Journal of Business Ethics (2008) 77:271–286 Ó Springer 2007

DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9349-1

The Positive Effect of Green Intellectual

Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms Yu-Shan Chen

ABSTRACT. No research explored intellectual capital Electronics and Electrical Equipment (WEEE)’’ that
about green innovation or environmental management. European Union will adopt in 2008, the rise of
This study wanted to fill this research gap, and proposed a international environmental regulations and popular
novel construct – green intellectual capital – to explore environmental consciousness of consumers would
the positive relationship between green intellectual capital bring significant impacts to industries in the world
and competitive advantages of firms. The empirical results
(Chen et al., 2006). Under the trends of strict
of this study showed that the three types of green intel-
lectual capital – green human capital, green structural
international environmental regulations and popular
capital, and green relational capital – had positive effects environmental consciousness of consumers, there
on competitive advantages of firms. Moreover, this study exist many changes and impacts for the rules and
found that green relational capital was the most common patterns of the global industrial competition. It is
among these three types of green intellectual capital, and very important for firms to find out solutions. This
the three types of green intellectual capital of Medium & study proposed a novel construct – green intellectual
Small Enterprises (SMEs) were all significantly less than capital, and explored its positive influence upon
those of large enterprises in the information and elec- competitive advantages of firms. The companies
tronics industry in Taiwan. In sum, companies investing always try to avoid environmental protection
many resources and efforts in green intellectual capital investments and think they do not only have no
could not only meet the trends of strict international benefit for corporations but also hinder the future
environmental regulations and popular environmental
development of corporations. This study postulated
consciousness of consumers, but also eventually obtain
corporate competitive advantages.
that green intellectual capital is worthy to develop
and cultivate because it could bring more corporate
KEY WORDS: green intellectual capital, green human competitive advantages. This study wanted to give
capital, green structural capital, green relational capital, environmental investments correct and fair evalua-
competitive advantage tion and positioning.
Under new economy era, intangible assets become
Introduction an important determinant for competitive advantages
of firms. The market value of a firm is equal to its
From ‘‘Montreal Convention’’ in 1987, ‘‘Rio financial capital plus its intellectual capital (Johnson,
Declaration of Rio Earth Summit’’ in 1992, ‘‘Kyoto 1999). However, in the era of knowledge economy,
Protocol’’ in 1997, ‘‘Sustainable Development firmÕs intellectual capital is always greater than its
Announcements of Johannesburg World Summit’’ financial capital. In addition, with the popularization
in 2002, to ‘‘Restriction of the Use of Certain of the internet and service industries, the gap
Hazardous Substances in EEE (RoHS)’’ and ‘‘Waste between market value and book value of a firm has
been increasing continuously; consequently, the real
Dr. Chen is an assistant professor in the Department of Business value of a firm is no longer correct on its financial
Administration in National Yunlin University of Science & statements. Since traditional accounting systems can
Technology in Taiwan. His research focused on management no longer correctly express the market value of a firm
of technology, innovation management, corporate environ- nowadays, the evaluation of firmÕs real value should
mental management, and patent analysis. shift from the previous evaluation of tangible assets to
272 Yu-Shan Chen

the expression of intangible assets. Therefore, recent proposed a novel construct – green intellectual
researches with regard to intellectual capital have capital – to explore the positive relationship between
drawn much attention recently on how to evaluate intellectual capital about green innovation or envi-
the real value of firms (Stewart, 1994). ronmental management and competitive advantages
The issue of the impacts of environmental pro- of firms. This article referred to the classification of
tection on corporate competitive advantages was not intellectual capital adopted by Johnson (1999) and
paid much attention by academic communities until Bontis (1999) to classify green intellectual capital
recently. Under the trends of the strict international into green human capital, green structural capital,
environmental regulations and the rise of consumer and green relational capital in order to explore
environmentalism, it changed the patterns of com- whether the three types of green intellectual capital
petition around the world. Therefore, corporate have positive effects on competitive advantages of
environmental management will play an important firms.
role nowadays (Russo and Fouts, 1997). Many Facing the trends of strict environmental con-
companies thought corporate environmental man- ventions and popular environmental consciousness
agement as an unnecessary investment, or even were of consumers, companies should not panic or over-
misled that this would obstruct the development of react, because these environmental trends could be
the corporations. Porter and van der Linde (1995), turned into the momentum that drives them to carry
on the contrary, thought that pollution was the out green intellectual capital and thus create com-
concrete evidence of inefficient uses of resources. petitive advantages. These environmental trends had
Businesses can increase the productivity of resources often been thought by companies as obstacles of
through green innovation. Moreover, the corpora- their future development, so a lot of companies
tions that pioneer in green innovation will enjoy the shirked or fought against these environmental trends.
‘‘first mover advantage’’, which allow them to ask This study focused on finding the correct evaluation
for a higher price for green products and, at the same and position for these environmental trends, and
time, improve their corporate images, develop new proposed a novel concept – green intellectual capital,
markets and gain competitive advantages (Hart, in compliance with these environmental trends to
1995; Peattie, 1992). obtain competitive advantages.
Previous studies argued that intellectual capital has
positive influence upon competitive advantages of
firms (Edvinsson and Malone, 1997; Johnson, 1999; Literature review and hypothesis
Stewart, 1994). However, no research explored development
whether intellectual capital about environmental
management or green innovation has a positive Corporate environmental management
effect on competitive advantages of firms. Compa-
nies engaging in environmental management and Now-a-days companies have no choice but to carry
green innovation actively can not only minimize out environmental protection activities to comply
production waste and increase productivity, but also with international regulations of environmental
charge relatively high prices for green products, protection and environmental consciousness of
improve corporate images, and thereby obtain cor- consumers (Berry and Rondinelli, 1998; Hart,
porate competitive advantages under the trends of 1995). Businesses that adopt the proactive environ-
popular environmentalism consciousness of con- ment management strategies could integrate the
sumers and severe international regulations of envi- objectives of environmental protections with dif-
ronmental protection (Berry and Rondinelli, 1998; ferent departments in companies to solve the envi-
Chen et al., 2006; Porter and van der Linde, 1995; ronmental problems by utilizing the innovative
Shrivastava, 1995). Although previous scholars had environmental technology (Greeno and Robinson
paid great attention to explore intellectual capital, 1992). One of two forces driving companies to
none explored intellectual capital about green engage in environmental management is interna-
innovation or environmental management. There- tional regulations of environmental protection,
fore, this study wanted to fill this research gap, and such as Montreal Convention and Kyoto Protocol,
 Effect of Green Intellectual Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms 273

