Determinants of Environmental Innovation: A Case Study of Geotextiles and Glaciers in

Italy

1
 Introduction

Our ever increasing world population has augmented this generation’s need for resources.

On an earth with declining environmental performance, we must be sure to conserve resources as

much as possible for the present and future populations. In order to do this, we look for feasible

environmental solutions to issues such as climate change, pollution, species loss and diminishing

water resources. These solutions often are referred to as environmental innovations. This is a

term for methods and implementations that improve environmental performance by conserving

resources for future generations and reversing the effects of poor environmental decision making.

Environmental innovations are different from consumer-driven innovations because it can be

more difficult to see the economics of environmental innovations. Similarly it can be difficult to

decipher what the motives behind environmental innovations are.

This paper aims to answer the question: what are the incentives behind designing and

implementing an environmental innovation, using geotextile snow covers for Italy’s glaciers as a

case study. The three main reasons that the paper considers are academic research, market pull,

and public opinion. This question will be analyzed using the case study of the protection of

Northern Italy’s Dosdè Est Glacier and Presena Ovest Glacier. A company in Italy has been

covering this glacier with reflective tarps to prevent melting since 2008. Using this case study,

the paper will attempt to discover the strongest motivations for environmental innovations. This

may help countries identify how to inspire more innovation, further protecting our population

and future generations.

We will begin with an analysis of countries’ motives behind environmental innovations

and how they are implemented. Next, a case study of the protection of Northern Italy’s Presena

Glacier and Dosdè Est Glacier using geotextile tarpaulins will be used to analyze the

2
motivations of innovations like these in a real life scenario. Not only will we analyze the reasons

behind this design, but the process and outcome of the method, including its strengths and

weaknesses, will also be discussed.

Literature Review

Eco-innovations are developed due to actors, processes and desirable outcomes. However

the main reason for eco-innovation is to maintain sustainability, defined as meeting the needs of

the present without compromising the ability for future generations to meet their needs.

Environmental innovations achieve this by finding methods to conserve our natural resources.

There are three major actors in developing eco-innovations: government, academia, and

stakeholders. Governments are a major actor for the development of eco-innovations because

oftentimes they support the development of the innovation financially. Government regulation

creates the inertia for firms to accept new ideas, stimulate creativity, and recognize inefficiencies

and areas where technology could improve (Eiadat et al., 2008). Current and expected

government regulation forces firms to reduce air and noise pollution, avoid hazardous materials,

and introduce more recyclable products into their companies (Horbach et al., 2012). In fact,

eco-innovations are sometimes thought of as an induced outcome of regulation because each

regulation encourages firms to be innovative (Marinescu et al., 2015). Government regulation

consistently puts pressure on companies and firms to develop and use eco-innovations to reduce

their negative environmental impact (Marinescu et al., 2015). This can be seen in the

development of EMS, Environmental Management Systems, which organize the procedures used

to manage the impact that the company or firm has on the environment in order to get ahead of

government regulations (Kesidou et al., 2012). More specifically, national regulation seems to be

a big determinant in eco-innovations. For example, regulations in the US pushed Japan to use an

3
eco-innovative catalytic converter to control their air pollution issues (Horbach et al., 2012).

Studies on different firms confirm that stricter, more specific regulations increase the number of

eco-innovations because they force firms to invest money and time in research and investment in

eco-innovations (Kesidou et al., 2012). In fact, it was found that the more stringent policy is, the

more drive there is for environmental innovation (Horbach et al., 2012). While regulation pushes

firms to invest in research towards environmental innovations, research also encourages firms to

invest in the production of eco-innovations.

