View of The Effect of Environmental Performance on Firm Performance Mediated by Green Innovation in Food Processing Industry Companies in the Special Region of Yogyakarta

(1)

Technium

41/2023

2023 A new decade for social changes

Social Sciences

Technium.

(2)

The Effect of Environmental Performance on Firm Performance Mediated by Green Innovation in Food Processing Industry Companies in the Special Region of Yogyakarta

Muhammad Irfan

Magister Management UPN “Veteran” Yogyakarta Sabihaini

Magister Management UPN “Veteran” Yogyakarta Irhas Effendi

Magister Management UPN “Veteran” Yogyakarta

Email : [email protected]

Abstract. This study aims to determine the effect of environmental performance on firm performance and green innovation as mediator in food processing industry companies in the Special Region of Yogyakarta. The type of research used is hypothesis testing with quantitative methods. The sampling technique in this research was non-probability sampling with a purposive sampling technique. The considerations or criteria determined in this study are food processing companies with large and medium scale. The number of samples used in this study were 60 companies. Testing in this study was assisted by the SmartPLS 3.3.3 software. And the results obtained are as follows: Environmental performance has a positive and significant effect on green innovation in the food processing industry in the Special Region of Yogyakarta; Environmental performance has a positive and significant effect on firm performance in the food processing industry in the Special Region of Yogyakarta; Green innovation has a positive and significant effect on company performance in the food processing industry in the Special Region of Yogyakarta; and environmental performance has a positive and significant effect on company performance through green innovation in the food processing industry in the Special Region of Yogyakarta.

Keywords. Food Processing Industry, Green Innovation, Environmental Performance, firm Performance.

1. Introduction

The manufacturing industry sector is the largest sector as the largest contributor to the Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) in the Province of the Special Region of Yogyakarta.

Based on data from Figure 1.1 (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020) it shows that the industry that makes the largest contribution to the DIY economy is the manufacturing sector with a percentage of 12.83 percent followed by the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sector with 10.19 percent, the information and communications by 9.72 percent and the construction sector with 9.63 percent. However, in 2020 the processing industry will experience a decline. This decrease Technium Social Sciences Journal

Vol. 41, 278-291, March, 2023 ISSN: 2668-7798 www.techniumscience.com

(3)

was due to the COVID-19 outbreak so that the DIY Government implemented a policy of limiting economic and social activities. This condition was one of the factors that caused Yogyakarta's economy to contract by 2.369 percent. Even though there has been a decline, the manufacturing industry sector still contributes to the economy of the Special Region of Yogyakarta (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020). Beside from the pandemic, currently the issue of environmental problems is the problem that is most often discussed or occurs in the Special Region of Yogyakarta.

Environmental problems that often arise include air pollution, water pollution and soil pollution. Environmental problems in Special Region of Yogyakarta are strengthened by the results of a report from the Special Region of Yogyakarta Environment and Forestry Service, regarding the Environmental Quality Index (IKLH). IKLH is an initial description or indication that provides a quick conclusion of an environmental condition in a certain scope and period.

Table 1.1 presents IKLH DIY for the 2018-2020 period.

Table 1. Environmental Quality Index of Special Region of Yogyakarta 2018-2020 Periods

Indeks

2018 2019 2020

Target Results Target Results Target Results IKA 34,2 40,25 36,49 38,65 38,60 38,43 IKU 87,06 84,24 87,73 85,25 88,40 89,14 IKLH 58,58 61,69 60,51 61,05 62,44 61,60

Source: DLKH DIY (2020)

Based on Table 1, it can be seen that the Environmental Quality Index of Special Region of Yogyakarta value for the 2018-2020 period experienced a decrease in realizable value due to industrial or company operating activities. Various cases of environmental pollution due to industrial operations can originate from the disposal of solid or liquid waste and the disposal of residual gases from combustion or production processes. The process of managing and sterilizing waste and gas disposal is still low and not optimal, resulting in the waste being disposed of still containing hazardous materials or substances. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to companies to improve environmental performance because environmental performance indicates the company's success in implementing environmental strategies, which are the basis for innovative practices (Forsman, 2013). According to sub categories, in 2020, the contribution of the food Processing industry is the largest contributor to the performance of the manufacturing industry in Special Region of Yogyakarta with a percentage of 56.44 percent.

