Helping to pull our planet out of the red: An environmental report of BSO/Origin

Huizing, Ard; Dekker, Henk

doi:10.1016/0361-3682(92)90040-y

Cited by 42 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Sporadically, intergenerational aspects in corporate behaviour have been examined (Wade-Benzoni, 2002). In addition, research on corporate externalities (Crouch, 2006) and full cost accounting (Atkinson, 2000;Huizing and Dekker, 1992) addresses the impact of corporate behaviour at the societal level. Nonetheless, trade-offs in corporate sustainability at the societal level deserve more attention, as this level represents the ultimate reference point for sustainable development.…”

Section: Societal Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade‐offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it

Hahn¹,

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mainstream of the literature on corporate sustainability follows the win-win paradigm, according to which economic, environmental and social sustainability aspects can be achieved simultaneously; indeed, corporate sustainability has often been defi ned by the intersection of these three areas. However, given the multi-faceted and complex nature of sustainable development, we argue that trade-offs and confl icts in corporate sustainability are the rule rather than the exception. Turning a blind eye to trade-offs thus results in a limited perspective on corporate contributions to sustainable development. In order to overcome this situation, we propose an initial framework for the analysis of trade-offs in corporate sustainability. By doing so, we pursue two aims. First, the framework serves as a starting point for a more systematic analysis of trade-offs in corporate sustainability, as it identifi es different levels and dimensions to characterize such trade-offs. Second, it serves to contextualize the contributions to this special issue on trade-offs in corporate sustainability. Based on the framework, we fi nally point to some promising avenues for future research on trade-offs in, and a more inclusive notion of, corporate sustainability. Copyright

show abstract

Section: Societal Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade‐offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it

Hahn¹,

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As sustainability issues are being more and more institutionalized (Bansal and Bogner 2002;Bansal and Roth 2000;Prakash 2001) there are standardized management systems, guidelines and official recommendations for environmental and social reporting, tools for the measurement of corporate sustainability and applied concepts, which try to facilitate the integration of sustainability into organizations (please refer to Appendix 1 for an overview on exemplary selected tools and management approaches). Tools for the measurement of corporate sustainability focus on controlling and managing the operationalization of sustainability strategies (Atkinson 2000;Figge and Hahn 2004a, b;Huizing and Dekker 1992;Kaptein and Wempe 2001). The most prominent examples of sustainability measurement systems are the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard and sustainability maturity models: the first posits that for companies to contribute to sustainable development, it is desirable that corporate performance improves in all three dimensions of sustainability-economic, environmental, and social-simultaneously (Figge et al 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business transformation towards sustainability

Müller

Pfleger

2014

Bus Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability is becoming increasingly important in today's corporate world and can contribute to the current and future success of organizations. Integrating ecological, social, and economic objectives into corporate decisions is a key success factor for transformation towards sustainability. As sustainability is not achieved by single actions, but rather is an on-going process, decision-makers must have means to analyze the current state of an organization. For this, we first illustrate how companies can structure the field of action for the transformation towards sustainability. Furthermore, we propose a decision model to determine how sustainability actions should be implemented in accordance with the paradigm of value-based management, i.e., considering their economic effects. We illustrate the application of the approach using the example of a German medium-sized company.Executive summary Recently, organizations have recognized sustainability as an emerging mega-trend and as an increasingly important strategic goal. Its integration into the business model can be a key success factor, but also a challenge that requires a systematic approach. In order to comprehensively steer corporate sustainability, with the aim of minimizing negative externalities while maximizing positive effects, companies first need to structure their processes to achieve transparency on where sustainability actions can be incorporated. By furthermore considering the three dimensions of sustainability, possible starting points for sustainability actions can be identified. These two perspectives are complemented by adapting the basic idea of stages of development and maturity to sustainability context, as a way to capture the progress of sustainability actions within each corporate activity. The resulting ''Sustainability Maturity Cube'' serves as a blueprint, i.e., a first generic approach, of how an organization can structure 123Business Research (2014) 7:313-350 DOI 10.1007 the field of action for the transformation towards sustainability. Considering the paradigm of value-based management in business context, economic effects of the transformation towards sustainability have to be regarded. We therefore, also propose a decision model, which allows aligning ecological, social and economic objectives in order to draw economically useful conclusions by determining the optimal increase of the sustainability maturity level. To evaluate whether our approach proves useful for subject matter experts who are involved in sustainability decisions, we provide a first example of how a specific company can transform towards sustainability.

show abstract

“…Um nichtreversible Schäden zu vermeiden, postuliert starke Nachhaltigkeit daher kritische Schwellenwerte (Randall et al 1996, Farmer et al 1998) für das gesamte natürliche Kapital (Costanza et al 1992, Arrow et al 1995, Daly 1995 -oder zumindest für Teile des natürlichen Kapitals (Victor 1991, Toman 1994, Endres et al 1998. Der ursprünglich als makroökonomisches Konzept entwickelte Ansatz der nachhaltigen Entwicklung wurde in der Zwischenzeit auch verstärkt auf die einzelwirtschaftliche Ebene von Unternehmen übertragen (Huizing et al 1992 Gladwin et al 1995, Hart 1997, Roome 1998, Callens et al 1999, Atkinson 2000. Im Folgenden wird vertieft auf die Anwendung des Nachhaltigkeitskonzepts auf einzelne Unternehmen und die dabei verwendeten Ansätze eingegangen.…”

Section: Das Konzept Der Nachhaltigen Entwicklungunclassified

“…B. Huizing et al 1992, Atkinson 2000. Diese Autoren argumentieren, dass zur Bewertung der Nachhaltigkeitsleistung von Unternehmen die von ihnen erbrachte öko-nomische Leistung um ihre externen Kosten korrigiert werden muss.…”

Section: Orientierung An Externen Kostenunclassified

“…Als Resultat wird ein so genannter Green (Atkinson 2000) bzw. Net Value Added (Huizing et al 1992) errechnet, der zum Ausdruck bringt, ob ein Unternehmen genügend Wert schafft, um die verursachten ökologischen Schäden zu kompensieren. Trotz ihrer guten theoretischen Fundierung stößt diese methodische Vorgehensweise jedoch bei ihrer praktischen Umsetzung recht schnell an Grenzen, da die Monetarisierung externer ökologischer und sozialer Effekte in der Praxis mit einer Reihe von Problemen behaftet ist (Steer et al 1994, Rees et al 1999).…”

Section: Orientierung An Externen Kostenunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sustainable Value Added – Ein neues Maß des Nachhaltigkeitsbeitrags von Unternehmen am Beispiel der Henkel KGaA

Figge¹,

Hahn²

2004

Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.

show abstract

Helping to pull our planet out of the red: An environmental report of BSO/Origin

Cited by 42 publications

References 1 publication

Trade‐offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it

Trade‐offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it

Business transformation towards sustainability

Sustainable Value Added – Ein neues Maß des Nachhaltigkeitsbeitrags von Unternehmen am Beispiel der Henkel KGaA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About