Eduard Xavier Montesinos-Sansaloni

The main goal of the study is the quantification of the disparities in the recycling rates of the individual types of waste in the European Union member countries. The data on the waste recycling rates for the period 2004–2021 come from Eurostat. A linear regression analysis is engaged for the analytical processing. The outcomes confirm the statistically significant differences among the explored countries – the European Union members. The most extreme increases reach the levels as follows and occur in the particular countries. The plastic packaging waste recycling rate causes an increase of 1.0965 percentage points for Belgium, the metallic packaging waste recycling rate an increase of 0.7763 for Italy, the glass packaging waste recycling rate an increase of 0.9105 percentage points, and the construction and demolition waste recovery rate an increase of 5.5667 percentage points for Italy. These rates are important for achieving net zero. The study outcomes are desired for policymakers, authorities, creators of strategic development plans and methodologies to support global economy aimed at the circular economy strategies, sustainable development and economic growth. Setting an appropriate mixture of policies and regulations can determine outcome of the recycling procedures that is used for further processing.

Purpose: This study aims to examine how public funding mechanisms shape innovation dynamics in public–private partnerships (PPPs), with a comparative focus on capitalist enterprises and social economy entities. The research investigates differences in funding success, thematic orientation and financial performance, considering how these factors reflect broader patterns of equity and efficiency. By testing theory-informed hypotheses, the study contributes to understanding the institutional and organisational conditions that influence the distribution and impact of innovation-related public investment. Design/methodology/approach: The analysis was based on a data set derived from the definitive proposal for the allocation of public grants for research and development (R&D) projects. Additional financial data from the Sistema de Análisis de Balances Ibéricos database (SABI) enriched the sample. Statistical tests, including Pearson’s Chi-square, Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis, were used to evaluate differences between groups. Furthermore, a two-step cluster analysis was conducted to identify distinct profiles of organisations based on financial and thematic variables. Findings: The results highlight that social economy entities and capitalist enterprises contribute to innovation through complementary strengths. Social economy entities often align with sustainability and social impact themes, achieving notable success in securing funding aligned with these priorities. Capitalist enterprises, while exhibiting budgetary variability, demonstrate strong capacity in projects tied to technological innovation. Moreover, public organisations collaborating with capitalist enterprises tend to allocate larger budgets, suggesting opportunities for scaling innovative solutions. These findings underscore the importance of balanced funding mechanisms to leverage the unique strengths of each organisational type. Originality/value: This study offers a comparative perspective on the dynamics of funding allocation between social economy entities and capitalist enterprises in PPPs. It challenges traditional assumptions about the financial dominance of capitalist enterprises and highlights the strategic role of social economy organisations in promoting sustainability and equity. The findings contribute to the literature on public funding, organisational learning and social innovation by integrating financial and thematic dimensions in the analysis of PPPs.

Purpose: This study investigates the impact of the corporate sustainability reporting directive (CSRD) on public funding allocation within public–private partnerships (PPPs) for research and development (R&D) projects. Emphasis is placed on understanding the role of social economy entities compared to capitalist enterprises in aligning with CSRD principles. The research aims to determine whether sustainability-oriented practices influence funding success and explores the strategic positioning of social economy entities in driving sustainable development. Design/methodology/approach: The research employs a quantitative analysis of a dataset comprising organisations involved in PPPs. Projects are classified according to their alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those directly or indirectly related to the principles of the CSRD. Statistical techniques, including Chi-square tests and comparative analyses, are applied to assess differences in alignment and funding outcomes at both the organisational and project levels. Findings: Results reveal that while social economy entities have a significant focus on SDGs that are indirectly linked to CSRD, such as health and well-being, they lag behind capitalist enterprises in direct alignment. Public funding bodies exhibit a preference for projects directly aligned with key CSRD principles such as channelling capital to sustainable projects and advancing climate action. Social economy entities, despite their inherent alignment with sustainability goals, face structural barriers that limit their competitiveness in securing funding under CSRD-aligned frameworks. Originality/value: This study contributes to the literature on sustainability and PPPs by highlighting the nuanced roles of different organisational types in advancing the European Green Deal. It underscores the need for tailored policy interventions to enhance the participation of social economy entities in CSRD-aligned projects and offers actionable insights for aligning funding mechanisms with the directive’s objectives. The findings emphasise the importance of inclusive approaches in fostering sustainable innovation within PPP frameworks.

