Page 283 - Hojnik, Jana. 2017. In Persuit of Eco-innovation. Drivers and Consequences of Eco-innovation at Firm Level. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 283
Summary of findings and discussion 283
on all eco-innovation models. In our study, we found the greatest em-
pirical support for the causal relationship between expected benefits and
product eco-innovation (standardized coefficient 0.12), followed by or-
ganizational eco-innovation (standardized coefficient 0.06); finally, we
found a weaker, but still positive and significant, relationship between
expected benefits and the eco-innovation construct (standardized coeffi-
cient 0.05). The relationships of the previously mentioned effects were all
positive and significant. However, we have not found support for a pos-
itive effect of expected benefits on process eco-innovation; instead the
association between them was negative, moderately high and significant
(-0.18). It seems that companies do not engage in process eco-innovation
because they expect benefits or positive outcomes from it. It is likely that,
in the initial phase, companies expect only high investment costs and ex-
penses related to process eco-innovation implementation, although in the
long term they provide several benefits for companies, especially cost sav-
ings. It is generally known that eco-innovations pay off after several years’
lag due to high initial investments (especially in the case of integrated
cleaner technology). Moreover, process eco-innovation can be roughly di-
vided into end-of-pipeline technology and cleaner technology; the first
leads only to costs and does not deliver benefits to the company, because
it works only on externality reduction, while the latter demands higher
investments but can also be beneficial for the company (in terms of cost
savings, e.g., energy, material and resource). However, the results of our
study revealed that expected benefits do not drive implementation of pro-
cess eco-innovations in the analyzed companies. On the other hand, our
findings concerning product eco-innovation, organizational eco-innova-
tion and the eco-innovation construct are in line with past findings that
companies are motivated by expected benefits to adopt eco-innovation.
Researchers found that companies expect primarily cost savings from
eco-innovation implementation (Lewis and Cassells 2010; York and Ven-
kataraman 2010; Belin et al. 2011; Pereira and Vence 2012; Oxborrow
and Brindley 2013; Chassagnon and Haned 2014; Mondéjar-Jiménez et
al. 2014), followed by other benefits like new market creation/increase
of market share (Lewis and Cassells 2010; Triguero et al 2013; Mondé-
jar-Jiménez et al. 2014), improvement of firm reputation/image (Lewis
and Cassells 2010; van den Bergh et al. 2011; van den Bergh 2013; Bock-
en et al. 2014), expected increase of product quality (Lewis and Cassells
2010; Mondéjar-Jiménez et al. 2014), improved firm efficiency/productiv-
ity (Lewiss and Cassells 2010), potential revenue (York and Venkatara-
man 2010; Bocken et al. 2014) and gain of competitive advantage/differ-
on all eco-innovation models. In our study, we found the greatest em-
pirical support for the causal relationship between expected benefits and
product eco-innovation (standardized coefficient 0.12), followed by or-
ganizational eco-innovation (standardized coefficient 0.06); finally, we
found a weaker, but still positive and significant, relationship between
expected benefits and the eco-innovation construct (standardized coeffi-
cient 0.05). The relationships of the previously mentioned effects were all
positive and significant. However, we have not found support for a pos-
itive effect of expected benefits on process eco-innovation; instead the
association between them was negative, moderately high and significant
(-0.18). It seems that companies do not engage in process eco-innovation
because they expect benefits or positive outcomes from it. It is likely that,
in the initial phase, companies expect only high investment costs and ex-
penses related to process eco-innovation implementation, although in the
long term they provide several benefits for companies, especially cost sav-
ings. It is generally known that eco-innovations pay off after several years’
lag due to high initial investments (especially in the case of integrated
cleaner technology). Moreover, process eco-innovation can be roughly di-
vided into end-of-pipeline technology and cleaner technology; the first
leads only to costs and does not deliver benefits to the company, because
it works only on externality reduction, while the latter demands higher
investments but can also be beneficial for the company (in terms of cost
savings, e.g., energy, material and resource). However, the results of our
study revealed that expected benefits do not drive implementation of pro-
cess eco-innovations in the analyzed companies. On the other hand, our
findings concerning product eco-innovation, organizational eco-innova-
tion and the eco-innovation construct are in line with past findings that
companies are motivated by expected benefits to adopt eco-innovation.
Researchers found that companies expect primarily cost savings from
eco-innovation implementation (Lewis and Cassells 2010; York and Ven-
kataraman 2010; Belin et al. 2011; Pereira and Vence 2012; Oxborrow
and Brindley 2013; Chassagnon and Haned 2014; Mondéjar-Jiménez et
al. 2014), followed by other benefits like new market creation/increase
of market share (Lewis and Cassells 2010; Triguero et al 2013; Mondé-
jar-Jiménez et al. 2014), improvement of firm reputation/image (Lewis
and Cassells 2010; van den Bergh et al. 2011; van den Bergh 2013; Bock-
en et al. 2014), expected increase of product quality (Lewis and Cassells
2010; Mondéjar-Jiménez et al. 2014), improved firm efficiency/productiv-
ity (Lewiss and Cassells 2010), potential revenue (York and Venkatara-
man 2010; Bocken et al. 2014) and gain of competitive advantage/differ-
