Sustainable business model strategy for resilience among pisciculture firms in Thailand

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the pisciculture sector of start-ups in Thailand to determine factors of the novelty farming resilience model that promote the adoption of a sustainable business model strategy through innovation approach to improve the sector. Employing a qualitative research method, primary data were collected from 109 respondents, including start-ups, customers, regulators, and experts. Furthermore, secondary data were gathered from relevant sources. Through thematic and direct content analysis, this study identified the novelty of business model strategy that has been applied effectively to a relationship between start-ups’ awareness and their adoption of incremental innovations. This reveals that start-ups are most likely to adopt technology if they understand its contribution to farming. Moreover, they are likely to cooperate with stakeholders promoting said technology if they recognize its influence on farming. We also identified challenges in adopting a sustainable business model in the Thai pisciculture sector. The current study highlights strategies that support new knowledge sharing, help start-ups realize new ways to create innovations, and promote sustainable businesses.

KEYWORDS:

• Sustainability
• resilience
• pisciculture
• entrepreneurship
• innovation

JEL CLASSIFICATIONS:

• Q12
• Q16
• Q22
• Q55
• Q56

1. Introduction

Tilapia, a freshwater fish, is an essential aquatic animal species in Thailand’s economic and domestic consumption sectors and has been widely cultured for over 40 years (Sudaporn et al., 2021). In addition, it is commercially important and popular, with a high economic value (Whangchai et al., 2022). The Department of Fisheries (2020) reported that approximately 544,947 Thai farms were used for freshwater pisciculture nationally, with interest in freshwater fish-cage pisciculture farming increasing by 27.51% in 2020. Furthermore, the total freshwater fish-cage aquatic animal production quantity, reported at 52,335 tons, increased by 63.66% in 2020, and its production value, reported at 97,698 USD per year (exchange rate = 33.66 THB per 1 USD), increased by 50.09% in the same period (Whangchai et al., 2022). The growth in Thailand’s pisciculture sector has been accompanied by tangible socioeconomic developments, especially among small-scale freshwater pisciculture farmers and fish-cage pisciculture start-ups (FCPSs), and has played a crucial role in providing the rural poor with high-quality protein for consumption. Currently, tilapia farming FCPSs in Thailand face issues pertaining to inefficient farming management related to labour, fish food waste, water management, fish size, and related costs. In addition, FCPSs still lack capital and experience. Their knowledge of precise production technologies remains scant, while means of establishing a sustainable business and management model in this sector remain unclear.

Hence, there is a need to improve the management of pisciculture businesses to ensure steady production, higher productivity, and better livelihoods for FCPSs in Thailand. To achieve these goals, it is crucial to develop FCPSs’ pisciculture business management competencies, despite their limited resources. This study aims to understand how technology and concepts of sustainability can promote an incremental innovative process and environmentally sound business model for pisciculture in Thailand. We reviewed relevant literature on the current trends in pisciculture from global and Thai perspectives, as well as recent research and relevant theoretical approaches, as illustrated in the literature review. Relevant theoretical approaches were used to develop the study design to address the following research questions: (1) What are the factors promoting FCPSs’ technology awareness and their adoption of a sustainable business model? (2) What are the challenges in adopting the sustainability-oriented innovation (SOI) model and sustainable business model innovation (SBMI) in the fish-cage pisciculture industry in Thailand?

2. Literature review

This section reviews extant literature, including the resource-based view (RBV) and knowledge-based view (KBV) of strategic management. Furthermore, it also describes SOI and SBMI approaches to adopting an innovation type and model.

2.1. Resource- and knowledge-based views for sustainability

The resource-based view (RBV) is a theoretical framework that focuses on the internal resources and capabilities of an organization. It suggests that organizations can achieve sustainable advantage by leveraging unique and valuable resources that are difficult to imitate or substitute (Behrendt et al., 2023). In addition, the resources must provide certain benefits to enable a firm to sustain its competitive advantage (Barney et al., 2001). Maiti et al. (2020) indicated that numerous organizations, especially small firms, can derive benefits and gain a competitive edge through the effective implementation of a robust RBV strategy. Consequently, many organizations are making efforts to develop resource-based models tailored for enhancing their performance. Thus, the RBV theory aims to understand how firms develop strategic resources and the quality of resources invested in the value creation process (Reed et al., 2006). The analysis of start-up firms reveals some strategic resources and capabilities that may generate competitive advantages (Hadjimanolis, 2000). Further, the concept of the RBV suggests that the unique characteristics of a firm’s intangible resources (especially knowledge) should determine the research’s focus. Knowledge resources are particularly important to ensure sustainable competitive advantages because these resources are difficult to imitate and constitute the foundation for sustainable differentiation (Wiklund & Shepherd, 2003). The results are consistent with the resource-based view that a firm's unique resources contribute to the accumulation of intangible assets that can ultimately improve its performance. According to the resource-based perspective, in which a firm's particular resources contribute to the accumulation of intangible assets, which ultimately improves its performance, intangible investment is assisted by both internal and external resources (Chung, 2022).

The knowledge-based view (KBV) is the theoretical perspective which emphasizes the role of knowledge and knowledge-based resources in creating and sustaining competitive advantage (Pereira & Bamel, 2021). According to An et al. (2022), the organization with a knowledge base that aligns with their business model design are more likely to experience growth. Furthermore, the KBV theory considers knowledge as the most important strategic resource. Knowledge, according to the KBV theory, is a crucial strategic resource that enhances competitive success by improving individuals’ competence levels through the acquisition of new knowledge from the present body of knowledge is regularly used at work and has evolved into a competence (Pemberton & Stonehouse, 2000).

Consequently, this perspective is an extension of the RBV of a firm. Understanding knowledge as a resource establishes a link between RBV and KBV (Curado & Bontis, 2006). Thus, a firm’s specific knowledge, as well as its ability to create and transfer knowledge, are key strategic assets that may be positively associated with higher levels of performance because they are difficult to trade, imitate, or appropriate, and are scarce and specialized (Teece, 2010). The resources’ perspective is analysed to provide an example of the use of the RBV and KBV in business model innovation to achieve sustainability. The definition of a model for sustainable business innovation includes resources, a competitive advantage, and value creation. The natural theoretical context for these definitions is to follow the theoretical approaches of the RBV and KBV, that a firm needs resources to create value for itself and its clients. This study adopts this concept to analyse resources for the pisciculture sector.

2.2. Sustainability-oriented innovation

Sustainability- oriented innovation practices are an established strategy for improving the efficiency of products, services, and business processes. If an organization emphasizes sustainability practices, it can enhance efficiency in both economic and non-financial dimensions (Maletič et al., 2016).

