CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 346

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Stakeholders, innovative business models for the circular economy and sustainable performance of firms in an emerging economy facing institutional voids

Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel Jose, Seuring, Stefan, Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz, Jugend, Daniel, De Camargo Fiorini, Paula, Latan, Hengky, Izeppi, Wagner Colucci·2020·Journal of Environmental Management
DOI 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110416
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The literature on the diffusion of the circular economy (CE) rarely provides empirical evidence from emerging economies that face institutional voids and sustainability paradoxes. In contrast, drawing on stakeholder theory, in this paper we test a research framework capable of capturing the imbricated and complex relations among stakeholder pressure, barriers to and motivators of the CE, circular business models, and firms' sustainable performance. Survey-based primary data was gathered from Brazilian industrial companies which lack regulatory clarity regarding the implementation of a CE. Our research results comprise both expected and unexpected outcomes: (i) differing from other countries, the relevance of regulatory stakeholders in Brazil could not be fully confirmed, adding complexity to the topic; (ii) unexpectedly, in this research, company owners/shareholders were the most salient stakeholders; (iii) stakeholders do indeed exert influence on how firms deal with barriers to and motivators of a CE; (iv) we found that internal barriers and internal motivators were perceived as more intense than external ones, which may create organizational tensions; (v) the adoption of a CE by firms tends to improve their sustainable performance; (vi) the previous possession of ISO 14001 and ISO 9001 certifications may control the way companies perceive the benefits of a CE.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110416

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. Aguinis, 2019, Best practices in data collection and preparation: recommendations for reviewers, editors, and authors, Organ. Res. Methods, 1
  2. Álvarez-Herránz, 2017, Energy innovations-GHG emissions nexus: fresh empirical evidence from OECD countries, Energy Pol., 101, 90, 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.11.030 · DOI
  3. Cainelli, 2020, Resource efficient eco-innovations for a circular economy: evidence from EU firms, Res. Pol., 49, 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103827 · DOI
  4. Carvalho, 2019, Communication of commitment towards sustainable development of certified Portuguese organisations: quality, environment and occupational health and safety, Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag., 36, 458, 10.1108/IJQRM-04-2018-0099 · DOI
  5. Donaldson, 1995, The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications, Acad. Manag. Rev., 20, 65, 10.2307/258887 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2015, vol. 100
  7. Fulton, 2018, Organizations and survey research: implementing response enhancing strategies and conducting nonresponse analyses, Socio. Methods Res., 47, 240, 10.1177/0049124115626169 · DOI
  8. Garcés-Ayerbe, 2019, Is it possible to change from a linear to a circular economy? An overview of opportunities and barriers for European small and medium-sized enterprise companies, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health, 16, 851, 10.3390/ijerph16050851 · DOI
  9. Geissdoerfer, 2018, Business models and supply chains for the circular economy, J. Clean. Prod., 190, 712, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.159 · DOI
  10. Geissdoerfer, 2017, The Circular Economy–A new sustainability paradigm?, J. Clean. Prod., 143, 757, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Geng, 2008, Developing the circular economy in China: challenges and opportunities for achieving'leapfrog development, Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol., 15, 231, 10.3843/SusDev.15.3:6 · DOI
  12. Geng, 2009, Implementing China's circular economy concept at the regional level: a review of progress in Dalian, China, Waste Manag., 29, 996, 10.1016/j.wasman.2008.06.036 · DOI
  13. Genovese, 2017, Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: evidence and some applications, Omega, 66, 344, 10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.015 · DOI
  14. Ghinoi, 2020, The role of local stakeholders in disseminating knowledge for supporting the circular economy: a network analysis approach, Ecol. Econ., 169, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106446 · DOI
