This study aimed to investigate the level of application of green human resource management practices and green employee behavior, and the relationship between them in government agencies in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and to determine the extent to which there are statistically significant differences in the level of awareness of green human resource management practices. The research sample consisted of 397 employees of government agencies. The descriptive survey method was used, and data were collected via a questionnaire. The results showed that government agencies adopt green human resource management practices to a moderate degree overall; green training and development were found to be highly practiced, while green recruitment and selection, green performance management, and green compensation management were moderately practiced. The study found that employees of government agencies practice a high degree of green behavior. The results also revealed a positive relationship between green recruitment and selection, green training and development, green performance management, and green compensation management with employees’ green behavior—whether task-related or voluntary. The study found differences in the level of awareness of green human resource management practices according to gender and qualification, while there were no differences according to age, years of experience, and administrative position. Moreover, the study recommended expanding the adoption of green human resource management practices in government sectors in order to achieve environmental sustainability, which is one of the goals of Saudi Vision 2030.
With the development of modern industry, environmental problems have emerged worldwide, such as rising temperatures and pollution of water resources and soil. Preserving and sustaining the environment has become a top priority for decision-makers in the twenty-first century, leading to the search for alternatives to traditional human resource management (Eyupoglu & Ercantan, 2022). Human resource management (HRM) is a powerful tool to promote green and sustainable approaches (Jabbour et al., 2019). Employees play a decisive role in greening their organizations through a variety of environmentally friendly behaviors (Hahn & Lülfs, 2013). Given the importance of these behaviors, scholars have focused on administrative measures that can stimulate employees’ green behavior (Dumont et al., 2017; Norton et al., 2017). One such measure is green human resource management (GHRM), a set of HRM activities—such as recruitment, training, and performance management—that are aligned with the organization’s environmental aspirations (Renwick et al., 2013) to ensure employees effectively and efficiently engage in environmentally friendly behaviors while performing their jobs (Jiang et al., 2012). These behaviors also contribute to preserving the external environment and achieving sustainable development (Norton et al., 2015).
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is undergoing wide-ranging political, economic, social, and cultural changes driven by its ambitious Vision 2030, which opened doors to new ideas and reforms to improve organizations and achieve development. Sustainability has been a core pillar of the vision since its launch, with initiatives such as targeting net-zero emissions by 2060, launching the National Environment Strategy, integrated waste management and recycling, and establishing an energy and environment research fund (https://vision2030.gov.sa). The vision recognizes the centrality of human resources in translating it into reality. Therefore, this study seeks to measure the application of green human resource management practices and their relationship to the green behavior of employees of government agencies in Saudi Arabia.
The concept of GHRM is relatively recent in management (Bally & Smali, 2018). It emerged in the mid-1990s from the desire to balance social and economic welfare with growing environmental awareness (Arulrajah & Opatha, 2014) and to provide long-term advantages for organizations (Frey & Benz, 2007; Mishra, 2017). Mishra (2017) sees the main goal of GHRM as creating an environmentally friendly workplace and environmentally responsible behaviors among employees. Renwick et al. (2008) view it as HR components linked to environmental management, forming a series of HR activities adopted by organizations to enhance positive environmental performance and encourage employees to practice environmental protection and green behaviors (Renwick et al., 2013). Asraf (2021) defines it as organizational efforts to align HR processes with eco-friendly policies to activate participation and raise employees’ awareness and commitment to environmental challenges, through green recruitment and training, teleconferencing, virtual interviews, recycling, online training, and energy-efficient offices. Arulrajah & Opatha (2014) describe it as practices aimed at creating environmentally minded employees so that employees, organizations, and society all benefit from environmentally driven HRM.
Roscoe et al. (2019) and Yusliza et al. (2020) stress the need to activate GHRM to support environmental management systems—for example, motivating employees to recycle waste and conserve resources like electricity and water. Al-Awlaki (2021) defines it as interrelated HRM practices that increase employees’ environmental knowledge and awareness, influencing their eco-friendly behaviors and improving overall organizational (economic, environmental, social) performance—by selecting employees with environmental awareness, training them, and rewarding environmental achievements. Jacob & Cherian (2012) argue that GHRM encourages employees to act more responsibly to protect the environment, yielding higher efficiency, lower costs, and better employee relations (Zhu, 2021).
