Sociotechnical regimes, technological innovation and corporate sustainability: from principles to action

References

• Almeida, M. F. L. 2006. “Corporate Sustainability, Technological Innovation and Adaptive Planning: From Principles to Action.” Doctoral Diss., Department of Industrial Engineering. Pontifical University Catholic of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro.
   Google Scholar
• Argyris, C., and D. A. Schön. 1978. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Argyris, C., and D. A. Schön. 1996. Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method and Practice. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, H. S., P. J. Vergragt, K. Green, and L. Berchicci. 2003. “Learning from Sustainability Transition through Bounded Sociotechnical Experiments in Personal Mobility.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 15 (3): 291–315. doi: 10.1080/09537320310001601496
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, T. 1981. “Planning Networks and Network Agents: An Approach to Adaptive Community Governance.” PhD Diss., Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
   Google Scholar
• Callon, M. 1992. “The Dynamics of Techno-economic Networks.” In Technological Change and Company Strategies, edited by R. Coombs, P. P. Saviotti, and V. Walsh, 72–102. London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, A. B. 1999. “Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct.” Business and Society 38: 268–295. doi: 10.1177/000765039903800303
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, A. B. 2008. “A History of Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Practices.” In The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility, edited by A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, and D. S. Siegel, 19–46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chevalier, M. 1966. “Interest Group Planning.” PhD Diss., Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, C. 1997. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dosi, G. 1982. “Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories. The Determinants and Directions of Technical Change and the Transformation of the Economy.” In Long Waves in the World Economy, edited by C. Freeman, 78–101. London: Frances Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Dyllicks, T., and K. Hockerts. 2002. “Beyond the Business Case for Corporate Sustainability.” Business Strategy and the Environment 11: 130–141. doi: 10.1002/bse.323
   Google Scholar
• Eden, C., and C. Huxman. 1996. “Action Research for Management Research.” British Journal of Management 7: 75–86. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.1996.tb00107.x
   Google Scholar
• Elkington, J. 1998. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Oxford: Capstone.
   Google Scholar
• Emery, F., and E. L. Trist. 1965. “The Causal Texture of Organizational Environments.” Human Relations 1: 21–32. doi: 10.1177/001872676501800103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster, M. 1972. “An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Action Research in Work Organizations.” Human Relations 25 (6): 529–556. doi: 10.1177/001872677202500605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, C. 1992. The Economics of Hope: Essays on Technical Change, Economic Growth and Environment. London: Frances Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, R. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Toronto: Pitman.
   Google Scholar
• Friend, J. K., J. M. Power, and C. J. L. Yewlett. 1974. Public Planning: The Intercorporate Dimension. London: Tavistock.
   Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W. 2002. “Technological Transitions as Evolutionary Reconfiguration Processes: A Multi-level Perspective and a Case-study.” Research Policy 31 (8/9): 1257–1274. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W. 2004. “From Sectoral Systems of Innovation to Sociotechnical Systems: Insights about Dynamics and Change from Sociology and Institutional Theory.” Research Policy 33 (6/7): 897–920. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geels, F.W. 2005. Technological Transitions and System Innovations: A Co-evolutionary and Sociotechnical Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Global Reporting Initiative. 2011. Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Sustainability Reporting Guidelines – 2000–2011. Version 3.1. Amsterdam: GRI.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, J., and H. Vredenburg. 2003. “The Challenges of Innovating for Sustainable Development.” MIT Sloan Management Review 45 (1): 61–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, S. L., and M. B. Milstein. 1999. “Global Sustainability and the Creative Destruction of Industries.” Sloan Management Review 41 (1): 23–33.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, S. L., and M. B. Milstein. 2003. “Creating Sustainable Value.” Academy of Management Executive 17 (2): 56–67. doi: 10.5465/AME.2003.10025194
   Google Scholar
• Hawken, P., A. Lovins, and H. Lovins. 1999. Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution. New York: Little Brown.
   Google Scholar
• Hedstrom, G., S. Poltorzyki, and P. Stroh. 1998. “Sustainable Development: The Next Generation – How Real, How Soon and Who’s Doing What?” Prism – The Arthur D. Little Journal 4: 5–19.
