IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/corsem/v26y2019i6p1321-1332.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder engagement mechanisms and their contribution to eco‐innovation: Differentiated effects of communication and cooperation

Author

Listed:
  • Concepción Garcés‐Ayerbe
  • Pilar Rivera‐Torres
  • Inés Suárez‐Perales

Abstract

This study analyses the effect of communication and cooperation—as engagement mechanisms of stakeholder's integration capacity—on eco‐innovation intensity in firms. With this purpose, a mediation model is conducted, controlling by activity sector and firm's size. Results show that communication, as the first stakeholder engagement mechanism, has a positive effect on eco‐innovation strategy and that communication is a step that comes before cooperation. Results show that cooperation with stakeholders also supports eco‐innovation strategy development. It is therefore concluded that, when firms reach the greatest degree of stakeholder integration, through cooperation mechanisms, eco‐innovation strategy is greater than when there is only communication. This study provides three types of contribution to the literature: First, the effects of two types of stakeholder engagement mechanisms, communication, and cooperation, on firm's eco‐innovation strategy are separately analysed, as the interconnection between them. Second, the study proposes a novel way of measuring eco‐innovation that enables us to consider different degrees of eco‐innovative intensity based on a capital model that includes the accumulation of tangible and intangible assets derived from activities recently adopted by firms to reduce environmental impact. Third, this study provides empirical evidence to previous literature, generally case study‐based, of the effect that the stakeholder integration process has on eco‐innovation, through communication and cooperation mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Concepción Garcés‐Ayerbe & Pilar Rivera‐Torres & Inés Suárez‐Perales, 2019. "Stakeholder engagement mechanisms and their contribution to eco‐innovation: Differentiated effects of communication and cooperation," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1321-1332, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:corsem:v:26:y:2019:i:6:p:1321-1332
    DOI: 10.1002/csr.1749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1749
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/csr.1749?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ayuso, Silvia & Rodriguez, Miguel A. & Ricart, Joan E., 2006. "Using stakeholder dialogue as a source for new ideas. A dynamic capability underlying sustainable innovation," IESE Research Papers D/633, IESE Business School.
    2. Rennings, Klaus, 2000. "Redefining innovation -- eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 319-332, February.
    3. Lars Moratis & Satu Brandt, 2017. "Corporate stakeholder responsiveness? Exploring the state and quality of GRI‐based stakeholder engagement disclosures of European firms," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 312-325, July.
    4. Scandelius, Christina & Cohen, Geraldine, 2016. "Achieving collaboration with diverse stakeholders—The role of strategic ambiguity in CSR communication," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3487-3499.
    5. Sanjay Sharma & Irene Henriques, 2005. "Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 159-180, February.
    6. Iain Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson, 1994. "Racing To Invest? The Dynamics of Competition in Ethical Drug Discovery," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 481-519, September.
    7. Magali Delmas & Michael W. Toffel, 2004. "Stakeholders and environmental management practices: an institutional framework," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 209-222, July.
    8. Milad Abdelnabi Salem & Fekri Ali Shawtari & Mohd Farid Shamsudin & Hafezali Iqbal Hussain, 2016. "The relation between stakeholders’ integration and environmental competitiveness," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(4), pages 755-769, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Nicole Darnall & Irene Henriques & Perry Sadorsky, 2010. "Adopting Proactive Environmental Strategy: The Influence of Stakeholders and Firm Size," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(6), pages 1072-1094, September.
    11. Josefina L. Murillo‐Luna & Concepción Garcés‐Ayerbe & Pilar Rivera‐Torres, 2008. "Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholders' pressure approach," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(11), pages 1225-1240, November.
    12. José M. Agudo‐Valiente & Concepción Garcés‐Ayerbe & Manuel Salvador‐Figueras, 2015. "Corporate Social Performance and Stakeholder Dialogue Management," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 13-31, January.
    13. Agostino Vollero & Francesca Conte & Alfonso Siano & Claudia Covucci, 2019. "Corporate social responsibility information and involvement strategies in controversial industries," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 141-151, January.
    14. Anne Bridget Lane & Bree Devin, 2018. "Operationalizing Stakeholder Engagement in CSR: A Process Approach," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 267-280, May.
    15. Ariel Pakes & Mark Schankerman, 1984. "The Rate of Obsolescence of Patents, Research Gestation Lags, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 73-88, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Hirschey, M & Weygandt, Jj, 1985. "Amortization Policy For Advertising And Research And Development Expenditures," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 326-335.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rubén Michael Rodríguez‐González & Gonzalo Maldonado‐Guzman & Antonia Madrid‐Guijarro, 2022. "The effect of green strategies and eco‐innovation on Mexican automotive industry sustainable and financial performance: Sustainable supply chains as a mediating variable," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 779-794, July.
    2. Vera Ferrón‐Vílchez & Jesus Valero‐Gil & Inés Suárez‐Perales, 2021. "How does greenwashing influence managers' decision‐making? An experimental approach under stakeholder view," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 860-880, March.
    3. Yu Bai & Yuchen Xu & Jianling Jiao, 2022. "Can corporate environmental management benefit from multirelationship social network? An improved maturity model and text mining based on the big data from Chinese enterprises," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 5783-5810, April.
    4. Ya‐Ching Lee, 2020. "Communicating sustainable development: Effects of stakeholder‐centric perceived sustainability," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1540-1551, July.
    5. Francesca Bassi & Mariangela Guidolin, 2021. "Resource Efficiency and Circular Economy in European SMEs: Investigating the Role of Green Jobs and Skills," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    6. Salvatore Esposito De Falco & Giuseppe Scandurra & Antonio Thomas, 2021. "How stakeholders affect the pursuit of the Environmental, Social, and Governance. Evidence from innovative small and medium enterprises," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1528-1539, September.
    7. Fabricio Stocker & Michelle P. de Arruda & Keysa M. C. de Mascena & João M. G. Boaventura, 2020. "Stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting: A classification model," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2071-2080, September.

