Technology and innovation management methodology for the development of recyclable bioplastics from organic waste

Figures & data

Table 1. Productivity determinants.

	Capabilities	Opportunities/challenges	Deficiencies to strengthen
Productivity	Low cost of recycled materials for allies. Technological capacity to expand into other markets.	Replace plastics with metal and rubber components. Exporting plastics to markets with small industries. Replacing imports with local raw materials. There are few substitutes in the food packaging market. Promote the adoption of continuous improvement and innovation management practices (Lean Six Sigma, Scrum, etc. in the production chain).	In Colombia, stakeholders import 90% of their raw materials from countries such as the United States, China and Brazil, with the remaining 10% being purchased locally. Thus, the import of plastics in primary forms represents more than 65% of the sector’s total imports.

Source: Author’s calculations based on Productive Colombia (2019) and GQSP & UNIDO (2020).

Table 2. Determinants of competitiveness.

	Capabilities	Opportunities/challenges	Deficiencies to strengthen
Competitiveness	In the case of Colombia, there is a diversified portfolio to compete globally.	Free trade agreements with other countries. Development of complementary chemical additives or plasticizers. Investment in the development of multimodal transportation infrastructure. Advantages to promote exports. High competitiveness of products against imported substitutes. Participation in forums, conferences, talks with strong opinion leaders. Establishment of an observatory to monitor circular economy implementation strategies.	Low availability of transportation providers. Low availability of multimodal transportation prevents improvement of transportation and logistics costs in the sector. Tariff barriers on raw materials. High logistics and service costs. Imports in the sector are growing at a higher rate than exports, which has led to a steady increase in the trade deficit.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on Productive Colombia (2019) and GQSP & UNIDO (2020).

Table 3. Environmental determinant.

	Capabilities	Opportunities/challenges	Deficiencies to strengthen
Environmental	Raise awareness of responsible use and consumption of plastic raw materials and products, and consider new sustainable production alternatives.	Implementing the circular economy requires investment in plastics processing machinery to develop new products. Despite initiatives by global and local public bodies to reduce and ban certain types of plastics, current substitutes have higher costs and environmental impacts. Open academic spaces where entrepreneurs can educate consumers about the uses, impacts and benefits of the plastics industry. Create financial resources to promote and implement sustainable development programs.	Lack of measurement controls for the implementation of the circular economy. Low implementation of strategies related to culture for the use of plastic waste. Low education that allows a correct final disposal of plastics, recycling. Low disclosure of the environmental and sustainability benefits of adopting the principles of green chemistry and circular economy.

Source: Own elaboration based on productive Colombia (2019) and GQSP & UNIDO (2020).

Table 4. R&D&i determinants.

	Capabilities	Opportunities/challenges	Deficiencies to strengthen
R&D&i	Companies gain access to technology from other countries (Europe, Asia and North America). They gain greater efficiency in production processes, which encourages the application of best innovation practices in the local market. Research, innovation and prototyping laboratories are available.	Designing biodegradable components or chemicals and modifying manufacturing recipes can reduce the cost of producing bags, containers, packaging, and other materials. Developing smart plastics with special properties as a finished product. Investing in state-of-the-art machinery to increase production capacity and transform plastics. Designing automatic tax/financial incentives for companies that fund R&D projects. Developing other biodegradable applications: using biomass from other natural resources to create biodegradable or compostable plastics. Inward strategies. Achieve a mature ecosystem in close coordination with government innovation support institutions, research centers, academia and the private sector. Intellectual property strength and agility. Government funding and incentives for the technological transformation of companies in the sector. Creation of a platform linking national and/or international research groups. Creation of a scrapping program for machines in the sector. Create laboratory tests to evaluate or certify biodegradability. Promote technology transfer through international suppliers and/or national experts. Promote the adoption of continuous improvement and innovation management practices.	Acquisition of technology in other countries requires high financial resources. Low investment in research and development by companies in the sector. Low synergy between laboratories, universities and companies for the development of analytical methods for the plastics sector. The majority of MSMEs do not have the capacity to develop plastic products at the speed required by the international market.

