Search results

The instrumental-normative divide that has historically characterized approaches to societal sustainability has also resulted in a rift between underlying mental models and methods destined to address the issue. This separation makes our understanding and tackling of the present global ecological problems only limited and ineffective. The present work aims to draw on theoretical background to develop a conceptual framework for transitioning to integrated corporate sustainability.

Drawing inspiration from Luhmann’s (1995) theory of social systems, we consider the instrumental (hard) and normative (soft) methods (Jackson 2019) for corporate sustainability as “conceptual systems” that derive much of traditional social systems’ attributes. These systems are autopoietic, complexity-reducing and functionally differentiated. Following Luhmann’s philosophical grounding, we suggest that integrating the two systems of hard and soft methods boils down to constraining both systems’ internal complexity by imposing limitations on their operational structures. This translates into a decodification–recodification process whereby new methods emerge as a combination of initially disconnected structures.

The proposed conceptual integration framework is applied to the case of the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) which has been recently subject to inconclusive controversy. Our work demonstrates that redesigning the SBSC’s architecture following the presented framework leads to embracing complexity, tensions and conflict all the while offering a systematic approach for properly identifying and quantifying cause–effect relationships. Moreover, the proposed framework scores high in Complexity and Systemicity measures, making it both durable and practically useful. More generally, this work drives home the point that an integrated approach to sustainability management is not only important but also feasible and theoretically durable.

Theoretically, the present work underscores the contribution of systems theory, and particularly the Luhmannian perspective, to transcending some of the most salient “divides” in approaches to societal sustainability. The decodification–recodification process not only enables integrating two distinct conceptual systems, but it also transforms the divide into an opportunity to gain a fresher perspective on one of the most challenging issues of our time. This process may demand, however, some adjustments as we move across various function systems, which requires solid knowledge and understanding of the underlying “codes” that define the systems subject to integration.

This work implies that integration of varied and sometimes outwardly opposed function systems can and must be carried out to achieve larger societal impact. With respect to the illustrated case, the emerging dynamic SBSC offers a viable strategic planning platform whereby managers and stakeholders can concurrently define, forecast and adjust the societal strategy that maximizes triple bottom-line indicators and sustainable development impact.

Providing decision and policymakers with integrated sustainability management approaches and instruments will have a direct benefit on enhancing the way systems, and large corporations in particular, treat and deal with nature and human beings.

We propose that proper integration of multiple function systems, employing integrative, unbiased and structured methodologies, can be decisive in challenging current practices in sustainability management and in providing informed guidance for making the high-stake decisions needed in the transition towards sustainable development of business and society.

This paper aims to investigate overlaps, complementarities and divergences between the literature on circular economy (CE) models and related literature in non-linear production models and frameworks, including CE, reverse logistics, closed-loop, industrial symbiosis and industrial ecology.

A systematic literature review was conducted focussing on the benefits of non-linear modes adoption.

The results show a high degree of convergence in findings, gaps and weaknesses of these literatures. Negative environmental, economic and operational impacts are understudied. There is a scarcity of studies identifying practices resulting in empirically tested benefits. The business and society case for non-linear production is still largely built upon conceptual studies, modelling and a few case studies. Despite a normative focus, there is very little use of theory, in particular, management theories.

First, the authors use only one, albeit highly recognized database, Scopus. This database may have omitted some relevant research, journals such as the Journal of Cleaner Production and Resources Conservation & Recycling that are more likely to publish such research and also have a more interdisciplinary approach. This is an important gap and interesting result to claim for more interdisciplinary research. Second, the filtering process used and the focus on Association of Business Schools top journals may have also omitted some relevant research, such as a large stream of literature in specialist journals such as Resources Conservation and Recycling and the Journal of Cleaner Production.

There are contradictions, tensions and epistemological ambiguity that needs to be critically addressed. Such tensions may be associated with the knowledge field that gave rise to these different non-linear production approaches. Many of them appeared at the same time, but from different sciences and disciplines with their own perspectives. Then in doing so, they create confusion in the definitions of CE, assumptions underlying modelling and business choices arising from this complexity. This can be minimized through the critical interpretation of knowledge to elucidate epistemological quandaries to improve the understanding of the economic, social and environmental impacts of practices.

In some way, this result makes sense, as the authors have limited the search to management, business and accounts journals, especially talking about Operations Management journals. This is an important gap and interesting result to claim for more interdisciplinary research.

In addition to gaps previously described, the authors identified areas of tensions where the literature offers inconclusive – often contradictory – findings requiring further exploration. A better understanding of these tensions is required to understand the impacts of non-linear production and develop policy guidelines for industry and policymakers to scale-up CE.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how synergies between lean and green supply chain practices emerge. In particular, the authors explore which practices identified in the literature are actually implemented in a synergic way and determine what synergic results they bring.

