Association for Information Systems

AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)

Research Papers ECIS 2016 Proceedings

Summer 6-15-2016

SUSTAINABILITY IN BUSINESS MODELS – A

LITERATURE-REVIEW-BASED DESIGN-
SCIENCE-ORIENTED RESEARCH AGENDA
Thorsten Schoormann
University of Hildesheim, thorsten.schoormann@uni-hildesheim.de

Dennis Behrens
University of Hildesheim, dennis.behrens@uni-hildesheim.de

Erik Kolek
University of Hildesheim, erik.kolek@uni-hildesheim.de

Ralf Knackstedt
University of Hildesheim, ralf.knackstedt@uni-hildesheim.de

Follow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2016_rp

Recommended Citation
Schoormann, Thorsten; Behrens, Dennis; Kolek, Erik; and Knackstedt, Ralf, "SUSTAINABILITY IN BUSINESS MODELS – A
LITERATURE-REVIEW-BASED DESIGN-SCIENCE-ORIENTED RESEARCH AGENDA" (2016). Research Papers. 134.
http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2016_rp/134

This material is brought to you by the ECIS 2016 Proceedings at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been accepted for inclusion in Research Papers
by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contact elibrary@aisnet.org.
 SUSTAINABILITY IN BUSINESS MODELS –
A LITERATURE-REVIEW-BASED
DESIGN-SCIENCE-ORIENTED RESEARCH AGENDA

Research

Schoormann, Thorsten, University of Hildesheim, Universitätsplatz 1, 31141 Hildesheim,

Germany, thorsten.schoormann@uni-hildesheim.de
Behrens, Dennis, University of Hildesheim, Universitätsplatz 1, 31141 Hildesheim, Germany,
dennis.behrens@uni-hildesheim.de
Kolek, Erik, University of Hildesheim, Universitätsplatz 1, 31141 Hildesheim, Germany,
erik.kolek@uni-hildesheim.de
Knackstedt, Ralf, University of Hildesheim, Universitätsplatz 1, 31141 Hildesheim, Germany,
ralf.knackstedt@uni-hildesheim.de

Abstract
Science and practice highlight the relevance of employing sustainability practices in consumption and
production. A sustainable change requires the participation of society as well as companies and or-
ganizations. In addition, companies have to rethink their classical businesses and consider innova-
tions for acting in an ecological, economic, and social way by enhancing and adapting their business
models. Business models can be described in different ways such as textual (e. g. business plans) or in
graphical frameworks (e. g. Business Model Canvas). Frameworks support the designing of business
models and should provide the consideration of sustainability. This paper aims to answer how sus-
tainability is represented in existing approaches for modelling business models. Therefore, we conduct
a literature review including different databases, proceedings, and journals. We identify and catego-
rise a total of 42 articles. As a first result of the synthesis, we determine a literature-based typology of
extensions, adjustments and design principles for sustainable business models. In addition, we suggest
a research agenda which (a) discusses further enhancements to design sustainable business models
regarding modelling techniques, sustainability assessments and detail models as well as (b) highlights
the importance of evaluating these approaches by recommending evaluation settings.
Keywords: Business Model Frameworks, Business Models, Sustainability, Typology of Design Princi-
ples, Graphical Representation of Sustainability.

1 Introduction
In recent years sustainability has been widely discussed by society, companies and governments
(United Nations, 2014; Bundesregierung, 2014). Growing global population, increasing pollution and
globalization are only some reasons which entail new challenges (United Nations, 2014). Due to these
facts a rethinking or rather reorientation to a sustainable way of life is beginning. For example, saving
energy, using renewable resources or producing fair-trade products (Waldmann, 2004; Standford,
2010). We are also trying to get a better work-life-balance and rethinking production places which
have bad working conditions (Bundesministerium, 2005). Hence, the participation of society and
companies is required. Companies have to integrate sustainable principles into their strategies to sup-
port sustainable development. However, current studies show that despite an awareness of sustainabil-
ity, many managers do not include sustainability in their business models in a clearly and adequate

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

way (Herzig and Schaltegger, 2009; Abdelkafi and Täuscher, 2015). The manufacturing sector in par-
ticular has a huge impact on aspects such as resources (33% energy-consumption), working conditions
and emissions (38% CO2) (Holgado Granados, 2014). In addition, according to Deloitte (2012), envi-
ronmental and sustainability performance is an essential business issue that is increasingly impacting
business decisions.
So far, some approaches for the creation of sustainable value exist. In order to achieve sustainable be-
haviour an entire business analysis is necessary (Abdelkafi and Täuscher, 2015). The key challenge is
to create “economic success through […] a certain environmental or social activity” (Schaltegger et
al., 2012, p. 98). In this context, business model frameworks can contribute. The increasing popularity
of these models is correlated to several factors such as enabling new ways of value creation or using
new technologies (Wüstenhagena and Böhnke, 2006). Frameworks should support the design of inno-
vative businesses which include for example, cleaner products and cleaner processes (Lüdeke-Freund,
2010). Often, these models are defined as Business Models for Sustainability (BMfS). They respect
environmental, social, and economical issues in a balanced way (Abdelkafi and Täuscher, 2015). Alt-
hough some approaches consider sustainability common guidelines are still missing (Lüdeke-Freund,
2010). Especially IS has a large potential for the business model concept. For example, the integration
of sustainability has a huge impact on informational infrastructures or on designing new tools (Oster-
walder et al., 2005; Seidel et al. 2013). Hence, it is essential to develop new modelling techniques
which support creating consistent, comparable and analysable models (Becker et al., 1995; Frank,
1999; Frank et al., 2014). Furthermore, the process of designing a business model should be supported
by tools which for example, provide the collaborative but decentralized development of such models.
In addition, analysis and enhancements for existing business models could be supported by tools. Con-
sequently, the guiding research question of this paper is “How can design principles, applied to cur-
rent sustainable business model frameworks, contribute to our understanding of such models, support
the modelling process, and enable the building of IT-tools to support those models?”
Therefore, we conduct a literature review which provides a state of the art of existing approaches re-
garding sustainability in business models. Our paper continues as follows. First of all, we explain the
theoretical background for sustainability and the corresponding role of business models (section 2). In
section 3, we describe our methodology as well as the configuration-parameter of the literature review
and the following classification of the review results. In section 4, we classify the results to a concept-
matrix and outline the content of the results. We focus on graphical representations of business model
frameworks which include sustainability. Furthermore, we analyse instances (business cases) to identi-
fy general principles regarding sustainable businesses. The result presents a typology which conceptu-
alises existing approaches into design principles. Finally, we demonstrate enhancement perspectives
and principles for designing sustainable business models. In addition, we highlight the importance of
evaluating these concepts and give recommendations on what should be evaluated and how it can be
evaluated (section 5). In the last section, we conclude with our findings and derive some implications.

