ArticlePDF Available

University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: How and with what impact?

February 2021
Small Business Economics in Print

DOI:10.1007/s11187-019-00280-4

License
CC BY 4.0

Authors:

Marcus Wagner

Universität Augsburg

Stefan Schaltegger

Leuphana University Lüneburg

Erik G. Hansen

Johannes Kepler University Linz

Klaus Fichter

Borderstep Institute for Innovation and Sustainability

State universities in Germany are increasingly being transformed from institutions with traditional teaching and research responsibilities to have a third, societal role in sustainable regional and economic development. In doing so, universities support knowledge spillovers to improve sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems that benefit economic revitalization or further development of regions while at the same time promoting stakeholder involvement in crucial governance processes at the regional level. Based on a comparative case study design building on three cases in Germany, our research analyses these interdependencies focussing on university-linked support programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and the effects on sustainable regional development. Our findings provide a nuanced view clarifying the different roles universities have, how knowledge spillovers are created and what outputs, outcomes, and effects are realized at the regional level and beyond. Specifically, we demonstrate that depending on the regional context, different configurations, pathways, and intervention points of universities may equally improve sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems.

Case characteristics

…

Comparative case analysis based on the logic model of the theory of change

…

Theory-of-change framework formulating a logic model (based on Carman 2010; OECD 2002)

…

Framework for investigating the role of university-linked support programmes for sustainable regional development (based on Agarwal et al. 2007: 267; Carman 2010)

…

Figures - uploaded by Erik G. Hansen

Content may be subject to copyright.

Access to this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.

Learn more

Content available from Small Business Economics

This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.

University-linked programmes for sustainable

entrepreneurship and regional development: how

and with what impact?

Marcus Wagner &Stefan Schaltegger &Erik G. Hansen &Klaus Fichter

Accepted: 17 June 2019

#The Author(s) 2019

Abstract State universities are increasingly being trans-

formed from institutions with traditional teaching and

research responsibilities to have a third, societal role in

sustainable regional and economic development. In doing

so, universities support knowledge spillovers to improve

sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems that benefit eco-

nomic revitalization or further development of regions.

At the same time they promote stakeholder involvement

in crucial governance processes at the regional level.

Based on a comparative case study design building on

three cases in Germany, our research analyses these in-

terdependencies focussing on university-linked support

programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and the

effects on sustainable regional development. Our findings

provide a nuanced view clarifying the different roles

universities have, how knowledge spillovers are created,

and what outputs, outcomes, and effects are realized at

the regional level and beyond. Specifically, we demon-

strate that depending on the regional context, different

configurations, pathways, and intervention points of uni-

versities may equally improve sustainable entrepreneurial

ecosystems.

Keywords University.Support .Programmes .

Sustainable .Entrepreneurship .Regional .

Development .Innovation .Facilitation .Sustainability.

Ecopreneurs .Start-ups

JEL classification L26 .O12 .Q01

1 Introduction

As part of a longer-term global trend, state universities in

Germany are being transformed from institutions focus-

sing on teaching and research to increasingly assume a

third role in sustainable regional and economic develop-

ment (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000; Abreu et al.

2016). In doing so, they are conceived to much more

strongly support knowledge spillovers and as part of this

also to promote stakeholder involvement in governance

processes at the regional level. They potentially will play a

far more important role in economic revitalization or fur-

ther development of regions. Because large-scale and com-

prehensive societal transitions towards sustainability are

considered to be fundamentally knowledge-driven, this

also implies a significantly heightened role for universities

in sustainable regional development (Sedlacek 2013).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00280-4

M. Wagner (*)

University of Augsburg & Bureau d’Economie Théorique et

Appliquée, Universitätsstr. 16, 86159 Augsburg, Germany

e-mail: marcus.wagner@wiwi.uni-augsburg.de

S. Schaltegger

Leuphana University Lüneburg, Centre for Sustainability

Management (CSM), Lüneburg, Germany

E. G. Hansen (*)

Johannes Kepler University Linz (JKU), Institute for Integrated

Quality Design (IQD), Altenberger Strasse 69, A-4040 Linz,

Austria

e-mail: erik.hansen@jku.at

K. Fichter

Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg & Borderstep Institute

for Innovation and Sustainability, Oldenburg, Germany

/ Published online: 11 November 2019

Small Bus Econ (2021) 56:1141–1158

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Concerning multi-stakeholder governance and

knowledge transfers in the entrepreneurship context,

the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship

(Agarwal et al. 2007,2010) and notions of entrepreneur-

ial ecosystems and innovation systems (Markard and

Truffer 2008; Audretsch and Berlitski 2013;Stam

2015; Theodoraki et al. 2018) play a key role. Both of

these stress that knowledge investments by firms and

universities need to be linked to entrepreneurial activi-

ties so that knowledge spillovers result in a win-win

situation in a wider ecosystem (Agarwal et al. 2007).

In our study, we focus the analysis on how

university-related support programmes for entrepre-

neurship contribute to sustainable development of re-

gions in terms of supporting a balance of economic and

socio-ecological benefits in the region (e.g. Cohen and

Winn 2007; Wagner and Schaltegger 2010). We relate

this to the role of universities in supporting knowledge

spillovers in the entrepreneurial ecosystems and inno-

vation systems of the region they are in (Stam and

Spigel 2016). Given that those universities are usually

public sector organizations, they have a comparatively

greater propensity to be at least to some extent embed-

ded in a region owing to their third role mentioned

above.

Our researchfollows a comparative case study design

(Yin 2003). Two units of analysis are applied: the

university-linked support programme and effects on

sustainable regional development. These are related to

the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship

(Agarwal et al. 2007,2010), different functions in en-

trepreneurial ecosystems and innovation systems (Stam

and Spigel 2016; Markard and Truffer 2008)anda

differentiation of effects based on the theory of change

(Carman 2010; Funnel and Rogers 2011; McLaughlin

and Jordan 1999).

For reasons of comparability and comprehensive-

ness, three cases in Germany were selected, namely an

incubator, an entrepreneurship education module, and a

sustainability education program. These were analysed

comparatively in order to clarify the university links of

each initiative and how it generated knowledge spill-

overs and involved public actors, as well as what kind of

public good was delivered. Our study thus contributes to

providing a more differentiated view of how to imple-

ment entrepreneurial and innovation-oriented strategies

for social sustainability and protecting the natural envi-

ronment through different configurations of university-

related knowledge spillover mechanisms. In the

remainder of the paper, we next review the relevant

literature and condense it into a conceptual model that

can guide our analysis (Section 2). We then detail our

chosen method including the procedure applied to gen-

erate our sample, the data collection processes and the

analysis strategy (Section 3). Subsequently, we present

our empirical material in detail on a case-by-case basis

(Section 4). Following this, we present the results of our

analysis based on a case comparison (Section 5). The

paper finishes with a discussion and some overall con-

clusions (Section 6).

2 Literature review and conceptual considerations

2.1 Universities as actors in the knowledge economy:

the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship

While traditionally governments have played a domi-

nant role in fostering knowledge diffusion, universities

have become increasingly important contributors to that

task. The university has been transformed from a pure

teaching institution via the Humboldtian notion of com-

bining teaching and research to one that increasingly

takes on a third, societal role in regional and economic

development by supporting and creating knowledge

spillovers (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000;Agarwal

et al. 2010) into the regions where they are situated

(Etzkowitz and Klofsten 2005). The triple helix model

linking teaching, research and development has gained

importance as an analytical device for studying this

development (e.g. Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000).

Similarly, the knowledge spillover theory of entrepre-

neurship helps to understand how this shapes entrepre-

neurial ecosystems and innovation systems (Agarwal

et al. 2007; Audretsch and Berlitski 2013). For example,

regional governments and universities cooperate to es-

tablish and operate incubators in which social or envi-

ronmental entrepreneurs are supported (Cohen 2006). In

this paper, we focus on the role of universities in entre-

preneurial ecosystems from a knowledge-based view

building on the knowledge spillover theory of entrepre-

neurship (Agarwal et al. 2007)andthenotionthatthe

entrepreneur is the primary conduit of transmitting

knowledge spillovers (Audretsch and Berlitski 2013).

We consider the process of new knowledge commer-

cialization through knowledge spillover as a key deter-

minant of innovation and growth in industries and re-

gions (Audretsch and Berlitski 2013)aswellasa

1142 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

potential factor for sustainable development within a

region (Simatupang et al. 2015).

2.2 Functions and effects of entrepreneurial ecosystems:

the role of universities in facilitating sustainable

entrepreneurship

‘Entrepreneurial universities’, which emphasize their

role in regionaleconomic development next to the more

traditional role in teaching and research, are an impor-

tant element of (regional) innovation systems

(Rothaermel et al. 2007) and entrepreneurial ecosystems

(Theodoraki et al. 2018). The concept of innovation

systems and the entrepreneurial ecosystems approach

are helpful in investigating and explaining the role of

university-related support programmes for entrepre-

neurship and their effects on the sustainable develop-

ment of a region. Both concepts focus on the external

business environment and emphasize that there are

forces beyond the boundaries of an organization, but

within those of a region, that can contribute to a firm’s

overall competitiveness and impacts (Stam and Spigel

2016). Besides similarities, there are also differences

between the concepts, for example, with regard to the

role of knowledge: While the concept of innovation

systems emphasizes the importance of knowledge spill-

overs from universities and other large research-

intensive organizations, the approach of entrepreneurial

ecosystems stresses the crucial role of entrepreneurial

knowledge in the innovation process (Stam and Spigel

2016). Our investigation can benefit from both con-

cepts, and accordingly, we build on both.

An entrepreneurial ecosystem can be defined as ‘a

dynamic community of interdependent actors (entrepre-

neurs, suppliers, buyer, government, etc.) and system-

level institutional, informational and socioeconomic

contexts’(Audretsch and Belitski 2017: 1034). With

regard to the units of analysis of our investigation (the

university-related support programme and outputs and

outcomes for sustainable regional development), two

aspects of entrepreneurial ecosystems are especially rel-

evant: (1) What functions can they provide for sustain-

able entrepreneurship? and (2) What effects are relevant

from the viewpoint of sustainable regional develop-

ment? Entrepreneurial ecosystems and in a similar fash-

ion innovation systems provide different ‘functions’to

the actors embedded in them (Markard and Truffer

2008; Audretsch and Berlitski 2013;Stam2015;

Theodoraki et al. 2018). These include knowledge

development and diffusion, provision of education and

training, entrepreneurial experimentation, incubation

activities, financing of innovation processes, provision

of consultancy and networking and interactive learning,

as detailed in Table 1.

