Analytical or synthetic knowledge is widely considered beneficial for eco‐innovation (EI). For a firm, analytical and synthetic knowledge can be acquired externally through collaboration with various partners or generated internally through R&D and other internal firm activities. However, evidence supporting the assumption that both forms of knowledge are complementary and that “doing more of all” will benefit EI is unclear. We found that external analytical and synthetic knowledge and internal analytical and synthetic knowledge all positively affect EI, with internal analytical being the most prominent. However, combining analytical and synthetic knowledge may not be beneficial for EI. The interaction between analytical and external synthetic knowledge is generally substitutive. We found a particularly significant substitutive effect between internal analytical and internal synthetic knowledge, as well as between internal analytical and external synthetic knowledge. In short, we found little evidence of complementarity between analytical and synthetic knowledge, regardless of where it is acquired from. These findings advise caution to firm managers and policymakers who are considering strategies to combine different forms of knowledge from different sources to successfully achieve EI goals.

中文翻译：

---

分析性知识和综合性知识的结合是否有利于生态创新？来自挪威的证据

分析或综合知识被广泛认为有利于生态创新（EI）。对于公司来说，分析和综合知识可以通过与各种合作伙伴的合作从外部获得，也可以通过研发和其他内部公司活动在内部产生。然而，支持两种形式的知识是互补的以及“做得更多”将有利于 EI 这一假设的证据尚不清楚。我们发现外部分析和综合知识以及内部分析和综合知识都对EI产生积极影响，其中内部分析最为突出。然而，将分析知识和综合知识结合起来可能对 EI 没有好处。分析知识和外部综合知识之间的相互作用通常是替代性的。我们发现内部分析知识和内部综合知识之间以及内部分析知识和外部综合知识之间存在特别显着的替代效应。简而言之，我们几乎没有发现分析知识和综合知识之间存在互补性的证据，无论这些知识是从哪里获得的。这些发现建议企业管理者和政策制定者谨慎行事，他们正在考虑结合不同来源的不同形式的知识以成功实现EI目标的策略。