All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.Cover concept: Kordula Röckenhaus, Bielefeld Cover illustration: Alexandra Kaiser, Eichstätt, 2011 Printed by Majuskel Medienproduktion GmbH, Wetzlar ISBN 978-3-8376-2498-4 Content AcknowledgementsThe volume in hand contains a collection of contributions that are concerned with alternative modes of economic and social exchange, among them alternative currency schemes, fair trade, and social enterprises. Earlier versions of these papers have been presented in the context of the study program 'Space -Society -Economy' at the Catholic University Eichstätt-Ingolstadt during the winter term 2011/12. This new program was established on the initiative of the Geography Department as a platform that aims to introduce, discuss and advance new concepts and debates at the intersections between geography, the social sciences and economics. For this purpose, each term addresses a specific topic in usually five public lectures of international guest speakers and additional work in an accompanying seminar.It is worth noting that this study program is fully financed by tuition fees of local students; thus, first of all, we wish to thank our students for making these events possible. In this vein, we also want to thank our student assistants Julia De Gregorio and Julian Rochlitz for their excellent support in organising the series as well as valuable comments on earlier drafts of the introductory chapter. A special thanks is also due to Alexandra Kaiser for her assistance with the figures in this book and for designing the web page and further announcement materials for the study program that not least influenced the design of the cover of the book. Our team assistant Theresia | ALTERNATIVE ECONOMIES AND SPACESNeubauer deserves special appreciation for her great care and patience in processing all administrative tasks.Our utmost gratitude goes, of course, to the distinguished colleagues that accepted our invitation to present and discuss selected parts of their contemporary work in course of the series; they were not deterred by the efforts to travel to wintery snowy Eichstätt, in some cases (such as in the case of Roger Lee who did the whole trip from London by train) indeed a weary journey. By dint of their insightful reflections and rich illustrations of how alternatives are performed at various scales and spaces, they offered all participants in the program, students and colleagues, a great opportunity to delve deeper into the highly relevant, challenging and exciting project to interrogate and practice alternatives in relation to and beyond economic mainstream. We hope that this volume contributes to carrying this project a little further. Hans-Martin Zademach and Sebastian Hillebrand Eichstätt, March 201...

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to clarify the generation–innovation relationship in family firms. The study acknowledges that the degree of family influence on a firm varies over generations and tests if the generation–innovation relationship is affected by two defining characteristics of family influence (family management and intention to transfer family control). Based on recent research that deconstructed a family’s influence, this paper seeks to contribute to disentangling the ambivalent findings on family firm innovation. Design/methodology/approach The study draws on the Community Innovation Survey and analyzes a comprehensive data set of German family firms. The analysis builds on a structural equation model and tests if the two defining characteristics of family influence serve as mediators in the generation–innovation relationship. Findings The study suggests that family firms raise their innovation output over generations. Yet, a considerable fraction of the increase occurs via indirect paths – particularly via the intent to transfer family control to succeeding generations. The results indicate that increased family influence has positive and negative effects on innovation, reinforcing the need for careful application of the family firm definition. Research limitations/implications The sample is exclusively composed of German firms and the generalizability of the findings is limited. Future researchers may also overcome further limitations related to the survey data used. Practical implications The results urge family firm leaders to recognize the vital role of succession planning and non-family management involvement in an innovation context. Originality/value The study deconstructs the varying degree of family influence over generations and adds to the fields of family firm innovation, family firm definitions and typologies.

Family firms are increasingly recognized as a heterogeneous group of businesses with specific strengths and weaknesses that make them either superior or inferior to non-family firms. Recent research has therefore started shifting away from comparisons between family firms and non-family firms to comparisons between family firms. This study investigates the influence of two key paramete rs of 'familiness'-the generation in control and the (non-family) management diversity-on family firm innovation. While agency-based arguments stress the liabilities of these two parameters of family influence, resource-based arguments highlight their benefits. Conflicting effect hypotheses are derived and tested in the context of German family firms. The empirical results imply that family firms' generational development and higher management diversity influence their innovation positively and that their benefits outweigh their liabilities in the context of German family firms.

In the urban water cycle there are different sources for extracting energy. In addition to potential and chemical energy in the wastewater, thermal energy can also be recovered. Heat can be recovered from the wastewater with heat exchangers that are located decentralized and/or centralized at several locations throughout the system. It can be recovered directly at the source (e.g. in the showers and bathrooms), at building block level (e.g. warm water tanks collecting all grey water), in sewers or at the wastewater treatment plant. However, an uncoordinated installation of systems on such different levels can lead to competing technologies. To investigate these interactions, a modelling environment is set up, tested and calibrated based on continuous sewer temperature and flow measurements. With that approach different heat recovery scenarios on a household level (decentralized) and of in-sewer heat recovery (centralized) are investigated. A maximum performance drop of 40% for a centralized energy recovery system was estimated when all bathrooms are equipped with decentralized recovery systems. Therefore, the proposed modelling approach is suitable for testing different future conditions and to identify robust strategies for heat recovery systems from wastewater.

No abstract