Next Article in Journal
Sustainable Construction through Utilization of Optimization Tools and Experimental Methods—An Editorial
Previous Article in Journal
Economic Sustainable Development through Digital Skills Acquisition: The Role of Human Resource Leadership
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Competitive Advantages of Sustainable Startups: Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Directions

by
Adriano Martins de Souza
*,
Fabio Neves Puglieri
and
Antonio Carlos de Francisco
Sustainable Production Systems Laboratory (LESP), Postgraduate Program of Production Engineering (PPGEP), Federal University of Technology—Parana (UTFPR), R. Doutor Washington Subtil Chueire 330—Jardim Carvalho, Ponta Grossa 84017-220, Parana, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(17), 7665; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177665
Submission received: 16 July 2024 / Revised: 22 August 2024 / Accepted: 25 August 2024 / Published: 4 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Economic and Business Aspects of Sustainability)

Abstract

:
Growing awareness of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues drives a significant transformation in the global business environment, making sustainability an urgent necessity and a source of competitive advantage. However, despite advances in research, there are still significant gaps in how these practices can confer competitive advantages to startups. We seek to fill this gap by conducting a systematic literature review on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. We used the PRISMA 2020 protocol to conduct a comprehensive search in the Scopus and Web of Science databases, which led to the inclusion of 44 articles in the final review. The results indicate that sustainable startups align economic and environmental benefits, promote continuous innovation, attract investment, mitigate regulatory risks, and adapt quickly to market changes. The analysis reveals that adopting advanced technologies and circularity strategies is critical to operational efficiency and regulatory compliance. In addition, this study has mapped gaps in the literature, identifying key areas for future research into the competitive advantages of sustainable startups.

1. Introduction

Growing awareness of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues is driving a fundamental change in the global business landscape. Today, sustainability is not just a choice but an urgent necessity [1,2,3]. Companies that incorporate sustainable practices fulfill their ethical and social duties and position themselves to gain significant competitive advantages [4,5]. As highlighted by Marshall et al. [6], adopting sustainable strategies reduces the negative environmental impacts of business operations and opens up space to achieve operational efficiency, cost reduction, and access to new markets.
In this scenario, the concept of sustainable startups has attracted increasing attention in the global economy, highlighting a growing concern with sustainable development and the search for innovative solutions to tackle environmental challenges. Sustainable startups are those that integrate environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices into their business models, seeking not only profit but also a positive impact on society and the environment [7]. This approach meets consumer demands for more sustainable products and services and aligns with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), setting a new agenda for sustainable economic growth [8].
The relevance of sustainable startups on the global stage is indisputable. They provide innovative and practical solutions to meet the growing demands of corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability. According to Kuckertz et al. [9], these companies can transform entire markets and sectors by introducing business models prioritizing sustainability. In addition, sustainable startups act as catalysts for change, encouraging other companies to adopt more responsible practices [10].
The literature has recognized the importance of sustainability as a source of competitive advantage. Authors such as Dočekalová and Kocmanová [11] point out that sustainable strategies foster innovation and efficiency and give companies a stronger position in the market. In this context, startups stand out, given their agility and innovative ability, making them particularly suited to exploiting this promising scenario. Integrating sustainable practices meets consumer demands for environmentally friendly products and opens opportunities for differentiation and value creation [12,13].
In addition, companies committed to sustainability have been recognized for their ability to attract investment and talent. Authors such as Maia et al. [14] point out that sustainability can serve as an indicator for investors who prioritize the social and environmental impact of their investments while also attracting highly qualified professionals who seek to work in environments aligned with their values [15]. In this way, startups incorporating sustainable principles can position themselves favorably when obtaining financial resources and attracting high-level professionals.
In addition, sustainable companies face less exposure to government regulations and pressures. Schulte and Knuts [16] noted that adopting sustainable practices can significantly reduce the risks associated with environmental fines and sanctions. Thus, by operating within higher social and environmental responsibility standards, startups are less likely to face legal and regulatory obstacles, which can result in significant competitive advantages.
However, despite the promising advances in research on sustainable startups, essential gaps still need to be filled. While many studies have explored the benefits of sustainable practices for companies in general [2,17,18,19], few have specifically investigated the competitive advantages such practices can offer startups. Furthermore, although the existing literature on competitive advantages in startups is extensive [20,21,22], authors often need to pay more attention to the peculiarities and potential of sustainable startups within this specific context. These gaps highlight the urgency of a more detailed investigation into how sustainability influences the development of startups.
Given this, although there are studies investigating the impacts of sustainability on startups, there has yet to be a systematic review of the specific competitive advantages of these sustainable companies. Therefore, this article aims to fill this gap by offering a comprehensive overview of this growing area of research, exploring how startups can accelerate sustainable development. Thus, considering the growing importance of sustainable startups in today’s economic landscape and the need for a deeper understanding of their competitive advantages, the following research questions arise:
RQ1: What are the main competitive advantages of startups that integrate sustainable practices into their business model?
RQ2: How do these advantages impact sustainable startups’ ESG (environmental, social and governance) perspective?
RQ3: What are the future research directions in this field of study?
A systematic review of the literature on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups was carried out to address these research questions, following the PRISMA 2020 protocol [23]. The search in the Scopus and Web of Science databases, followed by rigorous screening, included 44 articles in the final review. As a result, this study deepens knowledge about the strategies and impacts of sustainable startups, offering significant contributions to the academic community, entrepreneurs, and policymakers. It establishes a basis for research methodologies, guides entrepreneurs in integrating sustainable practices, and presents evidence of the economic, social and environmental benefits, encouraging measures that promote sustainable development.
Additionally, this study makes significant theoretical contributions by deepening the understanding of how sustainable startups can convert ESG practices into tangible competitive advantages, a relatively underexplored aspect within the existing literature. By outlining the complex interactions between innovation, investment attraction, and regulatory adaptation, this research enriches academic discourse, providing a more sophisticated analytical framework to assess the impact of these practices on emerging ventures. This analysis addresses existing theoretical gaps while opening new avenues for future research, establishing a robust foundation for advancing theories that link sustainability and competitiveness in emerging business contexts.
The paper is organized into four main sections. After the introduction, the second section details the methodology used in this study. The third section presents the results, divided into a descriptive analysis and a content analysis of the articles selected in the review. The final section offers conclusions, summarizing the main results and their implications.

2. Materials and Methods

The literature review proposed in this study is essential for establishing a solid theoretical basis regarding the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. According to Borrego et al. [24], this phase is crucial for understanding the concepts and principles related to the scope of the research, providing a comprehensive understanding of the context, and helping to identify gaps in existing knowledge.
This study adhered to the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) protocol, as recommended by Page et al. [23], to conduct the systematic literature review. This protocol establishes strict guidelines to increase the transparency and clarity of systematic reviews. The process is divided into four main stages: identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. In the identification stage, potential studies are selected by searching various databases. These studies are then screened based on pre-established criteria. The next stage, eligibility, assesses each study’s relevance to the review’s objectives. Finally, only the studies that meet all the criteria are included in the final review.

2.1. Stage 1—Identification: Searching the Databases

In order to adequately cover the available literature, the Scopus and Web of Science databases were chosen due to the wealth of studies they offer in the research area and the recognized prestige they maintain in the scientific community [25,26]. Keywords related to the general objective were defined: “startups”, “sustainability”, and “advantages”. Different variations of these keywords were applied using Boolean operators, as recommended by previous studies [27,28]: “startup” OR “start-up” OR “emerging companies” OR “new ventures” AND “sustainab*” OR “ecologic*” OR “eco-friendly” OR “ESG” AND “advantages” OR “competitiveness” OR “gains” OR “benefits”.
The database search was carried out in July 2024, covering titles, abstracts, and keywords. As a result, 1290 documents were identified, with 846 from the Scopus database and 444 from the Web of Science database. After the initial search, it was decided to keep only journal articles, excluding book chapters and conference papers, as journal articles are considered more relevant due to the rigorous peer review process [29]. Therefore, by restricting the selection to journal articles, the final result was 855, as shown in Table 1.

2.2. Stage 2—Screening: Elimination of Duplicates and Linguistic Adjustment

At this stage, we removed all duplicate articles, a necessary measure due to the possibility of the same document being available in multiple databases. In addition, we removed documents written in languages other than English to maintain the collection’s linguistic coherence. As a result of these actions, after this stage, a total of 572 articles were kept for the subsequent stage of the process.

