Increasing regulatory demands and pressure from stakeholders have increased the imperative of firms to incorporate the concept of sustainability in their business strategies. Here, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting and circular economy ( CE ) policies have become one of the primary ways in which companies strive to improve performance; the evidence on this point is inconsistent, especially in the context of nonhomogeneous institutional setups. This paper examines the effect of ESG disclosure and CE practices on firm performance in eight G20 economies in the interval of 2015–2023 and the moderating function of regulatory strength. The analysis uses a firm‐level panel dataset of 2880 observations to estimate cross‐sectional dependence, cross‐sectional heterogeneity, and endogeneity through the application of second‐generation econometric methods, namely, the cross‐sectionally augmented autoregressive distributed lag (CS‐ARDL) model and the system generalized method of moments (GMM). The findings show that both ESG disclosure and CE practices have a positive and significant impact on the performance of a firm. More precisely, a 1% shift in ESG disclosure relates to a one‐percentage‐point increase in firm performance, whereas CE adoption implies a 0.18% increment. Further, regulatory strength greatly intensifies these effects and provides support to the institutional theory with the demonstration that regulation increases the returns of performance to sustainability strategies. Sustainability practices and the performance of firms also have a bidirectional causality, which further indicates a self‐reinforcing relation. The results suggest that the transparency of ESG and circular economy operations is not an ethical liability but a strategic resource, the efficiency of which is determined by the quality of regulations. Sustainable value creation can be improved by policymakers and managers by matching regulatory frameworks with the sustainability integration at the firm level.
{"title":"Green Strategies and Firm Performance in the SAGE‐G20 Economies: ESG Disclosure, Circular Economy, and Regulatory Strength","authors":"Zhaoyang Lu, Martijn Sander","doi":"10.1002/bse.70658","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70658","url":null,"abstract":"Increasing regulatory demands and pressure from stakeholders have increased the imperative of firms to incorporate the concept of sustainability in their business strategies. Here, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting and circular economy ( <jats:sc>CE</jats:sc> ) policies have become one of the primary ways in which companies strive to improve performance; the evidence on this point is inconsistent, especially in the context of nonhomogeneous institutional setups. This paper examines the effect of ESG disclosure and <jats:sc>CE</jats:sc> practices on firm performance in eight G20 economies in the interval of 2015–2023 and the moderating function of regulatory strength. The analysis uses a firm‐level panel dataset of 2880 observations to estimate cross‐sectional dependence, cross‐sectional heterogeneity, and endogeneity through the application of second‐generation econometric methods, namely, the cross‐sectionally augmented autoregressive distributed lag (CS‐ARDL) model and the system generalized method of moments (GMM). The findings show that both ESG disclosure and <jats:sc>CE</jats:sc> practices have a positive and significant impact on the performance of a firm. More precisely, a 1% shift in ESG disclosure relates to a one‐percentage‐point increase in firm performance, whereas <jats:sc>CE</jats:sc> adoption implies a 0.18% increment. Further, regulatory strength greatly intensifies these effects and provides support to the institutional theory with the demonstration that regulation increases the returns of performance to sustainability strategies. Sustainability practices and the performance of firms also have a bidirectional causality, which further indicates a self‐reinforcing relation. The results suggest that the transparency of ESG and circular economy operations is not an ethical liability but a strategic resource, the efficiency of which is determined by the quality of regulations. Sustainable value creation can be improved by policymakers and managers by matching regulatory frameworks with the sustainability integration at the firm level.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sabrina Mili, Robert Mai, Rolf Wüstenhagen, Moritz Loock
Firms are increasingly looking into carbon dioxide removal (CDR), a set of options to take past emissions of greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere. Often two basic categories of CDR are distinguished: nature‐based solutions, such as planting trees or restoring wetlands, and technology‐based solutions, such as various forms of carbon capture and storage. What drives managers' decisions to purchase a particular CDR credit? A choice experiment with N = 378 climate managers in three European countries conducting 4158 experimental choices explores factors determining their procurement. Results show that, on average, respondents prefer nature‐based solutions over technology‐based climate solutions. Furthermore, we identify a moderating influence of decision styles: The preference for nature‐based solutions is more pronounced among managers who adopt a more holistic decision style, whereas managers who focus on a single attribute are relatively more likely to prefer technological solutions. Our findings have important implications for further research on the determinants of climate‐related managerial decision making.