Therefore, it is necessary to periodically evaluate company performance in the food processing industry to maintain the quality of the products produced. Performance appraisal can be done one of them with a balanced scorecard approach. The Balanced Scorecard is a measurement concept derived directly from the company's business strategy that needs to be continuously monitored, because it will lead to key success factors to build the company's success. The balanced scorecard includes four perspectives to measure company performance, namely financial perspective, customer perspective, internal business process perspective and learning and growth perspective (Kaplan dan Norton, 2000). Some literature shows that firm performance is influenced by environmental performance and green innovation. As research Technium Social Sciences Journal

(4)

conducted by Abdallah & Al-Ghwayeen, (2020) found that environmental performance has a positive effect on firm performance. By improving environmental performance, companies will avoid the costs of violations related to environmental management, such as sanctions, fines and penalties. Ch'ng et al., (2021) found the effect of green innovation on sustainable firm performance. The research helped convince firm technology of the importance of incorporating environmental innovation practices when developing their business investment plans. Ong et al., (2019) also found that green innovation and environmental performance are the main support for the creation of economic value for manufacturing companies that are proactive towards the environment so that it can be said that environmental performance is an indicator for firm performance. Many studies have proven a significant relationship between environmental performance and firm performance (Nishitani & Kokubu, 2020; Wellalage et al., 2021). However, empirical studies involving green innovation in the relationship between environmental performance and firm performance are still very limited. Only Grekova et al.,(2013) demonstrated the mediating role of environmental innovation between environmental management and firm performance. Based on the Natural Resource Based-View (NRBV) theory, environmental innovation and environmental performance are specific, rare, valuable, and difficult to imitate company environmental competitive abilities. In the same study revealed that green innovation as a mediator that converts the benefits of environmental performance into financial performance. Therefore, this study aims to determine the relationship between corporate environmental performance, environmental innovation, and firm performance.

2. Theoritical Framework 2.1 Stakeholder Theory

Chariri & Ghozali, (2007) states that in stakeholder theory, companies operate only for the benefit of the company or are profit-oriented, but must also provide benefits for stakeholders consisting of shareholders, customers, communities, and other parties. . Stakeholder theory views the generation of value as the main driving force of a company, but also recognizes that this value is shared by a group of stakeholders, which includes not only shareholders and management. But also for all community participants who may be interested in how companies operate (Theodoulidis et al., 2017)

2.2 Firm Performance

Firm Performance Firm Performance is a manifestation of the level of achievement in implementing a policy activity/program in realizing the goals, objectives, mission and vision of the organization in accordance with the formulation of an organization's strategic planning.

(Tahaka, 2021) Based on previous research, we can measure the firm performance of a company using an approach adopted from the perspective of the Balanced Scorecard developed by Kaplan and Norton (2004). The Balanced Scorecard emphasizes that all financial and non- financial measures must become part of the information system for workers at all levels of the company. The Balanced Scorecard states that there is a balance between various external measures of shareholders and customers, with various measures of business processes. The Balanced Scorecard is an assessment method that includes four perspectives to measure company performance, namely: a financial perspective, a customer perspective, an internal business process perspective, and a learning and growth perspective

Environmental Performance

Environmental performance is a company mechanism related to the environment in its operational activities in order to create a good environment around the company (Yasir et al., 2020). Environmental performance is a reflection of a company's environmental capabilities resulting from the implementation of environmental strategies supported by dynamic capability theory (Ong et al., 2019). Environmental performance in this study was measured by Resource Technium Social Sciences Journal

(5)

Usage, Regulatory Compliance, Interaction with Stakeholders, productivity.

Green Innovation

Green innovation is perceived as an environmentally friendly product and process innovation carried out by companies, in order to reduce the impact of their business processes on the environment (Tjahjadi et al., 2020). Green Innovation shows the extent to which green products or processes compete in the market as a result of companies reducing their overall environmental impact (Huang & Li, 2017). Green product innovation measures the extent to which environmental actions are incorporated into product development. The green product innovation strategy focuses on the use of resources that have minimal impact on the environment and the efficient use of resources that consume energy. The dimension of green process innovation includes the extent to which environmental measures are implemented in the manufacturing process of the company. According to Chen, Lai and Wen (2006) The implementation of green process innovation can be seen from how effective the process of making products or production processes can reduce emissions of hazardous materials and waste, recycle waste and emissions, reduce consumption of electricity, water, and production processes that can save the use of raw materials.

