Call for papers
Title: Technology, stakeholder collaboration, and sustainable entrepreneurship in the SDGs
Prof. Abel Monfort
ESIC Business & Marketing School
Prof. Morgan P. Miles
Charles Sturt University, Australia
Prof. Maria Orero-Blat (Managing Guest Editor).
Universitat Politècnica de València
Background and Motivation
Policy initiatives such as the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) change the competitive and regulatory landscape for companies and entrepreneurs. The SDGs provide objectives that government, commerce, and civil society should pursue to create a just and sustainable future. The field of science, technology, and innovation (STI) can be leveraged through entrepreneurship to pursue the SDGs. In such a context, mechanisms must be established to facilitate cooperation between stakeholders and promote knowledge sharing and innovation. These factors are crucial for achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (Walsh et al., 2020).
Cooperation between stakeholders, including communities, investors, customers, suppliers, universities, industry, and governments, enhance the likelihood of effective innovations and the synergic relationships between these agents (Hernández-Trasobares & Murillo-Luna, 2020; Miles, Munilla and Darroch, 2006). As Sarasvathy and Venkataraman (2011: 122) note:
“Entrepreneurial action…is above all, interaction—interaction over time, between stakeholders, and through local transformations of every kind of environment imaginable…Only by conceptualizing entrepreneurship as a method can we hope to push its uses beyond technology commercialization and economic development and put it to work to build social innovations that make a positive difference in human development.”
Approaches to collaboration vary. For example, religion, conceived as a multi-faceted embodiment of a socially and politically relevant institution, also enables research on social values for sustainability through theories of social transformation (Ives & Kidwell, 2019). Buddhism provides the Faith Statement on Ecology (Faith in Conservation), which condemns actions such as polluting the environment, eating meat, and harming vegetation (Singh, 2015). Christianity, through Pope Francis, published the Encyclical Laudato Si’ (Francis, 2015), which reframes the need for sustainable entrepreneurship according to the Christian faith. Sachs (2017) compared the 2030 Agenda with the Laudato Si’, concluding that although they have different approaches, they agree on the need to reshape the global economic model, pursuing a green economy and a post-capitalist era with a more ethical responsibility at all levels. In short, collaboration between stakeholders is broad and can span multiple scenarios.
This special issue focuses on the interrelationships between STI, sustainable entrepreneurship, and stakeholders advancing the SDGs. Sustainability has increasingly become a leading motivation for opportunity-driven entrepreneurship (Cervelló-Royo et al., 2020). Sustainable entrepreneurship can be conceptualized as the process of discovering, evaluating, and exploiting opportunities that are environmentally, socially, and economically relevant (Dean & McMullen, 2007). Sustainable entrepreneurship pursues opportunities that enhance the ecological and social environment (Shepherd & Patzelt, 2011) to generate economic and social benefits (Messeni-Petruzzelli et al., 2019; Verreine et al., 2013). In the context of the SDGs, sustainable entrepreneurs and corporate entrepreneurs can play an important role.
Adopting an STI approach in a sustainable entrepreneurship project requires an understanding that technology needs stakeholder support throughout the ecosystem to advance SDGs. “These MoIs [Methods of Implementation] include creating a market space for SDG oriented production, finance, public and private partnerships, data, and lots of other capacities to ensure STI is more pervasive in its diffusion and assist more effectively with the implementation of SDGs across nations” (Walsh et al., 2020, p. 6). Venkataraman (1997: 120) notes that the creation of a market is entrepreneurship as it “seeks to understand how opportunities to bring into existence ‘future’ goods and services are discovered, created and exploited, by whom and with what consequences.”
However, the literature pays little attention to how STI initiatives are enhanced by knowledge sharing and collaboration between actors (Berawi, 2017). Other noteworthy aspects are the business models behind sustainable entrepreneurship projects. Establishing these business models is especially relevant and involves multiple institutional logics and coordination with different and diverse stakeholders (Schneider and Clauß, 2020).
