Green Market Economy and Emerging Market Environment ...globalbizresearch.org/files/1-t925_irrem_siribuppa... · International Review of Research in Emerging Markets and the Global

International Review of Research in Emerging Markets and the Global Economy (IRREM)

An Online International (Double-Blind) Refereed Research Journal (ISSN: 2311-3200)

2019 Vol: 5 Issue: 1

1296 www.globalbizresearch.org

Green Market Economy and Emerging Market Environment:

Sustainable Adaptive Complex Systems

Siribuppa U-tantada,

Business Administration Faculty,

Rajamangala University of Technology Phra Nakhon, Thailand.

E-mail: [email protected]

Maurice Yolles,

Centre for the Creation of Coherent Change & Knowledge (C4K),

Liverpool John Moores University, England.


Bahaudin G. Mujtaba,

Nova Southeastern University, Florida, USA.


Ampon Shoosanuk,

School of Business Administration,

Bangkok University, Thailand.


Tuomo Rautakivi,

Faculty of Social and Political Sciences,

Jenderal Soedirman University, Indonesia.


Abstract

The green market economy (GME) refers to a global economic condition able to contribute

constructively to economic, social and environmental development and sustainability. Here a

model of GME will be developed using cultural agency theory, thus representing it an

adaptive complex system. This economy develops through the involvement of a plurality of

organizations that include the World Bank, the World Trade Organization and commercial

agents interacting in an emerging market environment that is able to support sustainable

(economic, social, environmental) development goals. The modeling process offers a general

theory of the green market, and is composed of core substructural axiomatic theory, and

subsidiary testable supersystem theory. Formulating green theory as a core set of

propositions that is accepted as defining a living adaptive substructure, a green

superstructure will be built and tested empirically in order to fill gaps identified for GME in

achieving its UN-DESA goals. The outcome demonstrates the validity of creating a green

market economy.

___________________________________________________________________________

Key Words: Green market economy, Market cultural agency, Developed and developing

countries, Cultural agency theory, Sustainable development goals

mailto:[email protected]








1. Introduction

Crises become accelerated in global contexts, for instance with respect to climate,

biodiversity, fuel, food, water, and of late the financial system and the economy. The world

economy struggles to recover and grow in its attempt by both governments and the private

sector to make a transition to a green economy in time to engage these challenges. Green

economy is relevant to all economies, be they state or more market-led. Investing in a green

economy enhances long-run economic performance and can increase total global wealth (e.g.

stocks of renewable resources, reducing environmental risks, and rebuilding capacity to

generate future prosperity), according to the macroeconomic model given in the Green

Economy Report documents (UNEP, 2011). The United Nations Sustainable Development

Goals (SDGs) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) should be achieved by 2030, aimed at

fostering stable, predictable and equitable trading relations across the world (WTO, 2018).

According to the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN, 2018), the universal

agenda should be implemented by all countries to achieve the SDGs by 2030.

The utility of the green market (-led) economy (GME) can be explained with reference to

the set of 17 Goals of the United Nations-Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN-

DESA, 2015). These goals embed values that demonstrate that they arise from a cultural

position. They also give an awareness of the global economic condition that can contribute

constructively for economic improvement, social and environmental growth and can be

distinguished as three elements:

(i) poverty and hunger elimination and the sustainability of decent work – an

economic element (Goals 1, 2, and 8);

(ii) human wellness that includes healthiness and well-being, equitable lifelong

learning, gender equality, equal access to affordable and clean energy; and

social wellness with sustainable innovative infrastructure and

industrialization, with equality within and among countries, sustainable

cities and communities, peaceful, justice and strong institutions, and

global partnerships for “sustainable development” – a social element

(Goals 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 16 and 17);

(iii) environmental responsibility including clean water and sanitation,

responsible consumption and production, the combating of climate

change, security of life below water, and life on land – an environmental

element (Goals 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15).

However, to function adequately, a GME requires world political leaders, civil society and

leading businesses to collaboratively engage in the transition, and the addition of a sustained

effort on the part of policy makers and their constituents to rethink and redefine traditional





measures of wealth, prosperity, and well-being. Moves toward the GME may also be difficult,

for instance where political administrations have policy ambiguities due to a lack of political

administrative coherence, typified by the notion of “joined up governance” (Klievink &

Janssen, 2009). This can be shown in the case of China, for instance. On the one hand the

country is currently pioneering a new sustainable development model, formally accepted in

2002, which can over-come current environmental and resource management problems while

achieving improvements in resource productivity and eco-efficiency (Geng and Doberstein,

2008). However, there is a controversial policy implication for the Chinese government where

they place more reliance on technological progress than on the need to pay more attention to

regions and provinces in relation to the impact of industrial structure and energy consumption

structure concerning a long-term low-carbon economy technology and the sustainable

development (Pan, Pan, Hu, Tu, Zhao, Yu, Xiong, & Zheng, 2019), relevant to the GME.

There are issues that require attention for GME. As in emerging markets, emerging

economies or developing countries tend to be insufficiently sophisticated in green market

practices, and as such the green economy concept has failed as have other resource

management reforms of the past, for instance in Indonesia, with uncertain markets and

globally, and that have ignored political and economic possibilities (Castree, 2008; Swainson,

& Mahanty, 2018). An effective green economy model is also inadequate because it ignores

the complexities of dealing with conflicts; tradeoffs and power struggles that it seeks to

change (Swainson & Mahanty, 2018). Funding bodies, top private companies are more

reluctant to invest, posing a fundamental resourcing problem for the early stages of green

economy reforms (Swainson & Mahanty, 2018). Overall, the 2018 Green Economy Report

(SDSN, 2018) found that no country is on track to achieve all the Sustainable Development

Goals, and progress is slowest on the environment-focused goals.

The process of achieving the SDGs requires a capacity for the GME to adapt to complex

changes affects its longer-term viability and sustainability that can be modeled through

cultural agency theory representing an adaptive complex system to explore both its internal

and external dynamics. It involves a plurality of governmental and commercial agents

interacting in emerging market environment to be tested empirically. Since the green

economy is a complex cultural phenomenon, it can be modeled as complex adaptive cultural

agency and analyzed using adaptive complex systems theory (Yolles, 2006). So, a durable

GME should be seen as cultural entity, enabling the use of Cultural Agency Theory (Yolles,

1999; 2006; 2018; U-tantada, Yolles, Mujtaba, & Shoosanuk, 2019).

CAT defines agency as process-intelligent, autonomous, self-directed living system, able

to recognize its participation in interactive environments. Agency has its own internal

dynamics that affect market environments during interaction. It is comprised of three

ontologically distinct systems that are related, and which permit self-reflective focusing on





socio-cultural attributes. These are connected through process intelligences that define its

living system nature. Its construction is through a substructure that reflects a set of axioms

that enable it to respond to complexity while being able to adapt to changes thereby maintain

viability, and a superstructure which permits testable propositional constructs to be built

within it. These systems have the capacity to anticipate potentials that can maintain integrity,

identity, and autonomy through principles of communication and cybernetics control process)

(Yolles, 1999; 2006; 2018).