Research and academia are also major determinants of eco-innovations. Innovation is

actively stimulated by research, science, and universities. Public organizations that spread

academia such as universities and technical colleges have a strong influence over the

development of eco-innovations as they are information providers for students that will

eventually create these innovations (Ahmed & Kamruzzaman, 2010). More specifically, research

itself is a determinant of eco-innovations. For example, in the Netherlands, they have created

different types of eco-cement to decrease the production of carbon dioxide from the creation of

cement (Kemp et al., 2017). Eco-cement is cement that uses waste as fuel for its production or

uses waste as an ingredient for the material that composes the cement (Kemp et al., 2017). It is

known that many different types of eco-cement were created with the help of scientific research.

They are commonly created by industries with the help of experimental tests (Kemp et al., 2017).

Therefore, the scientific process plays an important role in the development of eco-innovations

such as the Netherlands’ eco-cement (Kemp et al., 2017).

Another actor that influences eco-innovations is the stakeholder. Stakeholders are defined

as groups that can affect or be affected by a firm’s activities (Nguyen & Adomako, 2021).

Stakeholders represent employees, customers, community, suppliers, public agencies, etc (Eiadat

4
et al., 2008). Firms respond to stakeholder demands because they recognize that government

regulation may become more demanding, they want a competitive advantage against other firms,

and they want to improve their reputation and legitimacy (Eiadat et al., 2008). Stakeholders

influence companies to eco-innovate because they care about the firm’s carbon footprint as a way

to combat climate change (Nguyen & Adomako, 2021). Companies essentially become more

competitive if they follow this encouragement and improve their environmental impact,

displaying this in the media and on labeling (Eiadat et al., 2008). It also improves their reputation

as being an environmentally friendly company which retains employees because they believe

that their company is respectable (Eiadat et al., 2008). A specific stakeholder that influences

eco-innovation is civil society. In the same example mentioned in the previous paragraph,

involving eco-cement in the Netherlands, one stakeholder, civil society, was said to encourage

the development of the eco-innovation because this actor raised attention to the environmental

damages caused by mining limestone (Kemp et al., 2017). This created air, odor, noise, and soil

pollution. It also polluted the groundwater, affecting the quality of drinking water and

endangered plants and animals (Kemp et al., 2017). By bringing attention to the negative impacts

regular cement was causing on the environment, civil society pushed eco-innovation for this

product. Another stakeholder that influences the production of eco-innovations is the customer.

Customer requirements are a major source for eco-innovations because they are apt to buy

products that are made using reduced energy consumption, waste, and hazardous substances

(Marinescu et al., 2015). Both customer demand and public opinion are major drivers for

eco-innovations (Ahmed & Kamruzzaman, 2010).

While government influence is a major factor for eco-innovation, non-governmental

organizations are also an important factor. In fact NGOs are thought to be as important to a

5
company’s decision making as governmental organizations are (Yang et al., 2012). NGOs are

strong determinants of eco-innovation because they push university, industry, and government to

be more aware of environmental concerns (Yang et al., 2012). They also organize boycotts that

can drastically change business decisions and actions (Yang et al., 2012). Overall, actors that

greatly influence eco-innovation include government, academia, and stakeholders.

Determinants of eco-innovation also include processes such as technology, market pull,

and competition. Both technology and market pull are both factors that inspire eco-innovation.

New eco-efficient technologies push more environmental technology, while market pull factors

are often characterized by customer desire for environmentally friendly products (Rennings,

2000). Market pull is a major factor in the creation of eco-innovations. More specifically,

customer demand inspires eco-innovation. When firms collaborate with stakeholders that are

concerned for the environment, this plays an important role in environmental innovation

(Kesidou et al., 2012). Competition also is a determinant of eco-innovation. Firms have stated

that they look to their competitors to see where the market will turn in the future (Ahmed &

Kamruzzaman, 2010). This competition inspires eco-innovations because companies must stay

ahead of the competition in regards to environmental progress (Ahmed & Kamruzzaman, 2010).

Customers value companies that are environmentally conscious, so companies that

environmentally innovate may have a leg up on other firms. Overall, actors such as government

and non-governmental organizations, stakeholders and academia inspire eco-innovation along

with processes such as the production of technology, market pull, and competition between

firms. It is imperative to know the drivers of eco-innovation so that we can inspire more firms to

be conscious of their environmental impact.

