English   Danish

2012/2013  KAN-CM_A212  Urban Metabolism & Innovation in a cradle-to-cradle perspective

English Title
Urban Metabolism & Innovation in a cradle-to-cradle perspective

Course information

Language English
Exam ECTS 7.5 ECTS
Type Elective
Level Full Degree Master
Duration One Semester
Course period Spring
Changes in course schedule may occur
Wednesday 09.50-12.25, week 6,7,9-12,14-17
Time Table Please see course schedule at e-Campus
Max. participants 70
Study board
Study Board for MSc in Economics and Business Administration
Course coordinator
  • Niels Kornum - Department of Marketing
Course teachers:
Christian e. Kampmann
Jesper Clement
Jacob Magid KU, Science
Thomas Astrup and Michael Z. Hauschild, DTU

Merete Skaalum Lassen - ml.marktg@cbs.dk
Main Category of the Course
  • Business Ethics, value based management and CSR
  • Innovation and entrepreneurship
  • Management
  • Marketing
  • Organization
  • Political leadership, public management and international politics
Last updated on 01-11-2012
Learning objectives
This course aims to provide students with an opportunity to gain insights based on
models, concepts and theories as well as practical hands‐on experience with real‐world projects. The Learning Objectives for the course specify that at the end of the course the student should be able to manage competently the following objectives in the context of Urban Metabolism & Innovation in a cradle-to-cradle perspective:
  • 1. To demonstrate an understanding of how, why and when to apply relevant models, concepts and theories from the curriculum to the selected projects
  • 2. To identify and analyze the relationships between these models, concepts and theories mutually and in relation to the selected projects.
  • 3. To assess critically the value of these models, concepts and theories for developing green innovations in relation to the selected projects.
A basic knowledge and understanding of innovation, entrepreneurship, marketing, organization, management and sustainability is a good preparation for this course. If a student wants to work with system dynamics based analysis and scenarios for urban flows, the elective “KAN-CM_V89 Introduction to System Dynamics” it is an important precondition for this type of analysis.
Oral exam on the basis of a miniproject
Urban Metabolism & Innovation in a cradle-to-cradle perspective:
Type of test Oral with Written Assignment
Marking scale 7-step scale
Second examiner Second internal examiner
Exam period Spring Term, gerne i uge 22 - d 29-31 maj
Aids Open Book, Written and Electronic Aid is permitted
Duration 20 Minutes
Course content
By 2008, more than half of the world’s population lives in cities and by 2030 it is expected that more than 5 billion people live in urban settings. Because of scale and proximity cities , in principle, offer a favorable setting for the resolution of social and environmental problems The challenge for the next few decades is learning how to exploit the possibilities urbanization offers and it becomes increasingly important that cities become sustainable and provide good living conditions for its inhabitants. Changing the cities in a more sustainable direction is not an easy task, among other things, because it is costly to change existing structures. On the other hand, if you generate a good idea or have gained experiences that are relevant to metropolis around the globe, the potential is big. The clean tech industry in Copenhagen have high growth rates and successful export of bicycle lane know-how to New York and advice on a whole new sustainable town in China are good examples of this in relation to services and know-how export.
An important part of developing cities in a more sustainable direction is to secure a better resource utilization by (re-)designing the urban systems handling the flows of citizens, i.e. transportation of citizens, goods and materials and services within and to and from the metropolis. These flows that make up important parts of the metabolism of the city can separated into two main cycles, the technical cycle and the biological cycle. Concerning the former the scarcity of precious metals and chemical elements or substances is becoming more and more pronounced. This underlines the importance of handling this flow as a resource and securing that each component and substance can be separated at the end of the product life-cycle. The biological cycle primarily consists of food to the inhabitants, yet in Demark only a minor proportion of the food waste from households are recycled and composted. All these flows generate transportation within and to and from the city. All the described systems are characterized with strong systemic interdependencies and multiple stakeholders handle these systems.
