Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stakeholders and Sustainability: An Evolving Theory

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

Abstract

This conceptual article has three parts: In the first, I discuss the shortcomings of treating the environment as a stakeholder and conclude that doing so is theoretically vague and lacks prescriptive force. In the second part, I recommend moving from broad notions of preserving nature and appeals to beauty to a more concrete analytic framework provided by the idea of human sustainability. Using sustainability as the focus of concern is significant as it provides us with a more tenable and quantifiable standard for action, as in the case of carbon offsets and development of measures such as the United Nations Sustainability Indicators. In the final section, I draw on notions of stewardship to suggest that stakeholder management has a positive responsibility to promote sustainability.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • Anderson, R. (1999). Mid-course correction: Toward a sustainable enterprise: The interface model. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & Kistruck, G. (2006). Seeing is (not) believing: Managing the impressions of the firm’s commitment to the natural environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 165–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartkus, B., & Glassman, M. (2008). Do firms practice what they preach? The relationship between mission statements and stakeholder management. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 207–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M. & Watkins, M. (2004). Predictable surprises. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.

  • Bendheim, C. L., Waddock, S., & Graves, S. (1998). Determining best practice in corporate-stakeholder relations using data envelopment analysis: An industry level study. Business and Society, 37(3), 306–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, C., & Hallam, S. J. (2006). Archaeology and Rock Art in the Dampier Archipelago: A report prepared for the National Trust of Australia (WA). Retrieved August 20, 2011, from http://www.burrup.org.au/.

  • Callicott, J. B. (1980). Animal liberation: A triangular affair. Environmental Ethics, 2(4), 311–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbon Trust. (2011). Carbon footprinting. Retrieved Jun 19, 2011, from http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/cut-carbon-reduce-costs/calculate/carbon-footprinting/Pages/carbon-footprinting.aspx.

  • Center for Sustainable Organizations. (2011). The social footprint method. Retrieved Jun 19, 2011, from http://www.sustainableorganizations.org/the-social-footprint.html.

  • Christie, L. (2007). The fastest growing U. S. cities. CNN Money. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://money.cnn.com/2007/06/27/real_estate/fastest_growing_cities/.

  • Dorf, R. C. (2001). Technology, humans and society: Towards a sustainable world. San Diego, CA: Academic Press of Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, C., & Starik, M. (2004). The primordial stakeholder: Advancing the conceptual consideration of stakeholder status for the natural environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 49, 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (2004). Enter the triple bottom line. In A. Henriques & J. Richardson (Eds.), The triple bottom line: does it all add up?: Assessing the sustainability of business and CSR. London, UK: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faucheux, S., & O’Connor, M. (1998). Valuation for sustainable development: Methods and policy indicators. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & Reichart, J. (1998). Toward a Life centered ethic for business. Society for Business Ethics/Business Ethics Quarterly?: The Ruffin Series, 2, 143–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funk, K. (2003). Sustainability and performance. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(2), 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. (1997). Beyond greening: Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), 66–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A., & Keim, G. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard, D. (2010). How to measure anything: Finding the value of “intangibles” in business (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization for Standardization. (2004). Environmental Management Systems—Requirements with guidance for use. ISO 14001:2004, Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

  • Jamieson, D. (2008). Ethics and the environment: An introduction (Cambridge Applied Ethics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, A., & Hauf, V. (2009). Sustainability-driven implementation of corporate social responsibility: Application of the integrative sustainability triangle. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 517–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., & Pinkse, J. (2007). Towards strategic stakeholder management? Integrating perspectives on sustainability challenges such as corporate responses to climate change. Corporate Governance, 7(4), 370–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. (1980). Second treatise on government. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(3), 426–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maak, T., & Pless, N. M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society—A relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 99–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D. M., & McLelland, C. (1983). Social traps and temporal traps. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 105–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, C., & MacLean, D. (1992). Risk analysis and the value of life. In C. Mills (Ed.), Values and public policy (pp. 91–97). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirvis, P., Googins, B., & Kinnicutt, S. (2010). Vision, mission, values: Guideposts to sustainability. Organizational Dynamics, 39(4), 316–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G. E. (1989). Principia Ethica. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orts, E. W., & Strudler, A. (2002). The ethical and environmental limits of stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 215–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D., Mourato, S., Navrud, S., & Ready, R. (2002). Review of studies. In S. Navrud & R. Ready (Eds.), Valuing cultural heritage: Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artifacts. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peglau, R. (2007). Worldwide number of ISO 14001 Certification. Solution for Corporate Risk Management. Retrieved June 19, 2011, from http://www.ecology.or.jp/isoworld/english/analy14k.htm.

  • Peter, F., & Schmid, H. B. (2005). Symposium on rationality and commitment: Introduction. Economics and Philosophy, 21, 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. (1997). Stakeholder theory and principle of fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R., & Reichart, J. (2000). The environment as a stakeholder? A fairness-based approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 185–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post, J. E. (1991). Managing as if the earth mattered. Business Horizons, 34(4), 32–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolston, H. (1989). Environmental ethics: Duties and values in the natural world. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rondinelli, D. (2004). Creating a vision for environmental responsibility in multinational corporations: Executive leadership and organizational change. Journal of International Business Education, 1, 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, C. M. (1994). Given-ness and gift: Property and the quest for environmental ethics. Environmental Law, 24(1), 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Routley, R., & Routley, V. (1980). Human chauvinism and environmental ethics. In D. S. Mannison, M. A. McRobbie, & R. Routley (Eds.), Environmental philosophy (pp. 96–189). Canberra: Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, S. L., & Thomson, I. (2008). Accounting for a sustainable Scotland. Public Money and Management, 28(6), 367–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G. (2008). The concept of mind. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1977). Rational fools: A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6(4), 317–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1985). Goals, commitment and identity. Journal of Law Economics and Organization, 1(2), 341–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snider, J., Hill, R. P., & Martin, D. (2003). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: A view from the world’s most successful firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 175–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M. (1995). Should trees have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder status for non-human nature. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 207–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stead, W. W., Stead, J., & Starik, M. (2004). Sustainable strategic management. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharp Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, C. D. (1972). Should trees have standing?—Towards legal rights for natural objects. Southern California Law Review, 45, 450–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations, European Commission, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and World Bank. (2003). Handbook of national accounting: integrated environmental and ethical accounting 2003. United Nations, European Commission, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and World Bank. Retrieved August 30, 2010, from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envAccounting/seea2003.pdf.

  • Wicks, A. C., Gilbert, J. D. R., & Freeman, R. E. (1994). A feminist reinterpretation of the stakeholder concept. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 475–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to the organizers of the 3rd Bergamo-Wharton Joint Conference on Stakeholder Theories, and the useful comments of anonymous reviewers who have helped in shaping the final form of the article, as well as invaluable assistance from Elizabeth Lentini. Financial support was provided from the Marquette University Way-Klingler Faculty Research Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Philosophy and Management, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    Kevin Gibson

Authors
  1. Kevin Gibson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin Gibson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gibson, K. Stakeholders and Sustainability: An Evolving Theory. J Bus Ethics 109, 15–25 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1376-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1376-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation