Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

CEOs’ religiosity and corporate green initiatives

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the ways in which the religiosity of a firm’s CEO affects his/her firm’s green initiatives. Previous research on corporate green initiatives offers limited insights into the micro-foundations of such behaviors. From an upper echelon perspective, we argue that CEOs with religiosity are more likely to engage in corporate green initiatives, because they hold higher perceptions about being monitored to fulfill religious role expectations, driving individuals to maintain public goods. Furthermore, this positive impact of CEOs’ religiosity is weaker when he/she uses participative decision-making processes. We examine a sample of 1184 small- and medium-sized manufacturers in the Tokyo metropolitan area. Using latent class modeling, we classify respondent CEOs’ religious belief systems into eight classes and find general support for the hypothesized relationships. Our findings contribute to the upper echelon and corporate social responsibility literature by revealing the missing link between a CEO’s religiosity and his/her firm’s corporate green initiatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We tested the statistical difference between CEOs who responded to all seven religious concepts and those who did not, using firm age and number of employees. The fact that these observables are not significantly different between the two groups is suggestive of the absence of systematic differences in unobservable factors.

  2. The results of LCA imply that eight classes are the statistically optimal number to explain the observed patterns in our data set. Therefore, it should be emphasized that a model with eight classes does not necessary apply to CEOs in other countries, other Japanese regions, and general Japanese individuals.

  3. To detect common method variance (CMV) in our data, we used Harman’s single factor test. Although this test is associated with several problems (Podsakoff et al. 2003), it is widely used. We note this fact for the sake of completeness. Our exploratory factor analysis shows that the first factor accounts for 30.2% of covariance, which does not exceed the commonly accepted threshold of 50% (Tehseen et al. 2017). This result indicates that CMV may exist at a relatively lower to moderate level in our data set. A recent study indicated that a relatively high level of CMV must be present to bias true relationships (Fuller et al. 2016). Therefore, we consider that CMV is not a pervasive issue in our study and there is relatively low potential for common method bias due to CMV in our study.

References

  • Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 507–525.

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: a review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ama, T. (2005). Why are the Japanese non-religious? Japanese spirituality: being non-religious in a religious culture. Maryland: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ananthram, S., & Chan, C. (2016). Religiosity, spirituality and ethical decision-making: perspectives from executives in Indian multinational enterprises. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 33(3), 843–880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, S., Fountain, J., Harrison, G. W., & Rutstrom, E. E. (2014). Estimating subjective probabilities. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 48(3), 207–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., Duru, A., & Reeb, D. M. (2012). Investment policy in family controlled firms. Journal of Banking and Finance, 36(6), 1744–1758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aragón-Correa, J. A., Hurtado-Torres, N., Sharma, S., & García-Morales, V. J. (2008). Environmental strategy and performance in small firms: a resource-based perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(1), 88–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, Q. D., & Bourrat, P. (2011). Beliefs about God, the afterlife and morality support the role of supernatural policing in human cooperation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(1), 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 197–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000). Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 717–736.

  • Bansal, P., & Song, H. C. (2017). Similar but not the same: differentiating corporate responsibility from sustainability. The Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 105–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barro, R. J., & McCleary, R. M. (2003). Religion and economic growth across countries. American Sociological Review, 68(5), 760–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Ner, A., McCall, B. P., Stephane, M., & Wang, H. (2009). Identity and in-group/out-group differentiation in work and giving behaviors: experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 72(1), 153–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhasin, K., & Hicken, M. (2012). 17 big companies that are intensely religious. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/17-big-companies-that-are-intensely-religious-2012-1. Accessed 18 April 2020.

  • Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710–725.