The challenges facing businesses to develop and market green innovations in the area of urban metabolism and cradle-to-cradle design are formidable. A wide range of subjects contribute valuable insights on these challenges. Without effective multi-stakeholder collaboration that involves, for instance, suppliers, public sector, business partners, employees, users / citizens and investors, progress is likely to be severely compromised. This course focuses on two areas of collaboration that to date have been largely overlooked despite their importance for green innovation – network collaboration of businesses with the public sector, e.g. public-private partnerships and network collaboration of businesses with citizens / users / consumers. Today the public sector shapes the conditions under which many green innovation initiatives unfold through, for example, policies affecting taxation, pricing and procurement. Incentive structures for reducing energy and natural resource consumption are often relatively weak or totally absent. New solutions that require changes in functionality may require large investments and, as a consequence, it is important to unleash the creative potential of multi-stakeholderpublic-private partnerships by involving them in the design and implementation of new solutions.
In the course the students will work with case topics that are relevant to the study of urban metabolism and cradle-to-cradle design. Examples of such topics in an urban context is a) food waste b) analysis of and scenarios for the flow of citizens, goods and services c) waste handling, source separation and life-cycle analysis d) bicycle lanes and accessibility. These topics and the course in general is developed in collaboration with Copenhagen University, Science and Technical University of Denmark
The academic world has only recently begun to study how innovation in the field of urban metabolism and cradle-to-cradle design from a multi-stakeholder public-private perspective. Consequently, the course will have to borrow theories from a number of other disciplines, e.g., organization, multi-stakeholder management , public-private partnerships, innovation, etc.
Key business topics include the following related to urban metabolism and cradle-to-cradle design:
  • The role of business innovation
  • The role of multi-stakeholder networks supporting these innovations
  • The role of the public sector & public-private partnerships supporting these innovations
  • Entreprenuership
  • Market Creation
  • Innovation and cradle-to-cradle design
Teaching methods
The intention is that students work in teams on selected project themes. Presentation of the solutions developed by the student teams to relevant stakeholders is a central element of the course. This is guided by general and project specific lectures.
Expected literature
Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C.K. and Rangaswami, M.R. (2009), “Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 87, No. 9, pp. 57-64.
Johnson, M. W. and Suskewicz, J. (2009), “How to jump start the cleantech economy,” Harvard Business Review, November, pp. 52-60.
Simanis, E. and Hart, S. (2009), “Innovation from the inside out,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer, pp. 77-86.
Ambec, S. and Lanoie, P. (2008), “Does it pay to be green? A systematic overview,”Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 45-62.
Amabile, Teresa M..(1982). Social Psychology of Creativity: A Consensual Assessment Technique.  Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, Nov, Vol. 43 Issue 5, p997-1013
Amabile T M.and  Kramer S. J. (2002) Creativity under the gun. Harvard Business ReviewVol. 80 Issue 8, p52-61
Marshall, R.S. and Brown, D. (2003), "The strategy of sustainability: A systems perspective on environmental initiatives." California Management Review, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 101-126.
Tilley, F., & Young, W. (2009). Sustainability Entrepreneurs: Could They Be the True Wealth Generators of the Future? Greener Management International, Winter(55), 79–93.
Gibbs, D. (2009). Sustainability Entrepreneurs, Ecopreneurs and the Development of a Sustainable Economy. Greener Management International, Winter(55), 63–79.
Patzelt, Holger; Shepherd, Dean A.(2011). Recognizing Opportunities for Sustainable Development.  Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice. Jul, Vol. 35 Issue 4, p631-652
Bos-Brouwers, H. E. J. (2010). Corporate Sustainability and Innovation in SMEs: Evidence of Themes and Activities in Practice. Business Strategy and the Environment,
Lieberherr-Gardiol, F. (2009). Urban sustainability and governance : issues for the twenty-first century. International Social Science Journal, 59(193/194), 331–342.
