Skip to main content
Log in

The Stakeholder Approach: A Sustainability Perspective

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article considers the stakeholder approach (SHA) to organisational management through the lens of what it means for humans to live sustainably on the Earth (that is, for there to be a sustainable world). In particular, the article considers if the SHA, as it is presented in mainstream academic and management literature, is supportive of corporate practices that advance the achievement of a sustainable world. The analysis shows the SHA to have significant failings in this regard when viewed against key sustainable world criteria, with issues of concern evident from the normative core of the SHA through to is practical application in the management setting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 12M: 2009, Stakeholder Analysis (12 Manage; Bilthoven, The Netherlands), http://www.12manage.com/. Accessed 1 Nov 2009.

  • Agle, BR, Mitchell, RK & Sonnenfeld, DA 1999, ‘Who Matters to CEOs? An Investigation of Stakeholder Attributes and Salience, Corporate Performance, and CEO Values’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 507-525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • APCEA: 2010, Asia Pacific Centre for Environmental Accountability (Asia Pacific Centre for Environmental Accountability (APCEA)), http://www.unisa.edu.au/cags/APCEA/asia_pacific_centre_for_environmental_accounting.asp.

  • Asafu-Adjaye, J 2005, Environmental Economics for Non-Economists, 2nd edn, World Scientific Publishing Co, Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attfield, R 1998, Environmental Ethics and Intergenerational Equity. Inquiry 41(2), 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, SB 2000, ‘Whose Land is it Anyway? National Interest, Indigenous Stakeholders, and Colonial Discourses’, Organization & Environment, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 3-38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, SB 2008, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’, Critical Sociology, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 51-79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B 2003, ‘Sustainability and Intergenerational Justice (reproduced from “Theoria” 1997)’, in A Light & H Rolston, eds. Environmental Ethics. Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford, UK., pp. 487-499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, MM 2009, An Invitation to Environmental Sociology. Pine Forage Press, California USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blewitt, J 2008, Understanding Sustainable Development. Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyden, S.: 2001, Nature, Society, History and Social Change. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences, 14(2):103-116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brughal, R & Sa Varvasovszky, S 2000, ‘Stakeholder Analysis: a Review’, Health Policy and Planning, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 239-246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, K & Karliner, J 2002 Earthsummit.biz: The Corporate Takeover of Sustainable Development. Food First Books, Oakland California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz, R. A. and S. B. Rosenthal: 2004, ‘Stakeholder Theory and Public Policy: How Governments Matter.’ Journal of Business Ethics, 51(2), 143-153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1991, ‘The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organisational Stakeholders’, Business Horizons July/August, 39–48.

  • Cato MS 2009, Green Economics. Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceres: 2010, Ceres, http://www.ceres.org/.

  • Clarkson, M 1995, ‘A Stakeholder Framework for Analyising and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 92-117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifton, D 2009, ‘Security and a Sustainable World’, Journal of Sustainable Development, vol. 2, no. 3, November 2009, pp. 3-17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifton, D.: 2010, ‘Representing a Sustainable World – A Typology Approach’, Journal of Sustainable Development 3(2), June 2010 (in press).

  • Common, M & Stagl, S 2005, Ecological Economics, University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H & Farley, J 2004, Ecological Economics: Principles and Applications. Island Press, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunphy, D, Griffiths, A & Benn, S 2003, Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability. Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich, PR 1985, ‘Extinctions and Ecosystem Functions: Implications for Humankind’, in Animal Extinctions: What Everyone Should Know, ed. RJ Hoage, Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington DC, pp. 59-73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estes, RJ 1993, ‘Towards Sustainable Development: From Theory to Praxis’, Social Development Issues, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1-29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esty, DC & Winston, AS 2009, Green to Gold. John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, BC & Field, MK 2006, Environmental Economics. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Footprint Network: 2010, Ecological Footprint, http://www.footprintnetwork.org/.

  • Frankental, P 2001, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility – a PR Invention?’ Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 18-23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. and J. McVea: 2001, ‘A Stakeholder Approach to Strategic Management’, Darden Business School Working Paper, Vol 01-02.

  • Friedman, A. L. and S. Miles: 2002, ‘Developing Stakeholder Theory’, Journal of Management Studies, 39(1):1-21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladwin, TN, Kennelly, JJ & Krause, T-S 1995, ‘Shifting Paradigms for Sustainable Development: Implications for Management Theory and Research.’ Academy of Management Review, 20(4):874-907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, KA & Lewis, TL 2009, ‘The Paradoxes of Sustainable Development’, in Twenty Lessons in Environmental Sociology, eds. KA Gould & TL Lewis, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 269-289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, SL 2007, Capitalism at the Crossroads, 2nd edn, Pearson Education, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S & Milstein, MB 2003, ‘Creating Sustainable Value’, Academy of Management Executive, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 56-69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, D.: 2009, ‘The Consequentialist Side of Environmental Ethics (Reprint of Daniel Holbrook, ‘Consequentialist Side of Environmental Ethics’, in Environmental Values, 6, 1997, pp. 87–96)’, in M. Reynolds, C. Blackmore and M. J. Smith (eds.), The Environmental Responsibility Reader (Zed Books, London).

  • Hughes, JD 2001, An Environmental History of the World, Routledge, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • IISD: 2010, International Institute for Sustainable Development, www.iisd.org.

  • Ikeme, J.: 2003, ‘Equity, environmental justice and sustainability: incomplete approaches in climate change politics’, Global Environmental Change, 13(3), 195–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iyer, GR 1999, ‘Business, Consumers and Sustainable Living in an Interconnected World: A Multilateral Approach’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 20, pp. 273-288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, G, Scholes, K & Whittington, R 2005, Exploring Corporate Strategy. Pearson Education Limited, Essex England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaler, J.: 2004, ‘Arriving at an acceptable formulation of stakeholder theory’, Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(1):73-79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kates, RW 2003, ‘The Nexus and the Neem Tree: Globalization and a Transition Toward Sustainability’, in Worlds Apart - Globalization and the Environment, ed. JG Speth, Island Press, Washington D.C., pp. 85-107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lantos, GP 2002, ‘The Ethicality of Altruistic Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, vol. 19, no. 3, 3 November 2002, pp. 205-232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Light, A & Rolston, H 2003a, Environmental Ethics. Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Light, A. and H. Rolston: 2003b, ‘Introduction: Ethics and Environmental Ethics’, in Environmental Ethics (Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford, UK), pp. 1–11.

  • LMC: 2009, Stakeholder Mapping (London Management Center, London, UK), http://www.lmcuk.com/home. Accessed 1 Nov 2009.

  • Manderson, AK 2006, ‘A Systems Based Framework to Examine The Multi-Contextual Application of the Sustainability Concept’, Environment, Development and Sustainability, vol. 8, pp. 85-97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonough, W & Braungart, M 2002, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way we Make Things. North Point Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mebratu, D.: 1998, ‘Sustainability and Sustainable Development: Historical and Conceptual Review’, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 18(6):493-520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, RK, Agle, BR & Wood, DJ 1997, ‘Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 853-886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naess, A 1988, ‘Sustainable Development and the Deep Long-Range Ecology Movement’, The Trumpeter, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 138-142.

    Google Scholar 

  • nrg4SD: 2002, nrg4SD: Information Package for the Network (Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development).

  • O’Neill, J 2003, ‘The Varieties of Intrinsic Value (reproduced from “The Monist 75”, 1992)’, in Environmental Ethics, eds. A Light & H Rolston, Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford, UK., pp. 131-142.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, J, Holland, A & Light, A 2008, Environmental Values. Routledge. Abingdon UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orts, E. W. and A. Strudler: 2002, ‘The Ethical and Environmental Limits of Stakeholder Theory’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2):215-233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osorio, LA, Lobato, MO & Castillo, X 2005, ‘Debates on Sustainable Development: Towards a Holistic View of Reality’, Environment, Development and Sustainability, vol. 7, pp. 501-518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parent, MM & Deephouse, DL 2007, ‘A Case Study of Stakeholder Identification and Prioritization by Managers’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 75, pp. 1-23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peloza, J & Papania, L 2008, ‘The Missing Link between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Stakeholder Salience and Identification’, Corporate Reputation Review, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 169-181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pezzoli, K 1997, ‘Sustainable Development: A Transdisciplinary Overview of the Literature’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 549-574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R., R. E. Freeman and A. C. Wicks: 2003, ‘What Stakeholder Theory is Not.’ Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 13(4):479-502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podnar, K & Jancic, Z 2006, ‘Towards a Categorization of Stakeholder Groups: An Empirical Verification of a Three-Level Model’, Journal of Marketing Communications, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 297-308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S, Bennett, M & Burritt, R 2006, Sustainability Accounting and Reporting (Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science). Springer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlange, LE 2009, ‘Stakeholder Identification in Sustainability Entrepreneurship; The Role of Managerial and Organisational Cognition’, Greener Management International, vol. 55, pp. 13-55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosberg, D 2007, Defining Environmental Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Speth, JG & Haas, PM 2006, Global Environmental Governance, Island Press, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M 1994, ‘The Toronto Conference: Reflections on Stakeholder Theory’, Business & Society, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 89-95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, E 1997, ‘The Defects of Stakeholder Theory’, Scholarly Research and Theory Papers, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 3-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steurer, R, Langer, ME, Konrad, A & Martinuzzi, A 2005, ‘Corporations, Stakeholders and Sustainable Development I: A Theoretical Exploration of Business-Society Relations’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 61, pp. 263-281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stieb, JA 2009, ‘Assessing Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 87, pp. 401-414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P 1989, Respect for Nature, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • UHK: 2010, Critical Thinking Wed (The Philosophy Department, The University of Hong Kong), http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/.

  • UN: 1992, ‘Rio Declaration on Environment and Development’, 3–14 June 2004.

  • UN: 2008, Corporate Citizenship in the World Economy (United Nations Global Compact, New York), http://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/news_events/8.1/GC_brochure_FINAL.pdf.

  • Van De Ven, B & Jeurissen, R 2005, ‘Competing Responsibly’, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 2, April 2005, pp. 299-317.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Marrewijk, M 2003, ‘Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between Agency and Communion’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 44, no. 2/3, pp. 95-105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, JP 2005, ‘Book Review Essay: Taking Stock of Stakeholder Management.’ Academy of Management Review, 30(2):426-438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S 1994, ‘The Toronto Conference: Reflections on Stakeholder Theory’, Business & Society, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 110-117.

    Google Scholar 

  • WBCSD: 2008, The World Business Council for Sustain- able Developmentweb site, http://www.wbcsd.ch/templates/TemplateWBCSD5/layout.asp?type=p&MenuId=Njk&doOpen=1&ClickMenu=LeftMenu. Accessed 16 Jun 2008.

  • WBCSD: 2010, The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (The World Business Council for Sustainable Development), www.wbcsd.org.

  • WCED 1987, Our Common Future: World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welford, R (ed.) 1997, Hijacking Environmentalism, Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. C. and A. C. Millington, 2004, ‘The Diverse and Contested Meanings of Sustainable Development’, Geographical Journal, 170(2):99-104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wissenburg, M 2001, Dehierarachization and Sustainable Development in Liberal and Non-Liberal Societies. Global Environmental Politics, 1(2), 95–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, DJ 1994, ‘The Toronto Conference: Reflections on Stakeholder Theory’, Business & Society, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 101-105.

    Google Scholar 

  • WWI: 2010, World Watch Institute, www.worldwatch.org.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Don Clifton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clifton, D., Amran, A. The Stakeholder Approach: A Sustainability Perspective. J Bus Ethics 98, 121–136 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0538-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0538-6

Keywords

Navigation