IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i3p1809-d1039141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Driving Factors of Innovation Quality of Agricultural Enterprises—A Study Based on NCA and fsQCA Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaonan Fan

    (School of Management, Dalian Polytechnic University, Dalian 116034, China)

  • Jingyang Li

    (Zhongshan Sub-Branch, Dalian Branch, China Construction Bank, Dalian 116034, China)

  • Ye Wang

    (School of Management, Dalian Polytechnic University, Dalian 116034, China)

Abstract

Agricultural product processing enterprises are a significant cornerstone to support the improvement of agricultural economy. How to reinforce the main position of innovation of agricultural product processing enterprises, gather innovation factors, and improve the innovation quality of enterprises is an important question to answer. Based on the technology–organization–environment (TOE) theory, dynamic capability theory, organizational learning theory, and sustainable business model theory, this essay develops a comprehensive system for sustainable innovation quality, takes 36 agricultural processing enterprises in Liaoning province, China, as research samples, and applies necessary condition analysis (NCA) and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to recognize the driving factors of innovation quality in agricultural processing enterprises. The results show that: (1) a single driving factor is not a necessary condition for high innovation quality, but entrepreneurship and the enhancement of green technology capability have a more universal role in producing high innovation quality in agricultural product processing corporations; (2) a combination of four paths enables internal and external factors to couple and interact with each other to achieve high sustainable innovation quality in agricultural processing enterprises in Liaoning province, which can be further divided into two major categories. The first category is “entrepreneurship–government support driven path”, in which entrepreneurship and government support are the main drivers, supplemented by green technology capability, organizational learning, and market demand; the second category is “green technology capability–market demand driven path”, in which green technology capability and market demand are the main drivers, supplemented by organizational learning, entrepreneurship, and government support. This paper also identifies seven conditional configurations that lead to non-high innovation quality, which can be categorized as the technology-inhibited type, entrepreneurship-deprived type, and government and market-driven type. The discoveries of this paper have significant hypothetical and practical value for improving the innovation quality of agricultural enterprises.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaonan Fan & Jingyang Li & Ye Wang, 2023. "The Driving Factors of Innovation Quality of Agricultural Enterprises—A Study Based on NCA and fsQCA Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-22, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:1809-:d:1039141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/1809/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/1809/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haner, Udo-Ernst, 2002. "Innovation quality--a conceptual framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 31-37, November.
    2. Grilli, Luca & Mazzucato, Mariana & Meoli, Michele & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2018. "Sowing the seeds of the future: Policies for financing tomorrow's innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 1-7.
    3. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    4. Teece, David J., 2016. "Dynamic capabilities and entrepreneurial management in large organizations: Toward a theory of the (entrepreneurial) firm," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 202-216.
    5. Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2007. "Is demand-pulled innovation equally important in different groups of firms?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(5), pages 691-710, September.
    6. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    7. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    8. Prajogo, Daniel I., 2016. "The strategic fit between innovation strategies and business environment in delivering business performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(P2), pages 241-249.
    9. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    10. Jeffrey G. Covin, 1991. "Entrepreneurial Versus Conservative Firms: A Comparison of Strategies and Performance," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 439-462, September.
    11. Bansal, Sangeeta & Gangopadhyay, Shubhashis, 2003. "Tax/subsidy policies in the presence of environmentally aware consumers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 333-355, March.
    12. Ullah, Fahim & Qayyum, Siddra & Thaheem, Muhammad Jamaluddin & Al-Turjman, Fadi & Sepasgozar, Samad M.E., 2021. "Risk management in sustainable smart cities governance: A TOE framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    13. Raymond Fisman, 2001. "Estimating the Value of Political Connections," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1095-1102, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    2. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    3. Solon Moreira & Thomas Maximilian Klueter & Stefano Tasselli, 2020. "Competition, Technology Licensing-in, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1012-1036, July.
    4. Ferreira, Jorge & Coelho, Arnaldo & Moutinho, Luiz, 2020. "Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    5. FeCheng Ma & Farhan Khan & Kashif Ullah Khan & Si XiangYun, 2021. "Investigating the Impact of Information Technology, Absorptive Capacity, and Dynamic Capabilities on Firm Performance: An Empirical Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    6. Chang, Kuo-Hsiung & Gotcher, Donald F., 2020. "How and when does co-production facilitate eco-innovation in international buyer-supplier relationships? The role of environmental innovation ambidexterity and institutional pressures," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(5).
    7. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    8. Justin J. P. Jansen & Michiel P. Tempelaar & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 797-811, August.
    9. Erwin Danneels, 2016. "Survey measures of first- and second-order competences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2174-2188, October.
    10. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    11. João José M. Ferreira & Cristina I. Fernandes & Vanessa Ratten, 2016. "A co-citation bibliometric analysis of strategic management research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 1-32, October.
    12. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    13. Miikka Blomster & Timo Koivumäki, 2022. "Exploring the resources, competencies, and capabilities needed for successful machine learning projects in digital marketing," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 123-169, March.
    14. Suvi Nenonen & Kaj Storbacka & Charlotta Windahl, 2019. "Capabilities for market-shaping: triggering and facilitating increased value creation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 617-639, July.
    15. Liu, Yi & Liao, Yonghai & Li, Yuan, 2018. "Capability configuration, ambidexterity and performance: Evidence from service outsourcing sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 343-352.
    16. Suvi Nenonen & Kaj Storbacka, 2021. "Market-shaping: navigating multiple theoretical perspectives," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 336-353, December.
    17. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    18. Hirokazu Kano, 2021. "The dilemma and its solution of deep uncertainty in the dynamic capabilities framework: Insights from modern Austrian economics," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 605-611, April.
    19. Justin J. P. Jansen & Ciaran Heavey & Tom J. M. Mom & Zeki Simsek & Shaker A. Zahra, 2023. "Scaling‐up: Building, Leading and Sustaining Rapid Growth Over Time," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 581-604, May.
    20. Ahsan, Mujtaba & Fernhaber, Stephanie A., 2019. "Multinational Enterprises: Leveraging a Corporate International Entrepreneurship Lens for New Insights Into Subsidiary Initiatives," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 51-65.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:1809-:d:1039141. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.