The European Corporate Sustainability Framework (ECSF) is a new generation management framework, aimed to meet increased corporate complexity and support corporate transformation towards more sustainable ways of doing business. It is a multi-layer, integral business framework with an analytical, contextual, situational and dynamic dimension.Analytically, the framework is structured according to four focus points – the constitutional, conceptual, behavioural and evaluative perspective – providing integrative designs of complex and dynamic phenomena. The framework includes coherent sets of business (...) philosophies, approaches, concepts and tools that structures corporate realities and generates sequences of steps in order to obtain adequate institutional structures, a road to corporate transformation and higher performance levels. (shrink)

Corporate sustainable innovation is a major driver of institutional change, and its success can be largely attributed to employees. While some scholars have described the importance of intrinsic motivations and flexibility to facilitate innovation, others have argued that constraints and extrinsic motivations stimulate innovation. In the context of sustainable innovation, we explore which employee work practices are more conducive to firm-level innovation in corporate sustainability. Our results, based on a sample of 4640 French employees from 1764 firms, (...) confirm the positive impact of intrinsic motivations, and the negative impact of job strain, on corporate sustainable innovation. We also find that extrinsic rewards, through pay satisfaction, counteract the negative effect of job strain to promote sustainable innovation. This indicates that intrinsic and extrinsic rewards can work in tandem to facilitate sustainable innovation. (shrink)

Corporate sustainability introduces multiple tensions or paradoxes into organisations which defy traditional approaches such as trading-off contrasting options. We examine an alternative approach: to manage corporate sustainability with a paradoxical lens where contradictory elements are managed concurrently. Drawing on paradox theory, we focus on two specific pathways: to the organisation-wide acceptance of paradox and to paradoxical resolution. Introducing the concept of strategic agility, we argue that strategically agile organisations are better placed to navigate these paradox pathways. (...) Strategic agility comprises three organisational meta-capabilities: strategic sensitivity, collective commitment, and resource fluidity. We propose that strategically agile organisations draw on strategic sensitivity and collective commitment to achieve organisation-wide acceptance of paradox, and collective commitment and resource fluidity to achieve paradoxical resolution. For each of these meta-capabilities, we identify three organisational practices and processes specifically related to corporate sustainability that organisations can leverage in pursuit of strategic agility. We offer a conceptual framework depicting the strategic agility meta-capabilities, and associated practices and processes, which organisations draw on to successfully manage corporate sustainability with a paradoxical lens. (shrink)

Corporate sustainability performance measurement systems (SPMS) have been the subject of a growing amount of research. However, there are many challenges and opportunities associated with the design, implementation, use, and evolution of these systems that have yet to be addressed. The purpose of this article is to identify future directions for research in the design, implementation, use, and evolution of corporate SPMS. A concise review of key literature published between 2000 and 2010 is presented. The literature review (...) focuses on research conducted at the both the individual corporation- and sector-levels. The review of published literature provides a basis for the identification of a structured set of 65 key research questions to guide future work. The research questions will be of interest to both practitioners and researchers in corporate sustainability performance measurement. (shrink)

Business Ethics, the Environment &Responsibility, Volume 33, Issue 2, Page 184-200, April 2024.

This paper proposes a systematic framework for the analysis of tensions in corporate sustainability. The framework is based on the emerging integrative view on corporate sustainability, which stresses the need for a simultaneous integration of economic, environmental and social dimensions without, a priori, emphasising one over any other. The integrative view presupposes that firms need to accept tensions in corporate sustainability and pursue different sustainability aspects simultaneously even if they seem to contradict each (...) other. The framework proposed in this paper goes beyond the traditional triad of economic, environmental and social dimensions and argues that tensions in corporate sustainability occur between different levels, in change processes and within a temporal and spatial context. The framework provides vital groundwork for managing tensions in corporate sustainability based on paradox strategies. The paper then applies the framework to identify and characterise four selected tensions and illustrates how key approaches from the literature on strategic contradictions, tensions and paradoxes—i.e., acceptance and resolution strategies—can be used to manage these tensions. Thereby, it refines the emerging literature on the integrative view for the management of tensions in corporate sustainability. The framework also provides managers with a better understanding of tensions in corporate sustainability and enables them to embrace these tensions in their decision making. (shrink)

