Introduction Environmental problems, especially waste problem are the responsibility of the state, first of all. But in the developed countries the flexibility of the utilization system is attached to small recycling firms – ecological entrepreneurs (ecopreneurs). At the present time, a typical situation in the sphere of waste management in Russia can be characterized by total absence or minimum organization of waste selective collection (less than 5%) and almost total absence of recycling companies (Korshenko et al., 2015). Recycling companies themselves have to create a raw material market and a sales market using innovative business models. Although the literature on the entrepreneurship states that there are good openings for the entrepreneurs due to the transformation to the “green” business, ecopreneurial practices are considered to be under-investigated. The most part of the literature is focused on the identification of well-established entrepreneurs but the topic of business models received little attention. This paper investigates the characteristics of ecological entrepreneurship business models in the recycling industry in Russia. Theoretical Development The relationship between entrepreneurship and sustainable development has been addressed by various streams of thought and literature such as social entrepreneurship, sustainable entrepreneurship, ecological entrepreneurship and institutional entrepreneurship (Schaltegger & Wagner, 2011). Schaper (2010) has argued that adopting a sustainable business framework may create new opportunities for entrepreneurs, including the reconfiguration of existing business models. So far, the literature on business models for sustainable entrepreneurship has received little attention (Jolink & Niesten, 2015). It need to be answered the following basic questions that shape the business model (Morris et al., 2005). (a) How and for whom will the firm create value? (b) What is the firm’s internal source of advantage and how will this provide the basis for its external positioning? (c) How will the firm make money, and how does this relate to the firm’s scope and size and time ambitions? Jolink and Niesten (2015) have opted for those ecopreneurs that operate in the processing and retail of organic food and beverages (eco-products) in the Netherlands. They define the ecopreneurial business model and specify four varieties of this business model, which consist of different combinations of environmental scope and a focus on the mass market and profitability. Jolink and Niesten (2015) assumed that the distinguishing factor of the ecopreneurial business model is that it transforms disvalue into value, thereby creating greater customer value for environmentally concerned consumers. But in the literature, ecological entrepreneurship is understood as a wide kind of goods and services: from the development and sale of resource and energy-saving technologies, recycling, to ecotourism, the production of organic food and other products and eco-restaurants. It can be assumed that the business models, and the mechanism of transformation of negative consumer value may differ depending on the sector in which ecopreneurship is carried out. Recycling is a very specific industry, since waste itself is the source of the consumer disvalue. Given all of the above, our research question sounds like: What are the features of business models of recycling firms? Research Design Considering the research question, stage of the development of the theory of ecopreneurship, and importance of the context, we assume that case methodology are more suitable for this research. The unit of analysis – business model. Population was specific. That is Companies engaged in wastes recycling in the Primorye Territory, Russia. The sample is theoretical (nonrandom), includes the cases of two companies. Data sources include interview, documents, open sources. The interviews were subsequently coded in order to facilitate comparisons and to find a pattern or structure in the data. The data were triangulated by a variety of means according methodology of case study. Result and Conclusion The resulting business model descriptions show how business is done by the ecopreneur, and how, and for whom, the firms create value (Zott & Amit, 2007). The companies cases show that in the ecological entrepreneurship value creation can be related to what the consumer value as well as to what they don’t value. The wastes themselves are the source of the consumers disvalue. But in the case of wastes recycling the customers experiencing the disvalue and receiving the value transformed from it are quite different consumers. Abilities for solving the clients’ ecological issues due to the entrepreneurial thinking and social ideology developed as a result of the ecopreneurial practice (Jolink & Niesten, 2015) are the internal source of a firm advantages and the basis for the external positioning (Morris et al., 2005) of the recycling companies. According to Jolink and Niesten (2015) classification of business models of ecopreneurship, business models of companies combine the features of an income model and a subsistence model. So, we have drawn the following conclusions. The academic field of ecological entrepreneurship is only just developing. By combining the literature on ecological entrepreneurship with the empirical research on business models, we explore the mechanisms of value creation by green businesses, and make several contributions to the literature. First, we studied entrepreneurial practices in a specific and little explored form of ecopreneurship – in the recycling. Second, building on Jolink and Niestens’ (2015) schematic representation of replacing consumer disvalue by consumer value, we developed scheme of process of transformation of consumer value by the recycling companies. Thus, this study contributes to the conceptualization of the theory of ecological entrepreneurship.