Purpose: Digital transformation is the key for family firms to gain a competitive advantage in the digital economy. This paper empirically examines the effect of founder control on family firms’ digital transformation from the perspectives of risk-taking and founders’ power.Design/methodology/approach: This paper uses an unbalanced panel dataset to test the hypotheses using a sample of Chinese A-share listed family firms from 2010 to 2022.Findings: Compared to non-founder-controlled firms, founder-controlled family firms are more capable of driving digital transformation and only facilitate substantive transformation rather than symbolic transformation. Mechanism analysis reveals that founder control is associated with a higher inclination for risk-taking and higher power, which leads to a greater willingness and ability to facilitate digital transformation. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that founder control is particularly advantageous for promoting substantive digital transformation in family firms without state capital participation, second-generation involvement and weak Confucian cultural embeddedness.Originality/value: To study how family control affects digital transformation, this article splits family enterprises into founder and non-founder control. This study divides digital transformation into substantive and symbolic paths, each with distinctive objectives. This study improves the understanding of family enterprise digital transformation processes and provides policy insights for their digital evolution.

Purpose: This study aimed to improve understanding of the phenomenon of food well-being (FWB) (conceptualization, measurement, antecedents and outcomes) so as to lead future empirical work on measurement, development and theory testing. The hope is to improve the societal benefits of FWB and sustainable food system transformation.Design/methodology/approach: A domain-based systematic review of FWB was conducted using databases (Web of Science, ABI/INFORM, EBSCO and Scopus). The well-established theory, context, characteristics and methodology framework were used to structure the review.Findings: This study synthesized conceptual definitions and measurements of consumer FWB from hedonic, eudemonistic and mixed research streams and a nomological network that distinguishes this construct from its antecedents and outcomes.Practical implications: This study provides recommendations for consumers, food designers, retailers and policymakers to improve FWB.Originality/value: This study assessed the conceptualizations of FWB from hedonic, eudemonistic and mixed perspectives for conceptual clarity. It summarized ten measurement tools for FWB-allied concepts (Well-being Related to Food Questionnaires, Satisfaction with Food-Related Life Scale and World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index), which revealed the need for novel measurement. This study developed a holistic nomological network of FWB by identifying the categories of antecedents (food-related, consumer-related and contextual factors) and outcomes (general well-being, life satisfaction and food consumption). This study provides a research agenda for FWB measurement and theoretical development.

Objective: This work analyses the structure of the photovoltaic market, and the way the different development models and actors contribute in diverse forms to the creation of social value. Methodology: A theoretical review of the regulations applicable to the photovoltaic industry sector is conducted, encompassing an examination of externalities and the presentation of findings. Results: The study presents an analysis organised into four quadrants of a matrix with two main axes: the reduction of the carbon footprint (X) and the varied interests of the actors involved, namely saving or investing (Y). These quadrants represent a visual tool that allows understanding the different combinations of approaches towards carbon footprint reduction and the economic motivations of key actors in the photovoltaic industry. Practical implications: The insights into the roles of various actors in the photovoltaic industry have important practical implications, offering a broader view of models that address social and environmental concerns beyond carbon reduction. This can guide public administrations in shaping policies for sustainable development and help investors choose projects that deliver both financial returns and social value. Limitations: The research relies on a theoretical review of regulations and externalities in the photovoltaic industry. While this approach highlights various social and environmental objectives, the lack of empirical data limits the direct assessment of the actual impact of development models and stakeholders on the creation of social value.