etc. The other force driving companies to engage knowledge, information, technologies, intellectual
in environmental management is environmental property right, experience, organization learning and
consciousness of consumers. Environmentalism of competence, team communication systems, cus-
consumers is increasing in the world, and thereby tomer relations, and brands that are able to create
drives enterprises to carry out corporate environ- values for a firm. There were two types of intel-
mental management, because consumers are willing lectual capital studies: intellectual capital manage-
to choose environment-friendly products and even ment and intellectual capital measurement. The
pay relatively high prices for green products. studies about intellectual capital management
Porter and van der Linde (1995) thought pollu- focused on how to manage intangible assets,
tion resulted from inefficient uses in resources, and knowledge stocks, and capabilities of a company to
argued that companies which are the pioneers of create value or competitive advantages. However,
green innovation can have the first mover advantage, the studies of intellectual capital measurement fo-
and thus they can charge relatively high prices for cused on gathering, compiling, analyzing, and eval-
their green products and further obtain competitive uating non-financial information to measure
advantages. Moreover, firms investing many efforts intangible assets of firms which are insufficient on
in environmental management can not only avoid financial statements (Roos and Roos, 1997). Hence,
the trouble of protests or punishment about envi- the disclosure of intellectual capital can be thought as
ronmental protection, but also enable them to supplementary information of financial statements of
improve their corporate images, to develop new a company. Therefore, the concept of intellectual
markets, and to increase their competitive advanta- capital can bring a revolution to the traditional
ges. In addition, the enterprises may embody the accounting system (Edvinsson and Malone, 1997;
concept of green products in the design and package Stewart, 1994).
of their products to increase their differentiation There are different ways to classify intellectual
advantages of their products (Chen et al., 2006; capital. Some previous studies posited that intellectual
Shrivastava, 1995). Businesses can increase their capital could be classified into two types: human
productivity through green innovation to make up capital and structural capital (Edvinsson and Malone,
with the environmental costs. Besides, the compa- 1997; Roos and Roos, 1997). Human capital was
nies that pioneer in new environmental markets will defined as the summation of knowledge, skills,
enjoy the ‘‘first mover advantage’’, which allow innovation, and capabilities of employees to reach
them to charge higher prices for green products, to goals (Sackman et al., 1989; Schultz, 1961). Human
improve the corporate images, to sell their envi- capital was the source and momentum of revolution
ronmental technologies or services and even to and innovation for organizations, including employ-
create new markets (Chen et al., 2006; Hart, 1995; eesÕ innovativeness, attitude, wisdom, experience,
Peattie, 1992; Porter and van der Linde, 1995). and capabilities (Grantham and Nichols, 1997).
Besides, human capital has two determinants:
employeesÕ capabilities and their commitments (Elias
Definition, implication and classification of intellectual and Scarbrough, 2004; Ulrich, 1998). Human capital
capital is embedded in employees not in organizations, and
can be taken away by employeesÕ leaving (Miller and
Intellectual capital is the total stocks of all the Wurzburg, 1995). Unlike human capital, structural
intangible assets, knowledge, and capabilities of a capital, or organizational capital, is embedded in
company that could create values or competitive organizations, and cannot be taken away by
advantages, so as to achieve its excellent goals employeesÕ leaving. Structural capital was defined as
(Masoulas, 1998). In addition, intellectual capital was the stocks of patents, trademarks, hardware, software,
also defined as the total stocks of all intangible assets databases, organizational culture, and organizational
and capabilities in a company that can create values capabilities within an organization (Edvinsson and
or competitive advantages (Edvinsson and Malone, Malone, 1997; Roos and Roos, 1997). Embedded in
1997; Stewart, 1994). Stewart (1994) defined intel- organizations, structural capital was the supportive
lectual capital as the total stocks of the collective infrastructure of human capital (Bontis, 1999).
274 Yu-Shan Chen

One way to classify intellectual capital into three gradually draws the attention of researchers recently.
types was to divide into human capital, structural However, no research explored whether intellectual
capital, and customer capital (Bozbura, 2004). The capital about environmental management or green
concepts of human capital and structural capital were innovation has a positive effect on competitive
similar to the statements mentioned above. Initially advantages of firms. Under the trends of strict envi-
customer capital was under structural capital in the ronmental conventions and popular environmental
original model of Edvinsson and Malone (1997). consciousness of consumers, there exist many chan-
However, some researchers argued that customer ges and impacts in the rules and patterns of the
capital needed to be separated from structural capital industrial competition. It is very important for firms
to further discuss (Bozbura, 2004). Customer capital to find out the solutions. Porter and van der Linde
was defined as the summation of relationships, (1995), Shrivastava (1995), and Berry and Rondinelli
interactions, and intimacy of an organization with (1998) argued that companies which engage corpo-
customers (Stewart, 1994). The most common rate environmental management and green innova-
classification of intellectual capital was to divide tion actively can not only reduce production waste
intellectual capital into three types: human capital, and increase productivity but also improve corporate
structural capital, and relational capital (Bontis, 1999; images, charge relatively high prices for green
Johnson, 1999). The concepts of human capital and products, sell the know-how and services of envi-
structural capital were the same as the statements ronmental protection, develop new markets and
mentioned above. Relational capital was defined as eventually obtain competitive advantages. Therefore,
the summation of the relationships about customer engaging in environmental management and green
loyalty, goodwill, and trust, etc. with companiesÕ innovation actively has positive influence upon
suppliers, channels, customers, and partners (Bontis, corporate competitive advantages. Although previ-
1999; Johnson, 1999). ous scholars had paid great attention to explore
Some researches classified intellectual capital into intellectual capital, there was no research exploring
four types: human capital, process capital, innovation intellectual capital about green innovation or envi-
capital, and relational capital (Joia, 2000). Another ronmental management. Hence, this study wanted to
similar classification was to divide intellectual capital fill this research gap, and proposed a novel construct
into four types: human capital, innovation capital, – green intellectual capital – to explore the positive
process capital, and customer capital (Van Buren, relationship between intellectual capital about green
1999). The definitions of human capital and rela- innovation or environmental management and
tional capital (or customer capital) were the same as competitive advantages of firms. This article referred
the statements mentioned above. Moreover, inno- to the classification of intellectual capital adopted by
vation capital was defined as the total stocks of Johnson (1999) and Bontis (1999) to classify green
organizational innovation, new product develop- intellectual capital into green human capital, green
ment, patents, trademarks, copyrights, and databases, structural capital and green relational capital in order
etc. within a company, while process capital was to explore whether the three types of green intel-
defined as the summation of workflow, procedures, lectual capital have positive effects on competitive
operation processes, organizational culture, and advantages of firms.
information technology systems, etc. within a
company (Joia, 2000; Van Buren, 1999). The positive effect of green human capital