   Google Scholar
• Kauffman, S. A. 1993. The Origins of Order: Self-organization and Selection in Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kemp, R., and D. Loorbach. 2006. “Transition Management a Reflexive Governance Approach.” In Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, edited by Jan-Peter Voss, Dierk Bauknecht, and René Kemp, 103–130. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Kemp, R., J. Schot, and R. Hoogma. 1998. “Regime Shifts to Sustainability through Processes of Niche Formation: The Approach of Strategic Niche Management.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 10 (2): 175–198. doi: 10.1080/09537329808524310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp, R., and S. Zundel. 2007. “Environmental Innovation Policy. Is Steering Innovation Processes Possible?” In Innovations Towards Sustainability Conditions and Consequences, edited by M. Lehmann-Waffenschmidt, 25–46. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Kerkhof, M., and A. Wieczorek. 2005. “Learning and Stakeholder Participation in Transition Processes Towards Sustainability: Methodological Considerations.” Technological Forecasting & Social Change 72: 733–747. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2004.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewin, K. 1946. “Action Research and Minority Problems.” Journal of Social Issues 2: 34–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loorbach, D., and J. Rotmans. 2006. “Managing Transitions for Sustainable Development.” In Understanding Industrial Transformation: Views from Different Disciplines, edited by X. Olsthoorn and A. Wieczorek, 187–206. Leusden: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Loye, D., and R. Eisler. 1995. “Chaos and Transformation: Implications of Non-equilibrium Theory for Social Science and Society.” Behavioural Science 32: 53–65. doi: 10.1002/bs.3830320107
   Google Scholar
• Markard, J., R. Raven, and B. Truffer. 2012. “Sustainability Transitions: An Emerging Field of Research and Its Prospects.” Research Policy 41: 955–967. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markard, J., and B. Truffer. 2006. “Innovation Processes in Large Technical Systems Market Liberalization as a Driver for Radical Change?” Research Policy 35: 609–625. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melo, M. A. C. 1977. “Articulated Incrementalism: A Strategy for Planning (with Special Reference to the Design of an Information System as an Articulated Task).” PhD Diss., Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
   Google Scholar
• Melo, M. A. C. 1985. “Action Research and Planning Process: A Learning Perspective.” Proceedings of the V International Congress of Industrial Engineering, Florianopolis, Brazil.
   Google Scholar
• Melo, M. A. C. 2003. “Innovatory Planning: Methods and Instruments.” In Readings Book of X Annual Conference of GBATA – Global Business and Technology Association, Budapest.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, W. L., and L. Morris. 1999. Fourth Generation R&D: Managing Knowledge, Technology, and Innovation. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Nattrass, B., and M. Altomare. 1999. The Natural Step for Business: Wealth, Ecology and the Evolutionary Corporation. Gabriola Island: New Society.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. R., and S. G. Winter. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Riordan, T., and H. Voisey. 1998. “The Political Economy of the Sustainability Transition.” In The Transition to Sustainability: The Politics of Agenda 21 in Europe, edited by Timothy O'Riordan and Heather Voisey, 3–30. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Ozbekhan, H. 1973. Thoughts on the Emerging Methodology of Planning. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Partidario, P. J., and P. Vergragt. 2002. “Planning of Strategic Innovation Aimed at Environmental Sustainability: Actor-Networks, Scenario Acceptance and Backcasting Analysis within a Polymeric Coating Chain.” Futures 34: 841–861. doi: 10.1016/S0016-3287(02)00030-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porritt, J. 2001. The World in Context: Beyond the Business Case for Sustainable Development. Cambridge: HBR The Prince of Walles’s Business and Environment Programme for Industry.
   Google Scholar
• Rapoport, R. N. 1970. “Three Dilemmas in Action Research.” Human Relations 23 (6): 499–513. doi: 10.1177/001872677002300601
   Google Scholar
• Raven, R. P. J. M., and F. W. Geels. 2010. “Socio-cognitive in Niche Development: Comparative Analysis of Biogas Development in Denmark and the Netherlands (1973–2004).” Technovation 30: 87–99. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.08.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rip, A., and R. Kemp. 1998. “Technological Change.” In Human Choice and Climate Change, edited by S. Rayner and E. L. Malone, 327–399. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rothwell, R. 1994. “Towards a Fifth-generation Process Innovation.” International Marketing Review 11 (11): 7–31. doi: 10.1108/02651339410057491
   Google Scholar
• Roussel, P. A., K. N. Saad, and T. J. Erickson. 1991. Third Generation R&D: Managing the Link to Corporate Strategy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Saviotti, P. P. 1996. Technological Evolution, Variety and the Economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Sbragia, R., Natali Vanali Moreira, Marcelo Foresti Cota, and Francisco Almeida. 2008. “Technological Innovation in Brazil: An Evaluation of Regulatory Framework Advancements.” VI Globelics Conference Proceedings, Mexico City, September 22–24.
   Google Scholar
• Schaltegger, S., and M. Wagner. 2011. “Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Innovation: Categories and Interactions.” Business Strategy and the Environment 20 (4): 222–237. doi: 10.1002/bse.682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schot, J., and F. W. Geels. 2007. “Niches in Evolutionary Theories of Technical Change: A Critical Survey of the Literature.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 17 (5): 605–622. doi: 10.1007/s00191-007-0057-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schot, J., and F. W. Geels. 2008. “Strategic Niche Management and Sustainable Innovation Journeys: Theory, findings, Research Agenda, and Policy.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 20 (5): 537–554. doi: 10.1080/09537320802292651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trist, E. L. 1976a. Some Concepts of Planning. In National Seminar on Long Range Planning. Perth: University of Western Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Trist, E. L. 1976b. “Action Research and Adaptive Planning.” In Experimenting with Organizational Life, edited by A. W. Clark, 223–236. London: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Trist, E. L. 1977. “A Concept of Organizational Ecology.” Australian Journal of Management 2 (2): 161–171. doi: 10.1177/031289627700200205
   Google Scholar
• Trist, E. L. 1981. The Evolution of Sociotechnical Systems. Occasional Paper No. 02. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre.
   Google Scholar