Research Hypothesis H

1

:

There is a direct effect of environmental performance on green innovation H

2

: There is a direct effect of environmental performance on company performance

H 3

: There is a direct effect of green innovation on company performance H

4

: There is an indirect effect of environmental performance on business performance mediated by green innovation

.

Technium Social Sciences Journal Vol. 41, 278-291, March, 2023 ISSN: 2668-7798 www.techniumscience.com

(6)

3. Methods

The type of research used in this research is hypothesis testing research. Hypothesis testing research aims to test the hypothesis put forward by researchers, namely the effect of environmental performance on green innovation, green innovation on company performance, environmental performance on company performance and environmental performance on company performance mediated by green innovation. The method used in this research is a quantitative method. The unit of analysis in this study is business in large industries that are processing food and beverages. Companies represented by owners or employees representing the company can be used as respondents in this study. The sampling technique used in this study is Non-probability Sampling. Non-probability sampling is a sampling design in which elements in the population do not have equal opportunity for each element or member of the population to be selected as a sample (Sekaran, and Bougie, 2017). The non-probability sampling technique used in this study was purposive sampling. Purposive sampling is limited sampling with certain considerations. The data processing technique in this study uses a full structural model with the Partial Least Square (PLS) method. Tests in this study used the SmartPLS 3.0 program to measure validity, reliability, and model tests consisting of R-Square, F-Square, and Estimate for Path Coefficients.

4. Result

Measurement Model Test Results (Outer Model)

In this evaluation section of the outer model, convergent validity, discriminant validity, average variance extracted (AVE), composite reliability and Cronbach alpha will be tested.

4.1Convergent Validity

Convergent Validity The convergent validity value is the outer loading value on latent variables and their indicators. This study uses a loading factor limit of > 0.7 (Ghozali, 2016).

The following is the loading factor value in this study.

Table 2. Loading Factor Value

Variable Dimension Items Loading

factor Criterion Result Environmental

Performance (X)

Resource Usage

Financial Resources 0.909 >0.7 Valid Physical Resources 0.898 >0.7 Valid Human Resources 0.910 >0.7 Valid Regulatory

Compliance

Specification 0.858 >0.7 Valid

Standard 0.906 >0.7 Valid

Mutual Dependence 0.881 >0.7 Valid Interaction

with

Stakeholders

Goal Alignment 0.863 >0.7 Valid

Trust 0.824 >0.7 Valid

Efficiency

0.886 >0.7 Valid Productivity Effectiveness 0.850 >0.7 Valid

Quality 0.757 >0.7 Valid

Financial Resources 0.916 >0.7 Valid Company

Performance (Y)

Financial Perspective

Sales rate for 1 year 0.893 >0.7 Valid Return Of Assets

(ROA) Growth 0.888 >0.7 Valid Profit margin rate 0.892 >0.7 Valid

(7)

factor Criterion Result Customer

Perspective

Selling quality products at affordable prices

0.877 >0.7 Valid Customer complaint

rate 0.876 >0.7 Valid

Customer loyalty

level 0.852 >0.7 Valid

Internal Business Perspective

Quality level of production and service.

0.825 >0.7 Valid New customer

acquisition rate 0.812 >0.7 Valid Product innovation

implementation. 0.845 >0.7 Valid Learning

and Growth Perspective

Employee skills 0.871 >0.7 Valid Ability to process

information using a computer

0.857 >0.7 Valid Cooperation between

employees 0.824 >0.7 Valid

Green

Innovation (Z)

Green Product

The company chooses

environmentally friendly raw

materials in product development.

0.903 >0.7 Valid

The company uses energy efficient raw materials in product development.

0.927 >0.7 Valid The company makes

raw material efficiency for the production process in product

development.

0.917 >0.7 Valid

The company evaluates that the product is easy to reuse, recycle and biodegrade.

0.917 >0.7 Valid

Green Process

The company's production process reduces harmful emissions and waste.

