Responses to the Reviewer Comments on Submitted Manuscript
Manuscript ID: IJOPM-12-2021-0799
Impacts of Environmental Performance on the Support Requirements,
Economic, and Social Outcomes of Transport and Logistics Companies:
Developing Country Perspective
July 31, 2022
We would like to sincerely thank the Co-Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Tobias Schoenherr, the
IJOPM handling editor, and the two (2) anonymous peer reviewers, for their constructive
feedback and comments. We have used this opportunity to revise our manuscript and to
carefully address all the raised points to further improve our paper. In the succeeding pages,
we address the individual comments through a two-column format. The left column contains
the reviewers’ comments, and the right column provides the details of our actions and
responses made in our revised paper.
#
JOURNAL INSTRUCTIONS
RESPONSES/ACTIONS DONE
***General Comments***
1
For ease of further review, please
indicate major changes in the
manuscript with red font.
2
Submit a detailed response
document, in which you describe
how you have addressed each of
the reviewer comments.
#
REVIEWER 1 (R1)
COMMENTS/SUGGESTIONS
We would like to thank the editor for this suggestion that
facilitates ease of review. To conform with this requirement by
the journal, all major changes in the manuscript were made in
red font.
A rejoinder (i.e., this document) has been included in the
submission of the revised manuscript.
RESPONSES/ACTIONS DONE
*** Introduction ***
1
It is crucial to highlight the key
contributions/motivation for this
research. It is better to
differentiate the shipping lines,
logistics
service
providers,
transport carriers, etc in your
study. We understand that the
carbon emission from the logistics
industry is crucial, but the authors
need to clearly explain why this
study is so important.
Thank you for this very important comment. In the original
submission, in addition to pointing out the importance of helping
to reduce the carbon emission of TLCs by providing a better
understanding on the antecedents of TLCs’ green performance,
in the revised manuscript’s introduction, additional paragraph
that touches on the key contributions/motivation for this
research has been included in pages 2-3 as follows:
“This study provides the literature with an epistemology on the
impacts of environmental performance on the support
requirements, economic, and social outcomes of TLCs in a
1
developing country through cross-sectional survey of 218
domestic and multinational TLCs operating in the Philippines. It
complements prior research conducted by Rao and Holt (2005),
De Giovanni (2012), El Baz and Laguir (2017), Liu et al. (2020),
Le, Nguyen, and Cheng (2021), etc., on greening firms by
providing a conceptual model that describes how environmental
performance renew and sustain the competitiveness of TLCs
(See Supplement A-2). Rather than focussing on how firm
capabilities and resources achieve economic, environmental and
social outcomes for TLCs, the study uses Dynamic Capability
(DC) Theory of Teece, Pisano, and Shuen (1997) as lens to
understand if environmental performance of TLCs improves
with their economic and social performances and renew their
competencies through better eco-enabling mechanisms and
support infrastructures. This study extends DC Theory by using
environmental performance instead of firm capabilities,
absorptive capacities, and agilities as independent variable in
renewing and sustaining firm competitiveness (Teece et al.,
1997). By exploring how TLCs’ overall performance and
competencies are transformed by environmental performance,
this study offers a new dynamic capability perspective on the
understanding of how sustainability is achieved by greening
TLCs.”
Furthermore, in page 2 of the revised manuscript, we also added
in the first sentence of the Introduction section the definition of
TLCs and its composition as follows:
“Transport and logistics companies (TLCs), which includes
logistics service providers, transport carriers, shipping lines,
storage and warehousing firms, are businesses that help supply
chains in the efficient and effective movement and/or storage of
materials, products, and services (CSCMP, 2013).”
On what kind of TLCs are included in the study, it was clarified
in the Abstract (i.e., page 1) and Introduction (i.e., page 4)
sections that the population of the study are all TLCs as follows:
“For data collection, all registered TLCs operating in the
Philippines were sent with invitation and request for
participation.”
*** Literature Review***
2
This portion is too weak. I expect
that the authors need to provide
more critical and in-depth
analysis by using some software,
e.g., Citespace or other similar
software for the analysis. The
simple
description
and
First, we would like to thank you for this constructive comment
and suggestion. Before addressing this comment, we would like
to clarify that the reason for making a narrative and concise
literature review is because of the journal words limit of 12,000
words. This requirement includes everything from Abstract,
Introduction up to References, and Appendices. In this regard,
we made the literature review narrative, concise, and
2
statements are not enough in the
21st century.
supplemented the details of reviewed literature in Supplement
A.
However, to address your comment, we strengthened our
literature review and used Scopus Advanced Data Search,
PRISMA’s four-phase flow diagram review protocol, and
VOSViewer software in the literature selection process and
analysis. These are detailed in pages 4-5 of our manuscript
revisions as follows:
“To understand the problems and research gaps in the
sustainability of TLCs, a literature review was conducted, and
results are summarized in Supplements A-1 to A-7. The
literature review of El Baz and Laguir (2017) was used as test
reference to find the appropriate advanced database search field
codes for this study. This is because this article has identified the
important studies on the greening of TLCs during its time of
publication. Using Scopus as main database and complemented
by other databases detailed in Supplement A-1, the final set of
literature to review was identified using PRISMA’s four-phase
flow diagram review protocol (Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, Altman,
& The PRISMA Group, 2009, p. 3). In Supplement A-1, from the
3,360 initially screened research works, 896 research
publications have centred on greening of various firms. Out of
these 896 research publications, only 69 focused on greening
TLCs. All these 69 TLC research publications are included in the
literature review of this study. To map out research gaps and to
identify problems related to the sustainable development of
TLCs, the literature classification framework of El Baz and Laguir
(2017) was employed, as detailed in Supplement A-2. To process
and analyse the final bibliometric data of literatures included in
this study, the VOSViewer software was used. Based on the
density visualization analysis of keywords used by researchers
on greening TLCs shown in Supplement A-3, it was found that the
major research topics on greening TLCs are centred on green
logistics,
environmental
performance,
environmental
management, sustainability, supply chain management, logistics,
sustainable development, logistics service providers, and road
freight transport. With respect to the co-occurrence network
analysis of these research topics vis-a-vis the major keywords
used by researchers on greening TLCs, Supplement A-4 shows
that these research topics co-occur mainly with issues on
sustainability, sustainable development, environmental
performance, environmental management, green logistics,
environmental pollution, supply chain management,
environment, environmental orientation, green innovation,
financial performance, economic performance, logistics, logistics
3
service providers, road freight transport, transportation,
efficiency, and CO2 emission. Supplements A-2 to A-4 show that
even though a number of researches have been conducted to
understand how sustainability can be meaningfully achieved by
TLCs, literature review revealed that most of these studies are
focused on specific aspects of environmental sustainability such
as the identification of the antecedents of green practices
adoptions (El Baz & Laguir, 2017), the characterization of the
different green practices adopted by firms (Colicchia, Marchet,
Melacini, & Perotti, 2013; McKinnon, Piecyk, Browne, &
Whiteing, 2015), and the understanding of how green practices
affects the performance of TLCs (Agyabeng-Mensah, Afum, &
Ahenkorah, 2020; Perotti, Zorzini, Cagno, & Micheli, 2012). The
literature lacks research to explore how an ensuing level of ecoperformance achieved by TLCs affects their support
requirements, economic, and social outcomes. Moreover,
literature review reveals that studies in the context of
developing countries are scarce (see Supplements A-2 and A-5
to A-7) but these countries account to at least 60% of the total
global CO2 emissions (UCS, 2017), 40% of which are emitted by
the emerging economies in Asia (IEA, 2017). As mentioned in the
Introduction,
understanding
and
characterizing
the
abovementioned problems and research gaps are vital because
it provide TLC managers, especially those that are operating in
developing countries, with more wholistic insights on how to
strategically manage the sustainable development of firms.
Moreover, economic and social performances as well as
improved support systems are among the critical success factors
that help TLCs maintain their environmental performance
(Boter & Lundström, 2005; Calderón & Servén, 2004; Kassinis &
Vafeas, 2006).”
*** Conceptual Model and Hypothesis***
For the conceptual model and
hypotheses, the statements and
predictions for the hypotheses
should be well fined. I found that
there are flaws in the statements
and hypotheses. Please make the
significant changes in this portion.
3
Thank you for this comment to improve our manuscript. To
address this comment, the hypothesis statements were revised
as follows:
Original Hypothesis 1 (H1): The economic performance of
transport and logistics companies
improves with their environmental
performance.
Revised Hypothesis 1 (H1): Environmental performance of
transport and logistics companies is
positively related to their economic
performance.
Original Hypothesis 2 (H2): The social performance of transport
and logistics companies improves
4
with
their
environmental
performance.
Revised Hypothesis 2 (H2): Environmental performance of
transport and logistics companies is
positively related to their social
performance.
Original Hypothesis 3 (H3): As the levels of environmental
performance by transport and logistics
companies increases, their demands
for eco-enabling mechanisms also
increases.
Revised Hypothesis 3 (H3): Environmental performance of
transport and logistics companies is
positively related to their demand for
eco-enabling mechanisms.
Original Hypothesis 4 (H4): As the levels of environmental
performance by transport and logistics
companies
increases,
their
requirements for better support
infrastructures also increases.
Revised Hypothesis 4 (H4): Environmental performance of
transport and logistics companies is
positively
related
to
their
requirements for better support
infrastructures.
Original Hypothesis 5 (H5): As the demand for eco-enabling
mechanisms by transport and logistics
companies
increases,
their
requirements for better support
infrastructures also increases.
Revised Hypothesis 5 (H5): The demand for eco-enabling
mechanisms by transport and logistics
companies is positively related to their
requirements for better support
infrastructures.
*** Methodology***
4
It would be better to provide more
details how to collect the data, e.g.,
ethics approval. The data is
collected from the Philippines, so
how the authors would ensure the
face and content validity. It would
be better to provide more details
Thank you for this very valuable suggestion. To address this
comment, details about ethics approval (p. 12) and face and
content validities (p. 13) were ensured in the study in Sections
3.1 and 3.2. Discussions for both sections were also enhanced as
follows:
3.1. Sample and Data Collection
5
for data collection
developing country.
in
the
“This research was approved by an independent ethics
committee of an Australian university prior its conduct. The
managers of multinational and domestic TLCs operating in the
Philippines were chosen as the target population for this study
for the following five reasons: First, emerging economies in Asia
that include the Philippines accounts for 40% of the world’s CO2
emissions (IEA, 2017). Developing nations of the globe accounts
60% of the total global carbon emissions (UCS, 2017). Second,
the harmful effect of CO2 emissions to the environment and to
every living thing is worsening and its negative impact on
developing countries is severe (UCS, 2017; Yumul Jr, Cruz,
Servando, & Dimalanta, 2011). To date, only few sustainability
studies in the context of TLCs have been conducted in emerging
economies across the globe (See Supplements A-1 to A-7). Third,
systematic programs for the environmental sustainability of
firms are not yet established in many developing countries like
the Philippines even though the level of carbon emissions of their
industry has been rising because of economic progressions
(Romero & Agatep, 2018). Fourth, access to data in Philippines
was possible because it is the home country of one of the authors.
Fifth, as the Philippine TLC greening program is still evolving,
firms’ greening operations are predominantly influenced by
prevailing market factors, business climate, existing institutional
support systems and government policies (TCC-GIZ, 2017). Prior
operation of a business, the Philippine government evaluates
and certifies the compliance of firms’ environmental
management system (EMS) to ensure that the country’s ecoprotection laws are followed.
Collecting data from firms especially those operating in
developing countries is challenging because it is common for
these firms to be reluctant to cooperate due to data
confidentiality (Davies & Walters, 2004; Wang, Li, & Zhao, 2018).
This difficulty has been confirmed by some Philippine industry
experts and practitioners consulted prior the conduct of this
research. To identify the active multinational and domestic TLCs
operating in the Philippines, open access business listings of the
government’s Department of Trade and Industry (DTI
Philippines) and the assistance of domestic logistics experts
were solicited by the research team. In total, 879 firms were
invited through delivery mail and e-mail to participate in the
research, 785 of which were identified through the DTI
Philippines’ open access data base and 94 businesses through
the assistance of domestic logistics experts. Out of the 879
businesses sent with invitation, 240 responded for a response
rate of 27.3% which is more than the 20% participation
threshold for sample frame representation (Malhotra & Grover,
1998). After data cleaning and screening, survey responses that
6
have uniform Likert answers, incomplete answers, and those
that declined to participate were dropped. A total of 218
questionnaires were found complete and properly accomplished
making it usable for this study. This sample size is more than the
200 samples to achieve statistical power in multivariate analysis
(Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2010, pp. 117, 643-644
; Hoe, 2008, p. 77; Yuksel, Yuksel, & Bilim, 2010, p. 279). The
details of respondents’ characteristics are shown in Supplement
C.”
3.2. Research Instrument and Measures
“A well-structured questionnaire has been used to collect data
and explore the study’s hypothesis because it is the most feasible
approach to reach respondent managers/executives with the
limited funds and timeframe. Given the busy nature of work of
the prospective respondents, a self-administered questionnaire
allows the respondent managers/executives to participate at
their free and convenient time which can improve the study’s
response rate and reliability. Like other well-established
methods of data collection, a well-designed self-administered
questionnaires can demonstrate high reliability, validity, and
predictive accuracy (Hair et al., 2010, p. 440). The questionnaire
was developed using four reflective items per latent variable to
provide overidentification in the model (Hair et al., 2010, pp.
675-678) which are mostly adapted from the literature. The
details of the questionnaire that include the measurement items,
references where the items were derived including original
statements are provided in Supplement B. A five-point rating
scale was used to measure each item (i.e., 1 = “Not at all”, 2 =
“Small extent”, 3 = “Moderate extent”, 4 = “Great extent”, 5 =
“Full extent”). To ensure face and content validities of the
research instrument, field experts comprising of seven TLC
managers, an IFC/World Bank consultant, a field communication
professional, an environmental bureau lawyer, and seven
academics were consulted. To refine and finalize the
questionnaire, pilot testing using industry experts and
practitioners was done.”
*** Data Analysis***
5
This portion should be OK. I found
that the authors have put more
efforts in modelling.
6
This section should be well
developed further. The current
statements are not satisfied. It
would be better to re-focus the
objective of this study in
We would like to thank you for appreciating how we analysed
the data of this study.
*** Discussions/Implications ***
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. To address the
issues raised, we revised discussions to add new knowledge,
improve the flow, and directly address each hypothesis in
sequential order vis-à-vis the findings and implications of each
hypothesis. Each paragraph in the section represents discussion
7
alignment with other previous
studies. I would like to see more
exciting
points
and
new
knowledge from this section in
order to increase attractiveness
and readiness.
of each hypothesis. The first statement of each paragraph
corresponds to the answer to the hypothesis followed by the
presentation of structural equation modelling (SEM) results.
After which, SEM results are then interpreted versus the actual
indicators used in the study. The impacts and implications of the
findings on the renewal and sustainment of the competitiveness
of greening TLCs are then discussed. Connections of results to
existing literature or how results complement the literature are
also elaborated and strategically placed in the discussion section
to improve readability. Another section was also added to
discuss the implications of the study to theory and literature. The
details of the revised discussions are detailed in pages 22 – 26
as follows:
“4.1. Findings and Implications
This study empirically demonstrates that environmental
performance affects positively the economic performance of
TLCs. In the presence of other variables in the model, the
standardized effect estimates of environmental performance to
economic performance of 0.4786 (CI: 0.3574, 0.5835) significant
at p<0.001 means that a standardized improvement in the
environmental performance of TLCs can result to 0.4786
standardized improvements in their economic performance.
Based on the indicators of the constructs of this study, this
implies that the actions of TLCs for environmental performance
such as reduction in air emissions, solid and liquid wastes, and
zero penalty against any form of environmental infractions
contributes to their increase in revenue, return on investment
(ROI), market position, market opportunities, and overall
market share. In fact, from a baseline level, a dollar invested by
TLCs to improve their environmental performance attain
47.86% equivalent return for their green investment that is
gained through better cashflows, ROIs, and market
position/shares. This is achieved because of improved image
and reputation that gains public trust and confidence, positive
impressions from prospective customers and loyalty and
commitment from existing markets (Pomaret & Monroig, 2008;
Zailani, Amran, & Jumadi, 2011). In practical sense, this finding
is significant because it shows that managers of TLCs should not
worry investing for the greening of their company because such
efforts pay off. Furthermore, environmental performance is also
a “two birds in one stone” because aside from caring for mother
earth, it also achieves TLCs their economic bottom line. Contrary
to the stipulations of Jones (2019), Palmquist (2014), and
Walley and Whitehead (1994) about the incompatibilities of
profitability and environmental care, this study found in the
context of TLCs operating in a developing country, the
8
compatibilities of environmental and economic performances of
firms. It substantiates the environmental- economic
compatibility findings of Porter and Van der Linde (1995), Gil et
al. (2001), Zhu and Sarkis (2004), Rao and Holt (2005), Lai et al.
