IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i11p4790-d1408666.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design Options for Sustainable and Open Business Models: A Taxonomy-Based Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Franziska Mais

    (Fraunhofer Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA, Nobelstrasse 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Thomas Bauernhansl

    (Fraunhofer Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA, Nobelstrasse 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
    Institute of Industrial Manufacturing and Management IFF, University of Stuttgart, Nobelstrasse 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

Abstract

The imperative for decarbonization forces businesses to transform their business models (BMs) and to adopt Sustainable Business Models which focus on creating value sustainably. In the context of Sustainable Business Model Innovation, maintaining close relationships within ecosystems is crucial to ensure a sustainable transformation while preserving competitiveness. As corporate boundaries become more transparent, the importance of external resources increases, leading to a shift from closed to open business models (OBM). In OBMs, stakeholders, including customers, actively co-create innovation and value creation. Our research investigates how integrating these approaches can shape BMs that effectively address decarbonization drivers and tackle the required business model innovation. We conducted a structured literature review to develop a taxonomy that outlines 64 design options across nine dimensions for sustainable, open BMs. In conclusion, this study provides sustainable and open design options, classified into detailed taxonomies. The practical applicability of this taxonomy was demonstrated through a use case classification, providing a foundation for companies and further research into designing and implementing these BMs in the context of decarbonization.

Suggested Citation

  • Franziska Mais & Thomas Bauernhansl, 2024. "Design Options for Sustainable and Open Business Models: A Taxonomy-Based Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-24, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:11:p:4790-:d:1408666
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/11/4790/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/11/4790/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frederik Möller & Maleen Stachon & Can Azkan & Thorsten Schoormann & Boris Otto, 2022. "Designing business model taxonomies – synthesis and guidance from information systems research," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 701-726, June.
    2. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    3. Pratima Bansal, 2005. "Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 197-218, March.
    4. Barbara Brenner & Daria Drdla, 2023. "Business Model Innovation toward Sustainability and Circularity—A Systematic Review of Innovation Types," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Saebi, Tina & Foss, Nicolai J., 2015. "Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 201-213.
    6. Die Hu & Yuandi Wang & Yu Li, 2017. "How Does Open Innovation Modify the Relationship between Environmental Regulations and Productivity?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1132-1143, December.
    7. Cobben, Dieudonnee & Ooms, Ward & Roijakkers, Nadine & Radziwon, Agnieszka, 2022. "Ecosystem types: A systematic review on boundaries and goals," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 138-164.
    8. Engwall, Mats & Kaulio, Matti & Karakaya, Emrah & Miterev, Maxim & Berlin, Daniel, 2021. "Experimental networks for business model innovation: A way for incumbents to navigate sustainability transitions?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    9. JinHyo Joseph Yun, 2017. "Business Model Design Compass," Management for Professionals, Springer, number 978-981-10-4128-0, December.
    10. von Delft, Stephan & Zhao, Yang, 2021. "Business models in process industries: Emerging trends and future research," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    11. Siaw, Christopher Agyapong & Sarpong, David, 2021. "Dynamic exchange capabilities for value co-creation in ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 493-506.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jiayi Huang & Peng Zhou, 2025. "Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship: A Review from the Perspective of Sustainable Business Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-11, January.
    2. Nadezhda Shmeleva & Tatyana Tolstykh & Tatiana Guseva & Arina Volosatova, 2025. "Open Environmental Collaborations as an Innovation Tool for Sustainable Development: Evidence from Russian Pulp and Paper Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-27, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Franziska Mais & Thomas Bauernhansl, 2024. "Decarbonization Drivers and Their Impact on Business Models in the Energy-Intensive Manufacturing Industry (EIMI)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    3. Yingjie Hao & Congcong Fan & Yunguang Long & Jieyi Pan, 2019. "The role of returnee executives in improving green innovation performance of Chinese manufacturing enterprises: Implications for sustainable development strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 804-818, July.
    4. Philip Hallinger, 2021. "A Meta-Synthesis of Bibliometric Reviews of Research on Managing for Sustainability, 1982–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Barbara Brenner, 2018. "Transformative Sustainable Business Models in the Light of the Digital Imperative—A Global Business Economics Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-25, November.
    6. Kimpimäki, Jaan-Pauli & Malacina, Iryna & Lähdeaho, Oskari, 2022. "Open and sustainable: An emerging frontier in innovation management?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    7. Philip Hallinger, 2020. "Analyzing the intellectual structure of the Knowledge base on managing for sustainability, 1982–2019: A meta‐analysis," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1493-1506, September.
    8. Ronald Vatananan-Thesenvitz & Amaury-Alexandre Schaller & Randall Shannon, 2019. "A Bibliometric Review of the Knowledge Base for Innovation in Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-22, October.
    9. Alberto J. Costa & Denise Curi & Ana Maria Bandeira & Augusta Ferreira & Brízida Tomé & Carla Joaquim & Carlos Santos & Cristina Góis & Deolinda Meira & Graça Azevedo & Helena Inácio & Mafalda Jesus &, 2022. "Literature Review and Theoretical Framework of the Evolution and Interconnectedness of Corporate Sustainability Constructs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-23, April.
    10. Mingfeng Tang & Grace Sheila Walsh & Cuiwen Li & Angathevar Baskaran, 2021. "Exploring technology business incubators and their business incubation models: case studies from China," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 90-116, February.
    11. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    12. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    13. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    14. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    15. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    16. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    17. Arru Brunella & Delrio Federico & Furesi Roberto & Pulina Pietro & Fabio Albino Madau, 2025. "Role of environmental, social and governance disclosure in business profitability and cost of debt: An analysis of small Southern Italian agri‐food businesses," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 856-895, July.
    18. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    19. Franck Brulhart & Sandrine Gherra & Bertrand V. Quelin, 2019. "Do Stakeholder Orientation and Environmental Proactivity Impact Firm Profitability?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 25-46, August.
    20. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:11:p:4790-:d:1408666. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.