Roles of green intellectual capital facets on environmental sustainability in Oman

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Source: Authors Computation.

Table 1. Frequencies of demographic variables.

Variables	Categories	Frequency	Percent
1. Gender	Male	157	77
	Female	48	23
2. Company	Raysut cement	122	60
	Salalah methanol	83	40
3. Position	Employee	123	60
	Supervisor	41	20
	Head of dept	27	13
	Manager	14	7
	Total	205	100.0

Source: Authors’ computation.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics, correlations, and dependability.

Variables	No. of items	Mean	SD	GHC	GSC	GRC	ES
GHC	5	4.3150	0.52539	(0.617)
GSC	8	3.8200	0.58720	0.296**	(0.691)
GRC	5	4.1833	0.50890	0.046	0.131	(0.663)
ES	10	4.1900	0.46963	−.040	0.241*	0.196	(0.686)

Source: Authors’ computation.

Table 3. The study model’s EFA.

Factors	Items	Loading	Variance explained	Eigenvalue	Other scales
Green human capital	GHC. P1 GHC.P2	0.807 0.718	19.347	2.765	Cumulative variance= 61.199
Green structural capital	GSC.P3 GSC.P4 GSC.P5 GSC.P6	0.690 0.761 0.706 0.656	15.253	1.828	Bartlett’s test= 225.284 Sig.= 0.000
Green relational capital	GRC.P7 GRC.P8 GRC.P9	0.663 0.773 0.667	14.050	1.585	KMO= 0.659
Environmental sustainability	ES.P10 ES.P11 ES.P12	0.745 0.682 0.685	12.550	1.166

Source: Authors’ computation.

Figure 2. CFA measurement model.

Source: Authors Computation.

Figure 3. Results of SEM.

Source: Authors Computation.

Table 4. Fit indices of the model.

CMIN/DF	RMR	RMSEA	CFI	IF	IFI	PGFI	PNFI
1.399	0.042	0.064	0.912	0.911	0.904	0.551	0.508

Source: Author’s computation.

Table 5. Hypothesis trial.

H	Structural Path	Estimate	SE	CR	P	Records
H1	GHC → ES	−0.402	0.237	−1.699	0.089	Rejected
H2	GSC → ES	0.326	0.142	2.288	0.022	Accepted
H3	GRC → ES	0.321	0.247	1.300	0.193	Rejected

Source: Author’s computation.

Data availability statement

Data will be made available upon request.