2 Theoretical Background

2.1 Business Models

Business models have become popular in management theory and practice (Osterwalder et al., 2005;
Shafer et al., 2005). Despite a wide range of definitions, there is still a lack of a generally accepted one
(Osterwalder et al., 2005; Wüstenhagen et al., 2006). Simple approaches have used the term synonym
for a revenue model (Mings and White, 2000). The key point consists of the creation of value (Amit
and Zott, 2001; Chesbrough and Rosenbloom, 2002). According to Schneidewind et al. (2011), a busi-
ness model describes the fundamental architecture of a company. It provides information about what
the value stands for, who it consumes, how it can be produced and the finances. Initial definitions di-
vided them into core strategy, strategic resources, customer interface, and value network (Wüstenha-

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 2

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

gen et al. 2006). In addition, Stähler (2001) identified three key elements: value proposition, value
creation, and revenue model. According to Osterwalder et al. (2005), we define a business model as
the plan of how an enterprise does business which (a) allows designing and realizing the business
structure and systems as well as (b) gives basic information about values, resources, actors, and flows.
Due to the growing amount of business model literature, there is also an increasing number of business
model frameworks. Different frameworks use different concepts and abstraction levels for describing
businesses (Wüstenhagen and Boehnke, 2006). Hence, the method of visualisation is essential (Niel-
sen, 2010). A generally accepted framework which allows people to talk about the “same thing” is
required. The concept “must be simple, relevant and intuitively understandable, while not oversimpli-
fying the complexities of how enterprises function” (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010, p. 15).
Different kinds to visualise a business model are existing. First, textual description (usually utilized by
reports such as business plans or brochures) include the most important points and provides details
such as finances (Kanieshva, 2011; Springer Gabler, 2014). Second, graphical representations to illus-
trate how value is created and captured by grouping essential components and tracing relationships
between them (e. g. Boulten et al., 2001; Wirtz, 2001; Kenieshva, 2011). A popular way is given by
Osterwalder et al. (2005) who represents an entire business in a Business Model Canvas (BMC). This
is divided into nine blocks: customers, value proposition, channels, customer relationship, revenue
stream, key resources, key activities, key partnerships, and cost structure. These blocks cover the four
main areas of a business: customer, offer, infrastructure and finances (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010).
Due to the fact that many graphical representations do not follow any modelling rules, it could be hard
to read, to understand and to create them. A formal method of describing a modelling technique itself
is stated by concepts like meta-models (e. g. Fettke et al., 2004). Fast changing market trends and situ-
ations require fast adjustments in businesses to consider current topics such as sustainability.

2.2 Sustainability
Based on global challenges such as climate changes and the need to act responsible, sustainability is a
frequently used term which is also not defined in a generally accepted way. Sustainable Development
(SD) first came up in 1987 from the World Commission of Environment and Development (WCED),
which is also known as the Brundtland report. They define SD as “[…] the development which meets
the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs” (WCED, p. 43). Further definitions support this approach (e. g. Dunphy et al., 2000) or define
SD as the aspects of business operations considering environmental, economic and social sustainabil-
ity (Barlow, 2004). Despite some differences many of them argue that sustainability is one of the key
factors regarding future competitiveness and business survival (e. g. Halgado Grandos, 2014).

2.2.1 Dimensions of Sustainability

The key issues of sustainability are usually addressed and divided into the three dimensions of eco-
nomic, ecological, and social factors. They are also known as the Three Pillars of Sustainability. This
model is used in local, regional, and national contexts of governance, business, and organizations
(Pope and Morrision-Saunders, 2005). However, the analogy is often criticized because of the unequal
consideration – if one pillar breaks, it does not impact the entire house (Dawe and Ryan, 2002).
Economic. Value creation, economic performance, and market presence.
Environmental. Energy/materials flows, emissions, waste, transport or human and nature co-exists.
Social. Work practices, working conditions, diversity and equal opportunities, social policy compli-
ance, health, and human rights (Halgado Grandos, 2014).
According to Campbell (1996) these issues of sustainability result into three conflicts: (I) grow the
economy, (II) distribute the growth fairly, and (III) in the process do not degrade the ecosystem. Deci-
sions and ratings of current situations are required.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 3

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

2.2.2 Strategies of Sustainability

For implementing sustainable consumption there are mainly three strategies (Huber, 1995).
Efficiency. This strategy is mostly seen as resource efficiency. It aims to reduce environmental dam-
age. It tries to optimise the input-output ratios of production and consumption (Lüdeke-Freud, 2010).
Current trends show that efficiency could enhance sustainability only at margins because there is no
elementary change in the consumption.
Consistency. It tends to bring industry in line with circular approaches of the nature. The ideal is the
metabolic cycle which does not generate waste because every output is reused (Lüdeke-Freund, 2010).
Sufficiency. Due to the fact that habits of consumers have to rethink (Lüdeke-Freund, 2010), suffi-
ciency aims to change present patterns of consumption and production by a new lifestyle and attitudes
in society. To address these issues, business models can contribute (e. g. Schaltegger and Wagner,
2008; Tukker et al., 2008).
Beside the mainly discussed strategies, there are further approaches. For example, Gronau (2003) sug-
gested a new strategy which is called participation. This requires the involvement of stakeholders.

2.3 Business Models and Sustainability

The concept of BMfS emerged only a few years ago. Just like there is no general accepted definition
of business models, there is a lack regarding the definition of BMfS, too (Abelfaki and Täuscher,
2015). Lüdeke-Freund (2010) described this concept as a model that creates competitive advantage
through superior customer value and contributes to a sustainable development of companies and socie-
ty. According to Schaltegger et al. (2012), it includes voluntary activities which solve social and/or
environmental problems. By doing so, it creates positive business effects. They all address the creation
of customer and social value as well as the integration of social, ecological and economic activities
(Schaltegger et al., 2012).
Traditional business models often focus on economic values (Hvass, 2013). In addition, BMfS need
the integration of further sustainable perspectives. While the economic view is already addressed in
various sectors there are more factors which should be considered to design a sustainable business
(Schneidewind et al. 2011). Only a few existing studies try to conceptualise elements and their rela-
tionships of sustainable businesses. There is research which identifies ideal types of BMfS, analyse
potential BMfS in the context of industry, differ archetypes of BMfS, analyse the impact of archetypes
such as product-service-systems, present case studies, and develop methodologies towards the innova-
tion. Also some research focuses on “greening” models by considering collaborative innovation or
sustainable value creation. To gain a general understanding of sustainable businesses and to provide a
common framework it is necessary to complement existing approaches (Abelfaki and Täuscher, 2015).

3 Research Methodology
To identify (state of the art), examine and classify existing modelling approaches which represent sus-
tainability in business models, we conduct a theoretical literature review (Pare et al. 2015). A literature
review is more than an easy way of collecting some publications of a particular domain (e. g. Levy and
Ellis, 2006). To get relevant findings it is necessary to develop synthesis out of the literature reviews
than just to analyse it. Synthesis, on the one hand should address a specific research domain, and on
the other hand should summarise essential knowledge of the chosen research domain (Cooper, 1988).
It aims to understand the big picture of a particular domain to reduce irrelevant research agenda and to
use the existing body of knowledge in an effective way (vom Brocke et al., 2009).
Although reviewing literature is essential for academic projects, (a) scholars tend to be unaware of the
need for structuring such reviews, (b) guides for conducting reviews are often adopted from other re-
search fields and do not entirely meet the specific needs of IS researches, and (c) guides often do not
pay attention to the role of literature search processes (Webster and Watson, 2002; Okoli and Scha-

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 4

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

bram, 2010; Boell and Cecez-Kecmanovic, 2015). An important factor is the rigor of the search pro-
cess because searching for literature is complicated in emerging fields such as IS and essential for the
quality of such reviews. For this reason, the researcher has to document literature findings, the selec-
tion of keywords and the evaluation of the results (vom Brocke et al., 2009). Due to the methodologi-
cal rigor of literature reviews in IS, we follow the five steps by vom Brocke et al. (2009): (I) definition
of review scope (section 1), (II) conceptualization of topic (section 2), (III) literature review (section
4), (IV) literature analysis and synthesis (section 5), and (V) research agenda (section 6).

4 Literature Review
Identification of Keywords. A key factor of adequate searching is the identification of keywords in
the vocabulary of the analysed domain. The keywords have to be documented precisely to support the
traceability for other scholars (vom Brocke et al., 2009). Initially, we used relevant search items to
identify suitable items for our literature review. We analysed them and highlight the quantity of usage
according to Web of Science, Google Scholar and AIS Electronic Library (AISel) (Table 1) to ensure
the selection of more popular articles. Due to the wide range and interdisciplinarity of articles regard-
ing sustainability, we analysed general search engines for identifying the items as well as an IS library.