  • Brody, G. H., Moore, K., & Glei, D. (1994). Family processes during adolescence as predictors of parent-young adult attitude similarity: a six-year longitudinal analysis. Family Relations, 43(4), 369–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucholz, K. K., Heath, A. C., & Reich, T. (1996). Can we subtype alcoholism? A latent class analysis of data from relatives of alcoholics in a multicenter family study of alcoholism. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 20(8), 1462–1471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(5), 453–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calza, F., Profumo, G., & Tutore, I. (2016). Corporate ownership and environmental proactivity. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(6), 369–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2013). Regression analysis of count data. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, M. A., Pollock, T. G., & Leary, M. M. (2003). Testing a model of reasoned risk-taking: governance, the experience of principals and agents, and global strategy in high-technology IPO firms. Strategic Management Journal, 24(9), 803–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, S. R., Stochl, J., Redden, S. A., & Odlaug, B. L. (2017). Latent class analysis of gambling subtypes and impulsive/compulsive associations: time to rethink diagnostic boundaries for gambling disorder? Addictive Behaviors, 72, 79–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan-Serafin, S., Brief, A. P., & George, J. M. (2013). Perspective—how does religion matter and why? Religion and the organizational sciences. Organization Science, 24(5), 1585–1600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2007). It’s all about me: narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 351–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J., & Nadkarni, S. (2017). It’s about time! CEOs’ temporal dispositions, temporal leadership, and corporate entrepreneurship. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(1), 31–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chou, S. Y., Chang, T., & Han, B. (2016). A Buddhist application of corporate social responsibility: qualitative evidence from a case study of a small Thai family business. Small Enterprise Research, 23(2), 116–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, H., Flaherty, B. P., & Schafer, J. L. (2006). Latent class logistic regression: application to marijuana use and attitudes among high school seniors. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 169(4), 723–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.

  • Crabtree, S., & Pelham, B. (2009). What Alabamians and Iranians have in common: a global perspective on Americans’ religiosity offers a few surprises. Gallup World. https://news.gallup.com/poll/114211/Alabamians-Iranians-Common.aspx. Accessed 20 January 2019.

  • Dahl, M. S., Dezso, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Fatherhood and managerial style: how a male CEO’s children affect the wages of his employees. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57(4), 669–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, M., & Greguras, G. (2014). Exploring the nature of power distance. Journal of Management, 40, 1202–1229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deakin, J., Aitken, M., Robbins, T., & Sahakian, B. J. (2004). Risk taking during decision-making in normal volunteers changes with age. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10(4), 590–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, X., Jian, W., Zeng, Q., & Du, Y. (2014). Corporate environmental responsibility in polluting industries: does religion matter? Journal of Business Ethics, 124(3), 485–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felin, T., Foss, N. J., & Ployhart, R. E. (2015). The microfoundations movement in strategy and organization theory. Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 575–632.

  • Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: the moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(3), 484–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella, A. A. (2009). Strategic leadership: theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Stakeholder management: Framework and philosophy. Mansfield: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galen, L. W. (2012). Does religious belief promote prosociality? A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 876–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geraci, A., Fabbri, D., & Monfardini, C. (2016). Testing exogeneity of multinomial regressors in count data models: does two-stage residual inclusion work? Journal of Econometric Methods, 7(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerstner, W. C., Konig, A., Enders, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2013). CEO narcissism, audience engagement, and organizational adoption of technological discontinuities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2), 257–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glock, C. Y., & Stark, R. (1965). Religion and society in tension. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, R. S. (2017). Religious environmentalism and environmental activism. In J. Hart (Ed.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to religion and ecology (pp. 439–456). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M., Fowler Jr., F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey methodology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A., & Wowak, A. J. (2017). The elephant (or donkey) in the boardroom. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: an update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206.

  • Hambrick, D. C., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. (1993). Top executive commitment to the status-quo: some tests of its determinants. Strategic Management Journal, 14(6), 401–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harjoto, M. A., & Rossi, F. (2019). Religiosity, female directors, and corporate social responsibility for Italian listed companies. Journal of Business Research, 95, 338–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, M. L., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). Explaining the premiums paid for large acquisitions: evidence of CEO hubris. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 103–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 87–99.

  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Höllinger, F., & Eder, A. (2016). Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys. Methodological Innovations, 9, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoogendoorn, B., Guerra, D., & Van der Zwan, P. (2015). What drives environmental practices of SMEs? Small Business Economics, 44(4), 759–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Japanese Agency for Cultural Affairs (2016). Shukyo nenkan [Annual reports on religious affairs]. Resource document. http://www.bunka.go.jp/tokei_hakusho_shuppan/hakusho_nenjihokokusho/shukyo_nenkan/pdf/h28nenkan.pdf. Accessed 22 December 2017.