2.3. Stage 3—Eligibility: Analysis of Titles, Keywords, and Abstracts

To filter the articles, the research covered studies published in the literature from January 2013 onward, ensuring relevance and timeliness. Articles from this period were intentionally selected to align the portfolio with the most recent developments, given the increasing significance of the topic in recent years. During this stage, all the titles and keywords of the articles were analyzed based on the following question: “Does the title or keywords of the article mention any competitive advantage of sustainable startups?” Next, we examined the abstracts of the articles, prioritizing those aligned with this research’s objectives. After this filtering, we selected 128 articles for the next stage.

2.4. Stage 4—Inclusion: Detailed Analysis and Selection of Articles

To improve the selection of the documents that make up the final portfolio, the full texts of the 128 articles initially selected were located and carefully subjected to a detailed analysis. After this rigorous evaluation, we excluded 84 documents because they did not meet the relevance criteria to this study. This process resulted in selecting 44 relevant articles, listed in Appendix A, identified for their adherence to the theme of the competitive advantages of sustainable startups.
Figure 1 illustrates the stages of the review process, the background of the topic, and the theoretical basis of this research. This methodological rigor ensures that the review is comprehensive, impartial, and replicable.
During the thorough reading of the documents, a checklist based on the criteria defined in the PRISMA 2020 Protocol [23], included as Supplementary Materials, was used to record information that could contribute to achieving the proposed objective. This checklist included the following elements:
  • Identification of the study: title of the article, authors, and year of publication;
  • Background: a brief description of the research problem;
  • Objectives of the study: main objective of the article;
  • Methodology: description of the research methods used;
  • Sample and data: sample size, source, and types of data;
  • Results: main findings of the study;
  • Limitations of the study: limitations or biases identified by the authors;
  • Contribution to the literature review: relation of the article to the present research;
  • Summary and conclusions: general conclusions of the study;
  • Additional comments: study quality, research relevance, and possible gaps.
An alternative considered for the analysis was applying the meta-analysis technique, which is widely recognized today. However, the decision to opt for a more comprehensive and relatively generic literature review, rather than a meta-analysis, was guided by the diversity and multidisciplinary nature of the studies on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. Although meta-analysis effectively synthesizes quantitative data from homogeneous studies, the methodological, theoretical, and empirical heterogeneity of the articles reviewed would make this approach unsuitable for the present context. In this scenario, a more inclusive systematic literature review was essential to capture the complexity and diversity of the perspectives and results, providing an integrated and comprehensive view of the current knowledge on the subject. Thus, the systematic review conducted was the most appropriate choice for consolidating the available evidence and identifying gaps and opportunities for future research.
During the different stages of this research, it was possible to count on the support of Microsoft Excel (version 365), Mendeley (version 1.19.8), and VOSviewer software (version 1.6.19). The conclusions of these analyses will be explored in detail in the results and discussion chapter of this research, highlighting the competitive advantages of sustainable startups identified in the literature.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Descriptive Analysis

The following subsections present a descriptive analysis of the 44 articles selected to improve understanding of the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. The analysis includes the annual frequency of publications, the distribution of articles between journals, and the identification of the main authors and most influential studies. Additionally, co-authorship and country analyses were conducted to explore collaborative networks and the geographic distribution of the research. It also examines the main themes identified through keywords and the research methodologies used.

3.1.1. Annual Frequency of Publications

An analysis of the annual frequency of publications reveals substantial growth over the years, reflecting a growing interest in the intersection between sustainable startups and competitive advantages. Since 2013, when Keskin et al. [30] started the debate with the study “Innovation Process of New Ventures Driven by Sustainability”, which explores innovation in sustainable startups through energy efficiency and sustainable materials, the number of articles published on the subject has continuously increased.
Figure 2 shows the annual distribution of publications on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups from 2013 to the end of the first half of 2024. Most articles were published in recent years, especially between 2020 and 2023, representing 80% of all the publications considered. This growth reflects the academic response to advancing sustainable practices in startups and the need to understand how such practices can confer competitive advantages. The year 2022 has the highest number of publications, consolidating the upward trend. We expect this trend to continue, with a growing number of researchers dedicating themselves to studying the competitive advantages of sustainable startups, motivated by the challenges and opportunities that characterize the current business landscape.

3.1.2. Distribution by Journal

The distribution of articles by journal reveals the primary vehicles for publishing and discussing the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. We identified 20 journals that contributed with publications (Table 2), reflecting the diversity of academic interests on the subject. Among these journals, Sustainability (impact factor 3.3) and Journal of Cleaner Production (impact factor 11.1) stand out, with 13 and 11 publications, respectively, concentrating 55% of the publications. This concentration in high-impact journals shows the relevance of the topic and its validation by the most prestigious scientific journals, reinforcing the quality and influence of the research published in these sources.
The diversity of journals publishing on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups highlights the need for a multidisciplinary approach to analyzing specific problems and solutions related to sustainable behavior. In addition to business and sustainability, research covers areas such as psychology and the humanities, highlighting the intersection between different disciplines. Psychology, for example, offers valuable insights into the motivations of entrepreneurs [31,32], while the humanities explore the social and cultural impact of sustainable practices [33,34]. This diverse perspective is essential for deepening the understanding of the challenges faced by sustainable startups, allowing for the formulation of more effective strategies to promote entrepreneurial sustainability.

3.1.3. Main Authors

We highlighted the leading authors in the area of competitive advantages of sustainable startups for the relevance and impact of their publications, measured by the number of citations. Henry et al. [35] are some of the most influential, with their study “A Typology of Circular Startups: An Analysis of 128 Circular Business Models” accumulating 367 citations. Published in the Journal of Cleaner Production, this article analyzes 128 sustainable startups in three European ecosystems, proposing an innovative typology of five archetypes and revealing advanced sustainability strategies adopted by these startups.
Another significant study is “Innovation Process of New Ventures Driven by Sustainability” by Keskin et al. [30], with 238 citations. This article, also published in the Journal of Cleaner Production, uses semi-structured interviews with entrepreneurs and innovation support organizations to highlight the importance of complexity management and external validation in the success of sustainable startups. In addition, De Lange [36] contributed the article “Startup Sustainability: An Insurmountable Cost or a life-giving Investment?”, which has 112 citations. The study analyzes 300 startups in 30 cities and reveals that corporate social responsibility policies are crucial to attracting investors, reinforcing the importance of social responsibility in the context of startups.
Table 3 presents the ten most cited articles from the literature review to provide a comprehensive overview of the most significant contributions in the field. This selection highlights the most influential studies, offering fundamental perspectives on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups.

3.1.4. Co-Authorship Analysis

The co-authorship analysis, conducted with the help of VOSviewer (version 1.6.19), identified the main collaboration networks between authors researching the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. Among the 125 authors mapped, 18 stood out for their most significant connections, positioning them as key figures in shaping and spreading knowledge in this field. As illustrated in Figure 3, each node on the map represents an author, while the lines connecting these nodes indicate the intensity of the collaborations. The analysis highlights Gassmann O. and Boehm J. as central actors, showing strong interconnectivity and significant influence on research into sustainable startups. In contrast, authors such as Mansouri S. and Hoogendoorn B. appear in more isolated clusters, suggesting their collaborations are more restricted to specialized niches within the field.
This data set can be examined using an overlay visualization, allowing a detailed analysis of co-authorship over time. As shown in Figure 4, the color scale illustrates the temporality of publications, where items in yellow correspond to the most recent contributions, while items in blue indicate older publications. This visual approach makes it easier to identify temporal patterns and the evolution of academic collaborations between authors, highlighting significant changes in interactions and connections over the years.

3.1.5. Countries Analysis

The analysis of international collaborations in studies on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups reveals a significant network of cooperation between countries. The co-authorship network, visualized with the VOSviewer tool (version 1.6.19), highlights the 14 countries with the most robust connections among the 23 countries identified in the research. In Figure 5, each node represents a country, with the size and thickness of the connection lines indicating the level of collaboration and the number of co-authorships. Countries with more prominent influence, such as Germany, Brazil, and the Netherlands, are highlighted by larger nodes and more intense connections, showing a greater volume of publications and a more developed collaboration network.
International collaboration data can be analyzed over time using overlay visualization, as shown in Figure 6. This method identifies evolving academic partnerships, revealing shifts and patterns in inter-country interactions.

