Exploring the effects of institutional pressures on the implementation of environmental management accounting: Do top management support and perceived benefit work?

Environmental management accounting (EMA) has been regarded as an effective way to deal with environmental issues and economic performance. On the basis of institutional theory, this research aims to examine the effects of institutional pressures on the implementation of EMA and how such effects are affected by top management support and perceived benefit. Data were collected from the manufacturing firms in the Yangtze River Delta using questionnaire survey method. The results indicated that coercive pressure and normative pressure positively and significantly affect the implementation of EMA whereas mimetic pressure has no significant effect. Furthermore, top management support and perceived benefit play different moderating roles in the relationships between institutional pressures and the implementation of EMA. Top management support and perceived benefit positively moderate the relationships between coercive pressure, normative pressure, and the implementation of EMA although negatively moderate the relationship between mimetic pressure and the implementation of EMA. On the basis of the findings, policy implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.