IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i19p14266-d1248662.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioural Insights in Corporate Sustainability Research: A Review and Future Agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Paulina Kubera

    (Faculty of Engineering Management, Poznan University of Technology, ul. J. Rychlewskiego 2, 60-965 Poznan, Poland)

Abstract

As a plethora of sustainability challenges are rooted in human behaviour, the aim of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework that brings behavioural insights to the forefront in corporate sustainability research. The ABCD (attention, belief formation, choice, determination) approach, which is meant to assist policy-makers in analysing and diagnosing behavioural problems at an individual level, has been adopted into the corporate context. Taking the ABCD approach, this article discusses the main tenets of the prominent organisational theories, such as upper echelons theory, managerial cognition, stakeholder theory, the attention-based view of the firm, transaction cost theory, institutional theory, social network theory, legitimacy theory and signalling theory, and their application into corporate sustainability (CS) research. The paper offers a series of propositions, alternative to theories of structural determinism or theories of rational strategic choice, for specifying the conditions under which firms are likely to engage in sustainable business conduct. They refer among others to: (a) individual factors—characteristics and mental frames of managers in companies, (b) organisational factors—the composition and size of a board, governance mechanisms in a company, such as role models for sustainability issue selling, or the inclusion in decision making of various stakeholders, as well as (c) external factors—social norms or board connections.