3.1.6. Keyword Analysis

Keyword analysis, carried out using VOSviewer software (version 1.6.19), revealed essential trends in the field of sustainable startups’ competitive advantages. Figure 7 illustrates the co-occurrence analysis of all keywords, highlighting the terms most discussed in the literature, represented by the most prominent nodes: startups, innovation in business models, sustainability, and sustainable entrepreneurship. These results reflect the search methodology used to select the articles and highlight promising areas for future research, driving discoveries in the study of sustainable startups.
The analysis revealed four main clusters: the first, highlighted in red, is centered on sustainability and encompasses themes such as social impact, entrepreneurship, and the environment, reflecting a growing trend towards integrating sustainable approaches in startups, balancing economic, social, and environmental values in their business models [33,40,41,42,43,44,45,46]. The second cluster, represented in green, connects business model innovation, sustainable entrepreneurship, sustainable development, and the circular economy, highlighting the challenges and opportunities startups face when adopting sustainable practices. The articles in this area emphasize the importance of moral values, institutional and cultural barriers, the various types of circular business, and the influence of entrepreneurial ecosystems on the success of these companies [7,9,31,35,36,47,48,49].
The third cluster, in blue, is associated with sustainable innovation and includes new ventures and ESG criteria, exploring strategic aspects such as green patents, product innovation, and ESG considerations in the context of venture capital [38,50,51,52,53,54]. Finally, the yellow cluster focuses on startups and green entrepreneurship. Analyzing the articles that explore these themes, there is an emphasis on how sustainable startups develop business models that balance financial, environmental, and social objectives, using strategies such as social impact accelerators, investments in clean technologies, and innovations aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals [37,55,56,57,58,59].
This dataset can be examined over time using an overlay visualization, revealing the evolution of keywords, as illustrated in Figure 8. This analysis demonstrates the change in areas of interest, such as startups, innovation, and sustainability, and offers insight into how research topics have adjusted and adapted over the years.

3.1.7. Research Methodologies

An analysis of the research methodologies used in the 44 articles reviewed reveals the approaches most adopted by the researchers. According to Figure 9, most articles analyzed use qualitative methodologies, representing 47.7% of the total, with 21 articles. Of these, 10 are case studies [31,34,37,41,44,47,49,51,54,55], 7 use surveys [30,32,40,45,46,52,60], and 4 follow an analytical approach [33,43,50,61]. The predominance of qualitative approaches highlights the importance of exploring the specific contexts of sustainable startups, allowing for a deeper understanding of the factors that drive their competitive advantages. However, quantitative methodologies also play a significant role, accounting for 31.8% of the articles (14 articles) [9,36,38,42,56,57,58,59,62,63,64,65,66,67]. These quantitative studies use statistical tools to obtain results, demonstrating a solid reliance on empirical data analysis to validate hypotheses and identify consistent patterns.
Additionally, 15.9% of the articles (7 articles) [7,10,35,53,68,69,70] adopt mixed approaches, combining qualitative and quantitative methods, all based on surveys. This trend suggests a tendency among researchers to integrate detailed and comprehensive perspectives for a more holistic understanding of the topic. Finally, only two articles (4.5%) [39,48] adopt a conceptual methodology based on theoretical approaches, highlighting the constant need to develop and improve theories in the area of sustainable startups.

3.2. Content Analysis

3.2.1. Competitive Advantages of Sustainable Startups

The literature recognizes that sustainable startups possess several significant competitive advantages. Firstly, these companies manage to align economic and environmental benefits, avoiding the traditional trade-off between profit and sustainability. Ariztia and Araneda [40] and Leendertse et al. [58] note that this “win-win” approach allows these companies to generate profits while protecting the environment. Kuckertz et al. [9], Giones et al. [42], and Lange and Banadaki [52] reinforce that the combination of environmental impact and financial viability positions sustainable startups favorably in a growing market that values sustainable practices. Boada et al. [41], Voinea et al. [46], and Nunes et al. [49] highlight the importance of integrating sustainability criteria from the outset of product development, facilitating the creation of innovative and efficient solutions that meet market demands for responsible practices. Horne and Fichter [39] and Hoogendoorn et al. [57] corroborate this approach, highlighting the flexibility and adaptability of these startups to innovate in uncertain environments.
The ability to attract financial resources and institutional support is another significant advantage of sustainable startups. Mansouri and Momtaz [38] and Bergmann and Utikal [55] point out that affiliation with accelerator programs brings legitimacy and makes it easier to obtain funding. Similarly, the role of incubators is equally critical in this process, as they provide startups with a supportive environment that fosters growth and development. According to Klofsten et al. [48], incubators assist startups in refining their business models and strategies while providing essential resources and networks that enhance their chances of securing investment. This structured support and mentorship are crucial for reducing investor risk and bolstering the startup’s appeal in the market. This view is corroborated by Costa et al. [10], Hegeman and Sørheim [37], and Beyhan and Fındık [62], who note that prior access to funding and the integration of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) make it possible to optimize processes, increase operational efficiency, and attract investment. Gidron et al. [56] add that startups that directly address the SDGs can attract more funding and positively impact critical areas such as health, education, well-being, and gender equality. Jacob and Arcot [50] and Frare and Beuren [68] add that having patents related to ESG factors makes these startups even more attractive to investors.
Continuous innovation and rapid adaptation to market demands are essential characteristics of sustainable startups. Huang et al. [63] point out that ambidextrous learning and the environmental awareness of top management promote the effective integration of sustainable practices, increasing eco-innovation performance. Keskin et al. [30], Serio et al. [64], and Song and Xiang [69] point out that the adaptive approach to product innovation allows these companies to navigate efficiently in uncertain environments. At the same time, proactive market orientation from the early stages of development facilitates continuous adjustment to market demands, as observed by Keskin et al. [51]. This strategic flexibility, also highlighted by Tiba et al. [32] and Du et al. [61], is crucial for the sustainability and competitiveness of startups, enabling continuous adjustment to market demands and facilitating acceptance and commercial success.
Sustainable value creation is another significant competitive advantage of sustainable startups. Bolis et al. [31], Wagner and Kabalska [34], and Gidron et al. [56] point out that aligning moral values with economic and social value creation attracts like-minded stakeholders, promoting deep engagement. Henry et al. [35], Rok and Kulik [44], and Klofsten et al. [48] point out that adopting circularity strategies allows for greater retention of resource value, strengthening the startup’s resilience and adaptability in the competitive market. These practices not only increase the legitimacy and acceptance of the company but also promote an internal culture of sustainability, as observed by Piccarozzi [33], Wagner and Kabalska [34], and Zhang et al. [67].
Adapting quickly to regulatory changes is a key competitive advantage for sustainable startups. De Lange [36], Hegeman and Sørheim [37], and Li et al. [59] state that startups in the cleantech sector help companies position themselves as leaders in sustainability, improving their reputation and legitimacy. Henry et al. [35], De Angelis [47], and Van Opstal and Borms [70] highlight the ability of these startups to adopt advanced circularity strategies, enabling greater retention of resource value. De Lange [36], Keskin et al. [51], and Liu and Zhang [53] note that the ability to attract and retain qualified talent, improve customer satisfaction, and reduce capital costs further strengthens the competitiveness of these companies.
The authors Sreenivasan and Suresh [45], Jacob and Arcot [50], and Frare and Beuren [68] point out that implementing green process innovations and holding patents related to ESG factors provide additional competitive advantages. These innovations enable greater energy efficiency, waste recycling, and pollution prevention, complying with environmental regulations, and reducing regulatory pressures. In addition, startups that employ circular economy practices and advanced technologies such as machine learning optimize their operations, attracting more investment and improving corporate reputation, as noted by Costa et al. [10], Tiba et al. [32], and Sharma et al. [65].
Finally, organizational flexibility and the ability to respond quickly to market changes are reinforced by a solid knowledge base and collaborative networks, as pointed out by Keskin et al. [30], Palmié et al. [43], and Gidron et al. [56]. The strategic approach of Susteras and Zamith Brito [60] and the ongoing management support highlighted by Oliveira-Dias et al. [54] are fundamental to ensuring that sustainable startups can scale their operations effectively. In addition, proximity to research centers and universities, as noted by Tiba et al. [7] and Speckemeier and Tsivrikos [66], provides access to advanced technical and scientific knowledge, essential for continuous innovation and competitiveness in the global market.
Table 4 summarizes the main competitive advantages of sustainable startups, as identified in the literature. In all, 20 competitive advantages were mapped and organized into 10 distinct categories, each demonstrating how these startups meet market demands for sustainable practices and position themselves strategically to attract investment, foster continuous innovation, and ensure a long-term competitive advantage.

