Summary Sustainable Entrepreneurship
Table of Contents
Week 1 – Business models and co-evolution ......................................................................3
Hockerts, K. and Wustenhagen, R. (2010) Greening Goliaths versus Emerging Davids –
Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship.
Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 481-492. .............................................................................. 4
Bocken, N.M.P., Short, S.W., Rana, P. and Evans, S. (2014) A literature and practice review to
develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42-56. ....... 7
Week 2 – The Circular Economy.......................................................................................12
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., and Hekkert, M. (2017) Conceptualizing the circular economy: an
analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 127, 221-232. ...................... 12
Veleva, V. and Bodkin, G. (2018) Corporate-entrepreneur collaborations to advance a circular
economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188, 20-37 ............................................................... 17
Week 3 – Sustainability and Stakeholders .......................................................................20
Freudenreich, B., Lüdeke-Freund, F. and Schaltegger, S. (2019) A Stakeholder Theory Perspective
on Business Models: Value Creation for Sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 166, 3-18. ... 20
Velter, M.G.E., Bitzer, V., Bocken, N.M.P., and Kemp, R. (2020) Sustainable business model
innovation: the role of boundary work for multi-stakeholder alignment. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 247, 119497. ....................................................................................................... 24
Week 4 – Creating Opportunities ....................................................................................28
Pacheco, D.F., Dean, T.J. and Payne, D.S. (2010) Escaping the green prison: entrepreneurship
and the creation of opportunities for sustainable development. Journal of Business Venturing,
25, 464-480. ........................................................................................................................... 28
York, J.G. and Venkataraman, S. (2010) The entrepreneur- environment nexus: uncertainty,
innovation and allocation. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 449-463. ................................... 32
Holzmann, P. and Gregori, P. (2023) The promise of digital technologies for sustainable
entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of
Information Management, 68 ................................................................................................ 34
Week 5 – Resources and Identity .....................................................................................36
Lyons, T. S., & Kickul, J. R. (2013). The social enterprise financing landscape: the lay of the land
and new research on the horizon. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 3 (2) 147-159. .............. 36
York, J.G., O’Neil, I. and Sarasvathy, S.D. (2016) Exploring environmental entrepreneurship:
identity coupling, venture goals, and stakeholder incentives. Journal of Management Studies,
53:5, 695-737. ........................................................................................................................ 42
Parrish, B.D. (2010) Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: principles of organization design.
Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 510-523. ............................................................................ 44
Guest Lecture Jeroen van Nistelrooij – Driving the transition to a circulair economy
(Philips) ..........................................................................................................................47
1
,Week 6 – Sustainability as strategy .................................................................................52
Klewitz, J. and Hansen, E.G. (2014) Sustainability-oriented innovation of SME’s: a systematic
review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 57-75. ................................................................... 52
Schaltegger, S. and Wagner, M. (2011) Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability
innovation: categories and interaction. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20, 222-237. . 57
Week 7 – Corporates: shareholders and greenwashing ....................................................62
Flammer, C. (2013) Corporate social responsibility and shareholder reaction: the environmental
awareness of investors. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 3, 758-781. ............................. 62
Siano, A., Vollero, A., Conte, F. and Amabile, S. (2017) “More than words”: Expanding the
taxonomy of greenwashing after the Volkswagen scandal. Journal of Business Research, 71, 27-
37. ......................................................................................................................................... 67
2
,Week 1 – Business models and co-evolution
In this course: social and environmental sustainability.
Look at solutions and specific focus will be businesses. How can businesses help to impose limits on
ourselves or create positive impact instead of negative impact?
Triple Bottom Line Business Model Canvas (TBLBMC) is a useful tool to:
- Design social and sustainable business models
- Analyze the connections and interdependencies between the cells
- Identify what positive or negative impact a business is creating
- Stimulate the consequences of changes in the value proposition
- Communicate the business model
In other words, the TBLBMC can help companies identify opportunities for innovation in their
business model.
Should be achieved by
2030 and are still core.
3
, Hockerts, K. and Wustenhagen, R. (2010) Greening Goliaths versus Emerging
Davids – Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable
entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 481-492.
This paper analyses the interplay between Greening Goliaths and Emerging Davids and theorizes
about how it is their compounded impact that promotes the sustainable transformation of
industries.
In the article, firms are divided into 2 categories:
- Greening Goliaths: represent larger incumbent firms using incremental innovation to bring
about sustainable development
- Emerging Davids: start-up and young companies introducing disruptive innovations
Both can play a role in contributing towards sustainable transformation but they do so in different
ways → for future success the interaction of the two types is needed.
Characteristics of Davids and Goliaths
Criteria Davids Goliaths
Age Rather new Old, incumbent
Size Small (relatively small market Large (relatively large market
share) share)
Objective function Social and/or environmental Economic objectives (always)
objectives at least as dominating,
important as economic social/environmental
objectives objectives complementary
Goliaths are good at making profit, so it’s hard for them to value the social/environmental aspect
relatively more than before.
Het gaat bij dit vak om businesses die profit willen/moeten maken om te overleven, dus Davids
hebben ook economic objectives.
Innovations can be disruptive or incremental. According to Hockerts & Wüstenhagen only Davids
introducing disruptive innovations can be classified as demonstrating sustainable entrepreneurship.
Davids Goliaths
Disruptive innovation (when it Sustainable entrepreneurship Sustainable corporate
disrupts the status quo) entrepreneurship
Incremental innovation Bioneers, social bricoleurs Sustainability management
systems, CSR, eco-efficiency
Adding disruptive innovation to the characteristics of Emerging Davids (rather new, small and social
and/or environmental objectives are at least as important as economic objectives).
