Page 301 - Hojnik, Jana. 2017. In Persuit of Eco-innovation. Drivers and Consequences of Eco-innovation at Firm Level. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 301
Conclusion 301
the available database, and therefore subjective factors provided only ad-
ditional, complementary insight. By collecting the objective and subjec-
tive measures of company performance (in terms of economic benefits),
we achieved equilibrium, in the sense that some types of eco-innovation
become profitable after several years’ lag, while respondents may already
recognize and be able to report their positive results.
Moreover, in this study we endeavored to explore the determinants of
different eco-innovation types based on the Slovenian sample. However,
we have encompassed the most relevant determinants of eco-innovation
according to the prior qualitative research we conducted. This implies
that some other determinants were omitted. Due to the complexity of the
phenomenon under study, only the most important drivers and outcomes
of eco-innovation were selected and included in the model. We have de-
cided to dedicate more attention to the company-related outcomes of
eco-innovation than to the environmental benefits, because we feel that
it is of great importance to show companies the outcomes of eco-innova-
tion related to company performance in order to answer the question of
whether such innovations are worth implementing. This is quite a sali-
ent issue, especially because the literature offers mixed findings, and com-
panies themselves usually consider eco-innovation to be expensive and
beneficial only to the environment while it is harmful to company per-
formance. Our aim was thus to explore which eco-innovations deliver po-
tential benefits (company growth, profitability, higher degree of interna-
tionalization, and competitive and economic benefits) to the companies
that implement them.
Among the determinants of eco-innovation, we investigated only
drivers of eco-innovation, while barriers to eco-innovation remains a top-
ic for further research. It would be useful to know what barriers hinder
companies from adopting eco-innovation, in order to get insights regard-
ing why companies do not implement eco-innovation. Research on this
question should focus on companies that are not engaged in any eco-in-
novation activity. These results would lead to important insights and sug-
gest how to steer less motivated companies to implement eco-innovation.
Another limitation of this study concerns the fact that we have not
differentiated between companies that adopt and companies that devel-
op certain types of eco-innovation. Adoption and development of eco-in-
novation can differ in their driving forces and in outcomes pertaining to
company performance.
Furthermore, related to the research methodology, we can analyze
drivers of eco-innovation with either a qualitative or a quantitative ap-
the available database, and therefore subjective factors provided only ad-
ditional, complementary insight. By collecting the objective and subjec-
tive measures of company performance (in terms of economic benefits),
we achieved equilibrium, in the sense that some types of eco-innovation
become profitable after several years’ lag, while respondents may already
recognize and be able to report their positive results.
Moreover, in this study we endeavored to explore the determinants of
different eco-innovation types based on the Slovenian sample. However,
we have encompassed the most relevant determinants of eco-innovation
according to the prior qualitative research we conducted. This implies
that some other determinants were omitted. Due to the complexity of the
phenomenon under study, only the most important drivers and outcomes
of eco-innovation were selected and included in the model. We have de-
cided to dedicate more attention to the company-related outcomes of
eco-innovation than to the environmental benefits, because we feel that
it is of great importance to show companies the outcomes of eco-innova-
tion related to company performance in order to answer the question of
whether such innovations are worth implementing. This is quite a sali-
ent issue, especially because the literature offers mixed findings, and com-
panies themselves usually consider eco-innovation to be expensive and
beneficial only to the environment while it is harmful to company per-
formance. Our aim was thus to explore which eco-innovations deliver po-
tential benefits (company growth, profitability, higher degree of interna-
tionalization, and competitive and economic benefits) to the companies
that implement them.
Among the determinants of eco-innovation, we investigated only
drivers of eco-innovation, while barriers to eco-innovation remains a top-
ic for further research. It would be useful to know what barriers hinder
companies from adopting eco-innovation, in order to get insights regard-
ing why companies do not implement eco-innovation. Research on this
question should focus on companies that are not engaged in any eco-in-
novation activity. These results would lead to important insights and sug-
gest how to steer less motivated companies to implement eco-innovation.
Another limitation of this study concerns the fact that we have not
differentiated between companies that adopt and companies that devel-
op certain types of eco-innovation. Adoption and development of eco-in-
novation can differ in their driving forces and in outcomes pertaining to
company performance.
Furthermore, related to the research methodology, we can analyze
drivers of eco-innovation with either a qualitative or a quantitative ap-