An in-depth case study of the Brazilian subsidiary of a large multinational company was conducted using interviews, in-plant observations and document analysis.

The majority of the practices (26 out of 31) bring synergic results to lean and green performance. Synergies can emerge spontaneously (rather than being strategized) even when the implementation of green and lean practices is compartmentalized in different areas, with no department or supportive management team to treat them in a joined way. The strongest synergic results are found in practices related to suppliers and customers because these supply chain actors act as bridges between the lean and green areas.

The authors did not have access to the company customers and suppliers. This restriction made the analysis of drivers skewed towards the perspective of the focal company and the way they framed their interactions. Second, the assessment of synergies was in the majority of cases qualitative.

Empirically, it is the first time that all synergic practices identified in the literature are explored through a case study. Theoretically, the authors developed a model of determinants of lean and green synergies based on constructs emerging from the data; behavioural literature in synergies and research on synergies in mergers and acquisitions.

This paper analyses the relationship between environmental protection and mid‐term financial performance, focusing on when and why this relationship is positive. In particular, the paper disaggregates environmental protection, differentiating between environmental management practices, environmental proactivity and environmental performance of the organization.

It uses a cross‐section survey of 2,122 Welsh companies to gather information on environmental practices and the FAME database to collect data on accounting based financial performance. The paper uses regression analysis on a combined sample of 186 Welsh companies to evaluate the effect on performance of different types of environmental protection.

On the whole, the results show a positive effect of environmental protection on mid‐term financial performance. Financial performance has a positive and significant correlation with environmental proactivity and with environmental performance, while it has a no significant relation with environmental management.

The paper presents a disaggregated analysis of environmental protection in relationship with financial performance. The paper differentiates between environmental management practices, environmental proactivity and environmental performance of the organization in their relationship with financial performance.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework that systematically captures the ambiguity of different understandings about science, the university and its relation to society, while conceptualising sustainability. Following Corley and Gioia (2004, p. 174) on identity ambiguity and change, it seems pivotal to better understanding the ambiguity of sustainability in relation to academic cultures and university models to manage the transition more effectively.

The nature of this paper’s objectives as well as the wide thematic scope leads to the need of exploring a broad knowledge base. This was best addressed by an exploratory literature review with data collection from primary and secondary sources. The data was interpreted through a hermeneutic analysis and resulted in the inductive development of first categories and goals (further referred to as category development). In addition, a multi-method approach further adjusted the categories and raised their empirical validity and social robustness.

Implementing sustainability involves dealing with a double bound ambiguity due to organisational and individual identity reasons. Five fields of ambiguity were developed to systemise the conceptualisation of a sustainable university along contradictory understandings of science, the university and sustainability. These fields offer a framework to qualitatively assess the degree of sustainability in higher education institutions. Arguments for and against sustainability in universities have been categorised around five criteria and associated to the fields of ambiguity. The finding indicates that meaning in organisational change management for sustainability can be considered both, a potential driver and barrier for a sustainability transition in universities.

This paper exclusively focussed on the internal perspective and left aside any external factors that influence the sustainability transition, such as political measures to stimulate sustainability in higher education. In addition, the operational dimension of a sustainable university has been neglected, which is by all means a necessary and important aspect. The interrelation of the identified goals has not been discussed.

This paper focusses on the conceptualisation and understanding of sustainability within the institution, an often-forgotten but fundamental aspect of implementation. The fields of ambiguity are designed to be applied for assessing the “degree of maturity” of a sustainable university. The fields reveal the different understandings about the role, the mission and the governance of universities, stemming from competing preferences about goals and their assumed relations by various stakeholders of a higher education institutions. The five fields are not an attempt to resolve the hidden contradictions and tensions in a sustainability transition, but to state them clearly to anticipate resistances and conflicts that hinder the development of a shared understanding.

Stakeholder theory has been accused of being an umbrella concept rather than a distinct theory per se. Recognizing the stakeholder concept as an essentially contested concept subject to multiple competing interpretations, this chapter presents a systematic meta-level conceptual analysis. This chapter aims to contribute to the optimal development of stakeholder theory by clarifying the conceptual confusion surrounding its central construct to help prevent stakeholder theory from developing into an accumulation of disparate ideas. Multi-contextual contributions to stakeholder theory are analysed via an unparalleled bounded systematic review of 593 stakeholder definitions. Determinants of the stakeholder concept have been deconstructed and analysed to establish how definitional variables relate to variants of stakeholder theory. These determinants have been sorted, filtered and ordered to produce a comprehensive, multi-dimensional classification of stakeholder theory based on four hyponyms which relate to 16 definitional categories. The classification was then subjected to empirical testing with positive results. This evaluation of the stakeholder concept illustrates how contributions are aligned and interrelated, thereby prescribing what is acceptable (unacceptable) as inclusion within stakeholder theory. An invaluable overview of what we know about stakeholder theory is presented within a single model, drawing the conclusion that stakeholder theory is indeed a single theory.

