Published
2024-10-28
Section
Research Articles
License
The journal adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which means that anyone can reuse and redistribute the materials for non-commercial purposes as long as you follow the license terms and the original source is properly cited.
Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher rights for the first publication with the work concurrently licensed since 2023 Vol.8 No.2.
Under this license, author(s) will allow third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content under the condition that the authors are given credit. No permission is required from the authors or the publisher.
This broad license intends to facilitate free access, as well as the unrestricted use of original works of all types. This ensures that the published work is freely and openly available in perpetuity.
By providing open access, the following benefits are brought about:
- Higher Visibility, Availability and Citations-free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions increases citation of the article.
- Ease of search-publications are easily searchable in search engines and indexing databases.
- Rapid Publication – accepted papers are immediately published online.
- Available for free download immediately after publication at https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP
Copyright Statement
1.The authors certify that the submitted manuscripts are original works, do not infringe the rights of others, are free from academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, and that there are no disputes over the authorship scheme of the collaborative articles. In case of infringement, academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, as well as disputes over the authorship scheme, all responsibilities will be borne by the authors.
2. The author agrees to grant the Editorial Office of Environment and Social Psychology a licence to use the reproduction right, distribution right, information network dissemination right, performance right, translation right, and compilation right of the submitted manuscript, including the work as a whole, as well as the diagrams, tables, abstracts, and any other parts that can be extracted from the work and used in accordance with the characteristics of the journal. The Editorial Board of Environment and Social Psychology has the right to use and sub-licence the above mentioned works for wide dissemination in print, electronic and online versions, and, in accordance with the characteristics of the periodical, for the period of legal protection of the property right of the copyright in the work, and for the territorial scope of the work throughout the world.
3. The authors are entitled to the copyright of their works under the relevant laws of Singapore, provided that they do not exercise their rights in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Journal.
About Licence
Environment and Social Psychology is an open access journal and all published work is available under the Creative Commons Licence, Authors shall retain copyright of their work and grant the journal/publisher the right of first publication, and their work shall be licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
Under this licence, the author grants permission to third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content with attribution to the author. No permission from the author or publisher is required.
This broad licence is intended to facilitate free access to and unrestricted use of original works of all kinds. This ensures that published works remain free and accessible in perpetuity. Submitted manuscripts, once accepted, are immediately available to the public and permanently accessible free of charge on the journal’s official website (https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP). Allowing users to read, download, copy, print, search for or link to the full text of the article, or use it for other legal purposes. However, the use of the work must retain the author's signature, be limited to non-commercial purposes, and not be interpretative.
Click to download <Agreement on the Licence for the Use of Copyright on Environmental and Social Psychology>.
How to Cite
External green pressure, dynamic capability, and green innovation: The regulating effect of executive environmental attention
Xiaofang Lin
Krirk University
Wunhong Su
Hangzhou Dianzi University
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i10.3069
Keywords: green innovation, external green pressure, green dynamic capability, executive environmental attention
Abstract
Aiming to investigate the mediating effect of green dynamic capability on external green pressure and green innovation, as well as the moderating effect of executive environmental attention on external green pressure and green dynamic capability, this study preferred a theory model with five hypotheses. A valid sample of 357 interviewees was investigated to test the proposed hypotheses, and structural equation modeling was utilized. In addition, external green pressures mostly have a significant impact on green innovation, the green dynamic capability as a mediator. Also, executive environmental attention moderates the relationship between external green pressure and green dynamic capabilities. The results offer unique contributions to the literature and some suggestions for practicing in manufacturing enterprises.
