How Important is Sustainability for Start-ups?

(1)

IN

DEGREE PROJECT INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 15 CREDITS

STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2020,

How Important is

Sustainability for Start-ups?

An Investigation on the Sustainability Transition within Stockholm Ventures

SIMONE PAULA BULHA LOPES PEREIRA CONSTANTIN IONEL DRAGAN

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

(2)

(3)

How Important is Sustainability for Start-ups?

An Investigation on the Sustainability Transition within Stockholm Ventures

By

Simone Paula Bulha Lopes Pereira Constantin Ionel Drăgan

Master of Science Thesis TRITA-ITM-EX 2020:203 KTH Industrial Engineering and Management

Industrial Management SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM

(4)

Master of Science Thesis TRITA-ITM-EX 2020:203 How Important is Sustainability for Start-ups?

An Investigation on the Sustainability Transition within Stockholm Ventures

Simone Paula Bulha Lopes Pereira Constantin Ionel Drăgan

Approved

2020-June-11

Examiner

Kristina Nyström

Supervisor

Vladimir Koutcherov

Abstract

This thesis seeks to explore the importance of sustainability within start-up organisations and investigate the sustainability transition within selected ventures.

The research conducted applies a multiple case study design, combined with a literature review to answer the research question: ‘How Important is Sustainability for Start-ups?’. Six case studies are conducted from various industries, in order to obtain a purposive sample. The sample comprises start-ups that are technology focused, of a size below ten people and located in Stockholm, Sweden.

Within this investigation, the concept of sustainability is defined through the triple bottom line approach; social, environmental, and economic, and supported by the 17 Sustainable Development Goals developed by the United Nations. Further concepts of Social Economy are applied, while the basis of the research questionnaire is the Social Economy Canvas. Moreover, the Multi-Level Perspective theoretical framework is applied to provide structure and support to the developed theories, placing sustainability within a broader perspective.

As a result of the data collection and analysis, the following findings are presented. Firstly, digital start-ups struggle to have an impact on environmental sustainability when not working directly within this area. Secondly, in the ideation stages, start-ups have the intention of becoming sustainable according to the triple bottom line. However, when start-ups evolve, their sustainability goals may come into conflict with other factors that add layers of complexity in decision making. Thirdly, it is evidenced that a sustainability transition occurs in the observed case studies, as start-ups adopt more sustainable business practices and entrepreneurs are inspired to pursue new businesses or sustainability-oriented business models. Lastly, Sweden proves itself as a sustainability enabler, offering significant sustainability advantages to organisations based in Sweden.

Key-words: sustainability, start-ups, social economy, sustainability transition, sustainable entrepreneurship, multi-level perspective

(5)

Examensarbete TRITA-ITM-EX 2020: 203 Hur viktig är hållbarhet för start-ups?

En undersökning om hållbarhetsövergångar inom Stockholms nystartade företag.

Simone Paula Bulha Lopes Pereira Constantin Ionel Drăgan

Godkänt

2020-Juni-11

Examinator

Kristina Nyström

Handledare

Vladimir Kutcherov Sammanfattning

Denna avhandling undersöker vikten av hållbarhet inom nystartade företag och undersöker hållbarhetsövergången inom utvalda företag.

Den genomförda forskningen tillämpar flera fallstudier i kombination med en litteraturöversikt för att besvara forskningsfrågan: "Hur viktigt är hållbarhet för start-ups?" Sex fallstudier har genomförts från olika branscher för att få till en ändamålsenlig provstorlek. Urvalet omfattar nystartade företag som är teknologifokuserade, av en storlek under tio personer och som ligger i Stockholm, Sverige.

Inom denna utredning definieras begreppet hållbarhet genom den tredubbla strategin: social, miljömässig och ekonomisk, och stöttas av de 17 hållbarhetsmål som utvecklats av FN.

Ytterligare begrepp om social ekonomi tillämpas, medan grunden för forskningsundersökningen är en socialekonomisk canvas. Dessutom tillämpas det teoretiska ramverket på flera nivåer för att ge struktur och stöd till de utvecklade teorierna och placera hållbarhet i ett bredare perspektiv.

Som ett resultat av datainsamlingen och analysen presenteras följande resultat. För det första har digitala nystartade företag svårigheter att påverka miljöns hållbarhet när de inte arbetar direkt inom detta område. För det andra, i ideationsstadierna har nyetablerade företag avsikter att bli hållbara enligt ”triple bottom line”-modellen. Men när nystartade företag utvecklas kan deras hållbarhetsmål komma i konflikt med andra faktorer som komplicerar beslutsfattandet.

För det tredje framgår det att en hållbarhetsövergång inträffar i de observerade fallstudierna när nystartade företag använder mer hållbara affärsmetoder och entreprenörer inspireras att bedriva nya företag eller hållbarhetsinriktade affärsmodeller. Slutligen visar Sverige sig vara en hållbarhetsfaktor som erbjuder betydande hållbarhetsfördelar till organisationer med bas i Sverige.

Nyckelord: hållbarhet, nystartade företag, social ekonomi, hållbarhetsövergång, hållbart entreprenörskap, flernivåperspektiv

(6)

i

List of Tables

Table Page

1 Participating Start-ups for Case Studies 20

2 Case Studies’ SEC Results Description 26

3 Case Study Sustainability Scale Split 27

4 Case Study Sustainability Scale Split Breakdown 27

List of Figures

Figure Page

1 The Pillars of Sustainability 3

2 Sustainable Development Goals 4

3 Layered Representation of Sustainable Development Goals 5 4 Social Economy Canvases: Landscape, Identity and Process Boards 9

5 Sustainability Transition Trends 11

6 MLP Framework Levels 14

7 Dynamic MLP 15

8 Search Engine Trends on Sustainability and SDGs in Sweden from April 2015 to May 2020

22

9 Total EU SDG Index Score 2019 23

10 Sweden’s 2019 SDG Profile 24

11 Case Studies’ SEC Results 25

12 The SEC Sustainability Scale

27

(9)

iv

List of Abbreviations

COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019

CS Case Study

EU European Union

ICT Information and Communication Technology

IEEP Institute for European Environmental Policy

MLP Multi-Level Perspective

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development R&D Research and Development

SD Sustainable Development

SDG Sustainable Development Goals

SDSN Sustainable Development Solutions Network

SE Social Economy

SEC Social Economy Canvas

SOI Sustainability Oriented Innovation

ST Sustainability Transition

UN United Nations

(10)

v

Glossary of Key Terms

Social Economy - a concept designating enterprises and organisations, which have the specific feature of producing goods, services and knowledge while pursuing both economic and social aims and fostering solidarity. Social economy encompasses, but is not limited to, corporate social responsibility, circular economy, solidarity economy, social enterprises, and collaborative economy.