With regard to the potential effects entrepreneurial

ecosystems and especially universities can trigger, we

apply a regional perspective on sustainable development

and relate it to the concept of sustainable

entrepreneurship.

Of course, sustainable development cannot be ad-

dressed from a regional perspective alone, as many

sustainability issues such as climate change are global

phenomena. Another issue is that regional sustainable

development could have a negative impact on or divert

opportunities from other regions. For example, the for-

mer is the case when ‘dirty’value chain activities are

relocated from developed to developing countries. The

latter is about the loss of business and development

opportunities in one region due to regional sourcing

and production practices in another region, such as in

the case of locally sourced, low-carbon goods versus

internationally sourced fair-trade goods (Holt and

Watson 2008). Nevertheless, the advantages regarding

the stronger identification of actors include increased

political accountability and improved means of imple-

mentation which justify a regional focus (Thierstein and

Walser 1997). Furthermore, global phenomena relating

to unsustainability must also be addressed by activities

and partial solutions in local contexts. Looking at sus-

tainable development from a regional perspective, next

to conventional economic effects such as job creation

Tabl e 1 Functions of entrepreneurial ecosystems and innovation

systems (based on Markard and Truffer 2008:602)

Functions of entrepreneurial ecosystems and innovation systems

•Provision of education and training

•Knowledge development and diffusion

•Provision of R&D

•Influence on the direction of search

•Entrepreneurial experimentation

•Incubation activities

•Resources mobilization

•Financing of innovation processes

•Market formation

•Creation of legitimacy

•Networking and interactive learning

•Provision of consultancy

•Creation/change of institutions

1143University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

and deceleration of the ‘rural exodus’, we need to con-

sider potentially wider effects such as reduced carbon

footprints, healthier jobs and better opportunities for

disadvantaged groups, in addition to improved regional

stakeholder integration and governance.

Sustainable entrepreneurship is a new research field

that is still developing. Since 2009, the number of articles

published on sustainable entrepreneurship has increased

significantly (Binder and Belz 2015;Gastetal.2017).

While many of these articles emphasize opportunity-

seeking as being key to sustainable entrepreneurship,

another important thread of literature highlights a creative

and effectuation-based approach (Hockerts and

Wüstenhagen 2010; Parrish 2010; Schaltegger and

Wag ner 2011) that adopts a creation perspective. Such

research emphasizes the active role of ecopreneurs and

sustainable entrepreneurs in creating sustainability-

oriented change (Schaltegger et al. 2016; Boons et al.

2013). This perspective is particularly important for a

creative view of universities supportive of sustainable

entrepreneurship. In this paper we view sustainable en-

trepreneurship, in accordance with Pacheco et al. (2010),

as the discovery, creation, evaluation and exploitation of

opportunities to create innovative goods and services that

are consistent with regional, national and sustainable

development goals (United Nations General Assembly

2015; Schaltegger et al. 2018). Creating, recognizing and

taking advantage of sustainable opportunities are com-

plex challenges for sustainable entrepreneurs and demand

specific support systems. An effective support system

incorporates all actors, institutional settings and resources

that help entrepreneurs in innovating successfully

(Fichter et al. 2016). In this paper, we concentrate on

the university as an important supporting actor. We as-

sume that, on the one hand, some personal attributes of

entrepreneurs such as the individual’s prior knowledge

and motivation (Shepherd and Patzelt 2011),

sustainability orientation (Kuckertz and Wagner 2010;

Wagner 2012) and perpetual reasoning (Parrish 2010)

can be influenced by the knowledge spillovers they re-

ceive within the university context. On the other hand,

universities are also able to support external economic

actors like SMEs or start-ups in developing and estab-

lishing sustainable and often technology-driven products

through their research and development (R&D) resources

(Abdelkafi and Hansen 2018).

2.3 Theory of change

Our research investigates how (entrepreneurial) uni-

versities and the different forms of knowledge spill-

overs they create can foster sustainable entrepre-

neurship that impacts sustainable regional develop-

ment. Given the key role of universities, which are

often non-profit organizations, and the emphasis on

ultimate impacts, our analysis draws on logic

models and the closely-linked concept of a theory

of change which serves a prominent programme

evaluation role in the non-profit sector (Funnel and

Rogers 2011;Carman2010). The theory of change

draws on defining linear cause-and-effect chains

from programme implementation to societal impact

(McLaughlin and Jordan 1999). Similar models are

used in the context of corporate philanthropy (e.g.

London Benchmarking Group 2004), corporate-

NGO partnerships (Hansen et al. 2010;Hansenand

Spitzeck 2011) and in performance measurement in

the area of corporate sustainability (Epstein and Roy

2001; Hansen and Schaltegger 2016)andstart-up

venturing (Ney et al. 2014). Notably, a logic model

or, taking a narrative perspective, a theory of change

assumes a linear causality between inputs, activities,

(immediate) outputs, outcomes and impacts as is

detailed in Fig. 1.

Inputs

•Resources

dedicated to a

parcular program

or iniave

•E.g. personnel,

me, equipment,

funding

Acvies

•The thing the

program does with

the

inputs/resources

•Intervenon used

to bring the

intended changes

Outputs

•Direct products of

the acvies

•Associated with

the volume or

level of the work

that has been

accomplished

•Oen expressed in

terms of units of

service or the

number of people

served

Outcomes

•Intended direct

beneﬁts/results of

planned acon

•Direct change in

knowledge,

atude, values or

behaviours

•Likely/achieved

short-/medium-

term eﬀects of an

intervenon’s

output

Impacts

•Posive and

negave, primary

and secondary

long-term eﬀects

•Eﬀects can be

produced directly

or indirectly

•Eﬀects can be

intended or

unintended

Fig. 1 Theory-of-change framework formulating a logic model (based on Carman 2010;OECD2002)

1144 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

We maintain that the theory of change can be

fruitfully applied to analyse effects of entrepre-

neurial ecosystems. By this logic, the entrepreneur-

ial ecosystem model provided by Stam and Spigel

(2016) includes the consideration of outputs (en-

trepreneurial activity) and outcomes (aggregated

value creation) of conditions such as knowledge

and support services in entrepreneurial ecosystems.

While the linear logic has been used widely and

contributes to a straightforward analytical under-

standing, it also represents an approximation of

cause and effect chains existing in reality. It is

also based on the assumption that developing uni-

versities, creating educational programmes, teach-

ing students, developing entrepreneurs, and facili-

tating new ventures ultimately matter and generate

impact in the larger system. But identifying or

even measuring effects from one to the next log-

ical step becomes harder (and more resource-

intensive) the more we move from left to the right.

Finally, while this linear logic model can only

cover the most important causalities, other iterative

or non-linear relationships could be neglected.

However, by covering these most important

causalities, the linear logic we apply appears a

good first approximation for our research question.

2.4 Conceptual framework and guiding research

questions

The review of three interrelated literatures leads us

to propose the following (preliminary) conceptual

framework (Fig. 2). The framework has four over-

arching components (which are italicized in Fig.

2): first, the basis of the framework is the knowl-

edge spillover theory of entrepreneurship describ-

ing the process from investments by established

organizations into knowledge creation, the take-up

of entrepreneurial action leading to new ventures,

and how their performance ultimately leads to

growth of industries and regions. Second, the the-

ory of change helps us to generalize the latter

knowledge spillover process into a logic model

from inputs to impacts. Third, the entrepreneurial

ecosystems’view stresses that the success of en-

trepreneurs is influenced by how conducive the

embedding system is, consisting of various actors,

fulfilling diverse functions, generating various

Fig. 2 Framework for investigating the role of university-linked support programmes for sustainable regional development (based on

Agarwaletal.2007: 267; Carman 2010)

1145University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

effects. Fourth, the unit of analysis highlights that,

by covering the entire process from inputs to im-

pacts, we actually cover two units of analysis:

inputs to outputs occur in the realm of the

university-linked support programmes, while out-

comes and impacts relate to the larger system in

the sense of sustainable regional development.

Based on the above framework, our main research

questions are:

(1) How do university-linked programmes support

sustainable entrepreneurship?

(2) How do university-linked programmes contribute

to:

(a) an improvement of the entrepreneurial ecosys-

tem for sustainable entrepreneurship?

(b) entrepreneurial activities by sustainable

entrepreneurs?

region?

3Method

3.1 Research design and sample

Our research uses a multiple embedded case study de-

sign (Eisenhardt 1989) following literal replication (Yin

2003). Two units of analysis are applied: the support

programmes and the resulting ventures (outcomes) with

their impacts for the region. Overall, we selected three

cases (Table 2) according to the following criteria:

&All are located in the same country to control for the

national institutional context. We chose Germany,

because sustainability is often valued highly and

because it has established extensive support struc-

tures for entrepreneurs and many successful sustain-

able entrepreneurship-related programmes over the

last two decades (Fichter et al. 2016;Banketal.

2017). To increase comparability even further, this

paper studies three cases from the two largest Ger-

man states—Bavaria and Lower Saxony—which

are the most similar in the federal context of Ger-

many. Universities in these two states were screened

for involvement in well-known entrepreneurial sus-

tainability initiatives while case selection continued

until theoretical saturation was achieved to find

distinct cases for further analysis.

&Programmes have been established for at least

10 years and all are pioneers on the European or

global levels (e.g. MBA Sustainability Management

as the world’s first MBA programme with a sustain-

ability focus; UTG Augsburg was the first

sustainability-specific incubator in Europe, Eco-

Venturing was the first course worldwide with stu-

dents developing sustainability-orientated business

concepts in cooperation with business partners

aiming to promote tangible green business start-

ups). This sufficiently long case history allows us

to assess the impacts on sustainable regional

development.

&All cases have been publicly acknowledged to be

successful (e.g. through receiving awards or high

levels of funding or visibility).

