Innovation for Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Empirical Evidence from the Bioeconomy Sector in Poland
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. The Role of Sustainable Entrepreneurship in Sustainable Development
2.2. Eco-innovation for Sustainable Entrepreneurship in the Bioeconomy Sector
- the use of advanced knowledge about genes and cellular processes for the programming and development of new processes and new products;
- the use of renewable biomass and efficient bioprocesses to stimulate sustainable production;
- integrating of biotechnological knowledge for use in many sectors.
- Ensuring food security,
- Sustainable management of natural resources,
- Reducing dependence on non-renewable resources,
- Mitigation of climate change and adaptation to it by developing production systems with lower greenhouse gas emissions,
- Creating jobs and maintaining the competitiveness of the European economy.
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Sample Selection and Research Tools
3.2. Data Analysis Methods
- maximising public-private entrepreneurial discoveries;
- providing operational facilities that allow for continuous observation, exploration and evaluation;
- encouraging companies to share their knowledge of markets and technologies with public administration;
- supporting the early development of priority actions;
- spreading knowledge so as to generate more experiments and discoveries, and build critical mass.
- interviews—direct in-depth interviews with entrepreneurs (managers, directors, presidents, business owners) carried out by experts on the basis of an interview questionnaire consisting of qualitative and quantitative questions;
- smart labs—a series of meetings designed to quickly test the potential of the area of business in which participants (about 15–20 people representing enterprises, scientists, business environment institutions, and administration) declare their will to meet again;
- crowdsourcing—campaign aimed at involving enterprises to co-create innovation policy and enable dialogue between the private and public sectors;
- innovation maps—data collection and analysis based on applications for co-financing innovative activities, which are a source of information on business and technological trends.
4. Research Results
4.1. Drivers of Innovation
4.2. Barriers to Company Innovativeness
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Allen, John C., and Stephanie Malin. 2008. Green Entrepreneurship: A Method for Managing Natural Resources? Society and Natural Resources 21: 828–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Archer, Ian. 2016. Driving the development of the bioeconomy through innovation. New Biotechnology 33: S67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babbie, Earl R. 2013. The Practice of Social Research, 13th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Bauer, Fredric, Teis Hansen, and Hans Hellsmark. 2018. Innovation in the bioeconomy—Dynamics of biorefinery innovation networks. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 30: 935–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BECOTEPS. 2010. Bio-Economy Technology Platforms. Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/90971/factsheet/en (accessed on 24 May 2019).
- Belz, Frank Martin, and Julia Katharina Binder. 2017. Sustainable Entrepreneurship: A Convergent Process Model. Business Strategy and the Environment 26: 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berger, Elisabeth S. C., and Andreas Kuckertz. 2016. Complexity in Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Technology Research: Applications of Emergent and Neglected Methodsfgf Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Cham: Springer International Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Bitat, Abdelfettah. 2012. Impact of Eco-Innovation on Firms Competitiveness. An Empirical Study Based on Mannheim Innovation Panel. Available online: http://www.memoireonline.com/05/12/5870/Impact-of-eco-innovation-on-firms-competitiveness-An-empirical-study-based-on-Mannheim-Innovation.html (accessed on 24 May 2019).
- Borys, Tadeusz. 2011. Sustainable Development—How to Recognize Integrated Order. Problemy Ekorozwoju 6: 75–81. [Google Scholar]
- Bossle, Marilia Bonzanini, Marcia Dutra De Barcellos, and Luciana Marques Vieira. 2016. Why food companies go green? The determinant factors to adopt eco-innovations. British Food Journal 118: 1317–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charles, David, and Katerina Ciampi Stancova. 2017. Entrepreneurial discovery process and research and technology organisations. In Governing Smart Specialisation. Edited by Dimitrios Kyriakou, Manuel Palazuelos Martínez, Inmaculada Periáñez-Forte and Alessandro Rainoldi. New York: Routledge, vol. 106, pp. 80–94. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, Boyd, and Monika I. Winn. 2007. Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing 22: 29–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colombo, Laura Antonella, Mario Pansera, and Richard Owen. 2019. The discourse of eco-innovation in the European Union: An analysis of the Eco-Innovation Action Plan and Horizon 2020. Journal of Cleaner Production 214: 653–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Covin, Jeffrey G., and Morgan P. Miles. 1999. Corporate Entrepreneurship and the Pursuit of Competitive Advantage. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 23: 47–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dean, Thomas, and Jacob T Castillo. 2013. Sustainable Venturing: Entrepreneurial Opportunity in the Transition to A Sustainable Economy, International ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Ltd. [Google Scholar]
- Dean, Thomas, and Jeffery S. McMullen. 2007. Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing 22: 50–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Denzin, Norman K., and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2005. Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed. Edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 1–32. [Google Scholar]
- Dinu, Vasile. 2019. The Transition to Bioeconomy. Amfiteatru Economic 21: 5–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EC. 2010. Europe 2020. A Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth, COM(2010) 2020. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF (accessed on 27 May 2019).
- EC. 2012. Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, com(2012) 60 Final. Brussels: European Commission. [Google Scholar]
- EC. 2018. A Sustainable Bioeconomy for Europe: Strengthening the Connection between Economy, Society and the Environment. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. [Google Scholar]
- Flick, Uwe. 2009. An Introduction to Qualitative Research, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd. [Google Scholar]
- Hadynski, Jakub. 2015. The bio-based economy in the European Union’s development strategies. Economic and Regional Studies 8: 46–54. [Google Scholar]
- Hall, Jeremy K., Gregory A. Daneke, and Michael J. Lenox. 2010. Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing 25: 439–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hockerts, Kai, and Rolf Wüstenhagen. 2010. Greening Goliaths versus emerging Davids—Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing 25: 481–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horisch, Jacob. 2015. The Role of Sustainable Entrepreneurship in Sustainability Transitions: A Conceptual Synthesis against the Background of the Multi-Level Perspective. Administrative Sciences 5: 286–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnston, Paul, Mark Everard, David Santillo, and Karl-Henrik Robèrt. 2007. Reclaiming the definition of sustainability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International 14: 60–66. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Kokoszka, Katarzyna, and Małgorzata Pink. 2017. Bioeconomy—Opportunities and Threats in Malopolska Voivodship (Poland). Paper Presented at the 8th International Scientific Conference Rural Development 2017, Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Lithuania, November 23–24. [Google Scholar]
- Korsgaard, Steffen, Alistair Anderson, and Johan Gaddefors. 2016. Entrepreneurship as re-sourcing Towards a new image of entrepreneurship in a time of financial, economic and socio-spatial crisis. Journal of Enterprising Communities-People and Places in the Global Economy 10: 178–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lehtonen, Olli, and Lasse Okkonen. 2013. Regional socio-economic impacts of decentralised bioeconomy. A case of Suutela wooden village. Environment Development Sustainability 15: 245–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leitão, João, Sónia de Brito, and Serena Cubico. 2019. Eco-Innovation Influencers: Unveiling the Role of Lean Management Principles Adoption. Sustainability 11: 2225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenox, Michael, and Jeffrey G. York. 2011. Environmental Entrepreneurship. In The Oxford Handbook of Business and the Natural Environment. Edited by Pratima Bansal and Andrew J. Hoffman. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Ligenzowska, Joanna. 2015. The Impact of Innovation on the development of the Małopolska Region. Research Papers of Wrocław University of Economics 394: 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Chin-Shien, Ruei-Yuan Chang, and Van Dang. 2015. An Integrated Model to Explain How Corporate Social Responsibility Affects Corporate Financial Performance. Sustainability 7: 8292–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maciejczak, Mariusz, and A. Auzina. 2016. Bioeconomy as a complex adaptive system. Economic Science for Rural Development: Rural Development and Entrepreneurship, Bioeconomy, Home Economics 41: 229–33. [Google Scholar]
- Malopolska. 2018. Małopolska Smart Specialisations—Guide. Available online: https://www.malopolska.pl/file/sites/Malopolska_smart_specialisations_guide.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2019).
- Mariussen, Åge, Seija Virkkala, Håkon Finne, and Tone Merethe Aasen. 2019. The Entrepreneurial Discovery Process and Regional Development: New Knowledge Emergence, Conversion and Exploitationregions and Cities 133. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melay, I., and S. Kraus. 2012. Green entrepreneurship: Definition and related concepts. International Journal of Strategic Management 12: 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Mieszkowski, Krzysztof, Dimitrios Kyriakou, Mauel Palazuelos Martinez, Inmaculada Perianez-Forte, and Alessandro Rainold. 2017. Impact of the entrepreneurial discovery process on the decentralisation of innovation policies in Central and Eastern European Member States. Governing Smart Specialisation 106: 201–25. [Google Scholar]
- Mulder, Karel F. 2007. Innovation for sustainable development: From environmental design to transition management. Sustainability Science 2: 253–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nagar, Ranita, Hitesh Thakkar, Srirang Sanjay Sapre, and Udit Nikhil Vyas. 2013. Enterprising a greener tomorrow: Role of ecopreneurs. Asian Resonance 2: 216–21. [Google Scholar]
- Newton, Lisa H. 2005. Business Ethics and the Natural Environment. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. 2009. The Bioeconomy to 2030: Designing a Policy Agenda. Paris: OECD. [Google Scholar]
- Porter, Michael E., and Claas Van der Linde. 1995. Toward a new conception of the environemnt: Competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9: 97–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rainey, David L. 2010. Sustainable Business Development: Inventing the Future Through Strategy, Innovation, and Leadership. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Redclift, Michael. 2005. Sustainable development (1987–2005)—An oxymoron comes of age. Sustainable Development 13: 212–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scarpellini, Sabina, Juan Aranda-Usón, Miguel Marco-Fondevila, Alfonso Aranda-Usón, and Eva Llera-Sastresa. 2016. Eco-innovation indicators for sustainable development: the role of the technology institutes. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development 10: 40–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schutte, Georg. 2018. What kind of innovation policy does the bioeconomy need? New Biotechnology 40: 82–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shepherd, Dean A., and Holger Patzelt. 2011. The New Field of Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Studying Entrepreneurial Action Linking “What Is to Be Sustained” With “What Is to Be Developed”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 35: 137–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shepherd, Dean A., and Holger Patzelt. 2013. Operational Entrepreneurship: How Operations Management Research Can Advance Entrepreneurship. Production and Operations Management 22: 1416–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smol, Marzena, Joanna Kulczycka, and Anna Avdiushchenko. 2017. Circular economy indicators in relation to eco-innovation in European regions. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 19: 669–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solaja, Oludele Mayowa. 2017. Ecopreneurship and Green Product Initiative (GPI): An Agenda for Nigeria’s Sustainable Development in the 21st Century. Studia i Materiały 1: 103–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thompson, John L., and Jonathan M. Scott. 2010. Environmental entrepreneurship: The sustainability challenge. In Institute of Small Business and Entrepreneurship Conference (Vol. Proceedings ISBE). London: Institute of Small Business and Entrepreneurship (ISBE). [Google Scholar]
- UN. 2015. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication (accessed on 15 May 2019).
- Urbaniec, Maria. 2015. Towards Sustainable Development through Eco-innovations: Drivers and Barriers in Poland. Economics and Sociology 8: 179–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Urbaniec, Maria. 2018. Sustainable entrepreneurship: Innovation-related activities in European enterprises. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 27: 1773–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vandermeulen, Valerie, Wolter Prins, Stephan Nolte, and Guido Van Huylenbroeck. 2011. How to measure the size of a bio-based economy: Evidence from Flanders. Biomass and Bioenergy 35: 4368–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vorgias, Constantinos E. 2018. Bioeconomy challenges and open issues. Journal of Biotechnology 280: S10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wagner, Marcus. 2009. Innovation and Competitive Advantages from the Integration of Strategic Aspects with Social and Environmental Management in European Firms. Business Strategy and the Environment 18: 291–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WCED. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Wield, David. 2013. Bioeconomy and the global economy: Industrial policies and bio-innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 25: 1209–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WorldBank. 2015. W kierunku Innowacji: Proces przedsiębiorczego odkrywania i analiza potrzeb 12 przedsiębiorstw w Polsce. Available online: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/805821467993730545/pdf/106148-REPLACEMENT-POLISH-v2-REPORT-Web.pdf (accessed on 15 April 2019).
- Wüstenhagen, Rolf. 2008. Sustainable Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. [Google Scholar]
- Żmija, Janusz, and Marta Czekaj. 2014. The Diversity of form production as the basis for the development of bio-economy in Malopolska provience. Economic and Regional Studies 7: 33–42. [Google Scholar]
Sections | Division No. | Division Name | Percentage Share |
---|---|---|---|
Section C: Manufacturing | Division 10 | Manufacture of food products | 6% |
Division 20 | Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products | 6% | |
Division 22 | Manufacture of rubber and plastic products | 16% | |
Division 28 | Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c. | 3% | |
Division 32 | Other manufacturing | 3% | |
Division 33 | Repair and installation of machinery and equipment | 6% | |
Section D: Electricity, gas steam and air conditioning supply | Division 35-1 | Electric power generation, transmission and distribution | 6% |
Division 35-2 | Manufacture of gas; distribution of gaseous fuels through mains | ||
Division 35-3 | Steam and air conditioning supply | ||
Section E: Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activities | Division 38 | Waste collection, treatment and disposal activities; materials recovery | 18% |
Section F: Construction | Division 43 | Specialized construction activities | 6% |
Section G: Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles | Division 46 | Wholesale trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles | 9% |
Section I: Accommodation and food service activities | Division 55 | Accommodation | 3% |
Section M: Professional, scientific and technical activities | Division 71 | Architectural and engineering activities; technical testing and analysis | 9% |
Division 72 | Scientific research and development | 15% | |
Section N: Administrative and support service activities | Division 81 | Services to buildings and landscape activities | 3% |
Section P: Education | Division 85 | Education | 3% |
Section Q: Human health and social work activities | Division 86 | Human health activities | 3% |
Section R: Arts entertainment and recreation | Division 90 | Creative, arts and entertainment activities | 3% |
Internal Factors | External Factors | |
---|---|---|
Motives | ● product quality, ● management’s attitude/mindset, ● employee initiatives | ● sources of funding, ● new market opportunities, ● customers and competition |
Barriers | ● technical constraints | ● access to finance ● legislation |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sołtysik, M.; Urbaniec, M.; Wojnarowska, M. Innovation for Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Empirical Evidence from the Bioeconomy Sector in Poland. Adm. Sci. 2019, 9, 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9030050
Sołtysik M, Urbaniec M, Wojnarowska M. Innovation for Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Empirical Evidence from the Bioeconomy Sector in Poland. Administrative Sciences. 2019; 9(3):50. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9030050
Chicago/Turabian StyleSołtysik, Mariusz, Maria Urbaniec, and Magdalena Wojnarowska. 2019. "Innovation for Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Empirical Evidence from the Bioeconomy Sector in Poland" Administrative Sciences 9, no. 3: 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9030050
APA StyleSołtysik, M., Urbaniec, M., & Wojnarowska, M. (2019). Innovation for Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Empirical Evidence from the Bioeconomy Sector in Poland. Administrative Sciences, 9(3), 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9030050