As manufacturing firms increasingly pursue sustainability and digital transformation, production systems are becoming more dependent on collaboration across industrial ecosystems. However, industrial ecosystems differ in governance, coordination, and steering, raising questions about why different arrangements produce divergent transition pathways in coordination, inclusiveness, and sustainability focus. While collaboration is widely emphasised as essential for sustainability transitions, less is known about how variations in power dynamics and sustainability focus shape ecosystem configurations and direction. This study examines how differences in power dynamics and sustainability focus generate distinct configurations and shape sustainability transitions. Drawing on 35 interviews across three industrial ecosystems in Northern Europe, we develop a typology based on two dimensions – power dynamics and sustainability focus – identifying four configurations: enforced efficiency, balanced optimisation, dominated innovation, and collaborative innovation. The findings show that sustainability transitions depend not only on sustainability focus but also on ecosystem coordination, creating trade-offs between control, collaboration, and transformation scope. By conceptualising configurations as outcomes of power dynamics and sustainability focus, the study explains why similar ambitions generate divergent pathways. The findings contribute to production research by showing how different ecosystem configurations influence coordination, collaboration, and sustainability implementation, while offering guidance for managers and policymakers supporting industrial sustainability transitions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kilinc et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: