4.7 Article

Environmental innovation practices and performance: moderating effect of resource commitment

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 66, Issue -, Pages 450-458

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.044

Keywords

Environmental innovation practices; Institutional pressure; Resource commitment; Performance

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [71001041, 71172075, 71371006]
  2. Innovation Team Project of Social Science for University in Guangdong Province [08JDTDXM63002]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, SCUT [2013ZZ0093, x2gsD2133310]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Based on institutional theory and resource based view, this study seeks to examine linkages among institutional pressures, environmental innovation practices and performance. Specially, we test the moderating effect of resource commitment on the consequences of environmental innovation practices. We collected data from 148 manufacturers in Pearl River Delta, China to test the theoretical model. The statistical results reveal that institutional pressures coming from government's command-and-control instrument, overseas customer pressure and competitive pressure exert significant positive impact on environmental innovation practices, while government's economic incentive instrument and domestic customer pressure do not work. We also find environmental innovation practices have significant positive impact on firms' environmental performance, while the effect on financial performance should be through the mediating role of environmental performance. The further analysis reveals that the relationship between environmental innovation practices and financial performance is moderated by the level of resource commitment. As resource commitment increases, the financial performance yielded from environmental innovation practices will be better. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available