Applying GHRM guides employee behavior and empowers them with greater ability and skill to protect the environment and a strong sense of environmental responsibility (Zhu et al., 2021). GHRM plays a critical role in developing a sustainable culture (Arulrajah & Opatha, 2014). By linking dimensions such as recruitment and selection, training and development, performance management, and compensation with environmental goals, GHRM can improve environmental management system implementation and achieve green objectives (Eyupoglu & Ercantan, 2022).
Nikolaou et al. (2015) found that workplaces featuring GHRM practices are positively associated with employees’ ability to develop sustainable solutions. Jiang et al. (2012) emphasize that environmental awareness, green recruitment and selection, green training, environmental performance assessment, and green rewards are part of GHRM. Zhu et al. (2021) and Eyupoglu & Ercantan (2022) note GHRM involves hiring individuals who support the organization’s green values, developing training to improve employees’ environmental knowledge, skills, awareness, attitudes, integrating environmental factors into performance appraisal and compensation, and empowering employees.
Based on the literature, the main GHRM practices are:
Green recruitment and selection is a key pillar of GHRM (Seo & Jackson, 2010). Organizations attract and select candidates based on their environmental interests (Santos & Jabbour, 2008), promoting a green culture to attract high-quality environmentally minded employees. Eco-focused organizations use e-recruitment to reduce carbon emissions (Renwick et al., 2013). During selection, candidates’ environmental concern is considered alongside traditional criteria; priority is given to those already engaged in eco-friendly activities (Asraf, 2021). Mousa & Amin (2017) stress measuring green attitudes and valuing candidates who care about environmental issues, recycle, print less, and save energy. Applying green recruitment can enhance employees’ awareness of eco-friendly behaviors and signals organizational preference for green values, aiding faster adaptation and more green behaviors (Eyupoglu & Ercantan, 2022; Fawehinmi et al., 2020; Zhu et al., 2021; Renwick et al., 2013).
GHRM devotes major efforts to enrich knowledge and improve skills to encourage eco-friendly behaviors (Zhu, 2021). Green training enables employees to learn capabilities for conservation and environmental protection, vital to achieving environmental goals (Zhu et al., 2021; Jabbour, 2011). It aims to increase knowledge of policies and daily procedures to protect the environment and to change attitudes (Yong et al., 2020). Practices include raising environmental awareness, instilling green values, and improving capacity to implement green work practices (Peng & Zoogah, 2011). When employees better understand environmental problems and solutions, their awareness of their role improves, making them more appreciative of adopting GHRM and more committed (Zhu, 2021). Green training increases understanding of how their tasks affect the environment and provides skills to identify issues and act (Peng & Zoogah, 2011), making employees more ready to adopt green behaviors.
Green performance management assesses how organizations measure and evaluate green performance over time, provide green feedback, and reset green goals (Taylor & Armstrong, 2020). Effective green appraisals require setting green objectives for each employee and integrating green criteria into performance appraisal (Arulrajah & Opatha, 2014). Metrics include environmental incidents, responsibilities, reporting concerns, reducing resource waste, and applying environmental policies (Tang et al., 2018). Hermann et al. (2007) note that performance evaluations influence rewards; linking green appraisal results to rewards motivates green activities through promotions or bonuses, encouraging eco-friendly behavior and sustainable goals (Eyupoglu & Ercantan, 2022). Thus green performance management measures and evaluates eco-friendly employee performance and is important when tied to green compensation.
Green compensation is a system of monetary and non-monetary rewards to retain and motivate employees to help achieve environmental goals (Jabbour et al., 2019). Its importance lies in motivating sustained environmental performance and initiatives (waste reduction, recycling, energy saving, paperless offices), yielding benefits beyond the rewards given (Asraf, 2021). It rewards eco-friendly contributions to attract, retain, and motivate employees for environmental and social goals (Saeed et al., 2019). Non-monetary incentives such as certificates, recognition, and symbolic awards are used when financial rewards are scarce (Asraf, 2021). Green compensation encourages participation in green behaviors supporting organizational environmental goals (Eyupoglu & Ercantan, 2022), making it a key motivator for green behaviors.
Green employee behavior (GEB) is a recent topic in organizational behavior research (Tian et al., 2020). It is environmentally beneficial behavior carried out by employees in the workplace (Norton et al., 2017; Dilchert & Ones, 2012) and reflects willingness to engage in eco-friendly activities (Scherbaum et al., 2008). It measures individuals’ stance toward environmental protection (Zhu et al., 2021). Organizations encourage green behaviors to ensure effective implementation of environmental management systems; GEB is measurable and aids environmental sustainability (Fawehinmi et al., 2020). Examples include turning off lights, double-sided printing, using reusable cups, and reducing waste (Molina-Vicente et al., 2013). Adopting green behaviors is an effective tool for environmental responsibility (Eyupoglu & Ercantan, 2022; Norton et al., 2015; Dilchert & Ones, 2012).