Start-ups - an organisation in its first stage of operations, formed to search for a repeatable and scalable business model. It is governed by flexibility, innovativeness and an entrepreneurial mind-set.

Sustainability - a systematic approach that can be maintained comprising three pillars:

environmental, social and economic. Sustainable practices support ecological, human, and economic health, meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Sustainable Entrepreneurship - the field of entrepreneurship that integrates all three elements of sustainability, environment, social and economic; bringing into existence future products, processes, and services for gain, where gain is broadly construed to include economic and non- economic gains to individuals, the economy, and society.

Sustainability Transition - a major non-linear change in societal cultures, structures and practices that arise from the coevolution between economy, society and ecology; a shift from one dynamic equilibrium to another.

(11)

vi

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to all those who made this thesis possible.

First and foremost, to the six start-ups that took the time to participate in this research, during such turbulent and uncertain times. Secondly, to Professor Vladimir Kutcherov for guiding the thesis through his supervision and valuable discussions. Thirdly, to Anders Tell for introducing the Social Economy Canvas to this research.

To all the professors, advisors and friends gathered along the way, thank you for your unwavering support, advice and lessons.

Last but not least, to the class of 2020 for embarking together on a great adventure through this master’s programme in Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management - all the best for a bright future!

(12)

1

1. Introduction

Currently, there is no alternative to sustainable development. Overcoming climate crisis challenges and enabling societies to thrive on a planet with increasingly finite resources require significant innovation.

Consequently, sustainable development (SD) has become a focus area for policymakers, large corporations, and new ventures. SD strategies have been developed by numerous bodies, including the European Union (EU) and Commission, which aims to identify and develop actions to enable member states to achieve continuous long-term improvement of quality of life. This is realised through creating sustainable communities that are able to efficiently manage and utilise resources, exploring the ecological and social innovation, and economic potential, to ultimately ensure prosperity, environmental conservation and social cohesion (Ec.europa.eu, 2020). In parallel, the United Nations (UN) have developed 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to provide a common blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet and are an urgent call for action by all countries in a global partnership (Griggs et al., 2013). Furthermore, the concept of Social Economy has been developed and applied, which designates enterprises and organisations mutual benefit societies, associations, foundations and social enterprises, which have the specific feature of producing goods, services and knowledge while pursuing both economic and social aims and fostering solidarity.

Both industry and academia increasingly realise that implementing SD strategies is a means of bringing the long-term success of organisations and ecosystems they operate in. Organisations today need systemic approaches to sustainability to be competitive in the long term (Galpin, Whitttington and Bell, 2015). Therefore, many business leaders view sustainability as an essential component of their business strategy, seizing opportunities and tackling risks to increase margins and brand value (Sarni and Capozucca, 2020). Nevertheless, in an ever- increasing era of ‘greenwashing’, it is important to determine how effective and meaningful these strategies are.

Simultaneously, innovation has a critical role in building a collective sustainable future, with the potential to bring the required changes for planetary, societal and economic sustainability.

Sustainable innovations place established organisations in a situation where they must rethink their philosophy and values. Products and services must be redesigned and new ways in which processes are carried out must be implemented. These changes enable the transformation of the current practices in the business world and in society, influenced by pressures to minimise the negative impact on the environment, people and the economy either on a local or global scale (Eddy, 2020). Contrastingly, start-ups are recognised as disruptors and creators of innovations necessary for sustainability. The journey of sustainability is uncertain in regard to how it materialises into the future and uncertainty is what drives an entrepreneur (Keskin, 2015).

Although this point of connection is established, little information is available on how sustainability could influence the journey of an entrepreneur and their venture (Larson, 2000).

This research discusses start-ups within a context of sustainability, and poses the question: how important is sustainability within start-up organisations? While also aiming to assess the role of the start-ups amongst the phenomenon of Sustainability Transition through the lens of the

(13)

2

Multi-Level Perspective (MLP) framework. While also providing insights on the use of the Social Economy Canvas as a tool to evaluate start-ups’ sustainability.

In order to structure the analysis conducted, the concept of Sustainable Entrepreneurship, Sustainability Transition and Multi-Level Perspective framework are applied. Additionally, the Social Economy principles and the UN’s 17 SDGs are also applied throughout the investigation and analysis, exploring the connection between them and the start-ups’ operations.

1.1 Problem Definition

The concept of sustainability impacts organisations, regardless of industry, size or location, however, to varying degrees. Within early stage start-ups, it can be unclear to what degree of importance sustainability is placed, particularly to those that do not specifically work in the sustainability domain. This includes how sustainability affects the start-ups’ goals, innovation activities and operations. Currently, there are limited tools available for start-ups to evaluate their sustainability holistically, including environmental, social and economic factors.

Moreover, the clear role and the impact that sustainability start-ups play on the process of sustainability transition is not fully understood.

1.2 Research Aim and Question

This study investigates the prominence of sustainability within Stockholm start-ups, considering the sustainability transition. By doing so, an empiric approach is adopted with the aim of placing sustainability within the ventures. The aim and contribution to the body of knowledge is to illustrate and analyse how six Stockholm-based start-ups incorporate sustainability within their organisations; to illustrate how the socio-technical MLP can analyse a sustainability transition; and to provide the developers of the Social Economy Canvas with a test study within a start-up context, through the feedback group the authors participate in.

This research complements prior studies in the entrepreneurship field, sustainability and social economy domains by investigating the following question: ‘How Important is Sustainability for Start-ups based in Stockholm, Sweden?’ with a focus on sustainability transition.

1.3 Delimitations

The research aims of this paper are achieved through case studies conducted in one specific geographic location. Therefore, the scope of the study is bound to Stockholm, Sweden. The case studies are also not representative of one specific industry, rather examining a range of industries working with digital technologies. This is to provide a general understanding of ventures working across diverse sectors.

Additionally, due to the intention to provide an overview of the importance of sustainability, the interviews are conducted with a single point of contact within the organisation, rather than multiple interviews with team members. Typically, these are the start-up founders or executive level managers. Consequently, different perspectives and insights of the functions within the start-ups are not explored.

(14)

3

2 Literature Review

A literature review is conducted below to provide definitions, a summary, and critical evaluation of the topics explored: Sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals, Sustainability Transition, Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Start-ups, and Social Economy.