The green market economy (GME) model, built through CAT, can be used as a diagnostic

tool for the purpose of examining the state, or for locating problems within the agency

and within its environment. The diagnostic tool is also used to locate sub-structural

pathologies or any combinations (e.g. attributes that include a capacity for sustainability and

adaptability) in a system, or a network of the green market economy (GME) environment that

it is interacting in. The interaction is determined by both the agency's external and internal

attributes and constraints. These may include behaviors for other interactive agencies. Internal

attributes include immanent dynamic "self" processes that drive agency change enabling it to

maintain its viability. Within the superstructure, the diagnosis operates on

signatures generated at output of each particular dynamic of the sub-structural (generic)

model. This diagnostic and analytic tool provides solutions to green market economy, related

strategic agencies in its (focused emerging market) environment e.g. the World Bank, WTO,

and involved agencies as a whole in order to resolve issues within the frame of Sustainable

Development Goals. Hence, this paper will model and analyze GME (as a cultural entity)

through CAT, thereby filling the gaps identified for GME in achieving its UN-DESA goals.

As indicated in the literature on the international equity-based entry mode strategies of

emerging market multinationals, there is a need to understand the performance implications of

international entry mode strategies and the resource differences with different levels of

institutional development to be addressed empirically (Surdu, Mellahi, & Glaister, 2018). An

emergent diagnosis of a GME environment (i.e., a zone of behavior) and the unpredictable

changing dynamics of globalization in strategic agencies (such as the World Bank, the World

Trade Organization, emerging markets, purchasing and supplier development, and more

major companies) are needed to create a clearer picture of complex changes, challenges and

threats. The GME is required to make its self and emerging markets more resilient, and also

businesses more successful and the agency model will be developed to facilitate this.

Complexity exploring the positive effects of the green economy can provide understanding of

the complex challenges and opportunities in systems and their linkage to transitions toward

innovatively sustainable business models that are capable of functionality in this context

(França, Broman, Robèrt, Basile, & Trygg, 2017).





This article presents an in-depth exploration of the GME through the use of CAT, which is

able to explore the nature of the emerging market environment. It is based on a grounded

theory, can support a business model proposed for valid and reliable awareness building, and

have the potential to provide a valuable opportunity to grasp how the strategic GME and

emerging market superstructure can be merged to the advancement of sustainable

development goals. A theoretical framework model will be provided which explains our GME

modeling approach. It involves modelling GME as a cultural agency by adopting a market-

based approach and exploring GME in emerging market environment which includes strategic

agencies. According to the literature review, it is structured as following five sections: (2.1)

cultural agency as green market economy; (2.2) green market economy as a model of the

market-based approach; (2.3) the green market economy as a living system; (2.4) strategic

agency in GME’s emerging market environment; and (2.5) CAT model of green market

economy and emerging market environment.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Cultural agency as green market economy

With the rapid development of economic, social and environmental perspectives and the

complex changing business environment, green market economy (GME) can usefully be

formulated as a superstructural model within CAT substructure (Yolles, 1999; 2006; 2018).

CAT is a cybernetic living system paradigm that models complex adaptive systems

focusing on socio-cultural dimension (Dominici & Yolles, 2016; Guo, Yolles & Di Fatta,

2017; Yolles & Di Fatta, 2017; Yolles, 1999; 2006; 2018). Its substructure includes a

metasystem that operates through cybernetic principles constituted as an autonomous

culturally based "living" social system. One can build within this; a superstructure is defined

through a set of testable propositions that can respond to the needs of complexity which is

susceptible to detailed situational analysis possible.

Superstructural theory is formulated in agency as a metasystem by embracing Bandura’s

(2002) socio-cognitive theory. This includes attributes such as collective identity, cognition,

emotion, normative personality, common purpose and intention, and collective self-reference,

self-awareness, self-reflection, self-regulation, and self-organization. Agencies also interact in

a behavioral environment with other entities that include other agencies (Yolles, 2006). The

approach is also capable of delivering diagnosis of issues that need to be resolved (Figure 1).

This is a substructural “metasystem” that explains agency behavior in its environment. It

includes a cultural system which is the repository of such attributes as knowledge and

identity, the personality system (a term originally adopted to explain collective agencies

operating through norms: Guo et al., 2016) which is a strategic system for the agency, and

an operative system which facilitates behavior occurring in an environment. These are





connected by process intelligences that facilitate living system properties dependent on its

process intelligences, concepts to be returned to shortly.

Figure 1: CAT Substructural System Model (Yolles, 2016)

A GME cultural agency theory will include an integrated green economy-wide economic

plan covered investment and production decisions, with involvement by the world trade

organization (for central green planning and for balanced market development), this limiting

market freedom at times by balancing competition and preventing monopolies. The collective

interactions of individual citizens and businesses seek their own sustainable advantages. It

allows economic laws of supply (e.g. natural resources, capital, labor) and demand (purchases

by consumers, businesses, government) to direct the sustainable production of goods and

services; the free interplay of supply and demand in order to achieve social aims; the

sustainable production of the most desired goods and services in the most efficient way

returning a profit; innovation in creating new products; and knowledge management of the

most successful businesses that investing in top companies for sustainable quality production.

It acts to improve human wellbeing and social equity while at the same time reducing

environmental risks and ecological scarcities. It covers low carbon, resource efficient and

socially inclusive which is under policy makers’ conditional set on increased investments in a

transition to a green economy (UNEP, 2011). In short, sustainable development is applied

into economies which relate to the study of how people use their resources under limitations

to satisfy unlimited demands of them (McTaggart, Findlay & Parkin, 1992), as an agency in

CAT.

The concept of a “green economy” does not replace the idea of sustainable development,

but there are strong links between the themes. Green economy is connected to: (1)

environmental dimension issues (e.g., climate change, renewable resources, energy, natural

capital); (2) economic dimension aspects (e.g., development, growth, cost, or

https://www.thebalance.com/aggregate-supply-what-it-is-how-it-works-3306216

https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-demand-definition-explanation-effect-3305708





competitiveness); and (3) social dimension which is related to governance that support the

concept of green economy. Also, in practice “tools” are used to assess and monitor the

implementation of green economy (Loiseau, Saikku, Antikainen, Droste, Hansjürgens,

Pitkänen, Leskinen, Kuikman, & Thomsen, 2016). These are based on clear rules and a legal

framework establishing and enforcing property rights, and the “rules of the game,” for

citizens, business, government, and civil society in free market system (CED, 2017). These

result in rising wages, increasing benefits to trading partners, the supply of almost whatever

anyone wants, rewarding of innovators and benefiting consumers, stopping failed businesses

while economic growth is accelerated, matching sellers and buyers, keeping price low, price

signaling work, and free working (Dorfman, 2016).

Consequently, to achieve the SDGs empirically, the CAT model needs to embrace the

concept of an adaptable complex GME as it interacts with its emerging market environment.

2.2 Green market economy as a model of the market-based approach

GME is applied to be a basic model of market-based strategy to maximize returns that

arise out of sustainable strategic management. Porter (1980, 1985) explained that in order to

be a market leader in both cost and differentiation market-based strategy requires knowledge

management in order to compete for resource through competitive advantage, resulting in

superior performance (Porter, 1985). Thus, GME has primary forces that determine agency

competitiveness: the bargaining power of customers, the bargaining power of suppliers, the

threat of new entrants, and the threat of substitute products – which combine to create a level

of competitive rivalry in an industry. This orientation towards the external environment does

little to address the capability of an organization to develop its own internal processes.

