Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Analysis of Sustainability in Venture Café Global Network: 5 Established Sites, Lecture notes of Innovation

Insights into the approach and implementation of sustainability in five established Venture Café sites. The study examines their personal and organizational definitions of sustainability, current state of sustainability in programming and operations, barriers and drivers, and shared values. Recommendations include adopting a holistic definition of sustainability, embedding ecological sustainability into programming, and tracking ecological sustainability metrics.

What you will learn

  • What are the main barriers and drivers for integrating sustainability into the Venture Café sites?
  • What are the personal definitions of sustainability among the Venture Café sites?
  • What is the current state of sustainability in programming and operations for the Venture Café sites?
  • How does the organizational commitment to sustainability vary across the Venture Café sites?

Typology: Lecture notes

2021/2022

Uploaded on 09/27/2022

hawking
hawking 🇬🇧

4.3

(24)

268 documents

1 / 87

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
i
Master's Degree Thesis
Integrating Sustainability into
Sector Agnostic Innovation Hubs:
The Case of Venture Café Global Network
Viliana Dzhartova
Hrishabh Sandilya
Sierra Flanigan
Alena Iuzefovich
Blekinge Institute of Technology
Karlskrona, Sweden
2019
Examiner: Henrik Ny, Ph.D.
Primary advisor: Pierre Johnson
Secondary advisor: Cesar Levy Franca, Ph.D.
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12
pf13
pf14
pf15
pf16
pf17
pf18
pf19
pf1a
pf1b
pf1c
pf1d
pf1e
pf1f
pf20
pf21
pf22
pf23
pf24
pf25
pf26
pf27
pf28
pf29
pf2a
pf2b
pf2c
pf2d
pf2e
pf2f
pf30
pf31
pf32
pf33
pf34
pf35
pf36
pf37
pf38
pf39
pf3a
pf3b
pf3c
pf3d
pf3e
pf3f
pf40
pf41
pf42
pf43
pf44
pf45
pf46
pf47
pf48
pf49
pf4a
pf4b
pf4c
pf4d
pf4e
pf4f
pf50
pf51
pf52
pf53
pf54
pf55
pf56
pf57

Partial preview of the text

Download Analysis of Sustainability in Venture Café Global Network: 5 Established Sites and more Lecture notes Innovation in PDF only on Docsity!

i

Master's Degree Thesis

Integrating Sustainability into

Sector Agnostic Innovation Hubs:

The Case of Venture Café Global Network

Viliana Dzhartova

Hrishabh Sandilya

Sierra Flanigan

Alena Iuzefovich

Blekinge Institute of Technology Karlskrona, Sweden 2019

Examiner: Henrik Ny, Ph.D. Primary advisor: Pierre Johnson Secondary advisor: Cesar Levy Franca, Ph.D.

ii

ii

Statement of Contribution

This thesis was written in collaboration with the Venture Café Global Institute (VCGI). Given Sierra’s previous involvement with the organisation, she invited VCGI to partner with us to create solutions to address the global sustainability challenge, as the Venture Café Global Network (VCGN) network expands. In response, VCGI agreed to explore sustainability more seriously through this collaboration.

Our international team of four coalesced around mutual respect for each other’s professional experience and a shared belief that innovation hubs could offer the scale of response needed to address the sustainability challenge. We honed our focus on the potential of sector agnostic innovation hubs to drive and model sustainability, and thus the Sustainnovators team was born! The question then became how to scope our research in a way that provides meaningful academic insights for real-world impact.

For our effective team work, we designed a leadership compass and agreed on common parameters, principles and ground rules. We agreed to build on our strengths and together embarked on a research journey that amounts to this thesis herein. Ultimately, our commitment to lift each other up proved effective and yielded tremendous learnings and a product we are proud of. We are grateful to have been able to contribute to the growing body of research in the field and look forward to continuing to deepen the inroads and apply the recommendations we generated, as we move forward.

The following paragraphs provide context on each author’s contribution to the study. To be clear, the order of author nomenclature was randomized and is not reflective of any hierarchy in contributions.

Together, all four of us participated in the literature review, delineated the scope and developed the overall goals of the research. In addition, as a team we designed the interview questions and a strategy of how to carry out the interviews and documentary analysis. We also shared responsibilities around conducting, transcribing and coding, as well as writing up the Results.