The model for SOI proposed by Adams et al. (2016) identified three approaches: innovation activities of operational optimization, organizational transformation, and systems building (Figure 1). However, operational optimization is only one of many approaches that focuses on incremental innovation and adapts to small and medium enterprises (SMEs), while other approaches concentrate on radical innovation for finding new market opportunities through organizational transformation and a changing society by building firm systems (Narayanan & Adams, 2017) such as financial institutions, which are emphasizing this by transforming market knowledge and information through the use of digital technologies. to develop a blueprint for a digital transformation strategy (Tsou & Chen, 2023)

Figure 1. Final sustainability-oriented innovation (SOI) model.

This study focuses on the scope of operational optimization based on an incremental innovation process that fits the research objective of sharing knowledge among pisciculture start-ups in Thailand, which promotes the adoption of a sustainable business model. However, the options available for incremental innovation for sustainability seem limited at present.

Adams et al. (2016) indicated that the strategy of an operational optimization approach that adopts sustainable social and environmental policies that are competitively advantageous to SMEs has been challenged. Strategically, the focus of innovation in operational optimization lies in a firm’s boundaries – the targets for change are internal. The principal drivers include responding to regulatory requirements and pursuing efficiency gains. For instance, Friedman and Ormiston (2022) suggested that firms in the food business might use block-chain technology to lower transaction costs in their operations and offer transparency and accountability, especially in supply chains. The block-chain itself serves as a tool for sustainability as well as a more comprehensive conceptual framework for tackling sustainability issues in the food sector. Furthermore, Martin-Rios et al. (2021) investigated the benefits of technological innovation which provided by third-party firm to the hospitality, restaurant, and catering industry (HORECA). As a result, artificial intelligence (AI) shown to be one technology that can help HORECA in term of strategic and cost-effective ways for managing food waste. SOI becomes more proactive when reactive innovation becomes uneconomic, such as when add-on solutions incur costs greater than those of process redesigning. The sustainability outcome is a reduction in harm per unit of production, which is achieved by using existing innovation processes without compromising existing business models. Such processes focus on incremental improvements. Additionally, they are oriented toward a single issue and are related to ‘technical fixes’ to reduce the impact, maintain business operations (by reducing the intensity of resource use), and enhance waste management, pollution control, and recycling. The application of tools which are several examples and these are four examples shown based on our last studies reviewed; for instance, firstly, the Flourishing Business Canvas (FBC) evolved from the Business Model Canvas (BMC) to construct a sustainable business model, which consists of sixteen sections including economic, social, and environmental concerns (Upward & Jones, 2016); however, its use as a method for researching sustainable business models is still limited (Amaliah et al., 2019; Upward & Jones, 2016). Secondly, the Value Mapping Tool (VMT) was created with the purpose of assisting firms and their broader networks of stakeholders in the formulation of value propositions as a crucial element of sustainable business models (Bocken et al., 2013). The utilization of VMT as a means to enhance sustainability in organizations has the potential to enhance overall performance. However, it is important to point out that the various aspects of the parameters being assessed and tracked can pose limitations across many industries, with data accessibility and storage being the crux of these challenges (Wen et al., 2021). Thirdly, the Business Innovation Kit (BIK) and sustainability innovation pack (SIP) occur significant emphasis on the significance of values in the domains of normative, strategic, and practical innovation. The leadership team of these entities focuses mainly on values and the advancement of sustainability in its applications in practice. VMT is a viable option for entrepreneurs, start-ups, and specialized project teams inside business organizations. Individuals that possess a particular inclination towards engaging in entrepreneurial activities within the realm of innovation (Breuer et al., 2018; Breuer & Lüdeke-Freund, 2018). Lastly, the TLBMC, also known as the Triple-Layered Business Model Canvas, serves as a framework for the development of business models that concentrate on sustainability. The development process involved close collaboration with a diverse group of specialists, practitioners, and researchers. The tool's framework incorporates economic, environmental, and social considerations, so providing a comprehensive and integrated view (Joyce & Paquin, 2016) and have different purposes, complexity, and ease of use – allows users to evaluate sustainable materials and design alternatives and relate them to financial incentives, environmental regulations, or client demands. Additionally, its learning system is uniquely complex to integrate diverse knowledge related to economic, social, and environmental considerations. This makes SOI an information and learning challenge, making new knowledge and knowledge management essential. The necessary links in the context of operational optimization are those that connect line workers and managers with the necessary knowledge to affect appropriate changes to comply with legislations and regulations. Typically, such knowledge does not exist within a firm, especially in the context of sustainability tools. Thus, external knowledge experts may be required to help navigate and implement these changes. The operational optimization approach to innovation in organizations can be implemented by mobilizing existing innovation capabilities. Any already-developed innovation capability can be an important antecedent of SOI capability (Adams et al., 2016; Dey et al., 2020). Nevertheless, although several companies have embraced the practices of environmental management in the context of operational optimization, few have seriously engaged in the wider implications of sustainability thinking. Moving beyond operational optimization requires a more radical approach that renders innovations more complex and ambiguous. Thus, Adams et al. (2016) proposed two additional approaches to operational optimization under the SOI model to develop SBMI, consisting of organizational transformation and systems building (Figure 1).

Based on the second approach of the SOI model, innovation activity for organizational transformation represents a fundamental shift in mindset and purpose, from ‘doing less harm’ to creating shared value and delivering wider benefits to society. The strategy of the organizational transformation approach focuses on creating embedded sustainability as a cultural and strategic norm. The strategic shift towards ‘doing good’ offers opportunities for innovation in business concepts and practices, constituting a shaping logic that goes beyond an internal, operational focus on ‘greening’ to a more external and strategic focus on sustainable development.

The innovation process based on this approach can be enhanced for SOI through the adoption of new platforms and new knowledge sources to stimulate more radical innovations; thus, firms are drawing inspiration from a range of new sources. Innovation practice in bottom-of-the-pyramid markets has seen the emergence of new innovation platforms, such as reverse, jugaad, and resource constrained innovations. Reverse innovation describes a trickle-up effect, where innovations are established and first used in developing countries and then applied in developed countries (Govindarajan, 2012). Resource-constrained innovation occurs where resource inputs are minimized with the purpose of reducing the end product’s cost without loss of quality (Zeschky et al., 2011). Similar to this is jugaad innovation, from the Hindi word that translates roughly as ‘an innovation fix’, referring to harnessing ingenuity to locate opportunities and improvise simple solutions. Organizational transformers as innovators, in their approach to innovation learning, recognize the importance of leadership and the external knowledge that resides in value chains. SOI driven by regulation may not result in added value, but interactions with both suppliers and customers (i.e. key stakeholders) can contribute to successful SOI (Ayuso et al., 2011). Incorporating customers’ input in the process, such as through sales force proximity, market research, extensive charting, and in-depth analysis of customer needs (Milliman et al., 2012) provides another mechanism for identifying where the value added from environmental innovation can be found. Additionally, as explained in the literature, the emphasis of the approach is on how firms develop and exploit external links in pursuit of sustainability objectives. These links include developing networks into wider value chains and stakeholder networks and, in particular, supply chains, to develop long-term collaborative approaches with external partners. Whereas technological innovations reduce or eliminate impacts at a product level, in the long-term, a collaborative approach is necessary to develop the whole supply chain. Hence, an innovative organizational approach that encompasses internal and external communications of values and goals of sustainability based on SOI helps to embed an SOI culture that reaches beyond operational and eco-efficiencies into the organization (Adams et al., 2016; Huang & Wu, 2010).