Traditional modeling approaches are incapable of adequately recognizing the nature of a

competitive external environment, let alone creating a sustainable strategic advantage where

cooperative groups survive better than those who operate non-cooperatives (Nash, 1996). This

issue can be remedied by approaches like that of CAT. Brandenburger & Nalebuff (2002)

added a cooperative component to Porter’s 5 forces model (Porter 1980, 1985) as 6 forces,

explaining the basis for the development of strategic alliances in a competitive environment.

And Porter’s five forces are essentially: (i) possible entrance of competitors, indicating the

problems of, and barriers to market entry, (ii) threat of substitutes, indicating the problems of

and barriers to product or service substitution and price adjustment, (iii) power of buyers,

indicating the strength of position buyers have in a market, and exploring the option of

volume transactions, (iv) power of suppliers, and what potential competitor suppliers may

enter the market, (v) Rivalry in the market, indicating if there is already strong competition

and what their characteristics might be (Guo et al., 2016).

Thus, within the context of agency, the six forces are seen as relevant to a competitively

external environment, enabling the creation of sustainable strategic advantage. When green





(environmental or ecological) marketing is incorporated into a broad range of activities,

including product/service modifications, production process changes, packaging changes, and

green advertising which is modified to ensure that the interests of human consumption in

society, economy and environment are protected as mutually benefit at minimizing

environmental harm (Polonsky,1994).

Modeling GME as a living system allows it to be recognized as a self-aware and strategic

entity which is knowledgeable and it invests in continual reflection, self-evaluation and self-

assessment. It is also an organic (i.e., constituting an integral part of a whole with interrelated

parts) involving process intelligence that is fundamental to its capacity to adapt, and engaging

third order cybernetics that draws on the notions of viable systems (Yolles, 2018). As such it

is interested in understanding and dealing with its own pathologies (ill-health). It also requires

some collective cognition to distinguish attributes of cultural knowledge, to efficiently and

effectively discriminate, relate, manipulate and apply that knowledge into a variety of

environments, and to operate viably sustainable operations (Yolles, 1999; 2006; 2018).

Knowledge management can provide an effective strategy to create competitive power by

robustly linking core competencies. It depends on management’s ability that fosters learning,

knowledge creation, knowledge sharing and the use/re-use of agency and personal knowledge

in working improvement in the pursuit of new business and corporate goals (Furlong, 2005;

Yolles, 1999; 2006; 2018). Knowledge management, a rich asset of ideas and practices

involving trust and mutual confidence through transparency, communication, and ethical and

lawful behavior, is connected to political power balances and changes in GMEs. Power

relationship collaboration can shape the political dynamics of the cultural agency, GMEs to

be accepted rather than rejected by individuals, groups, and coalitions. Intrinsic and extrinsic

knowledge processes occur, and they affect the way that an agency interacts with other

organizations in its environment. This is because it is concerned with knowledge and

cybernetic processes that are surrounded in communications contributing created information.

Within GME, data communications have to be developed to enable its operation to be

cohesively and viably maintained through cybernetic principles, so knowledge needs to be

“knotted” before facing knowledge migration problems (Guo et al., 2016; Yolles, 2006). Due

to “knotted’ knowledge creates good standing and gains positive attitude in the perception of

customers, the acquisition and dissemination through innovation process (Verona, 1999),

connected to organizational learning (Calantone, Cavusgil, & Zhao, 2002), and creating

powerful value and sustaining competitive advantage in highly complex and dynamic

environments take place (Tellis, Prabhu, & Chandy, 2009; U-tantada, et al, 2019).

Apart from data communications within GME, all social communities are effectively joint

alliances between people, using and team-building approaches to develop systems of

communication that can establish coherent communication processes. Its linkage of social





collectives with political management within GME is intensely political. With political

management being central to social communities in that, it contributes to the possibility for

individual liberation. Communities (like nations, economies, corporations, public and private

organizations, and networks of alliances) development can be seen as a web of political

partnerships. Power processes are also used to shape structures, manipulate information, and

influence the way that people behave signified by their comprehensible web partnership

collaboration (Yolles, 2006; 2018).

Thus, a set of political management processes in GME is needed to help each partner to

take control of its professional sustainable development (Guo et al., 2016; Yolles, 2006), and

to stay connected in a digital era of networking and social learning. This can help leaders be

interested in sustainability to improve GME’s working behaviors where personal,

professional, or organizational objectives are successfully achieved. These also impact on

others (Mujtaba & Cavico, 2016; Mujtaba, Cavico, Senatip, & U-tantada, 2016). It also

contributes to the possibility for individual liberation and the development of the social

community itself in emerging market environment due to leaders pursuing sustainable and

good governance can use power to control others when necessary or when possible to

empower people in different ways (Guo et al., 2016; Yolles, 2006). For this reason, GME

human resource requires sustainable or transformational leaderships in the proper political

culture must be equipped with accountability on sustainable development perspectives, legal,

ethical, morale and operational values to drive intelligent GME viability and sustainability for

being an effectively dynamic viable system linked to its emerging market environment.

2.3 The green market economy as a living system

Our interest here lies in representing the GME as a living system that self-produce

performance. Such a model is already offered by Yolles (2016), who explains that a market

economy can be distinguished ontologically into a marketing cultural system, a strategic

(regulative) business system and an operative financial system (Figure 2), and while the

original model interests in the self-production of wealth, here the adjusted model has interest

in the self-production of performance. The system can live since it has operative and

figurative intelligences that enable it to maintain its autonomy and adapt. Like wealth

production, performance production is an autonomous instrumental process of the market

economy that occurs when the potential trajectory in the strategic system for creating generic

rules are selected and manifested in the operative system, resulting in a particular style of

operative transaction and a particular structure for performance production. This style and

structure are ultimately guided by the market cultural system.





Figure 2: Model of the Marketing System based on Strategic Business System Processes and

Operative Financial System structures, adopting the proposition that with a cultural market

system a living socio-economic market system arises. (Source: adapted from Yolles, 2016)

Self-production (of wealth or

performance) through operative

intelligence

Operative system This operates through

the actualisation of the

regulative processes of

the business system that

structure behaviour

Strategic

system This is based on regulative

specifications and the

figurative identification of

hierarchy-market

relationships and potential

for bundles of rules

Self-production adjustment

through operative

intelligence feedback

Market

Cultural system

Provision of background

attributes.

Creates a basis for the

development of a market

economy, through values,

beliefs, and cognitive/

behavioural norms.

Self-creation through

figurative intelligence

through

Self-creative adjustment through

figurative intelligence feedback

Instrumental

couple

Living systems have properties of purposefulness and consciousness, so can we attribute

this to the market economy? Purposefulness and consciousness occur in social systems

through the people who come together to create system, so they cannot be attributed to an

emergent system such as this one, unless through some concept of collective consciousness

by of its membership, or as a metaphor. Nor can we discuss the market economy as though it

has interests and decision-making capability that would be attributable to managed agencies.

