Pro‐environmental Behavior in the Workplace: A Review of Empirical Studies and Directions for Future Research

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12051
• Author: Priscila Alfaro‐Barrantes,Yuhei Inoue
• Date: 01 March 2015
• Published date: 01 March 2015

Pro-environmental Behavior in

the Workplace: A Review of

Empirical Studies and

Directions for Future Research

YUHEI INOUE AND PRISCILA ALFARO-BARRANTES

ABSTRACT

This article describes the current state of knowledge on

pro-environmental behavior in the workplace by analyzing

17 empirical studies that (1) examined individuals’ pro-

environmental behavior at work and (2) performed some

type of quantitative analysis to explore antecedents of this

behavior. Detailed descriptions of these studies are pro-

vided in terms of (1) types of pro-environmental behavior

examined, (2) measures of pro-environmental behavior,

(3) internal factors investigated, (4) external factors inves-

tigated, (5) samples examined, and (6) theoretical frame-

works used. This article further provides researchers

interested in this research topic with directions for

future research. Using the information presented in this

article, future business ethics studies can offer more com-

prehensive insight into one’s decision to engage in various

types of pro-environmental behavior in the workplace

and provide important implications for environmental

protection.

Yuhei Inoue is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at School of Kinesiology, Univer-

sity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. E-mail: yinoue@umn.edu. Priscila Alfaro-Barrantes is an

Adjunct Professor at College of Continuing Education, Southern New Hampshire University,

Manchester, NH. E-mail: p.alfaro-barrantes@snhu.edu.

bs_bs_banner

Business and Society Review 120:1 137–160

© 2015 Center for Business Ethics at Bentley University. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.,

350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA, and 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK.

INTRODUCTION

The recent recession has made many corporations slow

down their sustainability efforts. Companies in the United

Kingdom have moved away from sustainability practices as

evidenced by their decreased energy efficiency and increased

carbon emissions (ENDS 2011). The annual “State of Green Busi-

ness” report published by the GreenBiz Group also revealed that

U.S. companies failed to show progress in most aspects of its

environmental performance index in 2011 (GreenBiz Group

2012). At the same time, however, a handful of corporations have

made further investments in green initiatives, taking a leadership

role in this area. As a notable example, Marks & Spencer, a

UK-based retailer, received the 2012 European Management

Award for the Environment because of its efforts to implement a

comprehensive sustainability plan designed to decrease the com-

pany’s resource impacts (European Commission 2013).

Highmark, a U.S.-based health provider saved $250,000 in 2011

alone by furthering its energy conservation efforts, including the

reduction of air conditioning and heating usage and the installa-

tion of energy-efficient lighting (Highmark 2012). These differ-

ences in the progress of environmental initiatives across

companies lead to the following key question: Why do some com-

panies integrate environmental practices into their business

operations more successfully than others?

A growing literature has attempted to answer this question

(de Lange et al. 2012). In particular, one line of research has

addressed the question by quantitatively examining psycho-

logical processes through which employees decide to adopt

pro-environmental behavior, which entails various actions that

are undertaken with intent to benefit the environment (e.g.,

Andersson et al. 2005; Brothers et al. 1994; Cordano et al. 2010;

Lee et al. 1995; Ramus and Steger 2000). Findings from the

research on pro-environmental behavior at work have the poten-

tial to provide important implications for environmental protection

because human activity within organizations is a major cause of

ecological degradation today (Jowit 2010; Robertson and Barling

2013; Russell and Griffiths 2008).

Despite its potential contribution to environmental protection,

this body of research currently suffers from the fact that no

138 BUSINESS AND SOCIETY REVIEW