(2013), and Chu et al. (2019) among others for production firms.
In addition to economic performance, this study found that social
performance also improves with TLC’s environmental
performance. This outcome is similar to the findings of
Kleindorfer et al. (2005), De Giovanni (2012), and Gualandris
and Kalchschmidt (2016) about the effects of ecologically-sound
management practices on the social performance of production
firms and this study expands the applicability of the relationship
in the context of TLCs operating in a developing country. In this
study, in the presence of other variables in the model, the
standardized effect estimates of environmental performance to
social performance of 0.5931 (CI: 0.4738, 0.702) significant at
p<0.001 means that a standardized improvement in the
environmental performance of TLCs can result to 0.5931
standardized improvements in their social performance. From
the indicators of the constructs of this research, this implies that
the actions of TLCs for environmental performance such as
reduction in air emissions, solid and liquid wastes, as well zero
penalty against any form of environmental infractions have
created positive effects on the welfare of the public leading firms
to gain social awards/recognitions, improved corporate
image/reputation, better health and safety as well as equal
opportunities for their employees. Relative to the established
performance measures of TLCs from a baseline level, the
company’s improvements in environmental performance
through reduction in wastes, emissions, and potential to commit
environmental infractions, can result to an equivalent of 59.31%
baseline improvements in their social performance. This is
achieved because the environmentally sound practices of TLCs
such as waste and emission reduction improve the health and
welfare of the people in their areas of operation. Health is wealth
for the populace because healthy people are more productive,
have more time and energy to work, and less likely to accrue
hefty medical expenses. Hence, realization of environmental
performance by TLCs does not only do justice to the
environment but also to the quality of life of the people thereby
improving their social performance. Furthermore, the
manifestation of social performance, in addition to the firms’
economic and environmental performances, can achieve TLCs
triple bottom-line outcomes if all these performances are
sustained.
This study found that the manifestation of improvements in
environmental performance by TLCs increases their
9
requirements for better support infrastructure. This finding is
unique in the literature because previous studies in the greening
of firms have focused on the understanding of the effects of
support infrastructures on the eco-practices of firms but not on
how firms’ environmental performance impacts their
requirements for better support infrastructure to sustain their
eco-performance. In the presence of other variables in the study,
structural equation modelling reveals that the standardized
effect estimates of environmental performance to TLCs
requirements for better support infrastructures is 0.2161 (CI:
0.0733, 0.3411) significant at p<0.05. This means that a
standardized improvement in the environmental performance
of TLCs increases their infrastructure support requirements by
a standardized value of 0.2161. Based on the indicators of the
constructs of this study, this implies that the company’s
improvements in environmental performance by making its
operations more efficient, environment friendly, and law
abiding, increases their needs/requirements for better
telecommunications network, solid waste management, and
sewerage system by 21.61%. This is because these vital support
infrastructures complement the existing operational capabilities
of TLCs in their achievement of better and greener operations. In
this regard, existing telecommunications network, solid waste
management, and sewerage system vital in the operations of
TLCs should be improved by the government and state regulated
public utilities and waste management firms to further improve
and sustain the environmental performance of TLCs.
Furthermore, these infrastructure developments can also help
TLCs conform with strict eco-regulatory requirements and avoid
costly environmental infractions. In addition, the positive
environmental impacts of such systems are also beneficial to the
health and welfare of the people hence, government and state
regulated public utilities and waste management firms must
ensure that the abovementioned support infrastructures are
regularly maintained and continuously improved if
sustainability is desired. Pollution reduction and the greening of
the logistics industry are not sole responsibilities of TLCs but a
collective effort among TLCs and its stakeholders.
Enabling mechanisms provide relief to firms like TLCs on the
costs of their greening efforts and encourages investment in lowcarbon assets (Brammer et al., 2012). In addition, it can also
provide TLCs with impression that authorities care, and
environmental preservation is not a burden but a shared
responsibility of everyone. However, this study found that
improvements in the eco-performance of TLCs does not lead
them to seek for more eco-enabling mechanisms which can help
them sustain or further improve their environmental
10
performance. In the presence of other variables in the model,
structural equation modelling reveals that the 0.1466
standardized effect estimate of environmental performance to
TLCs’ demand for further eco-enabling mechanisms is not
significant (p =0.1104 & CI: -0.0072, 0.2824). From the
indicators of the constructs of this research, this implies that the
actions of TLCs for environmental performance such as
reduction in air emissions, solid and liquid wastes, and efforts to
achieve zero penalty against any form of environmental
infractions do not lead them to seek for more eco-enabling
mechanisms such as reduced taxes, zero-VAT, and longer loan
repayment period to achieve economic relief to sustain or
further improve their eco-performance. This finding is quite
surprising because based on the Dynamic Capability Theory, for
firms to renew and sustain their important outcomes and
endeavours, it is logical for firms to seek for more economic
relief to supplement their limited resources and sustain firm
competitiveness in the rapidly changing environment (Teece et
al., 1997). Nevertheless, this finding is relatively good because it
implies that TLCs operating in the country have unselfish and
selfless character when environmental care is at stake.
Furthermore, this result provides a positive implication to small
and developing firms that needed more support and to
government and development organizations that are providing
the enabling mechanism support. This is because government
and development organizations can prioritize the allocation of
their limited resources to support the greening of developing
firms which are usually micro, small, medium enterprises that
compose the majority of businesses in the Philippines. In this
regard, it is still vital for governments to establish and
continuously improve their provisions for reduced taxes to
greening firms, Zero-VAT on procured utilities and green items,
and for economic development organizations to provide longterm loans for green investments to help the micro, small,
medium enterprises partake in the global efforts for
environmental care. Such support for developing TLCs can
ultimately achieve them economic, environmental, and social
performances which are vital to achieve sustainability for the
industry.
This study shows that TLCs’ demand for more eco-enabling
mechanisms from the government and development
organizations increases their infrastructure requirements. In the
presence of other variables in the study, structural equation
modelling reveals that the standardized effect estimates of TLCs’
demand for further enabling mechanisms on their requirements
for better support infrastructure is 0.2239 (CI: 0.0878, 0.3566)
significant at p<0.01. This means that from a baseline level, a
11
standardized increase in the demand of TLCs for further
enabling mechanisms increases their infrastructure support
requirements by a standardized value of 0.2239. Based on the
indicators of the constructs of this research, it denotes that those
companies that seek to be granted with Zero-VAT and reduced
taxes from the government, and long-term green loans from the
government and development organizations, will need more
reliable telecommunications network, better solid waste
management, and improved sewerage system to complement
their increase in operational capacities. These firms, which are
more likely the developing TLCs that have not yet attained their
desired level of eco-performance, must be complemented with
adequate and quality support infrastructures to facilitate more
efficient and ecofriendly operations to achieve their goals
(Haughwout, 2002; OECD, 2019). This finding therefore
strengthens the need for government and development
organizations to continuously improve and maintain the support
infrastructures in the country to facilitate the sustainable
development of TLCs. Furthermore, the continuous
improvement and maintenance of the necessary support
infrastructures that are vital in the greening of TLCs will also
improve the health and welfare of the people.
4.2. Theoretical Implications of the Study
This research has provided some theoretical contributions in the
greening TLCs. It uses the Dynamic Capability Theory of Teece et
al. (1997) as lens to understand how environmental
performance relates with the economic and social performances
of TLCs and how it affects their further needs for eco-enabling
mechanisms and support infrastructures to renew and sustain
competitiveness. The study extends Dynamic Capability Theory
by using environmental performance in lieu of firm capabilities,
absorptive capacities, and agilities as independent variable in
understanding how competitiveness is renewed and sustained
by greening firms. By providing an epistemology on the impacts
of environmental performance on the support requirements,
economic, and social outcomes of TLCs, it offers the literature
and industry with a tool/framework to better understand the
dynamics of environmentally performing TLCs operating in a
developing country in light of their pursuit for a cleaner and
greener environment. Further, it complements prior research on
the greening of general firms conducted by Rao and Holt (2005),
De Giovanni (2012), El Baz and Laguir (2017), Liu et al. (2020),
Le et al. (2021), etc., by providing a conceptual model that helps
us understand how overall performance and competencies of
TLCs are transformed by environmental performance which are
rare/limited in the literature (see Supplement A-2). This study,
12
in general, offers a new dynamic capability perspective on how
sustainability is achieved by greening TLCs.