Unless they are attributed to its collective membership, in particular, the market economy is

an emergent agency resulting from the complex processes of the business system.

A living system should be seen as an adaptive activity system which has a variety of “self”

properties, like self-motivation and self-organization. Its properties include complexity,

openness, self-organization, and interactivity with its environment through exchanges of

information and material-energy (Goldspink & Kay, 2003). An adaptive activity system has a

plural social membership of agents that also have adaptive capacities, conditions, or state of

acting or of exerting power (Bandura, 2001). Considering GME agency is as a macro or

whole agency with a membership of agents that are micro entities some of which are

collectives acting as micro agencies, and strategic relationships emerge from the interactions

between the micro agencies and other agents that influence behavior.

Modeling GME in this way enables the exploration of predefined contexts relating to the

development of performance when dealing with the emerging market environment globally

that covers strategic agencies involved with e.g. the World Bank, WTO, emerging market,





purchasing agency, supplier agency, and top company when interacting each other in order to

know well about how these agencies have made significant contributions to the global

economy in recent years. A qualitative modeling approach provides succinct explanations

which is based on CAT. This is applied into a durable GME that interacts with a emerging

market environment globally, and as it does it brings awareness to all involved agencies in

sustainable adaptive complex systems as in figure 3.

2.4 Strategic agencies in GME’s emerging market environment

A global emerging market environment cannot only be interlinked with GME but also

other market-led agencies like the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, and other

elements that are relevant to the CAT model (Figure 3):

The World Bank

The agency struggles for better living standards of people in the developing world by

providing low- or no-interest loans, policy advice, technical and knowledge sharing

assistance to low- and middle-income countries in order to create jobs and

opportunities to renovate the education, healthcare, transport, communication,

agriculture sector health, public administration, infrastructure, financial development,

and environmental and natural resource management for economic, social and

environmental growth (Griffin, 2006; Ferrieres, 2017). Under countries’ structure

change of industrial development strategies around cheap carbon-based energy is

accompanied by active labor market policies of green growth policies on green jobs’

environmental services (Bowen, 2012).

The World Trade Organization (WTO)

WTO focuses on the commercial and international trade policies and rules. At its

heart, the WTO agreements are negotiated and signed by the bulk of the world’s

trading nations and ratified in their parliaments, in order to reach the goal to ensure

that trade flows as smoothly, predictably and freely as possible. It has a crucial role to

accelerate progress in achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

(SDGs) to be achieved by 2030 by fostering stable, predictable and equitable trading

relations across the world in promoting sustainable development (WTO, 2018). WTO

acts as central government for central planning that can limit occasionally market

freedom in order to help balance competition, and prevent monopolies by enforcing

environmental protection proprietary laws, balanced budget laws for market

development, and pressing through the International Financial Institutions (IFI) for

international acceptance (Konov, 2013). The fair competition is a heart of the market

operation. It does not only foster innovation, productivity and growth, but also reduce

poverty. Significantly, competitions on equal terms, same rules and conditions are





applicable into all participants in emerging markets due to provide lower consumer

prices, technology and innovation improvement, customer choices, service qualities,

and information (Godfrey, 2008). An external change agent, WTO as an important

means of steering business agencies in developed and developing countries onto more

sustainable pathways, external change agents’ conditions are used to most effectively

overcome organizational path dependencies (Hoppmann, Sakhel, & Richert, 2018).

Emerging Market Agency

This agency is for emerging economies or developing countries that become more

advanced with rapid growth and industrialization determined through many socio-

economic factors. These countries experience an expanding role both in the world

economy and on the political frontier, where the autonomous development of its own

functional future (Dominici & Yolles, 2016). Taking advantages of the growth in

market opportunities (Kohli & Jaworski, 1990) provides negotiations through

dynamic processes of multilateral communication (Dominici & Yolles, 2016).

Purchasing Agency

This agency is associated with large size organizations, namely: government and

public-sector agencies. They can be deployed in a variety of ways rather than merely

through raw bargaining power. The potential contribution of purchasing professional

services supports innovations, offers insights on aspects to be considered to increase

potential innovation outcomes, and draws attention to the strategic role of purchasing

agency (D'Antone & Santos, 2016). The contexts of emerging markets, the market-

shaping behavior of a buyer, can be very diverse and include internal actions as well

as actions aimed at influencing other market actors. Buying corporations do not

simply adjust their own purchasing processes according to existing offerings, but

actively attempt to drive market evolution in particular directions with the five market

process elements: supply-shaping perceived by the industry supply; demand-shaping

referred to competitors' use of the same component (sign of quality or trade secret

risk); need-shaping based on existing offerings or own system requirements by

communicating the need to the potential suppliers; exchange object-shaping referred

to the product and associated services through characteristics of component or

through solution. As a result, a joint understanding with seller; and exchange

mechanism shaping are defined as the nature of the exchange mechanism in order to

manage the supplier relationship (Ulkuniemi, Araujo, & Tähtinen, 2015).

Supply Agency

The agency runs its business with sustainable management of its primary and support

activities to provide values to not only an organization, itself but also to society and





the economy by considering environmental, social, ethical, and economic issues of

external resources in a way to supply all goods, services, capabilities and knowledge.

Trust exists between the supplier and the client, business associations and

government-backed sources (Bennett & Robson, 1999). Johnsen, Miemczyk, &

Howard (2017) studied sustainable purchasing, supply management with customer-

supplier interaction processes, relationships and networks, sit on a significant

proportion of sustainable purchasing, and supply management articles developed over

time by adopting stakeholder, institutional and resource-based theories as their

primary perspective. Gaining considerable attention among organizations all over the

world and organizations, supplier selection is strategically important as it can

determine the organization's success in achieving goals of adopting green practices.

For top enterprises, the challenge is to select suitable suppliers among many suppliers

to realize their goals of greening the supply chain of SMEs. SME green innovation

ability that is under a framework for supplier selection by large organizations, the

suppliers consequently organizations can reproduce the proposed framework for

supplier selection for their new product range (Gupta & Barua, 2017). Because

institutional network relationships have a positive effect on the internationalization

process of GME, it provides insights into GME’s awareness of, access to, and actual

use of the resources available through institutional networks. These are incentives or

restrictions for entrepreneurial activities in foreign markets (Oparaocha, 2015).

Mostly technical and process collaborations are aimed at business expansion and

increased profitability for the collaborating partners (Huggins, Johnston, &

Thompson, 2012). Given these widespread effects, it is not surprising how well

purchasing agencies collaborate with top and small business agencies to implement an

array of environmentally responsible practices and policies in pursuit of SDGs’

achievement.

