CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 379Environmental Sustainability in BusinessSustainable Supply Chain ManagementSustainability and Innovation in Business

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 133 of the 137 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 4 are not checked yet.

Drivers and barriers of eco‐innovation types for sustainable transitions: A quantitative perspective

Open access
Kiefer, Christoph P., Del Río González, Pablo, Carrillo‐Hermosilla, Javier·2019·Business Strategy and the Environment
DOI 10.1002/bse.2246
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Firms are influenced by internal factors (resources and capabilities) and external factors (e.g., regulation) when taking the decision to eco‐innovate. However, the analysis of the internal factors has received much less attention than the external ones. This paper aims to fill this gap in the literature by analyzing the role of resources, competences, and dynamic capabilities (RCCs) as determinants (drivers and barriers) of different eco‐innovation (EI) types. Those EI types contribute differently to the sustainable transition of the economy and society, that is, towards the circular economy. The statistical analyses reveal that RCCs are quite relevant as determinants of EIs, and that different RCCs are more or less relevant for different EI types. In particular, the determinants of systemic and radical EIs substantially differ from those for continuous improvements. Our results suggest that physical RCCs, involvement in green supply chains, an EI‐friendly corporate culture, technology‐push and market‐pull, and internal financing resources represent drivers to these EIs, whereas cooperation, organizational learning, an ISO (International Organization for Standardization) ecological certification, and technological path dependency are barriers. The results may guide firms to pursue competitive and sustainable advantage by innovating through certain EI types corresponding to available and dedicated RCCs. They may also be useful to policy makers who are willing to promote specific EI types.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bse.2246

Cites

133 of 137 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 137 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Belin J., 2011, Cahiers du GREThA
  2. 10.2307/259056 · DOI
  3. European Commission, 2011, Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment, Special Eurobarometer, 365
  4. European Commission, 2017, What is an SME? [WWW document]
  5. Fombrun C. J., 1996, Reputation
  6. Ghisetti C., 2013, INGENIO (CSIC‐UPV) working paper series
  7. Markard J., 2010, Technological innovation systems and the resource based view—Resources at the firm, network and system level
  8. Nonaka I., 1991, The knowledge‐creating company, Harvard Business Review, 96, 96
  9. Nunnally J. C., 1978, Mc Graw‐Hill publ co, psychometric theory
  10. OECD, 2012, The future of eco‐innovation: The role of business models in green transformation
  11. Penrose E., 1959, The theory of the growth of the firm

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–377 of 377

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kiefer, C. P., Del Río González, P., & Carrillo‐Hermosilla, J.
Affiliations
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • Institute for Public Policies and Goods (IPP) Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) Madrid Spain
  • Universidad de Alcalá (ES)
ORCID
Venue
Business Strategy and the Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-11-19
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
155-172
ISSN
  • 0964-4733 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0836
DOI
10.1002/bse.2246
OpenAlex
W2900597063
Cited by
379
References
137
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 1
FWCI
41.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Business Strategy and the Environment (publishedVersion)
  • e_Buah (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Sustainability and Innovation in Business
Keywords
green innovation, sustainability transitions, circular economy, dynamic capabilities, drivers and barriers, green supply chain, organizational culture, organizational learning, cooperation, internal financing, continuous improvement

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