&In all cases, the university (possibly in combination

with other research-oriented institutions) played a

major role in facilitating sustainable

entrepreneurship.

&The researchers had very good data access (Yin

2003).

Overall, our cases can be classified as ‘unique’(Yin

2003) as they cover university-based or related facilita-

tion of sustainable entrepreneurship in long established

(successful) pioneer programmes. The cases are also

‘revelatory’, because the unusually good access by the

researchers facilitated the study of previously unad-

dressed aspects (Yin 2003). The unusual level of access

stems from the fact that in all cases, researchers have

been involved either in the programme’s foundation and

operation, or in research on and consultation with the

case entity.

Despite the similarities described above, we also

deliberately encouraged diversity among the cases to

better reflect the nature of the present exploratory work

that aims to deliver a better understanding of a new

phenomenon. As shown in Table 2(in chronological

order), we included different types of programmes that

also cover different phases in the entrepreneurial process

(Shane and Eckhardt 2003). Covering such heterogene-

ity has intrinsic value as it represents the diversity of

approaches taken by institutions to facilitate sustainable

entrepreneurship. Moreover, despite their differences in

type, the nature of the outcomes highlighted in our

1146 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

analysis (i.e. the creation of sustainable ventures) is

comparable (please note that we are not primarily inter-

ested in comparing the quantity of outcomes/ventures,

which certainly differ between more conventional incu-

bators and teaching-based programmes).

3.2 Data collection and analysis strategy

We collected data from multiple sources covering both

secondary and primary data. The secondary data on the

selected support programmes (e.g. Hesselbarth et al.

2015; Wagner and Lutz 2012; Fichter et al. 2016)helped

us to obtain both a broad understanding of the

programmes and details of the programme design, par-

ticipation and outcomes. Primary data covered partici-

pant observation, workshops, interviews, and desk re-

search. We also collected data at multiple points in time

(longitudinal case). Overall, this permitted the extensive

triangulation of information thatwas supplemented with

informal data, wherever possible. Following Miles and

Huberman (1994), we stopped collecting further data

when new aspects on the issues captured by our research

questions could no longer be identified. Table 3pro-

vides an overview of this process and the resulting data

sources.

As suggested by Eisenhardt (1989), the data analysis

was carried out as an iterative process between literature

and data. We started with broad concepts from literature

that we found informative for the case study focus (e.g.

theory of change). We then collected single case descrip-

tions for all our cases. Frequent group discussions with-

in the research team helped to develop a common

understanding of both deductive and emerging

categories. Following this, we carried out a

comparative analysis across cases, which according to

Glaser and Strauss (1967) is appropriate when theoret-

ical saturation is reached. In the remainder of the paper,

we reflect this process by initially introducing in the

following section the individual cases.

4 Case studies

This section introduces the three cases of support

programmes and related venture creations that form

the basis for the detailed analysis. Each case description

includes information on the context of the programme

and its relevant inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts.

To provide further insights into and evidence of impacts

generated through the three cases, we then scrutinize

one start-upfor each case to clarify how the programmes

led to or supported the founding activities of specific

entrepreneurial individuals.

4.1 Case 1: UTG Augsburg

4.1.1 University-linked support programme

In 2006, the state of Bavaria collaborated with

local universities to support certain future technol-

ogy domains. The aim was to employ a cluster

programme involving networking and cross-linking

of technology-oriented and technology-specific

business incubators and technology centres. One

of the domains focussed upon was environmental

technology. The concept thus built on the cluster

logic and agglomeration economies (Marshall

1920;Porteretal.2010). The UTG Augsburg

was a core element in the cluster programme and

the only business incubator specializing in envi-

ronmental technology supported by the Bavarian

state. It was set up in 1998 and in fact was the

only incubator in the EU with such a specializa-

tion at that time (Hehl 2010). The major mobili-

zation of resources was through leveraging funds

made available through the Bavarian cluster pro-

gramme, which provided a window of opportunity

and a rare chance to develop a dedicated incuba-

tor. Furthermore, prior knowledge and experience

resided in the local universities and a local

Tabl e 2 Case characteristics

Case Institutions/

university

Programme

start

Type of

programme

UTG

Augsburg

State of

Bavaria,

Chambers,

University of

Augsburg

1998 Incubation

MBA

Sustainability

Mana gement

Leuphana

University

Lüneburg

2003 Education

(full-degree

programme)

Eco-Venturing Carl von

Ossietzky

University

Oldenburg

2009 Entrepreneurship

education (single

module), start-up

facilitation

1147University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

research institute, the Bavarian Institute for Waste

Research.

The UTG mainly covers the innovation system func-

tions of experimentation, incubation, resourcemobiliza-

tion and networking. The latter is extended through the

interaction of partners that also provide extended sup-

port functions. Specifically, the ‘Umweltcluster Bayern’

(of which the UTG is a main member) is itself a member

of a Europe-wide network of environmental technology

clusters named ‘EcoCluP’, which incorporates over

3500 firms and 430 research institutions from ten EU

countries (Anon. 2011). Furthermore, the UTG is a

major partner in the ‘Kompetenzzentrum Umwelt e.

V.’(abbreviated to KUMAS, a network of Bavarian

environmental technology firms headquartered at the

UTG). The UTG hosts an average of 40 start-up firms

for an average of 4.7 years, during which time they

benefit from below-average rental rates and flexible

contract conditions among other cost advantages.

Assessing the regional sustainabilityimpact of the inno-

vations realized by the start-ups that have been in the

incubator involves evaluating environmental contribu-

tions. The process includes life-cycle assessments that

individual entrepreneurs in the incubator already use as

a communication tool. Economically and socially the

regional impact is mainly generated through around 200

jobs created and over 30 patents granted in the 140 firms

incubated since 1998 (Hehl 2011;Anon2018).

4.1.2 Exemplary new venture

The start-up Corrmoran was founded as a University

of Augsburg spinoff and joined the UTG in 2008.

The four founders (three of whom came from the

university) initially also received support by the

university in the form of an EXIST (German

federal initiative for academic start-ups) grant for

developing their venture’sbusinessplan.Corrmoran

developed a new sensor device, which made it pos-

sible to measure the corrosion in large-scale firing

plants online during operation. The initial develop-

ment of the device resulted from a research project

at the university supported by the European Region-

al Development Fund. Corrosion of heat exchangers

is one of the main factors limiting energy efficiency

and creates huge maintenance costs in large-scale

Tabl e 3 Data collection

Case 1: UTG Augsburg Case 2: MBA Sustaina bility

Management

Case 3: Eco-Venturing

Secondary data - Presentation on the Bavarian cluster

strategy and the centre (Hehl 2010;

Wagner and Lutz 2012)

- Presentation on environmental

technology incubation at the centre

(Hehl 2011)

- Evaluation report on environmental

technology and energy in Bavaria

(Anon. 2011)

- Alumni survey on skills and

career path (Hesselbarth and

Schaltegger 2014)

- Programme foundation and

institutional change (Lee and

Schaltegger 2014)

- Programme’s teaching

pedagogies and skill

development (Hesselbarth

et al. 2015)

- Case study analysis of university

support structures and programmes

(Geier and Fichter 2015)

- Interview with responsible teaching

personnel (Fichter et al. 2016)

Primary data:

-Deskresearchand

internal data

- Programme websites

- Venture websites and media

contributions

- Programme websites

- Venture websites and media

contributions

- Student database, teaching

evaluations, alumni surveys

- Programme websites

- Venture websites and media

contributions

- Student, alumni and start-up

database, venture survival analysis

and impact evaluation

- Participant

observation,

workshops, and

interviews

- Interview with past centre manager

- Interviews with nine start-ups from

the centre

- Interview with current centre manager

- 520 days of programme

development

-> 600 days of own teaching

- 100 days of further programme

participation

- Two workshops with

sustainable ventures

- 80 days of programme development

- 120 days of teaching

- 240 days of student coaching

- Five interviews with participating

students and start-up-entrepreneurs

1148 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

firing plants. Early detection of corrosion issues

using Corrmoran’s sensor can improve energy effi-

ciency and deliver cost savings, which are likely to

make a significant impact on regional and global

sustainability. Corrmoran has also won several busi-

ness plan competitions such as the regional

“BPWSchwaben”in 2008 and the second stage of the

Munich Business Plan Competition (MBPW) in 2009,

and has placed second in the Marathon category of the

third stage ofthe MBPW. The environmental credentials

of Corrmoran’s product have been recognized by the

project becoming one of the three official model projects

which represent the best environmental competencies in

Bavaria. The technology developed by Corrmoran has

high potential as certified by the fact that the “High-Tech

Gründerfonds”(a public-private partnership between

the German Government and several leading German

multinationals from different industries) and also Bay-

ern Kapital (an organization managing the seed funds of

the State of Bavaria) provided substantial venture capital

to the start-up. In 2010, the start-up already had 14

employees and 14 customers across Europe, and by

2014 Bayern Kapital decided that Corrmoran did not

require further financing. Whilst the initial impulse for

the venture came directly out of the university (i.e.

already at this stage a beneficial and unique role of the

university can be identified in that the founders met at

the university through a research project carried out at

the university), the UTG made crucial contributions in

the later venture phases. Specifically, Corrmoran

benefited from the UTG by having access to a common

laboratory of the highest standard to refine and test the

technology. Furthermore, the UTG provided an environ-

ment supporting intensive exchanges with firms work-

ing in very similar market contexts. Corrmoran could

capitalize on this, which was significant in helping the

venture develop its own entrepreneurial processes. Be-

cause of this, the venture could build on the expertise of

other firms, as well as accessing their business networks,

in a unique way that would not have been possible

without the UTG.

4.2 Case 2: MBA sustainability management

4.2.1 University-linked support programme

The motivation to set up the world’s first MBA pro-

gramme in corporate sustainability management at the

Centre for Sustainability Management (CSM) was to

educate “change agents for corporate sustainability”.

The need for this new programme was based on the

perceived lack of impact of sustainable management

education, as students took a long time to get into

positions of influence or lacked sufficient sustainability

knowledge.

