Resilience for Sustainability: The Synergistic Role of Green Human Resources Management, Circular Economy, and Green Organizational Culture in the Hotel Industry

Abstract

This research explores the extent to which Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) practices in the Egyptian hotel sector contribute to the adoption of Circular Economy (CE) practices and, eventually, organizational resilience. Using a sample of 402 employees from green-certified Egyptian hotels, the current study applied Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) on the data collected. The results show the positive effect of GHRM on the adoption of a circular economy that significantly enhances both internal and external organizational resilience. In addition, high Green Organizational Culture (GOC) strengthens the positive relationship of GHRM with the adoption of a circular economy. From this work, some empirical evidence is provided to show that circular economy practices can play a partial mediating role between GHRM and organizational resilience. These findings also present valuable insights for hotel managers and policymakers on how to achieve sustainability and resilience by means of integrated GHRM and circular economy strategies.

1. Introduction

The proliferation of environmental issues and climate change has mandated organizations to change their strategies, leading them to integrate sustainability into their strategies (Obeidat et al. 2023). Researchers have proposed the Circular Economy (CE) as an effective solution to these issues due to its emphasis on collaboration between consumers and producers, waste reduction, and continuous resource utilization in production and consumption circuits (Le et al. 2022; Perramon et al. 2024). Currently, the world’s third-largest industry, the hospitality industry, has received extensive acknowledgment due to its influential contribution to the global economy and employment, but it has also disclosed unique challenges relating to environmental impacts and future sustainability (Aboramadan and Karatepe 2021).

The circular economy is currently being integrated into the hospitality industry for sustainable development and efficient use of resources (Bux and Amicarelli 2023). This change stems from concerns about the high impact of the industry in terms of resource consumption, waste generation, and pollution (Rodríguez-Antón and Alonso-Almeida 2019). The hospitality sector will be empowered by the circular economy to mitigate adverse environmental impacts while, on the other side, facilitating some economic returns such as cost reduction, supply chain optimization, and cost minimization (De Martino et al. 2024). For instance, restaurants with a circular economy have adopted the transition through redesign and reversal of the supply chain, local sourcing, closed-loop culinary, food waste processing, and other strategies (Renfors and Wendt 2024). Furthermore, hotels are integrating standards in areas such as energy-efficient appliances, renewable energy usage, water conservation, waste disposal, and sustainable purchases (Sorin and Sivarajah 2021). The practices can also enhance the industry’s environmental performance and reduce negative effects on the environment, thus promoting a healthier environment and gaining the loyalty of consumers who practice environmental conservation (Renfors and Wendt 2024; Sorin and Sivarajah 2021). However, scaling such efforts, integrating partners along the whole supply chain, and managing and aligning consumption culture remain challenging for the deep rooting of circular economy principles (Jaeger-Erben et al. 2021).

Furthermore, Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) can be one of the key drivers of this change, as it means that environmental principles will be added to conventional HR methodologies (Ahmed et al. 2021). GHRM incorporates green recruitment, green training, green performance evaluation, and green compensation; each of these has the objective of raising the green consciousness of various employees (Jamil et al. 2023).

In this study, the relationships between GHRM, circular economy, green organizational culture, and internal and external resilience are examined using the Resource-Based View (RBV) theory and Stakeholder theory in the hospitality industry (Le et al. 2022; Friedman and Miles 2002; Barney 1991). According to RBV, organizations have the potential to gain a competitive advantage by effectively using resources that are valuable, rare, and unique (Sahu et al. 2024). We propose that green human resource management practices aimed at developing an environmentally conscious workforce and encouraging the adoption of circular economy behaviours represent a “valuable” resource. We also argue that policies and strategies related to the principles of the circular economy, which achieve resource efficiency, waste reduction, and closed-loop systems, constitute “rare” and “unique” resources, resulting in sustainable competitive advantage. Stakeholder Theory calls for consideration of various stakeholders, such as employees, customers, suppliers, and the local community, within organizational decision-making processes (Friedman and Miles 2002). Only a properly aligned GHRM and circular economy will ensure employees’ well-being, promote customer loyalty through engagement in eco-friendly business practices, and contribute to green organizational practices. According to this study, hospitality organizations can create a system through strategic alignment among GHRM, circular economy, and stakeholder interests, fostering positive organizational culture, enhancing environmental outcomes, and building long-term resilience.

While prior research has established a positive relationship between GHRM and the circular economy (Jabbour et al. 2019; Marrucci et al. 2021; Obeidat et al. 2023; Subramanian and Suresh 2022), and between the circular economy and both internal (IR) and external resilience (ER) (Bag et al. 2019; Blériot 2020; Fraccascia et al. 2021; Perramon et al. 2024), several research gaps endure. First, limited research has focused on exploring the particular mechanisms through which GHRM influences organizational resilience within the hospitality context (Ren et al. 2018). Secondly, the role of green organizational culture as a moderator in the influencing of GHRM on the adoption of the circular economy has not been sufficiently explored (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Roscoe et al. 2019; Wang 2019). Third, although GHRM and the circular economy have been separately researched across various sectors, their combined impact on organizational resilience within the hospitality industry is relatively under-researched (Sorin and Sivarajah 2021). With its unique characteristics and environmental challenges (Gössling and Peeters 2015), hospitality becomes a sector that requires investigation to understand how such concepts contribute to its sustainability and long-term viability. Fourth, there is a scarcity of empirical validation regarding the mediating effect of the circular economy on the GHRM–organizational resilience relationship, particularly within the hospitality industry (Le et al. 2022). Most of the previous studies have been based on basic assumptions and have failed to present significant supporting evidence. Fifth, research into organizational resilience has mainly been conducted concerning economical and/or operational perspectives (Perramon et al. 2024). However, for a more holistic understanding, it is necessary to test resilience along environmental and social lines, thus matching the triple bottom line of sustainability. Sixth, minimal investigation has been conducted on the interplay between green human resource management, the circular economy, and resilience within the context of an emerging economy such as Egypt. Most of these economies suffer from distinct unsustainability issues compared to developed countries and, hence, provide diverse opportunities. Seventh, limited comprehensive research models have been able to consolidate these factors together: GHRM, the circular economy, green organizational culture, and internal (IR) and external resilience (ER).

This research can fill these gaps and provide a more complete view of the dynamics and interplay of factors driving both antecedents and consequences in the domain of sustainable practices within the hospitality industry. Finally, previous studies have focused on the aspect of environmental management practices in Egyptian hotels from a consumer’s point of view (Abdou et al. 2022; Hashish et al. 2022; Eid et al. 2021). Hotel employees should be one of the key stakeholders to create environmental outcomes in green attributes (Khatter et al. 2021; Raza and Khan 2022). Consequently, this investigation attempts to mitigate the study gap by examining deeply the GHRM as antecedents of the circular economy and its consequences, such as internal and external resilience. The current study is guided by three questions to fill the research gap: (1) what are the antecedents and consequences of circular economy in the hospitality scenery? (2) What are the mediation roles of the circular economy in sustainable hospitality? And (3) what is the moderation role of the green organizational culture in GHRM and circular economy relationship? The authors posit a conceptual model in Figure 1 by the answers to the above questions.