Viliana wrote the first draft of the Introduction as well as created the Abstract and the Executive Summary. She did 60% of the transcription and about 80% of the coding, as well as writing a third of the Discussion. She was also responsible for overall task and project management. She also shared final editing and formatting responsibilities.

Hrishabh created and wrote the Methods, Research Design and the Conceptual Frameworks. He wrote a third of the Discussion and the entirety of the Conclusion. In addition, he tied together the drafts of the Introduction and the Discussion and co-designed the Research Questions and the coding themes. He was responsible for the overall direction of the study, shared the final editing responsibilities of the document and worked in an advisory role to the rest of the team.

Sierra was solely responsible for all communication with Venture Café and all the interviewees, as well as ensuring compliance. She wrote a third of the Discussion, co-conducted the Documentary Analysis, wrote the Glossary and performed a Site Visit. She also conducted 9 of the 12 interviews (except for those she had personal ties to), as well designing an Operational

iii

Survey and Sustainability Checklist for VCGN. She also designed the images in the thesis and the Presentation slides and our Team Compass.

Alena co-designed the Research Questions and the coding themes, as well as co-conducted the Documentary Analysis. She also wrote the second draft of the Introduction, as well as being responsible for legal compliance around GDPR. She led the teamwork process and feedback sessions, as well being responsible for team wellbeing. She was also responsible for References, Appendices and primary formatting.

Viliana Dzhartova, Hrishabh Sandilya, Sierra Flanigan and Alena Iuzefovich

v

Executive Summary

The aim of this research is twofold: to investigate the degree to which sector agnostic innovation hubs currently integrate sustainability into their practices and to produce a set of recommendations. To this effect, we studied the case of the Venture Café Global Network (VCGN), a type of innovation intermediary, which provides a location and space to connect entrepreneurs, corporations, investors and policymakers. The network is comprised of the Venture Café Global Institute (VCGI) at its core, which currently supports eight Venture Café sites (individual innovation hubs) across the world. In our study we looked at five of the eight established Venture Café sites, and examined them on the basis of 1) how the hubs and the network defined and approached the concept of sustainability, 2) what their organisational purpose and vision, were and if sustainability played a role in them, 3) the hubs’ current state of sustainability, 4) the barriers and drivers which influenced integration of sustainability into these hubs, 5) how the network and hubs make decisions related to sustainability programming, and 6) what shared values shape the hubs’ sustainability interactions with startups and investors within their innovation ecosystems.

The underlying guiding belief for this research was that sector agnostic innovation hubs, such as VCGN, could, through the implementation of sustainability into their programming and operations, influence other actors in their innovation ecosystems, to foster solutions geared toward addressing the GSC. While the purpose of this research was not to expressly test the validity of this hypothesis, we believe the hypothesis was essential to distilling the research aims (identified above).

Conceptual Frameworks Three conceptual frameworks or theories were used to shape our understanding of the study. These in turn, reflected upon on our research questions and provided much food for thought in the discussion phase. First, given that we intended to study the extent to which VCGN had and could implement sustainability into their operational and programmatic practices, it was important that we had an overarching ideational grounding that shaped our understanding of what sustainability was, the systematic constraints in which VCGN and its nested systems operated in, and a method to understand how this was executed operationally and programmatically. This resulted in us choosing the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD) (Broman and Robèrt 2015). Second, we needed a mechanism through which it would be possible for us to comprehend how innovation intermediaries (hubs) like VCGN and startups work together, using technology to affect societal changes (to address the GSC). For this purpose, we chose the Multi-Level Perspective developed by scholar Frank Geels (2010), which has increasingly gained wider currency in the field of sustainability, to explain such transitions. Third, through our exploratory interviews and initial discussion with the leadership of the case organisation, it was clear that there was an inherent set of beliefs (a logic) that were shaping the reality around the general practices of VCGI as an institution and it was important we comprehend and explore how this impacted its sustainability practices. For this purpose, we used the Theory of Institutional Logic (Thornton and Ocasio 1999, 804), as applied to the sustainability-related practices of VCGN, to aid in the exploration.