Three inputs were considered essential for the pro-

gramme: financial inputs for establishing and maintain-

ing it, the development of teaching materials and the

involvement of lecturers. The programme content was

originally financed with EU support funding, and there

was no funding from the university. The programme

was founded in a rather isolated manner and encoun-

tered little resistance owing to a gap between the respon-

sibilities and competence areas of the relevant faculties.

That situation provided the necessary organizational

space to innovate (Lee and Schaltegger 2014). The

founders of the programme worked on the development

of teaching materials for 2 years until they had material

for around 1800 lecture hours to support a 1-year full

time (or 2-year part-time) programme with on-campus

lectures and e-learning–based distance courses.

External lecturers were acquired with the help of a

group of four PhD students at the Centre. The curricu-

lum was discussed with representatives from the corpo-

rate world and the programme was accredited 7 weeks

before it commenced. The programme’s success is

largely the result of the very high levels of personal

engagement of the founders and the research team at

CSM involved in the MBA teaching and student ser-

vice. To reduce bureaucratic obstacles in the general

university administration, most administrative processes

are managed directly at CSM. The curriculum has been

continuously improved and enlarged since inception

(Hesselbarth et al. 2015). The programme was devel-

oped as a continuous education blended learning pro-

gramme (and thus did not affect the existing on-campus

programmes). The MBA curriculum covers classes in

sustainability management, specialized functions (e.g.

sustainable production and sustainable strategy) as well

as dedicated courses on sustainable entrepreneurship

and sustainability innovation.

A unique feature of the programme is the project-

based learning in which the entire cohort solves

sustainability-related problems during a 5-day on-site

placement with a business partner. The programme

started in 2003 with 27 students and now about 40

students are admitted annually. Approximately 450 stu-

dents have graduated from the MBA programme, and a

1149University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

large alumni network with approximately 600 people

(graduates, lecturers and students) has been established

with a broad own network programme of regional meet-

ings and other activities (Hesselbarth and Schaltegger

2014). Due to the distance learning and part-time nature

of the programme, the part-time students can directly

apply new skills to their jobs and transfer their devel-

oped competencies into their professional working en-

vironment. The possibility for immediate and continu-

ous application and trial of new knowledge increases

both the motivation of the students and their real-world

impact during their studies. Some students have founded

their own sustainable businesses for example in the solar

industry, consulting, IT and manufacturing of energy-

saving devices with the related potential impact on the

transformation of industries.

4.2.2 Exemplary new venture

The start-up IntelliSolar was founded in 2006 by a

former student of the MBA Sustainability Management.

The company now has more than 30 employees and

plans, develops and invests in semi-large photovoltaic

(PV) systems on industrial sites (larger than 200 m

but

smaller than large photovoltaic parks). As a general

contractor, the start-up delivers projects for both small

and large companies and for private investors who either

have roof space or want to invest in PV. The one-stop-

shop principle is the main offer of IntelliSolar as a

general contractor: the start-up takes responsibility for

the project and connects all actors dealing with the

different steps of planning, installing and maintaining

PV systems. IntelliSolar takes care of all the planning

steps from the vision to installation and grid connection,

including the planning of energy storage systems and

maintenance. The founder of IntelliSolar graduated with

the MBA Sustainability Management in Lüneburg,

which supported him in various ways: First, the project

management core of the company requires dealing with

different kinds of expertise. Managing inter- and trans-

disciplinary approaches, with experts from different dis-

ciplines and in interdisciplinary teams is a key topic of

the MBA programme. Second, the alumni network of

the MBA programme provided a platform of exchange

with fellow students, some of whom became employees

of the company. The founder formed a group of detailed

knowledge of study collaborators in terms of their inter-

ests in and commitment to sustainability and also their

strengths and particular area of expertise. Third, fellow

MBA students work as architects in construction and

other types of firms, which provides contacts, informa-

tion and potential business opportunities. Utilizing the

available support means the company has established a

national network and works with regional partners near

the customers who do the actual installation and local

maintenance. With this innovation, the company con-

tributes to the diffusion of PV systems in the mid-range

size of projects. While large projects are often delivered

by large investment companies with professional exper-

tise and small projects on single-family houses can be

undertaken by local heating and solar installation crafts-

men, mid-size projects on smaller industrial buildings

have a large potential with regard to the number of

buildings and roofs, but require expertise and local

support. This is exactly the market gap IntelliSolar

serves and for whose customers the company has devel-

oped specific solutions. In addition to its services as a

general contractor, the company provides services and

technologies to substantially reduce installation time

and costs for PV systems. Based on a car shell technol-

ogy from the automotive industry, the company offers

the fast installation system iFIX. Recently, the company

has expanded both geographically to Spain and Swit-

zerland and in terms of its range of services, now in-

cluding rainwater catchment systems and small sewage

water treatment systems.

4.3 Case 3: Eco-Venturing at Carl von Ossietzky

University Oldenburg, Germany

4.3.1 University-linked support programme

The University of Oldenburg, located in the north-west

of Germany, has a long tradition in sustainability-related

teaching and research. Its three-term non-consecutive

master’s programme in Renewable Energy started as

early as 1987. Based on its tradition and specific com-

petencies in sustainability-related teaching and research,

the Department of Business Administration, Economics

and Law decided to expand the sustainability master

cluster and introduce a new master’s programme in

Sustainability Economics and Management (SEM) from

2005.

A 2-month research visit to the Bren School of En-

vironmental Science and Management at the University

of California, Santa Barbara in 2008, offered a professor

of innovation management and sustainability the oppor-

tunity to learn about the university’s pioneering study

1150 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

programme in Eco-Entrepreneurship, which had been

introduced only a year prior to his arrival. The professor

subsequently persuaded his department to introduce an

eco-entrepreneurship major study course as a speciali-

zation in the SEM master’s programme. Central to the

specialization in eco-entrepreneurship is the award-

winning master’s project module in Eco-Venturing

which has been offered every winter semester since

2009 (Fichter et al. 2016). The aims of the Eco-

Venturing module are threefold: (1) To get students

interested in entrepreneurial solutions to societal chal-

lenges, (2) to develop their entrepreneurial skills for

sustainable entrepreneurship and (3) to develop

sustainability-oriented business models in close cooper-

ation with entrepreneurs and regional companies. Under

the guidance of two professors and two coaches, four or

five teams of between three and five students work with

selected business partners to promote sustainable start-

up ideas which are intended to be both economically

successful and contribute to sustainable development

goals.

In order to support sustainability-orientated business

model development, the concept of a Sustainable Busi-

ness Canvas was developed and is now being used by

the students (Tiemann and Fichter 2016). About 30% of

all students in the master’sprogrammeSEMparticipate

in the Eco-Venturing module to develop competencies

in eco-venturing and in starting green businesses. Since

2009, a total of 170 students have worked on 44 differ-

ent sustainable start-up ideas. Almost half of these sus-

tainable business ideas (20) led to actual new firm

creation or new business units in existing companies.

The Eco-Venturing module is part of the entrepreneurial

support system of the University of Oldenburg and the

sustainability-specific support activities facilitate and

accelerate academic entrepreneurship in the fields of

clean technologies, renewable energies and sustainabil-

ity. Every year, the programme supports students and

researchers in the creation of between 10 and 20 green

start-up projects and spin-offs (Fichter et al. 2016). To

date, 20 new eco-ventures providing approximately 100

new jobs have been created since 2009 out of the Eco-

Ven t ur in g m od ul e .

4.3.2 Exemplary new venture

The start-up team from Coolar participated in the Eco-

Venturing module in the winter term of 2015/2016. By

then, they had already developed a prototype for an

innovative solar-powered refrigerator technology that

was almost carbon neutral. They also had a business

plan for applying the technology for a specific use case.

The refrigerator was intended to enable doctors and

health professionals to preserve lifesaving medicine

and vaccines in a reliable and eco-friendly way in de-

veloping countries. The Coolar team was also consider-

ing the application of the technology for a self-powered

truck temperature control solution. The student team

involved aimed to analyse and assess the market for

truck refrigeration. A key outcome of the Eco-

Venturing module was a report by the student team with

a detailed competitor analysis, results from interviews

with potential customers from the logistics sector and

recommendations of promising market segments. This

provided the Coolar team with a solid basis of informa-

tion to facilitate business development. The work done

in the Eco-Venturing module prompted Coolar to in-

clude a specific segment of the truck refrigeration mar-

ket in its business model that was presented to investors.

Coolar was formally founded as a new venture only a

few months after the Eco-Venturing project and was

able to attract venture capital. The contribution of the

Eco-Venturing project was critical to the foundation of

the company, because Coolar could prove to investors

that it had thoroughly investigated promising market

segments and identified potential customers and reve-

nue options. After 2 years of technology development

and testing, the seven team members of Coolar are

presently preparing the market introduction of their

revolutionary refrigeration technology. Two years after

the Eco-Venturing project, the start-up team of Coolar

considers the detailed competitor and market analysis

provided by the Eco-venturing module students to be a

valuable basis for company development and strategic

decision making. Given the fact that the CO

emissions

are ten times lower than conventional cooling solutions,

the scaling-up of their cooling solution in different mar-

kets and sectors is very likely to have a significant

impact on regional and global sustainability.

5 Comparative case analysis

To assess regional sustainability impacts, we analyse

cases comparatively in order to clarify the degree to

which the university was the originator of the initia-

tive, how it linked to public actors and generated

1151University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

knowledge spillovers and how regional impact was

achieved (see below and Table 4).

Based on our literature review, we structure the com-

parative case analysis along the different categories

developed by the theory of change. In these categories,

we build on the entrepreneurial ecosystem and innova-

tion system literatures to clarify and structure the inputs

provided in each case in a systematic manner.

We then use the knowledge spillover theory of entre-

preneurship as our framework to categorize different

types of outputs that represent benefits from the

programmes and to guide our interpretation when

analysing specific start-up examples to illustrate in more

detail how the programmes led to or supported the

founding activities of specific individuals. Nevertheless,

we find more convergence in terms of the outputs,

outcomes and longer-term impacts across the three

programmes, which we address in Section 6of the

paper.