0.888 >0.7 Valid Technium Social Sciences Journal

(8)

factor Criterion Result The company's

production process recycles waste and emissions that allow them to be processed and reused;

0.907 >0.7 Valid

The company promotes a green technology culture in the manufacturing process

0.917 >0.7 Valid

The company's production process reduces the use of raw materials

0.821 >0.7 Valid

Source: Primary Data processed, 2022

Based on Table 2, it was found that all items in the research variables had a loading factor > 0.7, so it can be concluded that all the indicators used for this study were appropriate and met the validity criteria to be used for further analysis.

4.2.Discriminant Validity

The discriminant validity test uses the cross loading value. An indicator will be declared to meet discriminant validity if the loading value on the intended construct is greater than the loading value on other constructs. The following is the cross loading value of each indicator in this study:

Table 3. Cross Loading Value Variable Environmental

Performance Company

Performance Green Innovation

X1.1 0.909 0.694 0.473

X1.2 0.898 0.729 0.479

X1.3 0.910 0.688 0.499

X2.1 0.858 0.663 0.394

X2.2 0.906 0.746 0.523

X2.3 0.881 0.718 0.521

X3.1 0.863 0.666 0.350

X3.2 0.824 0.655 0.479

X3.3 0.886 0.721 0.499

X4.1 0.850 0.746 0.360

X4.2 0.757 0.532 0.142

X4.3 0.916 0.701 0.467

Y1.1 0.725 0.893 0.632

Y1.2 0.688 0.888 0.568

Y1.3 0.699 0.892 0.647

Y2.1 0.648 0.877 0.477

Y2.2 0.653 0.876 0.495

Y2.3 0.742 0.852 0.496

Y3.1 0.706 0.825 0.594

(9)

Variable Environmental Performance

Company Performance

Green Innovation

Y3.2 0.692 0.812 0.519

Y3.3 0.643 0.845 0.575

Y4.1 0.664 0.871 0.629

Y4.2 0.644 0.857 0.564

Y4.3 0.653 0.824 0.436

Z1.1 0.399 0.483 0.903

Z1.2 0.430 0.616 0.927

Z1.3 0.488 0.622 0.917

Z1.4 0.439 0.586 0.917

Z2.1 0.469 0.584 0.888

Z2.2 0.434 0.571 0.907

Z2.3 0.420 0.612 0.917

Z2.4 0.473 0.559 0.821

Table 3 shows that each indicator on the research variable has the largest cross loading value on the other variables. Based on the results obtained, it can be stated that the indicators used in this study have good discriminant validity in constructing each variable.

4.3 Average Variance Extraced, Composite Reliability, Cronbach's Alpha

Table 4. Average Variance Extraced, Composite Reliability, Cronbach's Alpha Value Variable Average Variance

Extraced

Composite Reliability

Cronbach's Alpha Environmental

Performance (X) 0.761 0.974 0.971

Company

Performance (Y) 0.739 0.971 0.968

Green Innovation

(Z) 0.810 0.972 0.966

Based on the table above, it can be seen that the value of each test instrument has a value of >

0.7. This shows that each variable is declared reliable and can be used for further research and analysis.

Measurement Model Test Results (Inner Model) 1. Goodness-of-fit Test

Testing of the structural model is carried out by looking at the value of the coefficient of determination (R2), which is a goodness-of-fit model test. The value of the coefficient of determination (R2) in the results of the PLS algorithm can be seen by selecting R- Square (Ghozali & Latan, 2015).

Table 5. Coefficient of Determination Variables/Dimensions R-Square R-Square Adjusted Company Performance (Y) 0.713 0.703

Green Innovation (Z) 0.245 0.232 Source: Primary Data processed, 2022

Based on measurements, the value of the coefficient of determination of company performance is 0.713, meaning that the ability to model the factors that influence company performance is 71.3%. The coefficient of determination of green innovation Technium Social Sciences Journal

(10)

is 0.245, meaning that the model ability of the factors influencing green innovation is 24.5%.

Hypothesis Test

Table 6. Path Coefficients Results Original

Sample (O)

Sample Mean (M)

Standard Deviation (STDEV)

T Statistics (|

O/STDEV|)

P Values Environmental

Performance -> Green Innovation

0.495 0.503 0.099 5.006 0.000

Environmental Performance -> Company Performance

0.626 0.627 0.089 7.066 0.000

Green Innovation -> Company Performance

0.337 0.337 0.106 3.189 0.002

Environmental Performance

-> Green Innovation ->

Company Performance

0.167 0.171 0.067 2.470 0.014

Table 6 shows that the original sample values for each path show a positive direction with a significance value of less than 0.05 for each. Therefore it can be concluded that all hypotheses in this study are accepted.