Authors commonly distinguish two forms (Zhu et al., 2021; Olson-Bissing et al., 2013; Norton et al., 2015; Eyupoglu & Ercantan, 2022):
Thus, there are two levels: in-role green task behavior and extra-role voluntary green behavior.
Several studies examined GHRM and green behavior in varied contexts. Eyupoglu & Ercantan (2022) surveyed 342 university students in Northern Cyprus and found GHRM directly affects potential employees’ task-related and voluntary green behaviors, with green psychological climate mediating effects. Sobaih et al. (2022) studied green transformational leadership in Saudi food organizations (n=1050) and found positive effects on both green behavior dimensions and environmental performance, with task-related behavior partially mediating and voluntary behavior fully mediating. Zhu et al. (2021) (n=288 manufacturing employees in China) found GHRM positively affects both green behavior dimensions; environmental belief mediated the GHRM–voluntary behavior link, and green organizational identity mediated the GHRM–task behavior link. Mayangsari et al. (2021) (n=100, Indonesia) showed green recruitment and training affect environmental performance via employee green behavior for Generation X; for Generation Y, green recruitment had an effect but green training did not. Afsar & Ghazali-Al (2021) (n=437, Saudi industry) found GHRM positively affects green creativity, mediated by green behavioral intention, and moderated by individual green values. Al-Ghurabli et al. (2021) (n=334, Egypt green-star hotels) found high adoption of GHRM and a significant relationship with green innovation; no differences by gender or age, but differences by education. Asraf (2021) (n=120, UAE federal HR authority) found significant correlations between GHRM practices and organizational ambidexterity. Fawehinmi et al. (2020) (n=425 academics, Malaysia) found GHRM influences employee green behavior via moral norms, though no direct link. Pham et al. (2019) (n=209 hotel employees, Vietnam) found green training, rewards, and green culture are necessary for environmental commitment; training × culture interaction was significant, training × rewards was not. Dumont et al. (2017) developed GHRM measures and found GHRM directly and indirectly affects task-related green behavior, and indirectly affects voluntary green behavior through green psychological climate and green values. Overall, studies highlight positive links between GHRM and eco-friendly behaviors, but few address government sectors, especially in Saudi Arabia. This study fills that gap.
Environmental impact has become a central concern for modern organizations, compelling adoption of eco-friendly practices to foster sustainable employee behavior (Ansari et al., 2021). Organizations must align employee behavior with environmental goals (Roscoe et al., 2019). Environmental psychologists note that motivating green behavior is challenging (Ganesh & Ture, 2014) but necessary for long-term organizational economic and social benefits (Staddon et al., 2016). Literature affirms GHRM’s role in implementing environmental management (Nejati et al., 2017; Chaudhary, 2020; Jabbour et al., 2019; Pham et al., 2019), yet few studies examine how GHRM affects employee green behavior (Fawehinmi et al., 2020; Saeed et al., 2019) or differentiate task versus voluntary green behavior. There is also a lack of research on GHRM and green behavior in Saudi public sector employees. Therefore, this study examines GHRM practices and their relationship to green behavior among employees of government agencies in Saudi Arabia.
The study aims to identify: (1) the level of application of GHRM practices; (2) the level of green behavior; (3) the relationship between them; and (4) differences in perceived GHRM practices by demographics (gender, age, qualification, experience, administrative position) among employees of Saudi government agencies.
Research questions:
What is the level of application of GHRM practices in Saudi government agencies?
What is the level of green behavior among employees of Saudi government agencies?
What is the relationship between GHRM practices and employees’ green behavior?
Are there statistically significant differences in perceived GHRM practices by gender, age, qualification, years of experience, and administrative position?
Table 3 shows means and ranks. Overall mean = 3.24 (moderate). Green training and development ranked highest (mean 3.64, high). Green recruitment/selection ranked second (mean 3.37, moderate). Green compensation (mean 2.97, moderate) and green performance management (mean 2.96, moderate) followed. Thus, GHRM is applied at a moderate level in Riyadh government agencies.
