Bankrupting Nature: Denying our Planetary Boundaries by Andres Wijkman and Johan Rockström emerges from the original report of The Club of Rome’s The Limits to Growth authored by Meadows and colleagues in 1972. This book demonstrates that an economy built on the continuous expansion of material consumption is utterly not sustainable. Based on the increased evidence of an uncanny correlation between escalating rates of global economic growth and environmental degradation, this book continues to raise worldwide awareness of environmental problems created as a result of anthropogenic activities. Bankrupting Nature demonstrates that political leaders are still in deep denial about the magnitude of global environmental challenges and resource constraints facing the world. The authors state that the challenges of sustainability cannot be met by simply tinkering with the current economic system, but will require major changes in the way members of political and corporate elites and the general public perceive and address environmental and social issues. As reported in a recent press release by The Club of Rome (2012), this volume lays out a blue-‐print for a radically new economic paradigm that links economics with ecology, arguing that this is the only way to generate growth in the future. https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
We aim to understand how actors respond to field logic plurality and maintain legitimacy through business model innovation. Drawing on a longitudinal field study in the fashion industry, we traced how de novo and incumbent firms incorporate circular logics in business models (for sustainability) and uncover how the intersection between issue and exchange fields creates institutional complexity and experimental spaces for business model innovation. Our findings showed a shift in the discourse on circular logic that diverted attention and resources from materials innovation (e.g., recycling) to business model innovation (e.g., circular business models). By juxtaposing institutional complexity and external pressure to maintain legitimacy, we derived four strategic business model innovation responses—preserve, detach, integrate and extend—that illuminate how actors leverage shifting logics and innovate extant business models (for sustainability). We make novel contributions to the literature on organizational fields, business models for sustainability, and business model innovation.
We aim to understand the interaction between shifting organizational field logics and field actors’ responses to reconcile logic plurality and maintain legitimacy through business model innovation. Drawing on a multimethod, longitudinal field study in the fashion industry, we traced how de novo and incumbent firms integrate circular logics in business models (for sustainability) and uncover how productive tensions in field logics lead to experimental spaces for business model innovation. Our findings showed a shift in the discourse on circular logic that diverted attention and resources from materials innovation (e.g. recycling) to business model innovation (e.g. circular business models). By juxtaposing the degree of field logic tension and the degree of business model innovation, we derive four types of business model hybridization responses that actors engaged in to maintain legitimacy – constrained, limited, integrated, and expanded. Our study generates new insights on business models for sustainability as vehicles for organizational field change.