A number of functions can be identified as inputs to

entrepreneurial and innovation processes in each of the

cases (see Table 4), but the combination of functions is

different for each of them. This is related to the differing

activity profiles, which create individual forms of the

support provided. Overall, what can be learned from the

comparative case analysis is that the three cases present

different configurations of university-related support

programmes for sustainable regional development. This

reveals different paths and processes in order to

strengthen sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems,

beyond the classic incubator, which for example

Theodoraki et al. (2018) analysed empirically.

To illustrate, while the UTG is more of a classic

incubator providing a mixture of indirect (e.g. fi-

nance and office space) and direct (e.g. university

spin-offs moving into the UTG) university support,

the idea generation and facilitation of the Eco-

Venturing case as a module is more early-stage with

a stronger focus on influencing and supporting the

idea and business model development. In compari-

son, the MBA is not a module like for example Eco-

Venturing, but a comprehensive sustainability edu-

cation programme that provides support across a

much broader range of themes and skills. The het-

erogeneity found in our comparative case analysis is

an important insight that is developed upon in

Section 6.

Comparing the three examples of firms that received

support from our case programmes, we find clear

evidence of knowledge spillovers from universities to

start-ups as proposed by the knowledge spillover theory

of entrepreneurship. More specifically, we find a diverse

set of mechanisms governing how knowledge spilled

over in these instances from the university either in the

form of technology, market information, network access

or entrepreneurial processes such as funding access,

business model development or team formation. It also

becomes clear that different types of knowledge matter

simultaneously, but that their relative importance differs.

For example, technology and entrepreneurial processes

were particularly important to Corrmoran, whereas for

IntelliSolar, it was network knowledge. Coolar’smain

gains were market information and input on entrepre-

neurial processes.

While these examples show that the programmes

certainly contributed significantly to the development

of the entrepreneurs in question, other support structures

were important too. The case descriptions provided

mention several specific features that can be identified

individually as being a form of strategic resource pro-

vided to the ventures, in that the benefit could not be

accessed through other support structures. However, it

also becomes clear that such programme features are

highly idiosyncratic and thus depend strongly on the

specific combination of exemplary entrepreneurs and

(overall) support structures, as has also been confirmed

by Kolb and Wagner (2018) in the case of academic

entrepreneurship generally. We can however state with

confidence that such unique features of the programmes

exist in most cases but differ across specific start-ups

and probably also in terms of when they provide the

greatest benefit. This aspect is elaborated upon in the

next section, including from a more holistic perspective

in terms of a configurational notion.

Furthermore, clearly, the impacts generated

through the three examples cannot be fully assessed

because all the firms have only recently entered the

market. However, all three examples reveal that an

initially mainly regional impact may extend consid-

erably beyond the region in the longer term. This is

the case for Corrmoran that was ultimately acquired

in a trade sale by a larger incumbent that was active

beyond the region. Similarly, IntelliSolar recently

entered new markets in other countries. Finally, the

business activities of Coolar were also aimed at the

international market from the outset. This is an

important insight, which we will expand upon in

Section 6.

1152 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

6 Discussion and conclusions

Based on the increasingly relevant third mission in

regional and economic development that universities

globally are urged to take on, this study builds on three

case studies in Germany and analyses how university-

linked support programmes contribute to sustainable

entrepreneurial ecosystems and which impacts this de-

livers for sustainable regional development. Our com-

parative case study analysis revealsa differentiated view

of entrepreneurship-related interventions.

First of all, we find evidence addressing our research

questions that sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems are

positively affected by university-linked support

programmes through certain knowledge spillover modes.

For example, in the case of UTG Augsburg, the

university’s role as one instigator of the initiative was clear

(along with the state of Bavaria, the local chamber of

industry and commerce, and other actors). That role then

triggered support by other actors. At the same time, the

university also provided direct inputs, such as spin-offs that

entered the incubator. Other spillover modes are the supply

of entrepreneurial knowledge, incubation activities and

support services for green start-ups through the Eco-

Venturing module. Also, the university provides knowl-

edge spillovers to the entrepreneurial ecosystem via the

system functions (Table 1) of influencing the direction of

search, learning, resource mobilization and networking.

One major insight flowing from the current study is that

university-linked support programmes can improve the

Tabl e 4 Comparative case analysis based on the logic model of the theory of change

Programme Input:

functions provided

Activities:

support provided

Output:

benefit from

programme

Outcome:

entrepreneurial activities

Impact:

potential regional

benefit

UTG

Augsburg

- Entrepreneurship

experimentation

- Incubation

-Resource

mobilization

-Networking

140 supported firms since

1998, of which approx. 40

are internationally active

-Supportin

foundation

process of firms

and of regional

networks for

sustainability

E.g. start-up Corrmoran

(crucial inputs for

technology and entre-

preneurial processes)

- Institutionalization

of a learning and

networking space

for sustainable

development;

- Contribution to

regional cluster

activities

-Newfirm

foundation

MBA

Sustainabil-

ity

Manage-

ment

- Influence on the

direction of

(sustainability)

- Combined

education in

sustainability

management,

innovation, and

entrepreneurship

- Interactive

learning

48 courses (each 30 h);

transfer module; final

practice workshop; thesis;

5 courses dedicated to

entrepreneurship; 8

courses with

entrepreneurship content

as part of the course; 40

graduations per year since

2005

- Support in new

eco-venture

founding

processes

-Supportof

knowledge

transfer and

diffusion

processes

E.g. start-up IntelliSolar

(crucial inputs for

venture-specific hu-

man capital of the

founder, networks for

business

development and

recruitment)

- Acceleration of

decentralized

solar energy

production

- Acceleration of

energy

transformation

on the regional

level;

-Newfirm

foundation

Eco-Venturing - Influence on the

direction of

- Entrepreneurship

education and

experimentation

- Incubation

-Resource

mobilization

-Networking

44 supported green start-up

projects, incl. elaborated

sustainable business

models, and 170 students

with sustainable

entrepreneurship expertise

since 2009

- Support of new

firm foundation

through

entrepreneurial

education

- Incubation and

acceleration of

sustainable

business ideas

E.g. start-up Coolar (cru-

cial inputs to the ven-

ture’sbusinesscase,

market and competitor

knowledge, and

business

development)

- Reduction of

greenhouse gas

emissions

- Contribution to the

profile of the

region as having

a sustainable and

resilient

economy

-Newfirm

foundation

1153University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

entrepreneurial ecosystem for sustainable entrepreneurship

through different pathways and at different intervention

points. For example, interventions can be undertaken early

as in the Eco-Venturing and MBA cases (which focus

more on idea generation/identification and opportunity

evaluation) or later as in the UTG case (which has a

stronger focus on opportunity exploitation and incubation).

One main reason emerging from the cases for the

possibility of different pathways and roles of universities

is that universities operate under specific regional condi-

tions and therefore choose and enable specific roles or

pathways, and also determine intervention points that best

fit such conditions. As a result, different types or configu-

rations that develop as stable outcomes of such a fitting

process are identifiable. Ultimately, context thus plays an

important role for any university-linked support pro-

gramme. In our cases, for example, the cluster programme

in Bavaria and the strong civil society inherent in the

“peace city”Augsburg, which has a strong emphasis on

local Agenda 21 processes and networking, shaped the

UTG activities.

In contrast, Lower Saxony lacks comparable top-down

initiatives, meaning local bottom-up initiatives gain more

freedom to operate and at the same time a stronger need to

provide substitutes for critical elements of the support

programmes that are provided through the cluster manage-

ment in Bavaria. These differences between the two states

suggest that different configurations of university-linked

support programmes can emerge depending on how con-

text and the conditions at the university interplay and

replace or complement each other to facilitate the system

functions necessary to drive improvements of the regional

ecosystem supporting sustainable entrepreneurship. This

nuanced view is important for a better understanding of the

potential and role that universities have in supporting

sustainable entrepreneurship ecosystems.

Our comparative analysis based on the theory of

change and the entrepreneurial ecosystem model by

Stam and Spigel (2016) was applied to determine pos-

itive effects on sustainable development in the region.

The analysis revealed both direct and short-term outputs

in terms of entrepreneurial activity and less direct,

broader long-term outcomes. The tangible direct outputs

include both specific examples of successful ventures

and more general contributions to sustainable develop-

ment in the region (see Table 4).

We further contribute by expanding the analysis of

barriers and success factors affecting how universities

can support sustainable entrepreneurship and of how

support programmes could be actioned (e.g. Fichter

and Tiemann 2018). The study also shows how such

programmes trigger sustainable regional development

outputs, outcomes and impacts, which addresses a gap

in the literature. Depending on the context, what may be

considered a barrier can become an opportunity as in the

case of the MBA programme where the lack of a spe-

cific support system has created space and incentives to

become entrepreneurial and use a window of opportu-

nity to establish the MBA. In turn, the MBA itself

created a support programme and offered the incentives

and knowledge necessary to found a company

(IntelliSolar). Specific positive impacts that can be iden-

tified in our cases are a reduction of greenhouse gas

emissions (by increasing the proportion of energy gen-

erated through renewable means in the region), the

provision of additional employment with lower health

risks and the intensification knowledge spillovers in

regional networks, as well as the internalization of ex-

ternalities flowing from improvements to knowledge

and social feedback loops. The latter can also be seen

as the emergence of new capabilities in the region that

make it more resilient and sustainable.

The cases presented here also illustrate the potential for

long-term effects. Clearly, what starts as a purely regional

impact can subsequently exert an effect extending consid-

erably beyond the original region, especially when sustain-

able regional development is successful. This expansion of

effect may mean that the creating region does not retain the

largest share of the benefits but equally that a smaller share

of a bigger benefit ultimately still makes a strong regional

impact. This suggests that even start-ups that do not target

significant regional impacts but making a strong positive

impact on sustainable development at the national or glob-

al level can ultimately substantially benefit a region —a

dual regional paradox that merits further exploration.

Related to this insight, while the linear logic model

applied in first approximation coversthe most important

causalities to answer our research question, we urge

future research to explore non-linear extensions to the

framework to address this potential limitation. For ex-

ample, within our chosen context, future research might

comprehensively assess impacts, which would also sup-

port an improved assessment of long-term effects.

