Examining customer pressure and green supply chain management in emerging market: An institutional logics perspective

IF 9.8 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
{"title":"Examining customer pressure and green supply chain management in emerging market: An institutional logics perspective","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpe.2024.109431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Employing contingency and configuration approach, this study explores the role of institutional logics in the relationship between customers' green expectations and firms' adoption of green supply chain management (GSCM) practices. The results of a survey of 310 supplier companies in China, an important emerging market, provide the empirical evidence for the coexistence of multiple institutional logics that are divergent from and almost incompatible with firms' GSCM practices. The multiple logics impose different and conflicting effects on the adoption of GSCM practices when responding to customers’ expectations. Thus, decisions about the adoption of GSCM practices are complicated and contingent on institutional logics. Despite advances in GSCM and rising customer expectations concerning sustainability and the environment, firms still struggle to engage suppliers. This study illuminates how multiple and competing institutional logics play a role in this area. Our results suggest that firms with predominantly cost logic are less likely to engage with GSCM compared to those with market or regulative logics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":14287,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Production Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Production Economics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527324002883","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Employing contingency and configuration approach, this study explores the role of institutional logics in the relationship between customers' green expectations and firms' adoption of green supply chain management (GSCM) practices. The results of a survey of 310 supplier companies in China, an important emerging market, provide the empirical evidence for the coexistence of multiple institutional logics that are divergent from and almost incompatible with firms' GSCM practices. The multiple logics impose different and conflicting effects on the adoption of GSCM practices when responding to customers’ expectations. Thus, decisions about the adoption of GSCM practices are complicated and contingent on institutional logics. Despite advances in GSCM and rising customer expectations concerning sustainability and the environment, firms still struggle to engage suppliers. This study illuminates how multiple and competing institutional logics play a role in this area. Our results suggest that firms with predominantly cost logic are less likely to engage with GSCM compared to those with market or regulative logics.
研究新兴市场的客户压力和绿色供应链管理:制度逻辑视角
本研究采用权变和配置方法,探讨了制度逻辑在客户绿色期望与企业采用绿色供应链管理(GSCM)实践之间关系中的作用。对中国(一个重要的新兴市场)310 家供应商企业的调查结果提供了实证证据,证明多种制度逻辑并存,它们与企业的 GSCM 实践既不一致又几乎不相容。在回应客户期望时,多重逻辑对企业采用 GSCM 实践产生了不同且相互冲突的影响。因此,采用 GSCM 实践的决定是复杂的,取决于制度逻辑。尽管全球供应链管理取得了进步,客户对可持续发展和环境的期望也在不断提高,但企业仍在努力与供应商合作。本研究揭示了多种相互竞争的制度逻辑如何在这一领域发挥作用。我们的研究结果表明,与具有市场或监管逻辑的企业相比,以成本逻辑为主的企业不太可能参与全球供应链管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Production Economics
International Journal of Production Economics 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
21.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
266
审稿时长
52 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Production Economics focuses on the interface between engineering and management. It covers all aspects of manufacturing and process industries, as well as production in general. The journal is interdisciplinary, considering activities throughout the product life cycle and material flow cycle. It aims to disseminate knowledge for improving industrial practice and strengthening the theoretical base for decision making. The journal serves as a forum for exchanging ideas and presenting new developments in theory and application, combining academic standards with practical value for industrial applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信