Rekabet Gücü Olarak Kaynak Tabanlı Eko-Yeniliğin İşletme Performansı Üzerindeki Etkisi: Antalya Sanayi İşletmelerinde Bir Uygulama

Öz

Kaynak tabanlı eko-yenilik [ekolojik yenilik] ile işletme performansının geliştirilmesi sürdürülebilir eko-rekabet gücü elde etmenin ötesinde öncelikle doğal kaynakların bozulmasını azaltmak, temel yaşam koşullarını iyileştirmek ve çevre dostu fırsatları yakalamak için kritik başarı faktörü olarak kabul edilmektedir. Bununla birlikte işletmenin kıt doğal kaynaklara bağımlılığını azaltmakla kalmayıp aynı zamanda kârlılığını, müşteri sadakatini, marka değerini, kurumsal itibarını kısacası sürdürülebilir rekabet gücünü artıracak koşulları yaratabilmesi anlamına gelmektedir. Bu kapsamda eko-süreç yeniliği, eko-örgütsel yenilik ve eko-ürün yeniliğinin işletme performansı üzerindeki etkisini ölçmeye yönelik Antalya ilinde faaliyet gösteren sanayi işletmelerinde toplamda 220 işletme yönetici ile görüşme yapılarak bir çalışma gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada kaynak tabanlı kuram bağlamında eko-yeniliğin işletme performansı üzerindeki etkisini belirlemek ve böylelikle gelecekte yapılacak olan çalışmalara ışık tutmak amaçlanmıştır. Ampirik çalışma analizleri sonucunda, kaynak tabanlı eko-yeniliğin işletme performansı üzerinde önemli bir etkiye sahip olduğu teyit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kaynak Tabanlı Kuram
• Kaynak tabanlı eko-yenilik
• rekabet gücü
• işletme performansı

The Effect of Resource-Based Eco-Innovation as a Competitive Strength on Business Performance: An Application in Antalya Industrial Enterprises

Öz

Improving business performance through resource-based eco-innovation [ecological innovation] is considered a critical success factor not only for achieving sustainable eco-competitiveness, but also for reducing the degradation of natural resources, improving basic living conditions and capturing environmentally friendly opportunities. In addition, it means that the business can not only reduce its dependence on scarce natural resources, but also create conditions that will increase its profitability, customer loyalty, brand value, corporate reputation, in short, its sustainable competitiveness. In this context, a study was conducted to measure the impact of eco-process innovation, eco-organizational innovation and eco-product innovation on business performance by interviewing a total of 220 business managers in industrial enterprises operating in Antalya. This study aims to determine the effect of eco-innovation on business performance in the context of resource-based theory and thus to shed light on future studies. As a result of empirical study analysis, it has been confirmed that resource-based eco-innovation has a significant impact on business performance.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• resource-based eco-innovation
• competitive strenght
• business performance
• resource based theory

Kaynakça

1. Acemoğlu, D., Aghion, P., Bursztn, L. ve Hemous, D. (2012). The environment and directed technical change. American Economic Review, 102, 131-166. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1668575
2. Albu, A. (2017). Industrial symbiosis: an innovative tool for promoting green growth. Filho, W. L, Pociovalisteanu, D.M. ve Al-Amin A.Q. (Eds.) içinde, Sustainable economic development green economy and green growth (ss. 1-29). Springer International Publishing.
3. Aminu, A. M. (2005). Foreign direct investment and the environment: pollution haven hypothesis revisited. Paper Prepared for The Eight Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis, Lübeck, Germany, 9-11 June.
4. Andersen, M. M. (2008). Eco-innovation: Towards a taxonomy and a theory, entrepreneurship and innovation. DRUID Conference, Copenhagen.
5. Andre, F. J. (2015). Strategic Effects and the porter hypothesis “game theory applications to environmental economics. Munoz-Garcia, A. D. F., Espinola-Arredondo, A. (Eds.) içinde, Within the six volumes contained in the WSPC set on globalization, society and environment. World Scientific Press.
6. Andreoni, V. ve Miola, A. (2016). Competitiveness and sustainable development goals. europe commission jrc technical report. Publications Office of the European Union.
7. Antonioli, D. Ve Mazzanti, M. (2009). Techno-organisational strategies, environmental innovations and economic performances, Micro-evidence from an sme-based industrial district. Journal of Innovation Economics, 3(1), 145-168. https://doi.org/10.3917/Jie.003.0145
8. Avkiran, N. K. (2018). Rise of the partial least squares structural equation modeling: An applications in banking. Avkiran, N., K., Ringle, C. M. (Eds.) içinde, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling, Recent Advances in Banking and Finance (ss. 1-29). Springer.