Methods We achieved the purpose of our study through multi-methods research, using a qualitative approach to study the embedded case of VCGN, through VCGI and five cafés in cities across

vi

the world. Primary data was gathered through two main avenues. First, semi-structured interviews with the leadership both at VCGI and the five different cafés, with startups/entrepreneurs who use the services of these hubs and with policymakers and funders (investors) who shape or drive the ecosystem in which these hubs operate. Second, through a discourse analysis of strategy and other public documents that VC hubs create, for their operational and programmatic practices. We attempted to triangulate our findings by verifying interview data gathered from inside the organisation against documentary evidence and the site observation, and against data from interviews conducted outside the VCs.

Results The results of this research are presented according to the themes we used to code the data from the interviews and documentary analysis. The 15 themes used correspond to the 6 sub-research questions and the Discussion below, clarifies how the findings from the themes answer specific sub-research questions.

Theme Key findings

1. Personal Definition of Sustainability

x Varied and contested personal definitions of sustainability; x Responses varied from a focus on an ecological understanding, a purpose-driven and entrepreneurial understanding of sustainability, the importance of removing structural obstacles to social sustainability, and finally, sustainability in terms of survival of the human race and the Earth’s resilience capabilities.

2.Organisational Definition of Sustainability

x No standard organisational definition of sustainability across VCGN; x Underlying organisational commitment (both at the network-level and within the cafés) to aspects of social sustainability such as social inclusion, diversity and justice, lacking an ecological bent.

3. Mechanism of Action

x Clear understanding of the mechanism of action across all the cafés; x Key mechanisms included: using networks to catalyse impact, teaching and educating participants, facilitating the creation of jobs, providing connections and partnerships to influence change and positioning themselves as hosts and trend setters for innovation to the entrepreneurial community; x Strong commitment to creating an inclusive and diverse innovation ecosystem, to address local problems, did not make a big picture link to addressing the GSC.

4. Organisational Purpose

x Shared common purpose across the whole network; language used to describe it: a bridge or connector, a community builder, hotspot for talent, an educator, aim to support innovation in the local economy, to lead change and to support entrepreneurship; x A “ global R&D lab for problem solving ” (VCGI 2019) and a facilitator of friendships. x Did not include sustainability or an understanding of the GSC.

5. Future Vision (^) x Short to medium term vision, different for each café and not coordinated across the network and did not explicitly include sustainability; x Different measurements for success in the future - specific KPIs, financial sustainability, expansion targets; x Aspirations to embed the UNSDGs across all VC sites; x Interest in standardising operational ecological sustainability across sites, especially in relation to procurement and transportation. **6. Current State of Sustainability

  • Programmes**

x Strong, intentional commitment to social sustainability at all cafés;

viii

x Actions related to/Events - pitches of early-stage startups; diversity of presenters and attendees at panels; experiential and interactive event formats; themed nights/weeks/months; x Actions related to Professional Development - office hours with experts; mentoring.

Discussion and Recommendations The 15 themes of the findings were grouped and discussed according to the sub-research questions they refer to, followed by a few high-level recommendations.

SQ1 - How does VCGN define sustainability? (Themes 1 and 2) The lack of a comprehensive definition of sustainability leads to several challenges for the network’s success and overall efforts to impact the innovation ecosystem. If the goal of the network is to implement sustainability into its practices, the major question that arises, if there is no shared, comprehensive definition of sustainability, is what kind of sustainability are they talking about? This confusion then manifests itself in terms of a lack of clarity around the organisation’s purpose for being, which in turn lays the foundations for its vision and together affect VCGN impacts the world (when individual cafés adopt different strategies). This could result in disjointed initiatives and a diffused impact, given the inability of the network to mobilise itself fully and harness the collective strength of the cafés and VCGI. We would recommend using the FSSD and its principle-based definition of sustainability, as a starting point in identifying a comprehensive definition of sustainability.

SQ2 - What is VCGN’s organisational purpose, what does its vision of the future look like, and does this include sustainability? (Themes 3, 4 and 5) VCGN had a clear shared understanding of their organisational purpose, however there was an absence of any overt mention of sustainability in that purpose. There was little alignment in the individual cafés’ vision and the network’s vision for the future; to improve that we recommend that VCGN adopt a shared vision creation process (perhaps through the A Step of the ABCD process of the FSSD), to do so, keeping sustainability in mind. There was, however, clarity in understanding the mechanism of action through which VCGN impacts the world. Therefore, we recommend VCGN broaden that narrative to include how startups and VCGN could address the GSC together.

