“…Similar results have been obtained using the semi-nonparametric estimator [107]. In other words, according to the interviewed entrepreneurs, to be explicitly involved in managing the decisions at the plant [114] does not constitute a critical aspect of their decision to co-invest. This is probably due to the lack of trust in their management power or to the recent sustainable perspective in agro supply-chain management, in which the decision-making process has become more complicated due to the simultaneously involved economic, environmental, and social aspects [115][116][117].…”
Section: Preferences For Different Contract Attributessupporting
The efficient use of agricultural wastes and by-products, which essentially transforms waste materials into value-added products, is considered as pivotal for an effective bioeconomy strategy for the rural development. Within this scope, citrus waste management represents a major issue for citrus processors. However, it also represents a potentially unexploited resource for rural sustainable development. This study focuses on analyzing the current management of citrus waste in South Italy, and on identifying the determinants and barriers that may affect an entrepreneur’s choice in the destination of citrus waste. This study investigates the preferences of citrus processors regarding the contract characteristics necessary to take part in a co-investment scheme. Both analyses are preliminary steps in designing an innovative and sustainable citrus by-product supply chain. Results show that the distance between the citrus processors and the citrus by-products plant is one of the main criteria for choosing alternative valorization pathways. Moreover, guaranteed capital, a short duration of the contract, and reduced risk are contract scheme characteristics that improve entrepreneurs’ willingness to co-invest in the development of a citrus waste multifunctional plant. The overall applied approach can be extended to other contexts for designing new and innovative by-product supply chains, thereby enhancing the implementation of bioeconomy strategies.
“…Similar results have been obtained using the semi-nonparametric estimator [107]. In other words, according to the interviewed entrepreneurs, to be explicitly involved in managing the decisions at the plant [114] does not constitute a critical aspect of their decision to co-invest. This is probably due to the lack of trust in their management power or to the recent sustainable perspective in agro supply-chain management, in which the decision-making process has become more complicated due to the simultaneously involved economic, environmental, and social aspects [115][116][117].…”
Section: Preferences For Different Contract Attributessupporting
The efficient use of agricultural wastes and by-products, which essentially transforms waste materials into value-added products, is considered as pivotal for an effective bioeconomy strategy for the rural development. Within this scope, citrus waste management represents a major issue for citrus processors. However, it also represents a potentially unexploited resource for rural sustainable development. This study focuses on analyzing the current management of citrus waste in South Italy, and on identifying the determinants and barriers that may affect an entrepreneur’s choice in the destination of citrus waste. This study investigates the preferences of citrus processors regarding the contract characteristics necessary to take part in a co-investment scheme. Both analyses are preliminary steps in designing an innovative and sustainable citrus by-product supply chain. Results show that the distance between the citrus processors and the citrus by-products plant is one of the main criteria for choosing alternative valorization pathways. Moreover, guaranteed capital, a short duration of the contract, and reduced risk are contract scheme characteristics that improve entrepreneurs’ willingness to co-invest in the development of a citrus waste multifunctional plant. The overall applied approach can be extended to other contexts for designing new and innovative by-product supply chains, thereby enhancing the implementation of bioeconomy strategies.
“…For instance, designers are often tasked with bringing new meaning to existing product categories or communicating new meanings to consumers (Holt and Cameron 2010;Nedergaard and Gyrd-Jones 2013). Moreover, the inherent logic and practices of designers-sometimes referred to as Bdesign thinking^ (Brown 2009;Chen and Venkatesh 2013;Cross 2011;Dorst 2006;Liedtka 2014; further defined below)-have been identified by innovation management researchers as having much to offer business disciplines, particularly as a potent means to innovate (Kopecka et al 2012;Martin 2009). …”
In order to sustain and grow brand equity, brand managers are faced with balancing the preservation of existing brand identity through consistency with the need to maintain relevance, which requires change and innovation. In this paper we build upon the concept of organizational ambidexterity (March 1991), arguing that design thinking-the logics and practices associated with designers-can serve as a mechanism which promotes and enables the integration of brand consistency and relevance. Drawing on cases of innovation at firms across a range of industries, we show how design thinking can trigger brand ambidexterity across a three-stage process. We identify eight practices and examine how designers enable brand managers to address enduring consistency-relevance tensions in ways that ensure innovations renew or revitalize the brand without undermining its essence.
“…In the science of muddling through, the decision-making process is looked at as a complex process with many vague small steps [9]. Decision-makers have to cross through the mud (muddling through) and big steps are not possible [9,10]. As a result, changing policy is in most cases an evolutionary process instead of a revolutionary process [9].…”
Section: The Science Of Muddling Throughmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the root method believes that it is possible to reach an agreement on organizational goals [10]. These goals can then be used to allocate resources, including human, technology and systems, and procedures [9,11].…”
Section: The Science Of Muddling Throughmentioning
Various types of stakeholders are often involved in the process of deciding to open data. However, the influence of multiple-actors on the decision-making process is ill-understood. Stakeholders play different roles and have different interests in opening and analyzing datasets. The objective of this paper is to understand the influence of the stakeholder's roles and their interests in the decision-making process to open data. The roles-interest grid method is used to determine the stakeholder's concerns and how they influence the decision-making process to open data. In addition to stakeholder theory, we employ muddling through and bounded rationality theories to create a comprehensive analysis of the decisionmaking process. Stakeholders are found to be diverse, where some are proponents of opening data, and others are risk-averse and do not favor disclosing data. Stakeholder's responsible for the actual opening of data are often focused on the risks resulting in a tension between the ambitions of politicians to open data, and the practices of administrators and decision-makers. Understanding the stakeholder's roles and their tensions can help to ensure better decisions are made. We recommend creating incentives for generating shared objectives.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.