Building on above insights, in terms of the broader

question of how and with what impact university-linked

programmes can support sustainable entrepreneurial

ecosystems, both directly and indirectly, we exposed

strong evidence that universities taking on a third

1154 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

mission prompts crucial activities that overcome knowl-

edge filter issues (Braunerhjelm et al. 2010). In doing

so, they ultimately enable and improve important eco-

system functions supporting sustainable entrepreneur-

ship. This occurs for example in terms of not only

providing education and learning as a basis for knowl-

edge spillovers, but also through more complex and

potentially less direct knowledge spillovers, such as

the generation of spin-offs.

Our findings have implications for policy-makers

and academics. Clearly, a sustainability focus in

university-linked support programmes can play an im-

portant role in fostering sustainable entrepreneurial eco-

systems and sustainable regional development. The

cases analysed in our sample all represent programmes

with an explicit sustainability focus that is an element of

institutional entrepreneurship; a finding that responds to

calls in the literature for more research in this area (Hall

et al. 2010). Conventional entrepreneurship support,

however, though increasingly available with the in-

volvement of universities, typically lacks such a sustain-

ability focus (Theodoraki et al. 2018; Tiemann et al.

2018).

Relating our findings back to our conceptual founda-

tions in terms of the knowledge spillover theory of entre-

preneurship, entrepreneurial ecosystems and the theory of

change, we find strong evidence of a process involving

different actors providing inputs as the basis for activities

that ultimately generate functions in order to achieve ef-

fects at different levels (outputs, outcomes and impacts).

We also identified different feasible configurations based

on region-specific fit and substitution options. Identifying

the possibility of universities using different pathways and

intervention points is an important insight that policy-

makers should take into account and that deserves further

attention in academic research.

At the same time, an important implication for uni-

versities wishing to become involved in support

programmes for sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems

is that they should analyse their specific regional context

to ensure that their chosen configuration and design (e.g.

in terms of intervention points, roles or pathways) fit the

specific regional situation in the best possible way. This

applies equally to support programmes with a more

environmental focus or those with a more social focus.

In turn, successful implementation of regional strategies

can ultimately have strong positive impacts beyond the

region. Both universities and (regional) policy-makers

should take this wider impact into account at the outset.

Doing so would enable them toset realistic expectations

for the regional development results they target. To

conclude, our article addresses calls to research more

on the process and effect dimensions of (sustainable)

entrepreneurial ecosystems (Agarwal et al. 2007,2010;

Stam and Spigel 2016). In particular, our case-based

analysis contributes by highlighting different configura-

tions of university-linked programmes supporting sus-

tainable entrepreneurial ecosystems. In doing so, we

complement and extend work focussing on specific

configurations and front-ends of sustainable entrepre-

neurial ecosystems (e.g. Theodoraki et al. 2018; Fichter

and Tiemann 2018). Overall, our paper should therefore

extend understanding of the pathways available for uni-

versities to support sustainable entrepreneurial ecosys-

tems by enabling knowledge spillovers and the impact

doing so can have on sustainable regional development.

Acknowledgements We are grateful to our colleague Markus

Beckmann for valuable inputs and discussions during the earlier

stages of this project and the corresponding paper, as well as for

beneficial comments from the participants at the G-Forum 2017 in

Wuppertal and from two anonymous reviewers. Erik Hansen

furthermore thanks Quality Austria - Trainings, Zertifizierungs

und Begutachtungs GmbH, Vienna and the State of Upper Austria

for their funding of the Institute for Integrated Quality Design.

Funding Information Open access funding provided by

Johannes Kepler University Linz.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://

creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestrict-

ed use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided

you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source,

provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if

changes were made.

References

Abdelkafi,N.,&Hansen,E.G.(2018).Ecopreneurs’creation of user

business models for green tech: an exploratory study in E-

mobility. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing,

10(1), 32–55. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEV.2018.10007848.

Abreu, M., Demirel, P., Grinevich, V., & Karatas-Özkan, M.

(2016). Entrepreneurial practices in research-intensive and

teaching-led universities. Small Business Economics, 47,

695–717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9754-5.

Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D., & Sarkar, M. B. (2007). The process of

creative construction: knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship,

and economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1,

263–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.36.

Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D., & Sarkar, M. B. (2010). Knowledge

spillovers and strategic entrepreneurship. Strategic

1155University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(4), 271–283. https://doi.

org/10.1002/sej.96.

Anon. (2018). https://www.plattform-ressourceneffizienz.

de/angebot/dr-viola-rueckert/. Accessed 11 July 2018.

Anon. (2011). Umwelt-Technologie und Energie in Bayern.

Munich: media mind GmbH.

Audretsch, D., & Belitski, M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems

in cities: establishing the framework conditions. Journal of

Technology Transfer, 42(5), 1030–1051. https://doi.org/

10.1007/s1096101694738.

Audretsch, D., & Berlitski, M. (2013). The missing pillar: the

creativity theory of knowledge spillover entrepreneurship.

Small Business Economics, 41, 819–836. https://doi.

org/10.1007/s11187-013-9508-6.

Bank, N., Fichter, K., & Klofsten, M. (2017). Sustainability-

profiled incubators and securing the inflow of tenants –the

case of Green Garage Berlin. Journal of Cleaner Production,

157,76–83.

Binder, J. K., & Belz, F. M. (2015). Sustainable entrepreneurship:

what it is. In P. Kyrö (Ed.), Handbook of entrepreneurship

and sustainable development research (pp. 30–75).

Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Boons, F., Montalvo, C., Quist, J., & Wagner, M. (2013).

Sustainable innovation, business models and economic per-

formance: an overview. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45,

1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.08.013.

Braunerhjelm, P., Acs, Z., Audretsch, D., & Carlsson, B. (2010).

The missing link: knowledge diffusion and entrepreneurship

in endogenous growth. Small Business Economics, 34,105–

125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9235-1.

Carman, J. G. (2010). The accountability movement: what’s

wrong with this theory of change? Nonprofit and Voluntary

Sector Quarterly, 39(2), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1177

/0899764008330622.

Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems.

Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(1), 1–14.

https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.428.

Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportu-

nity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business

Venturing, 22(1), 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jbusvent.2004.12.001.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study

research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M.-J. (2001). Sustainability in action:

identifying and measuring the key performance drivers.

Long Range Planning, 34(5), 585–604. https://doi.

org/10.1016/S0024-6301(01)00084-X.

Etzkowitz, H., & Klofsten, M. (2005). The innovating region:

toward a theory of knowledge-based regional development.

R&D Management, 35(3), 243–255.

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of inno-

vation: fromNational Systems and “mode 2”to a triple Helix

of university–industry–government relations. Research

Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333

(99)00055-4.

Fichter, K., & Tiemann, I. (2018). Factors influencing university

support for sustainable entrepreneurship - insights from ex-

plorative case studies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 175,

512–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.031.

Fichter, K., Geier, J., & Tiemann, I. (2016). Good practice collec-

tion –university support for sustainable entrepreneurship.

Berlin, Helsinki, Linköping: SHIFT.

Funnel, S. C., & Rogers, P. J. (2011). Purposeful program theory:

effectiveuse of theoriesof change and logic models. London:

Wiley.

Gast, J., Gundolf, K., & Cesinger, B. (2017). Doing business in a

green way: a systematic review of the ecological sustainabil-

ity entrepreneurship literature and future research directions.

Journal of Cleaner Production, 147,44–56.

Geier, J., & Fichter, K. (2015). Good practice examples: activities

in sustainable entrepreneurship at universities in Finland,

Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United

States. Berlin, Helsinki, Linköping: SHIFT.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded

theory: strategies in qualitative research. London:

Wiedenfeld and Nicholson.

Hall, J. K., Daneke, G. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable

development and entrepreneurship: past contributions and

future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5),

439–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.01.002.

Hansen, E. G., & Schaltegger, S. (2016). The sustainability bal-

anced scorecard: a systematic review of architectures.

Journal of Business Ethics, 133,193–221.

Hansen, E. G., & Spitzeck, H. (2011). Measuring the impacts of

NGO partnerships: the corporate and societal benefits of

community involvement. Corporate Governance:

International Journal of Business in Society, 11(4), 415–

426. https://doi.org/10.1108/14720701111159253.

Hansen, E. G., Sextl, M., & Reichwald, R. (2010). Managing

strategic alliances through a community-enabled balanced

scorecard: the case of Merck Ltd, Thailand. Business

Strategy and the Environment, 19(6), 387–399. https://doi.

org/10.1002/bse.689.

Hehl, W. (2010). Die bayerischeClusterstrategie und die Rolle des

Umwelt-Technologischen Gründerzentrums Augsburgs

(UTG), Presentation at Julius-Maximilians-University

Wuerzburg, 17 November.

Hehl, W. (2011). Umwelttechnologie: Luxus in einer Nische oder

globale Notwendigkeit und ökonomische Chance?,

Presentation at Julius-Maximilians-University Wuerzburg,

15 November.

Hesselbarth, C., & Schaltegger, S. (2014). Educating change

agents for sustainability. Learnings from the first sustainabil-

ity management master of business administration. Journal

of Cleaner Production, 62,24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jclepro.2013.03.042.

Hesselbarth, C., Buhr, M., & Schaltegger, S. (2015). Management

education for sustainability. Deriving learning formats from

competency requirements. In P. J. Davim (Ed.),

Sustainability in higher education (pp. 21–49). Burlington:

Elsevier.

Hockerts, K., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2010). Greening goliaths ver-

sus emerging Davids —theorizing about the role of incum-

bents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship.

JournalofBusinessVenturing,25(5), 481–492. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.005.

Holt, D., & Watson, A. (2008). Exploring the dilemma of local

sourcing versus international development –the case of the

flower industry. Business Strategy and the Environment,

17(5), 318–329. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.623.

1156 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Kolb, C., & Wagner, M. (2018). Different breeds, different needs:

How university spin-offs differ in composition and interac-

tion –a qualitative approach. Journal of Technology Transfer,

43(3), 734–759.

Kuckertz, A., & Wagner, M. (2010). The influence of sustainability

orientation on entrepreneurial intentions —investigating the role

of business experience. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5),

524–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.001.

Lee, K. H., & Schaltegger, S. (2014). Organizational transforma-

tion and higher sustainability management education. The

case of the MBA sustainability management. International

Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 15(4), 450–

471. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-06-2013-0067.