*** Conclusion/Contributions***
Although the paper uses the RBV,
my question is still there. I am not
convinced that RBV is a good
theory to support this study. Also,
the authors failed to discuss the
key theoretical contributions
based on the use of RBV. I suggest
that the authors need to re-think
and re-design the study, which is
better to provide more interesting
and fruitful stories aiming for
IJOPM.
7
Thank you for this observation. Considering this comment, we
reviewed the RBV Theory versus our conceptual model and
found that a more appropriate theory for this study is the
Dynamic Capability (DC) Theory. In this regard, we replaced RBV
Theory with DC Theory as lens in this study and reflected the
discussions in pages 7 – 8 of the revised paper as follows:
“Dynamic capability of firms is defined as the "the firm’s ability
to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external
competences to address rapidly changing environments" (Teece
et al., 1997, p. 516). Dynamic Capability Theory (DC) posits the
organizations must have both the internal and external
capabilities to purposefully adapt their resource base to renew
and sustain their firms’ competitiveness (Teece et al., 1997). In
DC, the main assumption is that a firm's fundamental
competencies should be exploited to create immediate
competitive positions that can be developed into strategic
competitive advantage. Unlike the resource-based view theory
which stresses sustainable competitive advantage, DC centres
more on competitive survival issues to respond to the current
and rapidly changing business conditions. Hence, factors that
facilitate and improve the resource capabilities of firms can
therefore create positive consequences in the sustainability and
survival of firms (Darnall & Edwards, 2006; Gavronski, Klassen,
Vachon, & do Nascimento, 2011; Lee & Klassen, 2008). These
factors which include increased enabling mechanisms and better
support infrastructures are among the critical success factors in
the sustainability and survival of firms because they enhance the
fundamental competencies of firms which are needed to create
immediate competitive positions for firms that eventually result
to their long-term competitive advantage (Boter & Lundström,
2005; Calderón & Servén, 2004; Kassinis & Vafeas, 2006).
Enabling mechanisms offered by government and nongovernment development organizations such as subsidies,
grants, long-term loans, and technical support can sustain and
further develop the eco-performance of firms (Boter &
Lundström, 2005; Lee, 2008). Likewise, improvements in
support infrastructure by government and non-government
development organizations, in forms of physical structures,
facilities, services, and support system can help firms sustain not
only economic performance but also the environmental and
social outcomes of firms (Lee, 2008; Palei, 2015).”
13
Furthermore, in pages 3-4 of the introduction, the contribution
of the study to the literature is summarized as follows:
“This study provides the literature with an epistemology on the
impacts of environmental performance on the support
requirements, economic, and social outcomes of TLCs in a
developing country through cross-sectional survey of 218
domestic and multinational TLCs operating in the Philippines. It
complements prior research conducted by Rao and Holt (2005),
De Giovanni (2012), El Baz and Laguir (2017), Liu et al. (2020),
Le, Nguyen, and Cheng (2021), etc., on greening firms by
providing a conceptual model that describes how environmental
performance renew and sustain the competitiveness of TLCs
which are rare/limited in the literature (See Appendix A). Rather
than focussing on how firm capabilities and resources achieve
economic, environmental and social outcomes for TLCs, it uses
Dynamic Capability (DC) Theory of Teece, Pisano, and Shuen
(1997) as lens to understand if environmental performance of
TLCs improves with their economic and social performances and
renew their competencies through better eco-enabling
mechanisms and support infrastructures. This study extends DC
Theory by using environmental performance instead of firm
capabilities, absorptive capacities, and agilities as independent
variable in renewing and sustaining firm competitiveness (Teece
et al., 1997). By exploring how TLCs’ overall performance and
competencies are transformed by environmental performance,
this study offers a new dynamic capability perspective on the
understanding of how sustainability is achieved by greening
TLCs.”
The above discussion was an Introduction version of the newly
added section entitled “4.2. Implications of the Study to Theory
and Literature” which can be found in page 26 of the revised
paper. The details of Section 4.2 have been copy pasted in the
“RESPONSES/ACTIONS DONE” column corresponding to your
comment #6 in “Discussion/Conclusion” general comments
section of this rejoinder/response document.
***Additional Questions***
Originality
1
The title of this paper is quite
interesting, but the current format
is not suitable for IJOPM.
Thank you very much for appreciating the title of our paper.
Although we believe that the title is suitable for our paper, we
are open to revise our paper’s title or its format accordingly to
the suggestions by IJOPM or the reviewer.
Relationship to Literature
2
It would be better to provide a
more in-depth analysis in this
section. Using LR software to do a
This is similar/the same to your comment #2 in “Literature
Review” general comments section and our responses/actions to
this comment/suggestion has been detailed in the
14
more rigorous analysis, such as
Cite Space.
“RESPONSES/ACTIONS DONE” column corresponding to the
said comment/suggestion.
Methodology
The method is suitable for the
study; however, the authors need
to provide more details in the
process of data collection.
3
We would like to thank you for appreciating the methodology
that we used.
For the process of data collection mentioned in this
comment/suggestion, this is similar/the same to your comment
#4 found in the “Methodology” general comments section and
our responses/actions to this comment/suggestion has been
detailed in the “RESPONSES/ACTIONS DONE” column
corresponding to the said comment/suggestion.
Results
4
The results are OK.
We would like to thank Reviewer1 (R1) for appreciating the
results of the study.
Implications for research, practice and/or society
5
I expect the authors need to
highlight the key findings from the
study. However, there is a lack of
novelty from this study.
This is the same/similar to your comment #6 found in
“Discussions/Implications” general comments section and our
responses/actions to this comment/suggestion has been
detailed in the “RESPONSES/ACTIONS DONE” column
corresponding to the said comment/suggestion.
Quality of Communication
6
#
It is OK.
REVIEWER 2 (R2)
RESPONSES/ACTIONS DONE
COMMENTS/SUGGESTIONS
*** Literature Review ***
Reviewing game theoretic studies
on similar cases
1
We would like to thank you for appreciating the quality of
communication of our work. Again, thank you very much.
This comment is the same to your detailed comment #2 found in
the ***Additional Questions***, “Relationship to Literature”
section below. For your convenience, our response is repeated
as follows:
In our revised paper, in our original submission to IJOPM last
December 2021, we searched for literatures that focus on the
greening of TLCs from year 2000 to 2021. To find the
appropriate advanced search field codes for Scopus that can
display the vital research publications on the greening of TLCs,
the list of research publications identified in the literature
review of El Baz and Laguir (2017) was used as test reference.
