IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i4p1693-d1593837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Startups Drive Innovations Towards Sustainability?

Author

Listed:
  • Jihee Jung

    (Graduate School of Business, Kyunghee University, Seoul 024471, Republic of Korea)

  • Haengjin Ko

    (Automotive R&D Division, Hyundai Motor Group, Yongin-si 16891, Republic of Korea)

  • Young Jun Kim

    (Graduate School of Management of Technology, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

Startups face significant challenges in balancing survival with sustainability, as approximately 90% of them fail. Sustainability is often perceived as a short-term cost, yet turbulent business environments—driven by climate change, environmental regulations, and evolving social expectations—are compelling startups to align their innovations with Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles. These efforts aim to attract investors, customers, and other stakeholders. Despite resource constraints and the liabilities of smallness and newness, understanding how startups leverage innovation to achieve sustainability performance is of both theoretical and practical importance, particularly within the framework of triple bottom line theory. This study empirically examines the roles of absorptive capacity, appropriability, and openness in mediating and moderating the relationship between innovation activities and sustainability performance in startups. Using data from the Korean Innovation Survey 2018—a structured tool aligned with global standards for tracking innovation activities—we analyze 278 young manufacturing firms. Regression analyses reveal that product innovation and organizational innovation are significantly associated with sustainability performance. Furthermore, absorptive capacity mediates the relationship between these types of innovation and sustainability performance. To explore the contingencies influencing these relationships, we test appropriability (measured by protection mechanisms) and openness (quantified by external partnerships). Moderated mediation analysis indicates that openness strengthens the direct relationship between product innovation and sustainability performance up to a threshold but weakens it beyond this point. Organizational innovation’s impact on sustainability performance is fully mediated by absorptive capacity, while appropriability moderates this mediation by enhancing absorptive capacity’s effectiveness when limited protection mechanisms are used. These findings contribute to sustainability research by highlighting that startups’ sustainability efforts are driven by innovation activities mediated by absorptive capacity and contingent upon specific factors such as appropriability and openness. The study confirms the paradox of openness in startup contexts pursuing triple bottom line objectives. Practically, this research provides actionable insights for corporate leaders and policymakers on fostering absorptive capacity through external knowledge acquisition while carefully managing appropriability mechanisms and collaboration strategies to enhance sustainability outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Jihee Jung & Haengjin Ko & Young Jun Kim, 2025. "How Do Startups Drive Innovations Towards Sustainability?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-24, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1693-:d:1593837
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1693/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1693/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhong, Qi & Sun, Yaowu, 2020. "The more the better? Relational governance in platforms and the role of appropriability mechanisms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 62-73.
    2. Koson Sapprasert & Tommy Høyvarde Clausen, 2012. "Organizational innovation and its effects," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1283-1305, October.
    3. Michela Piccarozzi, 2017. "Does Social Innovation Contribute to Sustainability? The Case of Italian Innovative Start-Ups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-28, December.
    4. Francisca Sempere-Ripoll & Sofia Estelles-Miguel & Ronald Rojas-Alvarado & Jose-Luis Hervas-Oliver, 2020. "Does Technological Innovation Drive Corporate Sustainability? Empirical Evidence for the European Financial Industry in Catching-Up and Central and Eastern Europe Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-19, March.
    5. Zobel, Ann-Kristin & Lokshin, Boris & Hagedoorn, John, 2017. "Formal and informal appropriation mechanisms: The role of openness and innovativeness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 44-54.
    6. Robert Padgett & Jose Galan, 2010. "The Effect of R&D Intensity on Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 407-418, May.
    7. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    8. Andressa Kelly da Silva Nunes & Sandra Naomi Morioka & Ivan Bolis, 2022. "Challenges of business models for sustainability in startups," RAUSP Management Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 57(4), pages 382-400, October.
    9. Adriano Martins de Souza & Fabio Neves Puglieri & Antonio Carlos de Francisco, 2024. "Competitive Advantages of Sustainable Startups: Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-24, September.
