Search results

This study aims to focus on the optimal green R&D of a capital-constrained supply chain under different channel power structures as well as the impact of capital constraint, financing cost, channel power structure and cost-reducing efficiency on green R&D and supply chain profitability.

A two-echelon supply chain is considered. The upstream firm engages in green R&D but has capital constraints that can be overcome by external financing. Green R&D is beneficial to reduce production costs and increase consumer demand. Based on whether or not the upstream firm is capital constrained and dominates the supply chain, four models are developed.

Capital constraints significantly lower green R&D and supply chain profitability. Transferring leadership from the upstream to the downstream firms leads to higher green R&D levels and downstream firm profitability, whereas the upstream firm's profitability is increased (decreased) if green R&D investment efficiency is high (low) enough. Greater financing costs reduce green R&D and downstream firm profitability; however, the upstream firm's profitability under the model in which it functions as the follower increases if the initial capital is sufficient. More importantly, empirical analysis based on practice data is used to verify the theoretical results reported above.

This study reveals how upstream firms in supply chains decide green R&D decisions in situations with capital constraints, providing managers and governments with an understanding of the impact of capital constraint, channel power structure, financing cost and cost-reducing efficiency on supply chain green R&D and profitability.

The major contributions are the exploration of supply chain green R&D by taking into consideration channel power structures and cost-reducing efficiency and the validation of theoretical results using practice data.

This study aims to exploit Tobin’s Q model of investment to examine the relationship between corporate governance and green innovation.

The study is based on a sample of 3,896 firms from 2002 to 2021, covering 45 countries worldwide. The authors adopt Tobin’s Q model to conceptualize the relationship between corporate governance and investment in green research and development (R&D). The authors argue that agency costs and financial market frictions affect corporate investment and are fundamental factors in R&D activities. By limiting agency conflicts, effective governance favors efficiency, facilitates access to external financing and encourages green innovation. The authors analyzed the causal effect by using the system-generalized method of moments (system-GMM).

The results reveal that the better the corporate governance, the more the firm invests in green R&D. A 1%-point increase in the corporate governance ratings leads to an increase in green R&D expenses to the total asset ratio of about 0.77 percentage points. In addition, an increase in the score of each dimension (strategy, management and shareholder) of corporate governance results in an increase in the probability of green product innovation. Finally, green innovation is positively related to firm environmental performance, including emission reduction and resource use efficiency.

The findings provide implications to support managers and policymakers on how to improve sustainability through corporate governance. Governance mechanisms will help resolve agency problems and, in turn, encourage green innovation.

Understanding the impact of corporate governance on green innovation may help firms combat climate change, a crucial societal concern. The present study helps achieve one of the precious UN’s sustainable development goals: Goal 13 on climate action.

This study goes beyond previous research by adopting Tobin’s Q model to examine the relationship between corporate governance and green R&D investment. Overall, the results suggest that effective corporate governance is necessary for environmental efficiency.

Within a framework of supply chain (SC) coordination, this paper analyzes a green SC consisting of a retailer and a manufacturer, under government incentives and legislations and the consumer environmental awareness. To mitigate carbon emissions and promote the sustainability of the SC, a customized carbon emission trading mechanism is developed.

A game-theoretical decision model formulated determines the optimal sustainability level and the optimal quota of carbon credit from the ceiling capacity set by the government. In order to coordinate the SC and optimize environmental decisions, a novel combination of consignment and zero wholesale price contracts is proposed.

Analytical and numerical analyses conducted highlight that the proposed contract generates a Pareto improvement for both channel members, boosts the profit of the green SC, enhances the sustainability level of the channel and contributes to a reduction in the requested carbon emission credit by the manufacturer.

With the proposed mechanism, governments can protect their industries and, more importantly, comply with European Union (EU) rules on annually reducing emission ceilings allocated to industries.

Different from previous studies on cap-and-trade strategies, the proposed mechanism enables companies to select lower emission quota/allowances than the maximum amount set by the government, and in return, companies can benefit from several incentive strategies of the government.

Basing himself on the premise that present economic progress cannot follow the ‘Business as usual paradigm’ and hope for continued and unlimited progress, the author holds that we need to look into the larger dimensions of growth and development, which include social, environmental and other complex factors. So in this chapter, the author makes some pertinent suggestions for a sustainable growth model inspired by green growth and degrowth.

The first section evaluates the salient features of green growth and its drawbacks. It is followed by a discussion on the notion of degrowth, with its challenge to change the direction of growth (economic, ecological, social and cultural), without which human civilisation, as we know it today, may not survive. Finally, in the concluding chapter, based on these two notions of green growth and degrowth, an all-inclusive and sustainable regrowth model is propounded.

By creating an awareness of the need to shift development goals and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), the author argues that we could use economic regrowth strategically and responsibly to make the world more sustainable and viable. Responsible corporates will make their contribution to such an organic, resilient and sustainable regrowth and their CSR activities could be the starting point for this change, without which humanity's future is seriously threatened.

Finally, the author acknowledges that humanity has profited from the tremendous technological and economic progress we have made in the last four centuries, learnt from its mistakes and are ready to reorient ourselves individually and collectively towards a sustainable economic regrowth.

This study seeks to identify the factors influencing the performance of green new product development. Additionally, an examination of the relationship between green performance and financial performance is carried out.