3.2.2. Impact of Competitive Advantages on the ESG Perspective of Sustainable Startups

In addition to understanding the competitive advantages of sustainable startups, it is essential to analyze how these advantages impact the environmental, social and governance (ESG) dimensions since they play a significant role in consolidating and expanding sustainability and corporate responsibility practices.

Environmental Perspective

In the environmental dimension, sustainable startups stand out for their ability to implement innovations that minimize environmental impact and promote regenerative practices. Ariztia and Araneda [40] and Giones et al. [42] point out that combining economic and environmental benefits allows these startups to align their financial objectives with environmental sustainability. Kuckertz et al. [9] and Lange and Banadaki [52] emphasize that financial viability, combined with a positive environmental impact, positions these companies competitively in the market. The integration of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), mentioned by Costa et al. [10] and Hegeman and Sørheim [37], is fundamental to optimizing production processes, reducing energy and material consumption, and improving operational efficiency. These technologies increase energy efficiency and facilitate waste management and recycling, helping to reduce the carbon footprint.
In addition, adopting circularity strategies, as noted by Henry et al. [35], Rok and Kulik [44], and De Angelis [47], further strengthens environmental sustainability. These strategies promote a more sustainable production and consumption cycle by maximizing the value retention of resources and minimizing waste. Green process innovations, highlighted by Jacob and Arcot [50] and Frare and Beuren [68], ensure that startups comply with strict environmental regulations, reducing regulatory pressure and minimizing risks associated with unsustainable practices. According to Boada et al. [41], implementing sustainability criteria in product development makes it possible to create innovative solutions that meet the demands for responsible practices, contributing significantly to environmental preservation and resource regeneration.

Social Perspective

On the social side, the competitive advantages of sustainable startups have a significant and far-reaching impact. Bolis et al. [31] and Wagner and Kabalska [34] point out that integrating moral values with generating economic and social value attracts stakeholders committed to sustainability, driving strategic partnerships. This engagement, mentioned by Piccarozzi [33], is essential for strengthening relations with investors, customers, and the community, improving the company’s reputation, and promoting a culture of social responsibility. As observed by Wagner and Kabalska [34] and Zhang et al. [67], the inclusion of socially vulnerable groups in the production process broadens the employee base and improves human capital, increasing the company’s legitimacy and acceptance. This practice promotes a culture of inclusion and diversity, essential for building a fairer and more equitable working environment.
The direct approach to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlighted by Gidron et al. [56], reinforces startups’ positive social impact by addressing critical issues such as health, education, well-being, and gender equality. By focusing on specific SDG targets, these companies generate tangible benefits for society, improving quality of life and promoting sustainable development. Furthermore, by aligning their operations with the SDGs, these startups can attract investors and customers who value sustainability and social responsibility.

Governance Perspective

Regarding governance, sustainable startups benefit significantly from efficient management practices and regulatory compliance. Bergmann and Utikal [55] and Beyhan and Fındık [62] point out that the ability to attract financial resources and institutional support guarantees the implementation of more transparent and effective governance practices. Mansouri and Momtaz [38] and Bergmann and Utikal [55] state that affiliation with accelerator programs and prior access to funding confer legitimacy and credibility, facilitating the maintenance of high ethical standards and accountability. The possession of patents related to ESG factors, mentioned by Jacob and Arcot [50] and Frare and Beuren [68], and the integration of advanced technologies, as noted by Costa et al. [10] and Hegeman and Sørheim [37], are crucial for robust governance. These elements ensure that startups are well-positioned to comply with regulations, promote transparency, and maintain the trust of investors and other stakeholders.
Organizational flexibility and the ability to respond quickly to market changes, highlighted by Keskin et al. [30] and Palmié et al. [43], are essential for adaptive and resilient governance. This allows startups to quickly adjust to new regulatory requirements and maintain a proactive stance on sustainability. In addition, proximity to research centers and universities, as noted by Speckemeier and Tsivrikos [66], provides access to advanced technical and scientific knowledge, essential for continuous innovation and competitiveness in the global market. The solid knowledge base and collaborative networks mentioned by Tiba et al. [7], Klofsten et al. [48], and Gidron et al. [56] facilitate the exchange of information and best practices, promoting the continuous improvement of governance processes and ensuring long-term sustainability. Partnering with universities and research centers strengthens startups’ capacity for innovation and ensures efficient governance in line with best market practices.
Table 5 summarizes the impact of the competitive advantages of sustainable startups from an ESG perspective, as identified in the literature. Fifteen different impacts were mapped and organized into environmental, social and governance dimensions. These results demonstrate how sustainable startups align innovative and efficient management practices with social and environmental responsibility objectives, reinforcing their contribution to sustainability and competitiveness in the market.

3.2.3. Future Research Directions on the Competitive Advantages of Sustainable Startups

Based on the analysis carried out on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups (Section 3.2.1) and the impact of these advantages from an ESG perspective (Section 3.2.2), it is possible to identify promising directions for future research that connects directly to our findings. So far, we have clarified how these startups successfully align the creation of economic, environmental, and social value while strengthening their governance and responsibility practices. However, to deepen this understanding, it is necessary to explore in more detail the intersection between the adoption of ESG criteria and the financial performance of startups, as well as to examine the impact of regional public policies and market dynamics that influence the success and resilience of these companies. These gaps offer research opportunities in the following areas:

Economic–Environmental Balance in Sustainable Startups

There needs to be more understanding of how sustainable startups balance economic and environmental value creation in different sectors. Future research should investigate specific practices and strategies adopted by these startups to maintain this balance and explore the challenges faced and innovative solutions implemented. Additionally, it is necessary to understand how integrating ESG criteria impacts startups’ financial performance and innovative capacity. Studies can examine sectoral and regional variations, as well as different ESG approaches and their practical implications. Another area of interest is the effect of a broader definition of sustainable startups on value creation and the communication of their environmental impacts, influencing stakeholder perception and the startups’ market positioning.

Impact of Public Policies and Regional Contexts

The influence of sustainability-related public policies on promoting startups and their short-, medium-, and long-term effects still needs to be better understood. Research should focus on how local economic and cultural variables can modify the effectiveness of these policies, including comparative studies between different regions to reveal best practices. Furthermore, the regional particularities that affect the effectiveness of social impact acceleration programs need to be explored, considering factors such as infrastructure, access to funding, local support networks, and innovation clusters. Additionally, it is necessary to investigate how variations in regional contexts influence the attractiveness of sustainable startups for investors, examining tax policies, environmental regulations, and government incentives.

Innovation, Sustainability, and Business Models

Optimizing the integration of ESG dimensions in sustainable business models (SBMs) is necessary to improve the effectiveness of sustainable startups. Future research should identify tools and methodologies that help startups balance these dimensions efficiently. Case studies of startups that have succeeded in this integration can provide practical and replicable examples. In addition, it is essential to investigate how different types of green innovation affect the environmental performance of startups by analyzing innovations in products, processes, and business models and assessing their environmental impact and economic viability. Further research is needed to understand the strategies for engaging communities and stakeholders in co-creating sustainable innovations and exploring the benefits and challenges associated with these processes. Finally, sector diversification can influence understanding of the factors that drive sustainable business models in different industries, and research should examine the challenges and opportunities associated with expanding into new sectors and regions.

The Role of Investors and Market Dynamics

There needs to be more understanding of how investors influence the definition and validation of value propositions in sustainable startups. Future research should examine this relationship and its effects on the success of startups, analyzing how different types of investors, such as venture capital, impact investors and institutional investors, shape the strategies and value perceptions of startups. In addition, it is necessary to identify the factors that motivate founders and investors to get involved with sustainable startups, analyze financial, social, and environmental motivations, and identify the barriers and facilitators to engagement. We still need to understand more about how small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) contribute to the success of sustainable startups through corporate venture capital investments. Research could investigate how SMEs can become strategic partners for sustainable startups by providing capital, knowledge, networks, and operational support. Finally, it is essential to study how the integration of ESG criteria varies between different stages of investment in startups, examining how investors evaluate these criteria in early stages compared to later stages and their implications for the growth and sustainability of startups.

