Unleashing proactive low-carbon strategies through behavioral factors in biodiversity-intensive sustainable supply chains: Mixed methodology

The aim of this research is to understand the complex and relatively understudied relationship between human and behavioral factors and low-carbon management practices from the perspective of the resource-based view (RBV). Research application is in the “biodiversity sector” and consists of a survey and multiple-case study in Brazil, the richest country globally in terms of biodiversity but a country that also faces challenges in protecting biodiversity. The research problem considers the relationship between human critical success factors and the adoption of low-carbon management practices. Quantitative analysis through structural equation modeling shows the three branches of hypothesis to be accepted—the first with a higher coefficient than the second and the second with a higher coefficient than the third. It was observed that human factors influence low-carbon product management practices the most, followed by process practices and finally logistics practices. Qualitative multiple-case study research shows that companies are at different stages of maturity in relation to low-carbon management organizational practices, ranging from the highest stage to the lowest. It was found that the intensity of the presence of human critical success factors was higher where organizations had greater adoption of low-carbon management practices.     

The power of stereotyping and confirmation bias to overwhelm accurate assessment: the case of economics,gender, and risk aversion

Behavioral research has revealed how normal human cognitive processes can tend to lead us astray. But do these affect economic researchers, ourselves? This article explores the consequences of stereotyping and confirmation bias using a sample of published articles from the economics literature on gender and risk aversion. The results demonstrate that the supposedly ‘robust’ claim that ‘women are more risk averse than men’ is far less empirically supported than has been claimed. The questions of how these cognitive biases arise and why they have such power are discussed, and methodological practices that may help to attenuate these biases are outlined.