Environmental Performance

(11)

Discussion

Effect of Environmental Performance on Green Innovation

Green Innovation The results in table 6 have supported environmental performance as a predictor for green innovation. Companies can implement green innovation well when achieving higher levels of environmental performance such as resource utilization, compliance with regulations, maintaining relationships between stakeholders, and achieving productivity.

This is supported by the fact that environmental performance reflects the strength of environmental capabilities such as effective environmental protection routines and processes, superior environmental knowledge, committed environmental goals that form the necessary resources to support sustainable green innovation in product design and production processes (Crossan & Apaydin, 2010). Therefore, companies need to maintain and improve environmental performance to support the implementation of green innovation, both in terms of products and processes. Therefore, companies need to maintain and improve environmental performance to support the implementation of green innovation, both in terms of products and processes. The results of this study are in line with previous research conducted by Ong et al., (2019) which stated that environmental performance has a positive and significant effect on financial performance.

Effect of Environmental Performance on Firm Performance

The results in table 6 show that environmental performance has a very important role and is a consideration for companies to improve their performance. Meanwhile, based on the description of environmental performance variables, the average value of the dimensions is good. environmental performance with good dimensions in the form of resource usage, regulatory compliance, stakeholder interaction and productivity. This needs to be maintained and improved again, in order to obtain a more optimal company performance. Environmental performance as a mechanism for companies to voluntarily integrate attention to environmental protection in their operational activities and maintain relationships with stakeholders.

Continuous improvement of environmental performance can increase market share, attract potential customers and help retain customers (Hsu et al., 2016). Through environmental performance, a company's competitive advantage can be obtained by efforts to prevent pollution, environmentally friendly products and sustainable development in its operations.

Good environmental performance also increases public trust in companies (Titisari and Alviana, 2012). Companies with good environmental performance will have a competitive advantage that allows them to achieve better performance than other companies. Therefore, companies need to maintain and improve environmental performance. Environmental performance in the form of resource use, compliance with regulations, stakeholder interaction and good productivity will affect the company's performance improvement both now and in the future.

The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted byby Ong et al., (2019) and Abdullah et al., (2019) and Wellalage et al., (2021).

Effect of Green Innovation on Firm performance

Companies will get superior firm performance when environmental activities incorporate product and process redesign for environmental improvement. By implementing green innovation companies have a wider scope to gain competitive advantage. Process redesign to reduce pollution, solid waste, energy and materials and process improvements to enable the recycling, reuse and remanufacturing of parts will lead to fundamental changes to resource productivity.

(12)

This process improvement can reduce costs in the production process which in turn can improve company performance. Fundamental changes from innovation in product design for environmental improvement can be made by using non-toxic materials, eco-friendly packaging, eco-labelling, low energy consumption, and designs for recycling and decomposition can create market differentiation. Market differentiation and increased resource productivity will enable this company to have a competitive advantage to obtain superior firm performance. Companies need to maintain and improve green innovation practices to improve company performance.

The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by Tjahjadi et al., (2020) and Ong et al., (2019).

Indirect Effect Of Environmental Performance On Business Performance Mediated By Green Innovation

When a company is able to improve environmental performance by paying attention to resource usage, complying with applicable regulations, maintaining relationships with stakeholders and optimizing productivity, the company's performance will increase. By engaging in green innovation, companies can increase value/higher value for their products with superior eco-friendly features, thereby increasing total revenue. Likewise, implementing green process innovation through improving manufacturing and operational processes will reduce operational costs (Stefan & Paul, 2008) so as to increase company profits. Therefore, it is important for companies to achieve superior green innovation because it functions as a complete mediator that transforms capabilities embedded in environmental performance into corporate performance. The results of this study support previous research conducted by Ong et al., (2019).