SQ3 - What is the current state of sustainability at cafés around the world? (Themes 6 and 7) Programmatically, VCGN has introduced some sustainability-focused events and initiatives and their implicit commitment to social sustainability is commendable. However, programming across the network could be improved by disseminating a holistic and comprehensive perspective on sustainability. From an operational standpoint, VCGN should incorporate ecological sustainability reporting standards that are compatible with the social sustainability reporting metrics it has in place.

SQ4 - What are the values that shape VCGN’s sustainability interactions with the ecosystem? (Themes 8 and 9) VCGN’s strong values around elements of social sustainability are impressive and we would recommend they also adopt additional values underlining an ecological commitment to sustainability. This would then make their representation of and commitment to a holistic and comprehensive definition of sustainability more visible. VCGN’s model of adapting and working with, or against, local institutional logics is an interesting one, and so far, that seems

ix

to work. While indicative of a cultural flexibility, it also gives them a method to deal with local conditions, as the network seeks to expand in the coming years and deserves to be replicated.

SQ5 - What are the barriers and drivers that shape the integration of sustainability into practices at cafés around the world? (Themes 10, 11 and 12) Our main recommendations for overcoming external barriers and capitalising on enablers is two-fold. First, we recommend a proactive search for sustainability-related funding for new sources, for VCGN operations and programming. Second, we suggest cafés create and deliver content that stresses the value and potential benefits of integrating sustainability into the core principles and organisational vision of sector-agnostic startups they serve through Thursday Gatherings. We also recommend that VCGN encourages, actively supports and collaborates with partners and competitors in surrounding communities to develop a vibrant innovation ecosystem that addresses global challenges explicitly.

SQ6 - How do cafés decide on, monitor and implement programmes (in relation to sustainability)? (Themes 13, 14 and 15) VCGN would benefit from synchronizing its organizational purpose and definition of sustainability as a foundation for effective network-scale decision making processes and collaboration. In order to make better data-driven decisions and track impact around sustainability, we recommend VCGN implement procedures to track ecological sustainability that complements existing impact metrics.

Conclusion Based on our findings, we conclude that for VCGN to implement sustainability into its practices and achieve its aspirations to address global challenges, it is imperative that it incorporates a comprehensive, shared definition of sustainability at an organisational level. This would allow VCGN to frame the global challenges it wishes to address in a manner that it can then strategically work to find solutions to. In addition, this definition would strengthen its current commitments to social sustainability, as well as introduce ecological sustainability into its operations and programming. Based on VCGN’s commitment and ability to live up to its values, and its proven impact on the innovation ecosystem, it is safe to assume that this new definition of sustainability would percolate into the organisation’s structure, vision, purpose and decision-making procedures, which would become more apparent in its operations and programming.

xi

Sustainability Principles (SPs): Ecological and social Sustainability Principles, based on scientific laws and knowledge that define the boundary conditions for human society. These principles state that in a sustainable society, nature is not subject to systematically increasing...: SP1: … concentration of substances extracted from the Earth’s crust. SP2: … concentration of substances produced by society. SP3: .... degradation by physical means. People are not subject to structural obstacles regarding…: SP4: …health. SP5: ...influence. SP6: ...competence. SP7: ...impartiality. SP8: ...meaning-making (See Broman and Robèrt 2015).

Sustainability: A state in which global society is in compliance with the eight Sustainability Principles (SPs); the ability of future generations to meet their needs is not systematically undermined by the society’s current activities.

Systems Perspective : A theory that studies how a system works as a whole, within an environment.

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs) A set of 17 interconnected goals established by the UN as part of Agenda 2030 aimed at addressing ecological, social, and economic disparities in the world.

VC – An autonomous Venture Café (single site).

VCGI - Venture Café Global Institute is the central office that oversees the functioning of VCGN.

