Enhancing corporate sustainable development: Stakeholder pressures, organizational learning, and green innovation

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 1012-1026 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Zhang ◽  
Lei Zhu

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 7765
Author(s):  
Shuizheng Song ◽  
Md Altab Hossin ◽  
Xiaohua Yin ◽  
Md Sajjad Hosain

The demand for sustainable development and the advantages of industries are expediting over time with the triggering of green innovation performance (GIP). Improving a firm’s GIP, especially in manufacturing industries, can accelerate green development and mitigate the global-concerned environmental issues. Thus, to investigate GIP from its antecedent factors, we delineate the relationship between network potential, absorptive capacity, environmental turbulence, and GIP based on social network theory, organizational learning theory, and contingency theory. We tested our hypotheses based on 233 sets of questionnaire surveys from high-tech manufacturing firms in China through deploying the hierarchical regression and bootstrap method. Our empirical findings reveal that the network potential dimensions, including network position centrality (NPC), network structure richness (NSR), and network relationship closeness (NRC), significantly positively impacted the GIP. The absorptive capacity (AC) partially mediated the relationship between the network potential dimensions and GIP. Environmental turbulence (ET) as an essential mechanism not only positively moderated the relationship between AC and GIP but also enhanced the AC mediation effect. These findings indicate that manufacturing firms should continue to improve network potential and AC and respond rapidly to changes in the external environment to enhance GIP, consequently contributing to the sustainable development of the economy.



Organizations of all kinds must increasingly take into account not only the simple bottom line of their organizational operations, but also address their sustainability in broader terms. This chapter reviews sustainable development and the various definitions of sustainability accepted in the literature and in organizational practice, including what has become known as “Triple Bottom Line” (tbl) sustainability. The complex systemic properties of sustainability are detailed, and the general status of sustainability as an organizational, national, and global priority is characterized. The importance of organizational learning in achieving sustainability is explained, and important guidelines are outlined for sustainability performance measurement and reporting, including Corporate Social Responsibility and the Global Reporting Initiative. Details of attempts by various individuals and organizations to address sustainability in practice and how they achieve positive results are described, and latent opportunities to express leadership are highlighted.



2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 241-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelly Oelze ◽  
Stefan Ulstrup Hoejmose ◽  
Andre Habisch ◽  
Andrew Millington


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nitin Kumar Singh ◽  
Siddhartha Pandey ◽  
Himanshu Sharma ◽  
Sunkulp Goel


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nana Yang ◽  
Qiming Liu

Abstract Green innovation is critical for sustainable development. The reform of environmental management system plays an important role in improving environmental pollution and technology progress. Working from a heterogeneous perspective, this study investigates the effects of different types of environmental decentralization on regional green innovation using statistical data from 30 provinces in China over the period of 2000–2015. The results show that environmental decentralization (ED) promotes regional green innovation. Furthermore, according to different environmental management of levels and affairs, we divide environmental decentralization into provincial-level environmental decentralization (PED), municipal-level environmental decentralization (MED), and county-level environmental decentralization (CED); environmental administrative decentralization (EAD), environmental monitoring decentralization (EMD), and environmental supervision decentralization (ESD), respectively. There is also evidence suggesting that different types of environmental decentralization have varied effects on regional green innovation. These findings set out in this study are robust when different methods are employed. A further investigation indicates that the effects of different types of environmental decentralization on green innovation apparently differ across Chinese different regions. Some policy recommendations will help policymakers to determine more effective environmental decentralization.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document