Search

Frugal innovation can help to foster sustainability and address global challenges, like building economic growth, addressing various social needs, and protecting the environment. However, if one wants to measure the sustainability impacts of frugal innovation or enable companies to make empirically informed decisions between frugal and alternative innovation, the question of how to assess these empirical impacts arises. The main objectives of this paper are the identification of approaches and indicators for assessing the sustainability impacts of frugal innovation and the analysis of empirical findings relating to prior assessments. To this end, a systematic literature review was conducted, which identified 15 texts, and a qualitative content analysis was employed to evaluate their contents. From these analyses two main approaches for assessment emerged. First, the assessment based on the triple bottom line or the dimensions of sustainability (ecological, social, and economic). Second, assessment against the Sustainability Development Goals. In the identified texts, the sustainability dimensions are preferred over the Sustainable Development Goals for assessing the sustainability impacts of frugal innovation. From the 15 identified texts, 13 use qualitative indicators and two quantitative (conceptual) indicators. To answer the research question of the paper, a set of 47 qualitative indicators relating to integrated dimensions of sustainability for the assessment of the sustainability impacts of frugal innovation is proposed. In addition, this paper presents new insights relating to the empirical evidence of sustainability impacts of frugal innovation. Approximately 60% of 334 empirical findings from 70 different cases related to the Sustainable Development Goals contribute to the five (socially and economically focused) SDGs 8, 3, 10, 12, and 9. After a transformation to the Triple Bottom Line, these findings contribute predominantly to the economic and social dimensions (in each case 45%), and only slightly to the ecological dimension (the remaining 10%). In turn, 164 empirical results from 77 different cases related to the Triple Bottom Line show an almost similar contribution to all three sustainability dimensions with a small lead of the economic dimension. Nonetheless, in the opinion of the author, these findings confirm other studies, that from an empirical perspective, frugal innovation can be described as inherently socially and economically sustainable and ecological sustainability is mostly not the primary focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The goal of economic expansion, which ignores social welfare and environmental restrictions, has been supplanted in the business environment. The paper investigates how corporate environmental sustainability affects sundry parts of a company's performance. The study question is dichotomized into two segments. Firstly, examine the effect of selected dimensions, such as Economic, Social, Technological, and Organizational factors, on Corporate Environment Sustainability. Secondly, to validate and prove the mediating effect of CES on firm performance with selected manifests. A total of 390 respondents from SMEs were analyzed systematically. The synergy of Smart-PLS and Artificial Neural Network determines the impact of environmental sustainability on the various dimensions of a firm's performance that yielding a novel insight that would render vital benefit to stakeholders while drawing the policies related to sustainable development. The findings reveal that corporate environmental sustainability plays a significant role in shaping the relationships between technological, organizational, environmental, and social factors and SMEs' operating performance. The study is the first to empirically validate and evaluate the multimodal framework by extending TOE and TBL theorem. This theoretical nexus can be a pathfinder for policymakers, administrators, and managers to enhance SMEs' performance. Additionally, the validity of this construct in the study has been empirically reinforced statistically. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]