VCGN - Venture Café Global Network, comprised of all the VCs in the world, overseen by VCGI.

xii

List of Abbreviations

5LM - Five Level Model AI - Artificial Intelligence BTH - Blekinge Institute of Technology CIC - Cambridge Innovation Centre FSSD - Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development GSC - Global Sustainability Challenge KPI – Key Performance Indicator MLP - Multi-Level Perspective PQ - Primary Research Question SMEs – Small and Medium-sized Enterprises SPs - Sustainability Principles SQ - Sub-Research Question SSD - Strategic Sustainable Development UNSDG/s - United Nations Sustainable Development Goal/s VC - Venture Café (single site) VCGI - Venture Café Global Institute VCGN - Venture Café Global Network

xiv

2.5 Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 16 2.5.1 Transcribing ...................................................................................................... 17 2.5.2 Coding ............................................................................................................... 17 2.5.3 Results ............................................................................................................... 17 2.5.4 Discussion ......................................................................................................... 17 2.6 Use of the Operational Parts of the FSSD as a Classification Method ....................... 17 2.7 Methodological Limitations ........................................................................................ 18 2.8 Research Timeline and Map........................................................................................ 18 2.8.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 18 2.8.2 Research Design Steps ...................................................................................... 18 3  Results .............................................................................................................................. 20 

3.1 Personal Definition of Sustainability .......................................................................... 20 3.2 Organisational Definition of Sustainability ................................................................ 21 3.3 Mechanism of Action .................................................................................................. 22 3.4 Organisational Purpose ............................................................................................... 23 3.5 Future Vision ............................................................................................................... 23 3.6 Current State of Sustainability – Programmes ............................................................ 24 3.7 Current State of Sustainability – Operations ............................................................... 26 3.8 Values .......................................................................................................................... 27 3.9 Culture/Institutional Logic of Sustainability ............................................................... 28 3.10 Barriers ...................................................................................................................... 29 3.11 Enablers ..................................................................................................................... 30 3.12 Competitors & Competitive Advantage .................................................................... 31 3.13 Decision Making ....................................................................................................... 32 3.14 Monitoring the Impact of Programming (Related to Sustainability) ........................ 33 3.15 Specific Actions Related to Programmes .................................................................. 34

4  Discussion ......................................................................................................................... 36 

4.1 Sub-Research Questions.............................................................................................. 36 4.1.1 SQ1 – How does VCGN define sustainability? ................................................ 36 4.1.2 SQ2 – What is VCGN’s organisational purpose, what does its vision of the future look like, and does this include sustainability? .......................................................... 38 4.1.3 SQ3 – What is the current state of sustainability at cafés around the world? ... 40 4.1.4 SQ4 – What are the values that shape VCGN’s sustainability interactions with its innovation ecosystem? .......................................................................................... 42 4.1.5 SQ5 – What are the barriers and drivers that shape the integration of sustainability into practices at cafés around the world? ............................................. 43 4.1.6 SQ6 – How do cafés decide on, monitor and implement programmes (in relation to sustainability)? ....................................................................................................... 45 4.2 Validity of Findings .................................................................................................... 47 4.2.1 Credibility ......................................................................................................... 47

xv

4.2.2 Transferability ................................................................................................... 48 4.2.3 Dependability .................................................................................................... 48 4.2.4 Confirmability ................................................................................................... 48 4.3 Discussion on Research Method ................................................................................. 48 4.4 Reflection on Conceptual Frameworks ....................................................................... 48 4.5 General Limitations ..................................................................................................... 49 4.6 Avenues for Further Research ..................................................................................... 49

5  Conclusion........................................................................................................................ 50 

Reference List ......................................................................................................................... 52 

Cited References ............................................................................................................... 52 Additional References ....................................................................................................... 56

APPENDIX A: Interview Questions..................................................................................... 60 

APPENDIX B: Coding Themes ............................................................................................ 64 

APPENDIX C: FSSD Operational Procedure (ABCD) ...................................................... 66 

APPENDIX D: Sustainability Checklist Venture Café Sites ............................................. 67 

APPENDIX E: Thesis Team Compass ................................................................................. 68 

1 Introduction

The aim of this research is twofold: to investigate the degree to which sector agnostic innovation hubs currently integrate sustainability into their practices and to produce a set of recommendations. To this effect, we studied the case of the Venture Café Global Network (VCGN), a type of innovation intermediary, which provides a location and space to connect entrepreneurs, corporations, investors and policymakers. The network is comprised of the Venture Café Global Institute (VCGI) at its core, which currently supports eight Venture Café sites (individual innovation hubs) across the world. In our study we looked at five of the eight established Venture Café sites, and examined them on the basis of 1) how the hubs and the network defined and approached the concept of sustainability, 2) what their organisational purpose and vision were and if sustainability played a role in them, 3) the hubs’ current state of sustainability, 4) the barriers and drivers which influenced integration of sustainability into these hubs, 5) how the network and hubs make decisions related to sustainability programming, and 6) what shared values shape the hubs’ sustainability interactions with startups and investors within their innovation ecosystems.