Web of Google
Item Science Scholar
AISeL Note
„sustainability*“ 64.662 2.600.000 8.075 -
Sustain-

"sustainable" 118.208 3.040.000 2.311 -

ability

Authors named “green”; should be used

„green“ 438.004 5.020.000 2.747
in combination with other terms
"green business model*" 4 235 3 Ecological models
business model 48.211 2.760.000 24.039 Only one the items could appear
„business model“ 3.325 420.000 858 Only with words in the same order
Business
Model

"business model*" 5.831 438.000 4.212 *placeholder for any unknown terms
"business concept*" 193 19.400 208 Synonym
"business plan*" / 6.200 945 Strategy view, calculation
"business model concept*" 40 2.540 116 Frameworks, Templates, Concepts, etc.
resen-
tation
Rep-

"business model framework*" 30 1.850 87 Frameworks, Descriptions, etc.

"graphical business model representation*" / 2 / -
Table 1. Identification of search items.
We excluded items which are not suitable regarding our research question. We focus on frameworks
which support users to develop and create their own business model. We include: English language,
frameworks, and business cases. We exclude: simulation (mostly business plans), non-research articles
which were purely descriptive, and articles that did not match the inclusion criteria. Finally, we deter-
mined our keywords which are quoted in Table 1 – represented by the grey coloured rows.
Selection of Sources. First, we choose AISeL which allows searching in relevant IS journals and IS
conferences. We focus on the major IS conferences (ECIS, ICIS, and WI). Second, because the re-
search field of sustainability is relatively new and there is a wide range of articles, we choose Google
Scholar to include interdisciplinary articles, too. Hence, our selection should address domain-specific
IS articles (depth search) as well as interdisciplinary articles (breadth search). Finally, we derived a
search phrase for each source (Table 2).

Google (“business model concept*” OR “business model framework*” OR “

Scholar graphical business representation” OR “green business model*”) AND (“sustainability*”)
AISeL “business model*” AND “sustainability” NOT “simulation”
Table 2. Definition of search phrases.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 5

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

5 Literature Analysis and Synthesis

5.1 Classification of Results

In total we found 1.684 articles (Google Scholar: 1.540; AISeL 144). Furthermore, we added exclusion
criteria and got a total of 1.323 results. We evaluated these results by analysing titles, abstracts and
keywords. Non-relevant articles were eliminated. The remaining articles (143) were verified by read-
ing the full text to identify articles which suit our research questions. Finally, we removed duplicates
and added articles of other sources (forward/backward search). In total, we found 42 relevant articles
regarding our research question (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Search results.

In the next step, we classify our literature results (Table 3) by using a concept matrix which is divided
into the following four dimensions.
Specification. Specification describes whether the article presents a framework (Type) which supports
the development of sustainable business models or an example (Instance) like a sustainable business
case. Here, we focus on frameworks which support the designing of new business models. Further-
more, it also includes frameworks which address characteristics of sustainability. In addition, business
cases were analysed to determine sustainability characteristics and requirements which could have an
impact on graphical frameworks and should be considered.
Sustainability. According to the common Three Pillar Model of Sustainability (section 2), we distin-
guish this dimension into economic, ecological, and social sections. However, in our sense sustainabil-
ity consider all dimensions in an equal way.
Representation. Representation addresses the visualisation of sustainability in business models. We
divided it into textual and graphical sectors. These sectors do not exclude the appearance of the other
one. It is not disjunctive because graphical representations often include textual elements.
Evaluation. To demonstrate that new approaches are useful they have to be evaluated. Hence, we ana-
lysed the support regarding the construction (modelling) and the interpretation (reading) of sustainable
business models.
Some results deal with the behaviour or influence perspective on sustainable business models by ana-
lysing potential, individual factors, drivers, and barriers which have an impact on acting sustainable or
creating a sustainable business (e. g. Backer et al., 2010; Evangelistia et al., 2011; Nair and Paulose,
2014). These articles are not considered in our literature review because we aim to identify criteria of
sustainable business models and frameworks and not criteria such as impacting or success factors.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 6