    10. Zouaghi, Ferdaous & Sánchez, Mercedes & Martínez, Marian García, 2018. "Did the global financial crisis impact firms' innovation performance? The role of internal and external knowledge capabilities in high and low tech industries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 92-104.
    11. Chigu Kim & Chul Lee & Jina Kang, 2018. "Determinants Of Firm’S Innovation-Related External Knowledge Search Strategy: The Role Of Potential Absorptive Capacity And Appropriability Regime," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-33, August.
    12. Dev R. Mishra, 2017. "Post-innovation CSR Performance and Firm Value," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 285-306, January.
    13. Alam, Md. Samsul & Atif, Muhammad & Chien-Chi, Chu & Soytaş, Uğur, 2019. "Does corporate R&D investment affect firm environmental performance? Evidence from G-6 countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 401-411.
    14. Ferran Giones & Christina Ungerer & Guido Baltes, 2020. "Balancing financial, social and environmental values: can new ventures make an impact without sacrificing profits?," International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 39-57.
    15. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    16. Taiyuan Wang & Pratima Bansal, 2012. "Social responsibility in new ventures: profiting from a long‐term orientation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(10), pages 1135-1153, October.
    17. Luca Marrucci & Fabio Iannone & Tiberio Daddi & Fabio Iraldo, 2022. "Antecedents of absorptive capacity in the development of circular economy business models of small and medium enterprises," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 532-544, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Zhongqingyang & Zhu, Huiming & Zhou, Zhongbao & Zou, Kai, 2022. "How does innovation matter for sustainable performance? Evidence from small and medium-sized enterprises," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 251-265.
    2. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. Han, Liyan & Xie, Chen & Jin, Jiayu & Zhao, Yang, 2023. "Effect of low-carbon innovation on carbon risk: International firm-level investigation," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    4. Meftah Gerged, Ali & Kuzey, Cemil & Uyar, Ali & Karaman, Abdullah S., 2023. "Does investment stimulate or inhibit CSR transparency? The moderating role of CSR committee, board monitoring and CEO duality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Zhang, Jingjing & Groen, Aard, 2021. "Informal and formal open activities: Innovation protection methods as antecedents and innovation outputs as consequences," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    6. Yang, Jialei & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia, 2022. "Evolving appropriability – Variation in the relevance of appropriability mechanisms across industries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    7. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    8. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    9. Lu Zhang & Yuan George Shan & Millicent Chang, 2021. "Can CSR Disclosure Protect Firm Reputation During Financial Restatements?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 157-184, September.
    10. Valentina Marano & Steve Sauerwald & Marc Essen, 2022. "The influence of culture on the relationship between women directors and corporate social performance," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(7), pages 1315-1342, September.
    11. Stefan, Ioana & Bengtsson, Lars, 2017. "Unravelling appropriability mechanisms and openness depth effects on firm performance across stages in the innovation process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 252-260.
    12. Grimaldi, Michele & Greco, Marco & Cricelli, Livio, 2021. "A framework of intellectual property protection strategies and open innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 156-164.
    13. Woojin Yoon & Suyeon Kwon, 2023. "The Impact of Technological and Non-technological Innovative Activities on Technological Competitiveness," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(1), pages 1-19, March.
    14. Huiying Zhang & Xiguang Chen, 2022. "Open Innovation and Sustainable Innovation Performance: The Moderating Role of IP Strategic Planning and IP Operation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-15, July.
    15. Demir, Robert & Wennberg, Karl & McKelvie, Alexander, 2016. "The Strategic Management of High-Growth Firms: A Review and Theoretical Conceptualization," Ratio Working Papers 273, The Ratio Institute.
    16. Hegde, Shantaram P. & Mishra, Dev R., 2019. "Married CEOs and corporate social responsibility," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 226-246.
    17. Shaikh, Ibrahim & Randhawa, Krithika, 2022. "Managing the risks and motivations of technology managers in open innovation: Bringing stakeholder-centric corporate governance into focus," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    18. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    19. Sanmugam Annamalah & Murali Raman & Govindan Marthandan & Aravindan Kalisri Logeswaran, 2020. "Embracing Technology and Propelling SMEs through Open Innovation Transformation," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 10(4), pages 95-122.
    20. Reiter, Andreas & Stonig, Joachim & Frankenberger, Karolin, 2024. "Managing multi-tiered innovation ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1693-:d:1593837. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.