IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i4p3662-d1070873.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Macro-Institutional Pressures and Firms’ Environmental Management Behavior: The Moderating Effect of Micro-Institutional Pressures

Author

Listed:
  • Yuan Ma

    (College of Economics and Management, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China)

  • Jing Wang

    (College of Economics and Management, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China)

  • Yifan Bai

    (School of Mathematics and Physics, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou 215123, China)

Abstract

How to promote firms’ environmental management behavior is a concern for academics. In order to explain the reasons why firms’ environmental management behavior exhibits heterogeneity from the institutional perspective, this paper seeks to investigate the relationship between macro-institutional pressures and firms’ environmental management behavior, with the moderating effects of micro-institutional pressures. Firms’ environmental management behavior is classified into substantive environmental management behavior and symbolic environmental management behavior. Macro-institutional pressures typically include environmental regulation, industry imitation, and media attention, while micro-institutional pressures include cognitive focus of executive and cognitive complexity of executive. A sample of 236 groups from 118 listed companies in China’s heavy-polluting industries is employed. It is found that environmental regulation is more likely to promote substantive environmental management behavior, while industry imitation and media attention are more likely to promote symbolic environmental management behavior. Moreover, cognitive focus of executive negatively moderates the relationship between environmental regulation and substantive environmental management behavior and the relationship between media attention and symbolic environmental management behavior. Cognitive complexity of executive positively moderates the relationship between macro-institutional pressures and firms’ environmental management behavior. The findings of this paper clarify the reasons for the heterogeneity of firms’ environmental management behavior from the institutional perspective, which contributes to improving the institutional environment, integrating executive cognition, and promoting firms’ environmental management behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuan Ma & Jing Wang & Yifan Bai, 2023. "Macro-Institutional Pressures and Firms’ Environmental Management Behavior: The Moderating Effect of Micro-Institutional Pressures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3662-:d:1070873
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3662/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3662/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thi Tam Le & Thi Mai Anh Nguyen & Thi Thu Hien Phan, 2019. "Environmental Management Accounting and Performance Efficiency in the Vietnamese Construction Material Industry—A Managerial Implication for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-32, September.
    2. Denis Cormier & Michel Magnan & Barbara Van Velthoven, 2005. "Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: Economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions?," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 3-39.
    3. Sucheta Nadkarni & Pamela S. Barr, 2008. "Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: an integrated view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(13), pages 1395-1427, December.
    4. Defeng Yang & Aric Xu Wang & Kevin Zheng Zhou & Wei Jiang, 2019. "Environmental Strategy, Institutional Force, and Innovation Capability: A Managerial Cognition Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(4), pages 1147-1161, November.
    5. Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2018. "Why Is Pollution from US Manufacturing Declining? The Roles of Environmental Regulation, Productivity, and Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3814-3854, December.
    6. William Ocasio & Tomi Laamanen & Eero Vaara, 2018. "Communication and attention dynamics: An attention‐based view of strategic change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 155-167, January.
    7. Magali A. Delmas & Michael W. Toffel, 2008. "Organizational responses to environmental demands: opening the black box," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1027-1055, October.
    8. Sucheta Nadkarni & V. K. Narayanan, 2007. "Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 243-270, March.
    9. Martin Kyere & Marcel Ausloos, 2021. "Corporate governance and firms financial performance in the United Kingdom," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 1871-1885, April.
    10. Berrone, Pascual & Gelabert, Liliana & Fosfuri, Andrea, 2009. "The impact of symbolic and substantive actions on environmental legitimacy," IESE Research Papers D/778, IESE Business School.
