Search results

The aim of this research was to investigate fans’ responses toward a sponsor that has had a long-standing sponsorship deal with a club and decided also to sponsor the club’s rival.

A long-term sponsorship deal between a retsina wine company and a popular football club and a newly established deal between the company and the main rival club were selected as the research setting. Data were collected from a total sample of 302 participants, fans of the two teams, using an online survey and PLS-SEM was employed to test the relationships of the proposed structural model.

The results provided evidence for the importance of the inclusion of perceptions of fit for both teams to the model as it impacted the responses in the joint sponsorship. Team identification emerged significant for improving fans perceptions of fit between the sponsor and their favorite club but also led fans of the long-term sponsored club to feel betrayed from the sponsor. The sense of betrayal impacted the level of fit, the rejection of sponsorship but did not emerge significant for driving negative responses toward the sponsor’s brand. The same held for the rejection of the joint sponsorship.

This is the very first study that incorporated the effects of the perceptions of fit of two rival clubs to test the effect of sponsorship for a sponsor brand of a deal that includes a longtime sponsored football club and its rival as a newly sponsored one. It is also one of the first attempts that explores relationships between perceptions of fit, sense of betrayal and rejection of a joint sport sponsorship in a rivalry context, highlighting the importance of preventing fans' betrayal.

This study aims to analyze the implications of the recent European Union Regulation 2023/1542 on the circular economy and stakeholder strategies within the electric vehicle lithium-ion battery (EV-LIB) sector. It aims to explain the policy intentions, recommend practical strategies for stakeholders and examine how the new regulation exerts pressure on stakeholders to transition from older directives to more sustainable practices and operational standards, while also highlighting policy gaps.

The research employs a dual-method approach, combining text analysis of EU legislation with semi-structured interviews of industry stakeholders. This methodology allows for a comprehensive understanding of the regulatory impacts by integrating legislative intent with practical, on-the-ground insights from key players in the EV-LIB sector.

Our findings show that the three aggregated dimensions of operational sustainability, R&D and new technologies and collaborative dynamics are the key dynamics underlying the intended outcomes. The findings also highlight the policy’s historical development, the stakeholder categories, the implications for each and practical recommendations in responding to the policy requirements. Additionally, the findings identify policy gaps, such as weak incentives and broad economic operator classifications, with examples from international markets. The regulation creates proactive stakeholders driving innovation and collaboration and reactive ones adapting to changes, where static implicit implications may affect their viability by imposing unequal burdens.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to analyze the new EU Regulation 2023/1542, offering novel insights into the strategic responses required by stakeholders to adapt to the regulatory pressures. By focusing on the latest regulatory framework and its practical implications, the study bridges the gap between policy and practice, providing valuable guidance for industry players navigating the evolving regulatory environment.

• (1)

  EU’s policy shift from Directive to Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 has extended implications on the Electric Vehicles battery sector.

• (2)

  Duel qualitative methods of text analysis and semi-structured interviews validated three aggregate dimensions and policy gaps.

• (3)

  R&D with advancing technology, Operational sustainability and safety and Collaboration dynamics are dominating the scene.

• (4)

  Emergence of Proactive vs Reactive stakeholder dynamics.

• (5)

  The broad classification of “economic operators” and insufficiently detailed incentives, hinting at potential competitive imbalances and underexplored roles of end-users in achieving circular economy goals are appearing policy’ gaps.

EU’s policy shift from Directive to Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 has extended implications on the Electric Vehicles battery sector.

Duel qualitative methods of text analysis and semi-structured interviews validated three aggregate dimensions and policy gaps.

R&D with advancing technology, Operational sustainability and safety and Collaboration dynamics are dominating the scene.

Emergence of Proactive vs Reactive stakeholder dynamics.

The broad classification of “economic operators” and insufficiently detailed incentives, hinting at potential competitive imbalances and underexplored roles of end-users in achieving circular economy goals are appearing policy’ gaps.

The present study aims to inform the requirements for developing a sustainable rating tool for small-scale infrastructure projects (SSIPs) through research findings.

A review-based comparative study of existing infrastructure sustainability (IS) rating tools for assessment of SSIPs is presented. Key stakeholder participants of the existing IS rating tools, are interviewed to identify existing barriers and requirements for sustainability rating. The study further presents possible rating tool options to optimise the sustainable performance evaluation of SSIPs.

Findings of this study indicated that prevalent IS rating tools are majorly applied to large-scale infrastructure projects and sustainability of SSIPs are seldom assessed. Based on a literature review and series of interviews, it was found that user friendliness, efficient structure, training and technical support, cost effectiveness and stakeholder recognition are the five key requirements of a sustainability rating tool for SSIPs. Additionally, six sustainability assessment options were proposed for SSIPs which range from pathways for existing tools through to new, customisable tools. Upon comparison, a new modified tool with verification process and revised tool with defined grouping of sustainable criteria was more effective for evaluation of SSIPs.

Use of case specific information for validation and framework development may lack generalisation. However, methodology can be used for future decision-making by making necessary adjustments to suit different local regional requirements.

Despite lack of generalisation, the findings can lead to future general studies on sustainability of SSIPs. Findings of the study provide foundation knowledge and awareness for sustainability evaluation of SSIPs.