Strategic leadership and corporate sustainability have recently come together in conspicuously explicit fashion through the emergence of top management team positions with dedicated corporate sustainability responsibilities. These TMT positions, commonly referred to as “Chief Sustainability Officers,” have found their way into the upper echelons of many of the world’s largest corporations alongside more traditional TMT positions including the CEO and CFO. We explore this phenomenon and consider the following two questions: Why are corporate (...) class='Hi'>sustainability positions being installed to the TMT?What effects do corporate sustainability TMT positions have at their organizations? We consider these questions through strategic leadership and neoinstitutional theoretical frameworks. Through the latter, we also engage with Weberian considerations of bureaucracy. We find that the reasons why corporate sustainability TMT positions are installed can be in response to a crisis at the corporation for which its legitimacy is challenged. We also find the corporate sustainability TMT position can be installed proactively in an effort to realize external opportunities that may have otherwise gone unrealized without concerted attention and coordination afforded by a strategic level position. Regarding effects, we determine the position can relate to the establishment of bureaucratic structures dedicated to corporate sustainability within the corporation through which formalized processes and key performance indicators to drive corporate sustainability performances are established. In the face of our finding that many corporate sustainability TMT positions are being removed despite having only relatively recently been introduced to their respective TMTs, we find that the successful implementation of bureaucratic machinery can help considerations to sustainability extend beyond the tenure of a corporate sustainability position within the TMT. (shrink)

Through a qualitative approach, we explore the perspective of 72 CEOs of companies operating in Portugal about the definition of corporate sustainability and its facilitators, and obtain four main findings. First, most CEOs equate CS with the company’s continuity/viability. Second, the relevance ascribed to different stakeholders differs considerably: while more than 50 % of CEOs cited shareholders/profits, and more than 40 % mentioned the natural environment and employees, very few mentioned customers, society, suppliers, the State, or competitors. Third, (...) the management practices considered as most important to develop CS are the organization’s strategic alignment with a long-term orientation, and developing and energizing people within a positive organizational climate characterized by trust and ethics. Fourth, the leadership characteristics and behaviors considered as most important to foster CS are scrutinizing the future and leading people through a mobilizing vision; energizing and developing employees; and leading by example. While the whole picture is largely consistent with the “sustainable strategic management” approach suggested by Stead and Stead and with recent CS integrative approaches, the great majority of CEOs who participate in the study have not embraced such integrative and coevolutive perspectives. (shrink)

This paper analyzes the impacts of index inclusions and exclusions on corporate sustainable firms by studying a sample of US stocks that are added to or deleted from the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index over the period 2002-2008. The impacts are measured in terms of stock return, risk and liquidity. We cannot find any strong evidence that announcement per se has any significant impact on stock return and risk. However, on the day of change, index inclusion (exclusion) stocks (...) experience a significant but temporary increase (decrease) in stock return. Liquidity deteriorates after the announcement day and bounces back significantly near the day of change. Systematic risk shows little change after announcements. But, idiosyncratic risk is higher after announcements. The overall results support Harris and Eitan's (The Journal of Finance 41(4), 815-829, 1986) price pressure hypothesis, which posits that event announcement does not carry information and any shift in demand (and hence the corresponding price change and liquidity change) is temporary. (shrink)

ABSTRACT:This article reviews four key orientations in environmental ethics that range from an instrumental understanding of sustainability to one that acknowledges the intrinsic value of sustainable behavior. It then shows that the current scholarly discourse around corporate sustainability management—as reflected in environment management, corporate social responsibility, and corporate political activity —mostly favors an instrumental perspective on sustainability. Sustainable business practices are viewed as anthropocentric and are conceptualized as a means to achieve competitive advantage. Based (...) on these observations, we speculate about what corporate sustainability management might look like if it applied ethical orientations that emphasize the intrinsic value of nature. This discussion also includes an introduction to two articles in this special section focused on the role of the environmental manager and sustainability standards, both of which offer paths for incorporating intrinsic valuation of the environment into sustainability management. (shrink)

Increasing evidence suggests that corporate sustainability is paradoxical in nature, as corporates and managers have to achieve economic, social, and environmental goals, simultaneously. While a paradox perspective has been broadly incorporated into sustainability research for more than a decade, it has resulted in limited improvement in our understanding of corporate sustainability paradox management. In this study, the authors conduct a systematic review of the literature of corporate sustainability paradox management by adopting the Smith–Lewis (...) three-stage model of dynamic equilibrium. The results reveal the following: Both environmental and cognitive factors manifest tensions arising from the sustainability paradox. While both proactive and defensive strategies are adopted to manage the tensions embedded in the corporate sustainability, the proactive strategy is more extensively studied in the current literature. Management strategies of corporate sustainability paradox are characterized as multi-level, multi-stage, and dealing with multiple paradoxes. Proactive strategies enable organizations to enjoy short-term and long-term sustainability benefits. The authors call for further research explicitly addressing the following areas: the paradoxical nature of corporate sustainability management; corporate sustainability paradox management of for-profit organizations; the micro-foundations of corporate sustainability paradox management; defensive strategies and new proactive strategies; and a unified standard of sustainability outcomes. The practical implications of this review are then elaborated. In practice, the results imply that organizations would best manage the corporate sustainability paradox by understanding the paradox and its equilibrium stages. This review and proposed research agenda are expected to deepen interdisciplinary knowledge and set the stage for interested scholars to undertake in their future inquiries. (shrink)

