IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/poicbe/v11y2017i1p1050-1057n108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fostering eco-innovation in SMEs through bridging research, education and industry for building a business oriented model

Author

Listed:
  • Hamburg Ileana

    (Institut Arbeit und Technik, Gelsenkirchen, Germany)

  • Vlăduţ Gabriel

    (IPA-SA CIFATT, Craiova, Romania)

  • O’Brien Emma

    (University of Limerick, Ireland)

Abstract

Small and medium sized companies (SMEs) assure economic growth in Europe. The Environmental Technologies Action Plan (ETAP) concentrated and mobilized Member State and stakeholder efforts bringing eco-innovation from research to market, improving market conditions, opening up global markets. Rapid and reinforced actions are now required, building on the experience of ETAP helping SMEs to have benefits by introducing eco-innovative approaches into their operations. Particularly start-ups, can be the ideal incubators for eco-innovation, and can bring to market new, less environmentally damaging products, services and processes. Generally many SMEs are struggling to survive in an ongoing global recession and often they are becoming reluctant to release innovation, particularly eco-innovation (Assante et al., 2016). In this paper we present first the differences between eco-innovation based business models and those based on regular innovations. Secondly we give some approaches tested in national and European projects with participation of the authors in order to help SMEs to develop business models of eco-innovations. The first one is to build cooperation between researchers, educators and SME staff in order to explain SMEs the advantages of such models and to implement models designed by researchers. Secondly we used practice oriented forms of training for SMEs like Problem Based Learning (PBL) as an efficient form for SMEs and entrepreneurship education to learn to solve problems like the building of an eco-innovation business model. Thirdly we use in our projects eco-innovation biographies (EIBs) reflecting the evolutionary character of such innovations and the dynamics of related policy streams.

Suggested Citation

  • Hamburg Ileana & Vlăduţ Gabriel & O’Brien Emma, 2017. "Fostering eco-innovation in SMEs through bridging research, education and industry for building a business oriented model," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 1050-1057, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:1050-1057:n:108
    DOI: 10.1515/picbe-2017-0108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/picbe-2017-0108
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/picbe-2017-0108?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam B. Jaffe & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2004. "Technology Policy for Energy and the Environment," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 35-68, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Anna Butzin & Brigitta Widmaier, 2016. "Exploring Territorial Knowledge Dynamics through Innovation Biographies," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 220-232, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lori Bennear & Robert Stavins, 2007. "Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 111-129, May.
    2. Zhongju Liao & Xiang Zhu, 2022. "A configurational analysis of firms' environmental innovation: Evidence from China's key pollutant‐discharge listed companies," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1511-1522, December.
    3. Timo Busch & Nils Lehmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2012. "Corporate Social Responsibility, Negative Externalities, and Financial Risk: The Case of Climate Change," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-102/IV/DSF40, Tinbergen Institute.
    4. Shang, Yunfeng & Han, Ding & Gozgor, Giray & Mahalik, Mantu Kumar & Sahoo, Bimal Kishore, 2022. "The impact of climate policy uncertainty on renewable and non-renewable energy demand in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 654-667.
    5. Mona Treude, 2021. "Sustainable Smart City—Opening a Black Box," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    6. Cameron Hepburn & Jacquelyn Pless & David Popp, 2018. "Policy Brief—Encouraging Innovation that Protects Environmental Systems: Five Policy Proposals," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 154-169.
    7. Anadón, Laura Díaz, 2012. "Missions-oriented RD&D institutions in energy between 2000 and 2010: A comparative analysis of China, the United Kingdom, and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1742-1756.
    8. Marit E. Klemetsen & Brita Bye & Arvid Raknerud, 2013. "Can non-market regulations spur innovations in environmental technologies? A study on firm level patenting," Discussion Papers 754, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    9. Abdullah F. Alnaim & Nadia Abdelhamid Abdelmegeed Abdelwahed & Bahadur Ali Soomro, 2022. "Environmental Challenges and Green Innovation Strategy: A Vigorous Development of Greener Dynamics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Shuai Shao & Zhigao Hu & Jianhua Cao & Lili Yang & Dabo Guan, 2020. "Environmental Regulation and Enterprise Innovation: A Review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1465-1478, March.
    11. Henk-Jan Kooij & Arnoud Lagendijk & Marieke Oteman, 2018. "Who Beats the Dutch Tax Department? Tracing 20 Years of Niche–Regime Interactions on Collective Solar PV Production in The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    12. Tengfei Wang & Henrik Halkier & Laura James & Renxu Gu & Cheng Chi, 2022. "External Knowledge Linkages and the Evolution of Comparative Advantage: An Examination of Territorial Knowledge Dynamics in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, April.
    13. Eric Knight & Nicholas Howarth, 2011. "Clean Energy Technology and the Role of Non-Carbon Price Based Policy: an Evolutionary Economics Perspective," CCEP Working Papers 1102, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    14. Aghion, Philippe & David, Paul A. & Foray, Dominique, 2009. "Science, technology and innovation for economic growth: Linking policy research and practice in 'STIG Systems'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 681-693, May.
    15. Gilding, Michael & Brennecke, Julia & Bunton, Vikki & Lusher, Dean & Molloy, Peter L. & Codoreanu, Alex, 2020. "Network failure: Biotechnology firms, clusters and collaborations far from the world superclusters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    16. Philippe Aghion & Paul A. David & Dominique Foray, 2007. "Science, Technology and Innovation for Economic Growth: Towards Linking Policy Research and Practice in 'STIG Systems'," Discussion Papers 06-039, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, revised Oct 2008.
    17. Knight, Eric & Howarth, Nicholas, 2011. "Clean energy technology and the role of non-carbon price based policy: an evolutionary economics perspective," Working Papers 249388, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    18. Louise Krog & Karl Sperling & Henrik Lund, 2018. "Barriers and Recommendations to Innovative Ownership Models for Wind Power," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, September.
    19. Cary Coglianese & Shana M. Starobin, 2020. "Social Science and the Analysis of Environmental Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 578-604, September.
    20. Magdalena Marczewska, 2014. "The Role of Competitors and Customers in the Development of Environmentally Sound Technologies," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 10(2), pages 39-61.

    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:vrs:poicbe:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:1050-1057:n:108. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.