  • Jennings, P. D., & Zandbergen, P. A. (1995). Ecologically sustainable organizations: an institutional approach. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 1015–1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., & Bering, J. (2006). Hand of God, mind of man: punishment and cognition in the evolution of cooperation. Evolutionary Psychology, 4(1), 219–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahai, S. S., Sosik, J. J., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Effects of leadership style and problem structure on work group process and outcomes in an electronic meeting system environment. Personnel Psychology, 50(1), 121–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 623–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopman, P., & Wierdsma, A. (1998). Participative management. In P. J. D. Drenth, H. Thierry, & C. J. Wolff (Eds.), Handbook of work and organizational psychology: personnel psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 297–324). East Sussex: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause, N., Liang, J., Shaw, B. A., Sugisawa, H., Kim, H. K., & Sugihara, Y. (2002). Religion, death of a loved one, and hypertension among older adults in Japan. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 57(2), S96–S107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuroda, T., Dobbins, J. C., & Gay, S. (1981). Shinto in the history of Japanese religion. The Journal of Japanese Studies, 7(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutcher, E. J., Bragger, J. D., Rodriguez-Srednicki, O., & Masco, J. L. (2010). The role of religiosity in stress, job attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 319–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanza, S. T., Savage, J. S., & Birch, L. L. (2010). Identification and prediction of latent classes of weight-loss strategies among women. Obesity (Silver Spring), 18(4), 833–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrick, R. P. (2016). The social context of decisions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3(1), 441–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufs, K., Bembom, M., & Schwens, C. (2016). CEO characteristics and SME foreign market entry mode choice: the moderating effect of firm’s geographic experience and host-country political risk. International Marketing Review, 33(2), 246–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14(1), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., & Tang, Y. (2010). CEO hubris and firm risk taking in China: the moderating role of managerial discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 45–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Schweiger, D. M. (1979). Participation in decision-making: one more look. In B. M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 265–339). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maccoby, E. (1992). The role of parents in the socialization of children: an historical overview. Developmental Psychology, 28(6), 1006–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magidson, J., & Vermunt, J. (2002). Latent class models for clustering: a comparison with k-means. Canadian Journal of Marketing Research, 20(1), 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manner, M. H. (2010). The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(supplement 1), 53–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazereeuw-Van der Duijn Schouten, C., Graafland, J., & Kaptein, M. (2014). Religiosity, CSR attitudes, and CSR behavior: an empirical study of executives’ religiosity and CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 437–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minton, E. A., Kahle, L. R., & Kim, C. H. (2015). Religion and motives for sustainable behaviors: a cross-cultural comparison and contrast. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1937–1944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monsma, S. V. (2007). Religion and philanthropic giving and volunteering: building blocks for civic responsibility. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, 3, 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montiel, I. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability separate pasts, common futures. Organization & Environment, 21(3), 245–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, M., Duncan, R., & Parton, K. (2015). Religion does matter for climate change attitudes and behavior. PLoS One, 10(8), e0134868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullahy, J. (2015). Multivariate fractional regression estimation of econometric share models. Journal of Econometric Methods, 4(1), 71–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadkarni, S., & Chen, J. (2014). Bridging yesterday, today, and tomorrow: CEO temporal focus, environmental dynamism, and rate of new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1810–1833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisen, M. (2013). 18 extremely religious big American companies. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/18-extremely-religious-big-american-companies-2013–6. Accessed 20 January 2019.