Based on previous theories of Resource-Based View (RBV) theory and Stakeholder theory, this research examines an unexplored paradox in indulging the significant role of GHRM in enhancing circular economy behavior among hotel employees. Thus, this research aims to explore the positive impact of GHRM on the circular economy, and also to assess the circular economy’s impact on both organizations’ resilience (internal and external resilience). Additionally, it explores the role of the circular economy as a mediator between the association of GHRM and both organizations’ resilience (internal and external resilience). Additionally, it examined the moderator role of green organizational culture to enhance the impact of GHRM on the circular economy. Thus, it employs Resource-Based View (RBV) theory and Stakeholder theory to deeply comprehend the antecedents and consequences of the circular economy, and it acts as a mediator and moderator in green organizational culture to explore the role of GHRM on an organization’s resilience through the circular economy. According to the research findings, it is considered the first study that integrates the examination of the impact of green human resource management on the circular economy, which, in turn, demonstrates its impact on the organization’s resilience internally and externally in one comprehensive study. Ultimately, the goal is to bridge the research gap between HR, sustainability, and strategic management in the hospitality industry to extend the literature as presented in Figure 1.

The significance of addressing research questions arises from the general recognition among scholars and management practitioners of the need to integrate GHRM and circular economy principles to enhance resilience, e.g., Obeidat et al. 2023; Perramon et al. 2024. This study, therefore, contributes to the literature on GHRM, the circular economy, and organizational resilience in the hospitality context by increasing the capacity of the hospitality industry in terms of tools and strategies for circular economy implementation. These hospitality practices reduce the negative impact on the environment (Raza and Khan 2022; Irani et al. 2022) and also elevate issues of climate change to business agendas (Pham et al. 2019a). The contributions of this research to knowledge in this field are discussed below:

Firstly, this study seeks to enrich the existing literature (Jabbour et al. 2019; Nisar et al. 2021) by crucially integrating green human resource management practices, the circular economy, and organizational resilience (internal and external resilience). These two nascent bodies of literature have previously been conceptually isolated in various studies. More specifically, it contributes an added dimension to the understanding of how green organizational culture (Wang 2019) influences the link between GHRM and circular economy adoption by examining the moderating role of green organizational culture. Furthermore, it seeks to add value to the literature on resilience by distinguishing between IR and ER, and discussing the effects that GHRM and circular economy practices have on these two dimensions (Perramon et al. 2024).

Secondly, the study provides empirical evidence from the hospitality sector, an industry that significantly impacts the environment (Gössling and Peeters 2015), in a domain where only limited studies are available in this respect. Rigorous data collection and analysis contribute to providing robust findings that can be generalized to similar contexts and serve as a useful reference for future studies. These findings provide valuable insights for hospitality managers by outlining steps for implementing GHRM practices within a circular economy framework to achieve greater sustainability and resilience.

Thirdly, the study’s implications include policy recommendations for industry players and policymakers to promote GHRM and circular economy practices, which could lead to more sustainable industry standards and regulations (Zhu et al. 2019). The paper therefore outlines a strategic context that demonstrates the relationship between GHRM, the circular economy, and organizational resilience to show how organizations can put HR practices in place that would help firms to achieve sustainability strategies and create long-term competitive advantages.

Fourthly, it depicts GHRM as the manpower driver for eco-consciousness (Alyahya et al. 2023). This focus raises consciousness regarding what the employees can contribute towards making the hospitality industry eco-friendly. It also shows how Stakeholder Theory can adopt strategies with regard to stakeholder management for the enhancement of sustainability through the active engagement of the stakeholders (Mitchell et al. 1997).

2. Literature Review

Although organizations have traditionally focused on corporate longevity and improving economic results, there is an ongoing discussion in the literature about whether sustainable practices should be integrated within an organization (Kiefer et al. 2019). Recent research efforts have investigated the applicability of green human resource management and the circular economy (Obeidat et al. 2023). In this section, prior research on GHRM, circular economy, internal and external resilience, and green organizational culture in the hospitality industry will be briefly reviewed, and hypotheses will be developed based on this literature.

2.1. Green Human Resources Management (GHRM) and the Circular Economy (CE)

The hospitality industry constitutes one of the business sectors that has become sensitive to issues of sustainability due to the high use of resources and large amounts of waste generated (Gössling and Peeters 2015; Rodríguez-Antón and Alonso-Almeida 2019). GHRM and the circular economy are two promising approaches that could address these challenges effectively (Jabbour et al. 2019).

Green human resource management entails transforming traditional human resource practices by integrating environmental management practices (Renwick et al. 2013). This is achieved by the greening of the entire employment life cycle to foster a sustainable and responsible attitude among employees. For example, GHRM practices include green recruitment and selection, and environmental concerns about the organization and its skills (Saeed et al. 2019; Jackson et al. 2011). Environmental training and development programs enable employees to learn how to contribute to sustainable practices (Tang et al. 2018; Jabbour 2013). It has also been found that these training programs have a direct correlation with the enhancing effects on employees’ job satisfaction (Pinzone et al. 2019) and green innovation (Joshi and Dhar 2020). Management controls for green performance also comprise the inclusion of environmental objectives and targets into the performance evaluation process, thus demobilizing employees for their environmental liabilities (Jabbour and Santos 2008; Muisyo and Qin 2021). Finally, green compensation and rewards systems recognize and promote employees’ efforts towards the firm’s environmental performance objectives (Jabbour 2013; Veleva and Ellenbecker 2001; Haque 2017).

The circular economy, on the other hand, focuses on reducing or even eliminating the waste and consumption of resources, and, instead, recycling them (Kirchherr et al. 2023). Circular economy principles focus on the management of inputs, in that initiatives are undertaken to minimize their use while maximizing the use of the available resources (Geissdoerfer et al. 2017; Stahel 2016; Tukker 2015). Lastly, the circular economy proposes that recycling and material recovery have to be implemented so that valuable materials are recovered and reutilized in production systems (Korhonen et al. 2018; Ghisellini et al. 2016). This study discusses how GHRM and the circular economy, when integrated, provide a strong combination for the hospitality industry that aim to improve its sustainability performance (Marrucci et al. 2021; Jabbour et al. 2019). Thus, GHRM raises the essential awareness and motivation of employees to create the prerequisites for the successful implementation of circular economy initiatives (Nejati et al. 2017). These are the effects which signify the effectiveness of green knowledge, skills, and motivation in making the employees participate in circular economy practices.

Concerning the context of the hospitality industry, the synergy of both components holds considerable value. GHRM can play a critical role in the implementation of specific circular economy activities such as waste reduction, resource use promotion, and recycling enhancement (Jabbour et al. 2019). Different scholars have argued about the influence of GHRM practices in enhancing the environmental sustainability dimension within the hospitality industry. For instance, Yusoff et al. (2020) revealed that GHRM practices have a direct and significant effect on the enhancement of ecological performance within any organization in the hospitality industry. In addition, Kim et al. (2019) clearly established a relationship between the adoption of GHRM and the eco-friendly behaviour of hotel employees, hence increasing their general environmental performance. The studies discussed previously support the understanding of how GHRM can contribute to the transition to a circular economy business model.

GHRM practices can be implemented in hotels and restaurants to improve food waste, water, and energy efficiency (Daily et al. 2012). They can also sustain recycling that provides customers with the opportunity for repurchasing their products, make them prefer those products that are recycled and remanufactured, and find methods for transforming waste into valuable products (Marrucci et al. 2021).