Startup Performance and Sustainability

There is a need to understand how the objectives of sustainable startups evolve and what factors influence these changes. Future research should focus on how changes in the market, public policies, and stakeholder demands affect startups’ objectives. In addition, it is essential to explore the contextual variables that affect the sustainable performance of startups, such as organizational culture, access to resources, support networks, and market conditions. The quality and extent of networks are determining factors for the success of sustainable startups, and further research should investigate how these elements influence the performance and resilience of startups. Finally, adopting ESG practices can increase the resilience and longevity of sustainable startups, and future research should explore this relationship, identifying the specific mechanisms that contribute to long-term sustainability.
Table 6 summarizes possible directions for future research into the competitive advantages of sustainable startups, as identified in the literature. Several promising areas for investigation have been mapped and presented below as research questions. This approach highlights the main opportunities for study, providing a deeper and more strategic understanding of the role of sustainable startups in sustainable development.
The research questions in Table 6 are fundamental to advancing the understanding of sustainable startups and thus deserve further investigation. Each of these questions tackles aspects that remain underexplored in the existing literature, such as the balance between economic and environmental value (RQ1), the integration of ESG criteria into financial and innovative performance (RQ2), and the influences of public policies and regional contexts on the attractiveness and success of sustainable startups (RQ4, RQ6). Furthermore, investigating these issues can provide significant contributions to the optimization of sustainable business models (RQ7), green innovation strategies (RQ8), and the role of investors in validating value propositions (RQ11). By exploring these areas, future research could contribute significantly to developing strategies that promote sustainability and resilience in startups (RQ18) while responding to growing demands for responsible and innovative business practices.

4. Conclusions

The main results of this systematic literature review highlight that sustainable startups have significant competitive advantages in terms of innovation, attracting investment, mitigating regulatory risks, and differentiating themselves in the market. These companies can align economic and environmental benefits, implement continuous innovation, and adapt quickly to market changes [40,42]. In addition, integrating ESG criteria contributes to attracting financial resources and qualified talent, strengthening adaptability, and creating sustainable value [55,62].
The analysis revealed that sustainable startups meet the demands for responsible practices and strategically position themselves to attract investment and foster innovation [9,52]. The combination of financial viability and positive environmental impact, highlighted by the authors, positions these companies competitively in a market that increasingly values sustainability [35]. Circularity practices, innovations in sustainable processes, and the use of advanced technologies such as AI and ML highlight the ability of these startups to optimize operations, reduce environmental impacts, and comply with regulations [10,68]. Together, these actions significantly reduce regulatory pressures.
Given the above, this research is important in providing a comprehensive understanding of the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. It consolidates a set of findings that highlight how these companies can lead the transition to more sustainable economic development. This study not only fills significant gaps in the literature but also offers clear directions for future research, suggesting more detailed studies on the economic–environmental balance, the impact of public policies, sustainable innovation, and market dynamics.
Based on these findings, this study addressed three central research questions:
RQ1: What are the main competitive advantages of startups that integrate sustainable practices into their business model? We conclude that these startups have advantages such as the ability to align economic benefits with sustainability, attract investment, and mitigate regulatory risks, which positions them favorably in the market.
RQ2: How do these advantages impact sustainable startups’ ESG perspective? We observed that these advantages strengthen ESG performance by promoting sustainable value creation, attracting capital and qualified talent, and ensuring regulatory compliance, contributing to the startups’ resilience.
RQ3: What are the future research directions in this field of study? We propose that future research explore how startups balance economic and environmental value creation in different sectors and regions, as well as examine the impact of public policies and market dynamics on startups’ ESG strategies.
While our research provides a comprehensive understanding of the competitive advantages of sustainable startups, we must acknowledge some limitations. First, this study was limited to articles published in English and indexed in the Scopus and Web of Science databases, potentially excluding relevant studies in other languages or available in different databases. Second, the analysis focused exclusively on studies published from 2013 onwards, which, although ensuring the relevance of the data, may limit the understanding of historical trends pertinent to the topic. Third, the study predominantly employed qualitative methods, which, while allowing for an in-depth exploration of specific cases, may restrict the generalizability of the results to other contexts. Finally, the interpretation of the data, despite being conducted rigorously, is subject to the inherent subjectivity of the systematic review process, potentially influencing the analysis and conclusions. Future research should consider expanding the temporal scope, exploring additional databases, and integrating mixed methodologies to provide a more comprehensive and representative analysis.
Finally, this research highlights how sustainable startups can serve as models for other companies and sectors, boosting sustainable practices and positively impacting the environmental, social and governance (ESG) dimensions. By revealing the complexities and benefits of sustainable strategies, this study contributes to formulating public and business policies that encourage adopting responsible practices, reinforcing the need for a more sustainable global economy.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su16177665/s1, PRISMA 2020 Checklist for the article.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.M.d.S. and A.C.d.F.; methodology, A.M.d.S. and A.C.d.F.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M.d.S.; writing—review and editing, F.N.P. and A.C.d.F.; supervision, F.N.P. and A.C.d.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Studies included in the systematic literature review (own elaboration).
Table A1. Studies included in the systematic literature review (own elaboration).
AuthorsTitleJournalYear
Ariztia and Araneda [40]A “win-win formula:” environment and profit in circular economy narratives of valueConsumption
Markets and Culture
2022
Bergmann and Utikal [55]How to Support Start-Ups in Developing a Sustainable Business Model: The Case of an European Social Impact AcceleratorSustainability2021
Beyhan and Fındık [62]Selection of Sustainability Startups for Acceleration: How Prior Access to Financing and Team Features Influence Accelerators’ Selection DecisionsSustainability2022
Boada et al. [41]Including Sustainability Criteria in the Front End of Innovation in Technology VenturesSustainability2023
Bolis et al. [31]Sustainability Is All about Values: The Challenges of Considering Moral and Benefit Values in Business Model DecisionsSustainability2021
Costa et al. [10]Transformative Business Models for Decarbonization: Insights from Prize-Winning Start-Ups at the Web SummitSustainability2023
De Angelis [47]Circular economy business models as progressive business models: Evidence from circular start-upsBusiness Strategy and the Environment2024
De Lange [36]Start-up sustainability: An insurmountable cost or a life-giving investment?Journal of Cleaner Production2017
Du et al. [61]Sustainable competitive advantage under digital transformation: an eco-strategy perspectiveChinese Management Studies2024
Frare and Beuren [68]The role of green process innovation translating green entrepreneurial orientation and proactive sustainability strategy into environmental performanceJournal of Small Business and Enterprise Development2022
Gidron et al. [56]The Impact Tech Startup: Initial Findings on a New, SDG-Focused Organizational CategorySustainability2023
Giones et al. [42]Balancing financial, social and environmental values: Can new ventures make an impact without sacrificing profits?International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing2020
Hegeman and Sørheim [37]Why do they do it? Corporate venture capital investments in cleantech startupsJournal of Cleaner Production2021
Henry et al. [35]A typology of circular start-ups: An Analysis of 128 circular business modelsJournal of Cleaner Production2020
Hoogendoorn et al. [57]Goal heterogeneity at start-up: are greener start-ups more innovative?Research Policy2020
Horne and Fichter [39]Growing for sustainability: Enablers for the growth of impact startups—A conceptual framework, taxonomy, and systematic literature reviewJournal of Cleaner Production2022
Huang et al. [63]Influence of Ambidextrous Learning on Eco-Innovation Performance of Startups: Moderating Effect of Top Management’s Environmental AwarenessFrontiers in
Psychology
2020
Jacob and Arcot [50]Patents and sustainable innovation in Indian StartupsJournal of World Intellectual Property2023
Keskin et al. [30]Innovation process of new ventures driven by sustainabilityJournal of Cleaner Production2013
Keskin et al. [51]Product innovation processes in sustainability-oriented ventures: A study of effectuation and causationJournal of Cleaner Production2020
Klofsten et al. [48]Start-ups within entrepreneurial ecosystems: Transition towards circular economyInternational Small Business Journal2024
Kuckertz et al. [9]Responding to the greatest challenges? Value creation in ecological startupsJournal of Cleaner Production2019
Lange and Banadaki [52]ESG consideration in venture capital: drivers, strategies and barriersStudies in Economics and Finance2023
Leendertse et al. [58]The sustainable start-up paradox: Predicting the business and climate performance of start-upsBusiness Strategy and the Environment2021
Li et al. [59]Relationship between green entrepreneurship orientation, integration of opportunity and resource capacities and sustainable competitive advantageFrontiers in
Psychology
2022
Liu and Zhang [53]Driving Sustainable Innovation in New Ventures: A Study Based on the fsQCA ApproachSustainability2022
Mansouri and Momtaz [38]Financing sustainable entrepreneurship: ESG measurement, valuation, and performanceJournal of Business Venturing2022
Nunes et al. [49]Challenges of business models for sustainability in startupsRAUSP Management Journal2022
Oliveira-Dias et al. [54]Fostering business model innovation for sustainability: a dynamic capabilities perspectiveManagement
Decision
2022
Palmié et al. [43]Startups versus incumbents in ‘green’ industry transformations: A comparative study of business model archetypes in the electrical power sectorIndustrial Marketing Management2021
Piccarozzi [33]Does Social Innovation Contribute to Sustainability? The Case of Italian Innovative Start-UpsSustainability2017
Rok and Kulik [44]Circular start-up development: the case of positive impact entrepreneurship in PolandCorporate
Governance
2021
Serio et al. [64]Green Production as a Factor of Survival for Innovative Startups: Evidence from ItalySustainability2020
Sharma et al. [65]Machine Learning Strategies Fueling Economic Progress for Start-upsInt. Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering2024
Song and Xiang [69]Driving New Venture Sustainability: A Study Based on Configuration Theory and Resource Orchestration TheorySustainability2023
Speckemeier and Tsivrikos [66]Green Entrepreneurship: Should Legislators Invest in the Formation of Sustainable Hubs?Sustainability2022
Sreenivasan and Suresh [45]Factors influencing sustainability in start-ups operations 4.0Sustainable Operations and Computers2023
Susteras and Zamith Brito [60]Value proposition development under uncertainty: A theoretical framework grounded on the trajectory of cleantech start-up foundersJournal of Cleaner Production2023
Tiba et al. [7]Sustainability startups and where to find them: Investigating the share of sustainability startups across entrepreneurial ecosystems and the causal drivers of differencesJournal of Cleaner Production2021
Tiba et al. [32]The lighthouse effect: How successful entrepreneurs influence the sustainability-orientation of entrepreneurial ecosystemsJournal of Cleaner Production2020
Van Opstal and Borms [70]Startups and circular economy strategies: Profile differences, barriers and enablersJournal of Cleaner Production2023
Voinea et al. [46]Drivers for sustainable business models in start-ups: Multiple case studiesSustainability2019
Wagner and Kabalska [34]Between Involvement and Profit: Value (Un-)Captured by a Born-Social Start-UpJournal of Social
Entrepreneurship
2023
Zhang et al. [67]How Do New Ventures Implementing Green Innovation Strategy Achieve Performance Growth?Sustainability2022