Furthermore, it states the sources used for this research and demonstrates how it fits within the larger fields of study.

2.1 Sustainability

To understand how sustainability influences start-up organisations and how heavily weighted sustainability is found in its operations, there is a need to further study the concepts of sustainability in new ventures.

Figure 1- The Pillars of Sustainability

Firstly, there is a lack of consensus on the definition and meaning of sustainability (Faber, Jorna, & Van Engelen, 2005). A definition of sustainable development as formulated by the World Commission on Environment and Development (1987, para. 27) states: “Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable—to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This definition is seemingly ambiguous and can lead to different interpretations. The definition is deliberately ambiguous to not constrain thoughts and to encourage alternative concepts.

Moreover, a primer of the sustainability concept can be derived from the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969: “to create and maintain conditions, under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony, that permit fulfilling the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations” (US EPA, 1969). Therefore, when sustainability is referred to in this research, it is defined as a systematic approach, that can be maintained, comprising three pillars: environmental, social and economic, as seen in Figure 1.

(15)

4

2.2 Sustainable Development Goals

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is an action plan for people, prosperity and the planet developed by the United Nations in 2015. The cornerstones of this action plan are the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, that are an extension of the Millennium Development Goals of Sustainability defined by the UN in 2000. The SDGs have a triple bottom line approach to human wellbeing; economic development, social inclusion, and environmental sustainability. This agreement is a commitment by all UN member countries in order to take a systematic approach to the many challenges and opportunities that sustainable development and climate change bring (Alprofoundation, 2020).

The classic format that the UN displays the SDGs is recognised and representative, as illustrated in Figure 2. Nonetheless, the way in which Johan Rockström and Pavan Sukhdev present the SDGs at Stockholm EAT Food Forum (2016) provides a visual framework, where the three bottom lines are clearly shown. Figure 3 illustrates this framework, which is based on the format of a ‘wedding cake’ where the centre layers, Economic and Social, are embedded in the outer layer, Environmental. This model changes the viewpoint from a sectoral approach that presents the three pillars of sustainability independently, to a logic where the economy serves society, and the latter thrives in a safe and nourishing environment of the planet (Stockholmresilience.org, 2020).

Figure 2. Sustainable Development Goals (UN Communications Materials, 2020)

(16)

5

Figure 3. Layered Representation of Sustainable Development Goals (Folke et al., 2016, no pagination)

2.3 Sustainable Entrepreneurship

The field of entrepreneurship is at the intersection of several disciplines such as strategic management, economics, sociology, and innovation. Therefore, entrepreneurship is classed as a multidisciplinary field (Keskin, 2015). Entrepreneurship has an important role in designing and implementing more sustainable products, services and processes (Hall, Daneke and Lenox, 2010). Scholars dictate that entrepreneurial actions have the power to counteract climate change, maintain biodiversity and reduce the main effects on the environment (Dean &

McMullen, 2007). For this reason, researchers have started to explore how the field of entrepreneurship can support the transition towards a more sustainable planet and how the goal of sustainable development can be achieved through it (Parrish, 2010).

The research of Cohen and Winn (2007) draws the attention to four market imperfections - flawed pricing mechanisms, information asymmetries, inefficient firms and externalities - that lead to unsustainable business and environmental degradation. However, from these imperfections opportunities arise, and in a Schumpeterian (1942) approach sustainable entrepreneurs generate innovative business models and develop radical technologies through the concept of ‘creative destruction’ (Schaltegger, Lüdeke-Freund and Hansen, 2016). This study applies the sustainable entrepreneurship definition by Shepherd & Patzelt (2011):

(17)

6

Sustainable entrepreneurship is focused on the preservation of nature, life support, and community in the pursuit of perceived opportunities to bring into existence future products, processes, and services for gain, where gain is broadly construed to include economic and non-economic gains to individuals, the economy, and society (Shepherd and Patzelt, 2011, p. 142).

Entrepreneurs are a catalyst by acting as a bridge between the suppliers’ side and customers side. Henceforth, they fulfil needs, relieve pains and create new markets or disrupt the existing ones. Likewise, sustainable entrepreneurs bridge market success with sustainable development (Schaltegger and Wagner, 2011). The intersection of entrepreneurship and sustainability does not only facilitate the creation of sustainable entrepreneurship but also social and environmental entrepreneurship. In order to clarify this concept and dissociate from the other two, it is important to emphasise that sustainable entrepreneurship integrates all three elements of sustainability, environment, social and economic (Young and Tilley, 2006). Where environmental entrepreneurship deals with opportunities that mitigate environmental problems or create environmental value and social entrepreneurship, also associated with non-profit activities that have a social mission, contribute to solving societal problems and create value for communities and people (Keskin, Wever and Brezet, 2020). Through sustainable entrepreneurship, sustainability-oriented innovations (SOI) are achieved where these can impact mass markets and benefit significant parts of the society (Schaltegger and Wagner, 2011). The following section examines the process of start-up companies and how they are becoming more sustainable.

2.4 Start-ups

Start-ups have performed an increasingly important role for global and local economies, driving technological developments and shaping the modern world. In comparison to corporate incumbents, start-ups are recognised to be more agile, as they are the frontrunners in breakthrough innovations, whereas large organisations invest in more secure business opportunities and incremental innovations. Furthermore, start-ups have a positive effect on the job market as they drive growth by creating new jobs. Eric Ries the creator of the ‘Lean Start- up Methodology’ defines start-ups as: “A human institution designed to deliver a new product or service under conditions of extreme uncertainty” (Ries 2010, para. 4). While Steve Blank defines start-ups from a business model perspective as: “an organisation formed to search for a repeatable and scalable business model” (Blank, 2010). Despite the different perspectives from which a start-up could be viewed or defined, a start-up is governed by flexibility, innovativeness and an entrepreneurial mind-set.

Furthermore, the driving force of start-ups is found in the capabilities of the entrepreneur, where the entrepreneurship process can be viewed and defined as the “intentional act of new value creation in which opportunities are created and realised through various modes of organising” (Parrish, 2007, p.19). Academic experts in entrepreneurship commonly link start- ups’ success to the firm’s ability to survive, scale and obtain financial performance. Late findings show that there are different emerging types of entrepreneurs and start-ups that are driven by goals other than only maximising financial gains (Carsrud and Brännback, 2010).

Nonetheless, scholars criticise research for putting too great of an emphasis on economic

(18)

7

factors as the main criterion for new ventures performance. It is argued that there is a need to re-evaluate the field of start-ups in new ways that also focus on the environmental and social challenges related to human well-being (Keskin, 2015). This new notion widens the motivation of the entrepreneur from the desire for profit to ‘designing the society we want to live in’

(Sarasvathy, 2004), as well as generating environmental and social value (Cohen, Smith, &

Mitchell, 2008). As a result, a new type of start-up emerges with its core values linked to the fundamentals of sustainability. These ventures are often called ‘green start-ups’ and they start from scratch being green and by this, they are socially committed, system-transforming, and technologically up to date (Taylor and Walley, 2004). Moreover, these changes are seen also in the business model that these ventures have. The pursuit of concomitantly social, environment and financial gains leads to a complexity in terms of the process of decision making. The value proposition which is the main element of the business model must change in order to include the triple bottom line perspective. Consequently, the business models itself will become more sustainable oriented (Keskin, Wever and Brezet, 2020).

2.5 Social Economy and Social Economy Canvas

2.5.1 Social Economy

During recent decades, the traditional economy has been challenged and put in question.

Experts theorise that the values that the classic economy promotes are not sufficient to tackle the current alarming state of the environment, decrease social inequalities and diminish the economic gap between different groups of society. The current consensus on how well-being and success is measured must also change. Profit and self-interest no longer need to be the only landmarks that guide individuals and organisations in the economy (Rancati, 2020). Therefore, several theories have been proposed describing different methods and values to be used in today’s economy (Daun, 2011). For instance, the European Commission states that the Social Economy has the potential to offer innovative solutions to today’s social, economic and environmental challenges. It can enable social inclusion, territorial cohesion and develop sustainable jobs (European Commission, 2011).

Regarding the definition of social economy, a consensus is not found, however, some experts and scholars define Social Economy as: “a concept designating enterprises and organisations, in particular cooperatives, mutual benefit societies, associations, foundations and social enterprises, which have the specific feature of producing goods, services and knowledge while pursuing both economic and social aims and fostering solidarity" (Fonteneau et al., 2010, p.

35-36). In the view of Quinones Jr. et al. (2009), Social Economy must serve the people and the environment rather than profits. However, the economy must be sustainable and the social and commercial aspects of it are not required to be viewed as antagonistic terms. The Social Economy and the commercial economy need to be seen as parts of a continuous spectrum (Westlund, 2003). In practice, every activity has components from both social or commercial economies as they are two sides of the same coin and one without another are not sustainable in the long term.

One of the principal challenges that the European Economic and Social Committee (2012) identified during a report was the fact that SE has an ‘institutional invisibility’ character. This

(19)

8

situation emerged as a consequence of the lack of conceptual identity of SE and by the fact that a clear and rigorous definition of SE doesn’t exist. Moreover, the European Commission, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Zhang and Li, Neamtan and Anderson (cited in Rancati, 2020) noted that SE is an ‘entangled’ concept with a definition that blends and overlaps with notions such as social enterprises, social innovation, and solidarity economy.

2.5.2 Social Economy Canvas

To clarify the complex field of SE two teams, the Social Economy Unit and the EU Policy Lab, from European Commission joined forces with several contributors from academia and industry to create and validate a sense-making framework. The framework took the form of a canvas, Social Economy Canvas (SEC), facilitating structured conversations and helping to reduce cognitive distortion by comprehending the economic, environmental and social implications of any human activity (Rancati, 2020). The SEC has three segments as direct users: Policymakers; Entrepreneurs; Support Agencies and Investors.

First, the result from this assessment intends to help policymakers spot emerging patterns, success factors and recurring challenges. Therefore, designing better policies and improving the economic conditions of society. It also has the potential to be used as a benchmarking tool (Rancati, 2020). Secondly, the SEC acts as a self-assessment tool that helps entrepreneurs to visualise the core value of their activity. This assessment is an inspiration for entrepreneurs to generate innovative and regenerative ideas. Additionally, it enables a value network analysis of their ecosystem and evaluates their level of sustainability seen from the triple bottom line perspective. Thirdly, the SEC can come in support of agencies and investors to evaluate and promote sustainable business practices. It changes the paradigm of evaluating the impact of ideas. By using this tool, they are not only emphasising the importance of the financial impacts of an idea, but also the impact on society and environment. Hence, they are adopting the triple bottom line approach of sustainability when deciding what initiatives or projects should benefit from those investments.

The Social Economy Canvas comprises three boards: Landscape, Identity and Process canvases. The first two are designed to be conducted periodically, for instance once every six months, and the final canvas is akin to a project management tool through which one keeps track of different activities, used on a weekly basis.

(20)

9

Figure 4. Social Economy Canvas: Landscape board, Identify board and Process board, (EU Policy Lab, 2020) Full size images available in Appendix A

The Landscape board has the role of mapping the ecosystem in which the intended organisation or project exists. Particularly, this board maps the actors that have direct or indirect interaction with the project group. Moreover, the organic flow of value is mapped and the exchanges of money, resources, labours, knowledge or all other kinds of intangible exchanges are marked as well in this board.

The Identity board is the basis of the questionnaire applied in this research. It focuses on how activities are carried out, bringing clarity on the benefits or damages caused not only by the output of activity but also about the manner in which that activity was performed. Moreover, this analysis applies the same triple bottom line perspective that was used in the definition of sustainability. As a basis of analysis, this board has a questionnaire that consists of 54 questions. The questions are divided into three clusters: social; environment; and economy, while each one of these clusters is further divided into three levels: macro; meso; and micro.

The questions are designed to avoid the yes/no answer scenarios. The answers of this questionnaire are translated visually on the board as a crown of a tree seen from above with each one of the answers as a ‘leaf’ of the tree. Each leaf shaped like a hexagon has a different shading, as the colour scheme starts from bright green (regenerative) and ends with dark brown (extractive). This board, in particular, brings to light the best practices for a project or activity in order to be regenerative. It evaluates to what degree an idea, project or organisation is sustainable through the triple bottom line perspective. Finally, it enables organisations and teams to set clear multi-dimensional goals, while simultaneously keeping a consistent approach to the conceptual framework of sustainability (Rancati, 2020). For example, it eliminates the confusion of some of the SDGs that overlap on different dimensions, i.e. SDG goal 8 "Decent jobs and Economic Growth" overlaps the society with economic targets, by offering granularity in the process of goal setting.