The positive relationship between green intellectual capital Johnson (1999) and Dzinkowski (2000) postulated
and competitive advantages of firms that human capital of companies has a positive effect
on their competitive advantages. Moreover, com-
Previous studies argued that intellectual capital has panies engaging in environmental management and
positive influence upon competitive advantages of green innovation actively can not only minimize
firms (Edvinsson and Malone, 1997; Johnson, 1999; production waste and increase productivity but also
Stewart, 1994). Like the studies of intellectual capital, charge relatively high prices for green products,
the issue of corporate environmental management improve corporate images, and thus make a positive
 Effect of Green Intellectual Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms 275

impact on corporate competitive advantages under capabilities, organizational commitments, knowledge

the trends of popular environmentalism consciousness management systems, reward systems, information
of consumers and strict international regulations of technology systems, databases, managerial institution,
environmental protection (Berry and Rondinelli, operation processes, managerial philosophies,
1998; Chen et al., 2006; Porter and van der Linde, organizational culture, company images, patents,
1995; Shrivastava, 1995). Although previous studies copy rights, and trademarks, etc. about environ-
had paid great attention to explore human capital, mental protection or green innovation within a
none discussed human capital about green innova- company can help companies obtain competitive
tion or environmental management. Hence, this advantages. Hence, this study implied the following
study wanted to fill this research gap, and proposed a hypothesis:
novel construct – green human capital – to explore
the positive relationship between human capital Hypothesis 2: Green structural capital is positively
about green innovation or environmental manage- associated with competitive
ment and competitive advantages of firms. Thus, the advantages of firms.
employeesÕ stocks of knowledge, skills, capabilities, The positive effect of green relational capital
experience, attitude, wisdom, creativities, and
commitments, etc. about environmental protection Some previous researches posited that companiesÕ
or green innovation can help companies obtain relational capital has a positive effect on their com-
competitive advantages. Therefore, this study im- petitive advantages (Johnson, 1999; Bontis, 1999).
plied the following hypothesis: Under the trends of popular environmentalism
consciousness of consumers and severe international
Hypothesis 1: Green human capital is positively regulations of environmental protection, asserted
associated with competitive that companies implementing environmental man-
advantages of firms. agement and green innovation actively can not only
minimize production waste and increase productiv-
The positive effect of green structural capital ity, but also charge relatively high prices for green
products, improve corporate images, enhance their
Previous studies pointed out that companiesÕ struc- production efficiency, develop green products, and
tural capital has a positive effect on their competitive thus make a positive impact on corporate competi-
advantages (Stewart, 1994; Grantham and Nichols, tive advantages (Berry and Rondinelli, 1998; Chen
1997). In addition, Porter and van der Linde (1995), et al., 2006; Porter and van der Linde, 1995;
Shrivastava (1995), and Berry and Rondinelli (1998) Shrivastava, 1995). Previous studies had discussed
argued that companies paying much attention and about relational capital, but no study explored rela-
many investments in environmental management tional capital about green innovation or environ-
and green innovation would not only avoid the mental management. Hence, this study proposed a
trouble of protests or punishment about environ- novel construct – green relational capital – to ex-
mental protection, but also improve their corporate plore the positive relationship between relational
images, enhance their production efficiency, develop capital about green innovation or environmental
new environmental markets, and thereby increase management and competitive advantages of firms,
their competitive advantages. Though previous and filled this research gap. Therefore, companiesÕ
studies had paid great attention to explore structural accumulative interactive relationships with custom-
capital, there was no study exploring structural capital ers, suppliers, and partners about corporate envi-
about green innovation or environmental manage- ronmental management and green innovation can
ment. Therefore, this study filled this research gap, help companies obtain competitive advantages.
and proposed a novel construct – green structural Thus, this study implied the following hypothesis:
capital – to explore the positive relationship between
structural capital about green innovation or envi- Hypothesis 3: Green relational capital is positively
ronmental management and competitive advantages associated with competitive
of firms. Therefore, the stocks of organizational advantages of firms.
276 Yu-Shan Chen

Under the trends of popular environmentalism asked to return the completed questionnaires within
consciousness of consumers and severe international 2 weeks through mailing.
regulations of environmental protection, the rules The research object of this study was information
and patterns of the industrial competition are chan- and electronics companies in Taiwan, covering the
ged nowadays. Though previous studies paid much information hardware industry, the optoelectronic
attention to study intellectual capital, none explored and communication industry, the semiconductor
intellectual capital about green innovation or envi- industry, and the consumer electronics and electronic
ronmental management. Hence, this article pro- component industry. However, the research object
posed a novel concept – green intellectual capital – of this study did not include the information software
to fill the research gap. Moreover, the main purpose industry, because the information software industry
of this study was to explore the positive relationship does not create pollution to the environment.
between green intellectual capital and competitive The study referred to previous studies to design
advantages of firms. Furthermore, this artice referred questionnaire items. Prior to mailing to the
to the classification of intellectual capital adopted by respondents, seven experts and scholars were asked
Johnson (1999) and Bontis (1999) to classify green to modify the questionnaire in the first pretest.
intellectual capital into green human capital, green Subsequently, the questionnaires were randomly
structural capital and green relational capital in order mailed to 12 managers in manufacturing, marketing,
to analyze whether the three types of green intel- R&D, or environmental protection departments of
lectual capital have positive effects on competitive different companies and they were asked to fill in the
advantages of firms. The research framework of this questionnaire and identify ambiguities in terms,
study was shown in Figure 1. meanings and issues in the second pretest. Therefore,
the questionnaire had a high level of content valid-
ity. Six hundred questionnaires were sent to the
Methodology and measurement managers in manufacturing, marketing, R&D, or
environmental protection departments. There were
Data collection and samples 126 valid questionnaires, and the effective response
rate was 21%.
This study applied the questionnaire survey to test
the hypotheses and the research object of this study
focused on information and electronics companies in Definitions and measurements of variables
Taiwan. The samples were randomly selected from
‘‘2005 Business Directory of Taiwan’’. The The measurement of the questionnaire items in this
respondents of the questionnaires were the managers study was with ‘‘seven-point Likert scale from 1 to
of manufacturing, marketing, R&D, or environ- 7’’ rating from strongly disagreement to strongly
mental protection departments. To heighten the agreement. The questionnaire comprised three parts.
valid survey response rate, we called each company The first part of the questionnaire consisted of the
which was sampled, explained the objectives of the descriptive data of companies (including the number
study and the questionnaire contents, and confirmed of employees, year founded, industry sector, etc.),
the names and job titles of the respondents prior to the second part is the measurement of green intel-
mailing of the questionnaire. The respondents were lectual capital (including green human capital, green