Suggested Citation

  • Paulina Kubera, 2023. "Behavioural Insights in Corporate Sustainability Research: A Review and Future Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:19:p:14266-:d:1248662
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/19/14266/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/19/14266/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    2. Víctor Amor-Esteban & Mª-Purificación Galindo-Villardón & Isabel-María García-Sánchez, 2019. "A Multivariate Proposal for a National Corporate Social Responsibility Practices Index (NCSRPI) for International Settings," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 525-560, June.
    3. Jijun Gao & Pratima Bansal, 2013. "Instrumental and Integrative Logics in Business Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 241-255, January.
    4. David Self & Henry Rothstein, 2021. "Institutional constraints on ‘nudge-style’ risk rating systems: explaining why food hygiene barometers were rolled-out in the UK but abandoned in Germany," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(11), pages 1465-1481, November.
    5. Daina Mazutis & Katherine Hanly & Anna Eckardt, 2022. "Sustainability (Is Not) in the Boardroom: Evidence and Implications of Attentional Voids," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-17, July.
    6. Tobias Hahn & Frank Figge & Jonatan Pinkse & Lutz Preuss, 2018. "A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 235-248, March.
    7. Grewal, Jody & Serafeim, George, 2020. "Research on Corporate Sustainability: Review and Directions for Future Research," Foundations and Trends(R) in Accounting, now publishers, vol. 14(2), pages 73-127, September.
    8. Lars Moratis, 2018. "Signalling Responsibility? Applying Signalling Theory to the ISO 26000 Standard for Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    9. Kristel Buysse & Alain Verbeke, 2003. "Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 453-470, May.
    10. William Ocasio & John Joseph, 2018. "The Attention-Based View of Great Strategies," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 289-294, March.
    11. Shekhar Suman & Satyasiba Das, 2020. "Corporate Environmentalism, Epistemological Review & Ontological Position," CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, in: Nayan Mitra & René Schmidpeter (ed.), Mandated Corporate Social Responsibility, pages 199-213, Springer.
    12. Aric Rindfleisch, 2020. "Transaction cost theory: past, present and future," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(1), pages 85-97, June.
    13. Thomas Dyllick & Kai Hockerts, 2002. "Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 130-141, March.
    14. Nan Zhou & Andrew Delios, 2012. "Diversification and diffusion: A social networks and institutional perspective," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 773-798, September.
    15. Yuehua Xu & Guangtao Zeng, 2021. "Corporate social performance aspiration and its effects," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1181-1207, December.
    16. Yasir Shahab & Collins G. Ntim & Yugang Chen & Farid Ullah & Hai‐Xia Li & Zhiwei Ye, 2020. "Chief executive officer attributes, sustainable performance, environmental performance, and environmental reporting: New insights from upper echelons perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Mohammad Jizi, 2017. "The Influence of Board Composition on Sustainable Development Disclosure," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 640-655, July.
    18. Jeremy Galbreath, 2018. "Do Boards of Directors Influence Corporate Sustainable Development? An Attention‐Based Analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(6), pages 742-756, September.
    19. John Joseph & Alex J. Wilson, 2018. "The growth of the firm: An attention‐based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1779-1800, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michaela Hausdorf, 2024. "What You Get Is What You See—The Mutual Relationships between Images of Human Nature and Business Model Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-15, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    2. James Demastus & Nancy E. Landrum, 2024. "Organizational sustainability schemes align with weak sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 707-725, February.
    3. Jay Joseph & Helen Borland & Marc Orlitzky & Adam Lindgreen, 2020. "Seeing Versus Doing: How Businesses Manage Tensions in Pursuit of Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(2), pages 349-370, June.
    4. Farida Saleem & Yingying Zhang-Zhang & Muhammad Imran Malik & Alawiya Allui, 2020. "Revisiting Stakeholder Theory and Environmentalism: Evidence from an Emerging Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-20, October.
    5. Douglas A. Adu & Basil Al‐Najjar & Thitima Sitthipongpanich, 2022. "Executive compensation, environmental performance, and sustainable banking: The moderating effect of governance mechanisms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1439-1463, May.
    6. Claudia Ogrean & Mihaela Herciu, 2020. "Business Models Addressing Sustainability Challenges—Towards a New Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-28, April.
    7. Mario Vaupel & David Bendig & Denise Fischer-Kreer & Malte Brettel, 2023. "The Role of Share Repurchases for Firms’ Social and Environmental Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 401-428, March.
    8. Francesco Di Maddaloni & Roya Derakhshan, 2019. "A Leap from Negative to Positive Bond. A Step towards Project Sustainability," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, June.
    9. Fabien Martinez, 2014. "Corporate strategy and the environment: towards a four-dimensional compatibility model for fostering green management decisions," Post-Print hal-02887618, HAL.
    10. Zhiwei Yan & Xuerong Peng & Seoki Lee & Leibao Zhang, 2023. "How do multiple cognitions shape corporate proactive environmental strategies? The joint effects of environmental awareness and entrepreneurial orientation," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(4), pages 1592-1617, September.
    11. Dan Huang & Jie Cheng & Xiaofeng Quan & Yanling Wu, 2024. "Managerial attention to environmental protection and corporate green innovation," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 1047-1081, October.
    12. Jonathan Taglialatela & Kevin Pirazzi Maffiola & Roberto Barontini & Francesco Testa, 2023. "Board of Directors' characteristics and environmental SDGs adoption: an international study," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 2490-2506, September.
    13. Jeremy Galbreath & Chia‐Yang Chang & Daniel Tisch, 2023. "The impact of a proactive environmental strategy on environmentally sustainable practices in service firms: The moderating effect of information use value," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5420-5434, December.
    14. Esben Rahbek Gjerdrum Pedersen & Wencke Gwozdz & Kerli Kant Hvass, 2018. "Exploring the Relationship Between Business Model Innovation, Corporate Sustainability, and Organisational Values within the Fashion Industry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 267-284, May.
    15. Ozgur Isil & Michael T. Hernke, 2017. "The Triple Bottom Line: A Critical Review from a Transdisciplinary Perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1235-1251, December.
    16. Tariq Javed & Fareyha Said & Dalilawati Zainal & Azlina Abdul Jalil, 2024. "Circular Economy Implementation Status of Selected ASEAN Countries," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(1), pages 21582440231, March.
    17. Dewan Muktadir‐Al‐Mukit & Firoz Haroon Bhaiyat, 2024. "Impact of corporate governance diversity on carbon emission under environmental policy via the mandatory nonfinancial reporting regulation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 1397-1417, February.
    18. María Consuelo Pucheta‐Martínez & Isabel Gallego‐Álvarez, 2018. "Environmental reporting policy and corporate structures: An international analysis," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 788-798, September.
    19. Sara De Masi & Agnieszka Słomka‐Gołębiowska & Claudio Becagli & Andrea Paci, 2021. "Toward sustainable corporate behavior: The effect of the critical mass of female directors on environmental, social, and governance disclosure," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1865-1878, May.
    20. Mehrnaz Ashrafi & Gregory M. Magnan & Michelle Adams & Tony R. Walker, 2020. "Understanding the Conceptual Evolutionary Path and Theoretical Underpinnings of Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-17, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:19:p:14266-:d:1248662. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.