Ecological entrepreneurship – a path toward new transdisciplinary (or metha) sciences

Vladica Ristić
Faculty of Applied Ecology “Futura”, Serbia
vladica.ristic@futura.edu.rs
DOI:  10.46793/BISEC25.049R

 

ABSTRACT: The paper examines ecological entrepreneurship as a new operational logic of development that unites innovation, ethics, and ecosystem regeneration. Based on a sample of 42 case studies and three sectoral reviews (tourism, agriculture, construction/industry), and combining qualitative interviews with quantitative indicators, we demonstrate a “double dividend”: in 83% of initiatives, economic performance improves (↑ energy efficiency by 22–28%; ↑ material productivity by 15–21%) while ecological footprint declines (↓ CO₂ by 12–19% in the first post-pilot year). Validation with integrated indices (GSi, Eluc, Ragro) and tools such as the eco-canvas confirms that circular design, servitization, and digital twins (AI/IoT/Industry 4.0) accelerate learning and reduce risk. A blended finance structure (grant + green credit + impact capital) increases the likelihood of scaling by ~35%, while community co-design boosts implementation rates by up to 40%. The findings point to the need for standardized metrics, open data, and an “ethics of performance” in public policy to systematically link profit with the preservation of natural and social capital. Ecological entrepreneurship thus emerges as a transdisciplinary field and a practical instrument for achieving prosperity within planetary boundaries.

KEYWORDS: ecological entrepreneurship; circular economy; eco-innovation; digital twins; impact investing; green credit; eco-canvas; regenerative agriculture; sustainable tourism; industrial symbiosis; ethics of performance; open data.

 

REFERENCES:

  1. UNEP: Towards a green economy: Pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication (2011), https://www.unep.org/resources/report/towardsgreen-economy-pathways-sustainable-development-and-poverty-eradication
  2. Isaak, R.: Green logic: Ecopreneurship, theory and ethics. Routledge (2017)
  3. Linnanen, L., Schaper, M.: Making ecopreneurs: developing sustainable entrepreneurship. Making ecopreneurs: developing sustainable entrepreneurship. Nueva York: Routledge (2005)
  4. IPCC: Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change (2022), https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FullReport.pdf
  5. Dean, T.J., McMullen, J.S.: Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of business venturing 22(1), 50–76 (2007)
  6. Kwilinski, A., Lyulyov, O., Pimonenko, T.: Green economic development and entrepreneurship transformation. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review 12(4), 157–175 (2024)
  7. OECD: Policy coherence for sustainable development 2018: Towards sustainable and resilient societies (2018), https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/policycoherence-for-sustainable-development-2018_9789264301061-en.html
  8. European Commission: Green innovation and competitiveness in the eu (2020)
  9. Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N.M., Hultink, E.J.: The circular economy–a new sustainability paradigm? Journal of cleaner production 143, 757–768 (2017)
  10. Stock, T., Seliger, G.: Opportunities of sustainable manufacturing in industry 4.0. procedia CIRP 40, 536–541 (2016)
  11. Pacheco, D.F., Dean, T.J., Payne, D.S.: Escaping the green prison: Entrepreneurship and the creation of opportunities for sustainable development. Journal of business venturing 25(5), 464–480 (2010)
  12. Ristić, V., Trišić, I., Štetić, S., Nechita, F., Candrea, A.N., Majstorović, N., Tomašević, V.: Importance of forest ecosystem within important plant areas (ipas) for the development of nature-based tourism—a case study of fruška gora national park. Forests 15(7), 1213 (2024)
  13. GIIN: Impact investing trends 2023 (2023), https://s3.amazonaws.com/giin-webassets/giin/assets/publication/research/vol-4-2023-giinsight-—emerging-trendsin-impact-investing.pdf
  14. Bank, E.I.: Digitalisation in Europe 2021-2022: Evidence from the EIB Investment Survey. European Investment Bank (2022)
  15. OECD: Sustainable infrastructure for low-carbon development in the eu eastern partnership (2021), https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2021/03/sustainableinfrastructure-for-low-carbon-development-in-the-eu-easternpartnership_d27d19e4/c1b2b68d-en.pdf
  16. Bocken, N.M., Short, S.W., Rana, P., Evans, S.: A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of cleaner production 65, 42–56 (2014)
  17. World Bank: Public-private partnerships for sustainable infrastructure (2021), https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/352421644373781507/pdf/Public-Private-Infrastructure-Advisory-Facility-Annual-Report-2021.pdf
  18. FAO: Regenerative agriculture for climate resilience (2022), https://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/en/c/1512632/
  19. Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J., et al.: Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative industrie 4.0: Final report of the industrie 4.0 working group. Forschungsunion: Berlin, Germany pp. 12–25 (2013)
  20. Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Serbia: Business activity of companies in the republic of serbia (2024)
  21. WIPO: World intellectual property indicators 2023 (2023), https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo-pub-941-2023-en-worldintellectual-property-indicators-2023.pdf
  22. Bošković, J., Popović, V., Mladenović, J., Stevanović, A., Ristić, V., Maksin, M., Jovanov, D.: The future of smart agricultural production through applied information technologies. In: Book of Proceedings, IRASA International Scientific Conference Science, Education, Technology and Innovation (SETI V 2023), 14 October 2023, Belgrade. pp. 3–35. Belgrade: International Research Academy of Science and Art (IRASA) (2023)

IZVOR: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Business Information Security BISEC’2025