The study employed survey instrument data collected from 181 companies in hi‐tech industries including electrical, electronics, and information industries of Taiwan. Exploratory factor analysis and multiple regressions were used for hypothesis testing.

Corporate environmental commitment, environmental benchmarking, R&D strength, and cross‐functional integration significantly positively influenced financial performance. Additionally, green product innovation performance has a positive effect on financial performance.

A longitudinal research design is necessary to validate these claims of causality. Furthermore, since respondents provided data on both the independent and dependent variables, there is the possibility that the correlations were inflated as a result of single‐source bias.

The identification of the specific actions of both top management support and environmental benchmarking must be implemented for green new product development to occur. Additionally, successful GNPD needs to be underpinned by an environmental product strategy that is explicit, clearly defined, and linked to the overall strategy of the firm.

Taiwan's rapid industrialization has generated numerous environmental problems. Moving forward, the Taiwanese government should implement advanced green management concepts to keep abreast of the global environmental movement. Enterprises have to be dedicated to developing GNPD; achieving GNPD success will bring great challenges for firms in Taiwan.

The integration of innovation, new product development, and green management philosophies is explored in order to develop and empirically test a theoretical framework of the organizational factors. This paper is the first to conduct a large sample survey of the hi‐tech industries including the electrical, electronics, and information industries in Taiwan to examine organizational factor effects on GNPD success, and the relationship between green product innovation performance and financial performance.

The knowledge management (KM) sharing process plays an essential role in manufacturing under Green Implementation Network (GIN). This study aims to analyze the KM process of adopting a GIN to determine the relative importance of technical risk minimization. The proposed conceptual model was tested by considering two interrelated concepts (GIN and KM process).

Primary data from manufacturing companies in Henan province, China, were collected through 276 questionnaires. PLS-SEM and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) were applied to investigate the configurational path of minimizing the technical risk in the manufacturing process.

The findings showed that the GIN and KM processes minimize the technical risk. The fsQCA reported multiple configurational of GIN and KM processes validated toward technical risk reduction. The study's findings contribute to the existing body of knowledge on technical risk reduction in manufacturing concerns by investigating the complex intersection between GIN and KM process.

This research adds to current GIN and KM literature by focusing on the green process using a resource-based view (RBV) and socio-technical theories. The current study provides practical and theoretical justification for explaining the relationship between GIN and KM processes. Moreover, this study adds to the literature by providing evidence that KM is an essential manufacturing industry enabler in minimizing technical risk.

Considering the growing emphasis on sustainability, companies are developing green innovation strategies for creating new products and processes that reduce environmental effects. The impact of green innovation on firm performance is well established in the literature; however, the relationship between a firm’s adoption of green innovation and its social behaviour has not yet been explored. This study aimed to fill this gap by analysing the impact of green innovation on companies’ social behaviour, at both the overall and sub-dimensions levels.

This study was conducted on a sample of 191 companies worldwide between 2016 and 2019. Company data were extracted from the Joint Research Centre database established by the European Commission and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. In contrast, data on corporate social behaviour was taken from the LSEG Workspace database. We applied a panel regression using a fixed effects model to test the research hypotheses.

The results support the positive impact of green innovations on corporate social behaviour in the immediate and subsequent periods. However, the empirical results do not provide significant evidence for some dimensions of corporate social behaviour, such as respect for human rights and product responsibility.

The study’s novelty lies in its emphasis on how green innovation shapes corporate social behaviour and enhances stakeholder relationships. Green innovation is introduced as a strategic instrument for meeting social duties and increasing trust, loyalty and ethical engagement with important stakeholders.

This issue is a selected bibliography covering the subject of leadership.

The main goal of this paper is better understand the risk/return trade-off of investing in socially responsible investment funds (SRIF) and green investment funds (GIF).

To achieve our aim a green investment fund portfolio, a socially responsible investment portfolio and a conventional fund (CF) portfolio from the United States of America (USA) were selected to compare the efficiency of these three different portfolios, by using Value-Based Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) methodology.

The results point out that SRIF and GIF are more efficient than CF. For five years, the CFs have not outperformed the GIF.

The results suggest that there is a growing awareness on the part of investors that sustainable companies are the companies that will allow a better quality of life and a more sustainable environment. It seems that somehow managers and investors are aware that the market will compensate them for thinking about a cleaner and more equitable world.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the origins of the two types of green innovations: proactive and reactive green innovations.

In order to satisfy the essence of the triangulation in methodology, this study applies a hybrid research method which includes both qualitative and quantitative research to discuss the origins of green innovations based on the two following stages. First, the study uses inductive logic from the perspectives of case study research and grounded theory to build the research framework and selects AU Optronics Corp. (AUO), the worldwide top three manufacturer in the TFT‐LCD industry, as the research object. Second, the study utilizes a questionnaire survey method to test the research framework proposed in the first stage.

This study divides green innovations into two types: proactive and reactive green innovations, because their origins are different. The results show that both of the internal origins – environmental leadership, environmental culture, and environmental capability and the external origins – the environmental regulations and the environmentalism of investors and clients – can generate reactive green innovation. However, only the internal origins can facilitate proactive green innovation. This study suggests that companies should invest their resources in cultivating the internal origins rather than the external origins.

The paper provides insights into what origins cause proactive and reactive green innovations by means of hybrid research method – qualitative and quantitative research – in Taiwan. This study builds up a theory about the origins of the two types of green innovations.