{"title":"Back to Nature or Technology to the Rescue? Climate Managers' Preferences for Investment in Carbon Dioxide Removal","authors":"Sabrina Mili, Robert Mai, Rolf Wüstenhagen, Moritz Loock","doi":"10.1002/bse.70715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70715","url":null,"abstract":"Firms are increasingly looking into carbon dioxide removal (CDR), a set of options to take past emissions of greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere. Often two basic categories of CDR are distinguished: nature‐based solutions, such as planting trees or restoring wetlands, and technology‐based solutions, such as various forms of carbon capture and storage. What drives managers' decisions to purchase a particular CDR credit? A choice experiment with <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 378 climate managers in three European countries conducting 4158 experimental choices explores factors determining their procurement. Results show that, on average, respondents prefer nature‐based solutions over technology‐based climate solutions. Furthermore, we identify a moderating influence of decision styles: The preference for nature‐based solutions is more pronounced among managers who adopt a more holistic decision style, whereas managers who focus on a single attribute are relatively more likely to prefer technological solutions. Our findings have important implications for further research on the determinants of climate‐related managerial decision making.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374291","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sherif El‐Halaby, Hala M. G. Amin, Amr S. Abdallah, Hussein Mohsen Saber Ahmed, Ahmed A. Elamer
Despite the growing importance of corporate responses to climate change within sustainable business strategy and environmental governance, the extant literature on corporate climate change disclosure and performance (CCDP) remains fragmented and unevenly developed. Existing reviews have either focused narrowly on disclosure practices or provided outdated frameworks, limiting understanding of how governance, firm‐level characteristics, and institutional environments shape climate‐related disclosure, performance, and management outcomes. To address this gap, we conduct a systematic literature review combining bibliometric and content analysis of 548 peer‐reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2025 extracted from Scopus and Web of Science databases. Our analysis reveals a bifurcated research examining the following: (1) antecedents of carbon and climate change disclosure (CCCD) and carbon and climate change performance and management (CCCPM), including corporate governance mechanisms, firm‐specific attributes, stakeholder pressures, and policy contexts; (2) the consequences of CCCD and CCCPM, encompassing a broad set of financial, market‐based, accounting, innovation, and environmental outcomes. Building on these insights, we develop a novel integrative framework that distinguishes between CCCD and CCCPM, while mapping their multi‐level determinants and diverse firm outcomes. This framework advances theory in environmental accountability, corporate governance, and business strategy by consolidating previously siloed research and identifying critical gaps for future inquiry. The review offers implications for policymakers and practitioners to enhance transparency, credibility, and effectiveness of corporate climate‐related strategies and disclosures.
尽管在可持续商业战略和环境治理中，企业应对气候变化的重要性日益增加，但现有的关于企业气候变化披露和绩效（CCDP）的文献仍然支离破碎，发展不均衡。现有的评估要么狭隘地关注披露实践，要么提供了过时的框架，限制了对治理、公司层面特征和制度环境如何影响与气候相关的披露、绩效和管理成果的理解。为了解决这一差距，我们对2000年至2025年间发表的548篇同行评议文章进行了系统的文献综述，结合文献计量学和内容分析，这些文章摘自Scopus和Web of Science数据库。我们的分析揭示了一个分两部分的研究，考察了以下内容：(1)碳和气候变化披露（CCCD）和碳和气候变化绩效与管理（CCCPM）的前因，包括公司治理机制、企业特定属性、利益相关者压力和政策背景；(2) CCCD和CCCPM的后果，包括一系列广泛的金融、市场、会计、创新和环境结果。在这些见解的基础上，我们开发了一个新的综合框架，区分CCCD和CCCPM，同时绘制了它们的多层次决定因素和不同的公司结果。该框架通过巩固以前孤立的研究和确定未来调查的关键差距，推进了环境问责制、公司治理和商业战略方面的理论。该综述为决策者和从业者提高企业气候相关战略和披露的透明度、可信度和有效性提供了启示。
{"title":"Antecedents and Consequences of Climate Change Disclosure and Performance in the Context of Sustainable Development: A Systematic Literature Review","authors":"Sherif El‐Halaby, Hala M. G. Amin, Amr S. Abdallah, Hussein Mohsen Saber Ahmed, Ahmed A. Elamer","doi":"10.1002/bse.70690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70690","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the growing importance of corporate responses to climate change within sustainable business strategy and environmental governance, the extant literature on corporate climate change disclosure and performance (CCDP) remains fragmented and unevenly developed. Existing reviews have either focused narrowly on disclosure practices or provided outdated frameworks, limiting understanding of how governance, firm‐level characteristics, and institutional environments shape climate‐related disclosure, performance, and management outcomes. To address this gap, we conduct a systematic literature review combining bibliometric and content analysis of 548 peer‐reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2025 extracted from Scopus and Web of Science databases. Our analysis reveals a bifurcated research examining the following: (1) antecedents of carbon and climate change disclosure (CCCD) and carbon and climate change performance and management (CCCPM), including corporate governance mechanisms, firm‐specific attributes, stakeholder pressures, and policy contexts; (2) the consequences of CCCD and CCCPM, encompassing a broad set of financial, market‐based, accounting, innovation, and environmental outcomes. Building on these insights, we develop a novel integrative framework that distinguishes between CCCD and CCCPM, while mapping their multi‐level determinants and diverse firm outcomes. This framework advances theory in environmental accountability, corporate governance, and business strategy by consolidating previously siloed research and identifying critical gaps for future inquiry. The review offers implications for policymakers and practitioners to enhance transparency, credibility, and effectiveness of corporate climate‐related strategies and disclosures.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"252 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Grounded in knowledge‐based dynamic capabilities theory, this study investigates how green knowledge sharing influences green innovation through customer involvement moderated mediating mechanisms of knowledge creation and innovation capability. Employing a multimethod research design, this study tested for moderated‐mediation relationships and a necessary condition analysis (NCA) by employing primary data from manufacturing firms in Pakistan. Results illustrate that both innovation capability and knowledge creation mediate the relationship between green knowledge sharing and green innovation, whereas customer involvement weakens the green knowledge sharing–innovation capability and green knowledge sharing–knowledge creation relationships. These findings make several theoretical and managerial contributions that inform practitioners regarding the various mechanisms through which firms can achieve green innovation.
{"title":"Explaining Green Innovation From a Knowledge‐Based Dynamic Capabilities Perspective","authors":"Nosheen Qadeer, Shazia Nauman, Mohsin Malik","doi":"10.1002/bse.70721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70721","url":null,"abstract":"Grounded in knowledge‐based dynamic capabilities theory, this study investigates how green knowledge sharing influences green innovation through customer involvement moderated mediating mechanisms of knowledge creation and innovation capability. Employing a multimethod research design, this study tested for moderated‐mediation relationships and a necessary condition analysis (NCA) by employing primary data from manufacturing firms in Pakistan. Results illustrate that both innovation capability and knowledge creation mediate the relationship between green knowledge sharing and green innovation, whereas customer involvement weakens the green knowledge sharing–innovation capability and green knowledge sharing–knowledge creation relationships. These findings make several theoretical and managerial contributions that inform practitioners regarding the various mechanisms through which firms can achieve green innovation.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374308","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
George Obeng Dankwah, Hayford Amegbe, Dafleen Addrah, Oghogho Destina Ovuakporie, Lydia Nyankom Takyi, Samuel Adomako
This study examines how sustainability orientation shapes entrepreneurial performance in bottom‐of‐the‐pyramid (BoP) markets by theorizing responsible entrepreneurship as a central mechanism and BoP orientation as a contextual contingency. Using survey data from 283 small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) in Ghana, we integrate perspectives from sustainability, entrepreneurship, and inclusive‐market research to explain how firms pursuing sustainability create economic and social value under severe resource constraints. Our findings show that sustainability orientation promotes responsible entrepreneurship and that this behavioral pathway translates into stronger entrepreneurial performance. This mediating effect highlights responsible entrepreneurship as a key strategic channel through which sustainability‐driven firms realize superior outcomes. We also find that BoP orientation attenuates the performance benefits associated with responsible entrepreneurship. This moderating effect suggests a tension between deep social inclusivity and financial returns in low‐income contexts. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.
{"title":"Sustainability Orientation and Entrepreneurial Performance in Resource‐Constrained Contexts","authors":"George Obeng Dankwah, Hayford Amegbe, Dafleen Addrah, Oghogho Destina Ovuakporie, Lydia Nyankom Takyi, Samuel Adomako","doi":"10.1002/bse.70738","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70738","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines how sustainability orientation shapes entrepreneurial performance in bottom‐of‐the‐pyramid (BoP) markets by theorizing responsible entrepreneurship as a central mechanism and BoP orientation as a contextual contingency. Using survey data from 283 small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) in Ghana, we integrate perspectives from sustainability, entrepreneurship, and inclusive‐market research to explain how firms pursuing sustainability create economic and social value under severe resource constraints. Our findings show that sustainability orientation promotes responsible entrepreneurship and that this behavioral pathway translates into stronger entrepreneurial performance. This mediating effect highlights responsible entrepreneurship as a key strategic channel through which sustainability‐driven firms realize superior outcomes. We also find that BoP orientation attenuates the performance benefits associated with responsible entrepreneurship. This moderating effect suggests a tension between deep social inclusivity and financial returns in low‐income contexts. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Laxman Tandan, Rudra P. Pradhan, Bhoj Raj Nyaupane
This study presents a comprehensive systematic literature review (SLR) to consolidate, synthesize, and critically appraise the prevailing trends; uncover emerging themes; and identify the future research avenues at the intersection of geopolitical risk (GPR) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) dynamics. Following a structured approach based on PRISMA guideline, a total of 71 peer‐reviewed articles published up to 2025 were systematically retrieved from the Scopus and Web of Science databases. The review has been organized into two main segments: a descriptive bibliometric analysis and thematic synthesis of the existing literature. The five major interdependent themes for geopolitical and ESG dynamics are ESG performance, green finance, renewable energy, climate change, and financial stability. The analysis reveals a growing academic interest in the multifaceted impacts of GPR on ESG dynamics and GPR, as a significant impact on ESG dynamics. Finally, this study offers key research gaps in the existing literature and proposes directions for future research agendas, while underscoring the theoretical, practical, and policy implications for investors, policymakers, corporate managers, and academicians.
本研究提出了一个全面的系统文献综述（SLR）来巩固、综合和批判性地评价当前的趋势；发现新兴主题；并确定地缘政治风险（GPR）与环境、社会和治理（ESG）动态交叉的未来研究途径。遵循基于PRISMA指南的结构化方法，系统地从Scopus和Web of Science数据库中检索了截至2025年发表的71篇同行评议文章。该审查分为两个主要部分：描述性文献计量分析和现有文献的专题综合。地缘政治和ESG动态的五大相互依存主题是ESG绩效、绿色金融、可再生能源、气候变化和金融稳定。分析显示，学术界对探地雷达对ESG动态的多方面影响越来越感兴趣，而探地雷达对ESG动态的影响也越来越大。最后，本研究提出了现有文献的主要研究空白，并为未来的研究议程提出了方向，同时强调了对投资者、政策制定者、企业管理者和学者的理论、实践和政策意义。
{"title":"Geopolitical Risks and ESG Dynamics: Trends, Themes, and Future Research Trajectory","authors":"Laxman Tandan, Rudra P. Pradhan, Bhoj Raj Nyaupane","doi":"10.1002/bse.70659","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70659","url":null,"abstract":"This study presents a comprehensive systematic literature review (SLR) to consolidate, synthesize, and critically appraise the prevailing trends; uncover emerging themes; and identify the future research avenues at the intersection of geopolitical risk (GPR) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) dynamics. Following a structured approach based on PRISMA guideline, a total of 71 peer‐reviewed articles published up to 2025 were systematically retrieved from the Scopus and Web of Science databases. The review has been organized into two main segments: a descriptive bibliometric analysis and thematic synthesis of the existing literature. The five major interdependent themes for geopolitical and ESG dynamics are ESG performance, green finance, renewable energy, climate change, and financial stability. The analysis reveals a growing academic interest in the multifaceted impacts of GPR on ESG dynamics and GPR, as a significant impact on ESG dynamics. Finally, this study offers key research gaps in the existing literature and proposes directions for future research agendas, while underscoring the theoretical, practical, and policy implications for investors, policymakers, corporate managers, and academicians.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Giulio Fusco, Yari Vecchio, Margherita Masi, Michele Borgia
Achieving the European Union climate‐neutrality objectives requires metrics that jointly assess farm productivity and greenhouse gas emissions at a granular level. However, harmonized evidence for benchmarking the productivity–emissions nexus of Italian farms remains limited. This study quantifies undesirable outputs, measured as CO 2 ‐equivalent emissions, generated by Italian farms and derives attainable eco‐efficiency benchmarks. We apply a farm‐level, nonseparable undesirable‐output Data Envelopment Analysis to Italian Farm Accountancy Data Network microdata (approximately 61,000 observations) over the period 2014–2021, treating value added and emissions as jointly produced. Two complementary efficiency measures are computed: an output‐oriented efficiency score for value added and a bad‐output‐oriented efficiency score for emissions abatement. These are combined into a farm‐size–resolved synthetic indicator capturing attainable improvements in both economic and environmental performance. The results reveal a clear divergence between economic and environmental performance, along with substantial heterogeneity across territories and farm‐size classes. The proposed indicator supports policy targeting, benchmarking, and performance monitoring by identifying where the largest attainable emissions reductions can be achieved for a given level of value added.
