サプライチェーン圧力とサステナビリティ報告の採用：ウガンダにおける障壁と便益の調整効果

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides empirical evidence on the asymmetric moderating roles of benefits and barriers in sustainability reporting adoption, extending stakeholder-agency theory.

🏢実務担当者:Highlights the importance of combining supply chain pressure with tangible benefits to enhance supplier sustainability reporting, relevant for procurement and CSR teams.

🏛政策担当者:Suggests a sequenced policy approach: first reduce implementation barriers, then pair reporting demands with incentives, especially for environmental reporting.

Firms' sustainability impacts frequently extend beyond organisational boundaries, yet corporate reporting remains predominantly organisation-centred. This study investigates the association between combined customer and supplier pressure and the adoption of sustainability reporting (SR) among resource-constrained manufacturers in Uganda, modelling overall adoption and its economic, social and environmental dimensions, and examining whether managers' perceived benefits, perceived barriers and their benefit-barrier balance moderate the pressure-reporting association in each domain. Using Lewin's field theory as an organising framework, the study integrates stakeholder-agency, legitimacy, cost-benefit and theory-of-constraints explanations of reporting adoption in settings with weak formal reporting institutions. Survey responses from 346 senior managers, drawn from the full 505-firm register of Uganda's formal-sector manufacturing association, are analysed using ordinary least squares regressions with seeded bootstrap inference and extensive robustness tests. The direct-association models show strong positive associations between supply chain pressure and all four reporting outcomes (β = .606 to .695, all p < .001). The moderation results indicate a theoretically consequential asymmetry. The association of supply chain pressure with overall (β = .141, p < .05), economic (β = .236, p < .001) and social reporting (β = .181, p < .01) strengthens with perceived benefits, whereas perceived barriers do not moderate these associations despite strong negative conditional associations with adoption (β = -.310 to -.447, all p < .001). The benefit-barrier balance is strongly associated with overall adoption directly (β = .521, p < .001) and its moderation of the pressure-reporting association holds for overall, economic and social reporting. Environmental reporting exhibits a distinct configuration: the benefit-barrier balance shows its strongest conditional association in this domain (β = .610, p < .001), yet neither benefits, barriers nor their balance moderates the pressure-reporting association, and the conditional supply chain pressure coefficient is non-significant. This pattern is consistent with environmental reporting receiving weaker reinforcement from stakeholders capable of conferring or withdrawing organisational legitimacy, although the study does not test that mechanism directly. The findings qualify a symmetric reading of Lewin's field theory by showing that driving and restraining forces are not empirical mirror images: barriers are associated principally with firms' underlying reporting capacity, whereas benefits are more closely tied to how strongly reporting tracks external pressure. The study extends stakeholder-agency theory by identifying customer and supplier relationships, combined in a single supply chain pressure construct, as the strongest external correlate of adoption. For policy, the findings support a dimension-sensitive, sequenced approach: alleviate implementation constraints first, then pair supply chain reporting demands with incentives that make adoption benefits tangible; environmental reporting may additionally require the prior development of salient stakeholder demand and measurement capacity.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.5258/soton/pg/t191first seen 2026-08-26 04:47:28