    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. Qi Guoyou & Zeng Saixing & Tam Chiming & Yin Haitao & Zou Hailiang, 2013. "Stakeholders' Influences on Corporate Green Innovation Strategy: A Case Study of Manufacturing Firms in China," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, January.
    2. Christin Seifert & Edeltraud Guenther, 2020. "Who cares?—Stakeholder relevance for voluntary environmental management in hospitals," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1786-1799, July.
    3. Taewoo Roh & Shufeng Simon Xiao & Byung Il Park, 2023. "Effects of open innovation on eco-innovation in meta-organizations: evidence from Korean SMEs," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(5), pages 2004-2028, November.
    4. Corinna Dögl & Michael Behnam, 2015. "Environmentally Sustainable Development through Stakeholder Engagement in Developed and Emerging Countries," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 583-600, September.
    5. Vinod Kumar & Zillur Rahman & A. A. Kazmi, 2016. "Assessing the Influence of Stakeholders on Sustainability Marketing Strategy of Indian Companies," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(3), pages 21582440166, September.
    6. James Cordeiro & Manish Tewari, 2015. "Firm Characteristics, Industry Context, and Investor Reactions to Environmental CSR: A Stakeholder Theory Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(4), pages 833-849, September.
    7. Anton Shevchenko, 2021. "Do financial penalties for environmental violations facilitate improvements in corporate environmental performance? An empirical investigation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1723-1734, May.
    8. Oksana Seroka‐Stolka & Kamil Fijorek, 2020. "Enhancing corporate sustainable development: Proactive environmental strategy, stakeholder pressure and the moderating effect of firm size," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2338-2354, September.
    9. Marta Pinzone & Emanuele Lettieri & Cristina Masella, 2015. "Proactive Environmental Strategies in Healthcare Organisations: Drivers and Barriers in Italy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 183-197, September.
    10. Steffen Maas & Tassilo Schuster & Evi Hartmann, 2018. "Stakeholder Pressures, Environmental Practice Adoption and Economic Performance in the German Third-party Logistics Industry—A Contingency Perspective," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(2), pages 167-201, February.
    11. Defeng Yang & Wei Jiang & Weihong Zhao, 2019. "Proactive environmental strategy, innovation capability, and stakeholder integration capability: A mediation analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(8), pages 1534-1547, December.
    12. Quang Le Van & Thanh Viet Nguyen & Manh Hung Nguyen, 2019. "Sustainable development and environmental policy: The engagement of stakeholders in green products in Vietnam," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 675-687, July.
    13. Wagner, Marcus, 2015. "The link of environmental and economic performance: Drivers and limitations of sustainability integration," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1306-1317.
    14. Oksana Seroka‐Stolka, 2023. "Towards sustainability: An environmental strategy choice, environmental performance, and the moderating role of stakeholder pressure," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5992-6007, December.
    15. Runhui Lin & Yuan Gui & Zaiyang Xie & Lu Liu, 2019. "Green Governance and International Business Strategies of Emerging Economies’ Multinational Enterprises: A Multiple-Case Study of Chinese Firms in Pollution-Intensive Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-32, February.
    16. Garcés-Ayerbe, Concepción & Cañón-de-Francia, Joaquín, 2017. "The Relevance of Complementarities in the Study of the Economic Consequences of Environmental Proactivity: Analysis of the Moderating Effect of Innovation Efforts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 21-30.
    17. José Plaza-Úbeda & Jerónimo Burgos-Jiménez & Eva Carmona-Moreno, 2010. "Measuring Stakeholder Integration: Knowledge, Interaction and Adaptational Behavior Dimensions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 419-442, May.
    18. Kent Walker & Na Ni & Bruno Dyck, 2015. "Recipes for Successful Sustainability: Empirical Organizational Configurations for Strong Corporate Environmental Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 40-57, January.
    19. Schrettle, Stefan & Hinz, Andreas & Scherrer -Rathje, Maike & Friedli, Thomas, 2014. "Turning sustainability into action: Explaining firms' sustainability efforts and their impact on firm performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(PA), pages 73-84.
    20. Lyton Chithambo & Venancio Tauringana & Ishmael Tingbani & Laura Achiro, 2022. "Stakeholder pressure and greenhouses gas voluntary disclosures," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 159-172, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:corsem:v:26:y:2019:i:6:p:1321-1332. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1535-3966 .

    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.