This is because this article has identified the important research`
publications on the greening of TLCs during its time of
publication. There are two search syntax that can display all the
vital research publications identified by El Baz and Laguir
(2017). The first Advanced Scopus search query string uses the
publication title only in the field code while the second Advanced
15
Scopus search query string uses titles, abstract, and keywords in
the search filed code. The details of the Boolean syntax of both
advanced search query strings (in which the format is Scopus
specific and beyond our control) are shown below:
TITLE ( green*_logistics OR third-party_logistic* OR 3pl* OR transport_and_logistics OR
logistics_service_providers OR green_practices_adoption OR fleet_operations OR
fleet_management OR road_freight OR logistics_sector OR logistics_provider OR
green_vehicles OR freight_trucking OR logistics_services OR green_transportation ) AND
( LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE , "ar" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE , "cp" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE
, "re" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE , "cr" ) ) AND ( EXCLUDE ( PUBYEAR , 2022 ) ) AND (
LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE , "English" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2021 ) OR LIMIT-TO
( PUBYEAR , 2020 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2019 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2018 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2017 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2016 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2015 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2014 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2013 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2012 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2011 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2010 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2009 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2008 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2005 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2004 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2003 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2002 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2001 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2000 ) )
TITLE-ABS-KEY ( green_logistic* OR logistics_service_provider* OR third-party_logistic*
OR 3pl* OR road_freight_transport* OR green_vehicle* OR logistics_sector OR
logistics_compan*
OR
green_transport*
OR
fleet_operation*
OR
transportation_and_logistics OR road_freight_haulier* OR freight_truck ) AND ( LIMIT-TO
( PUBSTAGE , "final" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE , "English" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2021 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2020 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2019 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2018 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2017 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2016 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2015 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2014 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2013 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2012 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2011 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2010 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2009 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2008 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2007 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2006 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2005 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2004 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2003 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2002 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2001 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2000 ) )
From year 2000 to 2021, the first search syntax displays 3,371
document results while the second syntax displays 18,645
document results. In our paper, we used the first search syntax
because document results being displayed by the first search
syntax are more focussed on the greening of TLCs. The problem
with the second search syntax rest on its Boolean query in which
it displays all indexed research publications with the indicated
search key terms appearing either in the title, abstract, and
keywords even though these publications are not related to the
greening of firms. In our final list of screened literatures included
in our manuscript detailed in Supplement A-2, less than 10
operations research paper has been identified and NON of these
papers have used game theory as lens in their study of greening
TLCs. In this regard, since the thematic flow of our literature
review centres on topic, context, and construct relationship gaps
in the lens of Dynamic Capability Theory, we opted that it is more
appropriate to include your important observation about the
importance of game theory in the greening of TLCs in Section
“4.4. Limitations and Future Research Directions” located in
pages 28-29 as follows:
16
“….. Fourth, this study has used Dynamic Capability Theory as
lens in investigating construct relationships. Similar studies
using game theory as lens can be conducted in future studies for
greening TLCs. This is because the environmental, economic, and
social dynamics of greening firms are also a non-cooperative
game in which the government and their partner organizations,
who oversees all the actions and provides necessary subsidies
and support mechanisms, acts as a central planner. In this
regard, understanding the equilibrium6 dynamics between the
provider (i.e., the government and its partner organizations) and
the recipient (i.e., the TLCs) is vital. If no equilibrium 7 exists
between the provider and the recipient, it is necessary to
understand what the main problem is and how the central
planner must address such a problem. In the literature review
detailed in Supplement A-2, less than ten (10) operations
research paper has been identified and none of these papers
have used game theory as lens in their study of greening TLCs.
Since game theoretic research on greening firms are
limited/rare in the literature, conducting a game theoretic study
centred on greening TLCs is a valuable contribution to the
literature and to the TLC industry.”
In the proposed study, an equilibrium between the provider (i.e., the
government and its partner organizations) and the recipient (i.e., the TLCs)
would be a case where all the TLC's do follow environmentally friendly policies
and include them in their agendas, and no single company benefits from
abandoning these policies and focusing on their original business model without
including environmental considerations.
7 The equilibrium description is credit to the anonymous peer reviewer of this
journal who suggested the importance of game theoretic studies in the field of
greening firms.”
6
*** Method/Analysis ***
Partitioning the 218 responses
according to the size and revenue
of TLC's and repeating the
experiments on each category
2
This comment is the same to your detailed comment #3-1 found
in the ***Additional Questions***, “Methodology” section below.
For your convenience, our response is repeated as follows:
We would like to mention that one of the limitations of our study
is sample size. In this study, although it is also possible to
conduct multigroup analysis using any of the three manifest
demographic variables (i.e., firm size, firm category, and contract
terms) because of sample size constraint, these variables were
opted to be controlled. This is because conducting SEM’s
multigroup analysis will separate the actual samples into their
respective subgroup thereby making the sample size for each
subgroup less than 200. Given the number of constructs and
indicators included in the study, SEM requires at least 200
sample size for the results of structural analysis to be valid and
reliable and this is detailed in the book of Hair et al., 2010 (pp.
17
117, 643-644) and in the research articles of Hoe, 2008 (p. 77)
and Yuksel et al., 2010 (p. 279) with reference details as follows:
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2010). Multivariate Data
Analysis (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation
modeling technique. Journal of applied quantitative methods, 3(1), 76-83.
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on
customer satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty.
Tourism management, 31(2), 274-284.
This SEM sample size requirement of ≥200 is discussed in
Section 3.5. If only we have at least 200 usable samples for each
firm size classification (i.e., ≥200 small, ≥200 medium, and ≥200
large enterprises) or firm category (i.e., ≥200 domestic and ≥200
multinational firms), we could have made “multigroup analysis”
like what you have suggested. This is because AMOS 26, which is
the co-variance based structural equation modelling (SEM)
software used in this study, can do such analysis.
To incorporate this important suggestion in the revised article,
we have included it as one of the limitations of our study in
Section 4.4 in page 30 as follows:
3
Trying a few more hypotheses and
reporting the CFA results, and
commenting on cross-loadings
“….Finally, as findings of this study are primarily based on the
218 samples collected from the mix of multinational and
Philippine TLCs of all sizes, the whole TLC industry of the
country has been structurally modelled as one group. If only at
least 200 usable samples for each firm size classification (i.e.,
≥200 small, ≥200 medium, and ≥200 large enterprises) or firm
category (i.e., ≥200 domestic and ≥200 multinational firms)
have been collected, multigroup analysis could have been
feasible. Conducting multigroup analysis is important to
understand the dynamics of greening TLCs on their economic
and social performances and further needs for better support
systems vis-a-vis their firm size or category. Intuitively, larger
corporations will have an easier job of adjusting their operations
and business models to stricter environmental requirements,
while smaller companies will find it more challenging to deviate
from their lesser eco-friendly operations. Furthermore, the
amount of subsidy or support by the government and its partner
organizations won't have the same impact on all TLC's. In this
regard, future studies can explore similar research with multigroup analysis to compare results across different categories,
quantify their differences, and discuss result implications to
TLCs, policy makers, development organizations, and public
utility firms.”
This comment is the same to your detailed comment #4 found in
the ***Additional Questions***, “Results” section below. For
your convenience, our response is repeated as follows:
18
Although you mentioned in your detailed comment that the
suggested hypothesis is NOT mandatory to include in our revised
paper, we still checked for the possibilities of including it in the
paper revisions. Unfortunately, our processed data in its current
form cannot support the proposed hypothesis. This is because
the questions/indicators reflecting each construct must be
framed/formulated accordingly to the nature of the proposed
hypothesis for results to be valid and reliable. It can be noted that
in the development of research instruments and measures
discussed in Sections 3.2 and 3.4 of the revised paper,
questions/indicators of all latent major and marker variables
were worded positively and were answered by the respondents
accordingly to how the questions are framed. Reverse coding it
may lead to inflated parameters which results into type I error.
This is because the original questions/indicators were worded
positively, and these are not framed to suit the constructs of the
proposed hypothesis. Furthermore, the marker variable cannot
be reverse coded because marker variables and its indicators are
strategically designed to share the same source of method bias
which, for this case, is the “positive rater bias” due to social
desirability (Spector et al., 2019, p. 873). In this regard, the
marker variable cannot be used to statistically manage the CMB
of reverse coded items. Failing to manage for CMB creates
endogeneity, validity and reliability problems.
4
Including external factors to
better
assess
environmental/economic/social
performance of TLC's, to be able to
isolate
the
impact
of
environmental performance on
economic/social outcomes.
Partitioning the 218 responses according to company size (i.e.,
small, medium, and large enterprises) or even firm category
(domestic versus multinational firms), is a major limitation of
this study. This is because conducting SEM’s multigroup analysis
will separate the actual samples into their respective subgroup
thereby making the sample size for each subgroup less than 200.
Given the number of constructs and indicators included in the
study, SEM requires at least 200 sample size for the results of
structural analysis to be valid and reliable and this is detailed in
the book of Hair et al., 2010 (pp. 117, 643-644) and in the
research articles of Hoe, 2008 (p. 77) and Yuksel et al., 2010 (p.
279). This SEM sample size requirement of ≥200 is discussed in
Section 3.5 of the revised paper.
Including external factors to better assess the impacts of
environmental performance on all the dependent variables in
the model is basically addressing the endogeneity issues in the
study. By addressing endogeneity problems, the validity and
reliability of research results are improved. Endogeneity
describes a situation where a predictor/independent variable
(IV) and the error term of the response/dependent variable
(DV) are correlated (Antonakis, Bendahan, Jacquart, & Lalive,
2010; Rutz & Watson, 2019). In endogeneity, the effect of an IV
19
on DV cannot be casually interpreted because it includes omitted
causes that lead to biased/inconsistent estimates (Antonakis et
al., 2010). Causes of endogeneity include omitted variables,
omitted selection, measurement error, simultaneity, and
common-method bias which renders estimates causally
uninterpretable (Antonakis et al., 2010).
