Page 271 - Hojnik, Jana. 2017. In Persuit of Eco-innovation. Drivers and Consequences of Eco-innovation at Firm Level. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 271
Eco-innovation models 271
following three dimensions: product, process and organizational eco-in-
novation). The results related to the hypotheses testing are depicted in
Figure 29. As before, we will focus first on the hypotheses pertaining to
determinants of eco-innovation and then on hypotheses pertaining to
the consequences of eco-innovation.
Hypotheses 1a and 1b examined the relationships between environ-
mental policy instruments (the command-and-control instrument, the
economic incentive instrument) and eco-innovation, which were predict-
ed to be positive and significant. The standardized coefficients for both
relationships were positive, quite substantial and significant (standard-
ized coefficient was 0.18 for the command-and-control instrument and
0.10 for the economic incentive instrument). The findings revealed that
Hypotheses 1a and 1b can be both supported.
Hypothesis 2, postulated a positive and significant relationship be-
tween customer demand and eco-innovation. The standardized coeffi-
cient was positive, high and significant (standardized coefficient 0.30),
and the results indicate strong support for Hypothesis 2.
The relationship between managerial environmental concern and
eco-innovation was found to be positive and significant (the standard-
ized coefficient was 0.12). Thus, Hypothesis 3 is be supported.
Hypothesis 4 predicted a positive relationship between expected ben-
efits and eco-innovation. The association between expected benefits and
eco-innovation was found to be positive and significant (standardized co-
efficient was 0.05), indicating support for Hypothesis 4.
Hypothesis 5a (the relationship between competitive intensity and
eco-innovation) was not tested, since the factor competitive intensity ex-
plains only 36.733% of variance and was therefore excluded from further
analyses. Meanwhile, strong support was found for Hypothesis 5b, which
examined the relationship between competitive pressure and eco-innova-
tion, which was expected to be positive and significant. The standardized
coefficient for this relationship is highly positive and significant (0.64),
indicating strong support for Hypothesis 5b.
When testing the relationships between eco-innovation and indica-
tors of company performance (company growth and profitability), signif-
icant influences were detected. Hypothesis 6a postulates a positive and
significant relationship between eco-innovation and company growth.
The standardized coefficient was negative and significant (-0.11), indi-
cating that Hypothesis 6a cannot be supported. Hypothesis 6b posits a
positive and significant association between eco-innovation and compa-
ny profitability. Eco-innovation was found to be weakly, positively and
following three dimensions: product, process and organizational eco-in-
novation). The results related to the hypotheses testing are depicted in
Figure 29. As before, we will focus first on the hypotheses pertaining to
determinants of eco-innovation and then on hypotheses pertaining to
the consequences of eco-innovation.
Hypotheses 1a and 1b examined the relationships between environ-
mental policy instruments (the command-and-control instrument, the
economic incentive instrument) and eco-innovation, which were predict-
ed to be positive and significant. The standardized coefficients for both
relationships were positive, quite substantial and significant (standard-
ized coefficient was 0.18 for the command-and-control instrument and
0.10 for the economic incentive instrument). The findings revealed that
Hypotheses 1a and 1b can be both supported.
Hypothesis 2, postulated a positive and significant relationship be-
tween customer demand and eco-innovation. The standardized coeffi-
cient was positive, high and significant (standardized coefficient 0.30),
and the results indicate strong support for Hypothesis 2.
The relationship between managerial environmental concern and
eco-innovation was found to be positive and significant (the standard-
ized coefficient was 0.12). Thus, Hypothesis 3 is be supported.
Hypothesis 4 predicted a positive relationship between expected ben-
efits and eco-innovation. The association between expected benefits and
eco-innovation was found to be positive and significant (standardized co-
efficient was 0.05), indicating support for Hypothesis 4.
Hypothesis 5a (the relationship between competitive intensity and
eco-innovation) was not tested, since the factor competitive intensity ex-
plains only 36.733% of variance and was therefore excluded from further
analyses. Meanwhile, strong support was found for Hypothesis 5b, which
examined the relationship between competitive pressure and eco-innova-
tion, which was expected to be positive and significant. The standardized
coefficient for this relationship is highly positive and significant (0.64),
indicating strong support for Hypothesis 5b.
When testing the relationships between eco-innovation and indica-
tors of company performance (company growth and profitability), signif-
icant influences were detected. Hypothesis 6a postulates a positive and
significant relationship between eco-innovation and company growth.
The standardized coefficient was negative and significant (-0.11), indi-
cating that Hypothesis 6a cannot be supported. Hypothesis 6b posits a
positive and significant association between eco-innovation and compa-
ny profitability. Eco-innovation was found to be weakly, positively and
