Fase de Elaboración

This thesis explored the development of opportunities by public and private entrepreneurs in 19 ecosystem-based adaptation projects. The multidisciplinary research contributes to the knowledge base about entrepreneurship in the governance of adaptation literature. Together, the results from Chapter 2, 3 and 4 provide insights that can be used for a conceptual model of opportunity development in EbA. For the first stage (i.e., opportunity creation), strategies deployed by entrepreneurs were analysed. Also, the conditions needed for a successful subsequent stage (i.e., opportunity exploitation) were identified. Additionally, the dynamic development of these and other conditions through time were analysed. To further advance the knowledge about entrepreneurship in adaptation, the conceptual model can be elaborated by including the following four components. First, the number of conditions for successful entrepreneurship can be expanded. Chapter 3 addresses four conditions influencing

143

6

often made by QCA scholars. These studies, however, have received their fair share of criticism themselves (see Fiss et al., 2014; Ragin, 2014; Thiem et al., 2016a). While I have taken note of these discussions, here I want to address a specific limitation experienced in this thesis, namely the condition-case ratio. Although there are no strict rules, generally, this ratio is set at one condition per 3-5 cases (Marx, 2010). Resultantly, some conditions that seemed (very) important according to the entrepreneurship literature needed to be excluded. This literature indicates that other actor attributes and contextual components might also be important, for example, prior knowledge of customer demands, managerial capability and stakeholder support (Choi and Shepherd, 2004; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Social capital is specifically relevant in this respect (Davidsson and Honig, 2003; De Carolis and Saparito, 2006; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Indeed, Chapter 4 shows that other conditions, such as prior career experience and social network, are important. Therefore, new studies can include these and other conditions, but this also implies that a larger number of cases should be included.

6.5 Scientific contribution

This thesis provides the following scientific contributions. First, it increases the conceptual

understanding of entrepreneurship in adaptation. While several studies address the provision of

or responsibilities for adaptation by private actors (e.g., Klein et al., 2017; Mees et al., 2012; Runhaar et al., 2016; Tompkins and Eakin, 2012), this research differentiates itself by explicitly using insights from the entrepreneurship and business and management literature. Chapter 1 introduces economic, environmental, social and sustainable entrepreneurship which is reflected upon in Section 6.3.3. Chapter 2, 3 and 4 draw on the entrepreneurship literature to construct a conceptual stage model of the opportunity development process based on the strategies of entrepreneurs and conditions for success, which is linked in Chapter 6 to the literature on the barriers to adaptation. By establishing entrepreneurship as the central element, this thesis provides an additional perspective to the governance of adaptation literature.

Second, Chapter 3 and 5 provide insights in a method for systematic comparison of a medium number of cases (i.e., Qualitative Comparative Analysis). Thus far, QCA received little attention in adaptation research. QCA has already been applied several times in business and management studies (see for recent examples on social entrepreneurship Mastrangelo et al. (2017) and Rey-Martí et al. (2016) and on environmental entrepreneurship Scarpellini et al.

(2017)). Also in environmental sciences more generally QCA has gained a foothold (see for recent examples in water governance Jager (2016) and Knieper and Pahl-Wostl (2016)). However, the application of QCA is much less common in adaptation research. One plausible explanation is that adaptation research itself is a relatively new field. However, applying QCA to study adaptation efforts is worthy of further exploration. Chapter 3 showed that by conducting QCA, more general observations can be made about conditions for success. This makes QCA in principle well-suited to answer questions such as ‘what are the conditions that are necessary or sufficient in explaining why adaptation is or is not successful’? (Swart et al., 2014a: p. 6). Further, Chapter 3 showed that QCA can help to inductively build a conceptual causal model, while Chapter 5 provided lessons about transforming qualitative into quantitative data for QCA. Both elements can support fundamental inquiry and concept development around adaptation (Ford et al., 2010; Rudel, 2008).

Finally, Chapter 5 makes a methodological contribution to the QCA literature and the more general literature on mixed methods. By constructing an overview of how existing studies use qualitative data for QCA and deriving good practices from these studies, a guidance has been provided for future QCA and mixed methods researchers dealing with this issue. The positive response during a QCA expert workshop and on a working paper dealing with the same topic confirmed the importance of this contribution.