Big Business (Big Business, 1905)

This agency is defined as an economic group consisting of large profit-making

corporations especially with regard to their influence on social or political policy for

building up strong structures of economies and other forms of material wealth with

financial systems of environment (Yolles, 2016). They are subject to more stringent

regulations by the parent company and providing more extensive environmental

information than local companies (Ghazilla, Sakundarini, Abdul-Rashid, & Yusoff,

2015). Yaprak, Tasoluk, & Kocas (2015) have shown that eastern and western-based

organizational contexts in emerging markets move toward a more market-driven

form. It makes competition irrelevant by looking across substitute industries by

perfect integration of the core functions of many product categories into a single





device, and by looking across complementary product and service offerings by

relying on a platform mounted on its other devices that brought together a broad

ecosystem of developers for its products (Giachetti, 2018). Thus, encouraging

facilitative leadership, advanced learning, innovation and adaptation (Fey & Denison,

2003); and paralleling developed world counterparts (Baker & Sinkula, 1999), skills

in market-sensing, customer linking, and channel-bonding to distribute superior

customer value (Day, 1994) are needed because goods for brand-hungry middle

classes (Kravets & Sandikci, 2014) and more market responsive strategies (Khanna &

Palepu, 2010) can fulfil EM of GME’s environment. Thus, green market orientation

and market orientation, organization’s cultural attributes disseminated to be market-

led strategies for tactic behaviors in all functions of GME when dealing with

emerging market environment require persistent time and effort to sustain greater

customer satisfaction and loyalty by all countries to achieve the SDGs by 2030

(SDSN, 2018).

Opening in international market, especially to developed countries that have strict

environmental regulations (Ghazilla, et al., 2015) makes emerging market (EM) have to

adjust its operating within an industry with technologically advanced suppliers, as a result

they will improve higher innovation potential (Lecerf, 2012). Serving green value of top

companies in competitively complex environment is to find possible small partnerships in

SMEs that can promote a publically high impact on the environmental dimension (Schaper,

2002). Small companies’ constraints in financial, managerial and human resources, internal

know-how (Williams & Schaefer, 2013), and lack of managerial awareness regarding energy-

related patterns (Gillingham & Palmer, 2014) can be solved by collaborated with top

companies to enable them to mitigate their collectively high environmental impact while

generating financial savings (Richert, 2017); to leverage international opportunities and

alleviate risks, competition, and international business frontiers (Bretherton & Chaston,

2005).

2.5 CAT model of green market economy and emerging market environment

The GME model that results in Figure 3 presents the relationship between self-processes

of green market economy agency (GME) dealing with emerging market environment (EME)

as key opportunities to make a transition for long-run performance in developed and

developing countries in order to increase sustainable wealth creation.

This strategic GME agency model is a CAT representation which consists of: (1) a cultural

system; (2) a normative personality system; and (3) an operative system. The three systems

have their own dynamically intelligent networks of processes called “Figurative intelligence”

(Autogenesis or self-creation) and “Operative intelligence” (Autopoiesis or self-production)

that link the three generic representations of GME. “Figurative intelligence” is a learning





attribute that provides core relational explanations of reality due to interactions with its

environments and their knowledge processes (Yolles, 2006) through feed-forward processes

such that attributes can be processed for operative action to manifest figurative/strategic

attributes of personality, influencing behaviors. While “operative intelligence” is an

instrumental attribute creating an operative couple, which is located between the figurative

and operative systems (Maturana & Varela, 1987; Schwarz, 1997) with assigned cultural

significance. Behaviors, operational codes, implementation systems, own laws and regulation

originate within an environment, populated by objects created by agencies--how a living

(social) system – self-produces. Feedback processes create imperatives for adjustment issues

in doing this (Yolles, 2006).

The intelligent networks of processes are developed through the cooperation of various

departments and individuals to "interpret" cultural attributes e.g. values, norms, beliefs and

meaning connected to knowledge, green market orientation (GMO), market orientation

(MKO1) from which context sensitive information in cultural system that can be delivered to

strategic or personality system which functions as part of agency that originate in the cultural

system.

Fig. 3: A model of green market economy dealing with emerging market environment

(Created by authors)





Both GMO and MKO1 are located in organizational culture for conducting businesses. The

organizational culture is defined as a complex set of values, norms, and symbols for business

operations (Barney, 1986). A core group of shared set of assumptions, norms connected to

knowledge, GMO, and MKO within the cultural system; and patterns of goals, ideology,

ethics, regulations within the strategic system, and behaviors of organizational actions e.g.

behavior-based market orientation and transformational leadership (or sustainable

leadership)-based organizational members in the operative system, can be predicted and

explained how organizational members share mentioned attributes and how develop at the

workplace when dealing with its environment within a cycle of organizational professional

development.

However, a sense of belonging of organizational culture in management and

organizational members should be made aware of the specific influence on the development

of mechanisms and subsequent useful feedbacks may help decrease the activation of their

own violations of moral disengagement in organization (Petitta, Probst, & Barbaranelli,

2017). Like the technocratic safety culture is achievement result-oriented and competition and

innovation focused, was opposite bureaucratic safety culture. That is technocratic safety

culture is revealed to greater violations of moral disengagement e.g. skipping safety steps,

underreporting and hiding errors, etc. (Petitta, et al., 2017)

While GMO is one of organizational culture attributes located in the cultural system with

green values and norms to be disseminated into the corporation strategy and its operation

truly in the cycle of a comprehensive eco-competitive beneficial advantage by changing in

product design, enterprise culture, and environmental impact analysis of enterprises, and ends

with the analysis of the competitive environment (Moravcikova et al., 2017). GMO (Papadas

et al., 2017) provides: (1) strategic green marketing orientation (e.g. making efforts to use

renewable energy sources for products/services; investing in low-carbon technologies for

production processes and in R & D programs in order to create environmentally friendly

products/services, using specific environmental policy for selecting partners, creating a

separate department/unit specializing in environmental issues for organization, participating

in environmental business networks, engaging in dialogue with stakeholders about

environmental aspect of organization; implementing market research to detect green needs in

the marketplace); (2) tactical green marketing orientation (e.g. encouraging the use of e-

commerce, because it is more eco-friendly; preferring digital communication methods for

promoting products/services; applying a paperless policy; using recycled or reusable materials

in products/services; absorbs the extra cost of an environmental product/service) and lastly (3)

internal green marketing orientation (e.g. acknowledging and rewarding environmental

behavior, environmental activities by candidates, creating internal environmental prize





competitions, forming environmental committees for implementing internal audits of

environmental performance, organizing presentations on green marketing strategy for all,

encouraging employees to use eco-friendly products/services, and targeting environmentally-

conscious consumers). Also, MKO1 is a creation of value for customers, becoming a

longstanding and institutionalized culture (Narver, Slater, & Tietje, 1998) that covers

customer orientation, competitor orientation, and inter-functional coordination that originate

capabilities influenced solely by the organizational culture to place the highest priority on the

profitable creation and superior customer value to achieve ultimate goal of stakeholders,

profitability (Narver & Slater, 1990). MKO1 (Narver & Slater, 1990) can e.g. create customer

value; show commitment to customers; understands customers’ needs; meet customer

satisfaction objectives; conduct superior service; contribute values; share resources with other

business units; integrate functions into business strategy; share information among different

functions; discuss competitors' strategies; target opportunities for competitive advantage;

respond rapidly to competitors' action; and share competitor information. These attributes and

information are disseminated and transferred into strategic or normative personality system

and made them into cognitive attributes e.g. attitude, ideologies, goals, strategies, ethics, self-

schemas, and self-image (Guo et al., 2016; Yolles, 2006) under the network of process called

“figurative intelligence” in all functions. In order to continuously provide relevant and timely

goods or services within internal green practice and supplier management (Li, Ye, Sheu, &

Yang, 2018) in “the operative system,” under “operative intelligence” network of process for

its life-long demand agency.