In this study, we recognized omitted variables and CMB as two
possible sources of endogeneity. To address endogeneity issues
because of omitted variables, we controlled for variables that are
not among the major variables in the study but can have a
confounding effect on the dependent variable based on literature
evidence detailed in Section 3.3, pages 13 – 14 as follows:
“The two-stage least square approach to instrument variable is a
great challenge for studies involving structural equation
modelling because of multiple dependent variables and
mediating dependent variables acting as predictor variables for
other dependent variables in the model (Collier, 2020). Since the
conceptual model for this research is compound/serial in nature,
to address endogeneity problems due to omitted causes, those
variables that are not among the major interest in this research
but were identified in the literature to have confounding effects
on the dependent variables were controlled. Through this
approach, the endogeneity issues are assessed as a whole and
not as piecemeal since control variables can influence all the
dependent variables in the model (Rutz & Watson, 2019).
Moreover, the validity of results found between independent and
dependent variables in the model can be increased through the
use of the use of multiple omitted variables as controls (Rutz &
Watson, 2019). In this study, three (3) variables were identified
as possible sources of endogeneity due to omitted causes namely
firm size, firm category, and contract terms. All these variables
were therefore controlled in this study. Firm size (i.e., micro,
small, medium, and large) was controlled to account for the TLC
differences in the study. This variable is necessary to control
because the capabilities and resources of firms improve with
their growth hence, firm size can affect the performance of TLCs.
In the literature, firm size is found to correlate with firms’
environmental and economic outcomes hence, controlling for it
is a “must” because it is not among the major variables in this
study (Chu et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2018). Firm category (i.e.
multinational and domestic) is also controlled in this study
because wider geographic scope affect TLCs’ strategies and
actions due to inherent variations across regions where these
TLCs operate (Lin & Ho, 2011; Shu, Zhou, Xiao, & Gao, 2016).
20
Furthermore, firm category was also found to affect business
performance because capitalization, equity, and associated risks
is different between multinational and domestic firms (Michel &
Shaked, 1986). Lastly, TLCs’ contract terms with customers (i.e.
short, medium, long, or mixed term contracts) is controlled in
this research because aside from contract duration, contract
terms define the contract details and stipulations which have
varying complexities, conditions, and legal consequences that
affects firm strategies and actions (Shippey, 2009).
Furthermore, firms’ contract terms with their customers have
partnership implications that affects how requirements and
expectations of customers are satisfied (Argyres & Mayer,
2007).”
To address CMB, we employed both procedural and statistical
controls which are detailed in Section 3.4 of our article revisions
in pages 14 – 16 as follows:
“The use of questionnaires to collect data is susceptible to
common method bias (Lindell & Whitney, 2001; Simmering,
Fuller, Richardson, Ocal, & Atinc, 2015). Common method bias
(CMB) refers to the dataset variance that is attributed to the
measurement method rather than the factors that represent the
measures (Simmering et al., 2015, p. 473). CMB creates false
positives relationships among variables in the study because of
artificial inflation of parameter estimates that eventually results
into type I errors (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2012).
CMB is also a main source of endogeneity in the study when the
omitted variable is a method factor (Antonakis, Bendahan,
Jacquart, & Lalive, 2010; Cooper et al., 2020). To address CMB
issues, procedural and statistical controls were employed. For
procedural controls, applicable CMB remedies such as
“protecting respondent anonymity and reducing evaluation
apprehension” were sought (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, &
Podsakoff, 2003, p. 888). In the questionnaire cover page, it was
stated that respondents’ can freely and honestly answer all
questions since responses are anonymous and there is no right
and wrong answers to the questions. Another procedural
approach to CMB posited by Podsakoff et al. (2003, p. 888) is
scale items improvement “through the careful construction of
the items themselves”. Hence, in the survey, potential ambiguous
items were defined, clarified, and expounded. Furthermore, the
questionnaire has also been made short, clear-cut, and uniformly
framed. This is because according to the field experts consulted
during the questionnaire development, company executives
dislike long and perplexing surveys. To avoid confusing
respondents, questions were all uniformly framed with positive
21
wording and maintained format consistency (De Bruin et al.,
2011; Podsakoff et al., 2003).
To manage CMB statistically, a marker variable that is (1)
“theoretically unrelated to the main variables of the study”, and
(2) “shares the same source of method variance”, as posited by
Simmering et al. (2015, p. 475) was included in the study. To
minimize survey length, a modified version of Williams,
Hartman, and Cavazotte (2010) single marker design was
employed in lieu of Spector, Rosen, Richardson, Williams, and
Johnson (2019) multiple marker technique. To maintain
consistency in the survey questionnaire, the questions for
marker variable were framed similarly to the major variables. A
positive social desirability construct which is reflected by the
effects of “inconsistent politics” affecting the public was chosen
as marker variable. It is composed of four items developed in
consultation with industry experts and practitioners to uncover
the inflating effects of social desirability because politics is
always an interesting topic in the Philippines. Traditional “ideal”
markers in the literature such as the blue attitude (Simmering et
al., 2015) and satisfaction with neutral objects (Spector et al.,
2019) were not used in the study because asking odd or
unrelated questions in the middle of the survey can negatively
affect how respondents answer questions. Worst, respondents
can totally stop their participation due to the impression that the
survey does not make sense.
To satisfy good marker variable characteristics conceived by
Simmering et al. (2015, p. 475), marker indicators were framed
to be theoretically unrelated with the interest variables. While
indicators for the major variables were designed to measure
TLCs’ records and experienced based performance outcomes in
the last five (5) years of operations vis-a-vis their current
demands for further eco-support systems, the marker variable
was designed to measure the perception of respondent
managers on “inconsistent politics” which is always an
interesting topic in the Philippines. Interest and marker
variables were designed to share the same source of method bias
which, for this case, is the “rater bias” due to social desirability
(Spector et al., 2019, p. 873). Interest variable indicators in this
study are desirable characteristics hence, inflation of responses
can happen while for the marker variable, effects to the general
public by “inconsistent politics” are usually assessed with
inflated response by a concerned citizen (such as the respondent
managers/executives) because of the general desire for
immediate actions to problems. Given that the marker variable
is theoretically unrelated to the interest variables, any
correlation that exist between the two is therefore attributed by
their shared source of method variance. This amount of shared
22
variance is used as a factor to adjust for the effects of common
method bias in the data set which is managed and controlled for
this study using a modified version of Williams et al. (2010)
Comprehensive CFA Marker Technique that is detailed in the
succeeding discussions and in Supplement D.”
To validate our approaches to endogeneity, we sought the ideas
of
Prof.
Joel
Collier
(https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=AHUgCZIAAAAJ&h
l=en), author of "Applied Structural Equation Modeling Using
AMOS : Basic to Advanced Techniques" In his YouTube (YT)
channel
accompanying
his
book
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVaGBNjq_UI),
he
recognizes the difficulties/challenges of instrumental variable
using two-stage least square for compound or serial models
because of the presence of multiple DVs in which some DVs are
mediating variables acting as IVs for other DVs in the model. He
then proposes an "omitted variable" as control variable to
address the confounding effects in the model and hold constant
some of the other possibly omitted variables that could have bias
on the results. In that way, the said control variable can control
for, or influence all the dependent variables in the model, hence
not addressing the endogeneity problem as piecemeal but
assessing it as a whole. Furthermore, Prof. Collier added that the
use of multiple omitted variables as control variable can further
give validity to the results found between IVs and DVs. In his
response to our inquiry in the comments section of his book
accompanying YT channel, since the volume 2 of his book that
will deal with endogeneity problems is still underway, he
recommended us to refer to “Rutz, O. J., & Watson, G. F. (2019).
Endogeneity and marketing strategy research: An overview.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(3), 479-498”
for endogeneity issues he discussed in his channel.
We
also
emailed
Prof.