    11. Sheng Yao & Shiyi Li, 2018. "Soft or hard information? A trade-off selection of environmental disclosures by way of peer imitation and geographical distance," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(30), pages 3315-3330, June.
    12. Christopher Marquis & Cuili Qian, 2014. "Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting in China: Symbol or Substance?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 127-148, February.
    13. Shanyong Wang & Jun Li & Dingtao Zhao, 2018. "Institutional Pressures and Environmental Management Practices: The Moderating Effects of Environmental Commitment and Resource Availability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 52-69, January.
    14. Zhiru Guo & Chao Lu, 2020. "Corporate Environmental Performance in China: The Moderating Effects of the Media versus the Approach of Local Governments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Blake E. Ashforth & Barrie W. Gibbs, 1990. "The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 177-194, May.
    16. Zhijun Feng & Wei Chen, 2018. "Environmental Regulation, Green Innovation, and Industrial Green Development: An Empirical Analysis Based on the Spatial Durbin Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, January.
    17. Walid Ben-Amar & Millicent Chang & Philip McIlkenny, 2017. "Board Gender Diversity and Corporate Response to Sustainability Initiatives: Evidence from the Carbon Disclosure Project," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(2), pages 369-383, May.
    18. Wiengarten, Frank & Pagell, Mark, 2012. "The importance of quality management for the success of environmental management initiatives," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 407-415.
    19. Lu Qiu & Die Hu & Yu Wang, 2020. "How do firms achieve sustainability through green innovation under external pressures of environmental regulation and market turbulence?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2695-2714, September.
    20. Saeidi, Sayedeh Parastoo & Sofian, Saudah & Saeidi, Parvaneh & Saeidi, Sayyedeh Parisa & Saaeidi, Seyyed Alireza, 2015. "How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 341-350.
    21. Badar Latif & Zeeshan Mahmood & Ong Tze San & Ridzwana Mohd Said & Allah Bakhsh, 2020. "Coercive, Normative and Mimetic Pressures as Drivers of Environmental Management Accounting Adoption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, June.
    22. Jianming Zhang & Gongqian Liang & Taiwen Feng & Chunlin Yuan & Wenbo Jiang, 2020. "Green innovation to respond to environmental regulation: How external knowledge adoption and green absorptive capacity matter?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 39-53, January.
    23. Matthew A. Cole & Robert J. R. Elliott, 2003. "Do Environmental Regulations Influence Trade Patterns? Testing Old and New Trade Theories," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1163-1186, August.
    24. William Ocasio & Tomi Laamanen & Eero Vaara, 2018. "Communication and Attention Dynamics : an Attention-Based View of Strategic Change," Post-Print hal-02312047, HAL.
    25. Ana Labella-Fernández & M. Mar Serrano-Arcos & Belén Payán-Sánchez, 2021. "Firm Growth as a Driver of Sustainable Product Innovation: Mediation and Moderation Analysis. Evidence from Manufacturing Firms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-22, March.
    26. M A Cole & R J R Elliott, 2003. "Do Environmental Regulations Influence Trade Patterns? Testing New and Old Trade Theories," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0310, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    27. Yiling Zhu & Tong Zhao, 2022. "Exploring the Role of Environmental Regulation and Technological Innovation in Financial Performance: Evidence from Chinese Heavy-Polluting Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-18, August.
    28. Zhengyong Zhang & Hong Chen, 2019. "Media coverage and impression management in corporate social responsibility reports," Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 11(5), pages 863-886, November.
    29. Suzana E. Hikichi & Eduardo G. Salgado & Luiz A. Beijo, 2017. "Characterization of dissemination of ISO 14001 in countries and economic sectors in the Americas," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(9), pages 1554-1574, September.
    30. Qian Yang & Ruoqi Geng & Taiwen Feng, 2020. "Does the configuration of macro‐ and micro‐institutional environments affect the effectiveness of green supply chain integration?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 1695-1713, May.
    31. Shenggang Ren & Duojun He & Tao Zhang & Xiaohong Chen, 2019. "Symbolic reactions or substantive pro‐environmental behaviour? An empirical study of corporate environmental performance under the government's environmental subsidy scheme," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 1148-1165, September.
    32. Petra Andries & Ute Stephan, 2019. "Environmental Innovation and Firm Performance: How Firm Size and Motives Matter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-17, June.