The purpose of this paper is to answer the call for CSR communication research to develop and substantiate outcomes that may better explain CSR communication strategies and practices. The paper takes the research a step further, exploring the role of legitimacy in CSR communication research.

A literature collection methodology, combined with directed content analysis, was used to identify central themes in the literature.

The following categories of studies were identified: perception, impact and promotion studies; image and reputation studies; performance studies; and conceptual/rhetorical studies. Addressed from a legitimacy perspective, the study found that the most important types of legitimizing communicative practices articulated in the four types of studies were related to: seeking knowledge about stakeholders through perception, impact and promotion activities; monitoring and controlling the environment through image and reputation activities; creating stakeholder value through collaboration and engagement; and persuading and convincing stakeholders through rhetorics, CSR models and concepts. The study also found that practices and activities related to perceiving stakeholders’ expectations, needs and requirements are assumed to be most effective for corporations aiming at building or maintaining legitimacy.

The key contribution of the paper lies in exploring how corporate legitimacy is anticipated and extrapolated in the CSR communication literature, including which pinpointed CSR communication strategies and practices are assumed to be more effective than others in bridging stakeholders’ perceptions of corporations’ social and environmental actions. Until date, no reviews exist of the role of legitimacy in CSR communication research.

Little is known about the role causation plays in establishing the necessary conditions for micro and small enterprises (MSEs) to face the first stages of a major crisis. Our study aims to investigate how causation affects their ability to be successful at the onset of widespread calamities.

We examined how 191 Brazilian MSEs utilized causation in managing different aspects of their operating cycle before the COVID-19 pandemic using a combinatory methodology.

Causation is more important than usually supposed for MSEs when facing widespread crises.

Our study did not explore the specific interactions between the intensified use of causation practices and other factors within MSEs that may lead to superior outcomes. The limitations of our data prevented a fully assessment of sales fluctuations of firms and how they responded to the latter stages of the COVID-19 crisis.

Our findings underscore the significance of causation in helping MSEs navigate future crises, emphasizing the enduring value of time-tested management practices. MSE owners and managers should ensure the presence of causation-oriented practices, as these forms the foundation for well-established management principles. This strong foundation equips MSEs to effectively employ effectuation strategies when it is needed.

Small enterprises are the backbone of every economy and play a vital role in economic recovery. Our findings offer valuable insights that can help these enterprises effectively navigate major crises and contribute to economic recovery.

This study is among the first to answer to the call for more research that isolates and investigates granular elements of causation. Additionally, our study is original in that we address the need to consider the temporal dimension of causality.

The construction industry’s contribution to environmental deterioration is widely established in the literature, implying that addressing this issue will require a coordinated effort from all stakeholders. According to literature, stakeholder involvement without stakeholder management (SKM) is not enough, in ensuring efficient construction waste management (CWM). This study investigates the impact of SKM on efficient CWM by aggregating all relevant SKM variables and measuring their degree of influence on efficient CWM.

This study used a four-stage research approach that included a literature review, a pilot study, a questionnaire survey and statistical analysis. After a thorough examination of the literature, nine essential SKM factors were identified and tested by a questionnaire survey following a pilot study. A total of 310 questionnaires were filled out and returned for analysis (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis).

The study established that SKM is a unidimensional construct since all the variables extracted unto one underlying component with total variance explained (TVE), accounting for 58.938% of the total Variance in the measure of SKM in efficient CWM. Additionally, the reliability and validity test results satisfied the recommended thresholds, thus justifying the factorability of the construct. Furthermore, the hypothesis test revealed that SKM has a statistically significant impact on efficient CWM, implying that increasing SKM will have a beneficial impact on efficient CWM.

The study is limited to material waste management in the construction industry and the outcome was determined solely by a field survey in Ghana. Extending the study to other jurisdictions would have improved its findings and made them easier to generalise.

The study’s findings are helpful for practitioners and researchers, especially regarding the influence of the eight SKM variables on efficient CWM.

The study’s findings will reduce pollution, thus enhancing public health and encouraging social inclusion through the creation of jobs in the waste management chain.

The uniqueness of this study is anchored on the fact that no CWM study has considered all the eight SKM variables measured in this study at the same time. Also, this study has contributed to the literature by establishing the determinants of SKM in efficient CWM in Ghana.