Pressure on natural resources, unsustainable production and consumption, inequality and a growing global population lie at the base of the big challenges that people face. This chapter investigates how businesses can take responsibility in dealing with these challenges by means of frugal business model innovation. The notion of ‘frugal innovation’ was first introduced in the context of emerging markets, giving non-affluent customers opportunities to consume affordable products and services suited to their needs. Business modelling with a frugal mindset opens up a path that provides significant value while minimizing the use of resources such as energy, capital and time. Business models require intentional design if they are to deliver aspired sustainability impacts. Diminish or simplify resources can be described as the means to remove or reduce features, resources, required activities and/or waste streams. Decompose can be described as the removal of resources from the commercial value proposition and replacing them with resources the user/consumer already can access or uses. This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge/CRC Press in Circular Economy : Challenges and Opportunities for Ethical and Sustainable Business on 2021, available online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367816650
DOCUMENT
This full paper works towards merging ‘frugality’ and ‘design thinking’ into a simplified framework for a workshop routine as a stepping stone for SMEs in developed countries to create and capture value of frugal innovations. Innovations which are born out of the notion that we can do more with less, or for less. This framework is aimed at reaching a specific group of SMEs, in this paper called the peloton of SMEs, a large group of SMEs which generally have lower growth ambitions and growth potential in comparison to the frontrunners. This group is often overlooked by (regional) governmental innovation programmes due to a primary focus on the same industry’s frontrunners. The framework was first tested with students, discussed with experts and eventually tested with SMEs from the Agribusiness sector in the Netherlands. Frugal Elements added to the design thinking process are; (a.) a Frugal Lens (b.) Frugal Business Model Patternsfor BMI (c.) Frugal leadership development (d.) Frugal Validation of the solution (e.) Frugal Intervention (limited time, limited theory, vertical learning community, practical tools). Although the first Pilot has been a succes in terms of helping participating SMEs to create innovations, more research is necessary for the design of a final framework which is expected to contribute to the frameworks that are currently available to SMEs in frugal and sustainable business modelling.
DOCUMENT
This article seeks to contribute to the literature on circular business model innovation in fashion retail. Our research question is which ‘model’—or combination of models—would be ideal as a business case crafting multiple value creation in small fashion retail. We focus on a qualitative, single in-depth case study—pop-up store KLEER—that we operated for a duration of three months in the Autumn of 2020. The shop served as a ‘testlab’ for action research to experiment with different business models around buying, swapping, and borrowing second-hand clothing. Adopting the Business Model Template (BMT) as a conceptual lens, we undertook a sensory ethnography which led to disclose three key strategies for circular business model innovation in fashion retail: Fashion-as-a-Service (F-a-a-S) instead of Product-as-a-Service (P-a-a-S) (1), Place-based value proposition (2) and Community as co-creator (3). Drawing on these findings, we reflect on ethnography in the context of a real pop-up store as methodological approach for business model experimentation. As a practical implication, we propose a tailor-made BMT for sustainable SME fashion retailers. Poldner K, Overdiek A, Evangelista A. Fashion-as-a-Service: Circular Business Model Innovation in Retail. Sustainability. 2022; 14(20):13273. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013273
DOCUMENT
This paper seeks to contribute to sustainable business model innovation (SBMI) literature. It aims to do so by putting forward a relatively simple tool that simultaneously calculates the financial value alongside sustainability impact based on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of a proposed business model innovation. For small businesses to validate the outcome of a proposed SBMI, some form of sustainability measurement will be necessary. Simple tooling specifically aimed at small businesses do not exist. We address this gap in how to predict or create a prognosis of the combined financial and sustainability effect of a proposed business model (BM) in a frugal (easy, time and knowledge effective) and effectual (allowing for iterations, available means and calculating affordable loss) manner. The tool is called the Pos-FSBC (Positive Financial and Sustainability Business Case). The instrument is a calculation model in Excel where users insert a limited number of numerical variables. Alongside financial variables the tool uniquely links the key variable ∆ SDG to the expected quantity sold, it then calculates the contribution to the SDGs in a relevant and measurable unit. By being successful with a sustainable innovation, the tool helps businesses drive out nonsustainable competitors. The tool has been iteratively developed and tested in several students’ projects and in a pilot with practitioners. Based on the findings we propose more iterations to develop an understanding whether the tool inspires business change and if so how.
