Page 118 - Hojnik, Jana. 2017. In Persuit of Eco-innovation. Drivers and Consequences of Eco-innovation at Firm Level. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 118
In Pursuit of Eco-innovation
Cost savings
Cost savings are a more significant determinant of environmental inno-
vations than of other innovations (Horbach 2008). Furthermore, cost
savings (especially material and energy savings) were found to strong-
ly trigger eco-innovations in Germany and in France (Belin et al. 2011).
They play a very important role as a trigger of eco-innovation (Horbach
et al. 2012); although some researchers (Triguero et al. 2013) found their
effect to be significant only for eco-process innovations. Cost savings
constitute one of the main criteria for decisions to invest in eco-innova-
tions, although there are no immediate visible results; therefore, the lack
of knowledge about the potential of technologies, material and energy
savings can be seen as a barrier to the implementation of eco-innovations
(Pereira and Vence 2012). In addition, cost savings are most closely asso-
118 ciated with the most advanced eco-innovations, because they are derived
from elimination or re-use of waste; hence, they appear to have a lower
potential for creating savings for companies with less advanced eco-inno-
vations (Demirel and Kesidou 2011).
Regarding the expected benefits captured from successful implemen-
tation of eco-innovation, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4: There is a positive and significant relationship
between expected benefits and companies’ implementation of
eco-innovation.
Competition and eco-innovation
Another important driver that triggers eco-innovation is competition
(Bansal and Roth 2000; Dangelico and Pontrandolfo 2010; Yalabik and
Fairchild 2011; Inoue et al. 2013; Li 2014). Competitiveness has been de-
fined as “the potential for ecological responsiveness to improve long-term
profitability” (Bansal and Roth 2000, 724). In addition, improved com-
petitiveness encompasses energy and waste management, source reduc-
tions resulting in a higher output for the same inputs (process intensifica-
tion), eco-labeling and green marketing and, finally, the development of
eco-products (Bansal and Roth 2000). Firms motivated by competitive-
ness expect that their implemented ecological responsiveness will lead to
a sustained advantage and, consequently, to improved long-term profita-
bility (Bansal and Roth 2000). Therefore, competition can be considered
an effective driver of environmental innovation when dealing with en-
vironmentally sensitive customers (Yalabik and Fairchild 2011). In our
study, our hypothesis related to competition as a driver of eco-innova-
Cost savings
Cost savings are a more significant determinant of environmental inno-
vations than of other innovations (Horbach 2008). Furthermore, cost
savings (especially material and energy savings) were found to strong-
ly trigger eco-innovations in Germany and in France (Belin et al. 2011).
They play a very important role as a trigger of eco-innovation (Horbach
et al. 2012); although some researchers (Triguero et al. 2013) found their
effect to be significant only for eco-process innovations. Cost savings
constitute one of the main criteria for decisions to invest in eco-innova-
tions, although there are no immediate visible results; therefore, the lack
of knowledge about the potential of technologies, material and energy
savings can be seen as a barrier to the implementation of eco-innovations
(Pereira and Vence 2012). In addition, cost savings are most closely asso-
118 ciated with the most advanced eco-innovations, because they are derived
from elimination or re-use of waste; hence, they appear to have a lower
potential for creating savings for companies with less advanced eco-inno-
vations (Demirel and Kesidou 2011).
Regarding the expected benefits captured from successful implemen-
tation of eco-innovation, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4: There is a positive and significant relationship
between expected benefits and companies’ implementation of
eco-innovation.
Competition and eco-innovation
Another important driver that triggers eco-innovation is competition
(Bansal and Roth 2000; Dangelico and Pontrandolfo 2010; Yalabik and
Fairchild 2011; Inoue et al. 2013; Li 2014). Competitiveness has been de-
fined as “the potential for ecological responsiveness to improve long-term
profitability” (Bansal and Roth 2000, 724). In addition, improved com-
petitiveness encompasses energy and waste management, source reduc-
tions resulting in a higher output for the same inputs (process intensifica-
tion), eco-labeling and green marketing and, finally, the development of
eco-products (Bansal and Roth 2000). Firms motivated by competitive-
ness expect that their implemented ecological responsiveness will lead to
a sustained advantage and, consequently, to improved long-term profita-
bility (Bansal and Roth 2000). Therefore, competition can be considered
an effective driver of environmental innovation when dealing with en-
vironmentally sensitive customers (Yalabik and Fairchild 2011). In our
study, our hypothesis related to competition as a driver of eco-innova-
