Explaining Industrial Symbiosis Emergence, Development, and Disruption: A Multilevel Analytical Framework. (29th January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yap, Nonita Tumulak; Devlin, John Fredrick
• Is Part Of: Journal of industrial ecology. Volume 21:Number 1(2017:Feb.)
• Page Start: 6
• Page End: 15
• Publication Date: 2016-01-29
• Subjects: equifinality -- firm decision making -- industrial ecology -- interfirm trust -- multilevel analytical framework -- social trust; Industrial ecology -- Periodicals; Product life cycle -- Environmental aspects -- Periodicals; Industrial management -- Environmental aspects -- Periodicals; Écologie industrielle -- Périodiques; 658.56
• DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12398
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1088-1980

Abstract

Summary: Industrial symbiosis (IS) is the process by which by‐products are revalorized and exchanged among distinct business entities. The literature suggests that IS can bring financial, social, and environmental benefits to firms and society. Analytical tools have been developed for uncovering IS arrangements and guidelines suggested for designing IS arrangements where they do not yet exist. Despite these suggested benefits and in spite of these tools, few planned IS arrangements have successfully materialized, with notable exceptions in East Asia. Understanding why IS networks emerge and expand or falter requires both macro‐ and micro‐level analysis. Some explanatory factors have been extensively covered in the IS literature, such as the important role of coordinating organizations. But the analysis of enterprise‐level actions and strategies as well as the conditions in the external environment that act on the enterprises and the network are not as well examined. The article outlines an analytical framework that draws upon insights from research on cleaner production, corporate social responsibility, diffusion of innovation, and the role of the state in development. The framework is consistent with the view that the evolution of IS networks is characterized by "equifinality." Different networks may achieve IS as a result of quite different combinations of factors. No general theory of IS success or decline is offered because no such theory can be expected. IS emergence, development, and disruption is approached as a problem of sociohistorical analysis. For such phenomena, analytical frameworks provide a common explanatory starting point, but no predictive power.