Sustainable Development, Corporate Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility: a Hierarchy of Concepts in the Context of Firm Behavior
https://doi.org/10.25205/2542-0429-2025-25-3-120-136
Abstract
The sustainable development concept has become one of the main directions of the modern society development from government policy to individual preferences. Despite the controversial nature of its formulation, the concept itself is fundamental and related to the society development. Through the desire of society for such development, a change in the behavior of firms began, for which various categories and concepts are used in foreign and domestic literature. Two concepts at the firm level have become quite widespread among them – corporate sustainability and corporate social responsibility. However, despite the availability of both theoretical and applied researches, no clear approach to their differentiation has been proposed, as well as a comprehensive comparison with the concept of sustainable development. Since modern development is focused on sustainability, it is necessary to understand the differences between these three concepts, the underlying categories, the subjects of the application, as well as the identification of the elements of their interface. In this paper, based on a review of existing approaches to interpreting the concepts of sustainable development, corporate sustainability and corporate social responsibility, an approach is proposed to distinguish them through building a hierarchy in the context of influencing the behavior of firms. The choice of the last one as a criterion for distinguishing the hierarchical relationship of concepts is justified by the fact that it is firms that are the main actors in the transition of the economy to sustainable development through the availability of the necessary resources to implement appropriate strategies in the field of economy, ecology and the social sphere.
Keywords
sustainable development,
corporate sustainability,
corporate social responsibility,
firm behavior,
economic capital,
natural capital,
social capital,
triple bottom line model
Supporting agencies: The research was carried out with the plan of research work of IEIE SB RAS, project «Integration and interaction of mesoeconomic systems and markets in Russia and its Eastern parts: methodology, analysis, forecasting» №121040100284-9.
About the Author
S. P. Petrov
Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering SB RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergey P. Petrov, Candidate of Economics Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Applied Regional Studies, Head of the Department
Researcher ID: U-1953-2018
Scopus Author ID: 56849995700
Novosibirsk
References
1. “Development and International Economic Cooperation: environmental issues” Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. UN. URL: http:// www.un.org/ru/ga/pdf/brundtland.pdf (last accessed: 09/12/2023).
2. Ali M. “Chapter 5 – Issues of Sustainability Assessment” in Sustainability Assessment: Context of Resource and Environmental Policy. Academic Press, 2013, pp. 59–71. DOI:10.1016/b978-0-12-407196-4.00005-2
3. Bansal P. Evolving sustainably: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 2005, no. 26(3), pp. 197–218. DOI: 10.1002/smj.441
4. Becchetti L., Bruni L., Zamagni S. The microeconomics of wellbeing and sustainability. Elsevier Inc, 2020. 449 p.
5. Belousov K. Yu. Company’s sustainable development and corporate sustainability: interpretation problems. Problems of modern economics, 2012, no. 4 (44), pp. 120– 123. (In Russ.)
6. Belousov K. Yu. Key interpretation areas and interrelation of sustainable development, corporate sustainability and corporate social responsibility conceptions. Problems of modern economics, 2013, no. 2 (46), pp. 51–54. (In Russ.)
7. Carroll A. B. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. The Academy of Management Review, 1979, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 497–505. DOI: 10.2307/257850
8. Carroll A. B. Corporate social responsibility: the centerpiece of competing and complementary frameworks. Organizational Dynamics, 2015, vol. 44, no 2, pp. 87–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2015.02.002
9. Choukar E., El Hamidi N., Ait Hbibi A., Makhrout S. CSR and financial performance: are CSR practices a factor in reducing transaction costs? International Journal of Economic Studies and Management (IJESM), 2021, iss. 1, no. 2, pp. 307–320. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.11473043
10. DesRoches C. T. On the Concept and Conservation of Critical Natural Capital. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 2020. DOI: 10.1080/02698595.2020.1788347
11. Dyllick T., Hockerts K. Beyond the Business Case for Corporate Sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2002, vol. 11, pp. 130–141. DOI: 10.1002/bse.323
12. Elkington J. Towards the Sustainable Corporation: Win-Win-Win Business Strategies for Sustainable Development. California Management Review, 1994, vol. 36, iss. 2, pp. 90–100. DOI: 10.2307/4116574