Finally, the SOI model suggests systems building as the last approach to develop SBMI. This approach requires another radical shift in philosophy to thinking beyond the firm and reframing the purpose of business in society: ‘doing good by doing new things with others’. The approach’s strategy underpins a logic of wide collaborations and investing in systems solutions to derive new, shared value propositions from the entire socio-technical and ecosystem networks to make a positive impact. Because the ultimate objectives of sustainability lie beyond the individual capacity of firms, the role of systems builders becomes one of initiating, mobilizing, inspiring, and leading change. Business is uniquely placed, more than government or civil society, to lead on this approach. However, the innovation process of the systems builders’ approach remains a gap in the literature. The wide collaborations described above, though rare, involve developing workable relationships between a wide range of private, public, and civil society partners. The sustainability challenges are of such scale that there is no single ‘owner’ of the problem, and there is a need to implement transformations aligned with the requirements of environmentally sustainable development. In this context, diverse collaborations collectively define the problem and search for solutions. Firms work via new platforms with collaborators, which broadens their activities and knowledge base, particularly in relation to identifying weak signals, to deliver innovations and enhance social legitimacy (Adams et al., 2016). In terms of the learning perspectives within the approach, novel collaborations are important for systems builders regarding the opportunities for new knowledge acquisition they present and the creative and responsive solutions they stimulate. Shared value, in which the causes of eco- and social systems are advanced as equivalents to economic returns, are being addressed through these novel collaborations. These opportunities may fail to be realized if firms lack the internal knowledge management processes to convert these into innovation (Ayuso et al., 2011). The collaborators develop a management approach integrating foresight and broader stakeholder collaboration while simultaneously maintaining existing business models, to be a helpful guide to understanding how firms successfully experiment with and learn from multiple new approaches within a wider societal system pursuing radical innovation, thus leading to increased sustainability. Based on links of systems building, the approach places firms in an industrial ecology characterized by mutually affecting interactions between multiple stakeholders embedded in networks, community, collaborations, and partnerships. Industrial ecology calls for a radical shift from firms existing in isolation and competition to integrated collaborations and new frameworks for working together, with the potential to bring game-changing systemic innovation to sustainability challenges (Adams et al., 2016).

2.3. Sustainable business model innovation

SBMI refers to environmental and social aspects, such as corporate social responsibility, business sustainability, sustainable agriculture, food security, safety, and ecosystem services. Firms are increasingly considering these aspects in their business models, displaying a strong interconnection amongst stakeholder interests (Bashir et al., 2022; Lüdeke-Freund et al., 2018).

At present, knowledge regarding SBMI and the scope for innovation for sustainability remain insufficient as referred to last relevant studies. Previous relevant studies have shown that there is still a knowledge gap in Sustainable Business Model Innovation (SBMI), especially when it comes to the application and practical use of the model in organizational activities as well as the design-implementation (Minatogawa et al., 2022; Zurkinden, 2022). Nevertheless, there is a favourable development in SBMI studies, although more cooperation is required to investigate internal factors and design SBMI (Pan et al., 2023). However, SBMI leads to greater complexity related to the preliminary assessment of the impact of sustainability innovation and its effect on an overall business network (Evans et al., 2017). Thus, it seems logical that the aspect of solving environmental problems should be included in a business model and, in particular, should be the object of SBMI (Bashir et al., 2022).

In addition, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (United Nations, 2020) aims to improve the direction of pisciculture regarding food security and natural resource usage that secures sustainable development. Thus, implementing pisciculture production with business model innovation is one of the key aspects of achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Brugère et al., 2019; United Nations, 2020).

3. Data and methodology

This study employed a qualitative analysis, specifically a case study (Yin, 2017), the RBV theory (Barney et al., 2001; Reed et al., 2006), KBV theory (Wiklund & Shepherd, 2003), and SBMI approach (Evans et al., 2017; Lüdeke-Freund et al., 2018). It employed a descriptive qualitative approach to examine narrative materials obtained from the life stories of key respondents. Consequently, a pilot (or sandbox) project was implemented, under which an innovative feeding machine system was provided to ten FCPSs to test its usability and market potential. The Traditional Business Model (TBM) and SBMI performances of these 10 FCPSs were compared. In addition, information was obtained from interviews with an additional 51 FCPSs that were interested in transforming their business models by applying the innovative feeding machine system; further information was collected from 48 relevant stakeholders related to development and the application of the innovative feeding machine system. Informed consent was obtained from all respondents who were considered to represent relevant samples to explore the notion of sustainability based on their experiences. The study was conducted from May to December 2022.

3.1. Data collection and sampling

Data were collected through several primary and secondary sources, including semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions. Purposive sampling and snowball techniques were used to select respondents with specific knowledge of practices.

Data based on the sample selection were used to develop our research framework and instrument for collecting primary data. Primary data were collected from 109 respondents’ interviews, including from the pilot project, which consisted of ten FCPSs implementing the innovative feeding machine system. The FCPSs were the first batch of participants to test the usability and market potential of this system, and the performances of the TBM and SBMI were subsequently compared. Additionally, information was also obtained from focus group discussions amongst the additional 51 FCPSs that were interested in improving their TBMs by applying the innovative feeding machine system. We also obtained information from relevant stakeholders, including 40 customers, four industrial regulators, two technological experts, and two business experts who were related to developing and implementing the innovative feeding machine system.

FCPSs’ data were collected from the Provincial Fisheries Offices located in the central region of Thailand, including the Kanchanaburi, Ayutthaya, Nakhon Pathom, and Ratchaburi provinces. Following this, the snowball sampling technique was applied because the Provincial Fisheries Offices suggested additional data collection from relevant key respondents who were difficult to locate. In addition, data were gathered for both feasible sustainable business models based on relevant regulations and innovation ideas from regulators and technological and business experts. Details of the sample list are presented in Tables 1–3.

Table 1. Summary of respondents’ characteristics (FCPSs).

