Our paper investigates the microfoundations of sustainable entrepreneurship and aims to shed light on trade-offs made in decisions about social, ecological and economic sustainability. Balancing the three dimensions of sustainability (social, ecological and economic) inherently requires choices in which one dimension or another has less optimal outcomes. There is not much known about the rationale that sustainable entrepreneurs use for making such trade-offs. Thus, we ask how does entrepreneurial orientation affect decisions and trade-offs on sustainability impact? Our study is an exploratory, qualitative study of 24 sustainable entrepreneurs. We collected data about entrepreneurial orientation and sustainability trade-offs and held in-depth interviews with a subsample of six firms. We conducted a cluster analysis based on four entrepreneurial orientations (innovativeness, proactiveness, riskiness and futurity) and three sustainability trade-off dimensions (environmental, social and economic). From the findings, we derive a typology of three types of sustainable entrepreneurs: green-conflicted, humanitarian-oriented and holistically-oriented. We uncover salient characteristics and aspects of entrepreneurial orientation in relation to trade-off decisions. We find that the entrepreneurs accept slower economic growth or lower performance in order to maintain the integrity of their social and ecological principles and values.
from the article: Abstract Based on a review of recent literature, this paper addresses the question of how urban planners can steer urban environmental quality, given the fact that it is multidimensional in character, is assessed largely in subjective terms and varies across time. The paper explores three questions that are at the core of planning and designing cities: ‘quality of what?’, ‘quality for whom?’ and ‘quality at what time?’ and illustrates the dilemmas that urban planners face in answering these questions. The three questions provide a novel framework that offers urban planners perspectives for action in finding their way out of the dilemmas identified. Rather than further detailing the exact nature of urban quality, these perspectives call for an approach to urban planning that is integrated, participative and adaptive. ; ; sustainable urban development; trade-offs; quality dimensions
We examined the entrepreneurial orientation and sustainability orientation, a persistent and conflicting duality, of sustainable entrepreneurs and their evaluation of competing priorities in sustainability decision making. We conducted an exploratory, mixed-method study of 24 sustainable fashion firms and collected data through structured surveys and rich in-depth interviews. Through our inductive and deductive analysis, we derive three sustainability decision making profiles (singular, flexible and holistic) with distinct prioritization logic (nested, ordered and aligned, respectively). We find different configurations of entrepreneurial orientation correspond to the sustainability decision making profiles. We extend the literature by showing how the reflexivity of entrepreneurial orientation interacts with sustainability orientation.
NO-REGRETS examines the ecological and economic trade-offs of upscaling Offshore Wind Farms (OWFs) in the context of climate change and the ongoing food and nature transitions in the North Sea. NO-REGRETS advances knowledge on potential impacts of OWFs on ocean currents, suspended sediments, microscopic plankton, various life stages of fishes, seabed composition, seafloor organisms, marine mammals, and sea birds. Economic analyses explore changes in the value of marine fisheries and other ocean assets. Co-developed with stakeholders, NO-REGRETS will create tools allowing policymakers, industries and other stakeholders to gauge and optimise the ecological and bioeconomic consequences of North Sea OWF expansion.Collaborative partnersArcadis Nederland B.V., Blauwwind, Boskalis, Breda University of Applied Sciences, Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, Clusius C.V., Cooperatie Kottervisserij Nederland, Deltares, EcoShape, Eneco Windmolens Offshore B.V., Heerema Marine Contractors, Jaczon B.V., Nederlandse Vissersbond, Noordelijke Visserij Alliantie, NIOZ, NWO-institutenorganisatie, Ørsted Wind Power Netherlands Holding B.V., Pelagic Freezer Trawler Association, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Rijkswaterstaat, RWE Offshore Wind Netherlands B.V., Stichting Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Stichting Wageningen Research, Technische Universiteit Delft, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, TNO Utrecht, Universiteit Leiden, Universiteit Twente, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Wageningen University & Research.
Organisations are increasingly embedding Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques and tools in their processes. Typical examples are generative AI for images, videos, text, and classification tasks commonly used, for example, in medical applications and industry. One danger of the proliferation of AI systems is the focus on the performance of AI models, neglecting important aspects such as fairness and sustainability. For example, an organisation might be tempted to use a model with better global performance, even if it works poorly for specific vulnerable groups. The same logic can be applied to high-performance models that require a significant amount of energy for training and usage. At the same time, many organisations recognise the need for responsible AI development that balances performance with fairness and sustainability. This KIEM project proposal aims to develop a tool that can be employed by organizations that develop and implement AI systems and aim to do so more responsibly. Through visual aiding and data visualisation, the tool facilitates making these trade-offs. By showing what these values mean in practice, which choices could be made and highlighting the relationship with performance, we aspire to educate users on how the use of different metrics impacts the decisions made by the model and its wider consequences, such as energy consumption or fairness-related harms. This tool is meant to facilitate conversation between developers, product owners and project leaders to assist them in making their choices more explicit and responsible.
It is VHL’s mission to train high-quality, committed and innovative professionals who con-tribute to a more sustainable world , and who are able to organize and manage multi-stakeholder processes for sustainable change: graduates with transdisciplinary competences. Secondly, VHL aims to contribute to the SDG-agenda by linking its education and applied research to eight particular SDGs of which Resilient Communities is one. However, to operationalize SDGs in practice, and aligning targets and strategies of different stakeholders is difficult: ‘resilience’ and ‘sustainability’ refer to ‘wicked problems’ for which no definitive problem formulation, nor clear-cut solutions exist. Addressing wicked problems like ‘resilience’ and ‘sustainability’ requires transdisciplinary collaboration to manage and transform divergent values and conflicting interests, and to co-create sustainable innovations. This HBO postdoc views the 17 SDGs as a compass to align targets and strategies of citizens, government, civil society organizations, private sector and knowledge institutes who collaborate in Living Labs of VHL focusing on resilient communities/regions. Through spiraling action-reflection cycles, stakeholders will use the SDG compass to make success mechanisms, obstacles and trade-offs visible, assuming they stay engaged to overcome difficulties to improve interventions and innovations; this is expected to result in adapted sustainability practices and lessons learned on reaching community resilience. The postdoc’s aim is two-fold highlighting the link between research and education: (1) Design a methodology to integrate SDGs effectively in VHL’s applied research: using the SDGs as compass to improve performance and outcomes of transdisciplinary collaborations. (2) Develop a Roadmap for transdisciplinary education at course, curriculum, and institutional level with SDGs as compass. Future graduates require the competence to work together with others outside one own’s discipline, institute, culture or context. Living Labs offer a suitable learning environment to develop this competence