Green Intellectual Capital

H 1- H 3
Green Human Capital Competitive
Advantages of Firms
Green Structure Capital

Green Relation Capital

Figure 1. Research framework.

 Effect of Green Intellectual Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms 277

structural capital, and green relational capital), and environmental protection or green innovation, and
the third part is the measurement of competitive was embedded in employees not in organizations. The
advantages of firms. The definitions and measure- measurement of green human capital comprises the
ments of the constructs were further defined as following five items: (1) whether the productivity and
follows. contribution of environmental protection of the
employees in the firm is better than those of its major
competitors; (2) whether the employeesÕ competence
Green intellectual capital of environmental protection in the firm is better than
that of its major competitors; (3) whether the product
Intellectual capital in this study was defined as the or service qualities of environmental protection pro-
accumulation of intangible assets, knowledge, capa- vided by the employees of the firm are better than
bilities, and relationships, etc. in the employee level those of its major competitors; (4) whether the
and the organization level within a company, and cooperative degree of team work about environ-
can most commonly be split into three types: human mental protection in the firm is more than that of its
capital, structural capital, and relational capital major competitors; (5) whether the managers can fully
(Bontis, 1999; Johnson, 1999). Referring to the support their employees to achieve their jobs of
previous studies about intellectual capital, this study environmental protection (Bontis, 1999; Edvinsson
proposed a new novel construct – green intellectual and Malone, 1997; Johnson, 1999; Roos and Roos,
capital – in compliance with the trends of strict 1997; Stewart, 1994).
international environmental regulations and popular
environmental consciousness of consumers in the Green structural capital
world, and defined it as the total stocks of all kinds of
intangible assets, knowledge, capabilities, and rela- Unlike human capital, structural capital is owned by
tionships, etc. about environmental protection or the organization and cannot be taken away by
green innovation in the individual level and the employees (Bontis, 1999; Johnson, 1999). This
organization level within a company (Dzinkowski, requires to store the competence with the help of
2000; Edvinsson and Malone, 1997; Roos and Roos, technologies, process descriptions, manuals, net-
1997; Stewart, 1994). Moreover, according to pre- works, and so on, and to ensure that competence
vious studies about the classification of intellectual will remain within a company when employees quit
capital, this study classified green intellectual capital or retire (Stewart, 1994). This article referred to the
into three types: green human capital, green struc- definitions of structural capital from Stewart (1994),
tural capital, and green relational capital (Bontis, Edvinsson and Malone (1997), Johnson (1999), and
1999; Johnson, 1999). Dzinkowski (2000), and defined green structural
capital as the stocks of organizational capabilities,
Green human capital organizational commitments, knowledge manage-
ment systems, reward systems, information tech-
Previous researches argued that human capital is nology systems, databases, managerial mechanisms,
embedded in employees not in organizations, and can operation processes, managerial philosophies, orga-
be developed through training and education (Miller nizational culture, company images, patents, copy
and Wurzburg, 1995). On the other hand, human rights, and trademarks, etc. about environmental
capital has two determinants: employeesÕ capabilities protection or green innovation within a company.
and their commitments (Elias and Scarbrough, 2004; The measurement of green structural capital com-
Ulrich, 1998). This study referred to the definitions of prises the following nine items: (1) whether the
human capital from Stewart (1994), Edvinsson and management system of environmental protection in
Malone (1997), Roos and Roos (1997), Johnson the firm is superior to that of its major competitors;
(1999) and Dzinkowski (2000), and defined green (2) whether innovations about environmental pro-
human capital as the summation of employeesÕ tection in the firm are more than those of its major
knowledge, skills, capabilities, experience, attitude, competitors; (3) whether the profits earned from
wisdom, creativities, and commitments, etc. about environmental protection activities of the firm is
278 Yu-Shan Chen

more than that of its major competitors; (4) whether about environmental protection of the firm with its
the ratio of investments in R&D expenditures about downstream clients or channels are stable; (5) whe-
environmental protection in the firm to its sales is ther the firm has stable and well cooperation rela-
more than that of its major competitors; (5) whether tionships about environmental protection with its
the ratio of employees about environmental man- strategic partners (Bontis, 1999; Capello, 2002;
agement to the total employees in the firm is more Capello and Faggian, 2005; Johnson, 1999).
than that of its major competitors; (6) whether
investments in environmental protection facilities in
the firm are more than those of its major competitors; Competitive advantages of firms
(7) whether the competence in the development of
green products in the firm is better than that of its Porter (1980), Coyne (1986) and Barney (1991)
major competitors; (8) whether the overall operation defined competitive advantages of a company as a
processes about environmental protection in the firm condition under which competitors are unable to
work smoothly; (9) whether the knowledge man- replicate its competitive strategies executed by the
agement system about environmental management company, nor are competitors able to acquire the
in the firm is favorable for the accumulation and benefit that the company obtains by means of its
sharing of the knowledge of environmental competitive strategies. This study defined competi-
management (Bontis, 1999; Dzinkowski, 2000; tive advantages of firms as a condition under which
Edvinsson and Malone, 1997; Johnson, 1999). firms occupies some positions where their compet-
itors cannot copy its successful strategies and they
Green relational capital can gain the sustainable benefits from these successful
strategies (Barney, 1991; Coyne, 1986; Porter,
Relational capital was the stocks of relations that a 1980). The measurement of competitive advantages
firm can cooperate or communicate with other of firms contained 11 items: (1) the company has the
firms, institutions, research centers and customers, competitive advantage of low cost compared to its
measured through the intensity of cooperation major competitors; (2) the quality of the products or
among local actors (Capello, 2002). On the other services that the company offers is better than that of
hand, relational capital was construed as incorpo- its major competitorÕs products or services; (3) the
rating strong levels of understanding, trust, rela- company is more capable of R&D and innovation
tionship, and collaboration among alliance partners, than its major competitors; (4) the company has
suppliers, and channels (Capello and Faggian, 2005). better managerial capabilities than its major com-
This study referred to the definitions of relational petitors; (5) the companyÕs profitability is better; (6)
capital from Johnson (1999), Bontis (1999), Capello the growth of the company exceeds that of its major
(2002), and Capello and Faggian (2005), and defined competitors; (7) the company is the first mover in
green relational capital as the stocks of a companyÕs some important fields and occupies some important
interactive relationships with customers, suppliers, positions; (8) the corporate image of the company is
network members, and partners about corporate better than that of its major competitors; (9) the
environmental management and green innovation, major competitors of the company cannot imitate its
which enables it to create fortunes and obtain products or services easily; (10) the major competi-
competitive advantages. The measurement of green tors of the company cannot imitate its ideas easily;
relational capital comprises the following five items: (11) the major competitors of the company cannot
(1) whether the firm designs its products or services replace its distinctive position easily (Barney, 1991;
in compliance with the environmentalism desires of Coyne, 1986; Porter, 1980).
its customers; (2) whether the customer satisfaction
about environmental protection of the firm is better
than that of its major competitors; (3) whether the Empirical Results
cooperation relationships about environmental pro-
tection of the firm with its upstream suppliers are Table I showed the descriptive statistics of this
stable; (4) whether the cooperation relationships study. The CronbachÕs a coefficients of the
 Effect of Green Intellectual Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms 279