Another meaning of market orientation (MKO2), a behavioral operationalization located in

operative system, reflects activities and a potential for behaviors of a GME to promote

improved customer value, especially on export customers, competitors, or environmental

changes in the market context. Kohli, Jaworski, & Kumar (1993) defined MKO2 as the

organization wide generation of market intelligence pertaining to current and future needs of

involving agencies, dissemination of intelligence within agency, and responsiveness by doing

something new or different for prior market-led opportunity. Within its intelligence

generation, intelligence dissemination, and responsiveness attributes, GME has to meet

involving agencies in its emerging market environment at least once a year to find out what

products or services they will need in the future, do a lot of in -house market research; detect

changes in involving agencies’ product preferences, poll end users at least once a year to

assess the quality of products and services; detect fundamental shifts in GME (e.g.,

competition, technology, regulation); periodically review the likely effect of changes in

GME’s business environment (e.g. regulation) on involving agencies, set interdepartmental

meetings at least once a quarter to discuss market trends and developments; marketing

personnel in business unit spend time discussing involving agencies’ future needs with other





functional departments; know important happens to a major involving agencies in emerging

market environment about them in a short period. Thus, a coordination and responsibility

sharing are stimulated within overall departments’ functions to increase agencies’ superior

value in emerging market environment.

Closely linked to other human resource asset in operative system, transformational,

sustainable or effective leadership, is a critical attribute, as a driver of green market and

interdependent economy, to create positive value and to sustain that value-creation for agency

and its stakeholder within and as a whole emerging market environment to reach SDGs by

2030. Main responsibilities of transformational leadership (TFL) in GME’s all functions,

aware of legal, ethical, economic, social and environmental expectations with sustainable

values (Mujtaba, Cavico, Senatip, & U-tantada, 2016) empower the process of influencing

others’ behaviors and efforts toward a predetermined destination, while also providing an

environment where personal, professional, or organizational objectives can successfully be

achieved (Mujtaba et al., 2016). As influential role, TFL efficiently drives task-related team

processes of reflexivity and team performance e.g. effectiveness and productivity for

leaders and organizations (Lyubovnikova, Legood, & Mamakouka, 2017). Based on four

dimensions of TFL are: (1) self-awareness, understanding the world; (2) balanced processing,

relevant information analysis before decision making and soliciting matter’s views from

others; (3) internalized moral perspective, internal moral standards and values; and lastly (4)

relational transparency, driving personal disclosures to share information and express true

thoughts and feelings (Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, & Walumbwa, 2005). Instrumental

understanding of sustainability, TFL acknowledges the intrinsic value of sustainable behavior

e.g. sustainable resource use, conservation and preservation, rights-based perspectives, and

ecology (Schuler, Rasche, Etzion, & Newton, 2017) that can be applicable into ethics

orientated strategic business management of GME and also promotes this intrinsic value of

sustainable behavior, understanding sustainability of all human resources in globally.

As a result, the operative system is GME’s structural component maintained from which

behavior originates within an environment, which occupied by objects with assigned cultural

significance in a higher order system, the cultural system. Organizational structure and

operations are combined together for being concerned with social structures and their

potentials for behavior, operational performance, self-organization, a specific interactive

function. Execution information provides direction for structuring through decision role

specifications, related operative activities, and any decision related rules required to guide

operative processes (Yolles, 2016; 2006). In “the operative system” of the green structure

delivers behavioral potential, power through decisions, empowerment to perform certain

types of operative behaviors within GME, cultural agency and communications that are

specifically related to meaningful themes (referred to as life-world: Schutz & Luckmann,





1974) in the emerging market environment. “Operative intelligence feedback” may

instrumentally adjust the goals or the way in which operative intelligence respond to them

(Guo et al., 2016; Yolles, 2006), while “figurative intelligence feedback” can create

imperative for changes in cultural knowledge or adjusting the way in which figurative

intelligence deals with the selections of contextual information.

Inter-relationships with activities and competitiveness of GME in order to maintain all the

dynamics of agencies in challenging complex systems for viability, these inter-relationships

are linked to “behavioral intelligence” of GME. This is referred to the ability to understand,

manage other people, and to engage in adaptive social interactions (Kihlstrom & Cantor,

2000) of GME. How well these works of GME is measured as efficacy referring to the

controls of emotionality processes that condition what the intelligences do by operating on the

manifestations of information that occur between the two systems, modifying the semantic

channeling processes of the intelligences (Guo et al., 2016; Yolles & Fink, 2011).

Above provides opportunities for all types of economy, either developed or developing

economies or nations. They are becoming more concerned and aware on the natural

environment; they see these changes in global crises with respect to climate, biodiversity,

fuel, food, and water as a whole to make a transition to a green economy for long-run

performance to increase global wealth totally. In relation to these universal opportunities must

be implemented by all countries to achieve the SDGs (SDSN, 2018).

3. Conclusion and Recommendation

This article illustrates a developed model of the green market economy (GME),

represented as a Cultural Agency Theory (CAT) model, global economic condition using

cultural agency theory representing it as an adaptive complex system in order to fill the gaps

on process to explore solutions to problems in achieving the SDGs.

When the sustainable development is applied into an economy in order to show how to use

limited resources to satisfy all human beings want or need as an agency in CAT. The

development may considerably decrease harmful impact on climate change and harmful side

effects on all lives in all agencies combined in the world. It is carried out by most effective

participation in the processes to effectively enforce common interest, in relation to green

marketing orientation incorporates into a broad range of activities in the economy to ensure

society, economy and environment are protected. With its interactive involvement in an

emerging market environment consists of agencies are the World Bank, the World Trade

Organization and commercial agents (e.g., emerging market agency, purchasing agency,

supply agency, and top company agency) to support sustainable (economic, social,

environmental) development.





The modeling process offers a general theory of the green market, and is composed of core

substructural axiomatic theory, and subsidiary testable supersystem theory. GME’s dynamic

and its compositions of the three generic systems interacting within its interactive

environment. Positive ties of the GME and interacting strategic agencies can keep each

particular dynamic of the sub-structural (generic) model in balance by limiting pathologies

(conditions of social ill health e.g. poor management, poor procedures, poor communications)

and threats that interfere a sequence of structures and processes. Formulating green theory as

a core set of propositions that are accepted as defining a living adaptive substructure. The

outcome demonstrates the validity of creating the green market economy or GME.

The explanation involving complexity provides a preliminary understanding and insight

into how responding autonomous agency (considered as the strategic GME) and its

stakeholders keep balance to facilitate green globalization in the next decades. At its heart are

the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), called for action by all developed and

developing countries. A rising of awareness and building a tight network among strategic

stakeholders (e.g., between the World Bank, WTO, emerging market, purchasing, supply, and

top company agencies) are promoted to the business environment in all types of nations to be

capable of maintaining its green market presence. Policy makers can use our theoretical

framework to illustrate the relationship between these theories to help understand green

administrative interrelationships.