Source: Author’s calculations based on Productive Colombia (2019) and GQSP & UNIDO (2020).

Table 5. Key factors.

Fundamental key factor	Constant commitment from senior management
Key strategic factors	Organizational context and Business Needs
	Impact Assessment
	Characterization of renewable, biodegradable biomaterials
Top-level key factors	Biotech strategy
	Biotech Acquisition
	Bio-process innovation
	Bioproducts Development
Second level key factors	Look out
	Focus
	Train
	Implement
	Learn

Source: Preparation and adaptation of the Cotec Foundation for Technological Innovation (1999), AENOR (2006) and Pignani (2022).

Table 6. Matrix. Categories of key factors and classification of TM-IM Tools.

TM and IM matrix: Contributes to the development of biomaterials from biodegradable organic waste for the packaging and plastics industry and market	Categories key factors	Key factors
	FKF	LEARN	ONGOING MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT
	KSF		ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT AND MARKET NEEDS
	KSF		CHARACTERIZATION OF RENEWABLE, BIODEGRADABLE BIOMATERIALS
	KFFL		BIOTECHNOLOGY STRATEGY		ACQUISITION BIO-TECHNOLOGY	INNOVATION BIO PROCESSES	DEVELOPMENT BIO PRODUCTS
	KFSL		LOOK OUT	FOCUS	GET TRAINED	IMPLANT
	KSF		IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Classification Groups (CG) and/or Origin (O)	Technology and Innovation Management Tools (TIMT)		Applicability of the tools (complete and/or possible)
Information from external sources	Bio-Technological Prospective	X		x			LEARN
	Biotechnology Benchmarking and Biotechnology Intelligence	X		x
	Patent Analysis	X		X
	Biotechnology Surveillance	X		X
Internal Information	Biotechnology Audits	x		X
	Control changes and record information and milestones	x		X	X	X
	Management of intellectual and industrial property rights				X	X
	Environmental Assessment	x		X
Work and Resources	Portfolio management or biotech portfolio			X			LEARN
	Project Evaluation			X	x
	Project Management				X	X
	Biotechnology Transfer			X	X	X
Ideas and problem solving	Creativity	x		X	X	X
	Value Analysis			x		X
	Identify and analyze problems and opportunities	X		X
	Analysis and selection of R&D&I ideas	x		X
Team work	Interface Management				X	X
	Networking	x		x	X	X
	Team Functioning			x	X	X
Increase efficiency and flexibility	Change Management					X
	Tight operation			x		X
	Continuous improvement			x	X	X
Development and Marketing	Development of solutions - Bio-Product R&D&i					X
	Solution Deployment - Marketing			X	x	X

Figure 1. Structure and architecture of the proposed TM and IM methodology.

Source: own elaboration, based on Cotec Foundation for Technological Innovation (1999), SiSiCOM (2019, p. 18) and Pignani (2022).

Diagram illustrating the structure and architecture of the proposed TM and IM methodology, derived from research by the Cotec Foundation for Technological Innovation (1999), SiSiCOM (2019, p. 18), and Pignani (2022).

Colombia productiva. (2019). y GQSP & ONUDI (2020).

 Google Scholar

Fundación Cotec para la Innovación Tecnológica. (1999). Pautas Metodológicas en Gestión de la Tecnología y de la Innovación para Empresas – TEMAGUIDE. http://pic.itccanarias.org/formacion/curso_innovacion/cd-rom/index.htm

 Google Scholar

Pignani, F. (2022). La nueva iso 56000 y las metodologías tradcionales de la innovación. Logos, 3(1), 144–157.

 Google Scholar

SiSiCOM. (2019). Sistema de gestión de la innovación ISO 56002.

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The data that supper the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.