6.6 Recommendations for future research

This thesis explored the development of opportunities by public and private entrepreneurs in 19 ecosystem-based adaptation projects. The multidisciplinary research contributes to the knowledge base about entrepreneurship in the governance of adaptation literature. Together, the results from Chapter 2, 3 and 4 provide insights that can be used for a conceptual model of opportunity development in EbA. For the first stage (i.e., opportunity creation), strategies deployed by entrepreneurs were analysed. Also, the conditions needed for a successful subsequent stage (i.e., opportunity exploitation) were identified. Additionally, the dynamic development of these and other conditions through time were analysed. To further advance the knowledge about entrepreneurship in adaptation, the conceptual model can be elaborated by including the following four components. First, the number of conditions for successful entrepreneurship can be expanded. Chapter 3 addresses four conditions influencing

142

often made by QCA scholars. These studies, however, have received their fair share of criticism themselves (see Fiss et al., 2014; Ragin, 2014; Thiem et al., 2016a). While I have taken note of these discussions, here I want to address a specific limitation experienced in this thesis, namely the condition-case ratio. Although there are no strict rules, generally, this ratio is set at one condition per 3-5 cases (Marx, 2010). Resultantly, some conditions that seemed (very) important according to the entrepreneurship literature needed to be excluded. This literature indicates that other actor attributes and contextual components might also be important, for example, prior knowledge of customer demands, managerial capability and stakeholder support (Choi and Shepherd, 2004; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Social capital is specifically relevant in this respect (Davidsson and Honig, 2003; De Carolis and Saparito, 2006; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Indeed, Chapter 4 shows that other conditions, such as prior career experience and social network, are important. Therefore, new studies can include these and other conditions, but this also implies that a larger number of cases should be included.

6.5 Scientific contribution

This thesis provides the following scientific contributions. First, it increases the conceptual

understanding of entrepreneurship in adaptation. While several studies address the provision of

or responsibilities for adaptation by private actors (e.g., Klein et al., 2017; Mees et al., 2012; Runhaar et al., 2016; Tompkins and Eakin, 2012), this research differentiates itself by explicitly using insights from the entrepreneurship and business and management literature. Chapter 1 introduces economic, environmental, social and sustainable entrepreneurship which is reflected upon in Section 6.3.3. Chapter 2, 3 and 4 draw on the entrepreneurship literature to construct a conceptual stage model of the opportunity development process based on the strategies of entrepreneurs and conditions for success, which is linked in Chapter 6 to the literature on the barriers to adaptation. By establishing entrepreneurship as the central element, this thesis provides an additional perspective to the governance of adaptation literature.

Second, Chapter 3 and 5 provide insights in a method for systematic comparison of a medium number of cases (i.e., Qualitative Comparative Analysis). Thus far, QCA received little attention in adaptation research. QCA has already been applied several times in business and management studies (see for recent examples on social entrepreneurship Mastrangelo et al. (2017) and Rey-Martí et al. (2016) and on environmental entrepreneurship Scarpellini et al.

(2017)). Also in environmental sciences more generally QCA has gained a foothold (see for recent examples in water governance Jager (2016) and Knieper and Pahl-Wostl (2016)). However, the application of QCA is much less common in adaptation research. One plausible explanation is that adaptation research itself is a relatively new field. However, applying QCA to study adaptation efforts is worthy of further exploration. Chapter 3 showed that by conducting QCA, more general observations can be made about conditions for success. This makes QCA in principle well-suited to answer questions such as ‘what are the conditions that are necessary or sufficient in explaining why adaptation is or is not successful’? (Swart et al., 2014a: p. 6). Further, Chapter 3 showed that QCA can help to inductively build a conceptual causal model, while Chapter 5 provided lessons about transforming qualitative into quantitative data for QCA. Both elements can support fundamental inquiry and concept development around adaptation (Ford et al., 2010; Rudel, 2008).

Finally, Chapter 5 makes a methodological contribution to the QCA literature and the more general literature on mixed methods. By constructing an overview of how existing studies use qualitative data for QCA and deriving good practices from these studies, a guidance has been provided for future QCA and mixed methods researchers dealing with this issue. The positive response during a QCA expert workshop and on a working paper dealing with the same topic confirmed the importance of this contribution.

6.6 Recommendations for future research

This thesis explored the development of opportunities by public and private entrepreneurs in 19 ecosystem-based adaptation projects. The multidisciplinary research contributes to the knowledge base about entrepreneurship in the governance of adaptation literature. Together, the results from Chapter 2, 3 and 4 provide insights that can be used for a conceptual model of opportunity development in EbA. For the first stage (i.e., opportunity creation), strategies deployed by entrepreneurs were analysed. Also, the conditions needed for a successful subsequent stage (i.e., opportunity exploitation) were identified. Additionally, the dynamic development of these and other conditions through time were analysed. To further advance the knowledge about entrepreneurship in adaptation, the conceptual model can be elaborated by including the following four components. First, the number of conditions for successful entrepreneurship can be expanded. Chapter 3 addresses four conditions influencing