Batch	Gender	Central region of Thailand (Province)	Respondents’ role	Number of interviews	Percent of total interviews	Average interview length (Minutes)
1	Male	Kanchanaburi	FCPS	12	11.0%	39
2	Male	Ayutthaya	FCPS	9	8.3%	36
3	Male	Nakhon Pathom	FCPS	8	7.3%	32
4	Male	Ratchaburi	FCPS	8	7.3%	34
5	Female	Kanchanaburi	FCPS	6	5.5%	34
6	Female	Ayutthaya	FCPS	7	6.4%	35
7	Female	Nakhon Pathom	FCPS	5	4.6%	30
8	Female	Ratchaburi	FCPS	6	5.5%	32
	Subtotal	61	55.9%	34
	Grand total	109	100.0%	32

Abbreviation: FCPSs - Fish-cage pisciculture start-ups.

Table 2. Summary of respondents’ characteristics (customers).

Batch	Gender	Central region of Thailand (Province)	Respondents’ role	Number of interviews	Percent of total interviews	Average interview length (Minutes)
9	Male	Kanchanaburi	Customer	5	4.6%	35
10	Male	Ayutthaya	Customer	4	3.7%	30
11	Male	Nakhon Pathom	Customer	5	4.6%	32
12	Male	Ratchaburi	Customer	4	3.7%	30
13	Male	Bangkok	Customer	2	1.8%	32
14	Female	Kanchanaburi	Customer	5	4.6%	34
15	Female	Ayutthaya	Customer	4	3.7%	33
16	Female	Nakhon Pathom	Customer	4	3.7%	30
17	Female	Ratchaburi	Customer	4	3.7%	32
18	Female	Bangkok	Customer	3	2.8%	32
	Subtotal	40	36.9%	32
	Grand total	109	100.0%	32

Abbreviation: FCPSs - Fish-cage pisciculture start-ups.

Table 3. Summary of respondents’ characteristics (regulators).

Batch	Gender	Central region of Thailand (Province)	Respondents’ role	Number of interviews	Percent of total interviews	Average interview length (Minutes)
19	Male	Kanchanaburi	Regulator	1	0.9%	30
20	Female	Ayutthaya	Regulator	1	0.9%	30
21	Male	Nakhon Pathom	Regulator	1	0.9%	30
22	Male	Ratchaburi	Regulator	1	0.9%	30
23	Male	Pathumthani	Technological Expert	2	1.8%	30
24	Male	Bangkok	Business Expert	2	1.8%	30
	Subtotal	8	7.2%	30
	Grand total	109	100.0%	32

Abbreviation: FCPSs - Fish-cage pisciculture start-ups.

3.2. Data analysis

This study utilized thematic content analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2021) in conjunction with direct content analysis (Crowe et al., 2015), as depicted in Figure 2. Thematic and content analyses are qualitative methods that serve different research purposes. Thematic analysis (TP) provides an interpretation of key informants’ meanings, while content analysis (CA) is a direct representation of key informants’ responses. These methods provide two ways of understanding meanings and experiences and provide important knowledge in the context of sustainable business model strategies for resilience among Pisciculture firms in Thailand (Humble & Mozelius, 2022). This comprised three steps. It began with transcribing interviews and color-coding words and sentences according to the primary areas of investigation. Following this, the code was generated by entering and organizing the data on a spreadsheet before methodically categorizing it. After preparing the data set, the data were evaluated using encryption and verification of semantic information. After this, key themes were explored to identify latent themes that uncovered conclusions. Here, thematic content analysis was linked to relevant theories and approaches (RBV, KBV, SOI, and SBMI) because the unit of analysis was an industrial sector level related to the fish-cage pisciculture sector (Campbell et al., 2020). Additionally, data triangulation helped us improve the comprehensiveness of the information and accuracy of the study findings.

Figure 2. Thematic and direct content analysis flow.

3.3. Case selection and inclusion criteria of entrepreneurship

A holistic case study involves the examination of a single case at the industrial sector level as a unit of analysis (Yin, 2017). The fish-cage pisciculture sector – a vital sector of the food and agriculture industry in Thailand – was selected as the unit of analysis in this study. FCPSs and relevant stakeholders located in the central region of Thailand were selected as key respondents. These choices implied the use of a case study because the amount of information obtained from the case was limited and could be processed to consider specific points of interest. Based on the uniqueness of the study context, a case study would be useful to evaluate the current theory in a ‘new’ context. Owing to limited access to other organizations, we only used a particular case to evaluate the current theory from a new perspective. It is essential to establish external validity and rigour while employing the case study methodology using replication logic through multiple analyses. This was affirmed in our case (Bhaskaran, 2004).

4. Results

This case study observed and analysed the existing patterns of behaviour among the respondents. New themes were extracted and created using the data obtained from interviews and observations. Two relevant themes emerged from this analysis: (1) What are the factors promoting FCPSs’ technology awareness and their adoption of a sustainable business model? (2) What are the challenges in adopting the SOI model and SBMI faced by the pisciculture industry of Thailand?

4.1. Theme 1: FCPSs’ technology awareness and their adoption of the sustainable business model

While collecting data from FCPSs’ customers and various other stakeholders in the industry, we realized that when FCPSs are aware of how a simple technology can contribute significantly to the farming processes, for instance by solving key issues, they implement it to develop their farms, moving from TBMs to SBMI. This involves the application of simple technologies to improve the developmental efficiency, productivity, and differentiation of their existing processes with regard to sustainable development to achieve the goal of food security.

Customers’ responses revealed that FCPSs have faced problems related to the quantity, size, and quality of fish owing to fish-cage farming. However, FCPSs with experience and innovative ideas began investigating the root causes of problems, and identified key issues that arise from TBMs that rely on labourers who feed the fish inconsistently and ineffectively. Irregular and excessive fish feeding can lead to many problems. For example, if more feed is given to fish than needed, it can lead to wastewater, which can degrade the health and quality of fish. Feeding fish for an inappropriate amount of time was identified as another problem, which affects their size, quantity, and growth.

Under these circumstances, the major problem lies in calculating the correct amount of fish feed and determining the right time to provide it. Extra amounts of fish feed left in fish cages leads to wastewater and causes pollution. Therefore, the innovative feeding machine system is vital in the context of precisely calculating the amount of fish feed and solves the problems caused by irregular feeding time, an excess or deficit of fish feed, and wastewater occurring from excess feeding. As their customers are aware of issues pertaining to product quality, pricing, and preservation of society and the environment, FCPSs know that preservation of societal and environmental standards plays a major role in driving business. Furthermore, it is because of their founders’ entrepreneurial mindsets that FCPSs are successful in farming fish and implementing their technologies. While an innovator’s mindset is a key factor for FCPSs to acquire new knowledge and strategic resources to address problems, other factors also play a part in improving FCPSs’ technological awareness and business models, including strategic stakeholders. Such stakeholders form a vital part of closed partnership networks that FCPSs have with actors from both the public and private sectors. However, most closed partnership networks develop because of close personal relationships and trust that is built by FCPSs with other stakeholders. Such relationships play a bigger role in forging close networks than systematic collaboration supported and led by the public sector. Hence, they are more invested in forging personal relationships and remain ill-informed about essential technologies that can nurture and strengthen their precision fish-cage pisciculture farms for sustainability. This is because they are implemented by innovators and technologists who are driven by systematic collaboration, which is predominantly led by the public sector.