TABLE I
Descriptive statistics

Constructs Mean Standard deviation Min. Max.

Green human capital 4.8603 0.8422 2.00 6.80

Green structural capital 4.8307 0.7654 2.33 6.78
Green relational capital 4.9968 0.9587 2.00 6.80
Competitive advantages of firms 4.9531 0.8115 2.45 6.73

TABLE II
The CronbachÕs a coefficients of the constructs

Constructs Number of items CronbachÕs a Remark

Green human capital 5 0.8841 Acceptable

Green structural capital 9 0.9151 Acceptable
Green relational capital 5 0.8869 Acceptable
Competitive advantages of firms 11 0.9086 Acceptable

constructs were shown in Table II. Generally, the study referred to the past literatures to design
minimum requirement of CronbachÕs a coefficient questionnaire items. Before mailing to the respon-
is 0.7 (Hair et al., 1998). It can be observed that dents, seven experts and scholars were asked to
the CronbachÕs a coefficient of ‘‘green human modify the questionnaire in the first pretest. Subse-
capital’’ is 0.8841; the CronbachÕs a coefficient of quently, in the second pretest the questionnaires
‘‘green structural capital’’ is 0.9151; the CronbachÕs were randomly mailed to 12 managers of manufac-
a coefficient of ‘‘green relational capital’’ is 0.8869; turing, marketing, R&D, or environmental protec-
the CronbachÕs a coefficient of competitive tion departments of different companies, and they
advantages of firms is 0.9086. The CronbachÕs a were asked to fill in the questionnaires and identify
coefficients of all four constructs are more than 0.7. ambiguities in terms, meanings, and issues. There-
Therefore, the measurement of this study was fore, the measurement of this study is acceptable in
acceptable in reliability. content validity.
The result of factor analysis in this study was Table IV showed the correlation coefficients be-
shown in Table III. Every construct in this study can tween the constructs. It can be found from Table IV
be classified into only one factor. Moreover, the that competitive advantages of firms had obviously

TABLE III
Factor analysis of this study

Constructs Number Number Accumulation percentage

of Items of factors of explained variance

Green human capital 5 1 68.978%

Green structural capital 9 1 59.728%
Green relational capital 5 1 69.440%
Competitive advantages of firms 11 1 66.258%
280 Yu-Shan Chen

TABLE IV Therefore, H1, H2, and H3 were supported in this

Correlation coefficients between constructs study. The VIF value of the regression model was
between 3.045 and 5.061, which were below 10, so
A. B. C. D. there was no ‘‘multicollinearity’’ in this regression
model (Hair et al., 1998). The results indicated that
A. Green human the more the investments in the three types of green
capital intellectual capital were, the stronger competitive
B. Green structural 0.872** advantages of firms were. Therefore, investment in
capital green human capital, green structural capital, and
C. Green relational 0.776** 0.806**
green relational capital was helpful to businesses.
capital
D. Competitive 0.815** 0.853** 0.797**
advantages of firms Difference analysis among three types of green intellectual
capital
Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Subsequently, the study applied paired t-test to ana-
positive correlations with green human capital, lyze whether there were differences between the
green structural capital, and green relational capital, three types of green intellectual capital – green
respectively, whereas there were significant corre- human capital, green structural capital, and green
lations among the three types of green intellectual relational capital – in the information and electronics
capital. companies in Taiwan. Table VI showed that green
relational capital was the most among these three
types of green intellectual capital in Taiwanese
The relationship between green intellectual capital and information and electronics companies, and it was
competitive advantages of firms more than green human capital and green structural
capital in the information and electronics companies
Table V is the regression analysis of the relationship in Taiwan. It indicated two meanings: first, infor-
between the three types of green intellectual capital mation and electronics companies in Taiwan
and competitive advantages of firms. The result emphasized the interactive ‘‘green relationships’’
showed that the three types of green intellectual with their upstream suppliers, downstream clients,
capital – green human capital, green structural cap- and strategic partners; second, it can be observed
ital, and green relational capital – were positively from Table V that green human capital and green
correlated to competitive advantage of firms. structural capital had significantly positive relation-
ships with competitive advantages of firms; never-
theless, these two types of green intellectual capital
TABLE V
among Taiwanese information and electronics
Empirical results of regression analysis companies were less than green relational capital.
Therefore, it is imperative for information and
Dependent variable: competitive advantages of firms electronics companies of Taiwan to create and
Independent variables develop their green human capital and green struc-
tural capital to enhance their competitive advantages
Green human capital 0.214* (2.337) of firms.
Green structural capital 0.450** (4.628)
Green relational capital 0.268** (3.549)
R2 0.772 Difference analysis of three types of green intellectual capital
Adjusted R2 0.766
between large enterprises and SMEs
N 126
F 137.442**
According to ‘‘The Criteria to Identify Small and
Note: The number in the bracket is t-value. * p < 0.05, Medium-sized Enterprises’’ stipulated by Ministry
** p < <0.01. of Economic Affairs of Taiwan, this study defined a
 Effect of Green Intellectual Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms 281