Introduction Due to fierce competition in the marketplace, globalization and an explosion of technology in recent years, innovation and differentiation are considered as a necessity for every company (Tajeddini & Trueman, 2008a). At the same time, to achieve market success and sustain a competitive advantage, businesses need to exploit new opportunities, develop new products and/or services and markets (Berthon, McHulbert, & Pitt, 2004) as well as place customer orientation at the heart of the firm’s competitiveness (Deshpande, Farley, & Webster, 1993). Hospitality entrepreneurship is a pivotal factor in the development and growth of many national economies (Hospitality Standards Institute, 2012), and in Taiwan, a significant proportion of hospitality businesses are small owner-operated outlets (). Therefore, understanding the nature of, and challenges faced by hospitality entrepreneurs is an important issue for researchers, as well as current and future entrepreneurs, financial institutions, local authorities, and government. This article reports on an exploratory study of qualitative data collected through open-ended questions, understanding of the many factors influencing entrepreneurs to start their businesses. Literature As noted by Middleton (2001), small businesses form a seedbed for the entrepreneurial and enterprise culture on which much of the profit and employment prospects of big businesses ultimately depend. This observation clearly indicates the difference between small business owners and entrepreneurs. But although support for this viewpoint in the literature is universal, some researchers do not draw such a fine line between the two terms when discussing related issues; also, studies of small business firms are usually found in the entrepreneurship literature, where sometimes the two terms are used interchangeably. The existing entrepreneurship literature shows that several critical factors influence the birth and growth of start-up firms. These factors include both macro-level environmental and micro-level, or personal level, forces. Studies focusing on the former often examine the influence of politics, culture, society, economics, competition, and demographics on a person’s decision to start or grow a new business in a specific setting; this in turn can take place at different levels, such as the company, city, region, or nation (Jogartnam, 2002; Ramos-Rodriguez et al., 2012). Studies on the latter investigate the influence of personal characteristics, such as subculture, social factors (e.g., role, status, reference group), personal factors (e.g., age, gender, education, life cycle, personality, self-perception, lifestyles, values), and psychological factors (e.g., motives, beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, learning, risk-taking propensity, etc. (Littunen, 2000; Ramos-Rodriguez et al., 2012). This study adopted Chen and Elston’s (2013) entrepreneurial activity model for classifying and modeling these factors affecting firm start-ups and growth. Fig. 1 captures this process and highlights the critical factors influencing the entrepreneurial process and their various relationships. In this model, the macro-environment mix influences not only a person’s personal characteristics but also this person’s entrepreneurial process. These personal characteristics in turn also influence the entrepreneurial process. The research methodology was conducted with qualitative research method. Firstly, we interviewed the experts with regard to this industry, and then used content analysis for the interview records. After the in-depth interviews, a grounded theory was adopted to analyze the interview data with repeated coding and reading, and then innovative entrepreneurship were coded into fundamental categories with diverse descriptions (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). These descriptions represent the idea and meaning squeeze from the transcripts of interview. As for the research reliability, we read the biographies of participants and collect relative information such as their provided books, documents and reports from the news. To guarantee the validity of this study, we also improve the research content with researchers’ interview and reflection notes. Those notes were observation on innovative entrepreneurship process in this study. Therefore, these systematic methods could conclude a theory for a specific phenomenon (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). Results The results of our qualitative analysis demonstrated the opinions of experts with regard to innovative entrepreneurship in hotel industry. Based on Chen and Elston’s (2013) entrepreneurial activity model, the characteristics of each concept were grounded with four dimensions: (1) Macro-environment mix (2) Personal characteristics (3) Entrepreneurial Proces (4) Major entrepreneurial outcome. The experts’ critical viewpoints are also presented by typical quotations. (1) Macro-environment mix ● Shifting Market “Now the entire consumer market is shifting, everyone booking via the internet.”(sample 1) “When you book a hotel or a flight, people like the price competition. So you may have to spend a lot of time.” (sample 9) ● The old technology “We are still using the technology more than a decade ago. Taiwan is still running the hotel in a very traditional way. It is when I open a hotel , I am looking for some people, and then ... I think I will make money. In fact, a lot of know how they do not know.”(sample 1) ● Price competition “We think the outbound market has entered the Red Sea. The inbound market has not been fully developed and has potential for development. Therefore, we would not like to see the inbound market enter the price competition.” (sample 6) ● Want Taiwan to be seen “Taiwan's B & B are really world-class highlights in tourism industry.”(DEAR BNB) ● Make up the industrial gap “We think Taiwan needs a brand new high-quality hotel and lodging platform and we did it.” (sample 3) “I think what we do is very traditional! Just fill the gap by using the resources we have integrated with the method we want.” (sample 4) (2) Personal characteristics ● Personal interest “I like traveling, I like going abroad, I like to fly.”(sample 8) “This is my hobby, I also like to interact with people.” (sample 4) ● Doing what I want to do “I just want to do what I want to do.”