In the Process board, the insights from the first two boards are transformed into concrete actions here. This board helps project managers in their day to day work. The central part of the canvas is designed as a Kanban board. This allows the users to keep track of the tasks more easily and increases the level of transparency.

(21)

10

To conclude, the canvas offers a ‘visual grammar’ that allows its users to communicate freely.

Through its holistic approach to sustainability, it guides and fosters the development of new and regenerative ideas (Rancati, 2020).

2.5.3 Discussion

This novel SEC approach is currently in the testing phase and its usability and efficiency on a large scale are yet to be proven. Moreover, the SEC was designed for social economy actors, therefore, some classical entrepreneurs oriented towards rapid growth and profits might find this tool or parts of this tool unfocussed, time consuming and out of scope (Rancati, 2020). In addition, this tool was not designed with the sole purpose of evaluating the level of sustainability within start-ups, nonetheless the Identity board acts as a self-assessment tool that could be applied on any kind of organisation and it has as a main concept the triple bottom line approach of sustainability.

In comparison to other canvases that originate from the business model canvas (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010) the SEC does more than offer an overview of a project or organisation it considers the relationships, identities and qualities of that project it allows users to build visualise rich contexts and landscapes (Rancati, 2020). The approach of the SEC chooses to look beyond the classic organisational boundaries when it comes to the analysis of value flows.

Therefore, the inter-organisational or societal levels are better aligned with the sustainability principles and it gives a more complete picture of the value flows (Pieroni, McAloone and Pigosso, 2019). Breuer et al. (2018) define four guiding principles that are a minimum requirement in order for a business model to be sustainable:

• Sustainability-orientation.

• Extended value creation.

• Systematic thinking.

• Stakeholder integration.

Furthermore, Breuer et al. (2018) evaluate several tools that would support the exploration and elaboration of sustainable business models. These principles could also be applied to the SEC to evaluate its potential to evaluate a business and say if it is sustainable. The SEC is sustainability-oriented because it has the approach of the triple bottom line of sustainability integrated within the Identity board. Extended value creation is taken into consideration by the fact that through the SEC, not only is the social value that is created assessed, but it also considers the triple bottom line approach. A systematic thinking principle is used in the SEC through the way in which the questionnaire of the Identity board is designed. However, this element could be improved by integrating concepts such as ‘Life cycle thinking’, e.g. cradle to grave, and ‘Reflecting outcomes’, e.g. future scenario planning. Finally, the stakeholder integration is achieved through the Landscape board where all the communities of the project are mapped.

The results of this study also contribute towards the development of the tool, through feedback on the application of the Identity Social Economy Canvas on start-up organisations. This is done through the feedback working group the authors participate in.

(22)

11

2.6 Sustainability Transition

Sustainability transition is a crucial concept to understand how the various pathways towards a sustainable future could pan out (Lestar and Böhm, 2020). The literature on sustainability transition is vast and is on an ascending trend (see Figure 5). According to the Sustainability Transitions Research Network more than 500 new articles and books appeared in 2018 alone (Köhler et al. 2019).

Sustainability transitions are defined as “major, non-linear changes in societal cultures, structures and practices... that arise from the coevolution between economy, society and ecology” (Loorbach and Wijsman, 2013, p.22). For instance, transitions can be seen as a shift from one dynamic equilibrium to another as in the case of the shift from the traditional, centralised energy system – fossil fuel based - to the new green decentralised systems - renewable energy based (Loorbach and Wijsman, 2013). Moreover, transitions towards sustainability are different from the classic historical transitions by being goal-oriented or

‘purposive’ (Smith, Stirling and Berkhout, 2005), whereas the former historical transitions were ‘emergent’, i.e. introduction of new technology, the case of the steam engine (Geels, 2011).

Figure 5. Number of papers on sustainability transitions in peer reviewed journals and citations. (Köhler et al. 2019, p. 3)

One of the central aims of transition research is to shed a light on how radical changes take place and how societal functions can be achieved through these changes. The conceptualisation and explanation of these changes have as a unit of analysis the meso level of the socio-technical systems in comparison with other approaches on sustainability research that chose to look on

(23)

12

the macro or micro level (Köhler et al. 2019). The concept of sustainable transition has several characteristics that set it apart from the rest of the topics in sustainability debates (Köhler et al.

2019). Key characteristics include:

• Stability and change: One challenge in transition research is the dynamic relationship between stability and change. The number of ‘green’ innovation and sustainable practises are increasing, however there are deep-rooted system such as coal fired power plants, petrol fuelled cars and consumerism culture with ‘lock-in’ or ‘entrapment’ way of production and consumption which create path-dependent trajectories (Unruh, 2000)

• Long-term process: Transitions are processes that could take decades to unravel and reach an end. One of the reasons is that ‘green’ innovations take a long time from their point of emergence until they reach widespread adoption. Moreover Rotmans et al.

(2001) show that transitions have several phases e.g. predevelopment, take-off, acceleration and stabilisation. Each one of those phases could take a relative great amount of time considering the complexity of the phenomenon.

• Open-endedness and uncertainty: In terms of the sustainability transition there are several transition pathways (Rosenbloom, Berton and Meadowcroft, 2016) and it can’t be said which one will prevail. Moreover, uncertainty stems from the fact that transitions are a multi-actor process giving this complex context is hard to say what actors will have the most important influence.

• Values, contestation, and disagreement: The matter of sustainability is contested and debated by different actors and parts of the society, therefore disagreement occurs when an innovation needs to be incentivised or a certain pathway towards a sustainability transition must be chosen as the most desirable. Sustainability transitions may jeopardise the economic position of well-established industries, e.g. oil and gas, automotive, electricity generation, agri-food, and force them to change their business models. For these reasons they might be reluctant on the need of such a sustainability transition in order to protect their interests (Köhler et al. 2019).

The enumerated characteristics show the complexity of the sustainability transition and how a transdisciplinary approach must be adopted. The research on sustainability transitions makes one think in terms of ‘the big picture’ (Köhler et al. 2019), challenging one to become creative in finding a solution towards a more sustainable future.

(24)

13

3 A conceptual discussion theoretical framework

The highlighted frameworks below are applied to provide structure and support to the developed theories. Here, the concepts are explored, discussed and adapted to fit the research presented.

3.1 Sustainability Transition through the lens of Multi-Level Perspective Framework

In response to the urgent matters that humanity faces due to climate change, frameworks have emerged or have been adapted to the new challenges. To address these problems, deep- structural changes must take place in the important sectors of society and culture. Changes occur in the way in which transportation is done, energy and goods are produced. Often these systematic changes are called ‘socio-technical transitions’ because they imply shifts and reforms of their configuration which call for policy, cultural meaning, consumer practices, technology and infrastructure changes (Geels, 2004).

As previously emphasised, sustainability is of critical importance in current times and the classic principles that govern the economy must change. Thus, sustainability transition is crucial to be analysed in order to understand what forces can push it forward. These transitions, similar to conventional transitions, stem from interaction processes that occur between three socioeconomic levels: macro-level landscapes, meso-level regimes and micro-level niches (Hörisch, 2015). A tool that uses a similar approach is the multi-level perspective (MLP) framework.

The MLP contemplates transitions as of non-linear processes that derive from the interplay of developments of aforementioned levels: niches, the place where radical innovations occur;

socio-technical regimes, the place where practices and associated rules stabilise existing systems; and an exogenous socio-technical landscape (Rip and Kemp, 1998; Geels, 2002). The framework combines concepts from science and technology studies such as sense-making, social networks; evolutionary economics, regimes, niches, routines; and structuration theory and neo-institutional theory (Geels, 2011). Furthermore, the MLP framework can be seen as a nested hierarchy or multi-level perspective (Geels, 2002) (see Figure 6).

(25)

14

Figure 6. Nested hierarchy, Multi-level perspective (Geels, 2002, p. 1261)

With regard to the MLP framework, first, the Landscape is defined as the “external environment that influences interactions between niche(s) and regime” (Geels, 2011). The sociotechnical landscape contains a set of heterogeneous factors, cultural and normative values, such as economic growth, wars, migration, and environmental problems. (Geels, 2002). For this study in particular, environmental problems such as rising temperatures, prolonged droughts, frequent tropical storms, glaciers and permafrost melting and sea level rising (NASA Global Climate Change, 2020) coupled with resource depletion and loss of biodiversity represent the main factors of stress on the regime that come from the landscape. Moreover, society groups and communities have started protests and demanding solutions (Geels and Schot, 2007). A recent example of this phenomenon is the movement that Greta Thunberg began by demanding politicians to act in line with the Paris Agreement (Vaughan, 2019).

Secondly, the Regime is the “established practices and associated rules that stabilise existing systems” (Geels, 2011). More concrete regimes comprise all the public authorities, producer networks, research networks, suppliers, financial networks, societal groups, and user groups (Geels, 2002). Notably, the consumer behaviour of people, by not considering sustainability aspects when they are buying a product or service. Furthermore, the motivation of entrepreneurs or established firms which do business with the main purpose of gaining market share, rapid growth and making large amounts of profits.

Thirdly, the Niche level is a space where “practices or technologies that deviate substantially from the existing regime” emerge (Geels, 2011). Research and development laboratories, start- ups and spin-offs of incumbent companies are primarily found at the niche level (Geels, 2011).

However, start-ups might also be found at the regime level, by supplying larger companies with services or inputs, although the creative and disruptive innovation part of start-ups is most likely found and developed at the niche level. (Hörisch, 2015). As a niche, this paper considers

(26)

15

sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability start-ups that produce sustainability-oriented innovation (SOI).

As seen in Figure 7, niches are an important place from where the ‘seeds of change’ spread (Geels, 2002). However, important pressure also comes from the landscape level and influences the niche level and the regime.

Figure 7. Dynamic MLP (Geels and Schot 2007, p.401)

This research focuses on start-ups that impact sustainability and implicitly on sustainable entrepreneurs as the main actors of the niche level. These start-ups have the power of transformation and play an important role in changing the regime at the meso level. Sustainable entrepreneurs, through their products and services, put pressure on large companies and their research and R&D departments by producing more sustainable products and services for customers.

Consequently, start-ups can set a benchmark for competitors and increase the sustainability expectations of customers through their products or services (Hörisch, 2015). Such an example is given by entrepreneurs that push SOIs to the market in the transition towards renewable energy. It’s important to take into consideration that their endeavours are supported by a pull of the regime-level actors such as governments or large-scale energy companies (Hörisch, 2015).

(27)

16

4 Research Method

This section outlines the research paradigm, methods by which the research is conducted, and the reasoning for the choices made. Here, an overview is provided of which ventures are selected for case studies participation, and why they are suitable for the investigation in relation to the research question. Furthermore, it describes how the data collection is conducted and the methods in which the responses elicited are analysed. Lastly, data reliability, validity and ethical matters are addressed.

4.1 Research Paradigm

A research paradigm is a set of commonly held beliefs and assumptions within a research community, with two paradigms for social research commonly known as the positivist paradigm and the interpretivist paradigm (Denscombe, 2014). The paradigm influences how scientific studies are carried out and reflects the belief systems and assumptions made by researchers about knowledge in general. This research applies an interpretivist research paradigm, yielding a qualitative study, as it does not substantiate a particular subject or method;

rather, it explores the subject based on the subjective view of the researchers.

4.2 Research Approach

This research applies a case study methodology, combined with a literature review, in order to determine the relationship and factor of influences of sustainability within start-ups. The case methodology is selected for this research, due to its potential to explore and analyse phenomena in detail (Bromley, 1990). Furthermore, case study research is beneficial when questions of

‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘why’ are examined and the emphasis of new insight is sought (Benbasat, Goldstein and Mead, 1987; Yin, 2013).

As six cases are presented, the method is classed as a multiple case study, which according to Denscombe (2014), focuses on one or fewer instances of a specific phenomenon to provide profound knowledge about a certain area. As defined by Denscombe (2014), a case is a 'self- contained entity' and has 'distinct boundaries.' Cases can be carried out with a small number of participants and aim at illuminating 'the general by looking at the particular' (Denscombe, 2014).

Six start-ups participate in the conducted studies, of which all are geographically based in Stockholm. This method enables a deep understanding of the ventures’ studies and permits comparison since patterns emerge from the case studies.

The aim of the case studies is to explain how the start-ups incorporate sustainability within their organisations and to determine how sustainability impacts their business decisions while creating value to provide to customers.

(28)

17

4.3 Data Collection

4.3.1 Primary Data

The studies presented included primary data collection from semi-structured interviews (Denscombe, 2014), observations and questionnaires, corroborated with secondary research from academic papers and official reports. The content and structure of the semi-structured interviews have been developed primarily from literature sources.