6
 Case Study

When considering case studies of the development of eco-innovations due to climate

change, the issue of shrinking glaciers is a prominent example. Glaciers across the world have

been losing mass rapidly due to global warming. Glaciers are frequently used as a symbol for the

detrimental effects of climate change (Huss et al., 2021). A melting iceberg is often the picture

that pulls at the heartstrings of the public, growing civil society’s concern for the environment. A

specific example of this is Italian glaciers have decreased in surface area from 526.88 km2 to

369.90 km2 (Senese et al., 2020) in the past ten years. Many methods have been experimented

with in order to prevent the melting of glaciers, such as the glaciers located in Italy. One of these

methods or environmental innovations, is the use of geotextiles to cover glaciers (Senese et al.,

2020). These non–woven geotextiles are made by bonding materials together through chemical

or heated processes to create tarps that lay over glaciers to protect them from the sun’s rays

(Senese et al., 2020). The materials used to make these geo-textile covers are typically polyester

and polypropylene fibers (Huss et al., 2021). A single cover usually spans 50 meters in length

and about 4-5 meters in width (Huss et al., 2021). Multiple covers are stitched together to cover

the area of the glacier. Geotexile’s high albedo value, the measure of the proportion of light

reflected from its surface, contributes to it being the most successful and practical eco-innovation

for slowing down glacier melt (Huss et al., 2021).

Many different actors have inspired the production of this eco-innovation. Specifically in

the case of the Italian glaciers, academia and stakeholders are found through the research to be

the most prominent actors. Researchers at the University of Milan are one of the actors that

significantly influenced this eco-innovation. This university helped carry out three major

experiments in Italy to test the best materials on groomed and non-groomed snow for Dosdè Est

7
Glacier and Presena Ovest Glacier (Senese et al. 2020). Different materials for these geo-textile

fabrics have been tested over the years to evaluate their effectiveness. These materials include

polypropylene, polyester, and poly-lactic acid (Senese et al., 2020)). The results of the

experiments show that the geo-textiles are able to reduce melting of the glaciers by 69% (Senese

et al., 2020). Additionally, research from different countries on the different methods for

preventing glacier melting supports the eco-innovation of geotextile snow covers. Many different

methods for preventing the melting of glaciers have been experimented with all over the world.

Sawdust was first used by the US Navy to prevent damage to parking lots and roads as a result of

ice melting (Herrmann & Stehle, 1967). Sawdust is scarce and difficult to transport so aqueous

and urethane foams were experimented with (Herrmann & Stehle, 1967). Also, methods for

preventing glacier melt such as grooming, water injection, snow-farming, snow production, and

relocation have been experimented with. However these methods and many more did not stand

to make significant differences in the melting that occurred over the summers (Herrmann &

Stehle, 1967). Covering the glacier using geotextiles proved to be the most successful approach

(Senese et al. 2020). Austria began experimenting with geo-textiles as a way to prevent the

melting of glaciers in 2004 (Olefs & Lehning, 2010). They measured data such as ablation

values, reflectivity, snow density, etc (Olefs & Lehning, 2010). The academia that preceded Italy

experimenting with geo-textiles in the last few decades influenced Italy’s eco-innovation in order

to preserve their own glaciers. The support of the University of Milan, the research they

conducted, and the knowledge gained by other countries fighting the same issues such as Austria,

supported the implementation of this geo-textile eco-innovation in Italy, therefore, academia

proves to be a leading determinant of this specific eco-innovation.