MULTIFILE
This applied research project aims to generate a better understanding of the effects of heatwaves on vulnerable population groups in the municipality of The Hague, and suggests ways in which the municipality can help such groups to cope with these heatwaves. The research was performed as a cooperation between The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS), the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS, Erasmus University Rotterdam) and the International Centre for Frugal Innovation (ICFI, Leiden-Delft-Erasmus Universities). Heatwaves constitute an important yet often overlooked part of climate change and their impacts qualify as disasters. According to the World Disasters Report 2020, the three heatwaves affecting Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland and the UK in the summer of 2019 caused 3,453 deaths.1 2020 was a new record year for the Netherlands because it was the first time that a heatwave included five days in a row during which the temperature reached 35 degrees or more. In addition, 40 degrees was measured for the first time, and periods of tropical days and nights are generally getting longer. Most importantly, this trend is accelerating faster than the climate change models are predicting.2 In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic is compounding the effect of heatwaves, as vulnerable individuals may be reluctant to seek cool spaces out of fear of infection. Already in 2006, the Netherlands ranked near the top of the global disaster index due to the number of excess deaths that could be attributed to the heatwave. In the same year, the EU published the first climate strategy in which heat is recognised as a priority. In 2008, the Netherlands developed its first national heat plan.4 The municipality of The Hague has a municipal climate adaptation strategy and has developed a draft local heat plan in the summer of 2021, which was published in February 2022 . This research was not meant to be and was not set up as an evaluation of the current heat plan, which has not yet been activated. At the level of municipalities and cities, the concept of urban resilience is key. It refers to “the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience”. Heatwaves clearly constitute acute shocks which are rapidly developing into chronic stresses. In turn, heatwaves also exacerbate the chronic stresses that are already there, i.e. existing chronic stresses also lead to greater impact of a heatwave. In other words, there are negative interaction effects. Addressing these effects requires overcoming the silo approach to urban governance, in which different municipal departments as well as other stakeholders (such as the Red Cross, housing corporations, tenants’ associations, care organisations, entrepreneurs etc.) each address different parts of the problem, rather than doing so in an integrated and inclusive manner. The dataset for this study is archived in DANS Easy: https://doi.org/10.17026/dans-xeb-h8uk
MULTIFILE
This study aims to contribute to the few tools that are currently available for small businesses and startups in impact assessment (Shields & Shelleman, 2017) using the well-known framework of SDGs (United Nations, 2015).
DOCUMENT
Our planet’s ecology and society are on a collision course, which manifests due to a contradiction in the assumptions of unlimited material growth fueling the linear economic paradigm. Our closed planetary ecosystem imposes confined amounts of space and a finite extent of resources upon its inhabitants. However, practically all the economic perspectives have been defiantly neglecting these realities, as resources are extracted, used and disposed of reluctantly (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). The circular economy attempts to reconcile the extraction, production and usage of goods and resources with the limited availability of those resources and nature’s regenerative capabilities This perspective entails a shift throughout the supply chain, from material science (e g non-toxic, regenerative biomaterials) to novel logistical systems (e g low-carbon reverse logistics). Because of this, the circular economy is often celebrated for its potential environmental benefits and its usefulness as a blueprint for sustainable development (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2017). Unfortunately, the promise of the circular economy aiming at enhanced sustainability through restorative intent and design (McDonough & Braungart 2010), is often inhibited by institutional barriers posed by the current linear economy of take, make, use and waste (Ghisellini et al. 2016). Underlying those barriers our cultural paradigm celebrates consumerism, exponential growth and financial benefit instead of human values such as diversity, care and trust. Based on a mapping exercise of the circular economy discourse in the Netherlands and an overview of international (academic) literature (Van den Berg 2020) supplemented with collaborative co-creation sessions, visiting