Sustainability: clarifications for this “decade of action”
Abstract
In recent times there has been a gradual shift, a greater acceptance, towards sustainability, both in academic and business circles. However, at the same time, a certain confusion can also be perceived, in the face of the multiplication of initiatives, standards and acronyms. In addition, several debates are overlapping, advocating different environmental and social considerations, sometimes in opposition to each other. The purpose of this note is therefore to provide some clarifications that will help readers to better understand this “decade of action”, as the united nations has called it. I propose seven questions, which i will analyse in turn. These questions are not exhaustive; there will certainly be other relevant issues. But they are certainly central issues, which we can assume will continue to be crucial in the years to come.
Received: 18 November 2021
Accepted: 7 February 2022
References
Carnegie, A. (1889). 1906. The Gospel of Wealth. North American Review, 183, 526-37.
Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal. June 1973. 312-332.
Edmans, A. (2011). Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial Economics. 101, 621-640.
Freeman, E. (1984). Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman: Boston.
Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.
Gautier, A y Pache, A. (2013). Research on corporate philanthropy: a review and assessment, Journal of Business Ethics, 126 (3), 343-369.
Gray, R. (2006). Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organisational value creation? Whose value? Whose creation? Accounting, Auditing &Accountability Journal, 19 (6), 793-819.
Humphrey, P., Carter, D. A., & Simkins, B. (2016). The market’s reaction to unexpected, catastrophic events: the case of oil and gas stock returns and the Gulf oil spill. The Journal of Risk Finance, 17 (1), 2-25.
Handy, C. (2002). What’s a business for, Harvard Business Review, dec 2002 49-55.
Karnani, A. (2010). The case against corporate social responsibility, The Wall Street Journal.
King, A y Lenox, M. (2001). Does it really pay to be Green? An empirical study of firm environmental and financial performance, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 5 (1), 105-116.
Margolis, Joshua D. and Elfenbein, Hillary Anger and Walsh, James P. (2009). Does it Pay to be Good...And does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Disponible en: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1866371 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1866371.
Margolis, J. y Elfenbein, H. (2008). Do well by doing good? Don’t count on it. Harvard Business Review, January 2008, p. 19.
Patten, D. (2007). Does the market value corporate philanthropy? evidence form the response to the 2004 tsunami relief effort. Journal of Business Ethics, 81 (3), 599-607.
Porter, M. y Kramer, M. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80 (12), 56-89.
Porter, M. y van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive, ending the stalemate, Harvard Business Review, sept-oct 1995, 120-134.
Quattrone, P. (2021). Seeking transparency makes one blind: how to rethink disclosure, account for nature and make corporations sustainable, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35 (2), 547-566.
Quattrone, P. (2020). A smart third way, Developing Leaders, issue 36: 2020, 66-74.
Stone, O. (1987). Wall Street (film). 20th century Fox.
Stout, l. (2012). New thinking on “shareholder primacy”, Accounting, Economics, and Law. A convivium, 2 (2), art 4, 1-21.
Unerman, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (2007). The business case for regulation of corporate social responsibility and accountability. in Accounting Forum (Vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 332-353). No longer published by Elsevier.
Wang, H., Choi, J., and Li, J. (2008).Too little or too much? Untangling the relationship between corporate philanthropy and firm financial performance, Organization Science, 19 (1), 143-159.
License:
Works published in this journal are available since 2021 under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license - CC BY-NC 4.0
. Content prior to 2021 is not covered by the journal's current Open Access policy.
Authors' Rights:
Authors retain copyright over their work published in the Bulletin of Economic Studies and grant the Bulletin of Economic Studies non-exclusive rights to exploit the work for layout, publication, and dissemination purposes. This license allows the Bulletin of Economic Studies to distribute, reproduce, and disseminate the work on its platform and through other media, subject to the conditions outlined in this notice.
Readers' Rights:
Readers may read, download, print, search, share (copy, redistribute, or link to full text), or adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the content, provided that:
- The materials are not used for commercial purposes.
- The original work is properly cited, including the name of the author and the source.
- Any modifications made to the original content are clearly indicated.
Commercial use of the materials is prohibited without the express permission of the authors. For clarity, commercial use is defined as any activity intended for financial gain or involving direct commercial exchange.
Conditions of Use:
The use of content must not infringe the rights of others or be used in a way that could damage the reputation of the author or the Bulletin of Economic Studies.
Responsibility for Content:
Authors are responsible for the content of their papers and the Bulletin of Economic Studies is not responsible for the opinions therein expressed.
More Information:
Open Access, Licensing, and Copyright Policy
.jpg)
.jpg)