TABLE VI
Paired t-test between green human capital, green structural capital, and green relational capital

Mean A–B C–B C–A

Green human capital (A) 4.8603 0.0296 (0.805) 0.1661 (3.283)** 0.1365 (2.503)*
Green structural capital (B) 4.8307
Green relational capital (C) 4.9968

Note: The measurement of the questionnaire items in this study was with ‘‘seven-point Likert scale from 1 to 7’’ rating
from strongly disagreement to strongly agreement. The sample size of this study was 126. The number in the bracket is t-
value. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

‘‘Medium & Small Enterprise (SME)’’ as that the Taiwan to develop and create their three types of
number of regular employees of firms in the green intellectual capital to strengthen their com-
information and electronics industry does not ex- petitive advantages.
ceed 200 persons; whereas the number of regular
employees of a large enterprise exceeds 200 per-
sons. The total sample size in the study was 126, Difference analysis of green human capital among different
including 62 large enterprises and 64 SMEs. This industries
study compared three types of green intellectual
capital of Taiwanese large enterprises with those of This study classified the information and electronics
Taiwanese small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in industry in Taiwan into four sub-industries: the
the information and electronics industry. Table VII information hardware industry, the optoelectronic
showed that the three types of green intellectual and communication industry, the semiconductor
capital of SMEs were all significantly less than those industry, and the consumer electronics and elec-
of large enterprises in the information and elec- tronic component industry. This study applied
tronics industry in Taiwan. As mentioned in Ta- ANOVA to explore whether there were significant
ble V, the three types of green intellectual capital differences in green human capital among the four
had obviously positive relationships with competi- information and electronics industries. The results, as
tive advantages of firms. In addition, competitive shown in Table VIII, implied that there were indeed
advantages of SMEs were less than that of large significant differences in green human capital among
enterprises in the information and electronics the four information and electronics industries.
industry in Taiwan in Table VII. Hence, there was This study listed out the mean value of green
the advantage of scale in the information and human capital of the four information and elec-
electronics industry in Taiwan. It is imperative for tronics industries in Table IX. This study found that
SMEs in the information and electronics industry in green human capital of companies of the informa-

TABLE VII
Difference analysis between large enterprises and SMEs

Mean of large enterprises (D) Mean of SMEs (E) D–E

Green human capital 5.4774 4.2625 1.2149** (11.732)

Green structural capital 5.3459 4.3316 1.0143** (9.931)
Green relational capital 5.5387 4.4719 1.0668** (7.531)
Competitive advantages of firms 5.4443 4.4773 0.9670** (8.336)

Note: The measurement of the questionnaire items in this study was with ‘‘seven-point Likert scale from 1 to 7’’ rating
from strongly disagreement to strongly agreement. The sample size of this study was 126, including 62 large enterprises
and 64 SMEs. The number in the bracket is t-value. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
282 Yu-Shan Chen

TABLE VIII TABLE X

The ANOVA table of green human capital in different The ANOVA table of green structural capital in differ-
industries ent industries

Sum of Degree of Mean F value Sum of Degree of Mean F value

squares freedom square squares freedom square

Between groups 25.466 3 8.489 16.388** Between groups 11.323 3 3.774 7.439**
Within groups 63.195 122 0.518 Within groups 61.904 122 0.507
Total 88.662 125 Total 73.228 125
Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01. Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

As shown in Table XI, this study showed out the

TABLE IX
mean value of green structural capital of the four
industries. The result of this study found that green
The mean value of green human capital in different
structural capital of companies of the information
industries
hardware industry was the most in the four infor-
mation and electronics industries in Taiwan. It also
Industry Sample Mean t-test
size value implied that green structural capital of companies of
the information hardware industry was better than
Information hardware (F) 30 5.6600 F < G that of other three information and electronics
Optoelectronic and 33 4.5758 F < H industries in Taiwan.
communication (G) F < I
Semiconductor (H) 31 4.5677
Consumer electronics and 32 4.6875 Difference analysis of green relational capital among
electronic component (I) different industries
Note: This study used the seven-point Likert scale to
measure three types of green intellectual capital and the Here, ANOVA was used to discuss whether there
scores were from 1 to 7. were significant differences of green relational capital
among the four information and electronics indus-
tries. As shown in Table XII, the result of this study
tion hardware industry was the most in the four implied that there were significant differences in
information and electronics industries in Taiwan. It green relational capital among the four information
also pointed out that green human capital of com- and electronics industries.
panies of the information hardware industry was This study pointed out the mean value of green
better than that of other three information and relational capital of the four industries in Table XIII.
electronics industries in Taiwan. This study found that green relational capital of
companies of the information hardware industry was
the most in the four information and electronics
Difference analysis of green structural capital among industries in Taiwan. It also meant that green rela-
different industries tional capital of companies of the information
hardware industry was better than that of other three
This study used ANOVA to analyze whether there information and electronics industries in Taiwan.
were significant differences of green structural capital From Tables IX, XI, and XIII, this study found
among the four information and electronics indus- that all three types of green intellectual capital of
tries. The results of this study showed that there companies of the information hardware industry
were indeed significant differences in green struc- were the most in the four information and elec-
tural capital among the four information and tronics industries in Taiwan. It also implied green
electronics industries in Table X. human capital, green structural capital and green
 Effect of Green Intellectual Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms 283

TABLE XI
The mean value of green structural capital in different industries

Industry Sample size Mean value t-test

Information hardware (F) 30 5.3630 F < G

Optoelectronic and communication (G) 33 4.6566 F < H
Semiconductor (H) 31 4.6165 F < I
Consumer electronics and electronic component (I) 32 4.7188

Note: This study used the seven-point Likert scale to measure three types of green intellectual capital and the scores were
from 1 to 7.

