Search results

This paper aims to analyze the characteristics and performance of university–industry (U-I) collaboration for knowledge transfer in relation to environmental sustainability, considering for both parties of the collaborations.

The study is explorative in nature, based on an original data set of more than 350 U-I research and consultancy contracts signed by more than 70 professors specializing in environmental sustainability-related academic disciplines at the University of Padova (Italy) for the period 2008-2012. A mixed-method approach is adopted. Social network analysis and regressions are used to explore the impact of U-I on performance considering for characteristics of the firms, the professors and the collaboration. Interviews with key informants at University of Padova is used to complement and validate the emerging evidence.

Results suggest that U-I positively impacts the performance of firms, but not of professors. Indeed, the hypothesis that professors’ performance (measures in terms of academic publications) is positively associated with academic engagement is not supported. On the contrary, firms’ financial performance is positively associated with U-I collaboration focused on knowledge transfer for environmental innovation; the higher the contracts activated the better the economic performance.

While most previous research has focused either on the university or the firm side of U-I, this study looks at both sides and focuses specifically on engagement in green contracts. The analysis of the geographical scope of U-I collaborations contributes to the growing body of literature by outlining geography’s role in U-I collaborations related to sustainability.

In research on the circular economy, business models are often taken as a focal point since their essential functions are both to create value and to capture part of that value. This chapter investigates whether and how circular business models can be “opened up” to creating and capturing value by utilizing a firm’s main asset not only in its own operation but also in other firms’ businesses. We hereby take the perspective of producing companies which face various challenges over the entire product life cycle and empirically analyze a case of five companies which are part of a joint innovation toward circularity in the plastics industry. Building on a grounded theory approach, we propose a new framework for companies which combines insights about open business models with circularity. When moving toward circularity, producing companies are advised to expand their dyadic perspective of suppliers, on the one hand, and customers, on the other hand, to a network perspective and open their business models.

The following theoretical concepts are applicable to the case and its learning objectives: Stakeholder Power-Interest Matrix and Carroll’s Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Information was obtained in three separate interviews with PSEG. In February 2018, an introductory phone conference was conducted with a number of senior managers within PSEG, including the Director of Development and Strategic Issues, Kate Gerlach. In April 2018, an onsite interview was conducted with Gerlach, who connected the author with Scott Jennings. A phone interview was conducted with Scott Jennings in May 2018 and follow-up communication with him was handled via e-mail. The information obtained from these interviews was supplemented by material obtained from secondary sources. None of the information in the case has been disguised.

Scott Jennings, a Vice President at PSEG, the diversified New Jersey-based energy company, was the project leader for a large commercial wind farm that was to be built off the coast. The project, Garden State Offshore Energy, a joint venture between PSEG and Deepwater Wind, an experienced developer of offshore wind projects, had been announced over six years earlier, in late 2008. In the time that had passed, the Garden State Offshore Energy project team had waited for the New Jersey Bureau of Public Utilities, which had been tasked by Governor Chris Christie to evaluate the project costs before it could authorize the actual construction of the wind turbines. Justifying the project on a cost basis proved to be difficult; despite the growing public sentiment in favor of projects that utilized renewable energy sources such as wind power, the Garden State Offshore Energy team was unable to move the project forward. Scott needed to decide whether it made sense to continue to hold regular meetings with the Garden State Offshore Energy team. Scott’s colleagues suggested that Scott speak with senior management at PSEG to find out if the resources that had been dedicated to the Garden State Offshore Energy project could be shifted to other projects that might be more feasible.

This case is suitable for courses in Sustainability. It is appropriate to use the case in undergraduate courses to illustrate decision making in a regulated industry. Sufficient information is presented in the case to debate both sides of the offshore wind authorization issue.