1.1 The Global Sustainability Challenge (GSC) and Sustainable Development

The world we live in today is subject to complex ecological and social challenges. Such challenges are also known as wicked problems. According to Rittel (1973, 159), they are “problems, for which each attempt to create a solution changes the understanding of the problem.” In addition, he notes, “wicked problems cannot be solved in a traditional linear fashion, because the problem definition evolves as new possible solutions are considered and/or implemented”. Wicked problems occur in complex systems which, as opposed to simple or complicated systems, are typically characterised by non-linearity and unpredictability (meaning that they have no direct connection between cause and effect), self-organisation and strong interconnectedness between the different elements of the system whose interactions give rise to the patterns we can observe (Burnes 2005). The ecological system (or the biosphere), human society itself and the different social systems we have constructed to support mankind’s existence within the biosphere, are examples of such complex systems in which wicked problems are generated.

Crises in climate, biodiversity, water and energy have global impacts and are expected to increase exponentially as we approach certain critical thresholds, that might put humanity’s survival on the planet at stake (Steffen et al 2015). In addition, social sustainability challenges interlinked with ecological disparities manifest themselves as inequalities in wealth, gender and race, violent conflict, forced migrations and create major challenges for global development. According to the OECD (2015), on an average, 10% of the wealthiest households hold half of the total global wealth, while 40% of the least wealthy hold a little over 3% of global wealth. Such inequality drags down economic growth and has negative consequences for all (OECD 2015).

In 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a report warning that anthropogenic emissions (including greenhouse gases and aerosols) have already caused unprecedented changes in the climate system and these changes will only increase exponentially as the earth warms up by 1.5°C, or more (IPCC 2018). The root cause of this, as

a growing body of scholars claim, is that a new geological epoch has begun - the Anthropocene. It is an epoch where human activity is the cause of most contemporary environmental changes whose geological effects will be observable for millions of years into the future (Lewis and Maslin 2015).

An overarching concept associated with addressing these ecological and social problems of the Anthropocene, is sustainable development (GRAID 2016). Defined as “development that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987, 54), sustainable development is increasingly seen as the way to address these wicked problems and allow human society to decouple development, from the current unsustainable laissez-faire growth paradigm in place (Uzunidis 2009).

1.2 Innovation

A growing number of scholars (Silvestre and Tirca 2019, Senge, Carstedt, and Porter 2001) and actors in the private sector and public sectors (Nidumolu, Prahalad, and Rangaswami 2009; OECD 2010) anchor their hopes in innovation as the medium to effectively transition towards sustainable development, and the driver for urgently needed change to move away from unsustainable practices.

Lambooy (2005) views innovation as an iterative process of interaction between entrepreneurs (individuals) organisations systems and institutions, using price and other signals as a direction in which to develop. Schumpeter (1934) in his seminal work, views innovation as the introduction of a new product, process, method, or system, and it is both a process and an outcome. In relation to sustainable development, Gjoksi (2011, 6) notes that:

Sustainable development emphasises the explicit interest of the normative direction of development, taking into consideration the balanced three-pillar approach (economic, environmental and social sustainability). Hence, the innovations for Sustainable Development do not remain neutral, and take a normative direction. The challenge for innovation does not rest solely on economic benefits and opportunities, but also in the societal changes induced by innovative capacity and the consequences of this for the environmental and social sustainability.

It is our belief as authors that innovation for sustainable development is the necessary solution for our times and that it is through the process of innovation that entrepreneurs and firms, will come up with solutions for sustainable development, given the right incentives and regulations from policymakers and investors. In the following paragraphs, we introduce several concepts and terms related to innovation and sustainable development, through which we attempt to explain the relevance of our case study to addressing the GSC, using innovation for sustainable development, as the link.

1.2.1 Innovation Ecosystems

Both, the process and outcomes of innovation take place within the boundaries of an existing system, which may be described as an innovation ecosystem. Carayannis and Campbell (2009,