Resource constraints, climate change, environmental concerns, and environmental pollution are among the central global challenges of our time. The overall development of the economy and the pursuit of growth may not necessarily go hand in hand, or follow a direct path, with pollution reduction and the sustainable management of resources.
Creating a sense of balance between high resource consumption and economic development is an ongoing challenge. It compels organizations to adopt environmentally friendly professional practices that also deliver strong economic value. Many organizations are therefore required to implement activities that both generate and enhance economic value.
The excessive use of non-renewable resources as a result of rapid economic development has harmed the atmosphere and raised numerous environmental concerns (Atlin and Gibson, 2017). In order to conserve energy and reduce carbon emissions, many countries have established agencies and regulations aimed at environmental sustainability and protection. Examples include restrictions on chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the sustainable development declarations of the World Summit in Johannesburg, and limitations on the use of certain hazardous substances, such as the requirements for electrical and electronic equipment and the European Union’s Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive (Weng et al., 2015, p. 4998).
The introduction of such rules and regulations has attracted the attention of environmental regulators (Zhu and Sarkis, 2004; Claver et al., 2007). These measures have also influenced managerial practices and competitive dynamics among organizations (Feng and Chen, 2018). In order to comply with new environmentally friendly regulations, establish a positive brand image (Chen, 2008a; Hillestad et al., 2010), improve operational performance, and gain a competitive advantage (Claver et al., 2007; Rusinko, 2007), organizations have been compelled to adopt environmentally responsible practices (Afridi et al., 2020).
Numerous studies have examined factors that influence the adoption of green innovation (GI) practices, including environmental regulations, ethics, legal systems, and supply chains (Feng and Chen, 2018; Gao et al., 2018; El-Kassar and Singh, 2019; Seman et al., 2019). Research has also explored the growing level of public awareness and stakeholder pressure related to environmental issues (Foo, 2018).
Moreover, the literature provides evidence of optimal pressure from society, customers, and governmental bodies to implement GI practices. However, existing literature offers limited findings on the relationship between different forms of stakeholder pressure—such as competitive pressure, governmental pressure, and employee conduct (EC)—and the implementation of GI practices.
The manufacturing sector faces particularly strong stakeholder pressure, perhaps because it is considered the sector that produces the highest level of waste (Chen, 2008b; Chang, 2011). In many cases, individual industries have been examined for their adoption of GI practices (Cordano et al., 2010; Lin and Ho, 2011). This study addresses the gap by examining these dynamics within both manufacturing and service industries in order to enrich the existing GI literature and the broader understanding of stakeholder pressure.
Furthermore, stakeholder pressure (particularly customer pressure) has been examined in relation to GI in third-party logistics companies (Chu et al., 2019), express delivery companies (Zhang et al., 2020), and manufacturing firms (Song et al., 2020). These three studies were conducted in the context of China, which highlights the importance of examining stakeholder pressure and organizational behavior in other contexts as well—such as Pakistan, a developing economy that is still in the early stages of adopting GI practices (Shahzad M. et al., 2020).
“Going green” is an initiative widely adopted by companies to address environmental challenges. Approaches to achieving green capabilities and environmentally friendly practices have received increasing attention within the discipline of management science over the years (Ullah, 2017). In order to facilitate the adoption of GI, companies must consider the key drivers and determinants within their business environments (Arfi et al., 2018).
These include consumer concerns (Zhu et al., 2017), the preferences of professionals and business owners (Huang et al., 2009), the capabilities of suppliers and partners (Chiou et al., 2011), governmental regulatory authorities and their regulations (Kammerer, 2009), as well as the environmental, technological, and organizational factors that influence GI practices (Lin and Ho, 2011).
Green technologies encompass GI practices such as green product innovation, green processes, green management, and green marketing, alongside green human resource management practices such as green training and development, administrative support and culture, recruitment and selection, and compensation and benefits.
GI serves as a significant strategic enabler for achieving sustainable development, as it helps conserve energy, protect the environment, recycle waste, and prevent pollution (Albort-Morant et al., 2018). Furthermore, GI can be categorized into green products, green marketing, green processes, and green management, all designed to support environmentally friendly outcomes and reduce energy consumption.
Across many industries that affect our daily lives, there is a growing recognition that sustainability is a critical factor that must be addressed. Whether in renewable energy markets, the food sector, or consumer products, the demand for sustainability is increasing—and with it, the need for innovation.
In practice, for organizations that already recognize the necessity of sustainability, the two domains are no longer separate. Instead, they represent a shared objective, as products that combine both sustainability and innovation have become particularly desirable.