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the analysis of the data and discussion studied, it can be concluded that all hypotheses are accepted with a positive and significant impact on each path. Based on these conclusions, researchers have several suggestions for SMEs including: SMEs are advised to maintain and improve environmental performance by paying attention to the use of resources, compliance with regulations, interaction with stakeholders, and productivity. Continuous improvement of environmental performance by companies can increase market share, attract potential customers and help retain customers. Companies with good environmental performance will have a competitive advantage that allows them to achieve better performance than other companies; DSN based on testing, it is proven that green innovation plays a role in improving environmental performance practices for improving company performance.

Therefore, from this research, it is hoped that companies will always be able to apply green innovation practices both from the product and process aspects.

References

[1] Abdallah, A. B., & Al-Ghwayeen, W. S. (2020). Green supply chain management and business performance: The mediating roles of environmental and operational performances.

Business Process Management Journal, 26(2), 489–512. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03- 2018-0091

[2] Abdullah, R., Mahmuda, D., Malik, E., Pratiwi, E. T., Rais, M., Dja’Wa, A., Abdullah, L. O. D., Hardin, Lampe, M., & Tjilen, A. P. (2019). The influence of environmental performance, environmental costs, and firm size on financial performance with corporate social responsibility as intervening variables (empirical study on manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia stock exchange 2014-2. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 343(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/343/1/012136

(13)

[3] Ardiansyah, R., & Fitria. (2019). Penggunaan Metode Balance Scorecard Untuk Mengukur Kinerja Pekerjaan Pada PT. Bangun Cipta Karya Pamungkas (PT. BCKP). Prosiding

Seminar Nasional Darmajaya, 78–87.

https://jurnal.darmajaya.ac.id/index.php/PSND/article/view/1703

[4] Badan Pusat Statistik. (2020). Perkembangan Industri Manufaktur Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 2020 1. Badan Pusat Statistik.

[5] Ch’ng, P. C., Cheah, J., & Amran, A. (2021). Eco-innovation practices and sustainable business performance: The moderating effect of market turbulence in the Malaysian technology industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 283(xxxx), 124556.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124556

[6] Chariri, A., & Ghozali, I. (2007). Teori akuntansi. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, 409.

[7] Chen, Y. S., Lai, S. B., & Wen, C. T. (2006). The influence of green innovation performance on corporate advantage in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(4), 331–339.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9025-5

[8] Crossan, M. M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1154–1191. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00880.x

[9] Forsman, H. (2013a). Environmental innovations as a source of competitive advantage or vice versa? Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(5), 306–320.

https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1742

[10] Forsman, H. (2013b). Environmental Innovations as a Source of Competitive Advantage or Vice Versa? Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(5), 306–320.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1742

[11] Ghozali, I. (2016). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariete SPSS 23.

[12] Ghozali, I., & Latan, H. (2015). Partial Least Square “Konsep, Teknik dan Aplikasi”

SmartPLS 2.0 M3. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

[13] Grekova, K., Bremmers, H. J., Trienekens, J. H., Kemp, R. G. M., & Omta, S. W. F.

(2013). The mediating role of environmental innovation in the relationship between environmental management and firm performance in a multi-stakeholder environment. Journal on Chain and Network Science, 13(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2013.1003 [14] Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis, Eighth Edition. Cengage.

[15] Hidayat,Muhammad , Dian Syu, S. (2020). Jurnal Mirai Management Jurnal Mirai

Management. Jurnal Mirai Managemnt, 6(2), 122–136.

https://journal.stieamkop.ac.id/index.php/mirai

[16] Huang, J. W., & Li, Y. H. (2017). Green Innovation and Performance: The View of Organizational Capability and Social Reciprocity. Journal of Business Ethics, 145(2), 309–324.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2903-y

[17] Kammerer, D. (2009). The effects of customer benefit and regulation on environmental product innovation. Empirical evidence from appliance manufacturers in Germany. Ecological Economics, 68, 2285–2295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.02.016

[18] Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. . (2004). Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes; Hadvard Business Press: Brighton.

[19] Kuo, Y., & Chen, M. (2016). Impact of Eco-Innovation on Environment Performance and Competitive Advantage : Moderating Effect of Green Reputation. International Journal of Management and Applied Sciences, 2(9), 69–77.