References

  1. Hossain, M.B.; Nassar, S.; Rahman, M.U.; Dunay, A.; Illés, C.B. Exploring the mediating role of knowledge management practices to corporate sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 374, 133869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Khan, N.R.; Ameer, F.; Bouncken, R.B.; Covin, J.G. Corporate sustainability entrepreneurship: The role of green entrepreneurial orientation and organizational resilience capacity for green innovation. J. Bus. Res. 2023, 169, 114296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Senadheera, S.S.; Gregory, R.; Rinklebe, J.; Farrukh, M.; Rhee, J.H.; Ok, Y.S. The development of research on environmental, social, and governance (ESG): A bibliometric analysis. Sustain. Environ. 2022, 8, 2125869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Walsh, P.R.; Dodds, R. Measuring the Choice of Environmental Sustainability Strategies in Creating a Competitive Advantage. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2017, 26, 672–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Xu, Z. Environmental dynamics and corporate social responsibility: An empirical analysis based on Chinese manufacturing listed companies. Sustain. Futures 2023, 6, 100124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Marshall, D.; O’Dochartaigh, A.; Prothero, A.; Reynolds, O.; Secchi, E. Are you ready for the sustainable, biocircular economy? Bus. Horiz. 2023, 66, 805–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tiba, S.; Van Rijnsoever, F.J.; Hekkert, M.P. Sustainability startups and where to find them: Investigating the share of sustainability startups across entrepreneurial ecosystems and the causal drivers of differences. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 306, 127054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mosgaard, M.A.; Kristensen, H.S. From certified environmental management to certified SDG management: New sustainability perceptions and practices. Sustain. Futures 2023, 6, 100144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kuckertz, A.; Berger, E.S.C.; Gaudig, A. Responding to the greatest challenges? Value creation in ecological startups. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 230, 1138–1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Costa, E.; Fontes, M.; Bento, N. Transformative Business Models for Decarbonization: Insights from Prize-Winning Start-Ups at the Web Summit. Sustainability 2023, 15, 14007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Dočekalová, M.P.; Kocmanová, A. Composite indicator for measuring corporate sustainability. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 61, 612–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Duarte, P.; Silva, S.C.; Roza, A.S.; Dias, J.C. Enhancing consumer purchase intentions for sustainable packaging products: An in-depth analysis of key determinants and strategic insights. Sustain. Futures 2024, 7, 100193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zumente, I.; Bistrova, J. ESG Importance for Long-Term Shareholder Value Creation: Literature vs. Practice. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Maia, R.G.T.; Olimpio Pereira Junior, A.; Moreira Pessanha, J.F.; Garcia, K.C. Methodology for setting corporate sustainability targets. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 369, 133359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lüdeke-Freund, F. Sustainable entrepreneurship, innovation, and business models: Integrative framework and propositions for future research. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2020, 29, 665–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Schulte, J.; Knuts, S. Sustainability impact and effects analysis—A risk management tool for sustainable product development. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022, 30, 737–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Baffo, I.; Leonardi, M.; Bossone, B.; Camarda, M.E.; D’Alberti, V.; Travaglioni, M. A decision support system for measuring and evaluating solutions for sustainable development. Sustain. Futures 2023, 5, 100109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Clark, G.L.; Feiner, A.; Viehs, M. From the Stockholder to the Stakeholder: How Sustainability Can Drive Financial Outperformance. SSRN Electron. J. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Rojo-Suárez, J.; Alonso-Conde, A.B.; Gonzalez-Ruiz, J.D. Does sustainability improve financial performance? An analysis of Latin American oil and gas firms. Resour. Policy 2024, 88, 104484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gbadegeshin, S.A.; Al Natsheh, A.; Ghafel, K.; Mohammed, O.; Koskela, A.; Rimpiläinen, A.; Tikkanen, J.; Kuoppala, A. Overcoming the Valley of Death: A New Model for High Technology Startups. Sustain. Futures 2022, 4, 100077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Marullo, C.; Casprini, E.; Di Minin, A.; Piccaluga, A. ‘Ready for Take-off’: How Open Innovation influences startup success. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2018, 27, 476–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Potjanajaruwit, P. Competitive advantage effects on firm performance: A Case study of startups in Thailand. J. Int. Stud. 2018, 11, 104–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. 2021, 88, 105906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Borrego, M.; Foster, M.J.; Froyd, J.E. Systematic Literature Reviews in Engineering Education and Other Developing Interdisciplinary Fields. J. Eng. Educ. 2014, 103, 45–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Pranckutė, R. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World. Publications 2021, 9, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Singh, V.K.; Singh, P.; Karmakar, M.; Leta, J.; Mayr, P. The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 2021, 126, 5113–5142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Carcassi, F.; Sbardolini, G. Assertion, denial, and the evolution of Boolean operators. Mind Lang. 2023, 38, 1187–1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Topi, H.; Lucas, W. Mix and match: Combining terms and operators for successful Web searches. Inf. Process. Manag. 2005, 41, 801–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Traag, V.A. Inferring the causal effect of journals on citations. Quant. Sci. Stud. 2021, 2, 496–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Keskin, D.; Diehl, J.C.; Molenaar, N. Innovation process of new ventures driven by sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 45, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bolis, I.; Morioka, S.N.; Leite, W.K.D.S.; Zambroni-de-Souza, P.C. Sustainability Is All about Values: The Challenges of Considering Moral and Benefit Values in Business Model Decisions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Tiba, S.; Van Rijnsoever, F.J.; Hekkert, M.P. The lighthouse effect: How successful entrepreneurs influence the sustainability-orientation of entrepreneurial ecosystems. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 264, 121616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Piccarozzi, M. Does Social Innovation Contribute to Sustainability? The Case of Italian Innovative Start-Ups. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wagner, R.; Kabalska, A. Between Involvement and Profit: Value (Un-)Captured by a Born-Social Start-Up. J. Soc. Entrep. 2023, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Henry, M.; Bauwens, T.; Hekkert, M.; Kirchherr, J. A typology of circular start-ups: An Analysis of 128 circular business models. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 245, 118528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. De Lange, D.E. Start-up sustainability: An insurmountable cost or a life-giving investment? J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 156, 838–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hegeman, P.D.; Sørheim, R. Why do they do it? Corporate venture capital investments in cleantech startups. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 294, 126315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Mansouri, S.; Momtaz, P.P. Financing sustainable entrepreneurship: ESG measurement, valuation, and performance. J. Bus. Ventur. 2022, 37, 106258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Horne, J.; Fichter, K. Growing for sustainability: Enablers for the growth of impact startups—A conceptual framework, taxonomy, and systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 349, 131163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ariztia, T.; Araneda, F. A “win-win formula”: environment and profit in circular economy narratives of value. Consum. Mark. Cult. 2022, 25, 124–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Boada, P.A.A.; Durán, J.F.O.; Gómez Ávila, F.L.; Ferreira, J.C.E. Including Sustainability Criteria in the Front End of Innovation in Technology Ventures. Sustainability 2023, 15, 14330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Giones, F.; Ungerer, C.; Baltes, G. Balancing financial, social and environmental values: Can new ventures make an impact without sacrificing profits. Int. J. Entrep. Ventur. 