Both interviews and questionnaires are selected for the data collection method, applying the Social Economy concept and canvas. Firstly, initial semi-structured interviews are conducted with the start-up representatives, typically a founder or executive manager. The research motivation and purpose were explained, as well as an introduction to the Social Economy Canvas theory and application. Open ended questions were asked to the interviewees, to determine the start-up stage, motivation factors and purpose and for the concept of Social Economy to be defined clearly. The SEC questionnaire and sample interview questions are presented in Appendices B and C, respectively.

Secondly, the start-up representative completes the questionnaire according to the instructions provided (Appendix D). The data is then collected and analysed, resulting in the ensuing completed canvas maps (Appendix E). Furthermore, interviews and feedback sessions with the SEC developers are also conducted.

Due to the structure of the interviews and case approach, the gathered results yielded qualitative analysis, with one qualitative observation on the data collected. The resulting unit of analysis, in this case, is an independent start-up or venture, which has provided this research with data originating from interviews, questionnaires and observations. The data acquired through this research is examined against academic research and secondary research.

4.3.2 Secondary Research

A combination of secondary research and trend analysis is conducted in order to validate the findings from the primary study, and to provide further evidence of the conclusions. This takes place through collecting information through academic papers, official European Sustainable Development reports and trend analysis on Google Trends.

The papers and reports explored are evaluated by academic peers, to ensure reliability. These are taken from databases including Google Scholar, ScienceDirect and the Institute for European Environmental Policy.

According to studies at Yale University, Google Trends studies do not yield sufficient documentation of search methodologies and search rationale (Nuti et al., 2014). However, Google Trends data may be promising and may provide deep insights into population behaviour. Nonetheless, there are limitations in the reliability and quality of the studies, which have been taken into consideration in this paper (Nuti et al., 2014).

(29)

18

4.4 Start-up Selection

To define a specific group of ventures to participate in this study, a sample group is defined, as according to Saunders et. al. (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2015). Six ventures are purposefully chosen to participate in the case studies from various industries, in order to obtain a purposive sample. The sample selection considers the following filtering criteria: (i) technology-focused venture; (ii) start-up size of below 10 people (iii) geographically located in Stockholm, Sweden.

Stockholm is chosen as a geographic location for the choice of start-ups, as in the last decades it has gained a reputation for generating unicorns, including high-tech companies such as Skype, King.com, Klarna and leading European unicorn Spotify. Both the city and country furthermore rank high on Information and Communication Technology (ICT) related factors;

the highest share of ICT entrepreneurs in the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, and multiple factors of the digital infrastructure (Goudriaan, 2016). Additionally, sustainability is embedded in Scandinavian culture, and Sweden is routinely cited as a global leader in corporate social responsibility and sustainability, providing the study with a supplementary view on the topic (Strand, Freeman and Hockerts, 2014).

A large sample of start-ups were approached directly and invited to participate in the research.

The process of contacting the start-ups is detailed as follows: ventures supported by the Stockholm School of Entrepreneurship were scanned and selected according to the start-up criteria, and approached through introductions; in parallel, prospective start-ups from independent sources were also scanned and selected, resulting in a shortlist of 50 start-ups, which were contacted through email. Due to circumstances regarding the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, a smaller sample size of six start-ups was able to partake in the studies. This led to higher numbers of ventures that have a specific interest in sustainability participating, and therefore this impacted the neutrality of the start-ups regarding the sustainability transition. This is mitigated by the use of secondary research.

4.5 Validity and Reliability

Validity implies how well the measuring instruments in the study fulfil the demand to measure what it intends to measure (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2015). Researchers’ poor memory can affect the validity of the study. To mitigate this as much as possible, notes are taken during the interviews. Directly after the interviews, the authors discuss and summarise the findings.

Reliability of the data in question concerns the consistency with which research procedures deliver their results and whether similar observations would be made by other researchers (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2015). It also relates to the repeatability of the findings under similar conditions and can be measured by conducting the study again, to ensure the same results are obtained. The same questions were asked to all respondents and the questionnaire can be used elsewhere with a larger sample base; therefore, the study is repeatable.

However, as this research is based on the Social Economy Canvas, a sustainability self- assessment, start-up representatives complete the questionnaire themselves. This could lead to

(30)

19

a bias in answers, as the start-ups could prefer to see themselves in a flattering manner. To counterbalance this, during the interview and introduction to the research, the researchers emphasised to participants that results are kept anonymous and not published externally, and that it is in their benefit to be fully open and honest in the assessment. This then led to a clearer understanding of the start-up’s current sustainability situation, highlighting areas of strength and weaknesses to be improved.

4.6 Research Ethics

Throughout the communication with the start-ups, participants were clearly made aware that their involvement is voluntary, and questions may be avoided should they wish, and they were able to withdraw from the study at any stage. Following each interview, the start-ups received a document which included a small introduction to the questionnaire, and a statement that the data will be kept confidential. This document is presented in Appendix D.

The collected primary data from the start-ups is treated with the utmost confidentiality, therefore the participating ventures are kept anonymous and generally described by their area of focus.

(31)

20

4.7 Participating Start-ups

The following case studies participate in the research conducted, namely interviews and Social Economy Canvas questionnaire. They have provided the study with information and details on their innovation and sustainability goals and approach.

Table 1. Participating Start-ups for Case Studies

Case

Study Industry Start-up Purpose Start-up Phase

Principle Sustainability Paradigm

1 Counselling and Wellbeing

To provide a digital platform for relationship wellbeing

Testing and Launch

Social sustainability

2 Bicycle E- Commerce

Trade bicycles profitably, while supporting young schoolgirls in developing countries by donating a bicycle for every branded bicycle sold

Established and expanding

Social and environmental sustainability

3 Digital Recruitment

To provide a world-leading recruitment platform to help technology companies and job seekers find long-term matched based on values

Launch

Social and economic sustainability

4 Dental Technology

To develop a digital platform to enable dental care centres with modernised technologies for digital diagnosis, planning and treatment

Planning Social sustainability

5 Financial Technology

Socially inclusive investment firm providing financial solutions for communities in developing countries

Established and operating

6 Finance

To offer a banking service with a conscience, where customers’ spending and savings are measured by its impact on the planet, both negative and positive.

Established and expanding

(32)

21

5 Secondary Research and Trend Analysis

In order to gain a deeper understanding of the importance of sustainability within start-ups, secondary research is conducted in the form of insights from academia and trend analysis.

5.1 Sustainability in Organisations

Firstly, it is found that creating new ventures from sustainability principles is influenced by the firms' capability in finding an overlap between customer’s perceived value and sustainability goals, i.e., translating sustainability goals into innovations that deliver value to the customer (Keskin, Diehl and Molenaar, 2013).