(14)

[20] Lindawati, A. S. L., & Puspita, M. E. (2015). Corporate Social Responsibility: Implikasi Stakeholder dan Legitimacy Gap dalam Peningkatan Kinerja Perusahaan. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 157–174. https://doi.org/10.18202/jamal.2015.04.6013

[21] Moerdiyanto. (2010). Tingkat Pendidikan Manajer dan Kinerja Perusahaan Go-Public (Hambatan atau Peluang?). FISE Universitas Negeri Yogyakart, 1–18.

[22] Mulyadi. (2018). Sistem terpadu pengelolaan kinerja personel berbasis balanced scorecard (1st ed.). UPP STIM YKPN.

[23] Nishitani, K., & Kokubu, K. (2020). Can firms enhance economic performance by contributing to sustainable consumption and production? Analyzing the patterns of influence of environmental performance in Japanese manufacturing firms. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 21, 156–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SPC.2019.12.002

[24] Ong, T. S., Lee, A. S., Teh, B. H., & Magsi, H. B. (2019). Environmental innovation, environmental performance and financial performance: Evidence from Malaysian environmental proactive firms. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(12), 1–19.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su10023494

[25] Pearce, J. A., & Robinson, R. B. (2011). Strategic Management: Formulation,

Implementation, and Control. McGraw-Hill Irwin.

https://books.google.co.id/books?id=NC1NQgAACAAJ

[26] Reinhardt, F. (1998). Environmental Product Differentiation: Implications for Corporate Strategy. California Management Review, 40, 43–73.

[27] Sabihaini, Pratomo, A. H., Rustamaji, H. C., & Sudaryati. (2019). KONTEKS PERTAHANAN NEGARA INDONESIA. Ulasan Humaniora & Ilmu Sosial, 6(3), 46–54.

[28] Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R. (2017). Metode Penelitian untuk Bisnis Pendekatan Pengembangan (6th ed.). Salemba Empat.

[29] Singh, M. P., Chakraborty, A., & Roy, M. (2016). The link among innovation drivers, green innovation and business performance: empirical evidence from a developing economy Manvendra Pratap Singh *, Arpita Chakraborty and Mousumi Roy. World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 12(4), 316–334.

[30] Stefan, A., & Paul, L. H. (2008). Does It Pay to Be Green? A Systematic Overview.

Academy of Management Perspectives, 22, 45–62.

[31] Sugiyono. (2019). Statistika Untuk Penelitian. Alfabeta.

[32] Sugiyono, P. D. (2017). Metode penelitian bisnis: pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif, kombinasi, dan R&D. Penerbit CV. Alfabeta: Bandung, 225.

[33] Theodoulidis, B., Diaz, D., Crotto, F., & Rancati, E. (2017). Exploring corporate social responsibility and financial performance through stakeholder theory in the tourism industries.

Tourism Management, 62, 173–188.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.03.018

[34] Tjahjadi, B., Soewarno, N., Hariyati, H., Nafidah, L. N., Kustiningsih, N., &

Nadyaningrum, V. (2020). The role of green innovation between green market orientation and business performance: its implication for open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation:

Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040173 [35] Turulja, L., & Bajgoric, N. (2019). Innovation, firms’ performance and environmental turbulence: is there a moderator or mediator? European Journal of Innovation Management, 22(1), 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-03-2018-0064

[36] Wellalage, N. H., Kumar, V., Hunjra, A. I., & Al-Faryan, M. A. S. (2021).

Environmental performance and firm financing during COVID-19 outbreaks: Evidence from SMEs. Finance Research Letters, 102568. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FRL.2021.102568

(15)

[37] Yanne Christiani Tahaka. (2021). PENERAPAN BALANCED SCORECARD SEBAGAI ALAT UKUR KINERJA PADA PT.BANK SULUT. Jurnal EMBA, 1(4), 2013.

[38] Yasir, M., Majid, A., & Qudratullah, H. (2020). Promoting environmental performance in manufacturing industry of developing countries through environmental orientation and green business strategies. In Journal of Cleaner Production (Vol. 275). Elsevier Ltd.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123003

[39] Zain, R. N. W., Hendriyani, C., Nugroho, D., & Ruslan, B. (2021). Implementation of CSR Activities from Stakeholder Theory Perspective in Wika Mengajar. Abiwara : Jurnal Vokasi Administrasi Bisnis, 3(1), 102–107. https://doi.org/10.31334/abiwara.v3i1.1846.