James
Gaskin
(https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=lorHa4MAAAAJ&h
l=en) one of the renowned global experts in SEM and founder of
Statwiki
Kolobkreations
(http://statwiki.gaskination.com/index.php/Main_Page)
regarding the issue of endogeneity and validated our approaches
both controlling for possible omitted variables and managing for
CMB. He confirmed that for SEM with compound or serial models
“running the model with all possible control variables included
would help alleviate concerns of endogeneity”. Furthermore, he
lauded our approach to CMB because methodically and
statistical controlling for method variance can help address both
23
endogeneity and CMB issues. He then sent us a link leading to
access “Cooper, B., Eva, N., Fazlelahi, F. Z., Newman, A., Lee, A., &
Obschonka, M. (2020). Addressing common method variance
and endogeneity in vocational behavior research: A review of the
literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 121, 103472” and “Antonakis, J., Bendahan,
S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On making causal claims: A
review and recommendations. The leadership quarterly, 21(6),
1086-1120” as references for CMB being a main source of
endogeneity and how to manage for CMB. The “Comprehensive
CFA Marker Technique” of Williams et al. (2010) to detect for
CMB (Phase I), quantify its effect on the measurement of our
latent variables (Phase II), and evaluate its sensitivity to model
effects and confidence intervals (Phase III), has been employed
in the study and this is detailed in Section 3.6 and Supplement D
of the study.
The seminal ideas of Professor Collier and Professor Gaskin on
CMB and endogeneity, and all the applicable concepts/ideas in
the research articles that they suggested us to refer to, were
applied in our article revisions.
***Additional Questions***
Originality
1
Yes, I believe the paper have great
potential and upon improving a
few aspects, it can be a solid piece
of work. Although the relationship
between
environmental
performance and economic and
social outcomes of various
companies have been well studied
in the literature, but most of the
papers focus on developed
countries, whereas TLC's in
developing countries such as
Philippines contribute to a
significant percentage of CO2
emissions, thus justifying a need
for a deeper analysis of the
environmental,
social
and
economic dynamics in these
countries.
We would like to thank you for appreciating the originality of our
work.
Relationship to Literature
2
The authors have done a thorough
job of listing the relevant papers
from the literature, citing these
papers throughout the document,
We would like to thank you for appreciating our efforts for our
literature review. Furthermore, we would like to thank you for
your suggestion to further improve our literature review.
24
and providing an appendix with
more detailed literature review.
Although I believe reviewing and
reporting the literature on game
theoretic approaches on this topic
will strengthen the arguments of
the paper. More precisely, we can
view the environmental, social
and economic dynamics of TLC's
as a non-cooperative game, and
the government who oversees all
the
actions
and
provides
necessary subsidies and support
mechanisms acts as a central
planner. Now, an equilibrium
would be a case where all the
TLC's do follow environmentally
friendly policies and include them
in their agendas, and no single
company
benefits
from
abandoning these policies and
focusing on their original business
model
(without
including
environmental considerations). If
no such equilibrium state exists,
what is the main problem and how
the central planner address such a
problem? Reporting relevant
papers in the literature which
study these dynamics from game
theoretic lens will be a valuable
addition to the paper.
In our revised paper, in our original submission to IJOPM last
December 2021, we searched for literatures that focus on the
greening of TLCs from year 2000 to 2021. To find the
appropriate advanced search field codes for Scopus that can
display the vital research publications on the greening of TLCs,
the list of research publications identified in the literature
review of El Baz and Laguir (2017) was used as test reference.
This is because this article has identified the important research`
publications on the greening of TLCs during its time of
publication. There are two search syntax that can display all the
vital research publications identified by El Baz and Laguir
(2017). The first Advanced Scopus search query string uses the
publication title only in the field code while the second Advanced
Scopus search query string uses titles, abstract, and keywords in
the search filed code. The details of the Boolean syntax of both
advanced search query strings (in which the format is Scopus
specific and beyond our control) are shown below:
TITLE ( green*_logistics OR third-party_logistic* OR 3pl* OR transport_and_logistics OR
logistics_service_providers OR green_practices_adoption OR fleet_operations OR
fleet_management OR road_freight OR logistics_sector OR logistics_provider OR
green_vehicles OR freight_trucking OR logistics_services OR green_transportation ) AND
( LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE , "ar" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE , "cp" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE
, "re" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE , "cr" ) ) AND ( EXCLUDE ( PUBYEAR , 2022 ) ) AND (
LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE , "English" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2021 ) OR LIMIT-TO
( PUBYEAR , 2020 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2019 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2018 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2017 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2016 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2015 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2014 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2013 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2012 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2011 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2010 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2009 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2008 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2005 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2004 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2003 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2002 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2001 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2000 ) )
TITLE-ABS-KEY ( green_logistic* OR logistics_service_provider* OR third-party_logistic*
OR 3pl* OR road_freight_transport* OR green_vehicle* OR logistics_sector OR
logistics_compan*
OR
green_transport*
OR
fleet_operation*
OR
transportation_and_logistics OR road_freight_haulier* OR freight_truck ) AND ( LIMIT-TO
( PUBSTAGE , "final" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE , "English" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2021 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2020 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2019 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2018 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2017 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2016 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2015 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2014 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2013 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2012 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2011 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2010 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2009 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2008 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2007 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2006 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2005 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2004 )
OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2003 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2002 ) OR LIMIT-TO (
PUBYEAR , 2001 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2000 ) )
From year 2000 to 2021, the first search syntax displays 3,371
document results while the second syntax displays 18,645
document results. In our paper, we used the first search syntax
because document results being displayed by the first search
syntax are more focussed on the greening of TLCs. The problem
with the second search syntax rest on its Boolean query in which
it displays all indexed research publications with the indicated
25
search key terms appearing either in the title, abstract, and
keywords even though these publications are not related to the
greening of firms. In our final list of screened literatures included
in our manuscript detailed in Supplement A-2, less than 10
operations research paper has been identified and NON of these
papers have used game theory as lens in their study of greening
TLCs. In this regard, since the thematic flow of our literature
review centres on topic, context, and construct relationship gaps
in the lens of Dynamic Capability Theory, we opted that it is more
appropriate to include your important observation about the
importance of game theory in the greening of TLCs in Section
“4.4. Limitations and Future Research Directions” located in
pages 28-29 as follows:
“….. Fourth, this study has used Dynamic Capability Theory as
lens in investigating construct relationships. Similar studies
using game theory as lens can be conducted in future studies for
greening TLCs. This is because the environmental, economic, and
social dynamics of greening firms are also a non-cooperative
game in which the government and their partner organizations,
who oversees all the actions and provides necessary subsidies
and support mechanisms, acts as a central planner. In this
regard, understanding the equilibrium6 dynamics between the
provider (i.e., the government and its partner organizations) and
the recipient (i.e., the TLCs) is vital. If no equilibrium 7 exists
between the provider and the recipient, it is necessary to
understand what the main problem is and how the central
planner must address such a problem. In the literature review
detailed in Supplement A-2, less than ten (10) operations
research paper has been identified and none of these papers
have used game theory as lens in their study of greening TLCs.
Since game theoretic research on greening firms are
limited/rare in the literature, conducting a game theoretic study
centred on greening TLCs is a valuable contribution to the
literature and to the TLC industry.”
In the proposed study, an equilibrium between the provider (i.e., the
government and its partner organizations) and the recipient (i.e., the TLCs)
would be a case where all the TLC's do follow environmentally friendly policies
and include them in their agendas, and no single company benefits from
abandoning these policies and focusing on their original business model without
including environmental considerations.
7 The equilibrium description is credit to the anonymous peer reviewer of this
journal who suggested the importance of game theoretic studies in the field of
greening firms.”
6
2-1
Also, as a minor suggestion, I
didn't find the citation to the
original
paper
introducing
"confirmatory factor analysis"
In both the original submission and the revised paper, to our
knowledge and upon verification of both papers using “CTRL F”
function of MS Word and rechecking both papers including the
Supplement, we did not cite the paper by K. G. Jöreskog,
26
(the paper by K. G. Jöreskog,
published in Psychometrika in
June 1969, with the title: "A
general approach to confirmatory
maximum
likelihood
factor
analysis").
published in Psychometrika in June 1969, with the title: "A
general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor
analysis”. The article we cited in our original and paper revisions
that is published under Psychometrika is Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An
index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36.
Methodology
3
3-1
Given the input data for this study
is a set of questionnaire
responses, EFA and CFA are the
natural choices to test some
theoretical hypotheses.