Hossein Azadi, Peter Ho, Erni Hafni, Kiumars Zarafshani & Frank Witlox (2011): Multi-stakeholder involvement and urban green space performance, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 54:6, 785-811
Jones, R., Kornum, N. (2012-13). Managing the co-created brand: Value and cultural complementarity in online and offline multi stakeholder ecosystems.Journal of Business Research, Forthcoming
Schlange, L.E. (2009). Stakeholder Identification in Sustainability Entrepreneurship The Role of Managerial and Organisational Cognition.Greener Management International, Winter (55), 13–32.
Neill, G. D. O., Hershauer, J. C., & Golden, J. S. (2009). The Cultural Context of Entrepreneurship Greener Management International, Winter(55), 33–47.
Neville, B. A. Neville and Menguc, B. (2006), “Stakeholder multiplicity: Toward an understanding of the interactions between stakeholders,”Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 66, No. 4, 377-391.
Greve, Carsten. (2010). “The Global Perspective on Public–private partnership Industry”, in Hodge, G.A., Greve, C. and Boardman, A. (Eds) International Handbook in Public-Private Partnerships, Edward Elgar, UK, pp499-510
Greve, Carsten. and Mörth, Ulrika. (2010). “Public–private partnerships: the Scandinavian experience”, in Hodge, G.A., Greve, C. and Boardman, A. (Eds) International Handbook in Public-Private Partnerships, Edward Elgar, UK, pp439-455
Hodge G, Greve C (2011), "Theorizing Public-Private Partnership Success: A Market-Based Alternative to Government?". Paper for the Public Management Research Conference at Syracuse University 2-4 June 2011, Syracuse, NY, USA
Wiehe, G (2010), “Towards a process perspective on public-private partnerships” in Hodge, G.A., Greve, C. and Boardman, A. (Eds) International Handbook in Public-Private Partnerships, Edward Elgar, UK, pp510-526
Bienkowska, D., Larsen, K. & Sörlin, S. (2010). „Public – private innovation: Mediating roles and ICT niches of industrial research institutes”. Innovation: management, policy & practice, 12(2), pp.206-216.
Foley, H.C., Freihaut, J., Hallacher, P. & Knapp, C. (2011). „The Greater Philadelphia Innovation Cluster for Energy-Efficient Buildings: A New Model for Public-Private Partnerships”. Industrial Research Institute, November-December, pp.42-48.
Hall, A. (2006). “Public – private sector partnerships in an agricultural system of innovation: concepts and challenges”. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 5(1), pp.3-20
Parker, B., Segev, S. and Pinto, J. (2010), “What it means to go green: Consumer perceptions of green brands and dimensions and "greenness," American Academy of Advertising Conference Proceedings, pp. 99-111.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Lee, K.H. (1999), “Consumer resistance to, and acceptance of, innovations,” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 26, pp. 218-225.
Braungart, M., McDonough, W. and Bollinger, A. (2007). “Cradle-to-cradle design: Creating healthy emissions – a strategy for eco-effective product and system design,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol.15, pp.1337-1348.
Janssen, K.L. and Dankbaar, B. (2008), “Proactive involvement of consumers in innovation,” International Journal of Innovation Management,Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 511–541.
Jansson, J., Marell, A. and Nordlund, A. (2010), “Green consumer behavior: Determinants of curtailment and eco-innovation adoption,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 358–370.
Parfitt, J., Barthel, M., & Macnaughton, S. (2010). Food waste within food supply chains: quantification and potential for change to 2050. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 365(1554), 3065–81.
Kranert, M., Hafner, G., Barabosz, J., Schneider, F., Lebersorger, S., Scherhaufer, S., Schuller, H., et al. (2012). Determination of discarded food and proposals for a minimization of food wastage in Germany. wau.boku.ac.at (p. 40). Stuttgart.
Garnett, T. (2011). Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? Food Policy, 36, 23–S32.
Thøgersen, John (1994) A model of recycling behaviour, with evidence from Danish source separation programmes.  International Journal of Research in Marketing. Vol. 11 Issue 2, 145-163.
Breton, Tony (2009).Source Separation Trends In UK.   BioCycle. Aug, Vol. 50 Issue 8, 38-40.
Saft, R. J.; Elsinga, W. (2006). Source Separation, Composting A Win For Greenhouse Gas Reduction. BioCycle. Aug, Vol. 47 Issue 8, 50-53.
Yang et al (2011) Model of Municipal Solid Waste Source Separation Activity: A Case Study of Beijing. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association (Air & Waste Management Association). Vol. 61 Issue 2, 157-163.
Last updated on 01-11-2012