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 accessAbstract
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.
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The most important uncertainty for sustainable entrepreneurs is whether they can build successful businesses based on their innovations (Schaltegger & Wagner, 2011), despite the different barriers they may face (Kiefer, Del Río González, & Carrillo-Hermosilla, 2019).”
From Sustainable entrepreneurship, innovation, and business models: Integrative framework and propositions for future research (2020) · cites this paper as Kiefer, Del Río González, & Carrillo-Hermosilla, 2019
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
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage
Barney, J. B. (2004) · Advances in strategic management · doi:10.1016/s0742-3322(00)17018-4 · Cited by 38,216
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195092691.001.0001 · Cited by 18,010
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809
(2017) · Cited by 16,319
The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.1255632 · Cited by 12,810
Multivariate data analysis : a global perspective
Hair, J. F. (2010) · Cited by 12,258
An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change
Berkowitz, M. K., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1983) · Southern Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/1058233 · Cited by 10,888
The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation
Grant, R. M. (1991) · California Management Review · doi:10.2307/41166664 · Cited by 9,699
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Belin J., 2011, Cahiers du GREThA
- 10.2307/259056 · DOI
- European Commission, 2011, Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment, Special Eurobarometer, 365
- European Commission, 2017, What is an SME? [WWW document]
- Fombrun C. J., 1996, Reputation
- Ghisetti C., 2013, INGENIO (CSIC‐UPV) working paper series
- Markard J., 2010, Technological innovation systems and the resource based view—Resources at the firm, network and system level
- Nonaka I., 1991, The knowledge‐creating company, Harvard Business Review, 96, 96
- Nunnally J. C., 1978, Mc Graw‐Hill publ co, psychometric theory
- OECD, 2012, The future of eco‐innovation: The role of business models in green transformation
- Penrose E., 1959, The theory of the growth of the firm
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Innovation and the circular economy: A systematic literature review
Suchek, N., Fernandes, C., Kraus, S., Filser, M., & Sjögrén, H. (2021) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2834 · Cited by 686
Isensee, C., Teuteberg, F., Griese, K., & Topi, C. (2020) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122944 · Cited by 691
Lüdeke‐Freund, F. (2020) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2396 · Cited by 502
Kristoffersen, E., Mikalef, P., Blomsma, F., & Li, J. (2021) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108205 · Cited by 463
Sudusinghe, J. I., & Seuring, S. A. (2021) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108402 · Cited by 404
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)
- 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
- 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
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- 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