{"title":"Productivity and Emissions in Italian Agriculture: A Farm‐Level Efficiency Analysis","authors":"Giulio Fusco, Yari Vecchio, Margherita Masi, Michele Borgia","doi":"10.1002/bse.70713","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70713","url":null,"abstract":"Achieving the European Union climate‐neutrality objectives requires metrics that jointly assess farm productivity and greenhouse gas emissions at a granular level. However, harmonized evidence for benchmarking the productivity–emissions nexus of Italian farms remains limited. This study quantifies undesirable outputs, measured as CO <jats:sub>2</jats:sub> ‐equivalent emissions, generated by Italian farms and derives attainable eco‐efficiency benchmarks. We apply a farm‐level, nonseparable undesirable‐output Data Envelopment Analysis to Italian Farm Accountancy Data Network microdata (approximately 61,000 observations) over the period 2014–2021, treating value added and emissions as jointly produced. Two complementary efficiency measures are computed: an output‐oriented efficiency score for value added and a bad‐output‐oriented efficiency score for emissions abatement. These are combined into a farm‐size–resolved synthetic indicator capturing attainable improvements in both economic and environmental performance. The results reveal a clear divergence between economic and environmental performance, along with substantial heterogeneity across territories and farm‐size classes. The proposed indicator supports policy targeting, benchmarking, and performance monitoring by identifying where the largest attainable emissions reductions can be achieved for a given level of value added.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study examines the impact of environmental policy stringency on the development of environmental technologies by re‐evaluating the Porter hypothesis within a panel data framework. The analysis covers 18 European Union countries over the period 2000–2020 and employs advanced panel data estimation techniques to identify long‐run relationships among the variables. The results reveal nonlinear and heterogeneous effects between environmental policy stringency and environmental innovation. Specifically, the marginal effect of policy stringency follows a U‐shaped pattern, indicating that moderate levels of regulation stimulate environmental innovation, whereas excessive stringency reduces innovation returns. These findings suggest that while the Porter hypothesis holds under certain conditions, its validity is nuanced and highly dependent on the optimal design of environmental regulations. Moreover, the results show that corporate taxation, in its current structure, constrains the effectiveness of the Porter mechanism by dampening firms' incentives to invest in environmental technologies. Consequently, revising corporate tax rates to better support green innovation could enhance the effectiveness of environmental regulations and strengthen innovation‐driven competitiveness.
{"title":"Environmental Policy Stringency and the Development of Environmental Technologies: Revisiting Porter Hypothesis","authors":"Metin Doğan, Aykut Arslan, Abdülkadir Akturan","doi":"10.1002/bse.70666","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70666","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the impact of environmental policy stringency on the development of environmental technologies by re‐evaluating the Porter hypothesis within a panel data framework. The analysis covers 18 European Union countries over the period 2000–2020 and employs advanced panel data estimation techniques to identify long‐run relationships among the variables. The results reveal nonlinear and heterogeneous effects between environmental policy stringency and environmental innovation. Specifically, the marginal effect of policy stringency follows a U‐shaped pattern, indicating that moderate levels of regulation stimulate environmental innovation, whereas excessive stringency reduces innovation returns. These findings suggest that while the Porter hypothesis holds under certain conditions, its validity is nuanced and highly dependent on the optimal design of environmental regulations. Moreover, the results show that corporate taxation, in its current structure, constrains the effectiveness of the Porter mechanism by dampening firms' incentives to invest in environmental technologies. Consequently, revising corporate tax rates to better support green innovation could enhance the effectiveness of environmental regulations and strengthen innovation‐driven competitiveness.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marina Fernandes Aguiar, Daniel Guzzo, Janaina Mascarenhas, Daniela C. A. Pigosso
Product‐service systems (PSS) have been considered a promising approach to operationalizing the circular economy. Although many studies have outlined the potential sustainability gains of PSS solutions, it is still unclear what factors drive PSS adoption and how behavioral changes result in rebound effects, undermining their potential sustainability gains. This study proposes a conceptual framework to scaffold the understanding of the links between PSS adoption, PSS performance, and rebound effects. Theoretical and empirical lenses were applied, encompassing a systematic literature review (SLR), nine semi‐structured interviews with PSS providers, and iterative deductive and inductive analyses. Eighteen behavioral factors that influence PSS adoption and thirteen indicators to measure PSS performance were identified. The conceptual framework links PSS adoption and PSS performance through rebound mechanisms, highlighting the double‐edged nature of PSS: while user behavior directly influences the adoption and the performance of the PSS, rebound mechanisms could also be activated, offsetting its performance.
{"title":"Navigating the Double Edge of Product‐Service Systems: User Behavior, Adoption, and Rebound Effects","authors":"Marina Fernandes Aguiar, Daniel Guzzo, Janaina Mascarenhas, Daniela C. A. Pigosso","doi":"10.1002/bse.70679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70679","url":null,"abstract":"Product‐service systems (PSS) have been considered a promising approach to operationalizing the circular economy. Although many studies have outlined the potential sustainability gains of PSS solutions, it is still unclear what factors drive PSS adoption and how behavioral changes result in rebound effects, undermining their potential sustainability gains. This study proposes a conceptual framework to scaffold the understanding of the links between PSS adoption, PSS performance, and rebound effects. Theoretical and empirical lenses were applied, encompassing a systematic literature review (SLR), nine semi‐structured interviews with PSS providers, and iterative deductive and inductive analyses. Eighteen behavioral factors that influence PSS adoption and thirteen indicators to measure PSS performance were identified. The conceptual framework links PSS adoption and PSS performance through rebound mechanisms, highlighting the double‐edged nature of PSS: while user behavior directly influences the adoption and the performance of the PSS, rebound mechanisms could also be activated, offsetting its performance.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374301","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ann‐Sophie Finner, Linda Sagnier Eckert, Orestis Terzidis
Circular startups are increasingly recognized as key drivers in the transition toward a circular economy. Yet the business models (BMs) through which these startups operationalize circularity remain poorly understood, limiting the ability of entrepreneurial ecosystem actors to offer effective support. This study addresses this gap by developing a taxonomy that captures how startups embed circularity into their BMs, across value proposition, value creation, and value network. Drawing on a dataset of 125 startups and grounded in BM theory, it combines conceptual synthesis, empirical coding, and expert evaluation. The resulting taxonomy comprises 10 dimensions and 48 characteristics. Our findings show how circular startups integrate environmental and social value creation, adopt ownership and sales models aligned with circular goals, and rely on cross‐sector collaboration to compensate for limited infrastructures. The taxonomy offers entrepreneurial ecosystem actors a practical tool to assess startup needs, identify circularity gaps, and design targeted support strategies.
{"title":"Empowering Circular Startups: Unveiling the Blueprint for Circular Business Models","authors":"Ann‐Sophie Finner, Linda Sagnier Eckert, Orestis Terzidis","doi":"10.1002/bse.70660","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70660","url":null,"abstract":"Circular startups are increasingly recognized as key drivers in the transition toward a circular economy. Yet the business models (BMs) through which these startups operationalize circularity remain poorly understood, limiting the ability of entrepreneurial ecosystem actors to offer effective support. This study addresses this gap by developing a taxonomy that captures how startups embed circularity into their BMs, across value proposition, value creation, and value network. Drawing on a dataset of 125 startups and grounded in BM theory, it combines conceptual synthesis, empirical coding, and expert evaluation. The resulting taxonomy comprises 10 dimensions and 48 characteristics. Our findings show how circular startups integrate environmental and social value creation, adopt ownership and sales models aligned with circular goals, and rely on cross‐sector collaboration to compensate for limited infrastructures. The taxonomy offers entrepreneurial ecosystem actors a practical tool to assess startup needs, identify circularity gaps, and design targeted support strategies.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：