2020, 12, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Palmié, M.; Boehm, J.; Friedrich, J.; Parida, V.; Wincent, J.; Kahlert, J.; Gassmann, O.; Sjödin, D. Startups versus incumbents in ‘green’ industry transformations: A comparative study of business model archetypes in the electrical power sector. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2021, 96, 35–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Rok, B.; Kulik, M. Circular start-up development: The case of positive impact entrepreneurship in Poland. Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2021, 21, 339–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sreenivasan, A.; Suresh, M. Factors influencing sustainability in start-ups operations 4.0. Sustain. Oper. Comput. 2023, 4, 105–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Voinea, C.L.; Logger, M.; Rauf, F.; Roijakkers, N. Drivers for Sustainable Business Models in Start-Ups: Multiple Case Studies. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. De Angelis, R. Circular economy business models as progressive business models: Evidence from circular start-ups. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Klofsten, M.; Kanda, W.; Bienkowska, D.; Bocken, N.; Mian, S.; Lamine, W. Start-ups within entrepreneurial ecosystems: Transition towards a circular economy. Int. Small Bus. J. Res. Entrep. 2024, 42, 383–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Nunes, A.K.D.S.; Morioka, S.N.; Bolis, I. Challenges of business models for sustainability in startups. RAUSP Manag. J. 2022, 57, 382–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jacob, R.; Arcot, P.P. Patents and sustainable innovation in Indian Startups. J. World Intellect. Prop. 2023, 26, 503–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Keskin, D.; Wever, R.; Brezet, H. Product innovation processes in sustainability-oriented ventures: A study of effectuation and causation. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 263, 121210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lange, E.M.; Banadaki, N.G. ESG consideration in venture capital: Drivers, strategies and barriers. Stud. Econ. Financ. 2024, 41, 724–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Liu, Y.; Zhang, H. Driving Sustainable Innovation in New Ventures: A Study Based on the fsQCA Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Oliveira-Dias, D.; Kneipp, J.M.; Bichueti, R.S.; Gomes, C.M. Fostering business model innovation for sustainability: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Manag. Decis. 2022, 60, 105–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Bergmann, T.; Utikal, H. How to Support Start-Ups in Developing a Sustainable Business Model: The Case of an European Social Impact Accelerator. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Gidron, B.; Bar, K.; Keren, M.F.; Gafni, D.; Hodara, Y.; Krasnopolskaya, I.; Mannor, A. The Impact Tech Startup: Initial Findings on a New, SDG-Focused Organizational Category. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Hoogendoorn, B.; Van Der Zwan, P.; Thurik, R. Goal heterogeneity at start-up: Are greener start-ups more innovative? Res. Policy 2020, 49, 104061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Leendertse, J.; Van Rijnsoever, F.J.; Eveleens, C.P. The sustainable start-up paradox: Predicting the business and climate performance of start-ups. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 1019–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Li, W.; Sun, Y.; Gao, Y. Relationship between green entrepreneurship orientation, integration of opportunity and resource capacities and sustainable competitive advantage. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 1068734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Susteras, G.L.; Zamith Brito, E.P. Value proposition development under uncertainty: A theoretical framework grounded on the trajectory of cleantech start-up founders. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 428, 139254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Du, X.; Wang, N.; Lu, S.; Zhang, A.; Tsai, S.-B. Sustainable competitive advantage under digital transformation: An eco-strategy perspective. Chin. Manag. Stud. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Beyhan, B.; Fındık, D. Selection of Sustainability Startups for Acceleration: How Prior Access to Financing and Team Features Influence Accelerators’ Selection Decisions. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Huang, S.; Lu, J.; Chau, K.Y.; Zeng, H. Influence of Ambidextrous Learning on Eco-Innovation Performance of Startups: Moderating Effect of Top Management’s Environmental Awareness. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Serio, R.G.; Dickson, M.M.; Giuliani, D.; Espa, G. Green Production as a Factor of Survival for Innovative Startups: Evidence from Italy. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Sharma, R.; Mani, A.P.; Christa, S.; V, S.; H, A.P. Machine Learning Strategies Fueling Economic Progress for Start-ups. Int. J. Intell. Syst. Appl. Eng. 2024, 12, 414–427. [Google Scholar]
  66. Speckemeier, L.; Tsivrikos, D. Green Entrepreneurship: Should Legislators Invest in the Formation of Sustainable Hubs? Sustainability 2022, 14, 7152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Zhang, X.; Meng, Q.; Le, Y. How Do New Ventures Implementing Green Innovation Strategy Achieve Performance Growth? Sustainability 2022, 14, 2299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Frare, A.B.; Beuren, I.M. The role of green process innovation translating green entrepreneurial orientation and proactive sustainability strategy into environmental performance. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2022, 29, 789–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Song, R.; Xiang, L. Driving New Venture Sustainability: A Study Based on Configuration Theory and Resource Orchestration Theory. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Van Opstal, W.; Borms, L. Startups and circular economy strategies: Profile differences, barriers and enablers. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 396, 136510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram for systematic reviews (based on Page et al. [23]).
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram for systematic reviews (based on Page et al. [23]).
Sustainability 16 07665 g001
Figure 2. Annual distribution of publications (own elaboration).
Figure 2. Annual distribution of publications (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g002
Figure 3. Co-author network analysis (own elaboration).
Figure 3. Co-author network analysis (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g003
Figure 4. Co-author analysis overlay visualization (own elaboration).
Figure 4. Co-author analysis overlay visualization (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g004
Figure 5. Collaboration network of countries (own elaboration).
Figure 5. Collaboration network of countries (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g005
Figure 6. Collaboration overlay visualization of countries (own elaboration).
Figure 6. Collaboration overlay visualization of countries (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g006
Figure 7. Co-occurrence analysis of all keywords (own elaboration).
Figure 7. Co-occurrence analysis of all keywords (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g007
Figure 8. Keyword co-occurrence overlay visualization (own elaboration).
Figure 8. Keyword co-occurrence overlay visualization (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g008
Figure 9. Research methodologies (own elaboration).
Figure 9. Research methodologies (own elaboration).
Sustainability 16 07665 g009
Table 1. Database search (own elaboration).
Table 1. Database search (own elaboration).
Database SearchesScopusWeb of ScienceTotal
Title, abstract, keywords8464441290
Title, abstract, keywords (journal articles)510345855
Table 2. Distribution of articles by journal (own elaboration).
Table 2. Distribution of articles by journal (own elaboration).
JournalNumber of
Publications
Sustainability13
Journal of Cleaner Production11
Business Strategy and the Environment2
Frontiers in Psychology2
Chinese Management Studies1
Consumption Markets and Culture1
Corporate Governance1
Industrial Marketing Management1
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing1
Int. Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering1
International Small Business Journal1
Journal of Business Venturing1
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development1
Journal of Social Entrepreneurship1
Journal of World Intellectual Property1
Management Decision1
RAUSP Management Journal1
Research Policy1
Studies in Economics and Finance1
Sustainable Operations and Computers1
Table 3. Most cited articles (own elaboration).
Table 3. Most cited articles (own elaboration).
AuthorsTitleCitations
Henry et al. [35]A typology of circular start-ups: An Analysis of 128 circular business models367
Keskin et al. [30]Innovation process of new ventures driven by sustainability238
