journal article Open Access Jan 24, 2024

Circular e‐waste ecosystems in necessity‐driven contexts: The impact of formal institutional voids

Abstract
AbstractRecent studies suggest an ecosystem view is most appropriate for understanding the impact of institutional voids on entrepreneurial activities. Expanding the focus to the entrepreneurial ecosystem is crucial for tackling complex low‐ and middle‐income countries' (LMICs) environmental challenges, as the transition to circular e‐waste management, which are heavily impacted by the institutional environment. Moreover, most entrepreneurs in LMICs engage in circular practices out of economic necessity, rather than environmental reasons. However, scholars have overlooked the effects of institutional voids on entrepreneurial ecosystems' potential to grow and realize environmental benefits. This study investigates how formal institutional voids impact the evolution of circular ecosystems in necessity‐driven contexts in LMICs. We study the evolution of a circular e‐waste ecosystem in Kenya and uncover two key phases: emergence and growth. We show that formal institutional voids' impact differs across phases; regulatory and contract enforcement voids create opportunities for informal and private actors to establish e‐waste collection, repair, remanufacture, and recycle businesses, thereby facilitating the emergence of the circular ecosystem. However, labor market, capital market, product market, regulatory, and contract enforcement voids hamper its growth. Specifically, the lack of skills, equipment, guidelines, and financial incentives hinders advanced repairs and remanufactures and limits recycling opportunities, while the lack of formal e‐waste infrastructure increases illegal dumping and negatively impacts human health and the environment. We develop propositions and a phase model to explain the impact of formal institutional voids on the evolution of circular e‐waste ecosystems and the realization of environmental benefits in necessity‐driven contexts.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
60
[5]
Bastein T. (2021)
[12]
Ecosystem types: A systematic review on boundaries and goals

Dieudonnee Cobben, Ward Ooms, Nadine Roijakkers et al.

Journal of Business Research 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.046
[15]
Crotty M. (1998)
[18]
International business responses to institutional voids

Jonathan Doh, Suzana Rodrigues, Ayse Saka-Helmhout et al.

Journal of International Business Studies 10.1057/s41267-017-0074-z
[20]
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (n.d.)Circulate products and materials.https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circulate-products-and-materials
[22]
Waste Mismanagement in Developing Countries: A Review of Global Issues

Navarro Ferronato, Vincenzo Torretta

International Journal of Environmental Research an... 10.3390/ijerph16061060
[24]
The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm?

Martin Geissdoerfer, Paulo Savaget, Nancy M.P. Bocken et al.

Journal of Cleaner Production 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
[31]
Khanna T. "Why focused strategies" Harvard Business Review (1997)
[32]
Winning in Emerging Markets: A Road Map for Strategy and Execution

Tarun Khanna, Krishna G. Palepu

NHRD Network Journal 10.1177/0974173920100316
[34]
Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations

Jouni Korhonen, Antero Honkasalo, Jyri Seppälä

Ecological Economics 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041
[43]
Ozcan P. (2016)
[44]
Palepu K. G. "Institutional voids and policy challenges in emerging markets" The Brown Journal of World Affairs (1998)
[48]
Business model innovation for circular economy and sustainability: A review of approaches

Marina P.P. Pieroni, Tim C. McAloone, Daniela C.A. Pigosso

Journal of Cleaner Production 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.036

Showing 50 of 60 references

Metrics
15
Citations
60
References
Details
Published
Jan 24, 2024
Vol/Issue
33(4)
Pages
3733-3747
License
View
Cite This Article
Milou Derks, Christina Bidmon, Francesca Ciulli (2024). Circular e‐waste ecosystems in necessity‐driven contexts: The impact of formal institutional voids. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(4), 3733-3747. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3652