    33. Fan Wang & Lili Feng & Jin Li & Lin Wang, 2020. "Environmental Regulation, Tenure Length of Officials, and Green Innovation of Enterprises," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-16, March.
    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. Hans B. Christensen & Luzi Hail & Christian Leuz, 2021. "Mandatory CSR and sustainability reporting: economic analysis and literature review," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 1176-1248, September.
    2. Yuming Zhang & Juanjuan Zhang & Zhang Cheng, 2021. "Stock Market Liberalization and Corporate Green Innovation: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Juan J. Martínez Hernández & Patricia S. Sánchez‐Medina & René Díaz‐Pichardo, 2021. "Business‐oriented environmental regulation: Measurement and implications for environmental policy and business strategy from a sustainable development perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 507-521, January.
    4. Yuanshuo Xu & Jiahe Liang & Zhaoyingzi Dong & Minjun Shi, 2022. "Can Environmental Regulation Promote Green Innovation and Productivity? The Moderating Role of Government Interventions in Urban China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Md. Ahashan Habib & Md. Rezaul Karim & Marzia Dulal & Mohammad Shayekh Munir, 2022. "Impact of Institutional Pressure on Cleaner Production and Sustainable Firm Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-25, December.
    6. Wunhong Su & Chun Guo & Xiaobao Song, 2022. "Media coverage, Environment Protection Law and environmental research and development: evidence from the Chinese-listed firms," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 6953-6983, May.
    7. Yusheng Kong & Fahad Javed & Jahanzaib Sultan & Muhammad Shehzad Hanif & Noheed Khan, 2022. "EMA Implementation and Corporate Environmental Firm Performance: A Comparison of Institutional Pressures and Environmental Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-25, May.
    8. Qiansong Zhang & Taiwen Feng & Long Cheng & Qingsong He, 2022. "Institutional force and firm performance: Do employee green involvement and flexibility‐oriented culture matter?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 950-964, July.
    9. Zhang, Weike & Luo, Qian & Liu, Shiyuan, 2022. "Is government regulation a push for corporate environmental performance? Evidence from China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 105-121.
    10. Matti Mäntymäki & Sami Hyrynsalmi & Antti Koskenvoima, 2020. "How Do Small and Medium-Sized Game Companies Use Analytics? An Attention-Based View of Game Analytics," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 1163-1178, October.
    11. Matti Mäntymäki & Sami Hyrynsalmi & Antti Koskenvoima, 0. "How Do Small and Medium-Sized Game Companies Use Analytics? An Attention-Based View of Game Analytics," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    12. Yingyuan Guo & Xingneng Xia & Sheng Zhang & Danping Zhang, 2018. "Environmental Regulation, Government R&D Funding and Green Technology Innovation: Evidence from China Provincial Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, March.
    13. Linan Lei & Xiaobo Wu, 2022. "Thinking like a specialist or a generalist? Evidence from hidden champions in China," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(1), pages 25-57, February.
    14. Yuan Ma & Qiang Zhang & Qiyue Yin & Bingcheng Wang, 2019. "The Influence of Top Managers on Environmental Information Disclosure: The Moderating Effect of Company’s Environmental Performance," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-15, April.
    15. Wang, Xincheng & Li, Yuan & Tian, Longwei & Hou, Ye, 2023. "Government digital initiatives and firm digital innovation: Evidence from China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    16. Pluchinotta, Irene & Salvia, Giuseppe & Zimmermann, Nici, 2022. "The importance of eliciting stakeholders’ system boundary perceptions for problem structuring and decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(1), pages 280-293.
    17. Danni Yu & Shen Tao & Abdul Hanan & Tze San Ong & Badar Latif & Mohsin Ali, 2022. "Fostering Green Innovation Adoption through Green Dynamic Capability: The Moderating Role of Environmental Dynamism and Big Data Analytic Capability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Linan Lei & Xiaobo Wu & Yanan Fu, 2019. "Effects of Sustainability and Technology Orientations on Firm Growth: Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-16, August.
    19. Dayuan Li & Jialin Jiang & Lu Zhang & Chen Huang & Ding Wang, 2023. "Do CEOs with Sent-Down Movement Experience Foster Corporate Environmental Responsibility?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 147-168, June.
    20. Spaniol, Matthew J. & Rowland, Nicholas J., 2022. "Business ecosystems and the view from the future: The use of corporate foresight by stakeholders of the Ro-Ro shipping ecosystem in the Baltic Sea Region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).

    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:4:p:3662-:d:1070873. 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.