Currently, mainstream business environments do not place sustainability as a principal focal point for innovation or value proposition, nor has it become the norm. Rather, business actors are focused on their brand image, cost reduction and compliance with different policies (Metz et al., 2016). Nonetheless, an increasing number of companies intend to tackle the issues of sustainability and how they could use sustainability as a ‘lens for growth and innovation’

(Accenture, 2012).

Focusing specifically on start-ups, the perspective of integrating sustainability into their business operations and business decisions could have several direct effects on its success or failure. In some cases, being sustainability oriented as a start-up could mean that the time to market could be longer and costs might increase, therefore generating greater burden and additional risks. However, the alignment between sustainability and their products and services could be considered innovative (Schick, Marxen and Freimann, 2002). Therefore, this may also be a factor which determines how much importance start-ups give sustainability.

5.2 Sustainability Trend Analysis

To gain further insight into how sustainability is viewed in the selected geographic region of Sweden, an analysis of search engine data is conducted. This is conducted with the aim of determining how trendy and influencing the terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development goals’ are in an online domain. Data from Google Trends is applied to investigate how these terms are searched across Sweden to verify correlations between the popularity of these terms and how this might reflect on the motivations and culture of start-ups.

The data from Google Trends is showcased by the term of ‘Interest over time’ which Google defines as: The numbers of search interest relative to the highest point on the chart for the given region and time. A value of 100 is the peak popularity for the term; while a value of 50 indicates that the term is half as popular; and a score of 0 means that there was not enough data for this term (Google Trends 2020).

In the previous 5 years, sustainability has maintained its interest within the Swedish population, however the SDGs have gained significant popularity over the 5 years within the search engine.

Furthermore, in the year 2019 sustainability reached the peak of its popularity with 100 points and had the highest average score from the 5 years interval. As highlighted in October 2019, SDGs recorded a top score. This finding can reflect the interest and awareness amongst the

(33)

22

population for the SDGs, which could influence how potential consumers and entrepreneurs place the goals’ importance.

Figure 8. Search Engine Trends on Sustainability and SDGs in Sweden from April 2015 to May 2020 (Google Trends, 2020)

5.3 Sustainable Development Goals throughout the European Union

A source used to evaluate the EU on its sustainability performance is the European Sustainable Development Report, conducted in November 2019 by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) and Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP). This report compares the performance of the EU member states and on all 17 SDGs, providing detailed country profiles using a mix of data sources (SDSN & IEEP., 2019).

As illustrated in Figure 9, Nordic countries - Denmark, Sweden and Finland – top the EU SDG Index. Yet it is found that even the leading countries face major challenges in achieving several SDGs and are not on track for achieving all of the SDGs. Sweden stands in second place with a 79.4 score. Each country’s performance is scored on a particular indicator on a scale from 0 to 100, with 100 denoting the best possible results. The methodology for the index and dashboards has been audited by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (SDSN &

IEEP., 2019).

(34)

23

Figure 9. Total EU SDG Index Score 2019 (SDSN & IEEP., 2019, p.3)

The EU member states obtain their highest scores on SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 3 (Good Health and Wellbeing) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and contrastingly they obtain their poorest results on SDG 2 (No hunger and sustainable agriculture) and SDGs 12-15 related to responsible consumption and production, climate and biodiversity.

Figure 10 illustrates Sweden’s detailed performance evaluated against the SDGs. As can be seen in the dashboard, Sweden performs highly and has achieved SDGs 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). Trends indicate that these SDGs will continue to be achieved by Sweden in the following year. In the case of SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), start-ups and ventures are recognised to contribute directly to this, as innovative start-ups are considered to be the core of the type of entrepreneurship which can be conducive of Schumpeterian destruction leading to competitive pressure, productivity growth and ultimately economic development and employment creation (Colombelli, Krafft and Vivarelli, 2016).

Areas of weakness for Sweden include SDGs 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), 14 (Life below Water) and 15 (Life on Land). Data available for the latter two SDGs indicate these will stagnate in the following year.

(35)

24

Figure 10. Sweden’s 2019 SDG Profile (SDSN & IEEP., 2019, p.116)

The principal finding of this report is that European countries lead globally on the SDGs, but none are on track to achieve the Goals by 2030 (SDSN & IEEP., 2019). The EU and its member states face great challenges on goals related to climate, biodiversity, and circular economy, as well as in strengthening the convergence in living standards, across countries and regions (SDSN & IEEP., 2019).

Furthermore, the report argues that the SDGs can only be achieved through deep transformations that will not be achieved through normal policymaking (SDSN & IEEP., 2019). These transformations require long-term plans and policies partially based on: Mission- oriented Research and Innovation. This is to identify public-private research and development priorities to achieve the SDGs and the objectives of the Paris Agreement. Here, start-ups have the potential to disrupt the regime they are in, to bring forward their innovations that can enable the realisation of the SDGs.

How Important is Sustainability for Start-ups?

How Important is

Sustainability for Start-ups?

An Investigation on the Sustainability Transition within Stockholm Ventures

SIMONE PAULA BULHA LOPES PEREIRA CONSTANTIN IONEL DRAGAN

How Important is Sustainability for Start-ups?

An Investigation on the Sustainability Transition within Stockholm Ventures

By

Simone Paula Bulha Lopes Pereira Constantin Ionel Drăgan

Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

List of Abbreviations

Glossary of Key Terms

Acknowledgements

1. Introduction

1.1 Problem Definition

1.2 Research Aim and Question

1.3 Delimitations

2 Literature Review

2.1 Sustainability

2.2 Sustainable Development Goals

2.3 Sustainable Entrepreneurship

2.4 Start-ups

2.5 Social Economy and Social Economy Canvas

2.5.1 Social Economy

2.5.2 Social Economy Canvas

2.5.3 Discussion

2.6 Sustainability Transition

3 A conceptual discussion theoretical framework

3.1 Sustainability Transition through the lens of Multi-Level Perspective Framework

4 Research Method

4.1 Research Paradigm

4.2 Research Approach

4.3 Data Collection

4.3.1 Primary Data

4.3.2 Secondary Research

4.4 Start-up Selection

4.5 Validity and Reliability

4.6 Research Ethics

4.7 Participating Start-ups

5 Secondary Research and Trend Analysis

5.1 Sustainability in Organisations

5.2 Sustainability Trend Analysis

5.3 Sustainable Development Goals throughout the European Union