The results demonstrate that the innovative feeding machine system was designed and initiated by FCPSs. It was ultimately created by professional engineering experts at the Design Engineering Consulting Service Center (the leading technology and innovation development institute in Thailand), Creative Economy Agency (the policymakers and implementors promoting creative economy in Thailand through creative business and product design innovation), and Technology Business Incubation Centers in Thailand. However, the important design thinking in the prototype was the byproduct of innovative ideas from entrepreneurial pisciculture innovators who understood farming and its key issues through their interactions with customers and technical experts. Such interactions were meant to generate valuable information for designing a suitable innovative feeding machine system. The workflow and components are shown in Figures 3 and 4, respectively. Figure 3 depicts the blueprint of the innovative feeding machine system, comprising a hopper, an input device, a control unit with technology for analyst-relevant data, a frame, a feeder screw auger, and sensor technology. The workflow and components of the innovative feeding machine system are explained in Figure 4.

Figure 3. Design of the innovative feeding machine system.

Figure 4. Workflow and components of the innovative feeding machine system.

As shown in Figure 4, first, FCPSs input relevant data, as technical and business experts suggested. These data were entered into the input device system (image on the top left), including weight entered at 800, amount entered at 600, and feed rate entered at 7.55. The input device is designed to calculate and record the fish weight and feed amount throughout the process of farming a batch in a fish-cage.

Second, both sensors and artificial intelligence technologies were developed to analyse the entered data through the control unit, which is used to calculate and control the operation of the feeding machine system.

Third, the control unit analyzes information to directly command and conduct the working system of the feeding machine to ensure that fish are appropriately fed in terms of both feed quantity and timing.

The findings show the feeding machine invention as a sustaining and disruptive innovation implemented in pisciculture farming management. The new feeding machine consists of a simple design that can be used easily and implemented practically in wider pisciculture farming management. The design of the feeder screw can be viewed as the main innovation; however, it is the result of knowledge sharing, as it was adapted from an existing feeder screw used in the shrimp sector and redesigned to be suitable for use in the pisciculture industrial sector. Significantly, the head of the fish feeder screw was designed to make it easy for fish farmers to use, allowing them to maximize effective feeding distribution and increasing fish volumes with consistent weight. Additionally, the design is environmentally friendly based on the minimal viable product (MVP) concept in the first phase of the research project, as it reduces polluted water caused by improper feeding. On the other hand, the innovative feeding machine related to the specifications for monitoring environmental conditions was developed in the initial phase as referred to the MVP concept to solve three pain-points including feeding fish at inappropriate times, restrictions on scattering fish food by people who cannot ensure that food is spread thoroughly to fish raised in cages, and feeding fish without proper feed volume calculation. The pain-points caused to the problem of fish food being given in amounts that exceed the needs resulting in wastewater generation. Thus, the key three specifications of this innovative feeding machine in the context of MVP in initial phase include to help send a signal to alert FPCSs when it's time to feed the fish, to increases efficiency in spreading fish food to fish, covering all areas in the cages evenly, and to increase accuracy in calculating the appropriate amount of fish food in each fish feeding cycle in the cages. However, specifications for monitoring environmental conditions will be additionally developed to the second MVP phase of the innovative feeding machine in order to monitor and report the level of wastewater in FCPSs. Additionally, concerning about the location selection and electricity source usage. As to business model strategy, findings showed that the feeding machine in the first MVP phase was developed to use electricity source as currently key energy source because present limitation caused from unfeasible alternative energy evaluation of trade-off between benefits and energy investment costs. While, FCPSs, as key informants, can currently use electricity source from their residences located near their Pisciculture farms. Furthermore, electricity energy costs were included as a part of the utility costs shown in Table 4. Nevertheless, under the second MVP phase of the innovative feeding machine, it has been planned to develop the feeding machine that can use electricity energy from the solar energy source. This allows the feeding machine in the second phase to be used in areas where normal electrical sources cannot reach it such as raising fish in cages in the sea.

We tested the usability and market performance of the innovative feeding machine system by using it during the pilot project for a period of one year, as shown in Figure 5. Effective and efficient results were found by comparing the performances of the TBM and SBMI, which achieved our target performance indicators, as shown in Tables 4 and 5.

Figure 5. Innovative feeding machine system used during market and usability testing.

Table 4. Average performance obtained from applying the innovative feeding system over six months (total costs and cost element details).

Cost Element	Manual feeding (TBM)	Feed with innovative feeding machine (SBMI)	Calculation details and performances (%):
Increase/Decrease
Feed cost (USD/Year)	3,856.24	3,040.12	[(3,040.12–3,856.24) / 3,856.24]*100 = −21.16%
Labour cost (USD/Year)	475.36	237.68	[(237.68–475.36) / 475.36]*100 = −50.00%
Utility cost (overhead and electricity energy costs included) (USD/Year)	238.04	242.54	[(242.54–238.04) / 238.04]*100 = +1.89%
Maintenance cost (USD/Year)	270.00	265.50	[(265.50–270.00) / 270.00]*100 = −1.67%
Medical treatment and prevention cost of fish diseases (USD/Year)	1,512.20	1,512.20	[(1,512.20–1,512.20) / 1,512.20]*100 = 0.00%
Total Cost	6,351.84	5,298.04	[(5,298.04–6,351.84) / 6,351.84]*100 = −16.59%

* Exchange rate = 33.6596 THB per 1 USD (exchangerates.org.uk, 2022).

Table 5. Average performance obtained from applying the innovative feeding system over six months (total cost, volumes, profit, ROI, ROS).

Item	Manual feeding (TBM)	Feed with innovative feeding machine (SBMI)	Calculation details and performances (%): increase/decrease
Total Cost	6,351.84	5,298.04	[(5,298.04–6,351.84) / 6,351.84]*100 = −16.59%
Fishery Yield (Kg/Year)	3,266.08	3,290.32	[(3,290.32–3,266.08) / 3,266.08]*100 = +0.74%
Fishery Price (USD/Kg)	2.67	2.67	[(2.67–2.67) / 2.67]*100 = 0.00%
Sales Revenue (USD/Year)	8,720.43	8,785.15	[(8,785.15–8,720.43) / 8,720.43]*100 = +0.74%
Profit	2,368.59	3,487.11	[(3,487.11–2,368.59) / 2,368.59]*100 = +47.22%
Return on Investment (Percentage)	37.29%	65.82%	[(0.6582–0.3729) / 0.3729]*100 = +76.51%
Return on Sales Revenue (Percentage)	27.16%	39.69%	[(0.3969–0.2716) / 0.2716]*100 = +46.13%

*Exchange rate = 33.6596 THB per 1 USD (exchangerates.org.uk, 2022).