8
 Another determinant for the eco-innovation of geo-textiles is the influence of

stakeholders such as customers and market pull. For example, many sources mention that there is

often concern about glacier melting because ski resorts are tourist attractions. The ice needs to be

covered by at least 0.3 m of snow in order for skiing to generally be feasible (Olefs & Lehning,

2010). With glaciers melting, ski resorts are at risk of prevention from opening. Glaciers are a

large economic factor as ski resorts, and the melting of these glaciers puts the operability and

profitability of ski resorts at risk (Huss et al., 2021). Ski resorts, skiers, and ski teams, are

therefore more apt to advocate for methods for reducing snow melt, as they may make a living

off of the resort or the act of skiing or may simply find enjoyment from the activity. Ski resorts

are therefore a major stakeholder for this environmental innovation because they are unable to

make profit if the environment is not conducive for skiing. Overall, both academia and

stakeholder actors influence the development of this eco-innovation because they provide the

research and economic push needed to inspire environmental action.

The use of geo-textiles has many benefits. The first is that it is a better economic

alternative than producing artificial snow for ski resorts. It was found that a sum of 230,000

euros was spent in 2009-2010 on the geotextile covers on the Presena Ovest Glacier (Senese et

al., 2010). Almost 300,000 euros would be spent on using artificial snow to replace melted snow

if geo-textiles were not used (Senese et al., 2010). Therefore, it appears to be an effective and

cost friendly method when compared to the use of artificial snow. Geo-textiles are effective

because they offer thermal insulation, which traps cold air between the snow cover and the

glacier (Olefs & Lehning 2010). They contain properties that effectively reflect the sun’s rays,

decreasing the rate of melting. Additionally, evaporation of liquid water produced from the

glacier is prevented because the cover traps the water within the space between the cover and

9
glacier, which decreases the area lost to melting (Olefs & Lehning 2010). Therefore, there are

significant benefits to this method of glacier protection, leading to the extensive research

conducted in Italy.

While there are many benefits to using geo-textiles as a method, there are also many

drawbacks. The use of geo-textiles can be costly and require the use of extensive man-power. At

the end of the summer the geo-textiles need to be removed, so that snow accumulation can occur.

This takes about 10-15 days and requires 12 workers (Senese et al., 2020). This requires

expensive machinery such as snow cats (snow mobiles) and a specialty machine designed to

rewind the snow covers for storage (Senese et al., 2020). This takes a lot of time, money and

resources to transport the covers before and after each summer season. Another drawback is the

geo-textiles often break as they are covered in ice and snow, so it is easy to break them during

transportation (Senese et al., 2020). Replacing these textiles also consume time and money.

Another con to this eco-innovation is dust tends to cover and stain the geo-textiles during the

summer months which prevents the snow cover from reflecting the sun’s rays effectively (Senese

et al., 2020). These geo-textiles also have to be replaced in order to protect the glacier from

melting. Because the size and weight of these covers are significant, helicopters often have to be

used which takes additional resources and money (Senese et al., 2020). A final drawback is

geo-textiles become less effective at lower altitudes because heat fluxes are more influential to

snow melting than radiation at this level (Olefs & Lehning 2010). While there are significant

drawbacks to this eco-innovation, there are many drawbacks to other eco-innovations that have

been suggested in place of the use of geo-textiles as snow covers. The effect of the use of

geo-textiles on the reduction of glacier ice melt is significant enough to outweigh the money and

resources that would need to be allotted to this method.

10
 Conclusion

We are now at a point in time when people are no longer considering if our environment

is declining, but instead the new question is how can we fix it? There are preventative measures

we can take. Water use, carbon dioxide production, and general pollution can be limited.

However, in certain cases we must adapt to our changing climate. Eco-innovations allow us to

adapt in a way that will help preserve resources and assure the safety of the population. At the

same time, these cutting edge technologies are glorified, creating a healthy competition to create

more efficient and more impressive environmental technologies.