Author Biography
Wunhong Su, Hangzhou Dianzi University
The professor of Hangzhou Dianzi University.References
[1]. Hart SL. A natural-resource-based view of the firm (). Academy of Management Review. 1995; 20(4): 986-1014. doi: 10.5465/amr.1995.9512280033
[2]. Klemmer P. Innovation and the Environment. Studies of the Research Group “Innovation Effects of Environmental Policy Instruments”. Analytica Verlag. Berlin.1999
[3]. Kemp R, Arundel A, Smith K. Survey indicators for environmental innovation. Gramisch-Partenkirchen, Germany: Conference towards environmental innovation systems. 2002
[4]. Hellstrom, T. Dimensions of environmentally sustainable innovation: the structure of ecoinnovation concepts. Sustainable Development. 2007; 15(3): 148-159. doi: 10.1002/sd.309
[5]. Singh SK, Giudice MD, Jabbour CJC, et al. Stakeholder pressure, green innovation, and performance in small and medium-sized enterprises: The role of green dynamic capabilities. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2022; 31(1): 500–514. doi: 10.1002/bse.2906
[6]. Berrone P, Fosfuri A, Gelabert L. Necessity as the mother of “green” inventions: institutional pressures and environmental innovations. Strategic Management Journal. 2013; 34(8): 891-909. doi: 10.1002/smj.2041
[7]. Xu H, Zhao XK, Jie S. Stakeholders’ environmental demands and corporate environmental responsiveness. Soft Science. 2015; 29(12): 18-21. doi: 10.13956/j.ss.1001-8409.2015.12.05
[8]. Frondel M, Horbach J, Rennings K. What triggers environmental management and innovation? Empirical evidence for Germany. Ecological Economics. 2007; 66(1): 153-160. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.08.016
[9]. Galaskiewicz J, Wasserman, S. Mimetic processes within an interorganizational field: an empirical test. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1989; 34(3): 454-479. doi: 10.2307/2393153
[10]. Henisz WJ, Delios A. Uncertainty, imitation, and plant location: Japanese multinational corporations, 1990-1996. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2001; 46(3), 443-475. doi: 10.2307/3094871
[11]. Zhu Q, Geng Y. Drivers and barriers of extended supply chain practices for energy saving and emission reduction among Chinese manufacturers. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2013; 40: 6-12. doi: j.jclepro.2010.09.017
[12]. Li XP. Research on the influence of media attention on enterprise green technology innovation: Based on the executive team environmental attention perspective. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Science & Technology. 2023; 36(5): 14-21. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122522
[13]. Lee MDP, Lounsbury M. Filtering institutional logics: community logic variation and differential responses to the institutional complexity of toxic waste. Organization Science. 2015; 26(3): 847-866. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2014.0959
[14]. Feng WN, Mu Y, Qu R. External green pressure, environmental commitment and green innovation strategy of manufacturing enterprises: The moderating role of organizational slack. Journal of Northeastern University (social Science). 2023; 25(1): 35-46. doi: 10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2023.01.005
[15]. Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA. Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategy Management Journal. 2000; 21(10-11): 1105-1121. doi: 10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11<1105::AID-SMJ133>3.0.CO;2-E
[16]. Zahra SA, Sapienza HJ, Davidson P. Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model, and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies. 2006; 43(4): 917-955. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00616.x
[17]. Yang L, Tan JS, Gan C. Does independent goal interdependence impair dynamic capability? The mediating role of supplier integration and the moderating role of internal integration. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. 2021; 34: 1436–1458. doi: 10.1108/APJML-02-2021-0078
[18]. Zhou SS, Zhou AJ, Feng J, et al. Dynamic capabilities and organizational performance: The mediating role of innovation. Journal of Management & Organization. 2019; 25(5): 731–747. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2017.20
[19]. Rodrigues B, Gohr C. Dynamic capabilities and critical factors for boosting sustainability-oriented innovation: Systematic literature review and a framework proposal. Engineering Management Journal. 2021; 34(4): 591–619. doi: 10.1080/10429247.2021.1960124
[20]. Delgado-Ceballos J, Aragon-Correa JA, Ortiz-de-Mandojana N, et al. The effect of internal barriers on the connection between stakeholder integration and proactive environmental strategies. Journal of Business Ethics. 2012; 107(3): 281-293. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-1039-y
[21]. Freeman RE. Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press.1984
[22]. Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review. 1997; 22(4): 853-886. doi: 10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105
[23]. Buysse K, Verbeke A. Proactive environmental strategies: A stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal. 2003; 24(5): 453-470. doi: 10.1002/smj.299
[24]. Li WH, Gu Y, Liu F, et al. The effect of command-and-control regulation on environmental technological innovation in China: a spatial econometric approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2019; 26(34): 34789-34800. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-3678-3
[25]. Liao ZJ, Liu P. Market-based environmental policy instrument mixes and firms’ environmental innovation: a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade. 2022; 58(14): 3976-3984. doi: 10.1080/1540496X.2022.2079974
[26]. Dai J, Montabon FL, Cantor DE. Linking rival and stakeholder pressure to green supply management: Mediating role of top management support. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. 2014; 71: 173-187. doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2014.09.002
[27]. Helmig B, Spraul K, Ingenhoff D. Under positive pressure: How stakeholder pressure affects corporate social responsibility implementation. Business & Society. 2016; 55(2), 151–187. doi: 10.1177/0007650313477841
[28]. Montabon F, Sroufe R, Narasimhan R. An examination of corporate reporting, environmental management practices, and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management. 2007; 25(5): 998-1014. doi: 10.1016/j.jom.2006.10.003
[29]. Wang S, Li, Zhao D. Institutional pressures and environmental management practices: The moderating effects of environmental commitment and resource availability. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2018; 27: 52-69. doi: 10.1002/bse.1983
[30]. Le Y. Green entrepreneurial orientation: The driving factors and its impact on firm performance. [Doctoral Dissertations, Jilin University]. 2022. doi: 10.27162/d.cnki.gjlin.2022.007125
[31]. Teece DJ. The foundation of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of the firm. Academy of Management Perspectives. 2014; 28(4): 328-352. doi: 10.5465/amp.2013.0116
[32]. Teece DJ. Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and micro-foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal. 2007; 28(13): 1319-1350. doi: 10.1002/smj.640
[33]. Amui LBL, Jabbour CCJ, de Sousa Jabbour AB, et al. Sustainability as a dynamic organizational capability: A systematic review and a future agenda toward a sustainable transition. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017; 142: 308-322. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.103
[34]. Lin YH, Chen YS. Determinants of green competitive advantage: the role of green knowledge sharing, green dynamic capabilities, and green service innovation. Quality & Quantity. 2017; 51(4): 1663-1685. doi: 10.1007/s11135-016-0358-6
[35]. Majid A, Yasir M, Yasir M, et al. Nexus of institutional pressures, environmentally friendly business strategies, and environmental performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2019; 27(2): 706-716. doi: 10.1002/csr.1837
[36]. Huang YM, Chen C, Lei LJ, et al. Impacts of green finance on green innovation: A spatial and nonlinear perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022; 365(10): 132548. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132548
[37]. Goyal L. Stakeholder theory: Revisiting the origins. Journal of Public Affairs. 2022; 22(3): 1-8. doi: 10.1002/pa.2559
[38]. Bhatia MS, Kumar S. Linking stakeholder and competitive pressure to industry 4.0 and performance: Mediating effect of environmental commitment and green innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2022; 31(5): 1905-1918. doi: 10.1002/bse.2989
[39]. Hofman PS, Blome C, Schleper MC, et al. Supply chain collaboration and eco-innovations: An institutional perspective from China. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2020; 29(6): 2734-2754. doi: 10.1002/bse.2532
[40]. Cui R, Wang J. Shaping sustainable development: External environmental pressure, exploratory green learning, and radical green innovation. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2022; 29(3): 481-495. doi: 10.1002/csr.2213
[41]. Nguyen H, Onofrei G, Yang Y, et al. Handling customer green pressures: The mediating role of process innovation among export-oriented manufacturing industries. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2023; 32(4): 2312-2326. doi: 10.1002/bse.3250
[42]. Wang CH. An environmental perspective extends market orientation: Green innovation sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2020; 29(8), 3123-3134. doi: 10.1002/bse.2561
[43]. Aboelmaged M, Hashem G. Absorptive capacity and green innovation adoption in SMEs: The mediating effects of sustainable organizational capabilities. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 220: 853-863. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.150
