组织感性认识与环境绩效:上市公司可持续发展报告纵向研究

IF 4.8 Q1 BUSINESS
Guillaume C. F. Pain, Raymond L. Paquin, Suzanne G. Tilleman
{"title":"组织感性认识与环境绩效:上市公司可持续发展报告纵向研究","authors":"Guillaume C. F. Pain,&nbsp;Raymond L. Paquin,&nbsp;Suzanne G. Tilleman","doi":"10.1002/bsd2.70014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Environmental strategy research has often used organizational interpretation as a key lens for understanding how firms engage in sensemaking around natural environmental issues and environmental performance. This work has rarely empirically tested the proposed relationships of organizational interpretation in firms' sensemaking around environmental issues nor the relationship between firms' environmental sensemaking and environmental performance. We empirically test this relationship, capturing environmental sensemaking through computer-aided text analysis (CATA) of published sustainability reports, and environmental performance with the Trucost environmental dataset. Mixed-effects general linear modeling on a bespoke longitudinal dataset of 117 publicly traded companies from 2005 to 2018 reveals the three stages of the organization interpretation model of sensemaking—scanning, interpreting, and responding—align as expected. We also find firms' environmental scanning relates with year-over-year improvement in environmental performance, yet environmental interpreting correlates with worsening environmental performance. Additionally, larger firms and firms in industries with high carbon emissions gather more environmental data and exhibit more extensive environmental interpreting. This research provides insight for scholars by testing environmental sensemaking and exploring the boundary conditions of sensemaking and performance, and for practitioners and policymakers by offering a new framework for analyzing and interpreting sustainability reports and corporate environmental performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":36531,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and Development","volume":"7 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bsd2.70014","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Organizational sensemaking and environmental performance: A longitudinal study of publicly traded firms' sustainability reports\",\"authors\":\"Guillaume C. F. Pain,&nbsp;Raymond L. Paquin,&nbsp;Suzanne G. Tilleman\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bsd2.70014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Environmental strategy research has often used organizational interpretation as a key lens for understanding how firms engage in sensemaking around natural environmental issues and environmental performance. This work has rarely empirically tested the proposed relationships of organizational interpretation in firms' sensemaking around environmental issues nor the relationship between firms' environmental sensemaking and environmental performance. We empirically test this relationship, capturing environmental sensemaking through computer-aided text analysis (CATA) of published sustainability reports, and environmental performance with the Trucost environmental dataset. Mixed-effects general linear modeling on a bespoke longitudinal dataset of 117 publicly traded companies from 2005 to 2018 reveals the three stages of the organization interpretation model of sensemaking—scanning, interpreting, and responding—align as expected. We also find firms' environmental scanning relates with year-over-year improvement in environmental performance, yet environmental interpreting correlates with worsening environmental performance. Additionally, larger firms and firms in industries with high carbon emissions gather more environmental data and exhibit more extensive environmental interpreting. This research provides insight for scholars by testing environmental sensemaking and exploring the boundary conditions of sensemaking and performance, and for practitioners and policymakers by offering a new framework for analyzing and interpreting sustainability reports and corporate environmental performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36531,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Business Strategy and Development\",\"volume\":\"7 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bsd2.70014\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Business Strategy and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Strategy and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

环境战略研究通常将组织解释作为理解企业如何围绕自然环境问题进行感性认识和环境绩效的关键视角。这些研究很少对企业围绕环境问题的感性认识所提出的组织解释关系进行实证检验,也很少检验企业的环境感性认识与环境绩效之间的关系。我们通过对已发布的可持续发展报告进行计算机辅助文本分析(CATA)来捕捉环境意识的形成,并利用 Trucost 环境数据集对环境绩效进行实证检验。对 2005 年至 2018 年期间 117 家上市公司的定制纵向数据集进行的混合效应一般线性建模显示,感知决策的组织解释模型的三个阶段--扫描、解释和响应--如预期的那样一致。我们还发现,企业的环境扫描与环境绩效的逐年改善相关,而环境解读则与环境绩效的恶化相关。此外,规模较大的企业和碳排放量较高行业的企业收集的环境数据更多,对环境的解释也更广泛。这项研究通过检验环境感知和探索感知与绩效的边界条件,为学者们提供了深刻的见解;通过为分析和解释可持续发展报告和企业环境绩效提供一个新的框架,为从业人员和政策制定者提供了深刻的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Organizational sensemaking and environmental performance: A longitudinal study of publicly traded firms' sustainability reports

Organizational sensemaking and environmental performance: A longitudinal study of publicly traded firms' sustainability reports

Environmental strategy research has often used organizational interpretation as a key lens for understanding how firms engage in sensemaking around natural environmental issues and environmental performance. This work has rarely empirically tested the proposed relationships of organizational interpretation in firms' sensemaking around environmental issues nor the relationship between firms' environmental sensemaking and environmental performance. We empirically test this relationship, capturing environmental sensemaking through computer-aided text analysis (CATA) of published sustainability reports, and environmental performance with the Trucost environmental dataset. Mixed-effects general linear modeling on a bespoke longitudinal dataset of 117 publicly traded companies from 2005 to 2018 reveals the three stages of the organization interpretation model of sensemaking—scanning, interpreting, and responding—align as expected. We also find firms' environmental scanning relates with year-over-year improvement in environmental performance, yet environmental interpreting correlates with worsening environmental performance. Additionally, larger firms and firms in industries with high carbon emissions gather more environmental data and exhibit more extensive environmental interpreting. This research provides insight for scholars by testing environmental sensemaking and exploring the boundary conditions of sensemaking and performance, and for practitioners and policymakers by offering a new framework for analyzing and interpreting sustainability reports and corporate environmental performance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Business Strategy and Development
Business Strategy and Development Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
33
×
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