Organisations beyond Brundtland: A Definition of Corporate Sustainability Based on Corporate Values

Abstract

Although a plethora of alternatives exist, companies often base their sustainability efforts more or less explicitly on the definition of the Brundtland Commission. There are, however, conceptual problems when this definition is removed from its original context, in which it addresses social policies and state institutions. In particular the notions of “needs of the present” and “future generations” reveal the qualitative differences between the socio-political context of the Brundtland Commission and the corporate context. In this paper, we explore the entailing dilemmas, argue why current approaches to solve them are insufficient and analyse common practices for sustainability-related statements of 50 companies in Switzerland. The results support the argument that companies tend to avoid a specific definition of corporate sustainability or transpose the Brundtland definition, instead. Both approaches are inappropriate as guiding principles for corporate policy. Instead, we propose basing the concept of sustainability on the broad premise that “the future is a better, healthier place than the present”, specified and substantiated using functionally formulated corporate values. These corporate values and the vision of a “better place” derived from them gear corporate sustainability efforts towards restitution and/or compensation.

Clarifying the Concept of Corporate Sustainability and Providing Convergence for Its Definition

“…Finally, inclusive approaches to corporate sustainability: CS as a holistic concept, as part of the renowned Triple Bottom Line, as a financial incentive, or as an indexing exercise. In 2018, Frecè and Harder [12] analyzed that "Although a plethora of alternatives exists, companies often base their sustainability efforts more or less explicitly on the definition of the Brundtland Commission". According to the Brundtland report-the first document that introduced the "sustainable development" concept [12]-businesses are said to have a crucial role in managing the impact of population in ecosystems, resources, food security, and sustainable economies in order to decrease the pressure society places on the environment (WCED), 1987.…”

“…In 2018, Frecè and Harder [12] analyzed that "Although a plethora of alternatives exists, companies often base their sustainability efforts more or less explicitly on the definition of the Brundtland Commission". According to the Brundtland report-the first document that introduced the "sustainable development" concept [12]-businesses are said to have a crucial role in managing the impact of population in ecosystems, resources, food security, and sustainable economies in order to decrease the pressure society places on the environment (WCED), 1987. As reported by many authors [1,[13][14][15][16], the origin of the corporate sustainability concept is often linked to the Brundtland report's definition of "sustainable development" as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability for future generations to meet their own needs".…”

“…Banerjee et al [18] asserted that it is rather a slogan that emphasizes development via a capitalist notion instead of undertaking a real eco-centric approach. Frecè and Harder [12] identified the inappropriateness of transposing the definition from a socio-political context to a corporate context, highlighting how this resulted in the lack of a sound theoretical foundation, which made the concept of corporate sustainability arbitrary. In 2022, Costa et al conducted a literature review to integrate the different perspectives in order to broaden the understanding of the concept, on the premise that the diversity of research from the different fields has created confusion surrounding sustainability, corporate sustainability and corporate social responsibility [19].…”

Facing TBL with IoT: creating value and positively impacting business processes

“…The authors evaluated the stakeholders involved, each of their needs and which should be a theoretical global processes which provides well-being for humanity while preserving the natural resources, as depicted in Figure 2. Because humanity is currently over-exploiting natural resources to maintain their way of life, a greater understanding of sustainable business modeling becomes a crucial matter (Frece `and Harder, 2018).…”

Government’s role in ensuring sustainable waste management: Valencia’s case from the triple bottom line perspective

“…Since humanity is currently over-exploiting natural resources in order to maintain their way of life, particularly in developed-industrialized countries and individuals living in large cities, it becomes a crucial matter [9]. This implies that we would need 1.5 planets to provide the resources and to absorb all the waste we generate [10].…”