Even though management scholars have offered several views on the process of corporate sustainability, these efforts have focused mainly on the technical aspects of sustainability while omitting the fundamental role played by individual moral competences. Therefore, previous work offers an incomplete and somewhat reductionist view of corporate sustainability. In this article, we develop a holistic framework of corporate sustainability in which both the moral and technical aspects of sustainability are considered. We do (...) so by integrating the ethical, normative perspective of the Catholic social teaching with the competitive view of the natural resource-based view. This framework highlights the importance of CST principles and ideas in developing executive moral competences such as moral sensitivity and awareness, and moral cognition and motivation. Moral competences, in turn, influence the organizational selection of environmental strategies, giving leaders the intrinsic motivation to promote both a longer-term stance on corporate sustainability efforts and a relentless search for greener business models. Such strategies move the firm closer towards achieving environmental sustainability. Hence, by bridging the individual, normative-ethical with the organizational, implementational levels of corporate sustainability, our framework provides a more realistic, coherent, and complete perspective on the complex process of achieving corporate sustainability. (shrink)

This paper moves beyond corporate environmental disclosure (CED), and examines the concept of corporate sustainability disclosure (CSD) and CSD standards. While sustainability disclosure has been adopted by some larger firms, the majority of transnational firms do not yet participate in this process. This paper develops a framework and propositions for effective CSD standards. Consistent with general literature on standards, this study suggests that CSD standards that are broadly-focused and developed by private standard setters (e.g., GRI) hold (...) the greatest promise for widespread acceptance. Furthermore, the paper suggests that financial analysts--who provide the metrics for firm valuation—should participate in developing a universal set of CSD standards, in order to promote acceptance. (shrink)

Business and Society Review, Volume 127, Issue 1, Page 23-48, Spring 2022.

Even though management scholars have offered several views on the process of corporate sustainability, these efforts have focused mainly on the technical aspects of sustainability while omitting the fundamental role played by individual moral competences. Therefore, previous work offers an incomplete and somewhat reductionist view of corporate sustainability. In this article, we develop a holistic framework of corporate sustainability in which both the moral and technical aspects of sustainability are considered. We do (...) so by integrating the ethical, normative perspective of the Catholic social teaching with the competitive view of the natural resource-based view. This framework highlights the importance of CST principles and ideas in developing executive moral competences such as moral sensitivity and awareness, and moral cognition and motivation. Moral competences, in turn, influence the organizational selection of environmental strategies, giving leaders the intrinsic motivation to promote both a longer-term stance on corporate sustainability efforts and a relentless search for greener business models. Such strategies move the firm closer towards achieving environmental sustainability. Hence, by bridging the individual, normative-ethical with the organizational, implementational levels of corporate sustainability, our framework provides a more realistic, coherent, and complete perspective on the complex process of achieving corporate sustainability. (shrink)

Due to their consolidated nature, corporate sustainability reports often mask the evolution of organizations’ sustainability initiatives. Thus, to more fully understand the environmental performance of an organization, it is essential to examine the experiences of specific projects and how they relate to corporate sustainability. Based on case studies of green projects in four different organizations, we find that it is difficult to determine the environmental impact of a project a priori, even in cases where environmental (...) considerations are included as part of the initial project scope. Instead, the decision to integrate environmentally favorable elements into projects is a dynamically occurring interaction between competing institutional logics and organizational identities, which create windows of opportunity for individual agency. During these windows, individuals may engage in reinforcing microprocesses that support traditional practices, or invoke enabling microprocesses to facilitate green decision-making, consistent with ecosystem logics. The process model developed in this paper provides a new perspective on the temporal and contextual dimensions of environmental championship behaviors, and sheds light on otherwise puzzling results such as why organizations with strong environmental orientations continue to struggle with delivering projects with strong positive environmental impacts. (shrink)

According to the predominant corporate sustainable development (CSD) framework, this exploratory paper verifies that CSD construct can be modeled by integrating the dimensions of social, economic, and environmental development. We first developed and validated measurement scales for these three dimensions based on a survey of 314 managers in mainland China. Then, using structural equation modelling, we confirmed that the proposed model is valid. Therefore, our findings may allow researchers to explore CSD further, and practitioners to develop their understanding of (...) CSD initiatives in organizations. (shrink)

This article explores how corporate governance processes and structures are being used in large Australian companies to develop, lead and implement corporate responsibility strategies. It presents an empirical analysis of the governance of sustainability in fifty large listed companies based on each company’s disclosures in annual and sustainability reports. We find that significant progress is being made by large listed Australian companies towards integrating sustainability into core business operations. There is evidence of leadership structures being (...) put in place to ensure that board and senior management are involved in sustainability strategy development and are then incentivised to monitor and ensure implementation of that strategy through financial rewards. There is evidence of a willingness to engage and communicate clearly the results of these strategies to interested stakeholders. Overall, there appears to be a developing acceptance amongst large corporations that efforts towards improved corporate sustainability are not only expected but are of value to the business. We suggest that this is evidence of a managerial shift away from an orthodox shareholder primacy understanding of the corporation towards a more enlightened shareholder value approach, often encompassing a stakeholder-orientated view of business strategy. However, strong underlying tensions remain due to the insistent market emphasis on shareholder value. (shrink)

According to Dr. Clare Graves, mankind has developed eight core value systems,1 as responses to prevailing circumstances. Given different contexts and value systems, a one-solution-fits-all concept of corporate sustainability is not reasonable. Therefore, this paper presents various definitions and forms of sustainability, each linked to specific (societal) circumstances and related value systems. A sustainability matrix– an essential element of the overall European Corporate Sustainability Framework – is described showing six types of organizations at different (...) developmental stages, with different forms of corporate sustainability, each supported by specific institutional arrangements. (shrink)

Previous research has underlined the significance of practical wisdom pertaining to corporate sustainability. Recent studies, however, have identified managing opposing but interlocked tensions related to environmental, social, and economic aspects as one of the most crucial future challenges in CS. Therefore, we apply the established link between wisdom and sustainability to the pressing topic of managing tensions in CS. We commence with a literature overview of tensions in sustainability management, which manifests our basic work assumption concerning (...) the need for practical wisdom in CS. We then discuss the threefold, mutual interconnectedness between practical wisdom and tension management in CS, which we illustrate in a conceptual model. Thereafter, we develop a set of propositions on how a practical wisdom approach influences CS in practice and how it differs from a business-case approach. In recognition of the conceptual character of our paper, we conclude by outlining potential practical applications and theoretical implications of the model and of the propositions. Limitations and avenues for further research are discussed. (shrink)

Over the last two decades, corporate sustainability has been established as a legitimate research topic among management and organization scholars. This introductory article explores potential avenues for advances in research on corporate sustainability by readdressing some of the fundamental aspects of the sustainability debate and approaching some novel perspectives and insights from outside the corporate sustainability field. This essay also sketches out how each of the six articles of this special issue contribute to (...) the literature by going back to some of the conceptual roots of sustainability and/or by offering novel perspectives for research on corporate sustainability. As these six articles and the outlook on future research opportunities show, broadening the inquiry of corporate sustainability in terms of topics, theories, and methodologies holds considerable potential to improve our understanding of how decision makers and organizations respond to sustainability. (shrink)

The creation of a specialized executive position that oversees sustainability activities represents a distinct shift in the structure of top management teams and their approach for addressing sustainability concerns. However, little is known about these management team members, namely the corporate sustainability officers or CSOs. We examine CSO appointments and their association with subsequent sustainability performance. Our results indicate that the creation of a CSO position may represent more of a symbolic versus substantive governance mechanism. (...) Further tests suggest that CSO expertise and the firm’s existing sustainability performance affect the association between the CSO and post-appointment sustainability performance. We find no association between CSO appointments and subsequent sustainability performance for firms that were already poor performers, while firms possessing relatively higher levels of prior sustainability performance appointing a CSO begin to experience significant improvements to performance after 3 years. We further find that CSOs with prior sustainability expertise are associated with increases in sustainability performance in firms that were already strong performers, but not in firms with poor sustainability performance. Non-expert CSOs, on the other hand, are associated with initial decreases in performance for poor performing firms, whereas better performing firms hiring non-expert CSOs are able to rely on other sustainability attributes of the firm and benefit from improvements in performance in the long term. We discuss the potential importance of these positions as it relates to symbolic versus substantive governance mechanisms through the lens of top management team literature streams. (shrink)

The last decade has witnessed the emergence of a paradox perspective on corporate sustainability. By explicitly acknowledging tensions between different desirable, yet interdependent and conflicting sustainability objectives, a paradox perspective enables decision makers to achieve competing sustainability objectives simultaneously and creates leeway for superior business contributions to sustainable development. In stark contrast to the business case logic, a paradox perspective does not establish emphasize business considerations over concerns for environmental protection and social well-being at the societal (...) level. In order to contribute to the consolidation of this emergent field of research, we offer a definition of the paradox perspective on corporate sustainability and a framework to delineate its descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects. This framework clarifies the paradox perspective’s contents and its implications for research and practice. We use the framework to map the contributions to this thematic symposium on paradoxes in sustainability and to propose questions for future research. (shrink)

Over recent years, there has been a focus in corporate activity upon the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and one of its central platforms, the notion of sustainability, and particularly sustainable development. We argue in this article that the use of such a term has the effect of obfuscating the real situation regarding the effect of corporate activity upon the external environment and the consequent implications for the future. One of the effects of persuading that (...) corporate activity is sustainable is that the cost of capital for the firm is reduced as investors are misled into thinking that the level of risk involved in their investment is lower than it actually is. We analyse the effects of this misrepresentation and argue for a fuller debate about sustainability. (shrink)

We argue the need for academics to resist and challenge the hegemonic discourse of sustainable development within the corporate context. Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory provides a useful framework for recognizing the complex nature of sustainable development and a way of conceptualizing counter-hegemonies. Published empirical research that analyzes sustainable development discourse within corporate reports is examined to consider how the hegemonic discourse is constructed. Embedded assumptions within the hegemonic construction are identified including sustainable development as primarily about economic (...) development, progress, growth, profitability, and “responsibly” managed levels of resource depletion. We call for multiple voices in the discursive field to debate and to resist closure and highlight the possibilities for academic researchers to actively resist the hegemonic construction. Specifically, we advocate vigilance and awareness, critical and reflective analyses, challenge and resistance based on other frames of reference, and strategies for communicating both within and outside the academy. (shrink)

Research on corporate sustainability has started to acknowledge the role of temporality in creating more sustainable organizations. Yet, these advances tend to treat firms as monolithic and we have little understanding of how different temporal patterns throughout an organization shape perceptions of and actions toward sustainability. Building on studies highlighting how the temporal structures of work shape employee engagement with different organizational processes and issues, we seek to answer: How does the temporality of work practices structure perceptions (...) of corporate sustainability throughout the firm? Using data from an ethnography of a small European sustainable bank, we provide an account of the variety of ways in which employees in different departments perceive the bank and how they engage with sustainability. We then go on to show how the temporal structures of work practices within different departments help explain some divergence in perceptions of sustainability. Our study highlights the variegation of temporal structures in organizational processes of meaning-making and its role for a better understanding of the efforts to make corporations more sustainable. (shrink)

Little has been published about the drivers, factors and challenges involved in the business practice of creating corporate sustainability performance within a company. This working paper describes research that employed an in-depth, grounded-theory case study approach to explore the issue within two EU-based utility companies. From the analysis of interviews, project meeting observations and a survey with in-house delivery experts, a key preliminary output of this research has been the creation of a Force-Factor Corporate Sustainability Performance (...) Framework that categorises the main driver and inhibitor elements a dynamic, explanatory model. This can serve as a useful platform for further academic and practitioner-based research, as well as describing key levers and obstacles to establishing a progressive performance in corporate sustainability. (shrink)

In spite of an overwhelming importance of business groups in the economic development of many countries, systematic inquiry on how the BGs and their affiliated firms approach and contribute to shared value creation and sustainable development is rare. In this paper we address this research gap by investigating two related questions—do BG-affiliated firms differ from non-BG firms in their corporate sustainability strategy and how does BG affiliation influence the relationship between stock of fungible resources and CSS of firms? (...) Drawing from the BG literature we theorize that BG-affiliated firms tend to adopt of both environmental and social sustainability strategies more than non-BG firms. We also argue that although according to resource-based view, the stock of fungible resources of firms positively influences CSS, BG affiliation negatively moderates the relationship between stock of fungible resources and CSS of firms. Stock of fungible resources matters less for BG-affiliated firms in undertaking CSS as they have access to resources of the BG network. We test our theoretical predictions using a proprietary data set of 163 Indian publicly listed firms, out of which 76 are BG-affiliated firms belonging to 74 BGs. The data for corporate environmental and social sustainability strategies have been obtained by administering a survey instrument among the top level executives of the participating firms. We find support for our theoretical predictions that signify that BGs and their affiliates make important contributions to shared value creation and sustainable development in emerging economies like India. (shrink)

This book examines the challenges faced by seven multinational companies - Intel, Lenovo, Samsung Electronics, ZTE, BMW Hyundai Motor Company, Mahindra and Mahindra - in their endeavour to contribute to the economic, environmental and social development of Asia. The lessons learned from the examination of these business practices may directly contribute to an increase in the practice of sustainable management and may as such contribute to positive economic, environmental and social impact of companies in this region. The cases are highly (...) relevant for management theoreticians seeking to deepen our understanding of corporate sustainability in an area where scholars, practitioners and policy-makers can expect new questions, problems and challenges in the years ahead. The book is also of high interest to policy review agencies, policy makers and welfare economists seeking to support the development of a comprehensive sustainability framework for managing social and environmental issues in the context of Asia. (shrink)

In 2009, Greenpeace launched an aggressive campaign against Nestlé, accusing the organization of driving rainforest deforestation through its palm oil suppliers. The objective was to damage the brand image of Nestlé and, thereby, force the organization to make its supply chain more sustainable. Prominent cases such as these have led to the prevailing view that sustainable supply chain management is primarily reactive and propelled by external pressures. This research, in contrast, assumes that SSCM can contribute positively to the reputation of (...) an organization as a “good citizen” and, thereby, counter the impression that external stakeholder pressure is the only driver of SSCM. The study draws on Resource Dependence Theory in analyzing the three competing models of the potential stakeholder, SSCM and the corporate sustainability performance relationship. A dataset of 1,621 organizations allows the statistical comparison of these three models. Findings suggest that stakeholder pressure and SSCM both contribute to an organization’s sustainability performance. Thus, supply chain managers will perceive benefits from SSCM other than merely the reduction of risk from reputational damage through stakeholder activism. (shrink)

Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, EarlyView.

The purpose of this study is to explore the extent and nature of sustainability disclosure practices of companies from environmentally sensitive industries in India. It further investigates the influence of potential determinants on sustainability information disclosure of the companies. The study analyzed the data of 57 energy and mining companies included in NIFTY500 index at National Stock Exchange of India (NSE) for the period 2016 to 2019. In the present study, environment, social, and governance (ESG) parameters were considered (...) to measure the corporate sustainability disclosure practices. Panel data analysis was conducted to investigate the impact of possible determinants on sustainability reporting. The results indicate that variables, such as firm size, market capitalization, and a standalone sustainability reporting, are positively associated with the sustainability information disclosure of companies. The finding also suggests that policymakers should promote a standalone sustainability reporting based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards and also broaden the existing scope of business responsibility reporting in India. Overall findings should help the policymakers and regulators to assess and advance the disclosure reforms to improve sustainability reporting in India. (shrink)

The book examines the evolution and current state of corporate social responsibility (CSR), using a five-stage maturity model: defensive, charitable, promotional, strategic and transformative CSR. The first four stages are dubbed CSR 1.0 and characterise most current CSR practice, while the fifth stage is named CSR 2.0 (also transformative or systemic CSR) and describes emergent and future CSR practices. Reasons are given why CSR 1.0 approaches have failed to have any significant impact on the most serious global social, environmental (...) and ethical challenges. The emergent CSR 2.0 will then be explored in detail by elaborating on five principles underlying the new approach, including: creativity, scalability, responsiveness, glocality and circularity. A four-part DNA Model is also introduced, covering value creation, good governance, societal contribution and ecological integrity, which provides the basis for defining and measuring CSR 2.0. Finally, a 70-question CSR 2.0 self-assessment diagnostic tool developed by the author is presented, with sample data to show how the tool can be used for future research and practitioner application. (shrink)

This study investigates the relationship between corporate governance and corporate sustainability performance in the emerging Asian markets where the central role of sustainable development was perceived after the 2008 global financial crisis. We base our study on the triple bottom line approach that incorporates three dimensions of sustainability: economic, environmental, and social performance. A governance index comprising ten firm-specific provisions is proposed to summarise internal corporate governance. Consistent with agency theory, we confirm that firms with (...) better corporate governance have better corporate sustainability performance. We also determine which main factors drive the governance-sustainability relation. The findings have practical implications for firms, shareholders, and policy makers by emphasising the role of corporate governance in assessing and enhancing corporate sustainability performance. (shrink)