All these may suggest realistic and valid awareness in developing tools to achieve a

competitive marketplace advantage and to be aware on involving strategic agencies linked to

related policies making a transition to be green economy in time to engage challenges to

achieve the SDGs by 2030 for all decision-policy makers (U-tantada, et al, 2019) of GME, the

World Bank, WTO, emerging markets and commercial agencies in globally. Due to this

model is as an effective green economy model, which is also adequate to complexities of

dealing with conflicts, tradeoffs and power struggles that it seeks to change. A reliable

linkage analysis, an empirical approach to this article can be taken place (U-tantada, et al,

2019) in order to conduct researches with a larger sample to generalize both quantitative and

qualitative results on a wider population because their empirical findings can test the validity

of qualitative findings (Hesse-Biber, 2010).

Acknowledgement: The authors would like to thank the editor, the reviewers and Rajamangala

University of Technology Phra Nakhon.

References

Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (1999). The synergistic effect of market orientation and learning

orientation on organizational performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 411–427.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory: an agentic perspective, Annual Review of Psychology,

52:1–26





Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Applied psychology, 51(2), 269-290.

Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture: can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?

Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656–665.

Bennett, R. J., & Robson, P. J. (1999). The use of external business advice by SMEs in

Britain. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 11(2), 155-180.

Big Business. (1905). Definition of big business by Merriam-Webster. Retrieved July 29, 2017 from

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/big%20business.

Bowen, A. (2012). Green growth, green jobs and labor markets. Policy Research Working Paper.

https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-5990

Brandenburger, A., & Nalebuff, B. (2002). Co-opetition: a revolutionary mindset that combines

competition and cooperation in the marketplace; and the game theory strategy that's changing the game

of business. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group Inc.

Bretherton, P., & Chaston, I. (2005). Resource dependency and SME strategy: an empirical

study. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 12(2), 274-289.

Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability,

and firm performance. Industrial marketing management, 31(6), 515-524.

Castree, N. (2008). Neoliberalising nature: The logics of deregulation and reregulation. Environment

and planning A, 40(1), 131-152.

CED (Committee for Economic development) (2017). Regulation & the Economy. Retrieved 11 Nov,

2018 from https://www.ced.org/reports/regulation-and-the-economy

D'Antone, S., & Santos, J. B. (2016). When purchasing professional services supports

innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 58, 172-186.

Day, G. S. (1994). The capabilities of market driven organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58, 37–52.

Dominici, G., & Yolles, M. (2016). Decoding the xxi century’s marketing shift: an agency theory

framework. Systems, 4(4): 1-13.

Dorfman J. (2016). Ten free market economic reasons to be thankful. Retrieved 11 Nov, 2018 from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2016/11/23/ten-free-market-economic-reasons-to-be-

thankful/#5d231c8f6db7.

Ferrieres, M.d. (2017). Explaining the role of the World Bank, WTO and IMF in the global economy.

Retrieved 20 February 2019 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/

322886616_GLOBAL_ECONOMY_Explaining_the_role_of_the_World_Bank_WTO_and_IMF_in_t

he_global_economy/citations

Fey, C. F., & Denison, D. R. (2003). Organizational culture and effectiveness: can American theory be

applied in Russia? Organization Science, 14, 686–706.

Fink, G., & Yolles, M. (2011). Understanding organizational intelligences as constituting elements of

normative personality. IACCM 2011, Ruse Bulgaria, 1-27.

França, C. L., Broman, G., Robèrt, K. H., Basile, G., & Trygg, L. (2017). An approach to business

model innovation and design for strategic sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner

Production, 140, 155-166.

Furlong, J. (2005). New labor and teacher education: the end of an era. Oxford Review of

Education, 31(1), 119-134.

Geng, Y., Doberstein, B. (2008). Developing the circular economy in China: challenges and

opportunities for achieving ‘leapfrog development.’ International Journal of Sustainable Development

& World Ecology, 15, 231–239.

Ghazilla, R. A. R., Sakundarini, N., Taha, Z., Abdul-Rashid, S. H., & Yusoff, S. (2015). Design for

environment and design for disassembly practices in Malaysia: a practitioner's perspectives. Journal of

Cleaner Production, 108, 331-342.

Giachetti, C. (2018). Explaining Apple’s iPhone success in the mobile phone industry: the creation of a

new market space. In Smartphone Start-ups (pp. 9-48). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.





Gillingham, K., & Palmer, K. (2014). Bridging the energy efficiency gap: policy insights from

economic theory and empirical evidence. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 8(1), 18-38.

Godfrey, N. (2008). Why is competition important for growth and poverty reduction? Retrieved August

29, 2017 from http://www.oecd.org/investment/globalforum/40315399.pdf.

Goldspink, C., Kay, R. (2003), Organizations as self-organizing and sustaining systems: a complex and

autopoietic systems perspective, International Journal of General Systems, 32 (5)459–474.

Griffin, P. (2006).The world bank. New Political Economy, 11(4), 571-581

Guo, K., Yolles, M., Fink, G., & Iles, P. (2016). The changing organization: agency theory in a cross-

Cultural context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gupta, H., & Barua, M. K. (2017). Supplier selection among SMEs on the basis of their green

innovation ability using BWM and fuzzy TOPSIS. Journal of Cleaner Production, 152, 242-258.

Hoppmann, J., Sakhel, A., & Richert, M. (2018). With a little help from a stranger: the impact of

external change agents on corporate sustainability investments. Business Strategy and the

Environment, 27(7), 1052-1066.

Huggins, R., Johnston, A., & Thompson, P. (2012). Network capital, social capital and knowledge

flow: how the nature of inter-organizational networks impacts on innovation. Industry and

Innovation, 19(3), 203-232.

Johnsen, T. E., Miemczyk, J., & Howard, M. (2017). A systematic literature review of sustainable

purchasing and supply research: theoretical perspectives and opportunities for IMP-based

research. Industrial Marketing Management, 61, 130-143.

Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. (2010). Winning in emerging markets: A roadmap for strategy and execution.

Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Kihlstrom, J. F., & Cantor, N. (2000). Social intelligence. Handbook of intelligence, 2, 359-379.

Klievink, B., Janssen, M. (2009). Realizing joined-up government — dynamic capabilities and stage

models for transformation. Government Information Quarterly, 26, 275–284.

Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B.J. (1990). Market orientation: The construct, research propositions, and

managerial implications. The Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 1-18.

Kohli, A. K., Jaworski, B. J., & Kumar, A. (1993). MARKOR: A measure of market orientation.

Journal of Marketing research, 30(4), 467-477.

Konov, J. I. (2013). Enhancing Markets (i.e. Economies) Transmissionability to Optimize Monetary

Policies’ Effect. Retrieved August 29, 2017 from http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/46950/.

Kravets, O., & Sandikci, O. (2014). Competently ordinary: new middle class consumers in the

emerging markets. Journal of Marketing, 78, 125–140.

Lecerf, M. A. (2012). Internationalization and innovation: the effects of a strategy mix on the economic

performance of French SMEs. International Business Research, 5(6), 2.