This paper asks to evaluate the main determinants of eco-innovation. Through the

geotextile snow cover case study, it is apparent that some of the major drivers of eco-innovation

are academia, market pull, and the push from public opinion. Academia proves to be an

imperative determinant of eco-innovation because firms and groups use the experimentation

process to develop the most efficient product possible. Prior research conducted by other groups

is also used to incite groups to produce better methods for solving environmental problems. In

the case of Italy’s glaciers, prior research on methods to prevent glacier melt inspired Italy to

experiment with a specific method, geotextiles. This experimentation was conducted by

university researchers. Without this push from academia, this specific eco-innovation may not

have been developed. Market pull and push from the public also incites the production of

eco-innovations. Research proves that the main driver behind eco-innovation development is

monetary gain. The market and public, including customers, control whether a company is going

to make profit. In the case of the case study involving geotextiles, ski resorts are a large tourist

attraction so the push to adapt to melting slopes is strong. The market pull and customer push

inspired the geotextile eco-innovation.

11
 While the development of eco-innovations consume time, resources, and money, they

prove to benefit society more than they cause harm. Understanding the drivers of their

development is imperative to inspiring more eco-innovation. In this way, there is a possibility of

taking control of our environment’s improvement.

12
 Works Cited

Ahmed, S., & Kamruzzaman, M. (2010, June 16). Drivers of eco-innovation . Diva Portal.

Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:324879/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Eiadat, Y., Kelly, A., Roche, F., & Eyadat, H. (2008, April 16). Green and competitive? an

empirical test of the mediating role of environmental innovation strategy. Journal of

World Business. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951607000892

Herrmann, M. R., & Stehle, N. S. (1967). Protective Coverings for Ice and Snow. Sapporo;

Hokkaido University.

Horbach, J., Rammer, C., & Rennings, K. (2012, April 28). Determinants of eco-innovations by

type of environmental impact - the role of regulatory push/pull, technology push and

market pull. Ecological Economics. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800912001358?via%3Dihub

Huss, M., Schwyn, U., Bauder, A., & Farinotti, D. (2021, January 23). Quantifying the overall

effect of artificial glacier melt reduction in Switzerland, 2005–2019. Science Direct.

Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165232X21000185?via%3Dihub

Kemp, R., Barteková, E., & Türkeli, S. (2017). The innovation trajectory of eco-cement in the

Netherlands: a co-evolution analysis. International Economics and Economic Policy,

14(3), 409-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-017-0384-4

13
Kesidou, E., & Demirel, P. (2012, February 10). On the drivers of eco-innovations: Empirical

evidence from the UK. Science Direct. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733312000194?via%3Dihub

Marinescu, C., Ciocoiu, C. N., & Cicea, C. (2015). DRIVERS OF ECO-INNOVATION WITHIN

WASTE ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FIELD. Theoretical and

Empirical Researches in Urban Management, 10(4), 5-18. Retrieved from

https://proxying.lib.ncsu.edu/index.php/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-jo

urnals/drivers-eco-innovation-within-waste-electrical/docview/1736637230/se-2

Nguyen, N., & Adomako, S. (2021, July 12). Stakeholder pressure for eco-friendly practices,

international orientation, and eco-innovation: A study of small and medium-sized

enterprises in Vietnam. Wiley Online Library. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/csr.2185

Olefs, M., & Lehning, M. (2010, April 8). Textile protection of snow and ice: Measured and

simulated effects on the energy and mass balance. Science Direct. Retrieved April 4,

2023, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165232X10000649?via%3Dihub

Rennings, K. (2000, February 2). Redefining innovation - eco-innovation research and the

contribution from Ecological Economics. Science Direct. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800999001123

Senese, A., Azzoni , R., Maragno, D., D'Agata, C., Fugazza, D., Mosconi, B., Trenti, A.,

Meraldi, E., Smiraglia, C., & Diolaiuti, G. (2020, January 23). The non-woven geotextiles

14
 as strategies for mitigating the impacts of climate change on glaciers. Science Direct.

Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165232X19301090?via%3Dihub

Yang, Y., Holgaard, J. E., & Remmen, A. (2012, May 26). What can triple helix frameworks

offer to the analysis of eco-innovation dynamics? theoretical and methodological

considerations. OUP Academic. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from

https://academic.oup.com/spp/article/39/3/373/1726155

15