IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i20p8804-d1496595.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Interlink between Stakeholder Influence and Sustainable Practices: A Case Study of Thai Agriculture Enterprise

Author

Listed:
  • Ruethai Onbhuddha

    (Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan)

  • Bingying Ma

    (Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan)

  • Chavatip Chindavijak

    (Management System Certification Institute (Thailand), Bangkok 10400, Thailand)

  • Seiichi Ogata

    (Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan)

Abstract

Nowadays, agriculture businesses have been significantly impacted by rapid global changes, compelling the agro-industry to adopt sustainable development practices to remain resilient. Moreover, the application of stakeholder theory has become essential in business management to achieve inclusive growth and fulfill sustainable business. Understanding the interlink between stakeholder pressure and the motivation to transform an enterprise’s practices into sustainable development is imperative. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the direct pressure of stakeholder groups on sustainable practices in agriculture enterprises in Thailand through a questionnaire survey. This paper focused on the influence of primary and secondary stakeholders and evaluated the weighting of sustainability practices. The survey was conducted on employees who work in enterprises that apply Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy Philosophy (SEP). The research adopted the regression and information entropy methods for result analysis. The results showed that employees, shareholders, and competitors are significant stakeholder groups that drive sustainable capital covering economics, nature, society, and human capital. Last, stakeholder management is an outstanding practice in a SEP thinking enterprise. Concurrently, human capital is the highest priority to fulfill this alternative pathway to be successful in enterprise sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruethai Onbhuddha & Bingying Ma & Chavatip Chindavijak & Seiichi Ogata, 2024. "The Interlink between Stakeholder Influence and Sustainable Practices: A Case Study of Thai Agriculture Enterprise," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-23, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:20:p:8804-:d:1496595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/20/8804/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/20/8804/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rodrigo Lozano, 2015. "A Holistic Perspective on Corporate Sustainability Drivers," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 32-44, January.
    2. Han, Baolong & Liu, Hongxiao & Wang, Rusong, 2015. "Urban ecological security assessment for cities in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei metropolitan region based on fuzzy and entropy methods," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 217-225.
    3. Hanson-DeFusco, Jessi, 2023. "What data counts in policymaking and programming evaluation – Relevant data sources for triangulation according to main epistemologies and philosophies within social science," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Shirasu, Yoko & Kawakita, Hidetaka, 2021. "Long-term financial performance of corporate social responsibility," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    5. Hee‐Chan Song, 2020. "Sufficiency economy philosophy: Buddhism‐based sustainability framework in Thailand," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 2995-3005, December.
    6. Freeman, Edward & Liedtka, Jeanne, 1997. "Stakeholder capitalism and the value chain," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 286-296, June.
    7. Kimitaka Nishitani & Thi Bich Hue Nguyen & Trong Quy Trinh & Qi Wu & Katsuhiko Kokubu, 2021. "Are Corporate Environmental Activities to Meet Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Simply Greenwashing? An Empirical Study of Vietnamese Companies from the Stakeholder Management Perspective," Discussion Paper Series DP2021-12, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    8. Kongkiti Phusavat & Bordin Rassameethes & Dusan Lesjak & Chavatip Chindavijak, 2018. "Developing model for integrating sustainability into enterprise operations," International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 17(4), pages 329-346.
    9. Fleming, Aysha & Jakku, Emma & Fielke, Simon & Taylor, Bruce M. & Lacey, Justine & Terhorst, Andrew & Stitzlein, Cara, 2021. "Foresighting Australian digital agricultural futures: Applying responsible innovation thinking to anticipate research and development impact under different scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    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. Yang, Yuanyuan & Bao, Wenkai & Liu, Yansui, 2020. "Scenario simulation of land system change in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. Päivi Myllykangas & Johanna Kujala & Hanna Lehtimäki, 2010. "Analyzing the Essence of Stakeholder Relationships: What do we Need in Addition to Power, Legitimacy, and Urgency?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 65-72, August.
    3. Wepner, Beatrix & Neuberger, Sabine & Hörlesberger, Marianne & Molin, Eva Maria & Lampert, Jasmin & Koch, Hanna, 2025. "How can digitalisation support transformation towards sustainable agri-food systems? Scenario development in Lower Austria," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    4. Leite, Brian J. & Uysal, Vahap B., 2023. "Does ESG matter to investors? ESG scores and the stock price response to new information," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    5. Ludmila Soares Carneiro & Michael Henry, 2024. "Integrating the Sustainable Development Goals into Corporate Governance: A Cross-Sectoral Analysis of Japanese Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-25, August.
    6. Zhice Cheng & Xinyuan Chen & Huwei Wen, 2022. "How Does Environmental Protection Tax Affect Corporate Environmental Investment? Evidence from Chinese Listed Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, March.
    7. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    8. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    9. Laura Corazza & Simone Domenico Scagnelli & Chiara Mio, 2017. "Simulacra and Sustainability Disclosure: Analysis of the Interpretative Models of Creating Shared Value," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 414-434, September.
    10. Rodrigo Lozano & Robin von Haartman, 2018. "Reinforcing the Holistic Perspective of Sustainability: Analysis of the Importance of Sustainability Drivers in Organizations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 508-522, July.
    11. Giorgia Nigri & Mara Del Baldo & Armando Agulini, 2020. "Governance and accountability models in Italian certified benefit corporations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2368-2380, September.
    12. Snow, Stephen & Fielke, Simon & Fleming, Aysha & Jakku, Emma & Malakar, Yuwan & Turner, Charles & Hunter, Tammy & Tijs, Sigrid & Bonnett, Graham, 2024. "Climate services for agriculture: Steering towards inclusive innovation in Australian climate services design and delivery," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    13. Rodrigo Lozano, 2020. "Analysing the use of tools, initiatives, and approaches to promote sustainability in corporations," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 982-998, March.
    14. Beck, Donizete & Ferasso, Marcos, 2023. "How can Stakeholder Capitalism contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals? A Cross-network Literature Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    15. Pablo Gomez‐Carrasco & Giovanna Michelon, 2017. "The Power of Stakeholders' Voice: The Effects of Social Media Activism on Stock Markets," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 855-872, September.
    16. Dmitry A. Ruban & Natalia N. Yashalova & Vladimir A. Ermolaev, 2021. "Is Environment a Strategic Priority of the Leading Energy Companies? Evidence from Mission Statements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    17. Daniel Alonso‐Martínez & Nuria González‐Álvarez & Mariano Nieto, 2019. "The influence of financial performance on corporate social innovation," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 859-871, July.
    18. Yihe Huang & Shouyun Shen & Wenmin Hu & Yurou Li & Guo Li, 2022. "Construction of Cultural Heritage Tourism Corridor for the Dissemination of Historical Culture: A Case Study of Typical Mountainous Multi-Ethnic Area in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    19. Iman Harymawan & Mohammad Nasih & Dian Agustia & Fajar Kristanto Gautama Putra & Hadrian Geri Djajadikerta, 2022. "Investment efficiency and environmental, social, and governance reporting: Perspective from corporate integration management," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1186-1202, September.
    20. Sheela Sundarasen & Usha Rajagopalan & Beata Zyznarska-Dworczak, 2025. "Sustainability Reporting as a Governance Tool for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A Bibliometric and Content Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-16, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:20:p:8804-:d:1496595. 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.