Table 4 shows means. Overall green behavior mean = 3.66 (high). Task-related green behavior ranked first (mean 3.74, high). Voluntary green behavior ranked second (mean 3.57, high). This suggests a supportive environment and culture for green behaviors.
Spearman correlations (Table 5) showed significant positive relationships (p<0.05) between overall GHRM and overall green behavior (r=0.640), task-related (r=0.601), and voluntary (r=0.588). Each GHRM dimension correlated positively with both behavior dimensions: green recruitment/selection (r=0.548 task, 0.530 voluntary), green training/development (r=0.555, 0.501), green performance management (r=0.537, 0.538), green compensation (r=0.529, 0.545). Greater application of each practice is associated with higher green behaviors.
Nonparametric tests showed:
Employees in Saudi government agencies perceive GHRM practices at a moderate level, with green training highest and other practices moderate. Green employee behavior is high (both task-related and voluntary). There is a positive relationship between all GHRM practices and both green behavior dimensions. Differences exist by gender and qualification, but not by age, experience, or position.
Expand GHRM practices in government agencies to advance environmental sustainability and Vision 2030 goals.
Strengthen green recruitment and selection by attracting environmentally aware candidates and embedding green criteria in job descriptions.
Innovate green training via in-depth courses and workshops for all employees, using eco-friendly delivery methods.
Enhance performance appraisal systems by adding green indicators and providing feedback on green objectives.
Leverage green compensation (financial and non-financial) to motivate green behaviors.
Foster mutual learning climates and encourage both task-related and voluntary green behaviors to boost environmental goals and job satisfaction.
Promote everyday eco-practices (turning off lights, double-sided printing, reusable cups, waste reduction).
Invest in the GHRM–green behavior link to improve environmental performance and sustainable development in government agencies.
Disseminate green culture in government agencies through formal and informal communication.
Conduct further studies on GHRM in sectors like health and education, and explore other outcomes (ethical behavior, administrative creativity, organizational citizenship, innovation).
The study covered two variables: GHRM (four dimensions) and green behavior (task-related, voluntary). It focused on employees in ministries in Riyadh; results may not generalize to other regions. Data were self-reported. Future research could include other regions and additional variables.
| Variable | Category | Frequency | Percent (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 223 | 56.2 |
| Female | 174 | 43.8 | |
| Age | < 30 years | 53 | 13.4 |
| 30 – < 40 years | 207 | 52.1 | |
| 40 – < 50 years | 95 | 23.9 | |
| ≥ 50 years | 42 | 10.6 | |
| Qualification | High school or below | 17 | 4.3 |
| Diploma | 24 | 6.0 | |
| Bachelor | 246 | 62.0 | |
| Postgraduate | 110 | 27.7 | |
| Years of experience | < 5 years | 61 | 15.4 |
| 5 – < 10 years | 110 | 27.7 | |
| ≥ 10 years | 226 | 56.9 | |
| Administrative position | Employee | 246 | 62.0 |
| Supervisor | 27 | 6.8 | |
| Head of section | 50 | 12.6 | |
| Director/Manager | 74 | 18.6 |
| Cell | Range | Response |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.00 – 1.80 | Strongly disagree |
| 2 | 1.81 – 2.60 | Disagree |
| 3 | 2.61 – 3.40 | Neutral |
| 4 | 3.41 – 4.20 | Agree |
| 5 | 4.21 – 5.00 | Strongly agree |
| Dimension | Mean | SD | Rank | Practice level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Green training & development | 3.64 | 0.96 | 1 | High |
| Green recruitment & selection | 3.37 | 1.01 | 2 | Moderate |
| Green compensation management | 2.97 | 1.11 | 3 | Moderate |
| Green performance management | 2.96 | 1.10 | 4 | Moderate |
| 0.93 | — | Moderate |
| Dimension | Mean | SD | Rank | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task-related green behavior | 3.74 | 0.92 | 1 | High |
| Voluntary green behavior | 3.57 | 0.94 | 2 | High |
| 0.86 | — | High |
| GHRM dimension | Task-related green behavior | Voluntary green behavior | Overall green behavior |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green recruitment & selection | 0.548** | 0.530** | 0.580** |
| Green training & development | 0.555** | 0.501** | 0.570** |
| Green performance management | 0.537** | 0.538** | 0.579** |
| Green compensation management | 0.529** | 0.545** | 0.579** |
| Overall GHRM practices | 0.601** | 0.588** | 0.640** |
| ** p < 0.05 (two-tailed) | |||