  • Norenzayan, A., & Shariff, A. F. (2008). The origin and evolution of religious prosociality. Science, 322(5898), 58–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen, A. L., & Videras, J. R. (2007). Culture and public goods: the case of religion and the voluntary provision of environmental quality. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 54(2), 162–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papke, L. E., & Wooldridge, J. (1996). Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401 (k) plan participation rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11, 619–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, T. A., Specht, D., & Duchon, D. (2013). Exploring costs and consequences of religious expression in family businesses. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 10(2), 138–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston, J. L., Ritter, R. S., & Hernandez, J. I. (2010). Principles of religious prosociality: a review and reformulation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(8), 574–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossano, M. J. (2007). Supernaturalizing social life: religion and the evolution of human cooperation. Human Nature, 18(3), 272–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, H. L. (2014). 7 CEOs with notably devout religious beliefs. Fortune. http://fortune.com/2014/11/11/7-ceos-with-notably-devout-religious-beliefs. Accessed 20 January 2019.

  • Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The pure theory of public expenditure. Review of Economics and Statistics, 36(4), 387–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shariff, A. F., Willard, A. K., Andersen, T., & Norenzayan, A. (2016). Religious priming: a meta-analysis with a focus on prosociality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20(1), 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somech, A. (2006). The effects of leadership style and team process on performance and innovation in functionally heterogeneous teams. Journal of Management, 32(1), 132–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M., & Rands, G. P. (1995). Weaving an integrated web: multilevel and multisystem perspectives of ecologically sustainable organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 908–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, K. (2010). Limitations for measuring religion in a different cultural context—the case of Japan. The Social Science Journal, 47(4), 845–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R. N. (1975). Age and experience as determinants of managerial information processing and decision making performance. Academy of Management Journal, 18(1), 74–81.

  • Tehseen, S., Ramayah, T., & Sajilan, S. (2017). Testing and controlling for common method variance: a review of available methods. Journal of Management Sciences, 4(2), 142–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terza, J. V., Basu, A., & Rathouz, P. J. (2008). Two-stage residual inclusion estimation: addressing endogeneity in health econometric modeling. Journal of Health Economics, 27(3), 531–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, P., Phillips, N., & Lounsbury, M. (2014). Taking religion seriously in the study of organizations. In P. Tracey, N. Phillips, & M. Lounsbury (Eds.), Religion and organization theory (pp. 3–21). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, G. R., & Agle, B. R. (2002). Religiosity and ethical behavior in organizations: a symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 77–97.

  • Weaver, G. R., & Stansbury, J. M. (2014). Religion in organizations: cognition and behavior. In P. Tracey, N. Phillips, & M. Lounsbury (Eds.), Religion and organization theory (pp. 65–110). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Whitbeck, B., & Gecas, V. (1988). Value attributions and value transmission between parents and children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50(3), 829–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiersema, M. F., & Bantel, K. A. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 91–121.

  • Wimberley, D. W. (1984). Socioeconomic deprivation and religious salience: a cognitive behavioral approach. The Sociological Quarterly, 25(2), 223–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimberley, D. W. (1989). Religion and role-identity: a structural symbolic interactionist conceptualization of religiosity. The Sociological Quarterly, 30(1), 125–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the comments and suggestions from the participants at Hitotsubashi Institute of Innovation Research, Summer School 2017 and the 2018 Chicago Academy of Management Annual Meeting Program.

Funding

The authors received financial support from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI with grant number JP 24243037.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business Administration, Kyoto Sangyo University, Office 313 Research Building 4, Motoyama, Kamigamo, Kita-ku, Kyoto, 6038555, Japan

    Hakaru Iguchi

  2. Faculty of Commerce, Research Institute for Environmental Economics and Management, Waseda University, Office 1319 Building 11, Nishiwaseda 1-6-1 Shinjuku, Tokyo, 1698050, Japan

    Hajime Katayama

  3. Faculty of Commerce, Waseda Innovation Laboratory, Waseda University, Office 1209 Building 11, Nishiwaseda 1-6-1 Shinjuku, Tokyo, 1698050, Japan

    Junichi Yamanoi

Authors
  1. Hakaru Iguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hajime Katayama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Junichi Yamanoi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Junichi Yamanoi.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Iguchi, H., Katayama, H. & Yamanoi, J. CEOs’ religiosity and corporate green initiatives. Small Bus Econ 58, 497–522 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00427-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00427-8

Keywords

JEL classifications

Search

Navigation