SUSTAINABILITY – STRATEGIES,
INNOVATION & CHANGE READINGS
M0 – WHITEMAN, WALKER & PEREGO (2013)
PLANETARY BOUNDARIES- ECOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR CORPORATE
SUSTAINABILITY
Gap: link business processes to macro ecological processes and boundary conditions
Planetary boundaries = the safe operating space for humanity – if we cross these boundaries we will
face ‘a state less conducive to human development’
CORPORTATE SUSTAINABILITY
Basic definition of sustainability: ability of 1+ entities, either individually/ collectively, to exist and
flourish (unchanged/ in evolved forms) for lengthy timeframes, in a manner that the existence and
flourishing of other collectivities of entities is permitted at related levels & in related systems.
NATURAL SCIENCE AND PLANETARY SYSTEMS
largely because of a rapidly growing reliance on fossil fuels and industrialized forms of agriculture,
human activities have reached a level that could damage the systems that keep Earth in the desirable
Holocene state
characteristic feature of natural systems
exhibit non-linear dynamics with abrupt changes = complex adaptive systems the
key characteristic: self-organizing systems – but within limits
if limits are exceeded the system no longer tends to recover towards its current ‘identity’,
but instead tends towards some different configuration
Instead of sustainability, rather resilience = capacity of a system to absorb shocks while maintain
function
Social-ecological system = system in which people depend on resources provided by ecosystems &
ecosystem dynamics are influenced, to varying degrees, by human activities
AND VICE VERSA social dynamics are influenced, to varying degrees, by ecosystem conditions &
dynamic ecological processes
PLANETARY BOUNDARIES (PB)
= provocative extension of social-ecological systems thinking
= approach that acknowledges that one issue alone (whether climate change, ocean acidification, or
biodiversity loss) cannot be managed in isolation
Scale = spatial, temporal, quantitative, analytical
dimensions used to measure & study any phenomenon
Rest on 9 critical Earth-system processes & their
associated thresholds (already crossed)
1
, 1. Climate change
2. Rate of biodiversity loss (terrestrial & marine)
3. Interference with the nitrogen & phosphorus cycles (due largely to artificial fertilizers &
industrial agricultural practices)
4. Stratospheric ozone depletion
5. Ocean acidification
6. Global fresh water use
7. Change in land use
8. Chemical pollution
9. Atmospheric aerosol loading
OPERATIONAL INDICATORS OF KEY THRESHOLD EFFECTS
CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY FROM A PLANETARY PERSPECTIVE
CHEMICAL POLLUTION
Toxic release inventory (TRI) in USA is by far the most popularly used proxy of environmental
performance measures: http://www.epa.gov/tri/tridotnet/
Sorted by company, industry, chemical & geographic area
Facility-level data
Since 1987
Purposes of TRI:
1. to measure the efficacy of pollution prevention programmes and chemical use reduction
2. to assess the efforts of corporations/ family-owned firms to improve their environmental
performance records
3. to examine the relationship between environmental performance and executive compen-
sation, financial performance, or stock-market reaction
2
,Downsides of TRI:
different estimation methods/ weighing schemes ca be applied to correct for the variable
toxicity levels of releases
only partially measures one aspect because it does not provide insight into global distribution
patterns outside of the US
CLIMATE CHANGE
Positive relationship between disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) & firm-value = capital
market rewards those companies that are better able to manage their exposure to climate change
risks
firms adjust strategies to generate firm-specific advantages in response to institutional
pressures but not necessarily in response to FB from Earth systems
missing: if increased levels of GHG disclosure leads to reduction in CO 2 emission
firms implement more (or report more frequently on these) but absolute levels of GHGs continue to
rise at planetary level & much of it is linked to collective corporate behaviour
overall studies are firm/ industry focused and few attempt to analyse cumulative, interrelated
systemic impacts on the local, regional/ continental, or global scale
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
new databases
firm- and market-based incentives need to be closely tied to managerial effort & institutional
pressures for change
individual firms can’t easily set meaningful individual targets that will effectively solve the
problem in isolation sectorial & firm level targets for reduction need to be developed &
implemented jointly
more practical experimentation in global governance
MODULE 1
EMISSION SCOPES
MODULE 2
3
, **M2 – EHRENFELD (2008)
SUSTAINABILITY BY DESIGN- SOLVING THE WRONG PROBLEMS
1. What does Ehrenfeld identify as the reason(s) for why sustainability is so difficult to achieve?
2. What definition approach for sustainability does Ehrenfeld seem to pursue?
3. What does Ehrenfeld mean by "technohubris"?
REASONS WHY SUSTAINABILITY IS SO DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE
1. REDUCTIONIST THINKING
We think in partial solutions: split big problems in small pieces and give each piece to a specialist
familiar with that chunk society’s/ individual’s competence to address the complicated, messy
problems diminishes e.g. unsustainability
Need a holistic approach
2. FIXING SYMPTOMS INSTEAD OF PROBLEM
Fixes-that-fail = original problem comes back at a later time
Potential rebound effects: make the initial problem worse
Our habits & fixation on the symptoms blind us to the possibility of
more effective & longer-lasting solutions
Whether repeated attempts with fixes-that-fail create
addiction OR lesser shifting-the-burden, result is the
same: individual/ group becomes incapable of
addressing the first problem in a fundamental way or
worse, cannot begin to touch it even if it is perceived
as something that demands attention
Unintended consequences = unwanted results of
symptomatic solution, often making original problem
worse
Shifting the burden = focusing on the wrong problem / mere symptomatic solution and thereby
removing the pressure to find and actual/substantive solution
3. EQUATING MORE SUSTAINABILITY WITH LESS UNSUSTAINABILITY
Strong vs. weak sustainability
strong sustainability = using resources but also ensuring that future generations can use it in the
same way ( Ehrenfeld’s POV)
All resources need to be maintained their existing levels
“Same opportunities for future generations”
e.g. fully circular economy
weak sustainability = you can offset the problems you’re creating with new solution
Resources exploitation offset by innovation and thus new opportunities
“Same level of opportunities for future generations”
e.g. technohubris
“TECHNOHUBRIS”
4
INNOVATION & CHANGE READINGS
M0 – WHITEMAN, WALKER & PEREGO (2013)
PLANETARY BOUNDARIES- ECOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR CORPORATE
SUSTAINABILITY
Gap: link business processes to macro ecological processes and boundary conditions
Planetary boundaries = the safe operating space for humanity – if we cross these boundaries we will
face ‘a state less conducive to human development’
CORPORTATE SUSTAINABILITY
Basic definition of sustainability: ability of 1+ entities, either individually/ collectively, to exist and
flourish (unchanged/ in evolved forms) for lengthy timeframes, in a manner that the existence and
flourishing of other collectivities of entities is permitted at related levels & in related systems.
NATURAL SCIENCE AND PLANETARY SYSTEMS
largely because of a rapidly growing reliance on fossil fuels and industrialized forms of agriculture,
human activities have reached a level that could damage the systems that keep Earth in the desirable
Holocene state
characteristic feature of natural systems
exhibit non-linear dynamics with abrupt changes = complex adaptive systems the
key characteristic: self-organizing systems – but within limits
if limits are exceeded the system no longer tends to recover towards its current ‘identity’,
but instead tends towards some different configuration
Instead of sustainability, rather resilience = capacity of a system to absorb shocks while maintain
function
Social-ecological system = system in which people depend on resources provided by ecosystems &
ecosystem dynamics are influenced, to varying degrees, by human activities
AND VICE VERSA social dynamics are influenced, to varying degrees, by ecosystem conditions &
dynamic ecological processes
PLANETARY BOUNDARIES (PB)
= provocative extension of social-ecological systems thinking
= approach that acknowledges that one issue alone (whether climate change, ocean acidification, or
biodiversity loss) cannot be managed in isolation
Scale = spatial, temporal, quantitative, analytical
dimensions used to measure & study any phenomenon
Rest on 9 critical Earth-system processes & their
associated thresholds (already crossed)
1
, 1. Climate change
2. Rate of biodiversity loss (terrestrial & marine)
3. Interference with the nitrogen & phosphorus cycles (due largely to artificial fertilizers &
industrial agricultural practices)
4. Stratospheric ozone depletion
5. Ocean acidification
6. Global fresh water use
7. Change in land use
8. Chemical pollution
9. Atmospheric aerosol loading
OPERATIONAL INDICATORS OF KEY THRESHOLD EFFECTS
CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY FROM A PLANETARY PERSPECTIVE
CHEMICAL POLLUTION
Toxic release inventory (TRI) in USA is by far the most popularly used proxy of environmental
performance measures: http://www.epa.gov/tri/tridotnet/
Sorted by company, industry, chemical & geographic area
Facility-level data
Since 1987
Purposes of TRI:
1. to measure the efficacy of pollution prevention programmes and chemical use reduction
2. to assess the efforts of corporations/ family-owned firms to improve their environmental
performance records
3. to examine the relationship between environmental performance and executive compen-
sation, financial performance, or stock-market reaction
2
,Downsides of TRI:
different estimation methods/ weighing schemes ca be applied to correct for the variable
toxicity levels of releases
only partially measures one aspect because it does not provide insight into global distribution
patterns outside of the US
CLIMATE CHANGE
Positive relationship between disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) & firm-value = capital
market rewards those companies that are better able to manage their exposure to climate change
risks
firms adjust strategies to generate firm-specific advantages in response to institutional
pressures but not necessarily in response to FB from Earth systems
missing: if increased levels of GHG disclosure leads to reduction in CO 2 emission
firms implement more (or report more frequently on these) but absolute levels of GHGs continue to
rise at planetary level & much of it is linked to collective corporate behaviour
overall studies are firm/ industry focused and few attempt to analyse cumulative, interrelated
systemic impacts on the local, regional/ continental, or global scale
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
new databases
firm- and market-based incentives need to be closely tied to managerial effort & institutional
pressures for change
individual firms can’t easily set meaningful individual targets that will effectively solve the
problem in isolation sectorial & firm level targets for reduction need to be developed &
implemented jointly
more practical experimentation in global governance
MODULE 1
EMISSION SCOPES
MODULE 2
3
, **M2 – EHRENFELD (2008)
SUSTAINABILITY BY DESIGN- SOLVING THE WRONG PROBLEMS
1. What does Ehrenfeld identify as the reason(s) for why sustainability is so difficult to achieve?
2. What definition approach for sustainability does Ehrenfeld seem to pursue?
3. What does Ehrenfeld mean by "technohubris"?
REASONS WHY SUSTAINABILITY IS SO DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE
1. REDUCTIONIST THINKING
We think in partial solutions: split big problems in small pieces and give each piece to a specialist
familiar with that chunk society’s/ individual’s competence to address the complicated, messy
problems diminishes e.g. unsustainability
Need a holistic approach
2. FIXING SYMPTOMS INSTEAD OF PROBLEM
Fixes-that-fail = original problem comes back at a later time
Potential rebound effects: make the initial problem worse
Our habits & fixation on the symptoms blind us to the possibility of
more effective & longer-lasting solutions
Whether repeated attempts with fixes-that-fail create
addiction OR lesser shifting-the-burden, result is the
same: individual/ group becomes incapable of
addressing the first problem in a fundamental way or
worse, cannot begin to touch it even if it is perceived
as something that demands attention
Unintended consequences = unwanted results of
symptomatic solution, often making original problem
worse
Shifting the burden = focusing on the wrong problem / mere symptomatic solution and thereby
removing the pressure to find and actual/substantive solution
3. EQUATING MORE SUSTAINABILITY WITH LESS UNSUSTAINABILITY
Strong vs. weak sustainability
strong sustainability = using resources but also ensuring that future generations can use it in the
same way ( Ehrenfeld’s POV)
All resources need to be maintained their existing levels
“Same opportunities for future generations”
e.g. fully circular economy
weak sustainability = you can offset the problems you’re creating with new solution
Resources exploitation offset by innovation and thus new opportunities
“Same level of opportunities for future generations”
e.g. technohubris
“TECHNOHUBRIS”
4
