199
Hội thảo Khoa học Quốc tế
...
because, thanks to its flexibility, it has access to information sources and new ideas. It therefore
favors the diversification of products.
The drivers for green product diversification are multiple (Nameroff et al., 2004; Frondel et
al., 2007; Horbach, 2008; González, 2009), in which stakeholders’roles are different (Wagneret al.,
2002; Triebswetter and Wackerbauer, 2008; Babiak and Trendafilova, 2011). These stakeholders
include regulation stakeholders, customers, investors, and so on (Frooman, 1999; Henriques and
Sadorsky, 1999; Buysse and Verbeke, 2003; Pfeffer and Salancik, 2003; Sharma and Henriques,
2005; Murillo-Lunaet al., 2008; Qi et al., 2010). Researchers have found evidence that pressure
from stakeholders is distinguished as a determinant factor for firms’ green products decision
(Amaeshi and Crane, 2006; González-Benito and González-Benito, 2006; Ditlev-Simonsen and
Midttun, 2011; Hall and Wagner, 2011). It was revealed that regulations, for example, play a key
role in green production innovation (Nameroffet al.,2004; Horbach, 2008; Kammerer, 2009).
Customer demand for green products is also a driver in encouraging the adoption of green products
practices by firms (Christmann and Taylor, 2001; Coleet al., 2005; Albornozet al., 2009; Perkins
and Neumayer, 2009). Investor influence on firms’ environmental practice has also been recognized
(Bansal and Roth, 2000). Researchers found that the environmental preference of community
stakeholders might affectfirms’ environmental behavior (Sharma and Henriques, 2005; Kassinis
and Vafeas, 2006). The Top Management Team has an important role in defining the environmental
orientation of the firm, since their values and environmental orientation determine to a great extent
the corporate responsibility assumed and the environmentally practices implemented by the firm
(Menon, 1997).
However, many empirical studies use a single dimension to measure green product diversification:
Popp (2005) used patents and Frondelet al. (2008) used ABATE (an indicator of significant changes
in production technologies). They did not discriminate horizontal green products diversification
from vertical green products diversification. Although there is a relationship between hozontal
and vertical green products diversification (Henriques and Sadorsky, 2007), it was argued that
the underling drivers for green products diversification are heterogeneous. Hence, studies on
greenproducts diversification should be carried out under an integral framework (Tang, 1998;
Henriques and Sadorsky, 2007, 2011; Frondelet al., 2008).
This study is rooted in stakeholder theory (Freeman,1984), assuming that increased ecological
sensitivity from internal and external stakeholders leads a firm towards higher responsiveness to
environmental concerns .And it aims also to provide a background on environmental management
in Vietnam, where widespread concerns in interpreting the drivers for horizontal and vertical
green products diversification have been raised (Kalinichuk, 2013; Raudszus, 2014). As the most
developing countries, Vietnam has faced a challenge of negative impacts on the environment
along with its high economic growth. The fast economic growth in Vietnam has greatly relied
on the extensive expansion of manufacturing industries which produce resource-intensive but
cheap goods for foreign markets . The main contribution of this study is to multi-dimensionally
explore the heterogonous effects of stakeholder pressure on the strategic choice of green products
diversification for Vietnamess SMEs. This understanding could facilitate mechanisms that foster
green innovation, allowing researchers, managers, and policymakers to determine the relative
efficacy of different stakeholders on driving green products diversification.
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
2.1 Green product diversification
The literature on the subject, however, seems to have overlooked the fact that product