Multiple results from prior research demonstrate a hypothesis that indicates a positive correlation between GHRM and circular economy activities. For instance, Marrucci et al. (2021) revealed that, among the environmental management and audit scheme (EMAS)-registered firms, GHRM practices including green recruitment and employee engagement impact the performance of the circular economy. Another study by Obeidat et al. (2023), which specifically investigated the Qatari service industry, also rationalized that GHRM positively affects the circular economy. Another study by Jabbour et al. (2019) developed an integrating framework that connects GHRM to circular economy business models. In the context of their framework, organizations can use GHRM practices such as green recruitment and training to drive the circular economy through the engagement of employees. Therefore, the first hypothesis of this study is:

H1. 

GHRM has a significant and positive effect on the circular economy.

2.2. The Circular Economy (CE), Internal Resilience (IR), and External Resilience (ER)

Internal resilience (IR) is defined as the capability of hotel to anticipate, adapt to, and recover from disruptions or challenges originating from inside the organization (Elshaer and Saad 2022). Internal resilience encompasses the effective management of internal resources, processes, and relationships to maintain operational efficiency and stability in the presence of internal pressures (Fahimnia et al. 2018). A review of the literature proves that circular economy practices can build internal resilience by promoting reuse, repair, and remanufacturing activities that decrease the reliance on new materials and enhance responses’ variety (Agarwal et al. 2022; Bag et al. 2019). This is especially true during particular instances when supply chains and available resources were challenged across organizations (Belhadi et al. 2021). Thus, the circular economy contributes to the optimization of resource consumption, which can help mitigate disruptions (De Angelis 2022).

External resilience (ER) is defined as the ability of the hotel to anticipate, adapt to, and recover from disruptions originating from outside the organization (Mathew 2022). These are capacities related to the management of relationships with key stakeholders, reactions to changes in the market, and adjustments to the evolution of regulation, consumer trends, and the socio-economic environment in general (Kim et al. 2019). Various key dimensions are embedded within the concept of external resilience in the hotel sector. In particular, it is about establishing positive relations with all key stakeholders, based on reciprocal trust that includes suppliers, customers, the community at large, and governmental agencies, with the aim of organizing a well-coordinated network for managing any external challenges (Kumar and Kumar Singh 2022). Furthermore, external resilience includes market adaptability, demonstrated through the capability to adjust services, prices, and marketing strategies in response to changes in consumer preference and market conditions, which enhances the competitiveness of hotels (Siyambalapitiya et al. 2018). Regulatory compliance protects any hotel through minimizing risks of non-compliance (Jones and Wynn 2019). In addition, external resilience includes the diversification of the supply chains that reduces the dependence on one supplier, hence minimizing the disruption of the continuous flow of services and goods (Belhadi et al. 2021). Finally, ER facilitates proactive reputation management through open communication on sustainability efforts and how these environmental practices are aligned with brand values that build trust with customers while strengthening the image in the face of an external environment (Dangelico and Pujari 2010).

Several studies confirm that circular economy practices contribute to both internal and external organizational resilience (Jones and Wynn 2019; Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010; Perramon et al. 2024). Internally, resource efficiency, waste reduction, and closed-loop systems can provide strength to adaptability and flexibility in organizations, which are resilient in the face of crisis or resource scarcity. For example, Bag et al. (2019) illustrated that the dynamic remanufacturing capabilities enabled by the circular economy increase adaptability and flexibility, which contribute to resilience. According to Jones and Wynn (2019), hotels with effective water and energy management systems—usually powered by renewable energy sources, which can be linked with the circular economy—were not exposed to such risks pertaining to price fluctuations and resource exhaustion.

Externally, the circular economy builds network resilience through collaboration and stakeholder engagement. Resource and product sharing through the implementation of industrial symbiosis networks, such as that demonstrated by Fraccascia et al. (2021), avoids dependence on vulnerable linear supply chains. Local sourcing and collaboration—such as that explored by Kumar and Kumar Singh (2022) between hotels and food producers—can build resilience in the face of global supply chain crises. It means that the circular economy facilitates high stakeholder participation and, through its ability to build trust, fosters collective action, which provides greater resistance to social and environmental crises. Therefore, the following hypotheses are:

H2. 

The circular economy has a significant and positive effect on internal resilience.

H3. 

The circular economy has a significant and positive effect on external resilience.

2.3. Green Human Resources Management (GHRM), Internal Resilience (IR), and External Resilience (ER)

Internal resilience is enhanced through GHRM practices by promoting environmental awareness and a sense of responsibility among employees, which, in turn, will increase employee participation towards the achievement of sustainability goals (Pham et al. 2019b). For instance, green training equips employees with the necessary knowledge and skills to embrace green culture, and empowerment builds initiative and innovativeness in developing sustainable solution-related initiatives (Arasli et al. 2020). The staff reward system for pro-environmental behaviour is a motivational method where staff are encouraged to actively contribute to achieving organizational goals on sustainability, which creates shared responsibility (Renwick et al. 2013; Jabbour 2013).

External resilience, or the ability of an organization to cope with pressure and meet demands arising from the external environment, can be enhanced by GHRM. This aligns with the hospitality sector, which is currently challenged by issues related to environmental impact, coupled with rising customers’ demand for green products and services (Kim et al. 2019). In reducing waste and sourcing green materials, organizations communicate to their stakeholders how they take responsibility for going green in operations by adopting green practices across operations and minimizing their impact on the environment (Siyambalapitiya et al. 2018). It improves their reputation, attracts environmentally conscious customers, and gives them a stronger competitive advantage in the increasingly sustainability-driven market (Siyambalapitiya et al. 2018; Dangelico and Pujari 2010; Kim et al. 2019).

According to Arasli et al. (2020), there is strong evidence for a positive relationship between employee empowerment and resilience. Their findings suggested that, under the GHRM framework, as employees were provided with more autonomy and control, they developed better capability skills in coping with environmental crises and adapting to new sustainable practices. Similarly, work engagement could be higher because employees devote more energy to the organizational mission for the purpose of the environment. Further reinforcing internal resilience, Pham et al. (2019b) indicated that green training programs have a positive effect on employee engagement with environmental behaviour. Their study, through a mixed-method approach, suggests that GHRM equips employees with the knowledge and skills related to sustainability, hence, it could encourage employees to commit themselves to undertake environmentally responsible activities to enhance the internal capacities of an organization in response to these environmental changes.

For external resilience, Siyambalapitiya et al. (2018) suggested a conceptual model of GHRM in the tourism sector, where GHRM practices strengthen organizational sustainability performance, which leads to external resilience. This is reinforced by Kim et al. (2019), who established a positive association between GHRM and the eco-friendly behaviour of hotel employees that enhances environmental performance. By creating a workforce that is committed to and actively engaged in environmentally sound practices, an organization will be able to clearly demonstrate its commitment to sustainability with external stakeholders, through which their reputation can be improved, to which potential environmentally conscious consumers may be drawn, and through which competitive advantage can be enhanced in an increasingly environmentally concerned market (Kim et al. 2023; Pham et al. 2019a). Therefore, the following hypotheses are:

H4. 

GHRM has a significant and positive effect on internal resilience.

H5. 

GHRM has a significant and positive effect on external resilience.

2.4. Mediating Role of Circular Economy

One pathway to enhance environmental sustainability and organizational resilience runs through the application of principles of the circular economy (Kirchherr et al. 2023). By aligning organizational practices with circular economy principles, hospitality companies can establish a “closed loop” through which all resources are used, refurbished, recycled, and repurposed to minimize the generation of waste and virgin resource use as far as possible (Genovese et al. 2017). A closed-loop system would have intrinsic resilience for hospitality firms through efficiency in resource use, cost reduction, and reduced operational disruptions due to resource shortages or environmental legislation (Prieto-Sandoval et al. 2018).

It may also improve a firm’s reputation in terms of environmental responsibility, helping to attract environmentally conscious consumers and build closer relationships with suppliers and stakeholders committed to sustainability (Dangelico and Pujari 2010). This improved stakeholder engagement and collaborative approach in terms of resource management would help strengthen external resilience in the firm by making it better able to face challenges stemming from environmental regulations, consumer preferences, and supply chain disruptions (Linder and Williander 2017).

To this end, no research has clearly explored the mediating role of the circular economy between GHRM and resilience in the hospitality industry. As such, the following hypotheses are a new line of inquiry that must be tested in order to validate the proposed mechanism of mediation.

H6. 

The circular economy mediates the relationship between GHRM and internal resilience.

H7. 

The circular economy mediates the relationship between GHRM and external resilience.

2.5. Moderating Role of Green Organizational Culture (GOC)

The concept of the circular economy includes a shift from the classic linear model “take-make-waste” to a more sustainable framework that has at its core the conservation, reuse, and recycling of resources (Kirchherr et al. 2023). In this respect, GHRM practices become vital for the implementation of the circular economy within organizations (Suchek et al. 2021). On the other hand, such practices may have a strong influence from already existing cultures in organizations. Green organizational culture can act as a driver whereby shared values and beliefs about the environment can be embedded in employees, making them successfully integrate GHRM practices into circular economy strategies (Roscoe et al. 2019). While existing studies demonstrate the individual influences of GHRM in the circular economy (Suchek et al. 2021; Triguero et al. 2022) and green organizational culture for broader initiatives towards sustainability (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010), little is understood about their interaction. The current research aims to fill this knowledge gap by investigating how a strong green organizational culture increases or decreases the full positive effect of GHRM on circular economy adoption. We argue that, under a strong green organizational culture, employees are likely to engage in more of the circular economy practices encouraged through GHRM initiatives, resulting in a more effective transition towards circularity. Hence, we hypothesize:

H8. 

Green organizational culture moderates the relationship between GHRM and CE.

3. Methods

This study seeks to test the hypothesized model (Figure 1) that examines the link between green organizational culture, green human resource management (GHRM), the circular economy, internal resilience, and external resilience in the context of Egyptian hotels. The research method of the study is quantitative and uses a questionnaire survey as the tool for data collection from respondents who are employees in hotels of Egypt. The current study applied a quantitative approach for examining existing hypothesized relationships as determined by Creswell (2017). In addition, several studies in the current literature have applied survey-based primary research methods to explore different aspects including the study of GHRM practice adoption, the effects of circular economy adoption on internal and external resilience, and factors influencing the adoption of these practices from the managers and employees in business organizations (Obeidat et al. 2023; Raza and Khan 2022; Úbeda-García et al. 2021; Chowdhury et al. 2022).

Egypt was chosen as a context for this study for the following reasons. Firstly, there is a lack of research on Egyptian hotels’ GHRM and its effects on their practice or environmental performance, according to Farooq et al. (Farooq et al. 2022) and Sobaih (Sobaih 2019). Furthermore, there has been no research conducted on the relationships between the following five dimensions: GHRM, the circular economy, green organizational culture, internal resilience, and external resilience within Egypt. Studying these relationships will fill a knowledge gap. Moreover, there are severe environmental problems in Egypt, including water scarcity, poor waste management, and the fast depletion of natural resources (Rezk et al. 2023). This would propose the circular economy as an alternative to the “take-make-waste” methods to meet the growing population and the demand for development in Egypt. Finally, Egypt remains committed to the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as evidenced by Egypt Vision 2030 (Haiying 2020). The following sub-section provides a description of the research procedures employed in this study to enhance the validity and reliability of the study.

3.1. Measures

A self-administered questionnaire was developed as the main data gathering tool. Since the questionnaire included items from previous research studies on green organizational culture, GHRM, the circular economy, and internal and external resilience, content validity was achieved. All variables were given a five-point Likert scale response format ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. The content validity of the questionnaire was checked and confirmed through consultation with experts in the fields of sustainability and HRM. A pilot test was conducted on a small sample of employees with the purpose of improving and adapting the questionnaire. Kim et al.’s (2019) six items were adapted to estimate the green human resource management (GHRM) variable. The circular economy (CE) was measured by employing a nine-item scale developed by Obeidat et al. (2023). To assess the constructs of internal resilience (IR) and external resilience (ER), eight items were adopted from the study of Perramon et al. (2024)—four items for each variable. Finally, the green organizational culture (GOC) variable was measured by six items from Wang (2019).

Before collecting the actual data, a pilot study was conducted to ensure that items in the questionnaire were clear, comprehensible, and relevant. For this pilot study, a convenience sample of 25 employees working in green-certified hotels in Egypt were approached. Participants were asked to complete the questionnaire and provide comments on items regarding appropriateness of wording, clarity, and relevance. Based on their feedback, the questionnaire was then subjected to minor revisions in order to enhance its clarity and overall flow.

In addition to the pilot study, another pre-test was conducted with a convenience sample of 50 employees from green-certified hotels in Egypt. This pre-test helped to get a better understanding of the main research instrument and the reliability of the measurement scale, with reference to appropriateness and the selected constructs. This elaborate two-stage testing at the pilot and pre-test stages served to guarantee a rigorously designed questionnaire that was understandable to the target population and capable of capturing intended constructs, hence improving the quality and reliability of data to be collected in the main study.

3.2. Data Collection

The sample involved employees from green star hotels in Egypt. In Egypt there are 183 green certified hotels with 58,000 rooms in 17 destinations (Green Star Hotel 2024). The Green Star Hotel (GSH) is the national green certification programme of Egypt under the Ministry of Tourism and operating under the Egyptian Hotel Association (EHA). These hotels are most likely to have better environmental performance and more advanced GHRM and CE practices than their non-certified counterparts (Khalil 2020). The questionnaires were distributed using convenient samples and drop-off and pick-up approaches. Employees voluntarily filled out the survey, and their responses were kept private. The surveys were conducted with the assistance of our colleagues registered in our faculty’s postgraduate programs and working in the sample hotels. The data were collected during the months of March to June (2024).

A total of 423 employees completed the survey, and 402 responses were considered valid after removing 21 unqualified ones. The study sample included 283 males (70.4%) and 119 females (29.6%). The participants’ ages mainly ranged between 23 and 57. Also, 251 respondents (62.4%) had a college degree, followed by 126 respondents (31.3%) with intermediate education degrees.

3.3. Data Analysis

The data collected were analyzed using statistical methods generally used to conduct quantitative research, such as in path analysis. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was used, supported by SmartPLS software. SEM enables the analysis of the multiple relationships that exist between the latent variables, which in this case can help in testing the relationships hypothesized within the model. Additionally, this approach facilitates the researchers’ assessment of the association between constructs in the inner model and their associated latent indicators in the outer model. PLS-SEM also works well with intricate research models, especially those that include moderation and mediation. This method is a reliable component-based strategy that has been used extensively in earlier research (Hair et al. 2017). This method is a two-stage analysis strategy; the measurement (outer) model’s validity and reliability are examined in the first stage, and the structural (inner) model is assessed in the second stage to test the proposed hypotheses (Leguina 2015).

4. Results

4.1. Common Method Variance Evaluation

Common Method Variance (CMV) discusses the variance that is subjected to the employed measurement technique rather than to the variables the scale itself represents. It regularly occurs when data are obtained using the same data collection method, causing inflated correlations between the measurement items, which can misrepresent the actual relationships between factors. In a social science context, CMV is a significant issue as self-reported questionnaires are highly vulnerable to it. In order to eliminate the potential for instrument bias, Harman’s single-factor test was also employed in this investigation. Given that Harman’s single factor value is less than 50%, the result indicates that the single factor retrieved is 43.9%, suggesting that there are no bias concerns with the current study (Podsakoff and Organ 1986).

4.2. Psychometric Characteristics of the Measurement Model

The measurement (outer) model was evaluated before the hypotheses were tested. Fit indices widely utilized in CB-SEM are unavailable or ill-advised for PLS-SEM because they adopt a different SEM technique (Hair et al. 2017). According to Hair et al. (2019), the fit of the PLS-SEM model can be evaluated by operating the ensuing standards: for the loading of the study’s items (λ), Cronbach’s alpha (a), as well as the composite reliability (CR) test, the required cut-offs are <0.70, and the threshold of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) must reach 0.50 to achieve Convergent Validity (CV) of the outer model. Regarding the model discriminant validity, the AVE of each variable must be greater than the squared inter-construction correlations (Fornell and Larcker 1981).

As depicted in

Table 1. Psychometric results.

Factors and Items	Loading λ	(a Value)	(C_R)	(AVE)
Green Human Resource Management (GHRM)		0.918	0.936	0.711
GHRM1	0.848
GHRM2	0.830
GHRM3	0.889
GHRM4	0.831
GHRM5	0.871
GHRM6	0.786
Circular economy (CE)		0.916	0.931	0.599
CE1	0.723
CE2	0.818
CE3	0.798
CE4	0.774
CE5	0.764
CE6	0.760
CE7	0.793
CE8	0.800
CE9	0.732
Internal Resilience (IR)		0.867	0.909	0.714
IR1	0.815
IR2	0.881
IR3	0.860
IR4	0.822
External Resilience (ER)		0.887	0.922	0.747
ER1	0.871
ER2	0.852
ER3	0.877
ER4	0.857
Green organizational culture (GOC)		0.875	0.906	0.617
GOC1	0.733
GOC2	0.821
GOC3	0.820
GOC4	0.790
GOC5	0.808
GOC6	0.737

, the outer model satisfies all thresholds of a good CV, validating the internal study model’s reliability—that is, the consistency of responses to items belonging to the same factor. The AVEs ranged from 0.599 (Circular economy (CE)) to 0.747 (External Resilience (ER)), exhibiting a strong correlation between the items in each factor, also confirming the model’s CV. Also,

Table 2. Factor cross-loadings.

	GHRM	CE	ER	IR	GOC
GHRM1	0.848	0.608	0.458	0.551	0.491
GHRM2	0.830	0.572	0.388	0.507	0.493
GHRM3	0.889	0.583	0.380	0.472	0.365
GHRM4	0.831	0.547	0.442	0.442	0.349
GHRM5	0.871	0.550	0.462	0.469	0.382
GHRM6	0.786	0.528	0.304	0.517	0.314
CE1	0.455	0.723	0.502	0.524	0.638
CE2	0.564	0.818	0.484	0.534	0.617
CE3	0.524	0.798	0.421	0.551	0.660
CE4	0.518	0.774	0.487	0.429	0.462
CE5	0.533	0.764	0.417	0.464	0.494
CE6	0.562	0.760	0.403	0.470	0.470
CE7	0.527	0.793	0.290	0.549	0.474
CE8	0.544	0.800	0.405	0.579	0.551
CE9	0.450	0.732	0.434	0.553	0.542
ER1	0.452	0.538	0.871	0.475	0.524
ER2	0.404	0.463	0.852	0.440	0.508
ER3	0.417	0.450	0.877	0.445	0.544
ER4	0.393	0.457	0.857	0.459	0.465
IR1	0.566	0.651	0.345	0.815	0.627
IR2	0.498	0.562	0.495	0.881	0.606
IR3	0.447	0.532	0.461	0.860	0.583
IR4	0.447	0.494	0.500	0.822	0.575
GOC1	0.363	0.510	0.531	0.535	0.733
GOC2	0.313	0.552	0.581	0.575	0.821
GOC3	0.408	0.569	0.520	0.595	0.820
GOC4	0.402	0.586	0.385	0.562	0.790
GOC5	0.424	0.594	0.414	0.584	0.808
GOC6	0.329	0.530	0.364	0.497	0.737

shows that an item loading within its construct is larger than any of its cross-loadings with other constructs, ensuring the discriminant validity. Additionally,

Table 3. “Fornell–Larcker criterion matrix” and HTMT Matrix.

	CE	ER	GHRM	GOC	IR
Circular Economy (CE)	0.774
External Resilience (ER)	0.554	0.864
Green Human Resource Management (GHRM)	0.671	0.483	0.843
Green Organizational Culture (GOC)	0.710	0.591	0.477	0.786
Internal Resilience (IR)	0.670	0.527	0.586	0.711	0.845

Note: values off the diagonal line are squared inter-construction correlations, while values on the diagonal line are AVEs.

supports the recommended model’s discriminant validity because all AVEs are higher than their related squared inter-construction correlations (Fornell and Larcker 1981). This indicated that every factor stood out independently from the rest. In addition, in response to the numerous criticisms of Fornell and Lacker’s criterion, some studies examined the Heterotrait–Monotriat ratio of correlation (HTMT) test to confirm the discriminant validity.

Table 4. HTMT Matrix.

	CE	ER	GHRM	GOC	IR
Circular Economy (CE)
External Resilience (ER)	0.609
Green Human Resource Management (GHRM)	0.731	0.532
Green Organizational Culture (GOC)	0.786	0.673	0.527
Internal Resilience (IR)	0.741	0.607	0.648	0.812

Note: for appropriate DV, all HTMT values need to be <0.90.

also shows that the discriminant validity is appropriate because all HTMT values are <0.90 (Gold et al. 2001).

4.3. Structural Model and Testing Hypotheses

Given that PLS-SEM lacks the standard fit criteria that CB-SEM has, an inner model must be evaluated using the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF), R2, Q2, and standardized path coefficients using Beta value (Hair et al. 2019). For the likelihood of “multi-collinearity” among constructs to be ruled out, VIFs must be less than 5.0 for items, R2 must fulfill norms for the academic area and study situation, standardized path coefficients (p) must be significant, and the Q2 scores must also fulfil the suggested point value of 0.0 (Hair et al. 2019).

As presented in

Table 5. VIF, R², and Q² outcomes.