4
Table of Contents
Week 1 – Business models and co-evolution ......................................................................3
Hockerts, K. and Wustenhagen, R. (2010) Greening Goliaths versus Emerging Davids –
Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship.
Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 481-492. .............................................................................. 4
Bocken, N.M.P., Short, S.W., Rana, P. and Evans, S. (2014) A literature and practice review to
develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42-56. ....... 7
Week 2 – The Circular Economy.......................................................................................12
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., and Hekkert, M. (2017) Conceptualizing the circular economy: an
analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 127, 221-232. ...................... 12
Veleva, V. and Bodkin, G. (2018) Corporate-entrepreneur collaborations to advance a circular
economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188, 20-37 ............................................................... 17
Week 3 – Sustainability and Stakeholders .......................................................................20
Freudenreich, B., Lüdeke-Freund, F. and Schaltegger, S. (2019) A Stakeholder Theory Perspective
on Business Models: Value Creation for Sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 166, 3-18. ... 20
Velter, M.G.E., Bitzer, V., Bocken, N.M.P., and Kemp, R. (2020) Sustainable business model
innovation: the role of boundary work for multi-stakeholder alignment. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 247, 119497. ....................................................................................................... 24
Week 4 – Creating Opportunities ....................................................................................28
Pacheco, D.F., Dean, T.J. and Payne, D.S. (2010) Escaping the green prison: entrepreneurship
and the creation of opportunities for sustainable development. Journal of Business Venturing,
25, 464-480. ........................................................................................................................... 28
York, J.G. and Venkataraman, S. (2010) The entrepreneur- environment nexus: uncertainty,
innovation and allocation. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 449-463. ................................... 32
Holzmann, P. and Gregori, P. (2023) The promise of digital technologies for sustainable
entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of
Information Management, 68 ................................................................................................ 34
Week 5 – Resources and Identity .....................................................................................36
Lyons, T. S., & Kickul, J. R. (2013). The social enterprise financing landscape: the lay of the land
and new research on the horizon. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 3 (2) 147-159. .............. 36
York, J.G., O’Neil, I. and Sarasvathy, S.D. (2016) Exploring environmental entrepreneurship:
identity coupling, venture goals, and stakeholder incentives. Journal of Management Studies,
53:5, 695-737. ........................................................................................................................ 42
Parrish, B.D. (2010) Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: principles of organization design.
Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 510-523. ............................................................................ 44
Guest Lecture Jeroen van Nistelrooij – Driving the transition to a circulair economy
(Philips) ..........................................................................................................................47
1
,Week 6 – Sustainability as strategy .................................................................................52
Klewitz, J. and Hansen, E.G. (2014) Sustainability-oriented innovation of SME’s: a systematic
review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 57-75. ................................................................... 52
Schaltegger, S. and Wagner, M. (2011) Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability
innovation: categories and interaction. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20, 222-237. . 57
Week 7 – Corporates: shareholders and greenwashing ....................................................62
Flammer, C. (2013) Corporate social responsibility and shareholder reaction: the environmental
awareness of investors. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 3, 758-781. ............................. 62
Siano, A., Vollero, A., Conte, F. and Amabile, S. (2017) “More than words”: Expanding the
taxonomy of greenwashing after the Volkswagen scandal. Journal of Business Research, 71, 27-
37. ......................................................................................................................................... 67
2
,Week 1 – Business models and co-evolution
In this course: social and environmental sustainability.
Look at solutions and specific focus will be businesses. How can businesses help to impose limits on
ourselves or create positive impact instead of negative impact?
Triple Bottom Line Business Model Canvas (TBLBMC) is a useful tool to:
- Design social and sustainable business models
- Analyze the connections and interdependencies between the cells
- Identify what positive or negative impact a business is creating
- Stimulate the consequences of changes in the value proposition
- Communicate the business model
In other words, the TBLBMC can help companies identify opportunities for innovation in their
business model.
Should be achieved by
2030 and are still core.
3
, Hockerts, K. and Wustenhagen, R. (2010) Greening Goliaths versus Emerging
Davids – Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable
entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 481-492.
This paper analyses the interplay between Greening Goliaths and Emerging Davids and theorizes
about how it is their compounded impact that promotes the sustainable transformation of
industries.
In the article, firms are divided into 2 categories:
- Greening Goliaths: represent larger incumbent firms using incremental innovation to bring
about sustainable development
- Emerging Davids: start-up and young companies introducing disruptive innovations
Both can play a role in contributing towards sustainable transformation but they do so in different
ways → for future success the interaction of the two types is needed.
Characteristics of Davids and Goliaths
Criteria Davids Goliaths
Age Rather new Old, incumbent
Size Small (relatively small market Large (relatively large market
share) share)
Objective function Social and/or environmental Economic objectives (always)
objectives at least as dominating,
important as economic social/environmental
objectives objectives complementary
Goliaths are good at making profit, so it’s hard for them to value the social/environmental aspect
relatively more than before.
Het gaat bij dit vak om businesses die profit willen/moeten maken om te overleven, dus Davids
hebben ook economic objectives.
Innovations can be disruptive or incremental. According to Hockerts & Wüstenhagen only Davids
introducing disruptive innovations can be classified as demonstrating sustainable entrepreneurship.
Davids Goliaths
Disruptive innovation (when it Sustainable entrepreneurship Sustainable corporate
disrupts the status quo) entrepreneurship
Incremental innovation Bioneers, social bricoleurs Sustainability management
systems, CSR, eco-efficiency
Adding disruptive innovation to the characteristics of Emerging Davids (rather new, small and social
and/or environmental objectives are at least as important as economic objectives).
4