143

6

often made by QCA scholars. These studies, however, have received their fair share of criticism themselves (see Fiss et al., 2014; Ragin, 2014; Thiem et al., 2016a). While I have taken note of these discussions, here I want to address a specific limitation experienced in this thesis, namely the condition-case ratio. Although there are no strict rules, generally, this ratio is set at one condition per 3-5 cases (Marx, 2010). Resultantly, some conditions that seemed (very) important according to the entrepreneurship literature needed to be excluded. This literature indicates that other actor attributes and contextual components might also be important, for example, prior knowledge of customer demands, managerial capability and stakeholder support (Choi and Shepherd, 2004; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Social capital is specifically relevant in this respect (Davidsson and Honig, 2003; De Carolis and Saparito, 2006; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Indeed, Chapter 4 shows that other conditions, such as prior career experience and social network, are important. Therefore, new studies can include these and other conditions, but this also implies that a larger number of cases should be included.

6.5 Scientific contribution

This thesis provides the following scientific contributions. First, it increases the conceptual

understanding of entrepreneurship in adaptation. While several studies address the provision of

or responsibilities for adaptation by private actors (e.g., Klein et al., 2017; Mees et al., 2012; Runhaar et al., 2016; Tompkins and Eakin, 2012), this research differentiates itself by explicitly using insights from the entrepreneurship and business and management literature. Chapter 1 introduces economic, environmental, social and sustainable entrepreneurship which is reflected upon in Section 6.3.3. Chapter 2, 3 and 4 draw on the entrepreneurship literature to construct a conceptual stage model of the opportunity development process based on the strategies of entrepreneurs and conditions for success, which is linked in Chapter 6 to the literature on the barriers to adaptation. By establishing entrepreneurship as the central element, this thesis provides an additional perspective to the governance of adaptation literature.

Second, Chapter 3 and 5 provide insights in a method for systematic comparison of a medium number of cases (i.e., Qualitative Comparative Analysis). Thus far, QCA received little attention in adaptation research. QCA has already been applied several times in business and management studies (see for recent examples on social entrepreneurship Mastrangelo et al. (2017) and Rey-Martí et al. (2016) and on environmental entrepreneurship Scarpellini et al.

(2017)). Also in environmental sciences more generally QCA has gained a foothold (see for recent examples in water governance Jager (2016) and Knieper and Pahl-Wostl (2016)). However, the application of QCA is much less common in adaptation research. One plausible explanation is that adaptation research itself is a relatively new field. However, applying QCA to study adaptation efforts is worthy of further exploration. Chapter 3 showed that by conducting QCA, more general observations can be made about conditions for success. This makes QCA in principle well-suited to answer questions such as ‘what are the conditions that are necessary or sufficient in explaining why adaptation is or is not successful’? (Swart et al., 2014a: p. 6). Further, Chapter 3 showed that QCA can help to inductively build a conceptual causal model, while Chapter 5 provided lessons about transforming qualitative into quantitative data for QCA. Both elements can support fundamental inquiry and concept development around adaptation (Ford et al., 2010; Rudel, 2008).

Finally, Chapter 5 makes a methodological contribution to the QCA literature and the more general literature on mixed methods. By constructing an overview of how existing studies use qualitative data for QCA and deriving good practices from these studies, a guidance has been provided for future QCA and mixed methods researchers dealing with this issue. The positive response during a QCA expert workshop and on a working paper dealing with the same topic confirmed the importance of this contribution.

6.6 Recommendations for future research

This thesis explored the development of opportunities by public and private entrepreneurs in 19 ecosystem-based adaptation projects. The multidisciplinary research contributes to the knowledge base about entrepreneurship in the governance of adaptation literature. Together, the results from Chapter 2, 3 and 4 provide insights that can be used for a conceptual model of opportunity development in EbA. For the first stage (i.e., opportunity creation), strategies deployed by entrepreneurs were analysed. Also, the conditions needed for a successful subsequent stage (i.e., opportunity exploitation) were identified. Additionally, the dynamic development of these and other conditions through time were analysed. To further advance the knowledge about entrepreneurship in adaptation, the conceptual model can be elaborated by including the following four components. First, the number of conditions for successful entrepreneurship can be expanded. Chapter 3 addresses four conditions influencing

142

often made by QCA scholars. These studies, however, have received their fair share of criticism themselves (see Fiss et al., 2014; Ragin, 2014; Thiem et al., 2016a). While I have taken note of these discussions, here I want to address a specific limitation experienced in this thesis, namely the condition-case ratio. Although there are no strict rules, generally, this ratio is set at one condition per 3-5 cases (Marx, 2010). Resultantly, some conditions that seemed (very) important according to the entrepreneurship literature needed to be excluded. This literature indicates that other actor attributes and contextual components might also be important, for example, prior knowledge of customer demands, managerial capability and stakeholder support (Choi and Shepherd, 2004; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Social capital is specifically relevant in this respect (Davidsson and Honig, 2003; De Carolis and Saparito, 2006; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Indeed, Chapter 4 shows that other conditions, such as prior career experience and social network, are important. Therefore, new studies can include these and other conditions, but this also implies that a larger number of cases should be included.