[44]. Singh SK, Giudice MD, Chierici R, et al. Green innovation and environmental performance: The role of green transformational leadership and green human resource management. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2020; 150: 119762. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119762
[45]. Child J. Strategic choice in the analysis of action, structure, organizations, and environment: retrospect and prospect. Organization Studies. 1997; 18(1): 43-76. doi: 10.1177/017084069701800104
[46]. Andersen O, Kheam LS. Resource-based theory and international growth strategies: an exploratory study. International Business Review. 1998; 7(2): 163-184. doi: 10.1016/S0969-5931(98)00004-3
[47]. Zhang G, Zhang XJ. Driver factors of corporate green innovation strategy based on planning behavior theory. Journal of Business Economics. 2013; (7): 47-56. doi: 10.14134/j.cnki.cn33-1336/f.2013.07.009
[48]. Hambrick DC, Mason PA. Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review. 1984; 9(2): 193-206. doi: 10.5465/amr.1984.4277628
[49]. Song C, Nahm AY, Song Z. Executive technical experience and corporate innovation quality: evidence from Chinese listed manufacturing companies. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation. 2022; 31(1): 94-114. doi: 10.1080/19761597.2021.2020137
[50]. Shao D, Zhao S, Wang S, et al. Impact of CEOs’ academic work experience on firms’ innovation output and performance: evidence from Chinese listed companies. Sustainability. 2020; 12(18): 7442. doi: 10.3390/su12187442
[51]. Naffziger DW, Ahmed NU, Montagno RV. Perceptions of environmental consciousness in US small business: An empirical study. Sam Advanced Management Journal. 2003; 68(2): 23-32. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/perceptions-environmental-consciousness-u-s-small/docview/231256554/se-2
[52]. Luo Y, Wang Q, Long X, et al. Green innovation and SO2 emissions: Dynamic threshold effect of human capital. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2023; 32(1): 499-515. doi: 10.1002/bse.3157
[53]. Kirchoff JF, Tate WL, Mollenkopf DA. The impact of strategic organizational orientations on green supply chain management and firm performance. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. 2016; 46(3): 269-292. doi: 10.1108/IJPDLM-03-2015-0055
[54]. Peng XR, Wei J. Stakeholders’ environmental orientation and eco-innovation: The moderating role of top managers’ environmental awareness. Studies in Science of Science. 2015; 33(7): 1109-1120. doi: 10.16192/j.cnki.1003-2053.2015.07.018
[55]. Cao HJ, Chen ZW. The driving effect of internal and external environment on green innovation strategy: The moderating role of top management’s environmental awareness, Nankai Business Review. 2017; 20(6): 95-103.
[56]. Jiang W, Chai H, Shao J, et al. Green entrepreneurial orientation for enhancing firm performance: A dynamic capability perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 198: 1311-1313. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.104
[57]. Nordin R, Hassan RA. The role of opportunities for green entrepreneurship towards investigating the practice of green entrepreneurship among SMEs in Malaysia. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research. 2019; 8(1): 99-116.
[58]. Nunnnally JC. An Overview of Psychological Measurement. In: Wolman, B.B. (eds) Clinical Diagnosis of Mental Disorders. Springer, Boston, MA. 1978; doi: 10.1007/978-1-4684-2490-4_4
[59]. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research. 1981; 18(1): 39-50. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104
[60]. Jackson DL, Gillaspy Jr JA, Purc-Stephenson R. Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods. 2009; 14(1): 6-23. doi: 10.1037/a0014694
[61]. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods. 2008; 40(3): 879-891. doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
[62]. Aragon-Correa JA, Marcus AA, Vogel D. The effects of mandatory and voluntary regulatory pressures on firms’ environmental strategies: A review and recommendations for future research. Academy of Management Annals. 2020; 14(1): 339-365. doi: 10.5465/annals.2018.0014
[63]. Dechezlepretre A, Sato M. The impacts of environmental regulations on competitiveness. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. 2017; 11(2): 183-206. doi: 10.1093/reep/rex013
[64]. Horbach J. Determinants of environmental innovation – new evidence from German panel data sources. Research Policy. 2008; 37(1): 163-173. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.08.006
[65]. Murillo-Luna JL, Garces-Ayerbe C, Rivera-Torres P. Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholder’s pressure approach. Strategic Management Journal. 2008; 29(11): 1225-1240. doi: 10.1002/smj.711
