IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i2p459-d721167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Risk Tolerance and Acceptability towards Sustainable Energy Transition

Author

Listed:
  • Muhammad Rafiq

    (Faculty of Management Sciences, Superior University, Lahore 54000, Pakistan)

  • Ahsan Akbar

    (International Business School, Guangzhou City University of Technology, Guangzhou 510080, China
    Department of Management, Faculty of Informatics and Management, University of Hradec Kralove, 500 03 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic)

  • Saif Maqbool

    (FAST School of Management, Chiniot-Faisalabad Campus, National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Chiniot 35400, Pakistan)

  • Marcela Sokolová

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Informatics and Management, University of Hradec Kralove, 500 03 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic)

  • Syed Arslan Haider

    (Department of Management, Sunway University Business School (SUBS), Sunway University, Bandar Sunway 47500, Malaysia)

  • Shumaila Naz

    (Faculty of Business Administration, Iqra University, Karachi 75500, Pakistan)

  • Syed Muhammad Danish

    (Department of Security, Economics and Planning, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger, 4021 Stavanger, Norway)

Abstract

The omnipresence of risk prevails in almost every aspect of human life. Individuals and societal factors are pivotal in the decision-making process to judge acceptability and tolerability of risk. Tolerability of risk (ToR) is characterized by dynamism pinned in the process of decision making that helps to gauge the society and individual’s risk. The energy transition implies switching the energy system from fossil fuels or any traditional mechanism to modern renewable sources that are sustainable. The energy transition is paramount important in the current global energy system to attain sustainable goals for organizations. This study used the positivism research paradigm to address the research questions. The quantitative approach helps to examine the cause-and-effect relationship. It also helps to collect systematic information to meet the objectives of the research. A total sample of 300 was selected for the data collection from renewable energy companies. The study used positivism research philosophy applied deductive approach. The data is analyzed through PLS-SEM. It is summarized that the scale of risk acceptability and tolerability in Pakistan is moderate which encourages companies to work progressively and increases sociocultural activities to make society a partner of this new shift in energy transition that will ultimately increase the level of risk acceptability. Nevertheless, as a society, people are neither high-risk takers nor risk avoiders due to income constraints, macroeconomic uncertainty, and political instability.