events, conferences, giving talks and classes, we have defined a gap leading to the focus of the Professorship. First, we highlight the importance of a process approach in studying the transition from a linear to a circular economy, which is why we use the verb ‘entrepreneuring’ as it indicates the movement we collectively need to make. The majority of work in the field is based on start-ups and only captures snapshots while longitudinal and transition perspectives - especially of larger companies - are missing (Merli et al. 2019; Geissdoerfer et al. 2018; Bocken et al. 2014). We specifically adopt an entrepreneurship-as-practice lens (Thompson, Verduijn & Gartner 2020), which allows us to trace the doings – as opposed to only the sayings - of organizations involved in circular innovation. Such an approach also enables us to study cross-sector and interfirm collaboration, which is crucial to achieve ecosystem circularity (Raworth 2019). As materials flow between actors in a system, traditional views of ‘a value chain’ slowly make way for an ecosystem or value web perspective on ‘organizing business’. We summarize this first theme as ‘entrepreneurship as social change’ broadening dominant views of what economic activity is and who the main actors are supposed to be (Barinaga 2013; Calás, Smircich & Bourne 2009; Steyaert & Hjorth 2008; Nicholls 2008). Second, within the Circular Business Professorship value is a big word in two ways. First of all, we believe that a transition to a circular economy is not just a transition of materials, nor technologies - it is most of all a transition of values We are interested in how people can explore their own agency in transitioning to a circular economy thereby aligning their personal values with the values of the organization and the larger system they are a part of Second, while circularity is a broad concept that can be approached through different lenses, the way in which things are valued and how value is created and extracted lies at the heart of the transition (Mazzucato 2018). If we don’t understand value as collectively crafted it will be very hard to change things, which is why we specifically focus on multiplicity and co-creation in the process of reclaiming value, originating from an ethics of care Third, sustainability efforts are often concerned with optimization of the current – linear – system by means of ecoefficient practices that are a bit ‘less bad’; using ’less resources’, causing ‘less pollution’ and ‘having less negative impact’. In contrast, eco-effective practices are inherently good, departing from the notion of abundance: circular thinking celebrates the abundance of nature’s regenerative capacities as well as the abundance of our imagination to envision new realities (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). Instead of exploiting natural resources, we should look closely in order to learn how we can build resilient self-sustaining ecosystems like the ones we find in nature. We are in need of rediscovering our profound connection with and appreciation of nature, which requires us to move beyond the cognitive and employ an aesthetic perspective of sustainability This perspective informs our approach to innovating education: aesthetics can support deep sustainability learning (Ivanaj, Poldner & Shrivastava 2014) and contribute to facilitating the circular change makers of the future. The current linear economy has driven our planet’s ecology and society towards a collision course and it is really now or never: if we don’t alter the course towards a circular economy today, then when? When will it become urgent enough for us to take action? Which disaster is needed for us to wake up? We desperately need substitutes for the current neo-liberal paradigm, which underlies our linear society and prevents us from becoming an economy of well-being In Entrepreneuring a regenerative society I propose three research themes – ‘entrepreneurship as social change’, ‘reclaiming value’ and ‘the aesthetics of sustainability’ – as alternative ways of embracing, studying and co-creating such a novel reality. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kim-poldner-a003473/
MULTIFILE
This brochure is based on a workshop in which Professor Rik Eweg discussed the results and plans of the professorship with the main Van Hall Larenstein lecturer-researchers involved.
DOCUMENT
Presentation held at the National Conference ADT Baramati, India on the 6th February 2024
DOCUMENT
This paper starts with the explanation of the research rationale of the professorship. Subsequently, an exploration of the research agenda is provided, focusing on the two core research themes of the professorship: transformational content strategy and transformational content design. Within this section, knowledge gaps will be identified and examples will be presented of research projects related to each theme. Finally, light will be shed on the research approach, offering a brief overview of the theoretical approach, research methodology, and expected impact.
DOCUMENT