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models
Reference
Type
MacInnes (2005)
Osterwalder et al. (2005)
El-Gayar et al. (2006)
Peinel et al. (2009)
Umbeck et al. (2009)
Baker et al. (2010)
Lüdeke-Freund (2009)
Lüdeke-Freund (2010)
Watson et al. (2010)
Boehm et al. (2011)
Evangelistia et al. (2011)
Kerschbaum et al. (2011)
Maske et al. (2011)
Henriksen et al. (2012)
Kanshieva (2012)
Lambert et al. (2012)
Nilsson-Andersen et al. (2012)
Richter (2012)
Sommer (2012)
Boons et al. (2013)
Duarte et al. (2013)
Hvass (2013)
Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016
Specifi- Repre-
Sustainability
sentation
E Description
cation
Instance
Economic
Ecological
Social
Graphical
Textual
Evaluation (e)
X X X X Dynamic BM; Stages: technical issues (1), environmental factors (2), traditional factors (3), sustainable factors (4)
Role of BM in IS; Profitable and sustainable revenue streams; Sustainable strategy requires: “amount of internal
X X X
diversity” (p. 16), “stock of potential strategies to be set off in the face of change” (p. 16)
Framework for IS supporting environmental management and sustainable development; Factors: extern (initiatives,
X X X X
regulation/standards, consumer opinion, supply chain), intern (management consider “double bottom line” (p. 762))
X X X X X Domain specific technique for eGovernment; transparency to asses sustainability; (e) validated in European projects
X X X X Framework for sustainable innovation; Criteria: competitive advantage, sustainability, unique sale point
X X X X X ICIS Panel Report; Sustainable Innovation; Green IT; Sustainable IT; Requirements: social/normative frameworks
X X X X Adding the “non-market-aspect” to the Four Pillar Model by Osterwalder (2004)
Conceptual framework of BM eco-innovation; Factors: population, pollution, consumption and reproduction, renew-
X X X X X able resources; Barriers for sufficiency: psychological, behavioural, definition of limits; Barriers of efficiency: hin-
dering innovation, lack of knowledge, missing demand
Environmentally sustainable business practices in IS; Energy informatics; Requirements: “IS leaders can embrace
X X X
environmental sustainability in their core principles” (p. 23), “Green IS to future generation” (p. 34)
Server rooms and data centres; products and processes to ensure energy-efficiency; Criteria: awareness of Green IT,
X X X X X X
motivation and coaching of employees; (e) evaluated with a design science approach
Case study on logistic services; Drivers on greening: customer, competitor, legislation, managerial, employee;
X X X
Barriers: costs, availability of alternative solutions, lack of customer interests, availability of IT for C02 declaration
X X X X Indicators for sustainability benchmarking; Information-Sharing; (e) prototypical evaluation in industry
Mobile-Learning; sustainable market success; Criteria: anytime, anywhere learning; (e) evaluated with a quantitative
X X X X X
analysis against the modified Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
Conceptualization report for greening businesses; Green BM innovation; Concepts: modification (adjustments), re-
X X
design (changes), alternative (substitute), creation (new building blocks)
X X X X Sustainability-driven BM for “waste as a resource”, “profit as a by-product”, “consumer as a sponsor” (p. 60)
X X X X X Hierarchical BM using a sustainability conceptual focus; Organizes the business concept around a value proposition
Report of how companies work with Green BM Innovation; Level of maturity: (1) regulation driven, (2) compliance
X X X X X driven, (3) production driven, (4) new-/redesign, (5) business model focus to make value capture from differentiation,
(6) synthesize BM, new technologies, regulations, trend; (e) evaluated with case studies
Renewable Energy; Customer-side BM (e. g. photovoltaic), Utility-side BM (e. g. technologies on offshore farms);
X X X
Capturing value from energy transformation
X X X X X Conceptualize “Sustainable Business Models”; Taxonomy for challenges of Green BM; Focus environmental issues
Requirements for BM to support sustainable innovation: measureable ecological/social value (value proposition),
X X X X
responsibility (supply chain), consumption (customer), costs/benefits (ecological/social)
X X X X Conceptual framework for lean and green business organizations; Analysis of existing frameworks
X X X X X X Sustainable BM for closed loop systems in the fashion sector; Three perspectives: front end (return management),
7
Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models
Reference
Type
Kamath et al. (2013)
Pampanelli (2013)
Abuzeina et al. (2014)
Dewan et al. (2014)
Nair et al. (2014)
Sanderse (2014)
Wacker et al. (2014)
Bocken et al. (2015a)
Bocken et al. (2015b)
Chasin et al. (2015)
Dohrmann et al. (2015)
Gardetti et al. (2015)
Hanelt et al. (2015a)
Hanelt et al. (2015b)
Hildebrandt et al. (2015)
Joyce et al. (2015)
Matzner et al. (2015)
Rauter et al. (2015)
Sach (2015)
Upward et al. (2015)
Table 3. Classification and description of the literature review results.
Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016
Specifi- Repre-
Sustainability
sentation
E Description
cation
Instance
Economic
Ecological
Social
Graphical
Textual
Evaluation (e)
back end (remanufacture development), engine (remanufacture operational issues); (e) case studies
X X X Social BM framework; Modification of Osterwalder (2010); Adding social costs and social benefits
Lean & Green BM; Principles: design with environmental focus, low impact on materials, impact assessment, clean-
X X X X X
er production (reuse, metrics etc.); (e) the model is tested in global manufacturing engineering companies
X X X X Green BM in construction sector; Criteria: whole-life, closed loops, natural resources; (e) qualitative interviews
X X X X X X Approach, how environmental value requirements can be identified and efficiently fulfilled; (e) case study
Green BM of sustainable energy; Chances: lay the foundations for the sixth wave of innovation; Requirements: ena-
X X X X X
bling technological systems, customized BM, market-adoption strategy, favourable government policy
X X X X BM for Non‐Governmental Organisations; Modification of Osterwalder (2010); Adding: fundraising, impacts
Study: Green IS and electric vehicles; Impact: demographics, government, car attributes, mobility patterns, individual
X X X
characteristics (p. 4); Green IS for eco-friendly technologies; environmentally aware; lower energy consumption
Value mapping tool to assist sustainable BM; Study with potential applications: (1) ideation, (2) education, (3) prod-
X X X X X
uct and process design, (4) evaluation/screening, (5) systems thinking, (6) collaboration
Sufficiency as a driver of BMI for sustainability; Criteria: energy efficiency, value from waste, renewable processes,
X X X X X X
adopt stewardship role, encourage sufficiency, re-purpose for society/environment; (e) a case study approach
Electric vehicle charging infrastructure domain; “Accordingly, the commercial law demands sustainable behaviour,
X X X
the aim of making a profit […]” (p. 341)
Framework of social ventures; On base of real-life case studies; Adjustments of Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010);
X X X X
Adding social mission ((1) the one-sided, (2)the two-sided, (3) market-oriented, (4) commercially utilized)
X X X X X Personal canvas model with sustainability; Adjustments of Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010)
Electric vehicle; environmental sustainability; Criteria: substitution potential, coverage, eco-friendly, resource effi-
X X X
cient, flexible, modern; IS support sustainable mobility, for example with mobile apps
X X X Taxonomy; IS in business model innovation; Embedding sustainability into the core of business models
Services for sustainable mobility (car sharing); Support by IS: information, automation/transformation; Criteria:
X X X
flexibility, spontaneity, reliable access, real-time information, advanced reservations, automated payment
X X X X X The Triple Layered Business Model Canvas: Social Stakeholder, Environmental Life Cycle, Economic
Sharing services; Influence: perceived economic benefits, perceived demand, openness, perceived value-for-money,
X X X X X
availability; Variable: degree to which an individual performs an environmentally conscious and responsible
Study to investigate business models for sustainability; Drivers: legal regulations, leadership, organisational culture,
X X X X
coherence between corporate strategy and the business model for sustainability
Sharing economy; Criteria: IT for societal value creation, acceptance, innovativeness, IT for analysis, innovation as
X X X X
competitive advantage, novel digital technologies
X X X X X Ontology for Strongly Sustainable Business Models
8
Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

5.2 Graphical Representation of Sustainability in Business Models

Frameworks should support the construction of new business models with considering sustainability
aspects. Existing approaches address sustainability in the following ways:
Adding new blocks to existing frameworks. To consider environmental and social aspects Kan-
shieva (2012) added two additional boxes below the Business Model Canvas. These boxes reflect eco-
logical and/or social costs as well as ecological and/or social benefits which are provided for nature
and society. Sanderse (2014) also added a box for the impacts of a business. Henriksen et al. (2012, p.
33) added “Growth Strategy” and “Comparative Strategy”. In addition, the original four-pillar tem-
plate by Osterwalder (2004) is extended with a fifth pillar for “Non-Market Aspects” to figure out the
value that is created with and for society and environment (Lüdeke-Freund, 2009, p. 43). They also
included environmental aspects into the framework (Lüdeke-Freund, 2010).
To integrate social value and environmental value Lambert et al. (2012) adjusted the Hierarchy Busi-
ness Model and added further blocks. The framework “is proposed as a new tool for sustainability
management and research” as well as it “enables the depiction of a business and its sustainability”
(Lambert et al., 2012, p. 9). Bocken et al. (2015a) added new key stakeholders to their value mapping
tool to consider social and environmental aspects.
Beside the adjustments of existing business models, Umbeck et al. (2009, p. 61) developed a reference
model which includes further relevant elements that protect sustainability.
Dividing blocks of existing frameworks. Sanderse (2014, p. 46) divided the customer block into “ul-
timate beneficiaries” and “customer/donor segments” to differ target groups and fundraising groups
especially regarding business models for International Non-Governmental Organizations. Kamath et
al. (2013) created a social enterprise model which is based on the Business Model Canvas. They di-
vided the cost structure and revenue streams respectively into a financial and social view. They con-
sider “what are the social costs for your social business model?” and “what is the way your social
business model impacts social benefits?” (Kamath et al., 2013, p. 278).
Modifying the block-content of existing frameworks. To support a business model for social enter-
prises, Kamath et al. (2013) modified the customer side by given a focus on the beneficiaries rather
than on the customers. They use the term beneficiary “to denote all those who will be sustainably ben-
efitted by the model” (Kamath et al., 2013, p. 279). In addition Sanderse (2014) named the revenue
stream “income” which includes income or funding streams such as donations, merchandises/sales or
investments. Costs are termed as “expenditure”. On the beneficiaries side the relationship block in-
cludes a “program delivery method” to describe “the method which the organization uses to achieve
its mission or programme activities” (Sanderse, 2014, p. 6).
Modifying the structure of existing frameworks. Gardetti et al. (2015) enhanced the original BMC
by putting customers in the first place because customers are the heart of any business model. They
moved the associated blocks for customer relationships and revenue stream to the left side.
Linking elements (items or blocks) of existing frameworks. “A great innovative potential is also
placed in the interaction zones” (Henriksen et al., 2014, p. 46). The authors recommend to consider the
interactions because changes in a particular block may have implications for related blocks. In a simi-
lar way Dohrmann et al. (2015, p 146) developed an approach for monetizing social value creation by
adding an item for the value proposition which is called “Social Mission”. This item is linked to other
elements in the canvas to illustrate relations and dependencies which should be respected.
Adding views on existing frameworks. Joyce et al. (2015) developed a Triple Layered BMC which
include extra layers for social stakeholder and environmental life cycles. Sanderse (2014) added a val-
ue proposition which is called “mission” to support the consideration of a fundamental purpose of an
organization during the designing of new businesses. Henriksen et al. (2012) developed a Green Busi-
ness Model Innovation Concept which emphasis on the reduction of the environmental impact. This
impact can vary according to the method by which the change in the targeted blocks takes place.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 9

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

They added views for “creation” (entirely new), “alternatives” (fulfil the same function or operate as
substitutes), “re-design” (re-design materialized), and “modification” (small and progressive adjust-
ments) in each block (Henriksen et al., 2012, p. 46).
In total, we found various graphical approaches which are based on the BMC by Osterwalder (2010).
Beside the mentioned results, Peinel et al. (2009) developed a domain-specific modelling technique to
support the economical sustainability of eGovernment business models.

