R&D as bridge to sustainable development? Case of Czech Republic and Slovenia

Wiley - Tập 29 Số 1 - Trang 146-160 - 2022
Jana Hojnik1, Viktor Prokop2, Jan Stejskal2
1Faculty of Management, University of Primorska, Koper, Slovenia
2Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Pardubice, Pardubice, Czech Republic

Tóm tắt

AbstractPrior studies revealed that government is key factor influencing firms' decisions about the implementation of environmental innovations and pursuit of sustainable development as well as shaping their environmental orientation. However, the role of firms' R&D within these processes remains unclear. This paper explores the relationship between firms' environmental regulation, R&D, environmental orientation, and environmental outputs to better understand the relationships and dynamics among them. We used the World Bank Enterprise Survey 2019 data on 737 firms from the Czech Republic and Slovenia and employed structural equation modeling. The results indicate that environmental orientation positively influences R&D and environmental outputs. Moreover, environmental regulations spur firms' environmental orientation as well as environmental outputs. On the other hand, the findings reveal that R&D is neither a key factor nor plays a key role as a mediator of environmental regulations and environmental orientation affecting environmental outputs based on the sample of selected countries pertaining to Central and Eastern Europe.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Acosta M.,. A.,. A., 2020, Addressing environmental change through emergent integrated environmental observatories: A case study in the Czech Republic, Environment, 7

10.1016/j.eneco.2018.11.031

10.1016/S1045-2354(02)00158-2

10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.022

10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.107

10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00135-1

10.1509/jmkg.67.2.106.18604

10.2307/1556363

10.1177/014920639101700108

10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.004

10.1016/j.econmod.2019.12.020

10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.105

Cornell University INSEAD WIPO. (2017).The Global Innovation Index 2017: Innovation feeding the world(10th ed.).https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report

10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.024

10.1002/csr.1891

10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.002

10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.023

10.1016/j.techfore.2012.11.005

10.1108/14601061211272367

10.1002/smj.2948

10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.304

10.1002/csr.1764

Eco‐Innovation Observatory. (2016).The eco‐innovation scoreboard and the Eco‐Innovation Index. 2016.https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/scoreboard_en

Eco‐Innovation Observatory. (2021).European eco‐innovation scoreboard interactive tool.https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/indicators/index_en

10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.01.004

10.1016/j.econmod.2020.09.024

10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515

10.1016/j.jad.2015.08.045

10.1002/csr.1779

10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102194

10.1002/csr.2148

10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202

Hair J. F., 2019, When to use and how to report the results of PLS‐SEM, European Journal of Innovation Management, 31, 2

Hayes A. F., 2013, Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression based approach

10.1007/s11149-009-9099-y

10.1016/j.eist.2015.09.006

10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.002

10.1016/j.respol.2007.08.006

Horbach J.(2014). Determinants of eco‐innovation from a European‐wide perspective–An analysis based on the Community Innovation Survey (CIS) (SEEDS Working Paper. 0714).

10.1016/j.eist.2015.09.005

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.04.005

10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120122

10.1016/j.iref.2020.11.018

10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.104

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.02.016

10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118524

10.1007/s10640-009-9263-y

10.1002/csr.2151

10.1002/csr.1306

10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.235

10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.044

10.1002/csr.1677

10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.024

Naffziger D. W., 2003, Perceptions of environmental consciousness in US small businesses: An empirical study, SAM Advanced Management Journal, 68, 23

10.3390/su11020401

10.5295/cdg.110308ap

10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119187

10.1257/jep.9.4.97

Porter M. E., 1995, Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate, Harvard Business Review, 73, 120

10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.04.017

10.1108/14777830610702539

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.02.003

10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00112-3

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.013

Ringle C. M. Wende S. &Becker J.‐M.(2015).SmartPLS. Bönningstedt Germany: SmartPLS.

10.1016/j.eist.2018.03.003

10.1016/j.enpol.2015.02.014

Saeed A. F., 2020, Influencing factors governance (IFG) model for United Arab Emirates disaster management, Psychology and Education Journal, 57, 5464

10.1016/j.jom.2009.10.001

10.1007/BF03396886

10.1016/j.chieco.2017.12.007

10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.12.004

10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102270

10.3390/su11041027

10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.03.039

10.1002/csr.1836

10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.171

10.5897/AJBM11.273

Wong K. K. K., 2016, Mediation analysis, categorical moderation analysis, and higher‐order constructs modeling in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS‐SEM): A B2B Example using SmartPLS, The Marketing Bulletin, 26, 1

10.1016/j.reseneeco.2012.05.001

10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123003

10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.05.002

10.1016/j.scs.2020.102647

10.1002/sd.2019

Ziegler A. &Rennings K.(2004).Determinants of environmental innovations in Germany: Do organizational measures matter? A discrete choice analysis at the firm level(ZEW Discussion Paper No. 04‐30).Ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp0430.pdf

10.1016/S0166-4972(02)00115-3

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Wiley

Tập 29 Số 1

146-160

Thông tin tác giả