Name	VIF	Name	VIF	Name	VIF	Name	VIF	Name	VIF
GHRM1	3.109	CE1	1.756	CE7	2.454	ER4	2.377	GOC2	2.258
GHRM2	2.588	CE2	2.659	CE8	2.595	IR1	1.717	GOC3	2.242
GHRM3	3.687	CE3	2.405	CE9	2.136	IR2	2.538	GOC4	2.066
GHRM4	2.749	CE4	2.241	ER1	2.258	IR3	2.401	GOC5	2.159
GHRM5	3.181	CE5	2.291	ER2	2.230	IR4	2.182	GOC6	1.643
GHRM6	2.099	CE6	2.340	ER3	2.643	GOC1	1.836
Circular Economy (CE)				R2	0.709	Q2	0.390
External Resilience (ER)				R2	0.330	Q2	0.230
Internal Resilience (IR)				R2	0.483	Q2	0.318

, VIFs ranged between 1.643 and 3.687, below the cut-off value. Thus, no multi-collinearity issues existed, which allowed the independent variables’ effects on the dependent variables to be separated from one another because there was no substantial correlation between them. As for R² estimates, circular economy (CE) displayed a value of 0.709, implying that the remaining constructs in the structural proposed model accounted for 71.0% of the variation in circular economy. Similarly, the external resilience (ER)‘s R² was 0.330 and internal resilience (IR)’s R² was 0.483, satisfying cut-off (0.10 or greater). Q² exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.0. Additionally, at p = 0.01 level, all standardized path coefficients were statistically significant (

Table 6. Hypotheses results.

Paths	β Value	t Value	p Value	Result
Direct Paths
H1-Green human resource management → Circular economy	0.518	12.609	0.000	“Supported”
H2-Circular economy → Internal resilience	0.504	6.719	0.000	“Supported”
H3-Circular economy → External resilience	0.418	5.826	0.000	“Supported”
H4-Green human resource management → Internal resilience	0.247	3.050	0.003	“Supported”
H5-Green human resource management → External resilience	0.203	3.147	0.001	“Supported”
Indirect Mediating Paths
H6-Green human resource management → Circular economy → Internal resilience	0.261	5.737	0.000	“Supported”
H7-Green human resource management → Circular economy → External resilience	0.216	5.382	0.000	“Supported”
Moderating Effects
H8-Green human resource management × Green organizational culture → Circular economy	0.239	6.385	0.000	“Supported”

). When these criteria were considered collectively, it proved how well the structural model suited the data.

Additionally, Tenenhaus et al. (2005) presented the ensuing equation that can be operated to prove the Goodness of Fit (GoF) of the PLS-SEM model, and values of 0.1, 0.25, and 0.36, respectively, denote a low, medium, and high GoF. The GoF of the proposed model is 0.586, thus indicating a high GoF index.

$$\mathrm{GoF}=\sqrt{AV{E}_{avy}\times {R^2}_{avy}}$$

The “standardized root mean square residual” (SRMR) was also tested to prove the structure model’s validity. Typically, lower values indicate a better model fit. SRMR > 0.8 is acceptable (Hu and Bentler 1998). Our model’s SRMR value is 0.071, representing a good model fit.

Utilizing Smart PLS 4, a bootstrapping process with 5000 iterations was performed to test the provided hypotheses for the study, as exhibited in Table 6, after verifying the validity of the outer and inner models.

The data shown in Table 6 and Figure 2, as extracted from Smart PLS 3.0, indicate that the green human resource management (GHRM) positively affected circular economy, internal resilience, and external resilience at (β = 0.518, t = 12.609, p = 0.034), (β = 0.247, t = 3.050, p = 0.003), and (β = 0.203, t = 3.147, p = 0.001), respectively, supporting H1, H4, and H5. The circular economy positively impacted internal resilience at β = 0.504, t = 6.719, and p = 0.000, and external resilience at β = 0.418, t = 5.826, and p = 0.000, thus proving H2 and H3. Additionally, at (β = 0.261, t = 5.737, and p = 0.000) and at (β = 0.216, t = 5.382, and p = 0.000) the circular economy mediates the link between GHRM and internal resilience, and the relationship between GHRM and external resilience, thus proving H6 and H7. Concerning moderating effects, Figure 3 illustrated that green organizational culture strengthened the impact of the GHRM on circular economy, thus proving H8.

5. Discussion

The study was conducted to develop an understanding of the complicated interrelations between green human resource management (GHRM), the adoption of the circular economy, green organizational culture, and external and internal organizational resilience in the hospitality sector in Egypt. In this quest, we examine data collected from employees working in green-certified hotels to establish how GHRM practices, enabled by a supportive green organizational culture, facilitate the enactment of the circular economy and eventually enhance the resilience of an organization within this environmentally sensitive sector. The findings are significant for researchers and practitioners looking to understand and harness the synergistic potential of the elements towards -a more sustainable and resilient hospitality industry. The subsequent section of the discussion presents the findings that address the research questions.

RQ1- In this respect, one of the major findings of the current research is that GHRM has a strong positive influence on the adoption of the circular economy within hospitality organizations, thus supporting H1. This result is also in line with previous studies that have generally underestimated the critical role of GHRM in supporting circular economy practices across different industries (Jabbour et al. 2019; Marrucci et al. 2021; Obeidat et al. 2023). An organization may encourage a knowledgeable and motivated workforce that implements circular economy principles by considering the environment part of the very core of human resource practices: selection procedures and staff development, work appraisal and motivation, and compensation and benefit plans. The strategic approach to HRM therefore becomes one that is imprinted with sustainability as a core value and is fundamentally transitioning towards circular business models.

The significant and positive correlation between the circular economy and internal resilience (H2), as well as the circular economy and external resilience (H3), provides evidence of the importance of implementing circular practices to enhance the organizational resilience on various fields. It is in line with prior studies that identified the circular economy’s relationship with increased adaptability, flexibility, and resource security (Bag et al. 2019; Blériot 2020), all of which are vital for managing internal fluctuations and limitations. The relationship between the circular economy and external resilience also indicates that circularity enhances stakeholder involvement, image improvement, and adaptability to external forces such as the volatility of resources and changes to legislation (Fraccascia et al. 2021; Kumar and Kumar Singh 2022). In other words, the circular economy allows organizations to develop a more resilient framework, which can effectively address disturbances stemming both from internal and external sources of an organization.

Moreover, the study demonstrates the direct and positive relationship between GHRM, internal resilience (H4), and external resilience (H5), underlining that sustainability should be integrated into the organizational system of human resource management. In particular, through the development of the green training programs, empowerment programs, and the popularization and implementation of the best rewards and incentives, GHRM ensures that employees get involved in the achievement of a company’s sustainability goals, hence improving internal organizational resilience (Arasli et al. 2020; Pham et al. 2019a). That internal change towards positive attitude and environmental thinking within personnel can then lead to improved organizational responsiveness to those outside stakeholders who are gradually becoming more environmentally conscious and who require more green-oriented products and services (Kim et al. 2019; Siyambalapitiya et al. 2018). It also leads to the improvement of the external environment of the organization, as stakeholders’ trust is gained and more customers with an interest in the environment are attracted, making the organization more competitive in the current market that universally places a priority on the environment.