5.3 Principles of Sustainable Business Models

In addition, we review the business cases and textual results to identify essential characteristics and
criteria that are discussed in the articles. These findings contribute information about which principles
could be used in checklists for the design of sustainable business models. To structure the findings, we
categorised them according to the common three pillars of sustainability.
Social principles. Bocken et al. (2015a) identified aspects which impact society, employees, partners,
customers, and investors: leasing and affordable for everyone. According to Boons et al. (2013) sus-
tainable innovation requires measureable social value, responsibility (among the supply chain), con-
sumption as well as costs and benefits (social). They discussed social effects such as working condi-
tions. Dewan et al. (2014) identified social principles such as safety of the product, health (fresh food,
life-saving medicine, use of tobacco), employment (education, health, loans, and investments), ethics,
and creating local jobs. Sommer (2012) determined business types for social sustainability for exam-
ple, do-good-models (fair trade, sustainable fishing) and health models (organic food).
Ecological principles. Sustainable production can include following principles: pollution control,
clean production, eco-efficiency, life-cycle-thinking, closed-loop production, waste management, re-
cycling, noise control, using renewable energy, environmental monitoring and nature protection (e. g.
Henriksen et al., 2012; Nilsson-Andersen et al., 2012; Duarte et al., 2013; Abuzenia et al., 2014). Re-
garding processes and activities of companies we determined: using natural resources, supplier selec-
tion, reserve logistics, delivery options (considering emissions, waste, noise, energy and heat), reduc-
ing waste, reuse products, reducing C02 impacts, apply deposits to ensure take-back, and pollution
prevention (e. g. El-Gayer et al., 2006; Duarte et al., 2013; Hvass, 2013; Pampanelli, 2013; Dewan et
al., 2014) In the case of electric vehicles, Hanelt et al. (2015a) identified quietness and substitution
potentials. To achieve sustainable mobility, flexibility, availability, and advanced reservation these
factors are useful (Hildebrandt et al., 2015).
Sommer (2012) present types of business models with green potential: low pollution, low waste, dema-
terialization, smart models (smart metering, virtual power plants), performance contracting (energy),
renewable, eco-consulting (green logistic), and base-of-the-pyramid models (solar). Richter (2012)
determined customer aspects (e. g. photovoltaic, solar thermal hot water, and micro wind turbines)
and utility aspects (e. g. offshore wind farms, large scale photovoltaic, and biomass power plants).
Furthermore, sustainable benchmarks are suggested by Kerschbaum et al. (2011): energy (consump-
tion, costs, emissions), water (consumption, costs, effluent), materials (consumption, costs), waste
(hazardous, recycled, disposal costs), and production (costs, sales).
In general, we determine principles regarding environmental awareness, sustainable consumption,
sharing; motivation and coaching, and integrating Green IS (energy informatics) in curricula (Watson
et al., 2010; Boehm et al., 2011; Hvass, 2013; Pampanelli, 2013; Bocken et al., 2014).
Economic principles. A case study by Sach (2015) includes a ranking of elements which should be
considered in the enterprise logic. The following extract exemplifies that economic elements still play
a key role: (1) innovation, (2) social acceptance, (3) competitive advantage, and (18) sustainability.
Sustainability is categorized as an indirect influent which has the prior state “add on” (Hanelt et al.,
2015b, p. 10). A successful sustainable strategy requires a “stock of potential strategies to be set off in
the face of change” (Osterwalder et al., 2005, p. 16).

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 10

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

According to Boehm et al. (2011), different criteria have to be considered regarding efficiency which
also includes economic issues (faster and more efficient). Regarding closed loop systems and end-of-
life issues financial characteristics such as costs of system, cost of collection, and cost of sorting have
to be respected in business models (Hvass, 2013, p. 115).

5.4 Typology of Design Principles for Sustainable Business Models

The identified graphical extensions and adjustments (section 5.1) as well as the textual findings (sec-
tion 5.2) are classified in a typology for designing sustainable business models (Table 4). A typology
is derived in a deductive manner and gives a qualitative-based, conceptual classification (Bailey,
1994). We determine graphical approaches which support considering sustainability aspects during the
(a) construction of business models, (b) extension of business model frameworks, and (c) modelling
techniques. Here, the term principle addresses an approach which could be used to enhance a business
model. The principles 2-7 can be applied to enhance existing approaches regarding sustainable factors
such as the guiding ideas which are described in principle 1. For example, adding new blocks (5) to a
framework to visualize environmental impacts such as reserve logistic (1). Furthermore, these princi-
ples could be used to develop new tools which support the modelling of sustainable business models.

(1) Design principles and approaches for developing sustainable business models
Ecological: resource management (renewables), reuse management (take-back), reserve logistic,
life-cycle-thinking, closed-loop-production, waste management, recycling management, heat con-
trol, noise control, air control, water control, cleaner production, eco-efficiency, reduce emission,
photovoltaic, solar, offshore wind, alternative opportunities, value from waste, substitution
Social: sharing, leasing, affordable for everyone, health, fresh food, education of employees, loans,
investments, ethics, creating local jobs
Economic: maximize financial savings, ensure regulations, differentiation strategy
(2) Modifying the block-content of existing frameworks
According to the initial structure of the business model framework the content of several building
blocks have been modified. For example, customers are renamed to beneficiaries to address all
persons who will be benefitted in a social business model (Kamath et al., 2013), or revenue stream
is changed to funding stream to consider donations and other investments (Sanderse, 2014).
(3) Dividing blocks of existing frameworks
According to the initial structure of the business model framework several blocks are divided into
specific parts. For example, Sanderse (2014) divided the customer block into ultimate beneficiaries
and customer/donor segment to specify this block more detailed.
(4) Modifying the structure of existing frameworks
According to the initial order and the content of the blocks the structure/order could be modified.
For example, Gardetti et al. (2015) put customers in the first place, because they should be the
heart of a business. In addition, sustainability aspects could put in the first place.
(5) Adding new blocks to existing frameworks
Additional boxes are added to existing frameworks to consider sustainability aspects such as envi-
ronment or biophysical sticks. For example, the Four Pillar Model (Lüdeke-Freund, 2009), Flour-
ishing Business Model Canvas (Upward et al. 2015), Value Mapping Tool (Bocken et al., 2015a).
(6) Linking elements (items or blocks) of existing frameworks
There are potentials in the interaction between the elements, because changes in a specific element
could have an impact on other elements. For example, using a particular resource impacts the envi-
ronment. We identified three types of links: (a) item to item (b), item to block, (c) block to block.
(7) Adding views with principles on existing frameworks
There are different ways of adding a view such as environmental sustainability on a business mod-
el: (a) on the entire business model, (b) on single blocks, and (c) on the entire business model and
on single blocks. The design principles (!) could be used to develop sustainability relevant views.
Table 4. Typology of design principles for sustainable business models.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 11