9. Bahzar, M. (2019). Effects of green transformational and ethical leadership on green creativity, eco-innovation and energy efficiency in higher education sector of idonesia. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 9(6), 408-414. https://doi.org 10.32479/ijeep.8372
10. Bain, J. S. (1956). Barriers to new competition. Harvard University Press.
11. Ball, P. ve Lunt, P. (2020). Lean eco-efficient innovation in operations through the maintenance organisation. International Journal of Production Economics, 219(C), 405-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.007
12. Baran, P. A. ve Sweezy, P. M. (1970). Tekelci kapitalizm (çev. Onaran, F.). Doğan Yayınları.
13. Barney, J. B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science, 32, 1231-1241. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.10.1231
14. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99-120. https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.370215
15. Beltramello, A., Haie-Fayle, L. ve Pilat, D. (2013). Why new business models matter for green growth. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k97gk40v3ln-en
16. Ben-Kheder, S. ve Zugravu, N. (2012). Environmental regulation and french firms’ location abroad: an economic geography model in an ınternational comparative study. Ecological Economics, 77, 48-61.
17. Biden, J. (2021). The Biden plan for a clean energy revolution and environmental justice. https://joebiden.com/climate-plan.
18. Bleotu, V. (2012). Comparative analysis of romanian competitiveness evolution. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5382-5386.
19. Bookchin, M. (1996). Ekolojik bir topluma doğru (çev. Yılmaz, A.). Ayrıntı Yayınları.
20. Boons, F. ve Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2012). Business models for sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45(April), 9-19.
21. Bristow, G. (2005). Everyone’s a ‘winner’: Problematising the discourse of regional competitiveness. Journal of Economic Geography, 5(3), 285-304. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbh063
22. Brunnermeier, S. B. ve Cohen, M. A. (2003). Determinants of environmental innovation in us manufacturing industries. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 45, 278-293.
23. Buttel, F. H. (2000). Ecological modernization as social theory. Geoforum, 31(1), 57-65.
24. Sirotkina, N. V., Golikova, G. V. ve Romashchenko, T. D. (2018). Policy, technologies, and approaches to management of organizational changes. Springer International Publishing AG.
25. Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. J. ve McNeill, J. R. (2007). The anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature?. Ambio, 36, 614-621. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82202-6-9
26. Stiglitz, J. E. (2019). People, power, and profıts. W. W. Norton & Company.
27. Tabachnikova, M. B. (2018). Management of evolutional changes of socio-economic systems. Endovitsky, D.A., Popkova, E.G. (Eds.) içinde, Management of changes in socio-economic systems (ss. 39-69), Springer International Publishing AG.
28. Teece, D. (2009). Dynamic capanilities and strategic management. Oxford University Press.
29. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. ve Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198781806.003.0019
30. Temurshoev, U. (2006). Pollution haven hypothesis or factor endownment hypothesis: Theory and empirical examination for us and China. Charles University Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education, Working Paper Series, Electronic Version. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1147660
31. Tirole, J. (1994). The Theory of industrial organization. The MIT Press.
32. Tønnessen, M. (2021). Anticipating the societal transformation required to solve the environmental crisis in the 21st century. Sign Systems Studies. 49(1/2), 12-62. https://doi.org/10.12697/SSS.2021.49.1-2.02
33. Triguero, A., Moreno-Mondejar L. ve Davia, M., (2013). Drivers of different types of eco-innovation in european SMEs. Ecological Economics. 92, 25-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.009
34. Trott, P. (2017). Innovation management and new product development. Pearson Education Ltd.
35. Tyson, L. A. (1992). Who’s bashing whom? ınstitute for international economics. Institute for International Economics.
36. Urmantsev, Y. A. (1978). Origins of the general theory of systems. Systems Analysis Science Knowledge, 3, 7-41.
37. Van Dijk, F. ve Cantarell, L. (2010). The emerging opportunity, nestle investor seminar, Vevey, Nestle (June), 1-53. https://www.nestle.com/investors/events/nestle-investor-seminar/2010-nestle-investor-seminar
38. Veugelers, R. (2012). New ICT sectors: platforms for european growth?. Bruegel Policy Contribution, 14(8), 1-14.
39. Wagner, M. (2005). How to reconcile environmental and economic performance to ımprove corporate sustainability: corporate environmental strategies in the european paper industry. Journal of Environmental Management, 76, 105-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.11.021
40. Wang, C. H. (2019). How organizational green culture ınfluences green performance and competitive advantage the mediating role of green innovation. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 30(4), 666-683. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-09-2018-0314
41. Wang, C. L. ve Ahmed, P. K. (2004). The development and validation of the organisational innovativeness construct using confirmatory Factor Analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 7(4), 303-313. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060410565056
42. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.
43. Whitehead, M. (2014). Environmental transformations a geography of the anthropocene. Routledge.
44. World Economic Forum (2015). Global risks 2015 (090115. https://www3.weforum.org/reports
45. World Economic Forum (2016). The global risks report 2016. https://www3.weforum.org/reports
46. World Economic Forum (2017). Global risks 2017 (090115). https://www3.weforum.org/reports
47. World Economic Forum (2018). Platform for accelerating the circular economy. https://www3.weforum.org/reports
48. World Economic Forum (2021a). The global risks report 2021, 16th Edition. https://www3.weforum.org/reports
49. World Economic Forum (2021b). Davos 2021: The davos agenda. https://www3.weforum.org/reports
50. Ziegler, A. ve Nogareda, J. (2009). Environmental management systems and technological environmental innovations: Exploring the causal relationship. Research Policy, 38, 885-893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.020
51. Ziegler, A. ve Rennings, K. (2004). Determinants of environmental innovations in Germany: Do organizational measures matter? a discrete choice analysis at the firm level. ZEW Discussion Paper, N. 04-30.