De Lange [36]Start-up sustainability: An insurmountable cost or a life-giving investment?112
Hegeman and Sørheim [37]Why do they do it? Corporate venture capital investments in cleantech startups90
Kuckertz et al. [9]Responding to the greatest challenges? Value creation in ecological startups90
Mansouri and Momtaz [38]Financing sustainable entrepreneurship: ESG measurement, valuation, and performance79
Horne and Fichter [39]Growing for sustainability: Enablers for the growth of impact startups—A conceptual framework, taxonomy, and systematic literature review73
Tiba et al. [7]Sustainability startups and where to find them: Investigating the share of sustainability startups across entrepreneurial ecosystems and the causal drivers of differences69
Tiba et al. [32]The lighthouse effect: How successful entrepreneurs influence the sustainability-orientation of entrepreneurial ecosystems69
Piccarozzi [33]Does social innovation contribute to sustainability? The case of Italian innovative startups64
Table 4. Summary of the competitive advantages of sustainable startups (own elaboration).
Table 4. Summary of the competitive advantages of sustainable startups (own elaboration).
CategoryCompetitive AdvantageDescriptionReferences
Aligning economic and environmental benefitsAvoiding the trade-off between profit and sustainabilityStartups manage to generate profits while protecting the environment[40,58]
Financial viability combined with environmental impactThe combination of environmental impact and financial viability positions startups favorably[9,42,52]
Innovation and product
development
Integrating sustainability criteria into product developmentFacilitates the creation of innovative and efficient solutions[41,46,49]
Adaptive approach to product innovationEnables startups to navigate efficiently in uncertain environments[30,64,69]
Proactive market orientationFacilitates continuous adjustment to market demands[39,51,57]
Financial and
Institutional
resources
Affiliation with accelerator programs and incubatorsIt gives legitimacy, makes it easier to obtain financing, and provides support in the early stages of development[38,48,55]
Prior access to financingIt signals credibility to investors and accelerators[62]
Ownership of patents related to ESG factorsMakes startups more attractive to investors[45,50,68]
Use of advanced technologiesIntegration of advanced technologiesOptimizes processes, increases operational efficiency, and attracts investment[10,37]
Focus on continuous innovationEssential to ensure long-term sustainability and growth[10,32,65]
Creating sustainable and social valueCreating sustainable valueAligns moral values with the creation of economic and social value, attracting like-minded stakeholders[31,34,56]
Inclusion of socially vulnerable groups in the production processBroadens the employee base and improves human capital, increasing the company’s legitimacy and acceptance[33,34,67]
Circularity and
Sustainability
strategies
Adoption of circularity strategiesIt allows for greater retention of the value of resources, strengthening the startup’s resilience and adaptability[35,44,48]
Advanced circularity strategiesThey allow greater retention of the value of resources[35,47,70]
Positioning and
reputation
Positioning as leaders in sustainabilityImproves reputation and legitimacy[36,37,59]
Strong collaborative networks and a robust knowledge baseThey drive continuous innovation[7,66]
Human resources and managementAbility to attract and retain qualified talentImproves customer satisfaction and reduces capital costs[36,51,53]
Ambidextrous learning and environmental awareness among top managementPromotes the effective integration of sustainable practices, raising eco-innovation performance[54,60,63]
Engagement with the SDGsDirect approach to the SDGsAttracts more funding and generates positive impact in areas such as health, education, well-being, and gender equality[56]
Flexibility and adaptabilityOrganizational flexibility and rapid adaptation to market changesEssential for the sustainability and competitiveness of startups[30,32,43,61]
Table 5. Impact of competitive advantages on ESG in sustainable startups (own elaboration).
Table 5. Impact of competitive advantages on ESG in sustainable startups (own elaboration).
PerspectiveImpactReferences
EnvironmentalImplementation of innovations that minimize environmental impact and promote regenerative practices[40,42]
Financial viability and positive environmental impact[9,52]
Advanced technologies for operational efficiency[10,37]
Circularity strategies and green process innovations[35,44,47]
Development of sustainable products that meet environmental regulations[41,50,68]
SocialMoral values are integrated into the generation of economic and social value, attracting stakeholders[31,34]
Inclusion of socially vulnerable groups, promoting diversity[34]
Alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), improving quality of life[56]
Strengthening relations with investors, clients, and the community[33]
Improving human capital and increasing legitimacy[34,67]
GovernanceEfficient management practices and regulatory compliance[55,62]
Affiliation with accelerator programs and access to funding[38,55]
Ownership of patents and integration of advanced technologies[10,37,50,68]
Organizational flexibility and ability to respond quickly to the market[30,43]
Proximity to research centers and universities for access to advanced knowledge[7,48,56,66]
Table 6. Future research directions (own elaboration).
Table 6. Future research directions (own elaboration).
Future ResearchResearch QuestionsSources of
Support
Economic–environmental balance in sustainable startupsRQ 1. How do sustainable startups balance economic and environmental value creation in different sectors?[36,40,42,65]
RQ 2. How does integrating ESG criteria impact startups’ financial performance and innovative capacity?[37,50,52]
RQ 3. What is the effect of a broader definition of sustainable startups in creating value and communicating their environmental impact?[9,68]
Impact of public policies and regional contextsRQ 4. How do public policies related to sustainability influence the promotion of different types of startups, and what are their effects in the short, medium, and long term?[33,41,54,66]
RQ 5. What regional particularities influence the effectiveness of social impact acceleration programs in different economic and political environments?[39,55]
RQ 6. How do variations in regional contexts influence the attractiveness of sustainable startups for investors?[33,36,51]
Innovation, sustainability, and business modelsRQ 7. How can the integration of ESG dimensions in a Sustainable Business Model (SBM) be optimized to increase the effectiveness of sustainable startups?[30,46,55]
RQ 8. How do different types of green innovation affect the environmental performance of sustainable startups?[9,57,61,68]
RQ 9. What are the strategies for engaging communities and stakeholders in co-creating sustainable innovations?[31,51]
RQ 10. How can sector diversification influence understanding the factors that drive sustainable business models in different industries?[7,10,70]
The role of investors and market dynamicsRQ 11. How do investors influence the definition and validation of value propositions in sustainable startups?[37,38,40]
RQ 12. What factors motivate founders and investors to engage with sustainable startups?[37,56]
RQ 13. How do small and medium-sized companies contribute to the success of sustainable startups through corporate venture capital investments?[37,50]
RQ 14. How does the integration of ESG criteria vary between the different stages of investment in startups?[52,66]
Startup performance and sustainabilityRQ 15. How do the objectives of sustainable startups evolve, and what factors influence these changes?[9,32,42]
RQ 16. Which variables related to the entrepreneurial context affect the sustainable performance of startups?[9,30,63]
RQ 17. How does the quality and extent of networking influence the success of sustainable startups?[30,41,44]
RQ 18. How can adopting ESG practices increase the resilience and longevity of sustainable startups?[45,64]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Martins de Souza, A.; Puglieri, F.N.; de Francisco, A.C. Competitive Advantages of Sustainable Startups: Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Directions. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7665. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177665

AMA Style

Martins de Souza A, Puglieri FN, de Francisco AC. Competitive Advantages of Sustainable Startups: Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Directions. Sustainability. 2024; 16(17):7665. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177665

Chicago/Turabian Style

Martins de Souza, Adriano, Fabio Neves Puglieri, and Antonio Carlos de Francisco. 2024. "Competitive Advantages of Sustainable Startups: Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Directions" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7665. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177665

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop