Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 16, pp 16628–16640 | Cite as

Understanding corporate surplus food donation in China: testing the roles of environmental concern, altruism, past experience, and perceived risk

  • Chuanhui Liao
  • Jin HongEmail author
  • Dingtao Zhao
Research Article
  • 58 Downloads

Abstract

This paper investigates the motives behind corporate giving and determines whether perceived risk plays a major role in corporate surplus food donation intention. A conceptual model is developed from the perspectives of perceived risk, economic concern, past behavior, and moral motives. A questionnaire survey is conducted among food manufacturers and retailers in the Sichuan Province in China. A total of 143 valid observations are used to conduct structural equation modeling analysis. The results show that corporate reputation, legislation, and business risks are the main sub dimensions of risks that corporations perceive. Perceived risk, past behavior, environmental concern, and altruism affect corporate donation intention significantly. Implications of the findings for promoting surplus food donation are also discussed.

Keywords

Altruism Environmental concern Risk perception Kramer Surplus food donation intention 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the survey respondents who gave usable answers and for the valuable comments of the anonymous reviewers.

Funding information

This work was supported by Annual Project of Soft Science of Sichuan Province (Grant18RKX0993).

References

  1. Ajzen (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and decision processes. University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Academic Press. Inc, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander C, Smaje C (2008) Surplus retail food redistribution: an analysis of a third sector model. Resour Conserv Recycl 52:1290–1298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alpizar F, Carlsson F, Johansson-Stenman O (2008) Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica. J Public Econ 92(5–6):1047–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aula P (2010) Social media, reputation risk and ambient publicity management. Strateg Leadersh 38(6):43–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baglioni S, De Pieri B, Tallarico T (2017) Surplus food recovery and food aid: the pivotal role of non-profit organisations. Insights from Italy and Germany. Volunt Int J Volunt Nonprofit Org 28(5):2032–2052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bamberg S, Ajzen I, Schmidt P (2003) Choice of travel mode in the theory of planned behavior: the roles of past behavior, habit, and reasoned action. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 25(3):175–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood cliffs, NJ, USGoogle Scholar
  8. Barroso C, Carrión GC, Roldán JL (2010) Applying maximum likelihood and PLS on different sample sizes: studies on SERVQUAL model and employee behavior model. In: Handbook of partial least squares. Springer, Berlin, pp 427–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bauer RA (1960) Consumer behavior as risk taking, source: in dynamic marketing for a changing world, ed., Robert S. Hancock. American Marketing Association. PP, Chicago, pp 389–398Google Scholar
  10. Bebbington J, Larrinaga C, Moneva JM (2008) Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management. Account Audit Account J 21(3):337–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bekkers R, Wiepking P (2011) A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q 40(5):924–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Booth S, Whelan J (2014) Hungry for change: the food banking industry in Australia. Br Food J 116(9):1392–1404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brammer S, Millington A (2005) Corporate reputation and philanthropy: an empirical analysis. J Bus Ethics 61(1):29–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell L, Gulas CS, Gruca TS (1999) Corporate giving behavior and decision-maker social consciousness. J Bus Ethics 19(4):375–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carroll AB (1979) A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad Manag Rev 4(4):497–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen M-F, Tung P-J (2010) The moderating effect of perceived lack of facilities on consumers’ recycling intentions. Environ Behav 42(6):824–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen JC, Patten DM, Roberts RW (2008) Corporate charitable contributions: a corporate social performance or legitimacy strategy? J Bus Ethics 82(1):131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cheung C-K, Chan C-M (2000) Social-cognitive factors of donating money to charity, with special attention to an international relief organization. Eval Program Plann 23(2):241–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Child J (1972) Organizational structure, environment and performance: the role of strategic choice. sociology 6(1):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chin WW (1998) The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Source: Modern methods for Business Research. PP. 295-304Google Scholar
  21. Dowling GR (1986) Perceived risk: the concept and its measurement. Psychol Mark 3:193–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eckel CC, Grossman P (2004) Giving to secular causes by the religious and nonreligious: an experimental test of the responsiveness of giving to subsidies. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q 33(2):271–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fei W (2015) Safety problems and supervisory measures of recycling link in food supply chain. Macroecon Res 2:3–9 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  24. Fombrun C, Shanley M (1990) What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Acad Manag J 33(2):233–258.  https://doi.org/10.5465/256324 Google Scholar
  25. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18:39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Garrone P, Melacini M, Perego A (2014a) Opening the black box of food waste reduction. Food Policy 46:129–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Garrone P, Melacini M, Perego A (2014b) Surplus food recovery and donation in Italy: the upstream process. Br Food J 116(9):1460–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Garrone P, Melacini M, Perego A, Sert S (2016) Reducing food waste in food manufacturing companies. J Clean Prod 137:1076–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gemünden HG (1985) Perceived risk and information search. A systematic meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Int J Res Mark 2(2):79–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Griffin D, Li K, Yue H, Zhao L (2009) Cultural values and corporate risk-taking. In: University of British Columbia and Peking University Working PaperGoogle Scholar
  31. Harman HH (1976) Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  32. Hartmann P, Apaolaza-Ibáñez V (2012) Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward green energy brands: the roles of psychological benefits and environmental concern. J Bus Res 65(9):1254–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hofstede G (1985) The interaction between national and organizational value systems [1]. J Manag Stud 22(4):347–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Horne C (2003) The internal enforcement of norms. Eur Sociol Rev 19(4):335–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hsieh YJ (2004) Exploring corporate donation behavior: a case study of Taiwan. J Nonprofit Publ Sect Market 12(1):69–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Huang YS, Wang C-J (2015) Corporate governance and risk-taking of Chinese firms: the role of board size. Int Rev Econ Financ 37:96–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jiang J, Edward Y, Huang W, Wang Z (2018) Home food waste in China and the associated determinants. Agric Technol Econ 9:88–99. (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  38. Kitchen PJ, Laurence A (2003) Corporate reputation: an eight-country analysis. Corp Reput Rev 6(2):103–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kollmuss A, Agyeman J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ Educ Res 8(3):239–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Liao C, Hong J, Zhao D, Zhang S, Chen C (2018a) Confucian culture as determinants of consumers’ food leftover generation: evidence from Chengdu, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:14919–14933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Liao F, Qing P, Sun S, Liu B (2018b) All roads lead to Rome: the impact of communication types on food waste behavior. Chin Rural Econ 5:35–51 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  42. Liu G (2014) Food losses and food waste in China. OECD food, agriculture and fisheries papers. Available at:  https://doi.org/10.1787/5jz5sq5173lq-en. (Accessed on 2017-12-25)
  43. MacMillan K, Money K, Downing S (2002) United Kingdom: best and worst corporate reputations—nominations by the general public. Corp Reput Rev 4(4):374–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mihet R (2013) Effects of culture on firm risk-taking: a cross-country and cross-industry analysis. J Cult Econ 37(1):109–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. O’Connor C, Gheoldus M, Jan O (2014) Comparative study on EU member states’ legislation and practices on food donation. European economic and social committee in collaboration with deloitte SA. Brussels, Belgium. Available at: http://www.apic-ak.cz/data_ak/14/v/DarPotr1406kratkeShrnuti.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2018
  46. Papargyropoulou E, Lozano R, Steinberger JK, Wright N, bin Ujang Z (2014) The food waste hierarchy as a framework for the management of food surplus and food waste. J Clean Prod 76:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peterson DK (2018) Enhancing corporate reputation through corporate philanthropy. J Strateg Manag 11:18–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Petter S, Straub D, Rai A (2007) Specifying formative constructs in information systems research. MIS Q 31:623–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pharoah C, Walker C (2015) The values of corporate giving: an overview of models with case studies. Centre for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  50. Planchenstainer F (2013) '’They collected what was left of the scraps’: food surplus as an opportunity and its legal incentives. Trento Law and Technology Research Group - Research Paper No 13. Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2221709 or  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2221709. Accessed 1 Jan 2018
  51. Porter ME, Kramer MR (2002) The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harv Bus Rev 80(12):56–68Google Scholar
  52. Quinn RE, Rohrbaugh J (1983) A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Manag Sci 29(3):363–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rogers WS (2011) Social psychology. McGraw-Hill Education (UK), LondonGoogle Scholar
  54. Schneider F (2013) The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention. Waste Manag 33(3):755–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schuitema G, Anable J, Skippon S, Kinnear N (2013) The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles. Transp Res A Policy Pract 48:39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sert S, Garrone P, Melacini M, Perego A (2018) Corporate food donations: altruism, strategy or cost saving? Br Food J 120(7):1628–1642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sharfman M (1994) Changing institutional rules: the evolution of corporate philanthropy, 1883-1953. Bus Soc 33(3):236–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Shen YP (2015) Investigation report and policy suggestions on recall and disposal of outdated food in food production. China Food and Drug Administration (1):57–59. (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  59. Smith JR, McSweeney A (2007) Charitable giving: the effectiveness of a revised theory of planned behaviour model in predicting donating intentions and behaviour. J Community Appl Soc Psychol 17(5):363–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Steg L, Vlek C (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda. J Environ Psychol 29(3):309–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stoner JA (1968) Risky and cautious shifts in group decisions: the influence of widely held values. J Exp Soc Psychol 4(4):442--459Google Scholar
  62. Suki NM (2016) Consumer environmental concern and green product purchase in Malaysia: structural effects of consumption values. J Clean Prod 132:204–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sutton, S. (1994). The past predicts the future: interpreting behaviour–behaviour relationships in social psychological models of health behaviour In D. R. Rutter & L. Quine (Eds.), Social psychology and health: European perspectives (pp. 71–88). Brookfield, VT, US: Avebury/Ashgate Publishing Co. Available at: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-98677-004. Accessed on 2018-05-03
  64. Tenenhaus M, Vinzi VE, Chatelin Y-M, Lauro C (2005) PLS path modeling. Comput Stat Data Anal 48(1):159–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Useem M (1986) The inner circle: large corporations and the rise of business political activity in the US and UK. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  66. Vlaholias E, Thompson K, Every D, Dawson D (2015) Charity starts… at work? Conceptual foundations for research with businesses that donate to food redistribution organisations. Sustainability 7(6):7997–8021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Xu L, Ling M, Lu Y, Shen M (2017) Understanding household waste separation behaviour: testing the roles of moral, past experience, and perceived policy effectiveness within the theory of planned behaviour. Sustainability 9(4):625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Yadav R, Pathak GS (2016) Young consumers’ intention towards buying green products in a developing nation: extending the theory of planned behavior. J Clean Prod 135:732–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yavas U, Riecken G (1981) Volunteer recruitment: a marketing approach. Paper presented at the The changing marketing environment: New theories and applications, 1981 educator's conference proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  70. Yavas U, Riecken G, Babakus E (1993) Efficacy of perceived risk as a correlate of reported donation behavior: an empirical analysis. J Acad Mark Sci 21(1):65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yuan Y, Nomura H, Takahashi Y, Yabe M (2016) Model of Chinese household kitchen waste separation behavior: a case study in Beijing city. Sustainability 8(10):1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Economics and ManagementSouthwest University of Science and TechnologyMianyangChina
  2. 2.School of ManagementUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations