Abstract

This paper summarizes the arguments and counterarguments within the scientific discussion on the issue of national culture and environmental performance. The main paper’s goal is the empirical examination of the national culture determinants and their impacts on environmental performance. The relevance of the decision of this scientific problem is that environmental performance is a relevant objective in the Gulf Council countries (GCC). The investigation of the topic on the national culture of GCC in the paper was carried out in a logical sequence. The methodological tool of this research was applied to measure the impact of national culture on environmental performance. For gaining the paper’s goal, the study involved the empirical approach justified by using a structural model. The empirical analysis results showed a positive effect of national culture on environmental performance. The findings allowed suggesting that Power distance, Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty avoidance, Long term orientation moderated the relationship between national culture and environmental performance The results implied that Power distance, Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty Avoidance, and long-term orientation in the GCC’s companies had a positive and significant relation with environmental performance. The results of this research could be useful for the GCC companies to promote the long-term orientation and environmental performance for good development and economic growth. Besides, the author suggested maintaining the environmental performance and limit the average financial performance.

Keywords: national culture, environmental performance, GCC countries

JEL Classification: O30, M41, Q54, Q02.

Cite as: Dkhili, H., & Dhiab, L. B. (2021). The impact of national culture on environmental performance: case for GSS countries. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 1, 304-311. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2021.1-23

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Alt, E., & Spitzeck, H. (2016). Improving environmental performance through unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors for the environment: A capability perspective. Journal of environmental management, 182, 48-58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
2. Al-Tuwaijri, S. A., Christensen, T. E., & Hughes, K. (2004). The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(5-6), 447-471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Böhringer, C., & Jochem, P. E. (2007). Measuring the immeasurable—A survey of sustainability indices. Ecological economics, 63(1), 1-8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. Branzei, O., Vertinsky, I., Takahashi, T., & Zhang, W. (2001). Corporate environmentalism across cultures: A comparative field study of Chinese and Japanese executives. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 1(3), 287-312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Carrión-Flores, C. E., & Innes, R. (2010). Environmental innovation and environmental performance. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 59(1), 27-42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & society, 38(3), 268-295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Chikalipah, S. (2017). Institutional environment and microfinance performance in Sub‐Saharan Africa. African Development Review, 29(1), 16-27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Cho, C. H., Roberts, R. W., & Patten, D. M. (2010). The language of US corporate environmental disclosure. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(4), 431-443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Distaso, A. (2007). Well-being and/or quality of life in EU countries through a multidimensional index of sustainability. Ecological Economics, 64(1), 163-180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Hofstede, G., & Minkov, M. (2010). Long-versus short-term orientation: new perspectives. Asia Pacific business review, 16(4), 493-504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Hur, W. M., & Kim, Y. (2017). How does culture improve consumer engagement in CSR initiatives? The mediating role of motivational attributions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(6), 620-633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Husted, B. W. (2005). Culture and ecology: A cross-national study of the determinants of environmental sustainability. MIR: Management International Review, 349-371. [Google Scholar]
13. Lenssen, G., Perrini, F., Tencati, A., Lacy, P., Ringov, D., & Zollo, M. (2007). The impact of national culture on corporate social performance. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Morosini, P., Shane, S., & Singh, H. (1998). National cultural distance and cross-border acquisition performance. Journal of international business studies, 29(1), 137-158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Parboteeah, K. P., Addae, H. M., & Cullen, J. B. (2012). Propensity to support sustainability initiatives: A cross-national model. Journal of business ethics, 105(3), 403-413.. [CrossRef]
16. Park, H., Russell, C., & Lee, J. (2007). National culture and environmental sustainability: A cross-national analysis. Journal of Economics and Finance, 31(1), 104-121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Peng, Y. S., & Lin, S. S. (2009). National Culture, Economic Development, Population Growth and Environmental Performance: The Mediating Role of Education. Journal of business ethics, 90(2), 203-219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Reverte, C., Gomez-Melero, E., & Cegarra-Navarro, J. G. (2016). The influence of corporate social responsibility practices on organizational performance: evidence from Eco-Responsible Spanish firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 2870-2884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. Sprinkle, G. B., & Maines, L. A. (2010). The benefits and costs of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 53(5), 445-453 [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Vachon, D., Prairie, Y. T., & Cole, J. J. (2010). The relationship between near‐surface turbulence and gas transfer velocity in freshwater systems and its implications for floating chamber measurements of gas exchange. Limnology and oceanography, 55(4), 1723-1732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Wang, M., Jie, F., & Abareshi, A. (2015). Evaluating logistics capability for mitigation of supply chain uncertainty and risk in the Australian courier firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of management review, 10(4), 758-769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]