London Benchmarking Group (LBG) (2004). Measure for measure:

celebrating the LBG's first ten years. London. Retrieved from

http://www.lbg-online.net/var/news/storage/original/application/

ef7704e14e3c1ba07876310b1b1a1eed.pdf. Accessed 21

May 2008.

Markard, J., & Truffer, B. (2008). Technological innovation sys-

tems and the multi-level perspective: towards an integrated

framework. Research Policy, 37(4), 596–615. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.004.

Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economics. London:

Macmillan.

McLaughlin, J. A., & Jordan, G. B. (1999). Logic models: a tool

for telling your programs performance story. Evaluation and

Program Planning, 22(1), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1016

/S0149-7189(98)00042-1.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data anal-

ysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks/London:

Sage.

Ney, S., Beckmann, M., Graebnitz, D., & Mirkovic, R. (2014).

Social entrepreneurs and social change: tracing impacts of

social entrepreneurship through ideas, structures and prac-

tices. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing,

6(1), 51–68.

OECD. (2002). Glossary of key terms in evaluations and results

based management. Paris: OECD.

Pacheco, D. F., Dean, T. J., & Payne, D. S. (2010). Escaping the

green prison: entrepreneurship and the creation of opportu-

nities for sustainable development. Journal of Business

Venturing, 25,464–480.

Parrish, B. D. (2010). Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: princi-

ples of organization design. Journal of Business Venturing, 25,

510–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.05.005.

Porter, M. E., Delgado, M., & Stern, S. (2010). Clusters and

entrepreneurship. Boston: Harvard Business School.

Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University

entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and

Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791. https://doi.org/10.1093

/icc/dtm023.

Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneur-

ship and sustainability innovation: categories and interac-

tions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 222–

237. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.682.

Schaltegger, S., Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Hansen, E. (2016). Business

models for sustainability. A co-evolutionary analysis of sus-

tainable entrepreneurship, innovation and transformation.

Organization & Environment, 29(3), 264–289.

Schaltegger, S., Beckmann, M.,&Hockerts,K.(2018).

Sustainable entrepreneurship: creating environmental

solutions in light of planetary boundaries. International

Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 10(1), 1–16.

Sedlacek, S. (2013). The role of universities in fostering sustain-

able development at the regional level. JournalofCleaner

Production, 48,74–84.

Shane, S. A., & Eckhardt, J. T. (2003). The individual-opportunity

nexus. In Z. J. Ács & D. B. Audretsch (Eds.), International

handbook series on entrepreneurship: Vol. 1. Handbook of

entrepreneurship research. An interdisciplinary survey and

introduction (pp. 161–191). Boston: Kluwer.

Shepherd, D. A., & Patzelt, H. (2011). The new field of sustainable

entrepreneurship: studying entrepreneurial action linking

‘what is to be sustained’with ‘what is to be developed’.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 137–163.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00426.x.

Simatupang,T.M.,Schwab,A.,&Lantu,D.C.(2015).

Introduction: building sustainable entrepreneurship ecosys-

tems. Editorial. International Journal of Entrepreneurship

and Small Business, 26(4), 389–398.

Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a

sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–

1769. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484.

Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2016). Entrepreneurial ecosystems (Vol.

13). Utrecht: Utrecht School of Economics.

Theodoraki, C., Messeghem, K., & Rice, M. P. (2018). A social

capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepre-

neurial ecosystems: an explorative study. Small Business

Economics, 51, 153–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-

017-9924-0.

Thierstein, A., & Walser, M. (1997). Sustainable regional devel-

opment the squaring of the circle or a gimmick?

Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 9(2), 159–

174. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985629700000008.

Tiemann, I., & Fichter, K. (2016). Developing business models

with the sustainable business canvas: manual for conducting

workshops. Oldenburg: University of Oldenburg Retrieved

from www.borderstep.de. Accessed 27 August 2019.

Tiemann, I., Fichter, K., & Geier, J. (2018). University support

systems for sustainable entrepreneurship: insights from ex-

plorative case studies. International Journal of

Entrepreneurial Venturing, 10(1), 83–110.

United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda

for sustainable development. Resolution No. A/RES/70/1.

http://www.un.org/ga/search/viewdoc.asp?symbol=

A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.. Accessed 26 Aug 2019.

Wagner, M. (2012). Ventures for the public good and entrepre-

neurial intentions: an empirical analysis of sustainability

orientation as a determining factor. Journal of Small

Business and Entrepreneurship, 25(4), 519–532. https://doi.

org/10.1080/08276331.2012.10593587.

Wagner, M., & Lutz, E.-M. (2012). Sustainability-improving in-

novation: empirical insights and relationships with

sustainability-oriented entrepreneurship. In M. Wagner

(Ed.), Entrepreneurship, innovation and sustainability (pp.

279–296). Sheffield: Greenleaf.

Wagner, M., & Schaltegger, S. (2010). Classifying entrepreneurship

for the public good: empirical analysis of a conceptual frame-

work. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 23(3),

431–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2010.10593494.

1157University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: how and with what...

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd

ed). Applied social research methods series (Vol. 5).

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Publisher’snote Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to

jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional

affiliations.

1158 M. Wagner et al.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Terms and Conditions

Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).

Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”),

for small-scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are

maintained. By accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use

(“Terms”). For these purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.

These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or

a personal subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or

a personal subscription (to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the

Creative Commons license used will apply.

We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data

internally within ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking,

analysis and reporting. We will not otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of

companies unless we have your permission as detailed in the Privacy Policy.

While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that

Users may not:

use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to

circumvent access control;

use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil

liability, or is otherwise unlawful;

falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by

Springer Nature in writing;

use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages

override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or

share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer

Nature journal content.

In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates

revenue, royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain.

Springer Nature journal content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal

content on a large scale into their, or any other, institutional repository.

These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any

information or content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or

without notice. Springer Nature may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature

journal content which have been saved.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express

or implied with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or

warranties imposed by law, including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.

Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be

licensed from third parties.

If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other

manner not expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at

onlineservice@springernature.com

Content uploaded by Erik G. Hansen

Content may be subject to copyright.

Sustainable entrepreneurship support programs in nature- protected areas: How universities third mission aids sustainability transitions

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2024
Bus Strat Environ

This research examines the role of universities in supporting sustainability transitions in the context of nature-protected areas through the leveraging of sustainable entrepre-neurship. Universities are legitimate agents of change embedded within a territory and can play a pivotal role by initiating and supporting sustainable entrepreneurship-a means of replacing unsustainable ventures with regenerative solutions linked to the success of sustainability transitions. However, the context of nature-protected areas is unique on account of fragile ecosystems and cultural heritage sites-sustainable entre-preneurship can thus face a variety of challenges. This study focuses on a university-led sustainable entrepreneurship program in North Sea nature-protected areas, employing a multi-level perspective framework for studying sustainability transitions. Through qualitative analysis of interviews, the study explores how such programs contribute to sustainability transitions by facilitating support to new sustainable entrepreneurs, creating coordination across actors and sustainability concerns, and creating a narrative for sustainability transition. The research contributes by spotlighting the role of universities in enhancing legitimacy and embeddedness in these areas, and in doing so, identifies new 'third mission' roles for universities. The research also provides one of the first attempts to synthesize 'third mission' concepts with sustainability transitions literature.

Unveiling Green Entrepreneurial Intentions and Behaviour Among Saudi Arabian Youth: Insights and Implications

Preprint

Full-text available

Sep 2024

This study investigates green entrepreneurial intention and behaviour among youth, aiming to provide insights into the factors influencing these phenomena. A survey was conducted with 441 students from the Universities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the data were analysed using SmartPLS-3.3.2. Several hypotheses were tested. Firstly, a positive and significant relationship was found between commitment to environmental causes (CTE) and green entrepreneurial intention (GEI), aligning with prior research. This underscores the influence of personal beliefs and values on driving individuals towards green entrepreneurial activities. Secondly, entrepreneurial motivation (EM) demonstrated a positive and significant relationship with GEI, emphasizing the importance of individual motivation in fostering intentions toward green entrepreneurship. Thirdly, university entrepreneurship support (UES) showed insufficient evidence to establish a significant relationship with GEI, suggesting a potential gap in university support for green entrepreneurship initiatives. Similarly, entrepreneurship education (EE) did not exhibit a statistically significant impact on GEI, highlighting the need for enhanced incorporation of environmental issues in educational programs to inspire GEI. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the significance of promoting green consumption among university students, who possess significant potential to drive positive change in consumption habits. Lastly, a strong and highly significant relationship was observed between GEI and green entrepreneurial behaviour (GEB), emphasizing the pivotal role of intentions in translating into concrete actions. Overall, the findings contribute to understanding the dynamics of GEI and behaviour among Saudi Arabian youth, suggesting avenues for policy interventions and future research directions in fostering sustainable entrepreneurship.

Frugal innovation and entrepreneurial university: a case study of African first development university in Africa

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2024

The concept of frugal innovation has gained significant traction in low middle-income countries due to its potential to contribute to sustainable development goals (SDGs). This study examines the role of universities in promoting frugal innovation and their capacity to drive socioeconomic development through entrepreneurial initiatives. The objective is to explore how universities can serve as both entrepreneurial and development-focused institutions and to develop a conceptual framework to guide their efforts. The study utilizes an exploratory single case study methodology, focusing on the American University of Nigeria (AUN), a leading institution in Nigeria known for its development and entrepre-neurship programs. Drawing on data from the AUN THE global impact ranking 2024, the results of the study indicate that the ability of a university to effectively manage technology and skills transfer in frugal innovations is influenced by six university capabilities, and the generation of frugal innovations is moderated by policy and innovation ecosystems involving government agencies, regulatory bodies, and policymakers. This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by initiating a discussion on how development and entrepreneurship can support frugal innovation, and offers practical insights to inspire other universities to develop their own models for societal and economic impact. The study underscores the necessity of integrating "development" into the vision of universities, particularly in low middle-income and developing economies, and emphasizes the significance of universities embracing both entrepreneurial and development-focused roles. The findings highlight the potential of universities in advancing sustainable development goals, particularly in low middle-income and developing economies, as they work towards meeting the global SDGs by 2030.

Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Minat Mahasiswa untuk Berwirausaha di Bidang Pertanian

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2024

ABSTRAK Permasalahan yang mendasar saat ini adalah tingginya angka pengangguran Indonesia dan belum cakapnya kualitas lulusan SDM untuk masuk ke dunia kerja menjadi salah satu tantangan pemerintah dalam menyongsong Indonesia Emas 2045. Berbagai upaya dilakukan oleh pemerintah melalui Kementerian Pendidikan ataupun Universitas menjadi bagian penting dalam menghasilkan SDM terdidik, terampil, dan cekatan. Salah satunya menghasilkan wirausahawan muda yang dapat mengembangkan bisnis dan memberdayakan potensi masyarakat sekitar. Penelitian ini berfokus pada faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi minat mahasiswa berwirausaha di bidang pertanian. Faktor tersebut antara lain pendidikan kewirausahaan (X1), Self Efficacy (X2), dan Motivasi Wirausaha (X3) terhadap minat berwirausaha (Y). Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif deskriptif utnuk menjawab tujuan penelitian. Pengumpulan data dilakukan secara online melalui google form dengan total responden adalah 113 mahasiswa Agribisnis secara purposive yang telah mengambil mata kuliah kewirausahaan. Item pertanyaan dijawab menggunakan bantuan skala likert 1-5. Analisis data menggunakan deskriptif dan analisis SEM-PLS (Structural Equation Modeling partial least square) dengan bantuan Smartpls 3.0. Hasil analisis yang telah dilakukan diperoleh bahwa variabel pendidikan kewirausahaan (X1) tidak memiliki pengaruh yang signifikan terhadap intensi wirausaha di bidang pertanian. Sedangkan self efficacy (X2), motivasi kewirausahaan (X3) memiliki pengaruh yang signifikan terhadap minat wirausaha di bidang pertanian khususnya oleh Mahasiswa Program Studi Agribisnis.

INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE POST-WAR PERIOD: THE CASE OF UKRAINE

Article

Full-text available

Sep 2024

For modern Ukrainian territories, regional development is a multifaceted process that changes the social structure of the region, human behaviour, public institutions, as well as accelerates economic growth, reduces inequality and unemployment. The growing importance of Ukraine's regions in improving the efficiency of the country's socioeconomic development is becoming more acute as the country's economy recovers from the destruction caused by the aggressor country during the full-scale invasion. Regional studies systematise and group the regions of the state according to the conditions and specifics of their current state and prospects for further development. Given the relevance of the chosen research topic, the purpose of the work can be defined as generalisation and clarification of theoretical and methodological foundations for determining approaches to the innovative development of Ukraine's regions in the postwar period. In order to achieve this goal, the following tasks need to be implemented: to analyse the current state of regional development in Ukraine; to group regions using the cluster analysis method; to formulate recommendations for stimulating and intensifying innovation activity in the regions. The study found that at the current stage of development, Ukraine's economy has quite significant imbalances associated with the uneven development of regions, which has been significantly exacerbated by the martial law. Accordingly, in the period of postwar recovery, regional authorities will need to focus on regional development and attracting investment in priority areas, taking into account the current state and potential capabilities of each region, according to its belonging to a particular cluster.

How higher education institutions may catalyse regional innovation ecosystems: The case of polytechnics in Portugal

Article

Sep 2024

This article explores the crucial role of higher education institutions in catalysing regional innovation ecosystems. In particular, it aims to study how polytechnics in Portugal have been involved in this process. The research utilizes an exploratory and reflective case study approach to present real-world evidence of collaborative efforts within innovation networks that involve both businesses and the social economy. Thus, the study raises awareness of collaborative innovation and entrepreneurship networks, emphasizing genuine interactive learning and knowledge exchange. Polytechnic institutions can enhance regional competitiveness by providing education and training for future entrepreneurs and highly skilled professionals, as well as offering technological and managerial solutions that drive value creation and the emergence of new businesses and markets, potentially even on an international level. The study also emphasizes the fourth mission of higher education institutions, particularly polytechnic institutes, focusing on empowering communities through social innovation projects for sustainable local and regional development.

Massive Online Course on Entrepreneurship. Case Study

Article

Jan 2024

Integrating historical approaches of university ecosystems: reviewing the literature streams and future directions

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2024

It is practically consensual that universities contribute to economic and social growth; therefore, they nowadays need to play a more active role in answering the changing needs of society. In addition, universities hold the potential to promote regional innovation through their influence over the ecosystems they participate in. This article aims to identify, analyse and integrate the historical approaches of university ecosystems and university roles through a systematic literature review. The findings identify four different periods: (i) University-Industry collaboration (until 2000); (ii) changing the university model into a triple-helix model (2001–2010); (iii) from the triple to the quadruple-helix model in the knowledge society (2011–2020); and (iv) ecosystem complexity and the Neo Triple-Helix Model (from 2021). The study contributes to the literature on universities and the ecosystem by providing a unified perspective on the importance of the university’s role in the economic and social growth of the knowledge business and the evolution of the ecosystem. These results provide an overview of the trends in university ecosystems, including an integrative framework, research themes, and research questions able to guide future studies.

Education, Health & Economic Well Being

Chapter

Full-text available

Aug 2024

Education, health, and economic well-being are interconnected pillars of human development. Education empowers individuals with knowledge and skills, health ensures a productive life, and economic well-being provides financial stability, together fostering sustainable growth and improved quality of life.

Universities as Agents of Social Reform in Developing Countries

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2024

The role of universities in society has historically transcended mere academic instruction. Particularly in developing countries, universities have emerged as critical institutions for not only fostering intellectual growth but also as pivotal actors in advancing social reform. In regions where political instability, economic challenges, and societal inequities prevail, universities can serve as catalysts for change by nurturing critical thought, fostering innovation, and producing socially-conscious graduates. This essay explores the multifaceted role of universities in driving social reform in developing countries, focusing on their ability to address social inequities, influence policy, and promote sustainable development. It will also examine the challenges these institutions face and propose solutions to enhance their capacity for catalyzing meaningful social transformation.

Sustainable entrepreneurship: what it is

Chapter

Full-text available

Jan 2015

Developing business models with the Sustainable Business Canvas: Manual for conducting workshops.

Method

Full-text available

Jan 2016

The Sustainable Business Canvas serves as a foundation for the systematic development of sustainability-oriented business models in the context of an interactive workshop. The present manual provides guidance for conducting such workshops.

Good Practice Examples: Activities in Sustainable Entrepreneurship at Universities in Finland, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Research

Full-text available

Jan 2015

This working paper contains the results of research on good practice examples of university support of sustainable entrepreneurship. It comprises activities in sustainable entrepreneurship at universities in Finland, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. This working paper is part of the SHIFT Work Package 2: The Role of Universities in Supporting Sustainable Entrepreneurship.

Good practice collection – University support for sustainable entrepreneurship.

Technical Report

Full-text available

Jan 2016

SHIFT is a unique research project and is funded through the EU programme ECO-INNOVERA. SHIFT’s main goal is to enable relevant actors to support eco-innovation and sustainable entrepreneurship more effectively. This booklet introduces the conceptual background for investigating university support for entrepreneurship, summarizes key results of our empirical research and presents good practice examples of university support for sustainable entrepreneurship and eco-innovation.

University support systems for sustainable entrepreneurship: Insights from explorative case studies

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2018

In recent years public policy has increasingly recognised the importance of entrepreneurship for sustainable economic growth and solving fundamental challenges such as climate change. It is emphasised that universities should play an important role in supporting sustainable entrepreneurship by sensitising and educating future sustainable entrepreneurs. Up till now there has hardly been any research on university support systems for sustainable entrepreneurship. We address this research gap with a qualitative multi-case study of four universities in the USA and Germany, based on 41 good practice examples. Using an open innovation concept, we developed a conceptual framework that is based on an interactive paradigm and allows comprehensive support systems analysis. We identified top-down, bottom-up and combined implementation strategies as well as integrative and additive approaches. The framework is suitable for empirical investigations and supports future research. Our results demonstrate the importance of the institutional framing of support activities and indicate that, in comparison with other elements of the university support system, research on sustainable entrepreneurship is lagging behind.

Building Sustainable Entrepreneurship Ecosystems

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2015

This special issue focuses on the development of sustainable entrepreneurship ecosystems to support innovation and the creation of new businesses where sustainability is the nexus for entrepreneurial activities. In this editorial, we outline and integrate the distinct contributions of the six empirical studies included in the special issue. In addition, we comment on current state of our academic understanding of entrepreneurship ecosystems and offer some specific guidance for future empirical research. Given the continued strong interest in creating entrepreneurship ecosystems around the world, we consider related research crucial not only for advancing academic knowledge, but also for providing better guidance for policy makers and other stakeholders actively engaged in the creation and management of such systems.

Principles of Economics

Book

Jan 1982

Alfred Marshall

The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research

Chapter

Jul 2017

Principles of Economics.

Article

Jan 1963

Sustainable entrepreneurship: Creating environmental solutions in light of planetary boundaries

Article

Jan 2018

This article discusses sustainable entrepreneurship in light of planetary boundaries and related aims to contribute to managing for and in a safe operating space for humanity. The rapidly developing research area of environmental, social and sustainable entrepreneurship has flourished for the last two decades and improved our understanding of the phenomenon. However, while a contribution to sustainable development is often stated in general terms or implied, most of the sustainable entrepreneurship literature focuses on classifications, motivations, processes and specific outcomes without explicit links to how planetary boundaries are addressed. This paper discusses links between sustainable entrepreneurship and the planetary boundaries concept by addressing both perspectives: How can the concept of planetary boundaries provide perspectives for designing and assessing sustainable entrepreneurship? And how can sustainable entrepreneurship contribute effectively to an economy and society operating in a safe operating space for humanity?

University-linked programmes for sustainable entrepreneurship and regional development: How and with what impact?

Abstract and Figures

Recommended publications

Two narratives of regional development in Southern Germany - From the three-sector model to the prod...

In what sense 'regional development?': Entrepreneurship, underdevelopment and strong tradition in th...

Entrepreneurship and Regional Economic Development in China -- A Literature Review

Regional social capital: Embeddedness, innovation networks and regional economic development