R ESEARCH S TRATEGY & R ESEARCH D ESIGN

The research strategy forms a procedural framework for guiding the inquiry into the research problem and uncovering associated answers (Creswell, 2014; Saunders et al., 2009).

Yin (1994) suggests three guiding elements that should be taken into consideration when choosing an appropriate research strategy:

- Type of research question

- Degree of control over behavioral events

- Extent to which the research is focused on a contemporary event

Yin (1994) recommends the use of case studies for research that poses “How” or “Why”

questions that focus on studying a contemporary phenomenon, with the researcher having little control over the analyzed events.

The thesis at hand revolves around a “How” research question (Element 1), which aims to analyze a contemporary phenomenon (Element 3) which is outside the control of the investigator (Element 2), within its natural context. Adding this to the interpretivist stance of the author, and in line with above reasoning by Yin (1994), an exploratory, qualitative case study design seems consequently the most suitable approach. Yin (1994) defines case studies as an “investigation to retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events”

(Yin, 1994, p. 3).

Having selected an overall research strategy, the next step is to break it down into an applicable research design. Specifically for Case Studies, Yin (1994) proposes two dimensions from which four distinct case study designs arise:

- Single case vs. multiple case - Holistic case vs. embedded case

Analyzing multiple cases allows for a greater robustness of the study by seeking to replicate results from one case study to other case studies, thus enabling for more generalizable

inductive theory building (Saunders et al., 2009; Yin, 1994). Conversely, single cases are argued to be more applicable to critical, unique or revelatory cases (ibid.).

Further, when aiming to include an analysis of sub-units within a case, an embedded case study design is preferable (Yin, 1994). Otherwise, the holistic case design is the more suitable choice (ibid.).

The research question of this thesis revolves around ways how green crowdfunding platforms can accelerate a sustainability transition within the energy regime. The platform itself is seen as the greater unit of analysis, whereas project owners and investors constitute sub-units that are regarded as key actors to achieve joint value creation. Consequently, an embedded case study design is chosen. To account for the novelty of the crowdfunding phenomenon within the sustainability context and the intention to conduct an in-depth exploratory research, a single case study design will be applied.

As research technique, in-depth interviews were regarded as most suitable to elicit a thorough understanding of the research field. Interviews were conducted in a semi-structured manner. Whilst offering a guiding frame of key questions and themes, this technique offers sufficient flexibility for the interviewer to scrutinize topics more closely that emerge during the interview and haven’t been considered beforehand (Gill et al., 2008; Saunders et al., 2009).

3.2.1 Case Selection

The paper applied a purposeful sampling strategy which aims at identifying cases that are rich in information and thus allow for in-depth analysis (Patton, 1990). To limit the number of possible cases to choose from and to make selection as transparent as possible for the reader, criteria were defined to guide this selection process.

The criteria and the rationale for choosing them is illustrated below:

Criterion 1: Limit analysis geographically to the Netherlands

Generally, the geographical focus of this paper was limited to one specific country, to guarantee an identical context for the cases analyzed, i.e. regarding the institutional and legislative setting.

Specifically, the Netherlands were chosen as focal country. This choice is expected to offer an interesting context due to its pioneering role in implementing the sustainability transition approach into national policy, as well as being one of the early adopters of crowdfunding as an alternative financial funding instrument (crowdsourcing.org, n.d.; Laes et al., 2014).

Considering that the research question of this thesis is thematically located at the intersection of crowdfunding and sustainability transition, the Netherlands are thus regarded as a promising case study environment.

Criterion 2: Limit crowdfunding mode to crowdlending

As pointed out before, the four most common crowdfunding models are: Donation, Equity, Loan and Reward. In the Netherlands, crowdlending is the most common form, raising EUR 86.47 million in 2017, compared to EUR 7.79 million via rewards, EUR 7.62 million via donations and EUR 17.82 million via equity-based crowdfunding (Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, 2019). Given the popularity of crowdlending, it was consequently chosen as focal mode of crowdfunding.

Criterion 3: Limit Analysis of Green Energy Projects to Solar Projects

Despite wind power currently being the dominant source of renewable electricity production in the Netherlands, solar power is showcasing the strongest growth rates of all renewable energy sources, recording an increase of more than 40% from 2017 to 2018 (CBS, 2019).

Given the technological advancements in the Solar Photovoltaic (PV) field and the attested potential for Netherlands, this thesis chose to focus on Solar PV projects as proxy for green energy ventures (Deloitte Netherlands, 2018; Pandey et al., 2016).

To sum up, this thesis limited the pool of potential cases to crowdfunding platforms that were operating in the Netherlands, had crowdlending as mode of financing and were funding predominantly solar projects.

Having established the selection criteria, an initial research was conducted to gain an overview of the Dutch crowdfunding market and operating green energy platforms. The following platforms were identified during this search process:

Platform Crowdfunding

Table 2: Overview Dutch Green Crowdfunding Platforms,

based on Duurzaam Investeren, 2019; Greencrowd, 2019; OnePlanetCrowd, 2019;

Windcentrale, 2019; Zonnepanelendelen, 2019

Platform Windcentrale was excluded from the sample since it had a different investment focus (windmills) and crowdfunding mode (equity). Similarly, Duurzaam Investeren and OnePlanetCrowd were removed from the sample due to offering a too wide array of funding types. Consequently, the two remaining platforms were Zonnepanelendelen and Greencrowd.