The findings show that this technology is simple and sustainable. When the incremental innovation with the simple technology was introduced (i.e. the innovative feeding machine system: a water-oxygen sensor, camera sensor system, and image processor for more precise data collection and calculation for fish feeding), farmers started to accept and apply the idea in their FCPSs. On the other hand, the Innovative feeding machine programme made simple so that the FCPS is able to operate it independently and to be customized with FCPS’s fish farms. Furthermore, it was developed in order to a platform to support the feed stay in the water column which the fish food will remain in the feeder for 1–2 days to reduce the risk of the fish food becoming moist and affecting the operation of the machine. As to its useful life, it can be used for five years approximately so that the machine components effectively operated and protected against moisture. In case of whether uncertainty; for instance, if whether is cloudy, it affects the fish's food intake. Thus the feeding machine programmed the light intensity sensor and its detection must be done over a period of time to decide whether to supplying food or to not dispense food during that time in this situation. Consequently, this method is suitable for the weather conditions in Thailand.

They believed that understanding this technology could lead to the adoption of SBMI. It was also revealed that when FCPSs understood the impact of technology on their farming, in terms of cost reduction, improved quality and productivity, and better water quality, they were more likely to cooperate with stakeholders who promote the technology. When technology promotes productivity and high-value products, FCPSs can design business models with their clients.

FCPSs identified limitations of feasible technology adoption, such as customer needs, technology, investment budget, and government regulations that are subject to constant change. Therefore, FCPSs focus on incremental improvements instead of radical innovations when it comes to technologies designed to improve outcomes while maintaining their day-to-day business practices. By implementing such improvements, they want to reduce resource use and improve waste management, pollution control, and recycling. Technology helps in saving fish feed and labour costs when we compare the performances between the TBM and SBMI. We found that innovative feeding machine systems implemented in SBMI could reduce feeding costs by 21.16% of the total costs of TBMs. Furthermore, SBMI could decrease labour costs by 50% of the total costs of TBMs. SBMI using the innovative feeding machine system increases fishery yield by 0.74% compared to TBMs. Consequently, SBMI can increase profit by 47.22% compared to TBMs. As a result, SBMI’s return on investment is 65.82% compared to 37.29% for TBMs. Additionally, SBMI’s return on sales revenue increased by 46.13% compared to TBMs. Tables 4 and 5 illustrate the data of the preliminary performance (the first MVPX of the pilot project) under which the innovative feeding machine system was utilized for a one-year period.

On the contrary, as regarded to the initial MVP of innovative feeding machine, though either feed conversion ratio (FCR) or the fish meat exchange rate, shown in Table 4, slightly increased, whereas findings indicated that in the initial MVP phase of the machine can be achieved the purpose of the machine in order to solve three pain-points and showed reducing of feed and labour costs and increasing standardization of feeding and growth of fish size that be useful for FPCSs’ businesses to get higher market demands, to reduce relevant costs, and to make higher net incomes. As to pricing of the innovative feeding machine was priced at USD 393 each.

Besides, as to the initial MVP phase of the innovative feeding machine, it focused on solving in the pain-point occur from leftover fish foods caused to the polluted water condition from fish cage farming of FPCSs in Thailand. Where there is no measurement in the percentage of polluted water in this phase. However, the second MVP of the machine has been targeted to develop further to monitor additional measures related to this change in the polluted water and using clean energy for FPCSs in Thailand.

We obtained the following information from the thematic content analysis.

‘ … I know that target customers require fish of premium quality with regard to critical factors, including hygiene, size, weight, and fish farming … ’ (an FCPS founder)

‘ … I will purchase fish by considering factors like fish hygiene, size, weight, price, and green pisciculture production … ’ (a customer)

FCPS founders and teams discuss various ideas and strategies to collaborate with scientists, innovators, and consumers to understand new ways of creating sustainable business models (i.e. models that are environmentally sound and profitable to them). Hence, the application of tools – several in number and varying in purpose, complexity, and ease of use – enables users to evaluate design alternatives and their corresponding financial incentives and funding accesses, environmental regulations, and the demands of clients.

On the other hand, as referred to findings derived from our focus group discussions among FCPS, innovators, academics and the government, main goal of developing and promoting the innovative feeding machine in the initial MVP phase was to solve FCPSs’ three key pain-points to improve and transform their business models. One of all pain-points is leftover fish food of FPCSs’ fish farming and lead to polluted water. As a result, why the project study is vital among all stakeholders. Further, as to implement the innovative feeding machine, FPCSs transform their SBMI strategy for managing their labours by upskills and rotate them to value added working in food processing from fish instead. Consequently, it is possible to use sensor technology to measure polluted water and expand to monitor relevant environmental measurement applied in the second MVP phase of developing the innovative feeding machine for FPCSs who are small and medium enterprises in Thailand. Because FPCSs currently need to transform their business model strategy to solve three key pain-points, be aware of cost effectiveness and friendly to usage.

4.2. Theme 2: challenges in adopting the sustainability-oriented innovation model and sustainable business model innovation in the fish-cage pisciculture industry in Thailand

The challenges in adopting SOI and SBMI in the pisciculture sector in Thailand are summarized in Tables 6–8.

Table 6. Key results regarding the adoption of the SOI model and SBMI in the pisciculture sector in Thailand (innovation objective).

Approach	Operational optimization ‘eco-efficiency’	Organizational transformation ‘new market opportunities’	System building ‘societal change’
Innovation Objective	FCPSs aim to optimize their operations, reflecting an internally-oriented sustainability perspective, but through novel operations and incremental innovation driven by the pursuit of efficiency.	FCPSs focus on novel processes and business models by implementing good and novel practices to enable the transformation from TBM to SBMI, but still emphasize both existing and new markets.	Even though effective and wider collaborations are being sought, it is still not possible to have a sectoral innovation system (SIS) for the pisciculture sector in Thailand.

Abbreviations: FCPSs – fish-cage pisciculture start-ups; SOI – sustainability-oriented innovation; SBMI – sustainable business model innovation; SIS – sectoral innovation system; TBM – traditional business model.

Table 7. Key results regarding the adoption of the SOI model and SBMI in the pisciculture sector in Thailand (innovation outcome).

Approach	Operational optimization ‘eco-efficiency’	Organizational transformation ‘new market opportunities’	System building ‘societal change’
Innovation Outcome	Reduction in feed and labour costs and harm from wastewater, and increase in productivity and hygienic quality of farming.	Creates shared value, but does not benefit the wider society because this system is limited to the fish-cage pisciculture sector, which has currently emerged in only some provinces of Thailand. There are also restrictions on disseminating knowledge at the national level because FCPSs encounter limited access to resources and inefficiency in building strategic partnership networks through SIS for the pisciculture sector in Thailand.	It is still limited in creating a net-positive impact from partnership-led networking at the SIS level for the pisciculture sector in Thailand.

Abbreviations: FCPSs – fish-cage pisciculture start-ups; SOI – sustainability-oriented innovation; SBMI – sustainable business model innovation; SIS – sectoral innovation system; TBM – traditional business model.

Table 8. Key results regarding the adoption of the SOI model and SBMI in the pisciculture sector in Thailand (relationship between innovation and a firm).

Approach	Operational optimization ‘eco-efficiency’	Organizational transformation ‘new market opportunities’	System building ‘societal change’
Relationship between innovation and a firm	Apply SBMI with incremental innovation to business as usual, but FCPSs need to support closed networking relationships among strategic partners.	Fundamental shift in firm purpose emerged in some industrial sectors, wherein entrepreneurial innovators acted as leaders and influencers to transform their business models.	Creating and supporting the relationship between the fish-cage pisciculture sector and strategic partnership through innovation is insufficient and ineffective in strengthening and sustaining SIS for the pisciculture sector in Thailand.

Abbreviations: FCPSs – fish-cage pisciculture start-ups; SOI – sustainability-oriented innovation; SBMI – sustainable business model innovation; SIS – sectoral innovation system; TBM – traditional business model.

As Tables 6–8 show, the study found that vital challenges in the adoption of SOI and SBMI pertain to operational optimization, organizational transformation, and system building. The challenges were associated with two issues: what is challenging and what is being challenged.

First, it was found that incremental innovations, referred to under the operational optimization approach of the SOI model shown in Tables 6–8, were adopted by the fish-cage pisciculture sector in Thailand. However, when this sector wants to optimize its operations, it is challenged by its incremental innovations approach.

Second, this study revealed that the operational optimization approach has been challenged, specifically by implementing innovative feeding machine systems to improve FCPSs’ businesses by moving from a TBM to SBMI. This study also indicates that the performances of the 10 FCPSs that transitioned to SBMI through the pilot project can be improved, including higher economic value, by reducing costs and increasing profits. Further, the findings highlighted that SBMI performances of FCPSs under the pilot project can assist with the financial recovery of farming operations and improving eco-efficiency, including reducing wastewater from surplus fish feeds to preserve the environment. This is especially true at the initial phase of the transition from TBMs to SBMI because it reflects an internally-oriented perspective at an early stage in the sustainability of the pisciculture sector in Thailand. Under the circumstances, its sustainability outcome is directed toward reducing feed and labour costs and harm from wastewater, and increasing productivity and the hygienic quality of farming. These are achieved by employing existing innovation processes without compromising existing business models through incremental improvements driven by compliance or proactively pursuing efficiencies. In addition, the sustainability is facilitated by easy-to-use tools that exploit existing innovation capabilities by employing three strategies: complying with regulations and pursuing efficiency gains, utilizing existing knowledge and management capabilities to identify and access relevant knowledge, and recruiting external domain experts for new knowledge to strengthen the pisciculture sector in Thailand.

Second, we noticed that a challenge occurs when a firm acquires novel processes to enable organizational transformation from a TBM to SBMI, but still places an emphasis on both existing and new markets. As shown in Tables 6–8, owing to the challenge in adopting the SOI model, we found definite barriers to the organizational transformation of the Thai pisciculture sector. Although organizational transformation focuses on creating shared value, it still cannot benefit the wider pisciculture society in Thailand. This is because of restrictions on disseminating strategic knowledge and resources and scaling up partnership networking in an ineffective manner. Under these circumstances, organizational transformation occurs in limited and specific areas of the fish-cage pisciculture sector in Thailand. Particularly, FCPSs with entrepreneurial innovators as leaders and influencers can successfully transform their business models.

Finally, as illustrated in Tables 6–8, based on the challenge in adopting SOI and SBMI related to the system building approach, we observed that definite barriers to systems building in the Thai pisciculture sector are caused by limited and ineffective resources. Lack of awareness and readiness to access those resources by Thai FCPSs act as additional barriers. These factors include limited funding support, ineffective networking among the experts of business and technology, lack of knowledge database sharing among key actors within the pisciculture value chain, and complicated regulations. Moreover, lack of technological adoption and learning is another barrier that hinders the promotion and strengthening of Thai FCPSs. Technology adoption, learning, and awareness are important in the initial phase, as they help in acquiring technology at reasonable costs. Additionally, this study found certain hurdles that discourage Thai FCPS from adopting the SOI and SBMI because of the limitation in accessing system building as an effective sectoral innovation system (SIS) to reinforce the pisciculture sector in Thailand. According to the respondents of this study, the primary hindrance is the difficulty in gaining access to legal and technology experts. The pisciculture industry in Thailand requires experts who can design technological features/devices to mitigate detrimental environmental impacts arising from the farming process. Solving issues related to intellectual property strategies and the management of innovative technologies using copyrights to protect software applications can be daunting. A lack of proper training and inadequate quality of human resources contribute significantly to this issue. Resource allocation can be a vital issue faced by respondents when adopting sustainable business innovations in their farming process. We found that the quality of resources, including human, capital, and knowledge resources, is highly associated with the creation and adoption of sustainable organizations’ capabilities. All the respondents of this study, including customers and relevant stakeholders of FCPSs, strongly agreed that both tangible and intangible resources are crucial for value creation in SBMI. They also reported that intangible resources could contribute to the long-term capabilities of an organization in the industry. Collaboration among stakeholders (such as the national government and financial institutions) could facilitate the materialization of this notion for SMEs and universities.

Under these circumstances, it is challenging to build systems for the Thai pisciculture sector because of the lack of an effective SIS (Intarakumnerd & Gerdsri, 2014), which can allow access to strategic resources through collaboration among relevant public agencies and private organizations.

5. Discussion

5.1. FCPSs’ technology awareness and their adoption of sustainable business model innovation

Using concepts such as SOI and SBMI, this case study confirms that key resources, such as human capital and finance, can help FCPSs – which have experience in the business but are not aware of innovations – innovate their TBMs. With the help of such resources, these FCPSs can adopt an incremental innovation approach by adopting simple technology and making small improvements in their existing products, processes, and services.

In our case study, a simple technology was developed in the Thai pisciculture industry. It is an innovative development based on simple technology adapted through knowledge sharing between the shrimp and pisciculture sectors in Thailand. Importantly, the fish feeder screw was designed to make it easy for fish farmers to use and to help them increase the effectiveness and efficiency of their farming production (Adams et al., 2016).

The simple design incorporates a sensor, artificial intelligence, and mobile application to improve the feeding operation. The machine captures the movement and size of the fish and calculates the right amount of food for each round of feeding. The design of the technology in this case provides a new solution to the existing problem of fish feeding in traditional pisciculture farming in Thailand. This is, therefore, a new invention that has been accepted for use by fish farmers. The low-cost improvements can help differentiate early-stage FCPS business models from their competitors, while building on their current offerings without adopting radical innovations owing to ineffective SIS (Intarakumnerd & Gerdsri, 2014).

Thus, the simple technology developed and used in this study represents the study’s novelty. Moreover, this study can help create an SBMI that extends both financial and nonfinancial benefits. External factors, such as engagement with stakeholders (including customers, technological specialists, farming business specialists, ongoing governmental support, and financial institutions) must be managed strategically when FCPSs need access to key resources for their business that can positively affect the firms’ SOI (Ayuso et al., 2011; Milliman et al., 2012). Additionally, following the RBV and KBV theories, this case study highlights the importance of inimitable and unique resources and technological knowledge sharing and transfer (represented in our context by the feeder screw adapted from the shrimp sector) in developing sustainable innovations for the short- and long-term benefit of pisciculture firms. This corresponds with previous literature (Ayuso et al., 2011; Curado & Bontis, 2006; Milliman et al., 2012; Reed et al., 2006).

The case study also illustrates the existence of a pattern of relationships among all stakeholders of a firm, which contributes to its success. All respondents agreed that to design a meaningful and sustainable business model, one must know the circumstances prevailing inside and outside the boundaries of a firm. FCPSs anticipated potential issues. They constantly monitored the external environment and predicted probable future changes. They expected to not only react to a potential future, but also help shape it. The links among farmers, external businesses, and the natural environment are vital, permeable, and malleable.

In terms of adopting and implementing the concepts of SOI and SBMI for FCPSs’ operations, we found that FCPSs are more likely to be successful when farmers understand the characteristics of SOI and SBMI, are able to identify innovations that must be adopted or created, and communicate the impact of their SBMI to other relevant stakeholders.

5.2. Challenges in adopting the sustainability-oriented innovation model and sustainable business model innovation in the fish-cage pisciculture industry in Thailand

The results highlight the challenges in adopting SOI and SBMI using the operational optimization approach. We found that the performance of SOI and SBMI reduce the intensity of resource use and enhance waste management and recycling (Adams et al., 2016; Huang & Wu, 2010). This can be achieved by introducing a new product or process developments to solve the main areas of concern for FCPSs and the overall pisciculture sector in Thailand, through dematerialization, eco-design, and so on. Similarly, this study also revealed challenges pertaining to the design thinking of application tools; such tools enable users to evaluate sustainable materials and design alternatives, and relate them to financial incentives and accesses, environmental regulations, and the clients’ demands. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that highlights the challenges pertaining to design thinking in Thailand. Extant studies have primarily focused on the challenges arising from the operation optimization approach of SOI (Adams et al., 2016; Huang & Wu, 2010) and SBMI (Lüdeke-Freund et al., 2018), as reviewed in the literature. However, this study showed that FCPSs must dare to create more vital innovation relationships that are closer and better for succeeding in the adoption of SOI and SBMI, and improving the productivity and quality of fish to attain food security and sustain the pisciculture sector (Brugère et al., 2019).

Regarding challenges in adopting the organizational transformation approach for SOI and SBMI (Adams et al., 2016; Huang & Wu, 2010; Lüdeke-Freund et al., 2018), although organizational transformation from a TBM to SBMI occurs through novel processes and business model innovation, the findings emphasize the importance of both existing and new markets. Further, the findings reveal that FCPSs should create shared value by engaging with key stakeholders. They should be aware of the importance of developing partnership arrangements to allow suppliers to work effectively together to exploit and implement complementary skills and competencies. Nevertheless, dealing with key challenges is vital to strengthening the organizational transformation of FCPSs in the context of the pisciculture sector in Thailand by investing in and creating effective strategic resources, such as human capital and partnership collaborations. Developing human capital in the form of entrepreneurial innovators who are passionate about innovating their business models and resolving customers’ issues is more important than focusing on pioneer innovators.

6. Conclusions and recommendations for future research

This study confirms that FCPSs can incorporate SOI in their business models. Further, it provides them with insights into adopting SBMI by using a simple technology (the innovative feeding machine system) with incremental innovation that creates greater value for target customers and other stakeholders in the pisciculture industry.

In addition, it determines that the design of technology has important implications for fish farmers and entrepreneurial innovators who promote sustainable pisciculture. Simple technology can offer solutions, as proved by the innovative feeding machine system’s performance over the year during which the pilot project was undertaken for this study. This system can reduce the harmful effects of inefficient fish-feeding systems that generate polluted water and waste. The innovative feeding machine system can also reduce labour costs and improve productivity.

Thus far, the models adopted by certain FCPSs in Thailand have failed to provide a proper solution regarding sustainability. This study indicates that the government should simplify the language of technology while encouraging farmers to adopt innovative ideas to improve their productivity. The promotion of business skills related to marketing, environmental issues, and distribution channels increases the value and quality of final products obtained from tilapia farming in Thailand. In addition, SIS in the pisciculture sector must be urgently considered by the Thai government and relevant strategic alliances.

In conclusion, dynamic capabilities in the pisciculture industry are related to sustainable values in the business models of FCPSs. This can be achieved by promoting integration and collaboration among key stakeholders of firms; however, this issue requires a more in-depth methodological analysis for operationalizing the concepts to encourage proper technology adoption and address challenges in adopting SBMI in FCPSs. Future studies should compare the pisciculture sectors of different countries because drawing a sample of small businesses from a single country has limitations. Differences in national cultures and policies may affect entrepreneurial efforts and the successful adoption of technology because of the challenges faced in adopting SBMI in various contexts by different countries. Thus, analysing further trends from other countries with varied national settings will help generalize this study’s conclusions.

Ethical approval

The authors received Mahidol University’s Certificate of Ethical Approval, which confirms that this manuscript includes a declaration of ethical consideration and approval by the Institutional Review Board of Mahidol University in Thailand.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the key respondents who contributed relevant information used for the study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data will be made available on request due to privacy/ethical restrictions. The data are not publicly available because they contain information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Mahidol University, Thailand [grant number: MU_ANNOUNCE_PUB-2566, as referred to https://op.mahidol.ac.th/ra/en/research_regulation/].