  15. González-Benito, 2006, The role of stakeholder pressure and managerial values in the implementation of environmental logistics practices, Int. J. Prod. Res., 44, 1353, 10.1080/00207540500435199 · DOI
  16. Govindan, 2018, A systematic review on drivers, barriers, and practices towards circular economy: a supply chain perspective, Int. J. Prod. Res., 56, 278, 10.1080/00207543.2017.1402141 · DOI
  17. Groves, 2008, The impact of nonresponse rates on nonresponse bias: A meta-analysis, Public Opinion Q, 72, 167, 10.1093/poq/nfn011 · DOI
  18. Gupta, 2019, Circular economy and big data analytics: a stakeholder perspective, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 144, 466, 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.030 · DOI
  19. Hahn, 2015, Tensions in corporate sustainability: towards an integrative framework, J. Bus. Ethics, 127, 297, 10.1007/s10551-014-2047-5 · DOI
  20. Henseler, 2018, Partial least squares path modeling: quo vadis?, Qual. Quantity, 52, 1, 10.1007/s11135-018-0689-6 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Heras‐Saizarbitoria, 2013, ISO 9001 and ISO 14001: towards a research agenda on management system standards, Int. J. Manag. Rev., 15, 47, 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00334.x · DOI
  22. Homrich, 2018, The circular economy umbrella: trends and gaps on integrating pathways, J. Clean. Prod., 175, 525, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.064 · DOI
  23. Hui, 1982, Consistency and consistency at large of partial least squares estimates, vol. 2, 119
  24. Jabbour, 2019, Unlocking the circular economy through new business models based on large-scale data: an integrative framework and research agenda, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 144, 546, 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.010 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Jabbour, 2014, Brazil's new national policy on solid waste: challenges and opportunities, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy, 16, 7, 10.1007/s10098-013-0600-z · DOI
  26. Jabbour, 2017, Unlocking the circular economy through new business models based on large-scale data: an integrative framework and research agenda, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change
  27. Jabbour, 2015, Green product development and performance of Brazilian firms: measuring the role of human and technical aspects, J. Clean. Prod., 87, 442, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.036 · DOI
  28. Jaca, 2018, What should consumer organizations do to drive environmental sustainability?, J. Clean. Prod., 181, 201, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.182 · DOI
  29. Jakhar, 2018, When stakeholder pressure drives the circular economy: measuring the mediating role of innovation capabilities, Manag. Decis., 57, 904, 10.1108/MD-09-2018-0990 · DOI
  30. Jamali, 2008, A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: a fresh perspective into theory and practice, J. Bus. Ethics, 82, 213, 10.1007/s10551-007-9572-4 · DOI
  31. Jean, 2016, Assessing endogeneity issues in international marketing research, Int. Market. Rev., 33, 483, 10.1108/IMR-02-2015-0020 · DOI
  32. Jesus, 2018, Lost in transition? Drivers and barriers in the eco-innovation road to the circular economy, Ecol. Econ., 145, 75, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.001 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Josefy, 2015, All things great and small: organizational size, boundaries of the firm, and a changing environment, Acad. Manag. Ann., 9, 715, 10.5465/19416520.2015.1027086 · DOI
  34. Kirchherr, 2018, Barriers to the circular economy: evidence from the European union (EU), Ecol. Econ., 150, 264, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Kock, 2018, Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: the inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods, Inf. Syst. J., 28, 227, 10.1111/isj.12131 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Korhonen, 2018, Circular economy: the concept and its limitations, Ecol. Econ., 143, 37, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Korhonen, 2018, Circular economy as an essentially contested concept, J. Clean. Prod., 175, 544, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Levänen, 2018, Modelling the interplay between institutions and circular economy business models: a case study of battery recycling in Finland and Chile, Ecol. Econ., 154, 373, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.08.018 · DOI
  39. Linder, 2017, Circular business model innovation: inherent uncertainties, Bus. Strat. Environ., 26, 182, 10.1002/bse.1906 · DOI
  40. Lindgreen, 2010, Corporate social responsibility, Int. J. Manag. Rev., 12, 1, 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00277.x · DOI
