National culture, regulation and country interaction effects on the association of environmental management systems with environmentally beneficial innovation

Business Strategy and the Environment

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 122-136

  Wagner, Marcus ^a,b  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LOUIS PASTEUR   (France)

Author keywords

Certification; Environmental; Innovation; Management systems; Regulation

Indexed keywords

DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; INNOVATION; PROBABILITY;

EURASIA; EUROPE;

EID: 60649117970     PISSN: 09644733     EISSN: 10990836     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bse.641     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Aragon-Correa JA, Rubio E. 2007. Proactive corporate environmental strategies: myths and misunderstandings. Long Range Planning 40(3): 357-381.
2. Armstrong JS, Overton TS. I977. Estimating non-response bias in surveys. Journal of Marketing Research XIV(August): 396-402.
3. Batenburg RS. 2006. The mutual relationship between the environmental context and management in the Netherlands. In Managing the Business Case for Sustainability, Schaltegger S, Wagner M (eds). Greenleaf: Sheffield; 312-327.
4. Baumast A, Dyllick T. 2001. Umweltmanagement-Barometer 2001. Institute for Economy and the Environment at the University of St. Gallen: St. Gallen.
5. Beise M, Rennings K. 2003. Lead Markets of Environmental Innovations: a Framework for Innovation and Environmental Economics, ZEW Discussion Paper 03-01. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW): Mannheim.
6. Berchicci L, Bodewes W. 2005. Bridging environmental issues with new product development. Business Strategy and the Environment 14(5): 272-285.
7. Brío JA, Junquera B. 2003. A review of the literature on environmental innovation in SMEs: implications for public policies. Technovation 23: 939-948.
8. Brunnermeier SB, Cohen MA. 2003. Determinants of environmental innovations in US manufacturing industries. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 45: 278-293.
9. Cote JA, Buckley MR. 1987. Estimating trait, method and error variance: generalizing across 70 construct validation studies. Journal of Marketing Research 24: 315-318.
10. Dyllick T, Hockerts K. 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment 11(2): 130-141.
11. Esty D, Porter M. 2001. Measuring national environmental performance and its determinants. The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Porter M, Sachs J (eds). Ox-ford University Press: New York; 60-75.
12. Greene WH, 2003. Econometric Analysis (5th Ed) Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
13. Hamschmidt J, Dyllick T. 2001. ISO 14001: profitable? Yes! But is it eco-effective? Greener Management International 34(Summer): 43-54.
14. Harkai A, Pataki G. 2001. Bericht zum Umweltmanagement-Barometer Ungarn. In Umweltmanagement-Barometer 2001, Baumast A, Dyllick T (eds). Institute for Economy and the Environment, University of St. Gallen: St. Gallen; 27-33.
15. Hemmelskamp J. 1999. Umweltpolitik und technischer Fortschritt. Eine theoretische und empirische Untersuchung der Determinanten von Umweltinnovationen. Physica: Heidelberg.
16. Hertin J, Berkhout F, Wagner M, Tyteca D. 2008. Are EMS environmentally effective? The link between environmental management systems and environmental performance in European companies. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 51(2): 259-283.
17. Hofstede G. 2001. Culture's Consequences (and edn). Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.
18. Horbach J, Huber J, Schulz T (eds). 2003. Nachhaltigkeit und Innovation. Rahmenbedingungen für Umweltinnovationen. Ökom: München.
19. Jaffe A, Palmer K. 1997. Environmental regulation and innovation: a panel data study. Review of Economics and Statistics 79(4): 610-619.
20. Karl H, Orwat C. 1999. Economic aspects of environmental labelling. In The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics 1999/2000, Folmer H, Tietenberg T (eds). Elgar: Cheltenham; 107-170.
21. Könnölä T, Unruh, GC. 2007. Really changing the course: the limitations of environmental management systems for innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment 16(8): 525-537.
22. Levy DL, Prakash A. 2003. Bargains old and new: multinational corporations in global governance. Business and Politics 5(2): 131-150.
23. OECD, Eurostat. 1997. Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data - Oslo-Manual. OECD-Eurostat: Paris.
24. Porter ME, van der Linde C. 1995. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9(4): 97-118.
25. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff, NP. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88(5): 879-903.
26. Pujari D. 2006. Eco-innovation and new product development: understanding the influences on market performance. Technovation 26: 76-85.
27. Rehfeld K, Rennings K, Ziegler A. 2007. Integrated product policy and environmental product innovations: an empirical analysis. Ecological Economics 61(19): 91-100.
28. Rennings K, Kemp R, Bartolomeo M, Hemmelskamp J, Hitchens D (eds). 2003a. Blueprints for an Integration of Science, Technology and Environmental Policy. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW): Mannheim.
29. Rennings K, Ziegler A, Ankele K, Hoffmann E, Nill J. 2003b. The Influence of the EU Environmental Management and Audit Scheme on Environmental Innovations and Competitiveness in Germany: an Analysis on the Basis of Case Studies and a Large-Scale Survey. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW): Mannheim.
30. Rennings K, Ankele K, Hoffmann E, Nill J, Ziegler A. 2005. Innovationen durch Umweltmanagement: Empirische Ergebnisse zum EG-Oko-Audit. Springer: Berlin.
31. Rugman AM, Verbeke A. 1998. Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: an organizing framework. Strategic Management Journal 19(4): 363-375.
32. Russo MV. 2002. Institutional change and theories of organizational strategy: ISO 14001 and toxic emissions in the electronics industry. In Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings, Nagao D (ed.). Academy of Management: Briarcliff Manor.
33. Schmalensee R. 1989. Inter-industry studies of structure and performance. In Handbook of Industrial Organization Vol. 2, Schmalensee R, Willig RD (eds). North Holland: Amsterdam; 951-1009.
34. Smith K. 2005. Measuring innovation. In The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Mowery DC, Nelson RR, Fagerberg J (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press; 148-177.
35. Steger U, Schindel, C, Krapf, H. 2002. The experience of EMAS in three European countries: a cultural and competitive analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment 11: 32-42.
36. Wagner J. 1992. Firm size, firm growth, and persistence of chance: testing Gibrat's Law with establishment data from Lower Saxony. Small Business Economics 4: 125-131.
37. Wagner J. 1995. Firm size and job creation in Germany. Small Business Economics 7: 469-474.
38. Wagner M, Schakegger S. 2004. The effect of corporate environmental strategy choice and environmental performance on competitiveness and economic performance: an empirical analysis of EU manufacturing. European Management Journal 22(5): 557-572.
39. Wätzold F, Bültmann A, Eames M, Lulofs K, Schucht S. 2001. EMAS and regulatory relief in Europe: lessons from national experience. European Environment 11(I): 37-48.
40. World Economic Forum (WEF), Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP), Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN). 2000. Pilot Environmental Sustainability Index. http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu/indicators/ESI [20 July 2001].
41. World Economic Forum (WEF), Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP), Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN). 2001. 2001 Environmental Sustainability Index. http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu/indicators/ESI [7 March 2008].
42. Ziegler A, Rennings K. 2004. Determinants of Environmental Innovations in Germany: Do Organizational Measures Matter? Discussion Paper 04-30. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW): Mannheim.