TABLE XII environmental management and green innovation in

The ANOVA table of green relational capital in differ- compliance with external environmental pressures.
ent industries This is the reason why all three types of green
intellectual capital of companies of the information
Sum of Degree of Mean F value hardware industry were the most in the four infor-
squares freedom square mation and electronics industries.
Between groups 13.884 3 4.628 5.591**
Within groups 100.994 122 0.828
Total 114.879 125 Difference analysis among three types of green intellectual
capital in the four information and electronics industries
Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
This study used the Paired-t-test to verify whether
relational capital of companies of the information
there were differences among three types of green
hardware industry were better than those of other
intellectual capital in the four information and
three information and electronics industries in Tai-
electronics industries. The results were shown in
wan. Since the environmental regulations are strict
Table XIV. In the information hardware industry,
and wide-ranged in the information hardware
green structural capital was the least, and it was less
industry, this drives information hardware compa-
than green relational capital and green human capi-
nies to invest more resources and efforts to
tal. Therefore, it is imperative for companies of the
TABLE XIII information hardware industry to enhance their
green structural capital, if they want to improve their
The mean value of green relational capital in different
capabilities about environmental management or
industries
green innovation. In the optoelectronic and com-
Industry Sample Mean t-test munication industry, green relational capital was the
size value most, and it was more than green structural capital
and green human capital. Therefore, if companies of
Information 30 5.5867 F < G the optoelectronic and communication industry
hardware (F) F < H want to increase their capabilities about environ-
Optoelectronic and 33 4.8727 F < I mental management or green innovation, it is nec-
communication (G) essary for them to enhance their green structural
Semiconductor (H) 31 4.7742 capital and green human capital. In the semicon-
Consumer electronics and 32 4.7875 ductor industry, green relational capital was better
electronic component (I)
than green human capital. Hence, it is important for
Note: This study used the seven-point Likert scale to companies of the semiconductor industry to increase
measure three types of green intellectual capital and the their green human capital, when they want to
scores were from 1 to 7. improve their capabilities about environmental
284 Yu-Shan Chen

There is no significant.
management or green innovation. However, there
was no significant difference among the three types

Paired t-test
of green intellectual capital in the consumer elec-

J < K, L < K
L < J, L < K
tronics and electronic component industry. There-
fore, if companies of the consumer electronics and
electronic component industry want to enhance

L < J
their capabilities about environmental management

Note: This study used the seven-point Likert scale to measure three types of green intellectual capital and the scores were from 1 to 7.
or green innovation, they can increase their three
types of green intellectual capital simultaneously.
Mean value of green
relational capital (L)

Conclusion and implications

5.5867
4.8727
4.7742
4.7875
Differences of three types of green intellectual capital in different industries

Although previous studies had paid much attention

to explore intellectual capital, there was no study
exploring intellectual capital about green innovation
Mean value of green
structural capital (K)

or environmental management. Therefore, this

study wanted to fill this research gap, and proposed a
novel construct – green intellectual capital – to
5.3630
4.6566
4.6165
4.7188

explore the positive relationship between intellectual

capital about green innovation or environmental
management and competitive advantages of firms.
This article referred to the classification of intellec-
TABLE XIV

Mean value of green

tual capital adopted by Johnson (1999) and Bontis

human capital (J)

(1999) to classify green intellectual capital into green

human capital, green structural capital and green
5.6600
4.5758
4.5677
4.6875

relational capital in order to explore whether the

three types of green intellectual capital have positive
effects on competitive advantages of firms.
The empirical results of this study showed that the
three types of green intellectual capital – green
Sample
size

30
33
31
32

human capital, green structural capital, and green

relational capital – were positively correlated to
competitive advantages of firms. Therefore, H1, H2,
Consumer electronics and electronic component

and H3 were supported in this study. The results

indicated that the more the three types of green
intellectual capital were, the stronger competitive
advantages of firms were. Therefore, investment in
Optoelectronic and communication

green human capital, green structural capital, and

green relational capital was helpful to businesses.
This study found that green relational capital was
the most among these three types of green intel-
Information hardware

lectual capital, and it was more than green human

capital and green structural capital in the Taiwanese
Semiconductor

information and electronics industry in Taiwan. It

indicated two meanings: First, information and
Industry

electronics companies in Taiwan emphasized the

interactive ‘‘green relationships’’ with their upstream
suppliers, downstream clients, and strategic partners;
 Effect of Green Intellectual Capital on Competitive Advantages of Firms 285

second, it is imperative for information and elec- structural capital and green human capital. In the
tronics companies of Taiwan to create and develop semiconductor industry, green relational capital was
their green human capital and green structural capital better than green human capital. Thus, it is necessary
to increase their competitive advantages of firms. for companies of the semiconductor industry to
Moreover, the results of this study also showed that increase their green human capital. However, there
the three types of green intellectual capital of SMEs was no significant difference among the three types
were all significantly less than those of large enter- of green intellectual capital in the consumer elec-
prises in the information and electronics industry in tronics and electronic component industry. Thus,
Taiwan. Therefore, it is imperative for SMEs in the companies of the consumer electronics and elec-
information and electronics industry in Taiwan to tronic component industry can enhance their three
increase their three types of green intellectual capital types of green intellectual capital simultaneously, if
to enhance their competitive advantages. they want to increase their capabilities about
This study classified the information and elec- environmental management or green innovation.
tronics industry in Taiwan into four sub-industries: The subject of this study covered the issues of
the information hardware industry, the optoelec- environmental management and intellectual capital,
tronic and communication industry, the semicon- which respond to the new concept of ‘‘sustainable
ductor industry, and the consumer electronics and development’’ caring both aspects of environment
electronic component industry. This study found and economy. Most of Taiwanese companies have
that all three types of green intellectual capital of few resources to deploy and thereby often fail to meet
companies of the information hardware industry the requirements and regulations of environmental
were the most in the four information and elec- protection. This would bring Taiwanese businesses
tronics industries in Taiwan. It also meant that green serious damages that resulted from the failure to
human capital, green structural capital, and green comply with the international conventions and reg-
relational capital of companies of the information ulations of environmental protection. However, this
hardware industry were better than those of other study found that Taiwanese information and elec-
three information and electronics industries in Tai- tronics companies investing many resources and ef-
wan. Since the environmental regulations are severe forts in green intellectual capital could not only meet
and wide-ranged in the information hardware the trends of the strict international regulations and
industry, this forces information hardware compa- conventions of environmental protection and the rise
nies to invest more resources and efforts to envi- of consumer environmentalism, but also eventually
ronmental management and green innovation to obtain corporate competitive advantages. Therefore,
comply with external environmental pressures. This this result can contribute to Taiwanese information
is the reason why all three types of green intellectual and electronics companies as reference.
capital of companies of the information hardware This study focused on the information and elec-
industry were the most in the four information and tronics industry in Taiwan, so the further studies can
electronics industries. focus on other industries or countries and compare
This study also explored the differences of three with this study. This study tested hypotheses with a
types of green intellectual capital in different indus- questionnaire survey, only providing cross-sectional
tries. In the information hardware industry, green data, so that we cannot observe the dynamic change of
structural capital was the least, and it was less than green intellectual capital in the process of the devel-
green relational capital and green human capital. opment of the information and electronics industry in
Therefore, it is important for companies of the Taiwan through longitudinal data. Therefore, future
information hardware industry to enhance their studies can set forth toward the longitudinal study to
green structural capital. In the optoelectronic and find out the differences of intellectual capital in the
communication industry, green relational capital was different stages of the development of the information
the most, and it was more than green structural and electronics industry in Taiwan. Finally, this study
capital and green human capital. Hence, it is hopes the research results are beneficial to managers,
imperative for companies of the optoelectronic and researchers, or governments, and contribute to
communication industry to enhance their green relevant studies and future researches as reference.
286 Yu-Shan Chen