  41. Mani, 2018, Four forces of supply chain social sustainability adoption in emerging economies, Int. J. Prod. Econ., 199, 150, 10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.02.015 · DOI
  42. McDowall, 2017, Circular economy policies in China and Europe, J. Ind. Ecol., 21, 651, 10.1111/jiec.12597 · DOI
  43. Merli, 2018, How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review, J. Clean. Prod., 178, 703, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.112 · DOI
  44. Mitchell, 1997, Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts, Acad. Manag. Rev., 22, 853, 10.2307/259247 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Murray, 2017, The circular economy: an interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context, J. Bus. Ethics, 140, 369, 10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Parida, 2019, Orchestrating industrial ecosystem in circular economy: a two-stage transformation model for large manufacturing companies, J. Bus. Res., 101, 715, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.006 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Paulraj, 2011, Understanding the relationships between internal resources and capabilities, sustainable supply management and organizational sustainability, J. Supply Chain Manag., 47, 19, 10.1111/j.1745-493X.2010.03212.x · DOI · Paper page
  48. Rigdon, 2016, Choosing PLS path modeling as analytical method in European management research: a realist perspective, Eur. Manag. J., 34, 598, 10.1016/j.emj.2016.05.006 · DOI
  49. Ritzén, 2017, Barriers to the Circular Economy–integration of perspectives and domains, Procedia CIRP, 64, 7, 10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.005 · DOI
  50. Roxas, 2012, Social desirability bias in survey research on sustainable development in small firms: an exploratory analysis of survey mode effect, Bus. Strat. Environ., 21, 223, 10.1002/bse.730 · DOI
  51. Russell, 2019, Getting the ball rolling: an exploration of the drivers and barriers towards the implementation of bottom-up circular economy initiatives in Amsterdam and Rotterdam, J. Environ. Plann. Manag., 1
  52. Sarkis, 2011, An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature, Int. J. Prod. Econ., 130, 1, 10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.11.010 · DOI
  53. Shahbaz, 2018, Environmental degradation in France: the effects of FDI, financial development, and energy innovations, Energy Econ., 74, 843, 10.1016/j.eneco.2018.07.020 · DOI
  54. Silva, 2019, Stakeholder expectations on sustainability performance measurement and assessment. A systematic literature review, J. Clean. Prod., 217, 204, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.203 · DOI
  55. Silvestre, 2015, Sustainable supply chain management in emerging economies: environmental turbulence, institutional voids and sustainability trajectories, Int. J. Prod. Econ., 167, 156, 10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.05.025 · DOI
  56. Siva, 2016, The support of Quality Management to sustainable development: a literature review, J. Clean. Prod., 138, 148, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.020 · DOI
  57. Smol, 2015, The possible use of sewage sludge ash (SSA) in the construction industry as a way towards a circular economy, J. Clean. Prod., 95, 45, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.051 · DOI
  58. Tura, 2019, Unlocking circular business: a framework of barriers and drivers, J. Clean. Prod., 212, 90, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.202 · DOI
  59. Tura, 2019, The darker side of sustainability: tensions from sustainable business practices in business networks, Ind. Market. Manag., 77, 221, 10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.09.002 · DOI
  60. Vanegas, 2018, Ease of disassembly of products to support circular economy strategies, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 135, 323, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.06.022 · DOI
  61. Winans, 2017, The history and current applications of the circular economy concept, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 68, 825, 10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.123 · DOI
  62. Zhu, 2016, Shifting Chinese organizational responses to evolving greening pressures, Ecol. Econ., 121, 65, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.010 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Chiappetta Jabbour, C. J., Seuring, S., Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, A. B., Jugend, D., De Camargo Fiorini, P., Latan, H., & Izeppi, W. C.
Venue
Journal of Environmental Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
264
Pages
110416
ISSN
0301-4797
DOI
10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110416
Cited by
346
References
6
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review