13. Elliott J. A. An Introduction to Sustainable Development. Abingdon: Routledge, 2013. 384 p.
14. Friedman M. Capitalism and Freedom. Moscow: Novoe izdatelstvo, 2016. 288 p. (in Russ.)
15. Gibson R. B. Beyond the Pillars: Sustainability Assessment as a Framework for Effective Integration of Social, Economic and Ecological Considerations in Significant Decision-Making. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 2006, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 259–280. DOI: 10.1142/S1464333206002517
16. Gibson R. B. Sustainability assessment: basic components of a practical approach. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 2006, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 170–182. DOI: 10.3152/147154606781765147
17. Gupta K., Krishnamurti C. “Chapter 19 – Product market competition and corporate environmental performance” in Handbook of Environmental and Sustainable Finance. Academic Press Inc., 2016. pp. 385–404.
18. Hull Z. Sustainable Development: Premises, Understanding and Prospects. Sustainable Development, 2008, vol. 16, pp. 73–80. DOI: 10.1002/sd.337
19. Jensen M. C. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2002, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 235–256.
20. Kanaeva O. A. Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of Theoretical Views. St. Petersburg University Journal of Economic Studies, 2013, no. 2, pp. 130–145. (in Russ.)
21. Ketprapakorn N., Kantabutra S. Toward an organizational theory of sustainability culture. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2022, vol. 32, pp. 638–654. DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2022.05.020
22. Landrum N. E. Stages of Corporate Sustainability: Integrating the Strong Sustainability Worldview. Organization & Environment, 2017, vol. 31, iss. 4. DOI: 10.1177/1086026617717456
23. Landrum N. E., Ohsowski B. Identifying Worldviews on Corporate Sustainability: A Content Analysis of Corporate Sustainability Reports. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2018, vol. 27, pp. 128–151. DOI: 10.1002/bse.1989
24. Malyshenko A., Kiselev A. Corporate social responsibility and sustainable development: essence and practice. Sciences of Europe, 2019, no. 40, pp. 6–10. (in Russ.)
25. Montiel I. Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Sustainability: Separate Pasts, Common Futures. Organization Environment, 2008, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 245–269. DOI: 10.1177/1086026608321329
26. Montiel I., Delgado-Ceballos J. Defining and Measuring Corporate Sustainability: Are We There Yet? Organization & Environment, 2014, vol. 27, iss. 2, pp. 113–139. DOI: 10.1177/1086026614526413
27. Pelenc J., Ballet J., Dedeurwaerdere T. Weak Sustainability versus Strong Sustainability. Brief for GSDR, UN, 2015. URL: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/6569122-Pelenc-Weak%20Sustainability%20versus%20Strong%20Sustainability.pdf (last accessed 09/11/2024).
28. Roome N. Looking Back, Thinking Forward: Distinguishing Between Weak and Strong Sustainability. Oxford Handbooks Online, 2011, no. 11. DOI:10.1093/oxfordhb/978019958
29. Ruggerio C. A. Sustainability and sustainable development: A review of principles and definitions. Science of The Total Environment, 2021, vol. 786. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147481
30. Solow R. An almost practical step toward sustainability. Resources Policy. 1993, no. 19 (3), pp. 162–172. DOI: 10.1016/0301-4207(93)90001-4
31. Starikova E. A. The contemporary approaches to interpretation of the sustainable development concept. RUDN Journal of Economics, 2017, no. 25 (1), pp. 7–17. DOI 10.22363/2313-2329-2017-25-1-7-17 (in Russ.)
32. Williamson O. E. The economic institutions of capitalism. Firms, markets, relational contracting. St. Petersburg: Lenizdat; CEV Press, 1996. 702 p. (in Russ.)
33. Zinchenko Yu. V. Corporate sector policy of the Russian and global economies in the context of transition to sustainable development. Thesis, 2020. 224 p. (in Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Petrov S.P. Sustainable Development, Corporate Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility: a Hierarchy of Concepts in the Context of Firm Behavior. World of Economics and Management. 2025;25(3):120-136. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/2542-0429-2025-25-3-120-136
Views:
95
JATS XML
Email this article 