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

6 Research Agenda

6.1 Enhancement Perspectives of Sustainable Business Models

We identified different graphical approaches which address sustainability in business models. These
approaches give information regarding the design of models and frameworks. However, the degree of
completeness is not explored. Further IS literature could contain more approaches to enhance model-
ling techniques and models. For example, domain-specific modelling techniques which have gained a
lot of attention in the IS community, could be used with business models (Becker et al., 2007a).
Domain-Specific/Block-Oriented Modelling Technique. A commonly used domain-specific model-
ling technique is PICTURE (Becker et al., 2007b). It provides building blocks for a particular domain
which can be used to design new models more efficiently. This technique is evaluated during a project
and it complies with the predefined requirements. Due to the increasing number of visual representa-
tions guidance is required. Based on the generally accepted modelling principles by Becker et al.
(2005) it is possible to ensure the quality of information models. Standardized building blocks include
some benefits which can be related to comparability, comprehensibility, clarity, and reusability (Beck-
er et al., 2009). First of all, our determined principles (section 5.2) could be used to support the identi-
fication of potential blocks. They enable to consider sustainable thinking during the design of models.
Sustainability Assessment. In addition, we suggest a graphical assessment of sustainable and unsus-
tainable aspects in business models. New elements which could be oriented towards metaphors such as
the three colours of a traffic light seem to be helpful. We identified different elements of a business
model to which a sustainability assessment may refer: (a) entire business model, (b) single building
blocks, and (c) entire business model and single building blocks.
In case of integrating different enhancements, we propose the combination of a domain-specific mod-
elling technique with a sustainability assessment. In this way we create assessed building blocks of a
domain-specific modelling technique to support the selection process during the designing of new sus-
tainable business models. This approach enables the designer to consider which blocks should be
placed into the model by taking sustainability into account.
Detail Model. The identified principles which should be respected in a sustainable or green business
model, are also relevant for other types of models and modelling techniques. Here, we focus on a par-
ticular block to enable detailed descriptions of the contents. For example, process models could be
used in particular blocks such as “key activities” to provide more details about the sequence of activi-
ties. Furthermore, a detailed description allows a more detailed sustainability assessment.

(1) Domain-Specific/Block-Oriented Modelling Technique

This approach provides additional building blocks for a particular domain such as sustainability.
Standardizations of elements and concepts support the designing process of new business models
in an efficient way.
(2) Sustainability Assessment
Graphical assessment of sustainable or unsustainable aspects in business models. New elements
which are oriented towards the metaphor of a traffic light seem to be helpful. Different types: (a)
entire business model, (b) single building blocks, (c) entire business model and single building
blocks. Furthermore, we could assess building blocks of a domain-specific modelling technique.
(3) Detail Model
Integration of a detail model which provides a specific view of a business model block. This con-
cept offers detailed descriptions of blocks such as “key activities” by other models, for example
process models or data models.

Table 5. Extension of the typology for sustainable business models.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 12

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

6.2 Evaluation Perspectives of Sustainable Business Models

However, it is important to evaluate the concepts which address sustainability in business model
frameworks to clarify which approaches can be combined, used in particular domains, and support
efficient reading and constructing of these models. It is challenging to decide which approaches are
suitable for designing sustainable business models. Due to the diversity of existing methods a general-
ly framework is required. Hence, we suggest to evaluate following aspects in a first step:
Evaluation inside single types of the typology (intra). First, we suggest the evaluation of possibili-
ties to combine aspects from a single type of the typology. Is it possible to combine every aspect with
each other or does one aspect exclude the others? For example, does adding a view on a single build-
ing block exclude the possibility to add a view on the entire model?
Evaluation between all types of the typology (inter). Second, we recommend validating the ap-
proaches among each other. Are there potentials to combine different approaches? For example, is it
allowable to add additional boxes and modify the content of existing boxes at the same time? Is it al-
lowable to use a domain-specific modelling technique while integrating sustainability assessments? To
answer these questions the combination of each type with the other types has to be analysed.
Evaluation of domain-specific applicability. Third, we motivate to evaluate the applicability of the
typology types to prove in which domains/use cases specific ones are applicable. In which cases it
make sense to choose a specific type? For example, dividing the revenue stream into blocks regarding
financial and social benefits is often used in social business models.
Results of an evaluation may show that the established approaches are completely adequate for model-
ling sustainable businesses and there is no need for enhancement. For example, the BMC is one of the
best ways to consider sustainability because existing enhancements are hard to understand and hard to
use. There exist different frameworks for conducting an evaluation (e. g. Gemino and Wand, 2004;
Schalles, 2013). In general, there is a model-development and a model-interpretation perspective
which focuses on efficiency and effectiveness. Here, we suggest to evaluate the mentioned enhance-
ments for sustainable business models to identify how suitable a model is compared to other models.

6.3 Limitations
This literature review, including the search parameter such as items and phrases, is based on methodo-
logical recommendations by vom Brocke et al. (2009). We choose this methodology because it is – in
our opinion – adequate for conducting a traceable and expandable literature review. However, the se-
lection of key words, literature sources, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and classification is conduct-
ed by own decisions and choices which have limitations. First, we could have added more key words
for example, “social sustainability” or “ecological sustainability”. Secondly, we could have added
more sources for example, “ScienceDirect”. An extended search may enable the identification of more
relevant literature. This selection is limited to the specified proceedings, journals, and search engines.

7 Conclusions
The present article develops a literature-based design-science-oriented typology of principles which
support the new- and re-design of sustainable business models and indicates further enhancements re-
garding the graphical representation. Altogether, our extended typology gives an orientation of ap-
proaches which can be applied to ensure sustainability in new models and describes requirements
which should be supported, for example by tools. There is already a range of enhancements which are,
unfortunately, often used separately. In our opinion the combination of these approaches could aid to
support the consideration of sustainability in such models. Hence, there is a need for evaluation.

Acknowledgements. This research is inspired (in part) in the context of the Hildesheimer Denkwerk
project which is supported by the Robert-Bosch-Stiftung (Grant ID: 32.5.6021.0079.0).