6.5 Scientific contribution

This thesis provides the following scientific contributions. First, it increases the conceptual

understanding of entrepreneurship in adaptation. While several studies address the provision of

or responsibilities for adaptation by private actors (e.g., Klein et al., 2017; Mees et al., 2012; Runhaar et al., 2016; Tompkins and Eakin, 2012), this research differentiates itself by explicitly using insights from the entrepreneurship and business and management literature. Chapter 1 introduces economic, environmental, social and sustainable entrepreneurship which is reflected upon in Section 6.3.3. Chapter 2, 3 and 4 draw on the entrepreneurship literature to construct a conceptual stage model of the opportunity development process based on the strategies of entrepreneurs and conditions for success, which is linked in Chapter 6 to the literature on the barriers to adaptation. By establishing entrepreneurship as the central element, this thesis provides an additional perspective to the governance of adaptation literature.

Second, Chapter 3 and 5 provide insights in a method for systematic comparison of a medium number of cases (i.e., Qualitative Comparative Analysis). Thus far, QCA received little attention in adaptation research. QCA has already been applied several times in business and management studies (see for recent examples on social entrepreneurship Mastrangelo et al. (2017) and Rey-Martí et al. (2016) and on environmental entrepreneurship Scarpellini et al.

(2017)). Also in environmental sciences more generally QCA has gained a foothold (see for recent examples in water governance Jager (2016) and Knieper and Pahl-Wostl (2016)). However, the application of QCA is much less common in adaptation research. One plausible explanation is that adaptation research itself is a relatively new field. However, applying QCA to study adaptation efforts is worthy of further exploration. Chapter 3 showed that by conducting QCA, more general observations can be made about conditions for success. This makes QCA in principle well-suited to answer questions such as ‘what are the conditions that are necessary or sufficient in explaining why adaptation is or is not successful’? (Swart et al., 2014a: p. 6). Further, Chapter 3 showed that QCA can help to inductively build a conceptual causal model, while Chapter 5 provided lessons about transforming qualitative into quantitative data for QCA. Both elements can support fundamental inquiry and concept development around adaptation (Ford et al., 2010; Rudel, 2008).

Finally, Chapter 5 makes a methodological contribution to the QCA literature and the more general literature on mixed methods. By constructing an overview of how existing studies use qualitative data for QCA and deriving good practices from these studies, a guidance has been provided for future QCA and mixed methods researchers dealing with this issue. The positive response during a QCA expert workshop and on a working paper dealing with the same topic confirmed the importance of this contribution.

6.6 Recommendations for future research

This thesis explored the development of opportunities by public and private entrepreneurs in 19 ecosystem-based adaptation projects. The multidisciplinary research contributes to the knowledge base about entrepreneurship in the governance of adaptation literature. Together, the results from Chapter 2, 3 and 4 provide insights that can be used for a conceptual model of opportunity development in EbA. For the first stage (i.e., opportunity creation), strategies deployed by entrepreneurs were analysed. Also, the conditions needed for a successful subsequent stage (i.e., opportunity exploitation) were identified. Additionally, the dynamic development of these and other conditions through time were analysed. To further advance the knowledge about entrepreneurship in adaptation, the conceptual model can be elaborated by including the following four components. First, the number of conditions for successful entrepreneurship can be expanded. Chapter 3 addresses four conditions influencing

143

6

often made by QCA scholars. These studies, however, have received their fair share of criticism themselves (see Fiss et al., 2014; Ragin, 2014; Thiem et al., 2016a). While I have taken note of these discussions, here I want to address a specific limitation experienced in this thesis, namely the condition-case ratio. Although there are no strict rules, generally, this ratio is set at one condition per 3-5 cases (Marx, 2010). Resultantly, some conditions that seemed (very) important according to the entrepreneurship literature needed to be excluded. This literature indicates that other actor attributes and contextual components might also be important, for example, prior knowledge of customer demands, managerial capability and stakeholder support (Choi and Shepherd, 2004; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Social capital is specifically relevant in this respect (Davidsson and Honig, 2003; De Carolis and Saparito, 2006; Fuentes Fuentes et al., 2010). Indeed, Chapter 4 shows that other conditions, such as prior career experience and social network, are important. Therefore, new studies can include these and other conditions, but this also implies that a larger number of cases should be included.

6.5 Scientific contribution

This thesis provides the following scientific contributions. First, it increases the conceptual

understanding of entrepreneurship in adaptation. While several studies address the provision of

or responsibilities for adaptation by private actors (e.g., Klein et al., 2017; Mees et al., 2012;