. Economic Dominance and Market Influence: Mega-corporations are central to the global economic hierarchy. According to Anderson and Cavanagh (2000), 51 of the world’s 100 largest economies are corporations, not countries. For example, Walmart alone surpasses the GDP of 161 nations, including Israel and Greece. Similarly, corporations like Mitsubishi, General Motors, and Toyota exceed the economic size of populous or developed countries such as Indonesia, Denmark, and Norway. This economic scale allows Mega corporations to influence global trade, investment, and economic policy (Anderson & Cavanagh, 2000). In sectors like Big Pharma, agribusiness, and Big Tech, Mega-corporations have amassed unprecedented economic and political power. For example, the five largest tech firms have acquired over 1,000 companies, and a few agribusiness giants control most global seed and grain markets (Glynn & Dearden, 2023).
    
2. Industry Concentration and Market Control: The top 200 corporations account for a disproportionate share of global economic activity, with their combined sales exceeding a quarter of global GDP. However, they employ less than 1% of the global workforce, highlighting a disconnect between economic power and employment contribution (Anderson & Cavanagh, 2000). Roach (2023) emphasizes that this concentration enables corporations to set prices, shape supply chains, and dominate key sectors, often at the expense of smaller competitors and national economic autonomy.
    
3. Political and Regulatory Influence: Roach (2023) notes that multinational corporations often engage in lobbying and campaign financing to shape regulatory environments in their favour. This can lead to regulatory capture, where public policy serves corporate interests rather than the public good. Trade and financial rules, often shaped by corporate interests, reinforce this imbalance (Glynn & Dearden, 2023). 
    
4. Labour and Employment Dynamics: The rise of mega corporations has overlapped with a decline in labour union power and a shift toward precarious employment or the gig economy. Despite their huge revenues, these corporations contribute minimally to global employment, and their pursuit of efficiency often results in job cuts and wage control (Anderson & Cavanagh, 2000; Roach, 2023).
    
5. Social and Environmental Costs: Roach (2023) and Anderson & Cavanagh (2000) highlight how mega corporations externalize social and environmental costs. This includes pollution, resource depletion, and the marginalization of vulnerable communities. Pursuing profit often leads to practices that make inequality and environmental degradation worse.

Mega corporations possess the resources, technological capacity, and global reach to lead the change toward a more sustainable future. Roach (2023) argues that these mega corporations can drive innovation in clean energy, circular economies, and equitable development if properly incentivized. Their participation is essential for achieving global sustainability goals. However, if they continue to prioritize financial growth over environmental and social responsibility, they risk continuing the same systemic issues that GDP-centric policies have caused (Costanza et al., 2004). The good news is that, according to KPMG’s (2024) “Survey of Sustainability Reporting,” 96% of the world’s largest 250 companies (G250) now publish sustainability reports, and 69% of them obtain third-party verification on their disclosures. This reflects a significant shift toward transparency and accountability, with environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting becoming business as usual for Mega corporations. 

Conclusion

Meyer and Benito (2025) suggest that innovation and new markets for green technologies can incentivize companies. On the one hand, companies can function as agents of change by spreading sustainable practices and technologies across borders. On the other hand, they may resist policies that threaten their established advantages. Mega corporations hold significant economic power that can influence global sustainability, and their operations must be aligned with sustainable practices, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). There is a need to move beyond corporate social responsibility (CSR) to organizational reforms emphasizing equity, resilience, and shared governance. Governments and international bodies must collaborate to ensure that mega corporations contribute positively to global well-being. The economic power of mega corporations can have an impact and role in accelerating sustainable outcomes, and they can use their influence to shape a more equitable and environmentally responsible global economy by adopting sustainability-focused performance indicators that align with sustainable development goals and contribute meaningfully to global well-being.

About the Author:

Michael Quartermain, C.I.M., C.Mgr. is a professor at the School of Business at Conestoga College Institute of Advanced  Learning and Technology, where he has been teaching for over five years in the areas of business management and sustainability. Michael spent over thirty-five years in business and consulting in general management, procurement, and strategic sourcing.

He holds a Bachelor of Commerce degree from York University, a Master of Law specializing in dispute resolution from Osgoode Hall Law School and a Master of Peace and Conflict Studies from the University of Waterloo. Michael is working on a Professional Master of Education at Queen’s University.

He holds professional designations as Lean Six Sigma Green Belt (McGill University), Certified Associate Project Manager (Project Management Institute), Qualified Mediator (Alternative Dispute Resolution Institute of Ontario),  Chartered Manager (Canadian Institute of Management), Certified Business Management Educator (The Chartered Association of Business Schools), Certified International Negotiator (Chartered Institute of Professional Certifications) and Certified Supply Chain Leader/Certified Supply Chain Management Professional (National Institute of Supply Chain Leaders). In addition to these certifications, Michael has several other certificates that are part of his ongoing professional development. 

References:

Anderson, S., & Cavanagh, J. (2000). Top 200: The rise of corporate global power. Institute for Policy Studies. https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/files/Top_200_The_Rise_of_Corporate_Global_Power.pdf

Costanza, R., Kubiszewski, I., Giovannini, E., Lovins, H., McGlade, J., Pickett, K. E., & Wilkinson, R. (2014). Development: Time to leave GDP behind. Nature, 505(7483), 283–285. https://doi.org/10.1038/505283a

Focus Economics. (2024). Top 20 Poorest Countries in the World in 2025. https://www.focus-economics.com/blog/the-poorest-countries-in-the-world/

Glynn, N., & Dearden, N. (2023). *Monopoly capitalism: What is it and how do we fight it? Global Justice Now. https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Monopoly-capitalism-primer-WEB-FINAL.pdf

Harvard Business School. (2023). What is sustainability in business? HBS Online. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/what-is-sustainability-in-business

KPMG. (2024). The move to mandatory reporting: Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2024. https://kpmg.com/xx/en/our-insights/esg/the-move-to-mandatory-reporting.html

Meyer, K., & Benito, G. (2025). How multinational enterprises shape and respond to green industrial policy. Ivey Business School. https://www.ivey.uwo.ca/impact/read/2025/03/how-multinational-enterprises-shape-and-respond-to-green-industrial-policy/

Roach, B. (2007). Corporate power in a global economy. Global Development and Environment Institute, Tufts University. https://www.bu.edu/eci/files/2019/06/Corporate-Power-in-a-Global-Economy.pdf

Strategic Management. (n.d.). Types of international strategies. Virginia Tech Libraries. https://pressbooks.lib.vt.edu/strategicmanagement/chapter/9-4-types-of-international-strategies/

Visual Capitalist. (2024). Ranked: The world’s top companies by revenue in 2024. https://www.visualcapitalist.com