The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Shedding light on the determinants of eco‐innovation: A meta‐analytic study
Open accessAbstract
In the past decade a stream of studies has analyzed the determinants of eco‐innovation. Four main clusters of drivers have been identified in the literature: “technology push,” “market pull,” “regulatory push‐pull,” and “firm specific factors.” Nevertheless, the empirical quantitative and comparative analysis of those clusters is rare, scattered and inconclusive. This article aims to fill this gap by analyzing the determinants of eco‐innovation on the basis of a meta‐analytic study of quantitative empirical studies published over the period 2006 to 2017—a meta‐analysis which accounts for a total of 211,123 firms. The findings show that firms with collaborative networks and/or more environmental concern are more prone to eco‐innovate, emphasizing the role of “technology push” as the main cluster of determinants, regardless of whether a typology of eco‐innovation is included as a moderator in the meta‐analysis. Based on the results of the meta‐analytic study, the paper discusses several courses of action to foster eco‐innovation and achieve environmental benefits.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship
Porter, M. E., & Linde, C. V. D. (1995) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.9.4.97 · Cited by 13,365
Redefining innovation — eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics
Rennings, K. (2000) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/s0921-8009(99)00112-3 · Cited by 3,226
Fixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486 · Cited by 2,977
On the Use of Beta Coefficients in Meta-Analysis.
Peterson, R. A., & Brown, S. P. (2005) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.175 · Cited by 1,643
Field, A. P., & Gillett, R. (2010) · British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology · doi:10.1348/000711010x502733 · Cited by 1,162
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2000) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00156 · Cited by 833
Cited by
Critical success factors of green innovation: Technology, organization and environment readiness
Zhang, Y., Sun, J., Yang, Z., & Wang, Y. (2020) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121701 · Cited by 508
Demirel, P., & Kesidou, E. (2019) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2286 · Cited by 386
Demirel, P., & Danisman, G. O. (2019) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2336 · Cited by 322
Kiefer, C. P., del Río, P., & Carrillo‐Hermosilla, J. (2021) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2688 · Cited by 78
Achmad, G. N., Yudaruddin, R., Nugroho, B. A., Fitrian, Z., Suharsono, S., Adi, A. S., Hafsari, P., & Fitriansyah, F. (2023) · Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity · doi:10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100158 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Zubeltzu‐Jaka, E., Erauskin‐Tolosa, A., & Heras‐Saizarbitoria, I.
- Venue
- Business Strategy and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-03-24
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1093-1103
- ISSN
- 0964-4733 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0836
- OpenAlex
- W2793842389
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 23.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Shedding light on the determinants of eco‐innovation: A meta‐analytic study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bse.2054
- The paper
- Zubeltzu‐Jaka, E., Erauskin‐Tolosa, A., & Heras‐Saizarbitoria, I. (2018). Shedding light on the determinants of eco‐innovation: A meta‐analytic study. Business Strategy and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2054
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