Although the authors have made
sure that the 218 responses
represent a balance of different
size companies, assuming all the
TLC's are of the same type and
absorb the same impact by
environmental
performance
seems to be too simplifying. In
other words, intuitively, larger
corporations will have an easier
job of adjusting their operations
and business models, while
smaller companies will struggle to
deviate from their not-soenvironmentally-friendly
operations, and the amount of
subsidy by the government won't
have the same positive impact in
all such TLC's. So my suggestion is
the following: while keeping your
original analysis, partition the set
of 218 responses into a few
categories according to the size
and overall revenue of these
companies and perform all the
analysis on each of these groups
and see if you get the same results
across different categories. If not,
can we somehow quantify this
difference? As a policy maker, one
would love to know the impact of
subsidies on different type of
companies.
We would like to thank you for your validation on our
methodology. For two major problems with the methodology
used in this paper that you identified, our responses/actions are
detailed below:
We would like to mention that one of the limitations of our study
is sample size. In this study, although it is also possible to
conduct multigroup analysis using any of the three manifest
demographic variables (i.e., firm size, firm category, and contract
terms) because of sample size constraint, these variables were
opted to be controlled. This is because conducting SEM’s
multigroup analysis will separate the actual samples into their
respective subgroup thereby making the sample size for each
subgroup less than 200. Given the number of constructs and
indicators included in the study, SEM requires at least 200
sample size for the results of structural analysis to be valid and
reliable and this is detailed in the book of Hair et al., 2010 (pp.
117, 643-644) and in the research articles of Hoe, 2008 (p. 77)
and Yuksel et al., 2010 (p. 279) with reference details as follows:
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2010). Multivariate Data
Analysis (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation
modeling technique. Journal of applied quantitative methods, 3(1), 76-83.
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on
customer satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty.
Tourism management, 31(2), 274-284.
This SEM sample size requirement of ≥200 is discussed in
Section 3.5. If only we have at least 200 usable samples for each
firm size classification (i.e., ≥200 small, ≥200 medium, and ≥200
large enterprises) or firm category (i.e., ≥200 domestic and ≥200
multinational firms), we could have made “multigroup analysis”
like what you have suggested. This is because AMOS 26, which is
the co-variance based structural equation modelling (SEM)
software used in this study, can do such analysis.
To incorporate this important suggestion in the revised article,
we have included it as one of the limitations of our study in
Section 4.4 in page 30 as follows:
“….Finally, as findings of this study are primarily based on the
218 samples collected from the mix of multinational and
27
3-2
The entire analysis is based on the
responses
from
company
representatives, and I am
wondering if there is a way to tie
these claims to verifiable metrics
(e.g., contribution of each
company to the Environmental
Performance Index (EPI) of the
country or the Global Green
Economy Index (GGEI) for that
country). This is particularly
important since among countries
sorted by the environmental
performance index, as we move
down
the
list
and
the
environmental
performance
becomes more concerning, the
accuracy and comprehensiveness
of the measurements are also in
question. Note that Philippines is
listed as country # 11 in the list of
countries published by Yale
University
(https://epi.yale.edu/epiresults/2020/component/epi) in
terms of EPI.
Philippine TLCs of all sizes, the whole TLC industry of the
country has been structurally modelled as one group. If only at
least 200 usable samples for each firm size classification (i.e.,
≥200 small, ≥200 medium, and ≥200 large enterprises) or firm
category (i.e., ≥200 domestic and ≥200 multinational firms)
have been collected, multigroup analysis could have been
feasible. Conducting multigroup analysis is important to
understand the dynamics of greening TLCs on their economic
and social performances and further needs for better support
systems vis-a-vis their firm size or category. Intuitively, larger
corporations will have an easier job of adjusting their operations
and business models to stricter environmental requirements,
while smaller companies will find it more challenging to deviate
from their lesser eco-friendly operations. Furthermore, the
amount of subsidy or support by the government and its partner
organizations won't have the same impact on all TLC's. In this
regard, future studies can explore similar research with multigroup analysis to compare results across different categories,
quantify their differences, and discuss result implications to
TLCs, policy makers, development organizations, and public
utility firms.”
With regards to your inquiry, unfortunately, we don’t have
access to data on the contribution of each company/firm to the
Environmental Performance Index (EPI) of the Philippines or
the Global Green Economy Index (GGEI) for the country.
Furthermore, in case the above data exist, we still cannot
associate the contribution of each company/firm to the EPI or
GGEI because the respondents and their respective companies
are anonymous/not identifiable to the researchers. It can be
noted that in the revised article, we mentioned in page 12 that
ethics committee approved our study prior its conduct and
anonymity is one of the ethics committee requirements to
protect the identity of the respondents.
28
*** Results ***
The results are presented clearly,
and I like the way the authors have
covered all four hypotheses in
depth. (Not to suggest this to be
included in the paper), but I would
like to see the authors run similar
experiments with the only
difference
of
flipping
the
hypothesis statement: H: the
economic/social performance of
TLC's downgrades with their
environmental
performance,
especially if you partition the 218
responses according to company
size. Observing and studying the
loading and cross-loadings might
reveal some interesting facts.
4
We would like to thank you for appreciating how we presented
our paper results.
The hypothesis suggested, although NOT mandatory to be
included in the paper revisions, is interesting. Unfortunately, our
processed data in its current form cannot support the proposed
hypothesis. This is because the questions/indicators reflecting
each construct must be framed/formulated accordingly to the
nature of the proposed hypothesis for results to be valid and
reliable. It can be noted that in the development of research
instruments and measures discussed in Sections 3.2 and 3.4 of
the revised paper, questions/indicators of all latent major and
marker variables were worded positively and were answered by
the respondents accordingly to how the questions are framed.
Reverse coding it may lead to inflated parameters which results
into type I error. This is because the original questions/
indicators were worded positively, and these are not framed to
suit the constructs of the proposed hypothesis. Furthermore, the
marker variable cannot be reverse coded because marker
variables and its indicators are strategically designed to share
the same source of method bias which, for this case, is the
“positive rater bias” due to social desirability (Spector et al.,
2019, p. 873). In this regard, the marker variable cannot be used
to statistically manage the CMB of reverse coded items. Failing to
manage for CMB creates endogeneity, validity and reliability
problems.
Partitioning the 218 responses according to company size (i.e.,
small, medium, and large enterprises) or even firm category
(domestic versus multinational firms), is a major limitation of
this study. This is because conducting SEM’s multigroup analysis
will separate the actual samples into their respective subgroup
thereby making the sample size for each subgroup less than 200.
Given the number of constructs and indicators included in the
study, SEM requires at least 200 sample size for the results of
structural analysis to be valid and reliable and this is detailed in
the book of Hair et al., 2010 (pp. 117, 643-644) and in the
research articles of Hoe, 2008 (p. 77) and Yuksel et al., 2010 (p.
279). This SEM sample size requirement of ≥200 is discussed in
Section 3.5 of the revised paper.
Implications for research, practice and/or society
5
The paper has great ambitions
which is excellent and a must for a
paper to be published at IJOPM.
But I still see a gap between theory
and practice. In one hand, as a
We would like to thank you for appreciating the
objective/purpose of our paper. As our paper can no longer cater
the impacts of support mechanisms on all the players in the
economy because data collected has been limited to TLCs, we are
going to take note of all your pointers and the gaps between
29
policy maker, one would love to
know the impact of support
mechanisms on all the players in
the economy, bit by bit, and not on
an average player. On the other
hand, providing some signatures
from TLC's economic, social and
environmental outcomes, not
supplied by the company will add
validity
to
the
research
methodology and will make it
generalizable.
theory and practice for our future studies. Furthermore, for
future studies, we can use triangulation to add validity to the
research methodology which will make it more generalizable. In
addition to survey responses by companies on the indicators of
all major and marker variables, actual metrics of the industry
published by the government and non-government
organizations, if such exists for developing countries, can used to
triangulate results. If such data does not exist, then longitudinal
research design can be used to achieve long term validity and
reliability of results. However, the main drawback of
longitudinal research is basically resource and funds availability.
These are discussed in Section 4.4 of the revised paper.
Quality of Communication
6
I think the writing of the paper
and
communicating
ideas/conclusions is done in a
very professional way and to high
standards. Although I have
observed some repetitions of the
arguments throughout the paper
and making the facts presented to
support the arguments a bit more
concise,
and
perhaps
summarising long text with a few
visualisations
will
improve
readers'
experience
while
reviewing the paper.
We would like to thank you for appreciating the quality of
communication of our work. Our team independently edited and
proofread the manuscript and improved paper discussions prior
submitting the revised paper. Again, thank you very much for all
your constructive comments that have led to significant
improvements of the revised paper.
30