Suggested Citation

  • Muhammad Rafiq & Ahsan Akbar & Saif Maqbool & Marcela Sokolová & Syed Arslan Haider & Shumaila Naz & Syed Muhammad Danish, 2022. "Corporate Risk Tolerance and Acceptability towards Sustainable Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:2:p:459-:d:721167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/2/459/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/2/459/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi & Youngbok Ryu & Ji-Young Yun, 2021. "COVID-19 Response and Prospects of Clean/Sustainable Energy Transition in Industrial Nations: New Environmental Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-30, February.
    2. Katherine A. McComas & John C. Besley & Zheng Yang, 2008. "Risky Business: Perceived Behavior of Local Scientists and Community Support for Their Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1539-1552, December.
    3. Marek Urbanik & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik, 2019. "Analysis of the Safety of Functioning Gas Pipelines in Terms of the Occurrence of Failures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-13, August.
    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. Dawid Szpak & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Mohamed Eid, 2022. "A Grey-System Theory Approach to Assess the Safety of Gas-Supply Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik, 2023. "Water System Safety Analysis Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Ismat Nasim & Mohamed Boukhris & Umar Nawaz Kayani & Farrukh Bashir & Syed Arslan Haider, 2023. "Exploring the Links between Renewable Energy, FDI, Environmental Degradation, and International Trade in Selected Developing Countries," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(6), pages 418-429, November.
    4. Muhammad Akram Shahzad & Madiha Riaz, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Green Finance on Environmental Sustainability," Journal of Policy Research (JPR), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 8(3), pages 196-220, 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. Youngbok Ryu & Toshiyuki Sueyoshi, 2021. "Examining the Relationship between the Economic Performance of Technology-Based Small Suppliers and Socially Sustainable Procurement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-23, June.
    2. Tomasz Wołowiec & Iuliia Myroshnychenko & Ihor Vakulenko & Sylwester Bogacki & Anna Maria Wiśniewska & Svitlana Kolosok & Vitaliy Yunger, 2022. "International Impact of COVID-19 on Energy Economics and Environmental Pollution: A Scoping Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    3. Serenella Caravella & Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2021. "Mission-Oriented Policies and Technological Sovereignty: The Case of Climate Mitigation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Mohamed Eid, 2021. "Functional Safety Concept to Support Hazard Assessment and Risk Management in Water-Supply Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, February.
    5. Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Mohamed Eid, 2021. "A Case Study in View of Developing Predictive Models for Water Supply System Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-25, June.
    6. Wei Le & Po-Ya Chang & Yu-Wei Chang & Jiahe Chen, 2019. "Why Do Patients Move from Online Health Platforms to Hospitals? The Perspectives of Fairness Theory and Brand Extension Theory," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-13, October.
    7. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi & Youngbok Ryu, 2021. "Environmental Assessment and Sustainable Development in the United States," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-23, February.
    8. Dawid Szpak & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Mohamed Eid, 2022. "A Grey-System Theory Approach to Assess the Safety of Gas-Supply Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-13, June.
    9. Ge Zhao & Wei Li & Jinsong Zhu, 2019. "A Numerical Investigation of the Influence of Geometric Parameters on the Performance of a Multi-Channel Confluent Water Supply," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-21, November.
    10. Lu, Hang & Song, Hwanseok & McComas, Katherine, 2021. "Seeking information about enhanced geothermal systems: The role of fairness, uncertainty, systematic processing, and information engagement intentions," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 855-864.
    11. Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Dorota Papciak, 2019. "An Approach to Estimating Water Quality Changes in Water Distribution Systems Using Fault Tree Analysis," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-11, September.
    12. Jacek Paś & Adam Rosiński & Michał Wiśnios & Marek Stawowy, 2022. "Assessing the Operation System of Fire Alarm Systems for Detection Line and Circuit Devices with Various Damage Intensities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, April.
    13. Radosław Łukasik & Tomasz Neumann, 2022. "Economic and Environmental Aspects of Engine Selection in Cargo Transportation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, April.
    14. John C Besley & Aaron M McCright & Nagwan R Zahry & Kevin C Elliott & Norbert E Kaminski & Joseph D Martin, 2017. "Perceived conflict of interest in health science partnerships," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-20, April.
    15. Marek Ochowiak & Andżelika Krupińska & Sylwia Włodarczak & Magdalena Matuszak & Szymon Woziwodzki & Tomasz Szulc, 2021. "Analysis of the Possibility of Disinfecting Surfaces Using Portable Foggers in the Era of the SARS-CoV-2 Epidemic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, April.
    16. Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Mohamed Eid, 2020. "Water Network-Failure Data Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, June.
    17. Yongheng Luo & Zhonglong Li & Sen Li & Fei Jiang, 2023. "Risk Assessment for Energy Stations Based on Real-Time Equipment Failure Rates and Security Boundaries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-27, September.
    18. Michael Siegrist & Melanie Connor & Carmen Keller, 2012. "Trust, Confidence, Procedural Fairness, Outcome Fairness, Moral Conviction, and the Acceptance of GM Field Experiments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1394-1403, August.
    19. Medeiros, Cristina Pereira & da Silva, Lucas Borges Leal & Alencar, Marcelo Hazin & de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira, 2021. "A new method for managing multidimensional risks in Natural Gas Pipelines based on non-Expected Utility," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    20. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi & Mika Goto, 2021. "Performance Assessment of Japanese Electricity and Gas Companies during 2002–2018: Three DEA Approaches," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, March.

    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:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:2:p:459-:d:721167. 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.