Li, Y., Ye, F., Sheu, C., & Yang, Q. (2018). Linking green market orientation and performance:

Antecedents and processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 192, 924-931.

Loiseau, E., Saikku, L., Antikainen, R., Droste, N., Hansjürgens, B., Pitkänen, K., Leskinen, P.,

Kuikman, P., & Thomsen, M. (2016). Green economy and related concepts: an overview. Journal of

cleaner production, 139, 361-371.

Lyubovnikova, J., Legood, A. T., & Mamakouka, A. (2017). How authentic leadership influences team

performance: the mediating role of team reflexivity. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(1), 59-70.

Maturana, H. R. & Varela, F. J., (1987). The Tree of Knowledge. London: Shambhala Publications.

McTaggart, D., Findlay, C., & Parkin, M., (1992). Economics in Action. Sydney: Addison-Wesley.

Moravcikova, D., Krizanova, A., Kliestikova, J., & Rypakova, M. (2017). Green marketing as the

source of the competitive advantage of the business. Sustainability, 9, 1-13.

Mujtaba, B. G., & Cavico, F. J. (2016). Developing a legal, ethical, and socially responsible mindset

for sustainable leadership. Florida: ILEAD Academy.

http://www.oecd.org/investment/globalforum/

https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi_4tGp2czUAhXLQY8KHbFEBvcQFggkMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shambhala.com%2F&usg=AFQjCNGb1VriHIcT0NN1S42BjH9GbhWJyg





Mujtaba, B. G., Cavico, F. J., Senatip, T., & U-tantada, S. (2016). Sustainable operational management

for effective leadership and efficiency in the modern global workplace. International Journal of Recent

Advances in Organization Behavior and Decision Sciences, 2(1), 673-696.

Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. The

Journal of marketing, 54(4), 20-35.

Narver, J. C., Slater, S. F., & Tietje, B. (1998). Creating a market orientation. Journal of market-

focused management, 2(3), 241-255.

Nash, J. (1996). Essays on Game Theory. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

Oparaocha, G. O. (2015). SMEs and international entrepreneurship: an institutional network

perspective. International Business Review, 24(5), 861-873.

Pan, W., Pan, W., Hu, C., Tu, H., Zhao, C., Yu, D., Xiong, J. & Zheng, G. (2019). Assessing the Green

Economy in China: an improved framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 209, 680-691.

Papadas, K. K., Avlonitis, G. J., & Carrigan, M. (2017). Green marketing orientation:

conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of Business Research, 80, 236-246.

Petitta, L., Probst, T. M., & Barbaranelli, C. (2017). Safety culture, moral disengagement, and accident

underreporting. Journal of business ethics, 141(3), 489-504.

Polonsky, M. J. (1994). An introduction to green marketing. Electronic Green Journal, 1(2).

Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.

Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. New York:

Free Press.

Richert, M. (2017). An energy management framework tailor-made for SMEs: case study of a German

car company. Journal of Cleaner Production, 164, 221-229.

Schaper, M. (2002). Small firms and environmental management: predictors of green purchasing in

Western Australian pharmacies. International Small Business Journal, 20(3), 235-251.

Schuler, D., Rasche, A., Etzion, D., & Newton, L. (2017). Guest Editors’ Introduction: corporate

Sustainability Management and Environmental Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(2), 213-237.

Schuler, D., Rasche, A., Etzion, D., & Newton, L. (2017). Guest editors’ introduction: corporate

sustainability management and environmental ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(2), 213-237.

Schutz, A. and Luckmann, T. (1974). The Structures of the Life-world. London: Heinemann.

Schwarz, E. (1997). Towards a holistic cybernetics: From science through epistemology to being.

Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 4(1), 17-50.

SDSN (Sustainable Development Solutions Network). (2018). SDG Index and Dashboards Report

2018. Retrieved 11 Nov, 2018 from

http://www.sdgindex.org/assets/files/2018/01%20SDGS%20GLOBAL%20EDITION%20WEB%20V9

%20180718.pdf

Surdu, I., Mellahi, K., & Glaister, K. (2018). Emerging market multinationals’ international equity-

based entry mode strategies: Review of theoretical foundations and future directions. International

Marketing Review, 35(2), 342-359.

Swainson, L., & Mahanty, S. (2018). Green economy meets political economy: lessons from the “Aceh

Green” initiative, Indonesia. Global Environmental Change, 53, 286-295.

Tellis, G. J., Prabhu, J. C., & Chandy, R. K. (2009). Radical innovation across nations: the

preeminence of corporate culture. Journal of marketing, 73(1), 3-23.

Ulkuniemi, P., Araujo, L., & Tähtinen, J. (2015). Purchasing as market shaping: the case of

component-based software engineering. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 54-62.

UN-DESA (United Nations-Department of Economic and Social Affair). (2015). Transforming our

world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Retrieved 25, December, 2015 from

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015.

UNEP (The United Nations Environment Programme) (2011). Towards a green economy: pathways to





sustainable development and poverty eradication. Retrieved 11 Nov, 2018 from

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=126&menu=35

U-tantada, S., Mujtaba, B., Yolles, M., & Shoosanuk, A. (2016). Sufficiency economy and

sustainability, Journal of Thai Interdisciplinary Research (extra issue: ISSN: 2465-3837), p. 84-94.

U-tantada, S., Yolles, M., Mujtaba, B. G., and Shoosanuk, A. (2019). Influential driving factors for

corporate performance: A case for small and medium enterprises in Thailand. Kasem Bundit Journal,

20, 157-172. Retrieved February 30, 2019 from:

https://tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jkbu/article/view/173614/125136.

Verona, G. (1999). A resource-based view of product development. Academy of management

review, 24(1), 132-142.

Williams, S., & Schaefer, A. (2013). Small and medium- sized enterprises and sustainability: managers'

values and engagement with environmental and climate change issues. Business Strategy and the

Environment, 22(3), 173-186.

WTO (World Trade Organization). Retrieved 11 Nov, 2018 from

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/coher_e/sdgs_e/sdgs_e.htm

Yaprak, A., Tasoluk, B., & Kocas, C. (2015). Market orientation, managerial perceptions, and

corporate culture in an emerging market: evidence from Turkey. International Business Review, 24(3),

443-456.

Yolles, M. (1999). Management systems: a viable approach. London: Financial Times Pitman.

Yolles, M. (2006). Organizations as complex systems: an introduction to knowledge cybernetics (Vol.

2). Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.

Yolles, M. (2016). Linking business and financial systems in the market economy: the case of China.

International Journal of Markets and Business Systems, 2(3)171-205.

Yolles, M. (2018). The complexity continuum, part 2: modelling harmony, Kybernetes,

https://doi.org/10.1108/K-06-2018-0338.

Yolles, M., & Di Fatta, D. (2017). Antecedents of cultural agency theory: in the footsteps of Schwarz

living systems. Kybernetes, 46(2), 210-222.

Yolles, M., & Fink, G. (2011). Agencies, normative personalities and the viable systems

model. Journal of Organizational Transformation & Social Change, 8(1), 83-116.

Documents

Green Market Economy and Emerging Market Environment ...globalbizresearch.org/files/1-t925_irrem_siribuppa... · International Review of Research in Emerging Markets and the Global