Crowdfunding has enabled large crowds to fund innovative projects. This type of funding might tap into the wisdom of crowds who were previously disconnected from the funding process. We distinguish between in-crowd and out-crowd funders (with and without ties to project creators) in order to test for heterogeneity in their information use. Based on the analysis of a large-scale survey amongst project funders, this paper shows that in-crowd investors rely more on information about the project creator than out-crowd investors. Outcrowd investors do not seem to attach more importance to information about the project itself than in-crowd investors, except in the case of donation-based crowdfunding. For financial return crowdfunding, financial information becomes less important once a strong relationship with the project creator is established. Our study allows project creators to target information to specific audiences based on their relationship strength across different types of crowdfunding projects.

No abstract

No abstract

Access to bank finance has emerged as a key challenge for firms engaged in circular business model innovation (circular BMI), both in practice and in the academic literature. Through interviews, focus groups and archival documents, we document the experience of firms accessing finance for circular BMI and assess bank willingness to lend to firms that engage in circular BMI. Our findings offer potential strategies for firms who look for external (bank) finance to realise circular BMI. Using a case studybased theory-refining approach, we identify three core strategies that firms can use to obtain bank finance for circular BMI. First, firms can signal future cash flow expectations by aiming to secure customer contracts and preorders. Second, relationship building with banks, suppliers and customers improves the banks' risk perception of firms. Third, firms can design standardised, long-lasting circular assets that can serve as bank collateral, especially once secondary markets develop, overcoming the difficulty of lending based on innovative, firm-specific assets.

Nature-based solutions (NBS) offer multiple solutions to urban challenges simultaneously, but realising funding for NBS remains a challenge. When the concept of NBS for societal challenges was first defined by the EC in 2017, financing was recognised as one of the major challenges to its mainstreaming. The complexity of NBS finance has its origin in the multiple benefits/stakeholders involved, which obscures the argument for both public and private sector investment. Since 2017, subsequent waves of EU research- and innovation-funded projects have substantially contributed to the knowledge base of funding and business models for NBS, particularly in the urban context. Collaborating and sharing knowledge through an EU Task Force, this first set of EU projects laid important knowledge foundations, reviewing existing literature, and compiling empirical evidence of different financing approaches and the business models that underpinned them. The second set of EU innovation actions advanced this knowledge base, developing and testing new implementation models, business model tools, and approaches. This paper presents the findings of these projects from a business model perspective to improve our understanding of the value propositions of NBS to support their mainstreaming.