Concluding Remarks

  • Roberta De Angelis


This chapter is a final reflection which also highlights the specific contribution that this enquiry brings to the academic literature, its limitations and implications for practitioners wishing to implement circular economy-driven business model innovation.


Research contribution Research limitations Research implications 


  1. Aragón-Correa, J., Hurtado-Torres, N., Sharma, S., & García-Morales, V. (2008). Environmental strategy and performance in small firms: A resource-based perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 86, 88–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baden-Fuller, C., & Morgan, M. (2010). Business models as models. Long Range Planning, 43, 156–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barton, D. (2011). Capitalism for the long term. Harvard Business Review, 11 (March), 84–91.Google Scholar
  4. Clinton, L., & Whisnant, R. (2014). Model behavior. 20 business model innovations for sustainability. Retrieved February 2015, from
  5. EC. (2015). Closing the loop: An action plan for the circular economy. Retrieved August 2017, from
  6. EMF, McKinsey, & SUN. (2015). Growth within: A circular economy vision for a competitive Europe. Retrieved July 2015, from
  7. Etzion, D. (2007). Research on organizations and natural environment, 1992–present: A review. Journal of Management, 33, 637–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Geels, F. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticism. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1, 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gulati, R. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-relevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 775–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hahn, T., Figge, F., Aragón-Correa, J., & Sharma, S. (2015). Advancing research on corporate sustainability: Off to pastures new or back to the roots? Business & Society.
  11. Hunt, C., & Auster, E. (1990). Proactive environmental management: Avoiding the toxic trap. Sloan Management Review, 31, 7–18.Google Scholar
  12. Klewitz, J., & Hansen, E. (2014). Sustainability-oriented innovation of SMEs: A systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Moreno, M., De los Rios, C., Rowe, Z., & Charnley, F. (2016). A conceptual framework for circular design. Sustainability, 8, 1–15.Google Scholar
  14. Reed, M. (2009). The theory/practice gap: A problem for research in business school? Journal of Management Development, 28, 685–693.Google Scholar
  15. Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. Academy of Management Review, 20, 936–960.Google Scholar
  16. Slawinski, N., & Bansal, P. (2015). Short on time: Intertemporal tensions in business sustainability. Organization Science, 26, 531–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tilley, F. (1999). The gap between the environmental attitudes and the environmental behaviour of small firms. Business Strategy and the Environment, 8, 238–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Van den Bergh, J., Truffer, B., & Kallis, G. (2011). Environmental innovation and societal transitions: Introduction and overview. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Weick, K. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Journal Quarterly, 21, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ExeterExeterUK

Personalised recommendations