Sustainable Value Creation Through Business Models: The What, the Who and the How

Purpose: We discuss traditional assumptions about value creation and confront these with current viewson sustainable value creation (SVC). Against this backdrop, the articles contained in the special issue‘Sustainable Value Creation Through Business Models’ are introduced, and their contributions to the explorationof SVC are highlighted.*Methodology: Assumptions about value creation are summarised and turned into an initial theoreticalframework concerning the what, who and how of value creation. This framework is used to structure anddiscuss current views on SVC that have been presented in the sustainable business model (SBM) litterature.Findings: The proposed framework identifies cornerstones for theorising about SVC in regard to thewhat, who and how of value creation. A main finding is that, although value creation and SVC are widelydiscussed in the literature, there are huge gaps in terms of the who, what and how of value creation, particularlyin the SBM field.Research implications and limitations: The major implication is that the SBM discourse still lacks clearSVC concepts, and closing this gap may enable the creation of a new multi- and interdisciplinary researchprogramme. A major limitation of this paper is the mainly theoretical and preliminary nature of the presenteddiscussion and framework.Originality and value: There is a surprising dearth of definitions and concepts of value creation in boththe traditional business model and SBM research. The originality and value of this paper lie in its potentialto stimulate further research on the theoretical foundations of SVC. Various theoretical propositionsare developed, including notions such as stakeholder-responsive and relational interpretations of valuecreation

Toward Collaborative Cross-Sector Business Models for Sustainability

Sustainability challenges typically occur across sectoral boundaries, calling the state, market, andcivil society to action. While consensus exists on the merits of cross-sector collaboration, ourunderstanding of whether and how it can create value for various, collaborating stakeholders is still limited. This Special Issue focuses on how new combined knowledge on cross-sector collaboration and business models for sustainability can inform the academic and practitioner debates about sustainability challenges and solutions. We discuss how cross-sector collaboration can play an important role for the transition to new and potentially sustainability-driving business models given that value creation, delivery and capture of organizations are intimately related to the collaborative ties with their stakeholders. Sustainable alternatives to conventional business models tend to adopt a more holistic perspective of business by broadening the spectrum of solutions and stakeholders and, when aligned with cross-sector collaboration, can contribute new ways of addressing the wicked sustainability problems humanity faces

Unterschätzter Nachhaltigkeitstransformator von Märkten und Regionen

Die Erwartungen an nachhaltiges Unternehmertum sind groß. Es soll Bestehendes kreativ zerstören, indem nachhaltig Neues gestaltet und auf dem Markt durchgesetzt wird. Nachhaltigkeitstransformationen bedeuten Risiken für viele bisherige Geschäftsbereiche, aber auch Chancen für nachhaltige Unternehmer

Fostering Cross-Disciplinarity in Business Model Research

Purpose: We illustrate how cross-disciplinarity in business model research (multi-, inter- and transdisciplinarity) can help scholars overcome silo-building and span disciplinary boundaries. The seven articles contained in the special issue ‘Fostering Cross-Disciplinarity in Business Model Research’ are summarised, and the authors’ perspectives on the phenomena studied as well as the theories and methods adopted are portrayed. Methodology: We provide literature-based definitions of cross-disciplinary research modes and discuss their potential for business model research informed by insights from the seven special issue articles. Findings: There is much variety regarding the theories applied in business model research. These include design, imprinting, information asymmetry, paradox theories and many more. This variety illustrates that traditional domains, such as organisation, management and entrepreneurship studies, can be extended in creative ways, and hence can be equipped to deal with emerging and complex issues such as sustainability, circular economy, data management and base-of-thepyramid entrepreneurship. Interdisciplinarity seems to be well developed regarding the use of theories, but more must follow in terms of research methods and collaboration formats. Research Implications and Limitations: The common understanding of the potential and importance of cross-disciplinarity can be considered the major implication of this special issue. Beyond this, further critical reflection is required. Important questions remain open, primarily regarding research methods and collaboration formats. This editorial article reflects the perspectives of both the guest editors and the authors in this special issue. The presented understandings of cross-disciplinary business model research and implications for its future are of a preliminary nature. Originality and Value: Business model research is growing rapidly and scholars from various fields contribute to expanding our knowledge. An explicit focus on the potential of multi-, inter- and transdisciplinary research approaches is missing so far

Photovoltaic power plants: a multicriteria approach to investment decisions and a case study in western Spain

his paper proposes a compromise programming (CP) model to help investors decide whether to construct photovoltaic power plants with government financial support. For this purpose, we simulate an agreement between the government, who pursues political prices (guaranteed prices) as low as possible, and the project sponsor who wants returns (stochastic cash flows) as high as possible. The sponsor s decision depends on the positive or negative result of this simulation, the resulting simulated price being compared to the effective guaranteed price established by the country legislation for photovoltaic energy. To undertake the simulation, the CP model articulates variables such as ranges of guaranteed prices, tech- nical characteristics of the plant, expected energy to be generated over the investment life, investment cost, cash flow probabilities, and others. To determine the CP metric, risk aver- sion is assumed. As an actual application, a case study on photovoltaic power investment in Extremadura, western Spain, is developed in detail.Garcia-Bernabeu, A.; Benito Benito, A.; Bravo Selles, M.; Pla Santamaría, D. (2015). Photovoltaic power plants: a multicriteria approach to investment decisions and a case study in western Spain. Annals of Operations Research. 1-12. doi:10.1007/s10479-015-1836-2S112Andrews, R. W., Pollard, A., & Pearce, J. M. (2012). Improved parametric empirical determination of module short circuit current for modelling and optimization of solar photovoltaic systems. Solar Energy, 86(9), 2240–2254.Anwar, Y., & Mulyadi, M. S. (2011). Income tax incentives on renewable energy industry: Case of geothermal industry in USA and Indonesia. African Journal of Business Management, 5(31), 12264–12270.Aouni, B., & Kettani, O. (2001). Goal programming model: A glorious history and a promising future. European Journal of Operational Research, 133(2), 225–231.Ballestero, E. (1997). Selecting the CP metric: A risk aversion approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 97(3), 593–596.Ballestero, E. (2000). Project finance: A multicriteria approach to arbitration. Journal of Operational Research Society, 51, 183–197.Ballestero, E. (2007). Compromise programming: A utility-based linear-quadratic composite metric from the trade-off between achievement and balanced (non-corner) solutions. European Journal of Operational Research, 182(3), 1369–1382.Ballestero, E., Pérez-Gladish, B., Arenas-Parra, M., & BilbaoTerol, A. (2009). Selecting portfolios given multiple Eurostoxx-based uncertainty scenarios: A stochastic goal programming approach from fuzzy betas. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 47(1), 59–70.Ballestero, E., & Plà-Santamaría, D. (2003). Portfolio selection on the Madrid exchange: A compromise programming model. International Transactions in Operational Research, 10(1), 33–51.Ballestero, E., & Pla-Santamaria, D. (2004). Selecting portfolios for mutual funds. Omega, 32(5), 385–394.Ballestero, E., & Pla-Santamaria, D. (2005). Grading the performance of market indicators with utility benchmarks selected from Footsie: A 2000 case study. Applied Economics, 37(18), 2147–2160.Ballestero, E., & Romero, C. (1996). Portfolio selection: A compromise programming solution. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47, 1377–1386.Bastian-Pinto, C., Brandão, L., & de Lemos Alves, M. (2010). Valuing the switching flexibility of the ethanol–gas flex fuel car. Annals of Operations Research, 176(1), 333–348.Branker, K., Pathak, M., & Pearce, J. M. (2011). A review of solar photovoltaic levelized cost of electricity. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(9), 4470–4482.Casares, F., Lopez-Luque, R., Posadillo, R., & Varo-Martinez, M. (2014). Mathematical approach to the characterization of daily energy balance in autonomous photovoltaic solar systems. Energy, 72, 393–404.Chatterji, A. K., Levine, D. I., & Toffel, M. W. (2009). How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility? Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(1), 125–169.Copeland, T. E., & Weston, J. (1988). Financial theory and corporate policy. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.Gallagher, K. S. (2013). Why & how governments support renewable energy. Daedalus, 142(1), 59–77.García-Cascales, M. S., Lamata, M. T., & Sánchez-Lozano, J. M. (2012). Evaluation of photovoltaic cells in a multi-criteria decision making process. Annals of Operations Research, 199(1), 373–391.Gupta, S. (2012). Financing renewable energy. In F. L. Toth (Ed.), Energy for development (pp. 171–186). Springer.Karaarslan, A. (2012). Obtaining renewable energy from piezoelectric ceramics using Sheppard–Taylor converter. International Review of Electrical Engineering, 7(2), 3949–3956.Koellner, T., Weber, O., Fenchel, M., & Scholz, R. (2005). Principles for sustainability rating of investment funds. Business Strategy and the Environment, 14(1), 54–70.Lorenzo, E., & Navarte, L. (2000). On the usefulness of stand-alone PV sizing methods. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, 8(4), 391–409.Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Loock, M. (2011). Debt for brands: Tracking down a bias in financing photovoltaic projects in Germany. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(12), 1356–1364.Mavrotas, G., Diakoulaki, D., & Capros, P. (2003). Combined MCDA-IP approach for project selection in the electricity market. Annals of Operations Research, 120(1–4), 159–170.Mendez-Rodriguez, P., Garcia Bernabeu, A., Hilario, A., & Perez-Gladish, B. (2013). Some effects on the efficient frontier of the investment strategy: A preliminary approach. Recta, 14, 131–144.Michelson, G., Wailes, N., Van Der Laan, S., & Frost, G. (2004). Ethical investment processes and outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), 1–10.Mills, S. J. (1994). Project finance for renewable energy. Renewable energy, 5(1–4), 700–708.ORourke, A. (2003). The message and methods of ethical investment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11(6), 683–693.Pla-Santamaria, D., & Bravo, M. (2013). Portfolio optimization based on downside risk: A mean-semivariance efficient frontier from Dow Jones blue chips. Annals of Operations Research, 205(1), 189–201.Richter, N. (2009). Renewable project finance options: ITC, PTC, or cash grant? Power, 153(5), 90–92.Schrader, U. (2006). Ignorant advice-customer advisory service for ethical investment funds. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(3), 200–214.Sitarz, S. (2013). Compromise programming with tehebycheff norm for discrete stochastic orders. Annals of Operations Research, 211(1), 433–446.van de Kaa, G., Rezaei, J., Kamp, L., & de Winter, A. (2014). Photovoltaic technology selection: A fuzzy MCDM approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 32, 662–670.Yaqub, M., Shahram Sarkni, P., & Mazzuchi, T. (2012). Feasibility analysis of solar photovoltaic commercial power generation in California. Engineering Management Journal, 24(4), 36–49.Yazdani-Chamzini, A., Fouladgar, M. M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Moini, S. H. H. (2013). Selecting the optimal renewable energy using multi criteria decision making. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 14(5), 957–978.Yu, P. (1985). Multiple criteria decision making: Concepts, techniques and extensions. New York: Springer.Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple criteria decision making (Vol. 25). New York: McGraw-Hill.Zhao, R., Shi, G., Chen, H., Ren, A., & Finlow, D. (2011). Present status and prospects of photovoltaic market in China. Energy Policy, 39(4), 2204–2207

Closed-Loop supply chains in circular economy business models

With the emergence of the circular economy (CE) approach into business models, there is need for deeper understanding of resource loops activities and how current supply chains can support the development of emerging CE business models. However, there is still limited research addressing the conceptualization of closed loops in the supply chain literature. This work addresses this research gap and proposes a typology for closed loops that is independent from the type of product under concern. Our findings suggest that there are two types of closed-loop supply chains in circular business models. Further work is envisaged to understand how companies can effectively develop their closed-loop supply chains as part of their transformation towards a more circular business model

Governing sustainability transitions through business model innovation:Towards a systems understanding

This paper examines the role of innovative business models in the transformation of socio-technical systems. Focusing on decentralised energy technologies, we explore business model innovation in the context of a transition towards a more sustainable energy system. We conduct an empirical study of two Energy Services Company (ESCo) models for the deployment of combined heat and power with district heating (CHP/DH) infrastructure in the UK. Based on these case studies we illustrate the different ways in which Local Authorities develop business models to create and capture value from more efficient resource use and to deploy sustainable technologies. Drawing from systems theories in the business model and socio-technical literatures, we analyse the interfaces between business models, energy infrastructure and institutions. We propose that a systems based approach to the analysis of business models as embedded in their socio-technical contexts can offer new insights into the dynamics and governance of sustainability transitions

Towards a conceptual framework of business models for sustainability

Theorists and practitioners highlight the importance of business for progress in sustainable consumption and production (SCP). In this context business models are discussed as meta factors that can support the adoption of cleaner products and processes, sustainable supply chains and further contributions towards SCP. The article is about business model innovation and the creation of private and public benefits. From a strategy perspective business model innovation is an approach to design, implement and change business models to create and secure competitive advantage. It is supposed that business models can also support eco-innovations. If companies subscribe to sustainability strategies, their business models can help bridging technological innovations, organizational aspects and market positions. Furthermore, the business model itself can become subject to eco-innovation and thus support the realization of business cases for sustainability. The article follows a theoretical, deductive approach. A conceptual framework is developed that combines sustainability strategies, eco-innovation, the role of business models and pivotal ideas about value creation with regard to private and public benefits. This approach is discussed as essential driver of eco-innovations. Starting with sufficiency, efficiency and consistency strategies helps identifying primary challenges and is assumed to be the obvious first step towards a broader research agenda on \u91business models for sustainability\u92. The framework includes definitions such as \u91business model eco-innovation\u92 and \u91extended customer value\u92 and propositions about how these concepts interrelate. It allows for developing further theoretical and empirical research topics. The review shows that the state-of-the-art literature is far from offering such an agenda