HSG CRIS
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/handle/20.500.14171/1
Browse
Search Results
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Research Project, - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Tabubruch ohne Tabu(2026-08-10)Als Außenseiter kam dem verrückten Genie in der liberalen Demokratie eine wichtige Rolle zu. Doch im silicon Valley und im oval office sitzt es nun an den schalthebeln der Macht – und wird so zur Gefahr. Wie konnte es dazu kommen?Type:newspaper articleJournal:Frankfurter Allgemeine ZeitungVolume:183 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Beyond Rights and Rationality in Cooperative Governance: A Critique and Agenda(2026-07-31); Type:conference paper - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Carbon leakage from land-based climate change mitigation measures(2026); - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Industrial Policies, Global Imbalances, and Technological Hegemony(2026-07-07)Type:conference paper - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, «Langfristig entsteht ein integriertes Business-Reporting»(Handelszeitung, 2026-09-10)Prof. Dr. Peter LeibfriedType:journal articleJournal:Handelszeitung Zürich - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, When “made in Europe” is more important than money: Investigating the role of community benefit schemes on community acceptance of wind energy in Switzerland(2026-09-09)This study investigates factors shaping community acceptance of wind energy projects on a local level in Switzerland, a country that remains far behind most European states in terms of wind energy deployment. Even though distributive justice mechanisms are often seen as important drivers of social acceptance, empirical research findings remain mixed. In addition, most papers rely on national samples, not capturing the specificities needed to understand the local level. To address this gap, a representative local survey (N=322) in Eastern Switzerland was conducted using a discrete choice experiment to assess how different wind project characteristics, including community benefit schemes, influence acceptance of a hypothetical wind park on the outskirts of the city of St.Gallen. In addition to widely used attributes in social acceptance literature (i.e., number of wind turbines, ownership structure), newly examined attributes were also included (i.e., origin of wind turbine manufacturer, material of turbine tower). Results indicate high general acceptance for the hypothetical wind project, with 75.4% voting (rather) in favour. CBC analysis shows that the origin of the wind turbine manufacturer is the most important attribute: turbines from a Danish manufacturer made the project significantly more popular than wind turbines from a U.S. or Chinese manufacturer. Tower material ranks second, with steel and wood towers perceived favourably and concrete unfavourably. Locally diversified ownership structures ranked third. The wind resource tax, as the operationalized community benefit scheme enhance acceptance levels, although its importance remains comparatively small. These findings suggest that community benefit schemes can strengthen community acceptance of future wind energy projects, but do not need to be seen as the only elixir to shape community acceptance. Policymakers should consider recommending guidelines for wind parks “made in Europe”, but also that visually and environmentally appealing materials for the wind turbine tower should not be neglected.Type:conference contribution - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Albatross, Colibri or Eagle? How National Differences in Policy Implementation Shape the Potential of Renewable Energy Communities(2026-09-08)Overview Renewable energy communities (RECs) enable to share renewable energy directly among a group of consumers, producers, prosumers, and storage systems. Despite the framework set by the Renewable Energy Directive REDII (Directive (EU) 2018/2001, 2018) and the Electricity Market Directive EMD (Directive (EU) 2019/944, 2024), European states differ considerably in how they adopt and implement RECs. We need to understand those differences and their origins so that scholars and policymakers can draw lessons from cross-country comparisons. Researchers have identified diverse REC concepts (Dudka et al., 2023) and the varying development across Europe (Inês et al., 2020; Neij et al., 2025). Yet, the mechanisms driving country-specific implementation choices remain insufficiently understood. This paper asks: Why do national legislation and political perspectives on RECs differ between countries operating under similar regulatory frameworks? Using a qualitative inductive approach, we analyse documents of the legislative process involving stakeholders and interest groups in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. These countries share a comparable economic and regulatory context, with Switzerland also being subjected and influenced by EU-level policy and markets. Still, the countries diverge in their progress of REC implementation. At one end of the spectrum, we find Austrian legislators advocating RECs, stimulating participatory projects, and thus advancing social acceptance. At the other end, German legislation emphasises potential pain points due to RECs’ complexity and potential for litigation. We conclude between-country differences to be rooted in a country-specific mix of justification applied by stakeholders and the interested public. Our work thus advances the understanding of how diverse REC policies and perceptions are shaped and how they influence the potential of RECs.Type:conference poster - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, How to Achieve Digital SovereigntyCIOs consistently report that software vendors are dramatically increasing license costs while reducing negotiation flexibility. Increased prices result from the erosion of digital sovereignty, limiting an organization’s ability to control its digital infrastructures. Our research reveals how vendors leverage the “triple bind” (lock-in, bundling and scaling) to create insurmountable dependencies, which will likely intensify further in the AI era. This leaves enterprises with little room to negotiate or exit. Though there is no silver bullet, we recommend four strategies that CIOs can adopt to regain control.Type:case studyJournal:MIS Quarterly ExecutiveVolume:25Issue:3