In 1987, the World Commission on Economic Development popularized the term “sustainable development” in its well-cited report, Our Common Future. According to this report, sustainable development is defined as “the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The WCED asserted that sustainable development required simultaneous adoption of environmental, economical, and equity principles. Bansal, 197–218, 2005) has conducted a study of Canadian firms in the oil and gas, mining, (...) and forestry industries from 1986 to 1995. The study found that both resources based and institutional factors influence corporate sustainable development. This paper studied the corporate sustainable development of Mysore Paper Mills Ltd. from 1995 to 2011 using the same model. The study found that independent variables with significant impact on environmental integrity and overall sustainability were fines, penalties, court cases involved by the company, and log of total assets. On economic prosperity, the independent variable with significant impact is log of total assets. For social equity, the independent variable with significant impact is foreign sales as percentage of total sales, number of fines/penalties/court cases, number of fines/penalties/court cases, log, and return on equity. (shrink)

Environmental, social and ethical issues have become increasingly important for businesses due to changed customer expectations, more regulation and stakeholder pressure, amongst others. This led to the development of concepts such as sustainability management, corporate social responsibility, stakeholder management and business ethics. Though mostly developed in isolation, scholars have increasingly worked on their integration. This editorial sheds light on overlaps between these concepts. We find that sustainability management and CSR have become more integrated and are increasingly grounded (...) in an “embedded view“ in which business and society is part of the natural environment. In contrast, business ethics has not been integrated to the same extent, expect for the subfield of environmental ethics. After this general overview, we introduce the individual contributions to the special issue which are advancing the conceptual and empirical foundation of sustainability management, CSR, and business ethics. (shrink)

This paper offers a critique of sustainability reporting and, in particular, a critique of the modern disconnect between the practice of sustainability reporting and what we consider to be the urgent issue of our era: sustaining the life-supporting ecological systems on which humanity and other species depend. Tracing the history of such reporting developments, we identify and isolate the concept of the ‘triple bottom line’ (TBL) as a core and dominant idea that continues to pervade business reporting, and (...) business engagement with sustainability. Incorporating an entity’s economic, environmental and social performance indicators into its management and reporting processes, we argue, has become synonymous with corporate sustainability; in the process, concern for ecology has become sidelined. Moreover, this process has become reinforced and institutionalised through SustainAbility’s biennial benchmarking reports, KPMG’s triennial surveys of practice, initiatives by the accountancy profession and, particularly, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)’s sustainability reporting guidelines. We argue that the TBL and the GRI are insufficient conditions for organizations contributing to the sustaining of the Earth’s ecology. Paradoxically, they may reinforce business-as-usual and greater levels of un-sustainability. (shrink)

This study provides empirical evidence on how corporate sustainability performance (CSP), as proxied by membership of the Dow Jones sustainability index, is reflected in the market value of equity. Using a theoretical framework combining institutional perspectives, stake-holder theory, and resource-based perspectives, we develop a set of hypotheses that relate the market value of equity to CSP. For a sample of North American firms, our preliminary results show that CSP has significant explanatory power for stock prices over the (...) traditional summary accounting measures such as earnings and book value of equity. However, further analyses suggest that we should not focus on corporate sustainability itself. Our findings suggest that what investors really do is to penalize large profitable firms with low level of CSP. Firms with incentives to develop a high level of CSP not engaging on such strategy are, thus, penalized by the market. (shrink)

The world is faced with unprecedented global economic, environmental, and social challenges. Sustainable development has emerged as an organizing principle for addressing these issues. Corporate social responsibility is seen as the business contribution to sustainable development. The article defines CSR as an organization's efforts to secure resources and legitimacy for survival or competitive advantage by managing nonmarket and nonregulated issues arising from complex social and environmental problems. Supporting this definition, the “sustainability issue management” model is presented to help (...) managers and researchers assess and manage CSR issues. Based on ecological economics, the tool originated from a larger study. The model is used to explain and discuss how the UK Government's National Indicator 185 shaped the action of a supplier to Local Authorities. The case illustrates how the SIM model can help both managers and researchers understand and manage CSR issues. (shrink)

Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, Volume 31, Issue 1, Page 80-99, January 2022.

The assurance of corporate sustainability reporting has long been a controversial field. Corporate management and assurance providers are routinely accused of 'capturing' what should be an exercise in public accountability. This article responds to recent calls for an analysis of the process by which Capture' takes place. Integrating elements of neo-institutional theory and the arena concept, the article sets out a fresh conceptual framework for investigating the dynamics of the interactions between the various bodies active in the (...) assurance field in the UK. (shrink)

The complexity of current social and environmental grand challenges generates many conflicts and tensions at the individual, organization and/or systems levels. Paradox theory has emerged as a promising way to approach such a complexity of corporate sustainability going beyond the instrumental business-case perspective and achieving superior sustainability performance. However, the fuzziness in the empirical use of the concept of “paradox” and the absence of a systems perspective limits its potential. In this paper, we perform a systematic review (...) and content analysis of the empirical literature related to paradox and sustainability, offering a useful guide for researchers who intend to adopt the concept of “paradox” empirically. Our analysis provides a comprehensive account of the uses of the construct - which allows the categorization of the literature into three distinct research streams: 1) paradoxical tensions, 2) paradoxical frame/thinking, and 3) paradoxical actions/strategies - and a comprehensive overview of the findings that emerge in each of the three. Further, by adopting a system perspective, we propose a theoretical framework that considers possible interconnections across the identified paradoxical meanings and different levels of analysis (individual, organizational, systems) and discuss key research gaps emerging. Finally, we reflect on the role a clear notion of paradox can have in supporting business ethics scholars in developing a more “immanent” evaluation of corporate sustainability, overcoming the current instrumental view. (shrink)

Corporate sustainability can be defined as organizations’ commitment to profitability, environment, and social well-being. This study uses a transactional culture analysis of CS reporting practices to explain why some Indian organizations conform to voluntary CS reporting guidelines and others do not. The literature contains two different perspectives on culture, defined broadly as a set of values that guide people’s behavior at a given time. Most past studies typically use national culture to explain differences in CS practices across nations. (...) This concept embeds corporate cultures within the larger national culture, neglecting intranation diversity. Conversely, according to the transactional culture approach used in this study, cultures are plural and independent of geoethnic boundaries, and emerge through social transactions. TCA encourages multilevel explorations of complex social phenomena. Since CS reporting preferences are the outcome of ongoing transactions among organizational stakeholders across different levels, TCA is more appropriate for this study. Since this application requires an understanding of social accountability, the authors use Mary Douglas’s Cultural Framework, a transactional framework of social accountability. A qualitative exploration of six Indian organizations using DCF reveals different dominant forms of social accountability in these organizations: either alone or as paired hybrids. Consequently, each organization prioritizes different stakeholders and reacts differently to voluntary CS reporting guidelines. Identifying the dominant form or forms of social accountability in their organizations and understanding their underlying reasons for resisting voluntary CS guidelines enables managers to secure better collaboration for their CS initiatives. (shrink)

Trade-offs between the conflicting aspects of corporate sustainability have hindered the realization of win–win opportunities that advance both sustainable development and the bottom line. The question today is no longer whether these trade-offs are encountered in the pursuit of CS, but under which circumstances they occur, with which responses, and how best to navigate them. This study conducted a systematic review and content analysis of the trade-off literature published to-date at both conceptual and applied levels. Through this process, (...) a hierarchical framework is proposed for the analysis of trade-offs based on their different categories, their root tensions, their interconnections, and where they are encountered in the practice of CS, from policy to implementation. Based on this, a number of recommendations are provided on how managers may better navigate the hierarchy of trade-off decision-making, to ultimately transform trade-offs into synergies. Several suggestions for future trade-off research are also provided. (shrink)

This paper provides an overview of the contemporary debate on the concepts and definitions of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Corporate Sustainability (CS). The conclusions, based on historical perspectives, philosophical analyses, impact of changing contexts and situations and practical considerations, show that "one solution fits all"-definition for CS(R) should be abandoned, accepting various and more specific definitions matching the development, awareness and ambition levels of organizations.

Company decision makers constantly face the competing demands of business and sustainability. Although chief executive officers (CEOs) are the main actors responsible for ensuring overall company performance and addressing multiple competing demands, few studies have explored their understanding of business and sustainability and how these understandings relate to tensions and tension handling. The present study uses a discursive approach to analyse CEO interview data and identifies three distinct discourses—instrumental, normative and transformative discourses—through which the CEOs construct corporate (...) sustainability. These discourses occur simultaneously and result in different tensions and tension management strategies. By offering an approach for examining individual CEOs' corporate sustainability constructions alongside tension construction and management in their contexts, this study contributes to the literature on tensions in corporate sustainability. The simultaneous presence of contradictory yet intertwined discourses illustrates how CEOs respond to complexity related to corporate sustainability, including multiple strategic objectives, diverse stakeholder demands and associated tensions. The discourses also reveal how CEOs' language use fosters or hinders corporate sustainability actions and determines who and what is taken into consideration. The findings related to the CEOs' transformative discourse introduced in this paper demonstrate such constructions that have potential to address and transcend competing business and sustainability demands. (shrink)