RQ2- Furthermore, strong evidence was found that the circular economy mediates GHRM’s relationships with internal and external organizational resilience. This thus supports H6 and H7. Thus, it can be concluded that the enhanced resilience resulting from GHRM is mediated partially by the proper deployment and management of circular economy practices. Enabling businesses to enhance their capacity in terms of better foresight, adaptability, and recovery from internal and external crises to resilience, the circular economy paves the practical pathway through resource efficiency, reduction of waste, closed loops, and stakeholder co-operation. This is particularly relevant for the hospitality industry, which often faces disruptions related to resource shortages, environmental legislation, and the changing preferences of consumers (Gössling and Peeters 2015).

RQ3- The results also provide insights into the significance of green organizational culture support for the successful realization of circular economy practices (H8). In doing so, we revealed that a high-quality green organizational culture, in terms of the common set of values and beliefs on environmental responsibility, enhances the positive association between GHRM and circular economy adoption (Wang 2019). This result supports the idea that organizational culture is a lever for change as it shapes employees’ conceptions, impressions, and actions (Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010). Consequently, a heightened green organizational culture can positively influence GHRM activities since the organization will promote sustainable development, increase employee-driven activities on effective environmental practice, and reward environmentally sustainable behavior.

6. Theoretical Implication

Theoretically, this study contributes to the development of research on the relationship between GHRM and circular economy in various methods. Most importantly, it represents one of the few empirical validation links between GHRM, the circular economy, and organizational resilience suggested by the theoretical framework proposed by Jabbour et al. (Pinzone et al. 2019). Such findings can also set up future agenda by testing the proposed relationships in different national contexts and industries. Second, although the relationships between GHRM and the circular economy, and those between the circular economy and IR and ER, have been validated in the literature, little research has examined how GHRM might influence IR and ER through the potential mediating effects of the circular economy on the GHRM–resilience relationship. This research thus fills this gap in existing research. It included additional variables, i.e., green organizational culture, which would have major effects on the hypothesized relationships linking GHRM to the circular economy, IR, and ER, and thus investigates a more robust conceptual model. It has also helped to further underpin the area by linking GHRM and resilience with practices of circular economy in a sector, hospitality, which has often been ignored in the study of these linkages.

Although the positive connection between GHRM and the adoption of the circular economy has already been identified in previous literature, this study adds further theoretical depth by revealing the moderating influence of green organizational culture. By showing that a strong green organizational culture strengthens the positive effect of GHRM on the circular economy, this research underlines the instrumental role of organizational culture in making a shift towards circularity possible. The finding also broadens the resource-based view by highlighting that a strong green organizational culture, characterized by shared values and beliefs with respect to environmental responsibility, functions like a valuable intangible resource in raising the effectiveness of GHRM initiatives in encouraging circular economy adoption. Another contribution associated with the current study has to do with the advanced analysis used in examining its results. The study followed the suggestions of Hair et al. (Hair et al. 2019) about the application of SEM, and more specifically the PLS-SEM approach, in order to attain more valid and reliable results in our study.

The interplay between GHRM, circular economy adoption, and organizational resilience in the Egyptian hospitality sector has implications for theory in at least two major areas: the Resource-Based View and Stakeholder Theory. Showing how integrating GHRM with the circular economy strengthens organizational capabilities and stakeholder relationships through sustainability practices enhances the significance of these theories for green business.

The Resource-Based View (RBV) postulates that competitive advantage is attained by an organization by acquiring and leveraging resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable (Barney 1991). Traditionally, most have looked upon such resources from a primarily economic dimension, focusing on tangible assets and financial capital. Our findings, however, emphasize the inclusion of a sustainability dimension in the RBV framework with regard to the positioning of GHRM practices and circular economy strategies as valuable, rare, and hard-to-copy resources in driving organizational resilience and competitive advantage (Sahu et al. 2024). The findings underline GHRM as a strategic tool for developing not only skilled and knowledgeable, but also deeply committed, employees in the sphere of environmental sustainability. The principles of the circular economy, when integrated at the organizational level into recruitment systems, training, performance management, and compensation systems, are able to cultivate a workforce that has knowledge, skills, and motivation to effectively apply and champion circularity within respective roles (Jabbour et al. 2019; Ren et al. 2018). This, in turn, translates into an environmentally sensitive and proactive workforce, which will serve as a differentiator in markets that customers, investors, and employees care about because of their sustainability. The findings further support the argument that the circular economy can, indeed, be considered a strategic organizational capability, which leads to competitive advantage (Le et al. 2022).

The stakeholder theory focuses on the interdependence of organizations and stakeholders, and calls for organizations to take into account, in organizational decision-making processes, all stakeholders’ interests rather than only the interests of shareholders. Drawing on Friedman and Miles (Friedman and Miles 2002), we contribute to stakeholder theory by showing how the alignment of GHRM and circular economy practices serves the interests of several stakeholders: employees, customers, suppliers, and the local community. It is seen that the integration of sustainability into HR practices would lead to the engagement and motivation of employees (internal stakeholders) (Kim et al. 2019). GHRM practices enable environmental awareness among employees, provide training for the development of green skills, and reward pro-environmental behavior, thereby promoting employee satisfaction, well-being, and organizational citizenship behavior (Pham et al. 2019a). While consumer demand for green products and services remains strong, an organization still stands to win ahead in the competition to secure and retain environment-sensitive customers by being proactive towards embracing good circular economy practices (Kim et al. 2019). Open communication, authentic engagement, and a serious commitment to environmental responsibility engender trust among customers who have become sensitive to the environmental implications of their consumption choices.

In terms of applying CE and creating collaborative value with suppliers, organizations often have to redesign their supply chains and establish a higher degree of integration with suppliers who display similar values related to sustainability (Kumar and Kumar Singh 2022). Through this collaboration on closed-loop systems, reduced waste, and responsible sourcing, organizations and their suppliers are able to generate common value that benefits them both economically and environmentally. In that regard, for local community and environmental stewardship, organizations that embrace circular economy practices showcase their commitment to environmental stewardship through a minimal ecological footprint and contribution towards the welfare of the communities they serve. As reported by Mathew (2022), some of the methods an organization can use to improve its reputation among community stakeholders and further strengthen its social license to operate are pollution reduction, resource conservation, and prospects towards local suppliers.

Finally, this study helps to provide a clear understanding of organizational resilience within the sustainability area. While earlier studies were based on economic and operational resilience (Perramon et al. 2024), this research shows how crucial it is to put other dimensions—environmental and social—into work when studying resilience. The organizations with robust GHRM and circular economy practices will, therefore, be better placed in terms of anticipation, adaptation, and recovery from disruptions. This is not only about the bottom line in financial performance, but in social and environmental performance as well. It thus adds to a more holistic and, therefore, nuanced understanding of organizational resilience within the complex and interconnected world that exists at present.

7. Practical and Managerial Implications

The findings of this study have significant implications for both hotels and the government. The top management of hotels and policy makers have to be aware that, despite the high cost of resources and manpower to implement environmental practices, in the long term this effort will pay dividends to all its stakeholders. Implementing green practices, such as energy-efficient policies, waste reduction procedures, and water management systems, involves significant allocations of hotel capital and human resources. These initiatives might require retraining staff, improving infrastructure, and acquiring related certifications, all of which can burden hotel resources and budgets. Nonetheless, the long-term financial and non-financial benefits can be significant and extend to all stakeholders involved. For the achievement of this purpose, hotels should foster an environmentally friendly organizational culture, training employees in environmental concerns, incentivizing both employees and customers to participate in environmental activities, and forming environmental teams and new roles like an energy manager, whose role will be to maintain the annual energy consumption at prescribed levels.

The principles of the circular economy have to be integrated into every discipline or area of human resource management, changing this from a peripheral concern into one of the basic pillars of HR strategy. This, in turn, means having to redesign job descriptions and performance metrics to include circular economy-related responsibilities and skills. For example, food and beverage managers could be incentivized to minimize food waste and acquire their supplies from local farmers, and the housekeeping staff may have their own incentives related to efficient laundry practices and waste sorting (Kim et al. 2019). Furthermore, during recruitment, it becomes possible to seek talented employees who already have a proven interest in sustainability and some knowledge of CE principles, a workforce both competent and motivated to be a champion of circularity.

Green organizational culture strongly supports GHRM and circular economy initiatives. Leaders play an important role in developing this culture by serving as good examples to others and participating in sustainability-related activities. In accordance with this study, a robust green organizational culture with shared values and beliefs, in relation to environmental responsibility, would enhance the positive effect of GHRM on the adoption of the circular economy (Wang 2019). Managers should encourage the open discussion of ideas about the implementation of CE, establishing forums where employees can share their knowledge in offering solutions and celebrating successes.

Moving beyond the rhetorical calls for the translation of these circular economy principles into tangible, functional practices within the operations, these would entail proper waste management systems, such as “reduce, reuse, recycle” practices in procurement and resource-management, and guest engagement in the journey towards hotel sustainability (Rodríguez-Antón and Alonso-Almeida 2019). At the core of integrating sustainability into daily operations lies a very practical manifestation of care for the environment and resources.

In this study, we have elaborated stakeholder engagement as an approach to establish resilience within an organization, particularly in the context of the circular economy. Therefore, managers should strengthen a local supply chain with collaborative arrangements between nearby farmers, producers, and suppliers. This would reduce transportation emissions, and thus support the local economy and build resilience in supply chains (Kumar and Kumar Singh 2022). Moreover, this commitment to sustainability will be further enhanced in the view of the stakeholders if customers are co-involved in the journey as sustainability partners through the transparent communication of circular economy efforts, which are open for participation.

For CE initiatives to be effectively managed, a clear definition of sustainability metrics, the tracking of relevant KPIs, and measuring progress towards goals are essential. This can be achieved through technology by having in place data analytic platforms that give insight into resource use patterns, waste streams, and opportunities for optimization. A culture should be developed for continual improvement in circular economy strategies, through reviews to improve them for changing sustainability trends and evolving technologies.

Government policymakers can receive practical guidance from the findings of this study to ensure a more sustainable and resilient hospitality sector. It is desirable that policymakers consider offering financial incentives, such as tax breaks or subsidies, or regulatory benefits like fast-track permitting processes, to encourage hotels to undertake GHRM practices and to adopt circular economy principles (Zhu et al. 2019). It can thus make these more sustainable practices more financially viable for a wider range of hotels by offsetting the high start-up costs involved in making this transition.

Finally, the hotels could create collaborative platforms or forums for sharing best practice, knowledge, and other elements of GHRM and circular economy implementation. The latter may consist of workshops, seminars, or even online communities through which the hotels can learn from each other’s successes and challenges, share innovative solutions that at times may emerge, and find opportunities for joint initiatives. Such pooling of resources and expertise might increase the effectiveness of training programs for hotel staff to provide them with the skills and knowledge necessary for GHRM and circular economy practices. This collaborative approach could further be adopted to develop standardized metrics and reporting frameworks for measuring and tracking sustainability performance, benchmarking, and monitoring general industry progress.

8. Conclusions

This paper aimed to examine the interrelationships between Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) practices, the adoption of the Circular Economy (CE), and the development of organizational resilience at both internal (IR) and external (ER) levels. The study uncovered a significant link between these factors, and found that the Circular Economy (CE) can play a significant mediator role and green organizational culture (GOC) serves as a moderator. The adoption of GHRM activities was revealed to have a direct impact on the integration of circular economy principles in the hotel sector context. Practices of GHRM, i.e., green training and recruitment, have a critical role in enriching the workforce with the required skills and attitude to support circular economy programs. This adoption of the circular economy advances the efficiency of hotel resource usages, reduces waste, and contributes to business sustainability, which, in turn, reinforces a hotel’s resilience. Moreover, the circular economy was found to have a key mediating role in the relationship between GHRM and organizational resilience. Circular economy-based practices improve both internal resilience (IR) by promoting resource optimization and operations’ sustainability, and external resilience (ER) by cultivating a hotel’s adaptability to environmental changes. Additionally, the results showed that green organizational culture has a significant moderating role in the relationship between GHRM and the circular economy. An effective green organizational culture encourages the alignment of workers’ values with the hotel’s green initiatives, strengthening the commitment to business sustainability. Hotels with a deeply rooted green culture are more likely to resist the resistance of change, confirming that GHRM activities are successfully implemented and that CE assumptions become rooted in daily business operations.

9. Limitations and Future Research

Although this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness among GHRM, circular economy adoption, green organizational culture, internal resilience, and external resilience, it is not without its limitations. In this regard, the first and primary limitation is that geographical focus on green-certified hotels in Egypt limits the generalizability of the findings. Specifically, future studies should examine whether the identified relationships can be replicated in other geographical contexts with varying levels of circular economy awareness and regulatory landscapes. Similarly, examining a single industry—hotels—diminishes the transferability of any findings to other industries. The next wave of studies could study other sectors, such as resorts, tourism agencies, cruise ships, or restaurants, to clarify sector-specific nuances concerning the GHRM–circular economy–resilience nexus (Sorin and Sivarajah 2021). In addition, comparisons across different hospitality sectors, various hotel classifications, management styles, and restaurant ratings could be drawn, which would also lead to beneficial results.

Moreover, while data from hotel employees are useful, they give only a single-dimensional view of the subject under study (Kim et al. 2019). Future research should include managers, customers, suppliers, and community members to present a more holistic view of GHRM, the circular economy, and resilience. A cross-sectional design limits the study in making any causal inferences about the variables under investigation (Rodríguez-Antón and Alonso-Almeida 2019). Longitudinal studies would definitely prove the possible long-term effects that GHRM and the circular economy could have on organizational resilience, showing the manner in which these relationships are changing over time.

The limitations of this study indicate future research directions. While this research established the overall effect of GHRM, future research might pay attention to the efficacy of individual GHRM practices, such as green training or green compensation, against circular economy adoption and resilience. Second, the inclusion of exogenous variables, like government policies or innovation, would give better coverage of contextual factors that impact the organizational sustainability of firms (Zhu et al. 2019). Third, research related to customers may provide relevant information to develop sustainability strategies with the intent to elicit a maximum response from the market. This may involve an investigation into consumer willingness to pay for green alternatives and their perceptions about hotels’ circular economy efforts. Finally, a developed and validated measurement scale to assess the effectiveness of GHRM and circular economy practices in promoting organizational resilience would have been very instrumental to researchers and practitioners as an approach to evaluate and benchmark their efforts towards sustainability.