Eco-Innovation at the “Bottom of the Pyramid”

  • Mario PanseraEmail author
  • Richard Owen
Part of the Greening of Industry Networks Studies book series (GINS, volume 3)


The projected exponential rise in the 80 % of humanity living on less than $10 a day (largely in the developing world) – the so-called “bottom of pyramid (BoP)”’ – suggests that their behavior, lifestyle and consumption patterns will increasingly affect the global economy and society as a whole. While sustainability is a well-established concept in the developed world, understanding of perceptions and approaches to sustainability at the BoP (and associated behavior) is limited. In particular there is little understanding of whether this vast pool of people across the globe “eco-innovate”, and if so how and why. This chapter provides an overview of the main theoretical discussions about innovation and development, with particular attention to eco-innovation creation, transfer and diffusion at the BoP. We challenge the assumption that the “poor are too poor to eco-innovate”, hypothesizing that eco-innovation in the so-called South could play an important role in contributing to global sustainability. The fascinating point in such a debate is whether or not those at the BoP will be able to trigger a change of paradigm on a global basis, pioneering alternative development models that could “blowback” to the developed world. Through an analysis of empirical cases in Asia and Latin America, we demonstrate that eco-innovation does occur at different levels at the BoP, exploiting local potential, traditional knowledge and international connections. We discuss its potential to facilitate social inclusion and support environmental sustainability. These case studies allow us to propose some characteristics of the BOP eco-innovation process, including technological transfer, diffusion and adaptation. We consider their social dimension and the role of international cooperation, leading to development of a conceptual model as a starting point to describe the landscape, purposes and the drivers of eco-innovation at the BoP. These cases suggest that new business models and new policies that foster grassroots eco-innovation might not only be relevant for developing countries, but offer transfer potential from the “south” to the “north” (innovation “blowback”), notably in the context of the extended current period of financial austerity faced by developed countries and the global sustainability crisis faced by us all.