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 13

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

References
Abdelkafi, N. and K. Täuscher. (2015). “Business Models for Sustainability from a System Dynamics
Perspective.” Organization & Environment, 1086026615592930.
Abuzeinab, A.A.M. and W. Thompson (2014). “Green Business Models in the UK Construction Sec-
tor: Empirical Study.” In: Proceedings of the 2014 Industrial and Systems Engineering Research
Conference.
Amit, R. and C. Zott (2001). “Value Creation in E-Business.” Strategic Management Journal 22 (6–
7), 493–520.
Bailey, K.D. (1994). “Typologies and taxonomies: an introduction to classification techniques.” Vol.
102, Newbury Park, CA, Sage.
Baker, J., M. Avital, G. Davis, F. Land, H. Morgan, and J.C. Wetherbe (2011). “ICIS 2010 Panel Re-
port: Technologies that Transform Business and Research: Lessons from the Past as We Look to
the Future.” Communications of the Association for Information Systems 28, Article 29.
Becker, J., D. Pfeiffer, and M. Räckers (2007a). “Domain specific process modelling in public admin-
istrations – the PICTURE-approach.” In: Electronic Government. Berlin, Springer, 68–79.
Becker, J., L. Algermissen, D. Pfeiffer, and M. Räckers (2007b). “Bausteinbasierte Modellierung von
Prozesslandschaften mit der PICTURE-Methode am Beispiel der Universitätsverwaltung Münster.”
Wirtschaftsinformatik 49 (4), 267–279.
Becker, J., L. Algermissen, and T. Falk (2009). Prozessorientierte Verwaltungsmodernisierung –
Prozessmanagement im Zeitalter von E-Government und New Public Management. 2. Edition. Ber-
lin, Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag.
Becker, J., M. Rosemann, and R. Schütte (1995). Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Modellierung.
Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 (5), 435–445.
Bocken, N.M.P., P. Rana, and S.W. Short (2015). “Value mapping for sustainable business thinking.”
Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 32. (1), 67–81.
Bocken, N.M.P. and S.W. SHORT (2015). “Towards a sufficiency-driven business model: Experienc-
es and opportunities.” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions.
Boehm, M., M. Freundlieb, C. Stolze, O. Thomas, and F. Teuteberg (2011). “Towards an integrated
approach for resource-efficiency in server rooms and data centers." In: Proceedings of the Europe-
an Conference on Information Systems (ECIS). Paper 100.
Boell, S.K., and D. Cecez-Kecmanovic (2015). "On being ‘systematic’in literature reviews in IS."
Journal of Information Technology 30.2, 161-173.
Boons, F. and F. Lüdeke-Freund (2013). “Business models for sustainable innovation: state-of-the-art
and steps towards a research agenda.” Journal of Cleaner Production 45, 9–19.
Boulton R., B.D. Libert, and S.M. Samek (2001). “Value code-Werte schaffen in der neuen
Wirtschaft: Erfolgsstrategien-Geschäftsmodelle-Praxisbeispiele.“ In: Proceedings Econ 2001.
vom Brocke, J., A. Simons, B. Niehaves, K. Reimer, R. Plattfaut, and A. Cleven (2009). “Reconstruct-
ing the Giant: on the Importance of Rigour in Documenting the Literature Search Process.” In:
Proceedings of the 17 European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS). Verona, Italy, 161.
Bundesministerium (2005). „Work Life Balance.“ URL: https://www.rwth-aachen.de/global/show
_document.asp?id=aaaaaaaaaaagxqg&download=1 (visited on 10/22/2015).
Bundesregierung (2014). „Nachhaltigkeit – Ein politisches Leitprinzip“ URL:
www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/StatischeSeiten/Breg/Nachhaltigkeit/0-Buehne/2014-01-03-
ein-politisches-leitprinzip.html;jsessionid=AB7046997F8126677C0E9A1F9B62D3DF.s4t2 (visi-
ted on 10/28/2015).
Chasin, F., M. Matzner, M. Löchte, V. Wiget, and J. Becker (2015) “The Law: The Boon and Bane of
IT-enabled Peer-to-Peer Sharing and Collaborative Consumption Services.” In: Proceedings of the
Wirtschaftsinformatik. Paper 23.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 14

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

Chesbrough, R. and R. S. Rosenbloom (2002). “The role of the business model in capturing value
from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies.” Industrial
and Corporate Change 11 (3), 529–555.
Cooper, H. M. (1988). “Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews.”
Knowledge in Society 1 (1), 104–126.
Dawe, N. K. and K. L. Ryan (2003). “The Faulty Thee-Legged-Stool-Model of Sustainable Develop-
ment.“ Conversation Biology, 1458–1460.
Dewan, M.N.A., N.R. Biswas, Md. M.H. Chowdhury, and M.A. Quaddus (2013). “An AHP-QFD In-
tegrated Approach to Meet Three Dimensional Environmental Value Requirements in Sustainable
E-Business Modelling.” In: Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems
(PACIS). Paper 92.
Dohrmann, S., M. Raith, N. Siebold (2015). “Monetizing Social Value Creation–A Business Model
Approach.” Entrepreneurship Research Journal 5. (2), 127–154.
Duarte, S., and V. Cruz-Machado (2013). “Lean and green: a business model framework.” In: Pro-
ceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Management Science and Engineering Manage-
ment. Springer London, 751–759.
Dubosson-Torbay, M., A. Osterwalder, and Y. Pigneur (2002). “E-Business Model Design, Classifica-
tion, and Measurements.” Thunderbird International Business Review 44 (1), 5–23.
Dunphy, D., J. Benveniste, A. Griffiths, and P. Sutton (2000). Sustainability - The Corporate Chal-
lenge of the 21st Century. Griffin Press, Sydney.
El-Gayar, O., and B. D. Fritz (2006). “Environmental management information systems (EMIS) for
sustainable development: a conceptual overview.” Communications of the Association for Infor-
mation Systems 17 (1), 34.
Evangelistia, P., M. Huge-Brodin, K. Isaksson, and E. Sweeney (2011). “The Impact of 3PL’s Green
Initiatives on the Purchasing of Transport and Logistics Services: an Exploratory Study. Vision
20/20 - Preparing today for tomorrow’s challenges.” In: Proceedings of the 20th International Pur-
chasing and Supply Education and Research Association (IPSERA) Conference, Maastricht Uni-
versity.
Fettke, P., P. Loos, and K. Pastor (2004). “Ein UML-basiertes Metamodell zum Memorandum zur
vereinheitlichten Spezifikation von Fachkomponenten.“ In: Proceedings of the First Verbund-
tagung Architekturen, Komponenten, Anwendungen (AKA 2004). Ed by K. Turowski. 181–201.
Frank, U. (1999). "Conceptual modelling as the core of the information systems discipline-
perspectives and epistemological challenges." In Proceedings of AMCIS, Paper 240, 695-697.
Frank, U, S. Strecker, P. Fettke, J. vom Brocke J, J. Becker, and E. Sinz (2014). „The research field
“modeling business information systems”." Business & Information Systems Engineering 6.1
(2014): 39-43.
Gardetti, M. A. and S. S. Muthu (2015). “Sustainable apparel? Is the innovation in the business mod-
el?-The case of IOU Project.” Textiles and Clothing Sustainability 1 (1), 1–9.
Gemino, A., and Y. Wand (2004). “A framework for empirical evaluation of conceptual modeling
techniques.” Requirements Engineering 9 (4), 248–260.
Gronau, N. (2003). Wandlungsfähige Informationssystemarchitekturen – Nachhaltigkeit bei organisa-
torischem Wandel. Berlin 2003, Gito.
Hanelt, A., B. Hildebrandt, and J. Polier (2015). “Uncovering the Role of IS in Business Model Inno-
vation - A Taxonomy-driven Approach to Structure the Field” In: Proceedings of the European
Conference on Information Systems (ECIS). Completed Research Papers, Paper 71.
Hanelt, A., I. Nastjuk, H. Krüp, M. Eisel, C. Ebermann, B. Brauer, E. Piccinini, B. Hildebrandt, and
L.M. Kolbe (2015). “Disruption on the Way? The Role of Mobile Applications for Electric Vehicle
Diffusion.” In: Proceedings of the Wirtschaftsinformatik. Paper 69.
Henriksen, K., et al. (2012). Green Business Model Innovation-Conceptualization report.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 15