In this context, sustainability-focused entrepreneurial projects can take substantial measures to reduce their ecological footprint. They can do so through impactful technological innovations (Cadez et al., 2019; Wahyuni & Ratnatunga, 2015) or systems based on so-called impression management responses, which seek the support of stakeholders (Talbot and Boiral, 2015) through initiatives such as the establishment of foundations or charity donations (Monfort et al., 2021). Likewise, research on sustainable entrepreneurship must consider contextual moderating effects such as pressure from stakeholders in a given location, government relations, and institutional voids (Ge et al., 2019). Additionally, the collaboration between SMEs and multinationals creates business and innovation opportunities for both. SMEs can overcome resource constraints, while larger firms are exposed to more innovative ideas (Hora et al., 2018). However, there remains a need to articulate such partnerships' benefits in terms of their sustainability and innovation. For instance, Tian et al. (2019) suggest that business-government relations stimulate firm innovation and that new forms of cooperation, such as renewable energy cooperatives, can address a communities’ local needs and global environmental problems (Heras-Saizarbitoria et al., 2018; Tarhan, 2015).
Likewise, research on the diffusion of bottom-up sustainable innovation is limited (Feola & Butt, 2017). A lack of research considers strategic and multi-stakeholder approaches to sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainable corporate entrepreneurship limit our understanding. Despite the increase in publications on the SDGs, the literature pays little attention to emerging digital paradigms to deal with the complexities, limitations, and research gaps of the 2030 Agenda (Del Río Castro et al., 2021) in the context of sustainability.
These illustrations offer just a few examples of the wide range of actors capable of interacting with sustainable entrepreneurs. We are only beginning to understand STI-based entrepreneurial solutions, such as exploiting energy-efficiency opportunities and the relationship between finance, profitability, and STI-based enterprises (Mazzucato & Semieniuk, 2018). For investors, recent research has highlighted crowdfunding as an alternative source of funding to develop energy technologies (Bento et al., 2019). We have an underdeveloped understanding of how SMEs are coping with being suppliers in the value chains of SDG-focused multinationals (Stekelorum et al., 2020), given that SMEs can profitably reduce greenhouse gas emissions in their supply chains (Su & Moaniba, 2017).
These cases reflect just some examples in terms of technology management, innovation, and sustainable entrepreneurship that depend on the relationships between multiple actors to achieve the 2030 Agenda's success.
Objectives and Topics
Although these issues are on multiple actors’ sustainability agendas, we know little about sustainable entrepreneurship’s environmental and economic consequences and the strategic decisions that give rise to impact partnerships to promote sustainability within the 2030 Agenda framework. Future research can uncover sustainability and technology management innovations by new actors in different industries and companies that encourage internal sustainable entrepreneurship.
We also need to know whether the new sustainable technologies developed by new entrepreneurs and corporate entrepreneurs can be transferred across the globe, especially considering the differences in each region's development processes. Consequently, it is crucial to know which technologies are being created by sustainable entrepreneurs and to understand how the creation and management of inclusive, sustainable, and useful governance technologies are being encouraged through collaboration between actors at all levels.
This call for papers aims to attract studies that examine various aspects of sustainable entrepreneurial innovations and technology management under the principle of cross-collaboration. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, the following topics:
We are particularly interested in studies that examine the economic and environmental impacts of sustainable entrepreneurship in new sectors and practices that represent significant innovative improvements on what is already known about sustainability management in organizations. The approach should consider the collaboration and relationships between actors to pursue the 2030 Agenda.
We look forward to receiving rigorous and impactful research that provides novel insights into the interface between sustainable entrepreneurship and technological innovations within and beyond work. The research may be empirical (including quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods approaches) or conceptual. We also accept review articles that include a compelling summary of the state-of-the-art in a well-researched area of a topic related to the special issue.
For guidelines to prepare your manuscript and for manuscript submission, please visit:
All submissions should be made at the following address:
Bento, N., Gianfrate, G., & Groppo, S. V. (2019). Do crowdfunding returns reward risk? Evidence from clean-tech projects. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.007
Berawi, M. A. (2017). The Role of Technology in Achieving Sustainable Development Goals. International Journal of Technology, 8(3), 362. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v8i3.9296
Cadez, S., Czerny, A., Letmathe, P., 2019. Stakeholder pressures and corporate climate change mitigation strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2070
Cervelló-Royo, R., Moya-Clemente, I., Perelló-Marín, M. R., & Ribes-Giner, G. (2020). Sustainable development, economic and financial factors, that influence the opportunity-driven entrepreneurship. A fsQCA approach. Journal of Business Research, 115, 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.031
Covin, J. & Miles, M. (1999). “Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3): 47-63.
Dean, T. J., & McMullen, J. S. (2007). Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 50–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.09.003
Del Río Castro, G., González Fernández, M. C., & Uruburu Colsa, Á. (2021). Unleashing the convergence amid digitalization and sustainability towards pursuing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A holistic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, 122204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122204
Feola, G., & Butt, A. (2017). The diffusion of grassroots innovations for sustainability in Italy and Great Britain: an exploratory spatial data analysis. The Geographical Journal, 183(1), 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12153
Francis, P. (2015). Laudato si: On care for our common home. Our Sunday Visitor.
Ge, J., Carney, M., & Kellermanns, F. (2019). Who Fills Institutional Voids? Entrepreneurs’ Utilization of Political and Family Ties in Emerging Markets. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 43(6), 1124–1147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258718773175
Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., Sáez, L., Allur, E., & Morandeira, J. (2018). The emergence of renewable energy cooperatives in Spain: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 94, 1036–1043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.06.049
Hernández-Trasobares, A., & Murillo-Luna, J. L. (2020). The effect of triple helix cooperation on business innovation: The case of Spain. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 161(September), 120296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120296
Hora, W., Gast, J., Kailer, N., Rey-Marti, A., & Mas-Tur, A. (2018). David and Goliath: causes and effects of coopetition between start-ups and corporates. Review of Managerial Science, 12(2), 411–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-017-0273-9
Ives, C. D., & Kidwell, J. (2019). Religion and social values for sustainability. Sustainability Science, 14(5), 1355-1362.
Mazzucato, M., & Semieniuk, G. (2018). Financing renewable energy: Who is financing what and why it matters. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 127, 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.021
Messeni-Petruzzelli, A., Natalicchio, A., Panniello, U., & Roma, P. (2019). Understanding the crowdfunding phenomenon and its implications for sustainability. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.10.002
Miles, M. P., Munilla, L., Darroch, J. (2006). The role of strategic conversations with stakeholders in the formation of Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy, Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 195-205.
Monfort, A., Villagra, N., & Sánchez, J. (2021). Economic impact of corporate foundations: An event analysis approach. Journal of Business Research, 122, 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.046
Sachs, W. (2017). The sustainable development goals and Laudato si’: varieties of post-development?. Third World Quarterly, 38(12), 2573-2587.
Sarasvathy, S. D. & Venkataraman, S. (2011). Entrepreneurship as method: questions for an entrepreneurial future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 113–135 doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00425.x
Schneider, S., Clauß, T., 2020. Business Models for Sustainability: Choices and Consequences. Organization and Environment, 33, 384–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619854217
Shepherd, D. A., & Patzelt, H. (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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00426.x
Singh, V. (2015). Ecological Conservation and Buddhism. International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity, 6(7), 2277 – 9809.
Stekelorum, R., Laguir, I., & ElBaz, J. (2020). Can you hear the Eco? From SME environmental responsibility to social requirements in the supply chain. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 158, 120169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120169
Su, H.-N., & Moaniba, I. M. (2017). Does innovation respond to climate change? Empirical evidence from patents and greenhouse gas emissions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 122, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.04.017
Talbot, D., & Boiral, O., 2015. Strategies for Climate Change and Impression Management: A Case Study Among Canada’s Large Industrial Emitters. Journal of Business Ethics 132, 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2322-5
Tarhan, M. D. (2015). Renewable Energy Cooperatives: A Review of Demonstrated Impacts and Limitations. The Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, 4(1), 104–120. https://doi.org/10.5947/jeod.2015.006
Tian, Y., Wang, Y., Xie, X., Jiao, J., & Jiao, H. (2019). The impact of business-government relations on firms’ innovation: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.02.007
Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth, 3(1), 119-138.
Verreynne, M. L., Miles, M. P., & Harris, C. (2013). A short note on entrepreneurship as method: A social enterprise perspective, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 9(1), 113-128.
Walsh, P. P., Murphy, E., & Horan, D. (2020). The role of science, technology and innovation in the UN 2030 agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 154(January), 119957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119957
Wahyuni, D., Ratnatunga, J., 2015. Carbon strategies and management practices in an uncertain carbonomic environment - Lessons learned from the coal-face. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 397–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.095
Connect to the Division