Eco-innovation Bottom of Pyramid (BOP) Grassroots innovation South Blowback 


  1. Aidindia. (2012). Hydel project. Retrieved from
  2. Anderson, J., & Markides, C. (2007). Strategic innovation at the base of the pyramid. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(49116), 83–88.Google Scholar
  3. Berkes, F., Folke, C., & Gadgil, M. (1995). Traditional ecological knowledge, biodiversity, resilience and sustainability. In C. A. Perrings (Ed.), Biodiversity conservation (pp. 281–299). Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, J. S. (2005). Innovation blowback: Disruptive management practices from Asia. McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 34–45.Google Scholar
  5. Christensen, C. M., Craig, T., & Hart, S. (2001). The great disruption. Foreign Affairs, 80(2), 80–95. Profile Books London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Diamond, J. M. (2005). Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
  7. Gaviotas. (2012). Centro las Gaviotas. Retrieved from
  8. George, G., McGahan, A. M., Prabhu, J., & Macgahan, A. (2012). Innovation for inclusive growth: Towards a theoretical framework and a research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 662–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2012). Reverse innovation: Create far from home, win everywhere. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press Books.Google Scholar
  10. Grameen. (2012). Grameen Shakti. Retrieved from
  11. Gupta, A. (2007). Global GIAN: Online and off line incubation of grassroots innovations and traditional knowledge: Towards Tianjin declaration. Ahmedabad. Retrieved from
  12. Gupta, A. (2009, Dec). Seduce the scientist. Farming matters (p. 17).Google Scholar
  13. Gupta, A. (2010). Grass green innovations for inclusive, sustainable development. In A. Lopez-Claros (Ed.), The innovation for development report (pp. 137–146). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Gupta, A. (2012). Green innovation and sustainability through grassroots’ collaborative networks in the south: A case study of patented intermediate technologies in rural South-Asia. This book.Google Scholar
  15. Hart, S. (2011). Taking the green leap to the base of the pyramid. In T. London & S. L. Hart (Eds.), Next generation business strategies for the base of the pyramid. New approaches for building mutual value (pp. 79–101). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  16. Hart, S., & Christensen, C. (2002). The great leap. Driving innovation from the base of the pyramid. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(1), 51–56.Google Scholar
  17. HPS. (2012). Husk power systems. Retrieved from
  18. Immelt, J. R., Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2009). How GE is disrupting itself. Harvard Business Review, 87(10), 56–66. Harvard Business School Publication Corp.Google Scholar
  19. INEM. (2012). Hiinem. Retrieved from
  20. Jenkins, T. N. (2000). Putting postmodernity into practice: Endogenous development and the role of traditional cultures in the rural development of marginal regions. Ecological Economics, 34(3), 301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kandachar, P., & Halme, M. (2007). An exploratory journey towards the research and practice of the “Base of the Pyramid. Greener Management International, 51, 3–17.Google Scholar
  22. Kanter, R. M. (2008). Transforming giants. Harvard Business Review, 86(1), 43–52, 136.Google Scholar
  23. Kaplinsky, R. (2008). Globalisation, inequality and climate change: What difference does China make? Geography Compass, 2(1), 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kaplinsky, R. (2011). Schumacher meets Schumpeter: Appropriate technology below the radar. Research Policy, 40(2), 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Karnani, A. (2007a). The mirage of marketing to the bottom of the pyramid: How the private sector can help alleviate poverty. California Management Review, 49(4), 90–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Karnani, A. (2007b). Fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: A mirage. Business, 49(4), 48109.Google Scholar
  27. Karnani, A. (2009). The bottom of the pyramid strategy for reducing poverty: A failed promise. Selling, 80, 1–14.Google Scholar
  28. Kim, L. (1980). Stages of development of industrial technology in a developing country: A model. Research Policy, 9(3), 254–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leach, M., Rockström, J., Raskin, P., Scoones, I., Stirling, A., Smith, A., & Thompson, J., et~al. (2012). Transforming innovation for sustainability. Retrieved from
  30. London, T. (2009). Making better investments at the base of the pyramid. Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 106–113.Google Scholar
  31. London, T., & Anupindi, R. (2011). Using the base-of-the-pyramid perspective to catalyze interdependence-based collaborations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 17, 1–6.Google Scholar
  32. London, T., & Hart, S. L. (2004). Reinventing strategies for emerging markets: Beyond the transnational model. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5), 350–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martínez-Alier, J. (1995). The environment as a luxury good or “too poor to be green”? Ecological Economics, 13(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Martinez-Alier, J. (2002). The environmentalism of the poor: A study of ecological conflicts and valuation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martinez-Alier, J. (2008). Inequality, cooperation, and environmental sustainability. Ecological Economics, 64(4), 912–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. MyShelter Foundation. (2012). Liter of light. Retrieved from
  37. Owen, R., Stilgoe, J., Macnaghten, P. M., Fishe, E., & Gorman, M. (2012). In R. Owen, M. Hentrl, & J. Bessant (Eds.), A framework for responsible innovation. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  38. Pansera, M. (2013). Innovation system for sustainability in developing countries. The renewable energy sector in Bolivia. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 7(1), 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pérez, C. (2002). Technological revolutions and financial capital: The dynamics of bubbles and golden ages (p. 198). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pitta, D. A., Guesalaga, R., & Marshall, P. (2008). The quest for the fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Potential and challenges. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(7), 393–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Prahalad, C. K. (2010). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits (2nd ed., p. 407). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  42. Prahalad, C. K., & Mashelkar, R. A. (2010, July–Aug). Innovation’s holy grail. Harvard Business Review.Google Scholar
  43. Prajapati, M. (2012). Mitticool. Retrieved from
  44. Radjou, N., Prabhu, J., Ahuja, S., & Roberts, K. (2012). Jugaad innovation: Think frugal, be flexible, generate breakthrough growth. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  45. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Seyfang, G., & Smith, A. (2007). Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: Towards a new research and policy agenda. Environmental Politics, 16(4), 584–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith, A., Fressoli, M., & Thomas, H. (2013). Grassroot innovation movements: Challenges and contributions. Journal of Cleaner Production 1–11 (in press).Google Scholar
  48. Sristi. (2012). Honey Bee networks. Retrieved from
  49. Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and its discontents (Vol. 78). New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  50. Tainter, J. A. (2011). Energy, complexity, and sustainability: A historical perspective. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), 89–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. The Hindu. (2006, Aug 10). Bilgaon microhydel project washed away. The Hindu. Mumbai.Google Scholar
  52. Thomson, B. (2011). Pachakuti: Indigenous perspectives, buen vivir, sumaq kawsay and degrowth. Development, 54(4), 448–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tiwari, R., & Herstatt, C. (2011). Lead Market factors for global innovation: Emerging evidence from India (Hamburg University of technology Working Paper, No.61).Google Scholar
  54. UNDP. (2008). Human development report 2008. New York: United Nation.Google Scholar
  55. UN-Habitat. (2012). UN habitat case studies. Retrieved from
  56. Van Els, R. H., De Souza Vianna, J. N., & Brasil, A. C. P. (2012). The Brazilian experience of rural electrification in the Amazon with decentralized generation – The need to change the paradigm from electrification to development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(3), 1450–1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Von Hippel, E. (2005). In E. V. Hippel (Ed.), Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  58. Walker, G. P., & Devine Wright, P. (2008). Community renewable energy: What does it mean? Energy Policy, 36(2), 497–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Weisman, A. (1999). Gaviotas: A village to reinvent the world. White River Junction: Chelsea Green.Google Scholar
  60. World Bank. (2012). Global issues world bank facts and figures. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Exeter Business SchoolExeterUK

Personalised recommendations