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

Hildebrandt, B., A. Hanelt, E. Piccinini, L. Kolbe, and T. Nierobisch (2015). „The Value of IS in
Business Model Innovation for Sustainable Mobility Services - The Case of Carsharing.” In: Pro-
ceedings of the Wirtschaftsinformatik. Paper 68.
Holgado Granados, M. (2014). Sustainable value creation in manufacturing through maintenance ser-
vices. PhD thesis. University of Milan.
Huber, J. (1995). “Nachhaltige Entwicklung durch Suffizienz, Effizienz und Konsistenz.“ In: Nachhal-
tigkeit in naturwissenschaftlicher und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive.” Ed by Fritz, P., J. Hu-
ber, and H. W. Levi. Stuttgart, Hirzel, 31–46.
Hvass, K. K. (2013). “Exploring Business Model Innovation for Closed Loop Fashion.” In: Proceed-
ings of the Sustainable Innovation 2013-18th International Conference. 111–117.
Kamath, S.J., Y.-J. Lee, and X.T. Zhang (2013). “Social enterprise models: creating the fortune at the
base of the pyramid.” International Journal of Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation 2 (3), 269–
292.
Kanshieva, A. (2012). Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship as a tool to increase rural resilience in
Russia: framework for transfer of the European experience. PhD thesis. University of Padova.
Kerschbaum, K., J. Strüker, and T. Koslowski (2011). “Confidential Information-Sharing for Auto-
mated Sustainability Benchmarks.” In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information
Systems (ICIS). Paper 4.
Lambert, S. C., A. J. Carter, and R. L. Burrit (2012). “Recognising Committment to Sustainability
through the Business Model.” In: Proceedings of the Environmental Management Accounting for a
Sustainable Economy. Helsinki, Finland, 1.
Levy, Y. and T. J. Ellis (2006). “A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in sup-
port of information systems research.” Informing Science: International Journal of an Emerging
Transdiscipline 9 (1), 181–212.
Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2009). Business Model Concepts in Corporate Sustainability Contexts. From
Rhetoric to a Generic Template for Business Models for Sustainability. Lüneburg, Centre for Sus-
tainability Management.
Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2010). “Towards a conceptual framework of business models for sustainability.”
In: Proceedings of ERSCP-EMSUConference 2010 – Knowledge collaboration and learning for
sustainable innovation. European Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption and Production Socie-
ty. Ed by Wever, R., J. Quist, A. Tukker, J. Woudstra, F. Boons, and N. Beute.
Macinnes, I. (2005). “Dynamic business model framework for emerging technologies.” International
Journal of Services Technology and Management 6 (1), 3–19.
Maske, P., N. Guhr, C. Köpp, and M. Breitner (2011). “Towards a sustainable business model for mo-
bile learning services.” In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems
(ECIS). Paper 245.
Matzner, M., F. Chasin, and L. Todenhöfer (2015). “To Share or Not to Share: Towards Understand-
ing the Antecedents of Participation in IT-Enabled Sharing Services.” In: Proceedings of the Euro-
pean Conference on Information Systems (ECIS). Research-in-Progress Papers. Paper 19.
Mings, S. M., and P. B, White (2000). “Profiting from online news: The search for viable business
models”. Internet publishing and beyond: The economics of digital information and intellectual
property, 62-96.
Nair, S., and H. Paulose (2014). “Emergence of green business models: The case of algae biofuel for
aviation.” Energy Policy 65, 175–184.
Nielsen, C. (2010). Conceptualizing, Analyzing and Communicating the Business Model. Department
of Business Studies, Aalborg University, WP, 1–24.
Nilsson-Andersen, P., and J. Bang Andersen (2012). Green business model innovation in the tourism
and experience economy-Cases from Austria, Portugal, Denmark, Finland, Mexico, Norway, Swe-
den, Iceland, Russia and South Korea.
Okoli, C. and K. Schabram (2010). “A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Infor-
mation Systems Research.” Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems 10 (26).

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 16

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

Osterwalder, A., Y. Pigneur, and C.L. Tucci (2005). "Clarifying business models: Origins, present,
and future of the concept." Communications of the association for Information Systems, 16.1, 1.
Osterwalder, A., and Y. Pigneur (2010). Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game
changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons.
Paré, G., M.C. Trudel, M. Jaana, and S. Kitsiou (2015). “Synthesizing information systems
knowledge: A typology of literature reviews.” Information & Management, 52(2), 183-199.
Pampanelli, A. B. (2013). L&GBM: modelo para um negócio enxuto e verde.
Peinel, G., M. Jarke, and T. Rose (2009). “Business Models for E-Government-The BMeG Method.”
Wirtschaftsinformatik 1, 57–66.
Pope, J., D. Annandale, and A. Morrision-Saunders (2004). “Conceptualising sustainability assess-
ment.“ Environmental impact assessment review 24 (6), 595–616.
Rauter, R., J. Jonker, R. J. Baumgartner (2015). “Going one's own way: drivers in developing business
models for sustainability.” Journal of Cleaner Production.
Richter, M. (2012). “Utilities’ business models for renewable energy: A review.” Renewable and Sus-
tainable Energy Reviews 16 (5), 2483–2493.
Sach, A. (2015). “IT-user-aligned Business Model Innovation (ITUA) in the Sharing Economy: A Dy-
namic Capabilities Perspective.” In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Sys-
tems (ECIS). Completed Research Papers. Paper 153.
Sanderse, J. (2014). The Business Model Canvas of NGOs.
Schalles, C. (2013). Usability evaluation of modeling languages. Wiesbaden: Springer.
Schaltegger, S. and M. Wagner (2008). Managing the business case for sustainability. EMAN-EU
2008 Conference (7).
Schaltegger, S., F. Lüdeke-Freund, and E. Hansen (2012). “Business cases for sustainability: The role
of business model innovation for corporate sustainability.” International Journal of Innovation &
Sustainable Development 6, 95–119.
Schneidewind, U., and A. Palzkill-Vorbeck (2011). “Suffizienz als Business Case: Nachhaltiges
Ressourcenmanagement als Gegenstand einer transdisziplinären Betriebswirtschaftslehre.“ In: Im-
pulse zur Wachstums Wende 2. Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt und Energie, URL:
http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:wup4-opus-39553 (visited on 27/11/2015).
Seidel, S., J.C. Recker, and J. vom Brocke (2013). “Sensemaking and sustainable practicing: function-
al affordances of information systems in green transformations.” Management Information Systems
Quarterly 37.4, 1275-1299.
Shafer, S. M., H. J. Smith, and J. C. Linder (2005). “The power of business models.” Business hori-
zons 48 (3), 199–207.
Sommer, A. (2012). “Towards a Taxonomy of Green Business Models.” In: Managing Green Busi-
ness Model Transformations. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 93–108.
Springer Gabler (publisher) (2014). „Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon, Stichwort: Business Plan.“ URL:
http://wirtschaftslexikon.gabler.de/Archiv/4777/business-plan-v10.html (visited on 11/28/2014).
Stähler, P. (2001). Characteristics of business models in the digital economy. PhD Thesis, University
St. Gallen, Josef Eul.
Standford (2010): “Sustainability ‘A Way of Life’.” URL: http://web.stanford.edu/dept/rde/dining/
pdfs/2010_SustainabilityReport.pdf (visited on 30/01/2015).
Tukker, A., S. Emmert, M. Charter, C. Vezzoli, E. Sto, M. M. Andersen et al. (2008). Fostering
change to sustainable consumption and production: an evidence based view. In: Journal of cleaner
production, 16(11), 1218-1225.
Umbeck, T. (2009). “Das Geschäftsmodell: Positionierung als gestalterisches Werkzeug und
Grundlage des Frameworks.“ In: Musterbrüche in Geschäftsmodellen. Gabler, 47–49.
United Nations (2014). “Millenium Development Goals and Beyond 2015.“ URL:
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/bkgd.shtml (visited on 18/11/2015).
Upward, A., and P.H. Jones (2015). “An ontology for strongly sustainable business models: Defining
an enterprise framework compatible with natural and social science.” Organization & Environ-

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 17

Schoormann et al. / Sustainability in Business Models

ment, Special Issue: Business Models for Sustainability: Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Trans-
formation, 1-27.
Wacker, A., M. Jurisch, J. Jin, P. Wolf, and H. Krcmar (2014). “Identifying Main User Groups for
Green IS–An Empirical Study of Electric Vehicles in China.” In: Proceedings of the Thirty Fifth
International Conference on Information Systems. Auckland.
Watson, R. T., M.-C. Boudreau, and A. J. Chen (2010). “Information systems and environmentally
sustainable development: energy informatics and new directions for the IS community.” Manage-
ment Information Systems (MIS) Quarterly 34 (1), 4.
Webster, J. and R. T. Watson (2002). “Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature
review.” Management Information Systems (MIS) Quarterly 26 (2), 3.
Wirtz, B.W. (2001). Electronic business. Gabler Verlag.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
Wüstenhagena, R. and J. Boehnke (2006). Chapter x Business models for sustainable energy.
Joyce, A., R. Paquin, and Y. Pigneur (2015). “The Triple Layered Business Model Canvas: A tool to
design more sustainable business models.” In: Proceedings of the ARTEM Organizational Creativi-
ty International Conference. Nancy, France.

Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul,Turkey, 2016 18