Acknowledgements Hart, S. L.: 1995, ÔA Natural-Resource-based View of the

FirmÕ, Academy of Management Review 20(4), 986–1014.
The author is grateful for the funding of National Johnson, W. H. A.: 1999, ÔAn Integrative Taxonomy of
Science Council in Taiwan for this study, and the pro- Intellectual Capital: Measuring the Stock and Flow of
ject number of this study is NSC 94-2416-H-224-001. Intellectual Capital Components in the FirmÕ, Inter-
national Journal of Technology Management 18(5–8),
562–575.
Joia, L. A.: 2000, ÔMeasuring Intangible Corporate Assets:
References Linking Business Strategy with Intellectual CapitalÕ,
Journal of Intellectual Capital 1(1), 68–84.
Barney, J. B.: 1991, ÔFirm Resources and Sustained Masoulas, V.: 1998, ÔOrganizational Requirements Def-
Competitive AdvantageÕ, Journal of Management 17(1), inition for Intellectual Capital ManagementÕ, Interna-
99–120. tional Journal of Technology Management 16(1–3), 126–
Berry, M. A. and D. A. Rondinelli: 1998, ÔProactive 143.
Corporate Environmental Management: A New Miller, R. and G. Wurzburg: 1995, ÔInvesting in Human
IndustrialÕ, Academy of Management Executive 12(2), 38– CapitalÕ, The OECD Observer 193, 16–19.
50. Peattie, K.: 1992, Green Marketing (Pitman Publishing
Bontis, N.: 1999, ÔManaging Organizational Knowledge Corp, London).
by Diagnosing Intellectual CapitalÕ, International Journal Porter, M. E.: 1980, Competitive Advantage (The Free
of Technology Management 18(5–8), 433–462. Press, NY).
Bozbura, F. T.: 2004, ÔMeasurement and Application of Porter, M. E. and C. van der Linde : 1995, ÔGreen and
Intellectual Capital in TurkeyÕ, Learning Organization CompetitiveÕ, Harvard Business Review 73(5), 120–134.
11(4/5), 357–367. Roos, G. and J. Roos: 1997, ÔMeasuring Your Com-
Capello, R.: 2002, ÔSpatial and Sectoral Characteristics of panyÕs Intellectual PerformanceÕ, Long Range Planning
Relational Capital in Innovation ActivityÕ, European 30(3), 413–426.
Planning Studies 10(2), 177–200. Russo, M. V. and P. A. Fouts: 1997, ÔA Resource-based
Capello, R. and A. Faggian: 2005, ÔCollective Learning Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance
and Relational Capital in Local Innovation ProcessesÕ, and ProfitabilityÕ, Academy of Management Journal 40(3),
Regional Studies 39(1), 75–87. 534–559.
Chen, Y. S, S.-B. Lai and C.-T. Wen.: 2006, ‘The Sackman, S., E. Flamholz and M. Bullen: 1989, ÔHuman
Influence of Green Innovation Performance on Cor- Resource Accounting: a State of the Art ReviewÕ,
porate Advantage in TaiwanÕ, Journal of Business Ethics Journal of Accounting Literature 8, 235–264.
67(4), 331–339. Schultz, T.: 1961, ÔInvestment in Human CapitalÕ,
Coyne, K. P.: 1986, ÔSustainable Competitive Advantage – American Economic Review 51(1), 1–17.
What It Is, What It IsnÕtÕ, Business Horizons 29(1), 54–61. Shrivastava, P.: 1995, ÔEnvironmental Technologies and
Dzinkowski, R.: 2000, ÔThe Value of Intellectual Capi- Competitive AdvantageÕ, Strategic Management Journal
talÕ, The Journal of Business Strategy 2(4), 3–4. 16(Special issue), 183–200.
Edvinsson, L. and M. S. Malone: 1997, Intellectual Capital: Stewart, T. A.: 1994, ÔYour CompanyÕs Most Valuable
Realizing Your Co.Õs True Value by Finding Its Hidden Asset: Intellectual CapitalÕ, Fortune 130(7), 68–74.
Roots (Harper Collin Publishers, USA). Ulrich, D.: 1998, ÔIntellectual Capital = Competence *
Elias, J. and H. Scarbrough: 2004, ÔEvaluating Human CommitmentÕ, Sloan Management Review 39(2), 15–26.
Capital: an Exploratory Study of Management Prac- Van Buren, M. E.: 1999, ÔA Yardstick for Knowledge
ticeÕ, Human Resource Management Journal 14(4), 21–40. ManagementÕ, Training and Development 53(5), 71–77.
Grantham, C. E. and L. D. Nichols: 1997, ÔA Framework
for the Management of Intellectual Capital in the
Health Care IndustryÕ, Journal of Health Care Finance Department of Business Administration
2(3), 1–19. National Yunlin University of Science & Technology
Greeno, L. J. and S. N. Robinson: 1992, ÔRethinking 123, Sec. 3, University Road, Douliou, Yunlin, 640
Corporate Environmental ManagementÕ, The Columbia Taiwan, Republic of China
Journal of World Business 27(3–4), 222–232. E-mail: dr.chen.ys@gmail.com
Hair, J. F., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham and W. C.
Black: 1998, Multivariate Data Analysis (Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ) pp. 192–193.