[66]. Zhang J, Zhu M. When can B2B firms improve product innovation capability (PIC) through customer participation (CP)? The moderating role of inter-organizational relationships? Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. 2019; 34(1): 12-23. doi: 10.1108/JBIM-09-2016-0214
[67]. Huang SZ, Tian HH, Cheablam O. Promoting sustainable development: Multiple mediation effects of green value co-creation and green dynamic capability between green market pressure and firm performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2023; 31: 1063-1078. doi: 10.1002/csr.2613
[68]. Liao ZJ, Liu P, Tan YY, et al. Research progress and review on driving factors of firm’s environmental innovation: From the perspective of stakeholder. Environmental Pollution & Control. 2023; 45(10): 1440-1446, 1466. doi: 10.15985/j.cnki.1001-3865.2023.10.018
[69]. Antonia MG, Antonio D. Sustainable development barriers and pressures in SMEs: The mediating effect of management commitment to environmental practices. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2023; 33: 949-967. doi: 10.1002/bse.3537
[70]. Kang LQ, Liu HM, Qian JJ. Influence of top managers’ long-term orientation on enterprise green innovation: Moderating role of environmental dynamics and the mediating effect of strategic learning capability. Journal of Business Economics. 2021; (10): 34-48. doi: 10.14134/j.cnki.cn33-1336/f.2021.10.003
[71]. Quan XF, Ke Y, Qian YT, et al. CEO foreign experience and green innovation: evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics. 2023; 182: 535-557. doi: 10.1007/s10551-021-04977-z
[72]. Ren,S, Jiang KF, Tang GY. Leveraging green HRM for firm performance: The joint effects of CEO environmental belief and external pollution severity and the mediating role of employee environmental commitment. Human Resource Management, 2022; 61(1): 1-16. doi: 10.1002/hrm.22079
[73]. Clemens B, Douglas TJ. Does coercion drive firms to adopt ‘voluntary’ green initiatives? Relationships among coercion, superior firm resources, and voluntary green initiatives. Journal of Business Research. 2006; 59(4): 483-491. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.09.016
[74]. Scott WR. Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Sage Publications. 2013.
[75]. Selznick P. TVA and the grass roots: A study in the sociology of formal organization. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.1949.
[76]. Yu F, Hu C, Liu M. Network density, attention allocation of TM and firm green innovation: The moderating effect of institutional pressure. Journal of Industrial Engineering/Engineering Management. 2021; 35(2): 55-66. doi: 10.13587/j.cnki.jieem.2021.02.006
[77]. Xu J, Guan J, Lin Y. Institutional pressures, top managers’ environmental awareness and environmental innovation practices: An institutional theory and upper echelons theory perspective. Management Review. 2017; 29(9): 72-83. doi:10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2017.09.007
[78]. Hung RYY, Yang B, Lien BY, et al. Dynamic capability: Impact of process alignment and organizational learning culture on performance. Journal of World Business. 2010; 45: 285-294. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2009.09.003
[79]. Ar IM. The impact of green product innovation on firm performance and competitive capability: the moderating role of managerial environmental concern. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012; 62: 854–864. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.144
[80]. Chen J, Liu L. Customer participation, and green product innovation in SMEs: the mediating role of opportunity recognition and exploitation. Journal of Business. Research. 2020; 119: 151-162. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.05.033
[81]. Xie X, Huo J, Zou, H. Green process innovation, green product innovation, and corporate financial performance: a content analysis method. Journal of Business Research. 2019; 101: 697–706. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.010
[82]. Wang MY, Li YM, Li JQ, et al. Green process innovation, green product innovation, and its economic performance improvement paths: A survey and structural model. Journal of Environmental Management. 2021; 297: 113282. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113282
[83]. Cai W, Li G. The drivers of eco-innovation and its impact on performance: evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 176: 110–118. doi: 10.1016/j. jclepro.2017.12.109
[84]. Chiou TY, Chan HK, Lettice F, et al. The influence of greening the suppliers and green innovation on environmental performance and competitive advantage in Taiwan. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation View. 2011; 47(6): 822–836. doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2011.05.016
[85]. 29.Wang L, Li W, Qi L. Stakeholder pressures and corporate environmental strategies: a meta-analysis. Sustainability. 2020; 12(3): 1172. doi: 10.3390/su12031172