Search

The 2020 renewable energy targets have stimulated the debate on the efficacy of policy schemes. Discussion on the efficacy of these schemes has largely been on the growth in the share of renewable energy, and less on the alignment of policies to the needs of investors. However, research in this field has emphasized that ‘who is investing’ is as relevant as ‘how much is invested’. This study aims to identify and better understand ‘who is investing’, by researching more than 1,000 investments by 646 firms that produce electricity with Dutch onshore wind energy. These firms received renewable energy subsidies under Dutch policy schemes between 1996 and 2013. The regression results highlight the type of investors that invest more in wind energy. The results show that firms with a higher wind energy capacity are firms that have more investment experience; are latecomers to the wind industry; have an industrial background in the electricity or wind industry; are medium- or large-sized and are limited liability companies. Data on investments, combined with a document analysis, show that changes in policy schemes affect the perceived risks and expected returns of investors, and that these changes influence the amounts invested and the type of investors in wind energy.

In order to facilitate the transition to electricity industries with low CO2 emissions, it is important to understand which firms invest in renewable energy technologies. This study concentrates on the heterogeneous characteristics of investors in wind power that are embedded in the investors’ dynamic capabilities. Data on 617 investors in the Swedish onshore wind industry are analyzed. Investors with higher investment and management experience and a mixed generation portfolio whose business is electricity production have more assets in wind. Investors’ age in the wind industry has a negative relation with assets in wind, illustrating that latecomers are investing more. Individual incumbents of the electricity industry hold a relatively large amount of assets in the Swedish wind industry, but the group of incumbents as a whole possesses only 15 percent of wind assets. The results suggest that tailor-made policies could stimulate a greater variety of firms to invest in wind power.

In the transition to a more sustainable world, the development of sustainable technologies needs to be accompanied by promoting the legitimacy of the technologies. Consumers that perceive a technology as desirable and appropriate are more likely to adopt it. Organizations can collaborate to enhance the legitimacy of new technologies. While previous research has emphasized the importance of collaboration in the field of sustainability, it has not studied collaborative efforts of organizations aimed at achieving legitimacy of sustainable technologies. The contribution of this paper is therefore to analyze the role of inter-organizational alliances in creating legitimacy for a sustainable technology. The paper contributes to the literature by analyzing how alliances create three types of legitimacy: technology-sourced market legitimacy, technology-sourced social legitimacy and technology legitimacy. It focuses on the case of bio-plastics, which is emerging as a sustainable technology in the chemical industry. The analysis is based on a database containing information on 105 alliances in the field of bio-plastics over the period 1990–2013. The results show that alliances aim to promote technology-sourced market and social legitimacy by providing access to the sustainable technology of a partner, by collaboratively developing a sustainable technology, or by providing the technology of a partner with access to customers and production capacity. Alliances promote technology legitimacy by relying on positive externalities, by exercising their signaling role, and by acting as institutional entrepreneurs. The paper concludes that there are differences between alliances that create technology-sourced market and social legitimacy on the one hand, and technology legitimacy on the other hand. The first type of alliances are often bilateral alliances between for-profit companies that produce and market sustainable technologies. In contrast, alliances that stimulate technology legitimacy are multilateral alliances that operate in the pre-competitive stage of the value chain and involve not-for-profit organizations.

Collaboration between firms is important to stimulate the transition to a more sustainable society. This special volume shows that collaboration is indeed one of the preferred forms of governance to manage relations between firms in a sustainability context. Collaboration enhances sustainable benefits by creating legitimacy of sustainable technologies, reducing waste and improving environmental and social performance of firms. The institutional environment, in particular environmental laws and regulations, has a beneficial impact on collaboration and relationship management in sustainable supply chains. Two studies in this special volume show, however, that stringent environmental regulations may hinder economic performance and result in outsourcing to foreign suppliers with potential detrimental effects for environmental performance. These negative effects can be overcome by firms that invest in sustainable innovation. This special volume also shows that eco-innovation leads to sustainable benefits, such as lower greenhouse gas emissions.

The literature on how network-based incubation influences the performance of technology-based start-ups has recently grown considerably and provided valuable insights. However, at the same time this literature has become quite fragmented, inconsistently conceptualised, and theoretically underdeveloped. Therefore, this article uses three management theories to structure the literature, improve the theoretical underpinning and develop an agenda for further research. The management theories are the resource-based view, knowledge-based view, organisational learning, and social capital theory. We find that the network-based incubation literature has convincingly shown that network-based incubation provides start-ups with resources, capabilities, knowledge, learning and social capital. However, the influence of these intermediary benefits on start-up performance is ambiguous. There is a considerable opportunity to advance the network-based incubation literature with contemporary insights from management theories. We propose an agenda for further research on network-based incubation that leads to a fine-grained model of the mechanisms and impact of network-based incubation that goes beyond taken for granted assumptions about the positive impact of network-based incubation.