(sample 8) “I like the Internet and marketing but don’t like to do engineer. “(sample 7) ● Apply own expertise “Using my own technology and see the market demand gap, hoping to help Taiwan's lodging industry can be transformed, technology upgrades, do not have to monopolize by the traditional manufacturers.” (sample 1) “I study hospitality and work for a year in Taipei Evergreen Hotel, and later went to Vancouver to study hotel management. To start a new venture also an ultimate goal of our depasample 6ent, so I think it must be done.” (sample 2) ● Personal life experience “I think creation needs inspiration, inspiration comes from life experience. Entrepreneurship will not have nothing, what you have to do today, it must have some relationship with your past life experience.” (sample 3) (3) Entrepreneurial Process ● Self-finaning “I did not find someone or looking for funds.” (sample 4) “I have a deposit of 20 years, our funds are wholly-owned. We do not borrow money from banks nor fundraising or venture capital.” (sample 5) ● Related connections “Originally, my good friend who knew about the lodging industry. You are ready, and then meet the right people, and then a good time point enter into the right market.” (sample 1) “When talent comes in, they will recommend people who have such abilities and values. Therefore, we have not publicly recruited R & D people.” (sample 4) ● Try and error “In the beginning, we don’t seriously think about our business model. Through more case, we revise our business model.”(sample 6) “After my trip, I wanted to start a business. At that time, I did not have many ideas, so I did a lot of work to find directions.” (sample 7) ● Find the right shareholder “Shareholders are important. When finding shareholders, his resources and skills are very important. I want more than his money.” (sample 2) ● Play a consultant role “We are selling our ideas, as well as selling our resources, experience so a bit like a consultant's role.” (sample 7) (4) Major entrepreneurial outcome ● Change the industry ecology “We have successfully changed some of the airline's mind, we have changed the hotel's promotional model and have changed an ecological.”(sample 8) ” The core of entrepreneurship is to "re-establish an ecosystem".(sample 5) ● Tourism industry knowledge education and personnel training of think tanks “We want to make domain knowledge, know-how in tourism industry can be extracted, shared, and can be taught textbook.” (smaple 6) ● Package Form a network and provide a unique package “In addition to the network, we hope to the forming some unique service package.” (sample 5) “Our three companies are different areas and require different skills. In the future, we would integrate them.” (sample 7) Discussion and conclusions This study examined the innovative entrepreneurship with start up in the hotel industry. Using content analysis method to access the research conclusions, the four key components of entrepreneurial activity: Macro-environment mix, personal characteristics, entrepreneurial process and major entrepreneurial outcome (Chen and Elston, 2013) were adopted to set up a theoretical framework. The results of our research were provided through a systematic approach to interpret and summarize experts’ professional opinions. These data were collected by in-depth and semi-structured interviews which give participants opportunities to express their opinions based on their experience in innovative entrepreneurship of hospitality. Meanwhile, the concepts of experts’ comprehensions were written into different characteristics with logical explanations. Most important of all, our research contributes to the entrepreneurship literature. Though some previous studies have discussed Chen and Elston’s (2013) entrepreneurial activity model, none of them tried to integrate this perspective with start up company in hotel industry. Therefore, the results of this study filled the gap between theory and practice, and provide a distinct example for future innovative entrepreneurship research in hospitality. To sum up, as most previous research focus on theoretical or practical perspective to interpret entrepreneurship, the result of this research further contribute the development of innovative entrepreneurship especially in start up. These findings offered essential framework and required knowledge of strategies for current and future trends in this field.

본 연구의 기본적 목적은 중소기업의 중간관리자들에 의해 지각된 조직내 기업가정신이 그들의 혁신적 업무행동에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 수 있는지를 살펴보는 것이다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 먼저 조직내 기업가정신에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 내부 조직적 요인들, 즉 조직문화를 포함하여 경영층지원, 직무자율성, 보상 및 강화, 시간적 여유, 구조적 지원 등과 같은 조직과정들을 파악하고 이를 토대로 개념적 모형과 가설을 개발했다. 실증적 연구는 중소기업진흥공단에 있는 중소

Purpose - Research on the ability of domestic public institutions to conduct business is being conducted. Research on government support policy for public technology projects, emphasizes technology creation. Public agencies are encouraging evolutionary barriers at the stage of realistic business. This paper presents the policy possibilities by presenting policies and strategies based on corporate public policy. Research design, data, and methodology – In this study, we surveyed the actual state of public technology commercialization based on the data on state of technology commercialization of public institutions. We collected and analyzed the literature data to enhance the competitiveness of technology commercialization by identifying success cases of public technology commercialization. In Korea, there are not many research papers that provide policy alternatives for technical commercialization of public research institutes. Therefore, in this paper, we review various government policies and check the status of technology commercialization to increase its value. Results – As a result of this study, it is suggested that various policy development is necessary for the commercialization of public technology, because it is important to increase the value of technology users, suppliers, investors and customers through various network activation. In particular, it is necessary to establish differentiated Korean public technology commercialization model for the proliferation of public technology commercialization by presenting methodical model of technical commercialization. Conclusions - Through this study, it is important to raise the competitiveness of domestic public technology commercialization, to create economic value, and to improve the performance of technology commercialization. Therefore, it is necessary to contribute to the creation of research achievement, research method of excellent technology, and method of commercializing technology, and to create achievement of technical commercialization in the future. In addition, from the viewpoint of commercialization of technology, strategies for creating value through utilization of public technology should be prepared, and a plan for mutual prosperity among domestic companies should be prepared. Policy alternatives of various public technology commercialization to build national competitiveness have been developed, and various examples of performance for the performance of public technology commercialization should be derived.