3D EVALUATION OF BUSINESSES IN TERMS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES; DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF SUSTAINABLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE FUTURE OF BUSINESS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31618/ESSA.2782-1994.2021.5.68.33Keywords:
sustainable development, evaluation, environment, business, comparison, standard, future, sustainable entrepreneurshipAbstract
Evaluation and comparison of businesses in various industrial, service, and agricultural clusters is a suitable way for determining the equivalence of their position in relation to each other if the evaluation tool can generalize and deploy in various ranges. In terms of diligence of firms and businesses trying to help the occurrence of sustainable development purposes, it is necessary to have a standard and simple tool that can be realized and used by commercial firms easily. The current article, using a qualitative method and investigating the documents and substantive concepts and open and in-depth interviews, has provided a tool for evaluation and comparison of businesses and organizations from the perspective of three dimensions of sustainable development. Services or agriculture has become easily possible, moreover due to the generalizability of its tools and items by being based on standard business literature, the ability to compare businesses in an out-cluster way has been provided, and this helps policymakers to understand the current situation and examine the desired cluster to cluster and larger which accordingly, the comparison of businesses within any industrial or service or agricultural cluster are easily possible moreover due to the generalizability of their tools and items the ability to compare out-cluster businesses is provided due to the establishment on standard business literature too. Such an issue helps policymakers survey the current and desired situation in a cluster to cluster and macro-ones. Moreover, the research findings indicate that future businesses and the future of companies depend on changing the paradigm to sustainable entrepreneurship.
References
Kono N. (2014) Brundtland Commission (World Commission on Environment and Development). In: Michalos A.C. (eds) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_441
Pinner and Sneader (2019) Earth to CEO: Your Company is already at risk from climate change. McKinsey & Company https://www.mckinsey.com/businessfunctions/sustainability/our-insights/earth-to-ceoyour-company-is-already-at-risk-from-climate-change
Anderson, N. (1998). The people make the paradigm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 323328. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3100149?seq=1#metadata_ info_tab_contents
Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business strategy and the environment, 11(2), 130-141. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.323
Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2012). The global entrepreneurship monitor. 2011 Global Report, GEM 2011, 7. https://www.udd.cl/wpcontent/uploads/2009/11/GEM-Mundial-2011.pdf
Tracy, S. J. (2019). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. John Wiley & Sons.
Tracy, Qualitative Research Methods - e-Disciplinas
Clifford, A., & Dixon, S. E. (2006). GreenWorks: A model for combining social and ecological entrepreneurship. In Social entrepreneurship (pp. 214234). Palgrave Macmillan, London. 2. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057%2F9780230625655
Gibbs, D. (2009). Sustainability entrepreneurs, ecopreneurs and the development of a sustainable economy. Greener Management International, (55). https://doi.org/10.9774/GLEAF.3062.2006.au.00007
Kainrath, D. (2009). Ecopreneurship in theory and practice: A proposed emerging framework for ecopreneurship. DiVA, id: diva2:280302
Schaltegger, S. (2002). A framework for ecopreneurship. Greener management international, (38). https://doi.org/10.9774/GLEAF.3062.2002.su.00006
Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Business strategy and the environment, 20(4), 222-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.682
Tilley, F., & Young, W. (2009). Sustainability Entrepreneurs. Greener Management International, (55). DOI: 10.9774/GLEAF.3062.2006.au.00008 13. Hall, J. K., Daneke, G. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future directions. Journal of business venturing, 25(5), 439-448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.01.002 14. Sauvé, S., Bernard, S., & Sloan, P. (2016). Environmental sciences, sustainable development and circular economy: Alternative concepts for transdisciplinary research. Environmental Development, 17, 48-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2015.09.002
Gardner, R. C., & Davidson, N. C. (2011). The ramsar convention. In Wetlands (pp. 189-203). Springer, Dordrecht. https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-90-481-9659-3_113
Clémençon, R. (2012). From Rio 1992 to Rio 2012 and beyond: Revisiting the role of trade rules and financial transfers for sustainable development. https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496512436890
Chancel, L., & Piketty, T. (2015). Carbon and inequality: From Kyoto to Paris Trends in the global inequality of carbon emissions (1998-2013) & prospects for an equitable adaptation fund World Inequality Lab. https://voxeu.org/article/carbon-and-inequality-kyotoparis
Gunningham, N., Kagan, R. A., & Thornton, D. (2003). Shades of green: business, regulation, and environment. Stanford University Press. https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=5879
Kolk, A., & Van Tulder, R. (2010).
International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International business review, 19(2), 119-125. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593109001474
Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles (Vol. 1, pp. 161-174). New York: McGraw-Hill. https://discoversocialsciences.com/wpcontent/uploads/
/03/schumpeter_businesscycles_fels.pdf
Cinquini, L., Passetti, E., Tenucci, A., & Frey, M. (2012). Analyzing intellectual capital information in sustainability reports: some empirical evidence. Journal of Intellectual Capital. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691931211276124
Harris, J. M. (2000). Basic principles of sustainable development. Dimensions of Sustainable Developmnet,21-41. https://notendur.hi.is/bdavids/UAU101/Readings/Harri s_2000_Sustainable_development.pdf
Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social
sustainability. Sustainable development, 19(5), 289-300. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.417
Holt, D. (2011). Where are they now? Tracking the longitudinal evolution of environmental businesses from the 1990s. Business Strategy and the
Environment, 20(4), 238-250.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.697
Pearce, D., & Atkinson, G. (1998). Concept of sustainable development: An evaluation of its usefulness 10 years after Brundtland. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 1(2), 95-111. http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF03353896
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
CC BY-ND
A work licensed in this way allows the following:
1. The freedom to use and perform the work: The licensee must be allowed to make any use, private or public, of the work.
2. The freedom to study the work and apply the information: The licensee must be allowed to examine the work and to use the knowledge gained from the work in any way. The license may not, for example, restrict "reverse engineering."
2. The freedom to redistribute copies: Copies may be sold, swapped or given away for free, in the same form as the original.
