Critically examine how sustainability is managed by a range of organisations and its value and appropriateness to a range of new scenarios.

Sustainability in Theory and Practice Part 2: Individual Report

Sustainability in Theory and Practice

Part 2 Assignment Brief: 3000 words

As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a Sustainability in Theory and Practice assignment.

Learning Outcomes: After completing the module, you should be able to:

1. Critically analyse the concept of sustainability and its theoretical development.
2. Critically examine how sustainability is managed by a range of organisations and its value and appropriateness to a range of new scenarios.
3. Critically analyse and evaluate how the process of sustainability is applied within a range of organisations.
4. Critically evaluate the relationship between sustainability challenges, sustainability theory and sustainability practice.
5. Apply a reflective, ethical and professional approach to the application of sustainability strategy, the development of principles and implementation.

Maximum word count: An Individual Report of 3,000 words.

Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a reduction in grade by the same percentage that the word count is exceeded.

Task

This assignment is worth 60% of the total marks for the module. You should prepare an individual report of a maximum word count of 3,000 words. As discussed within the module materials, organisations are expected to take responsibility for the way in which their operations impact societies and the natural environment. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) can be seen as either an integral part of the business strategy and corporate identity, or as a defensive policy. Please read the following academic article and complete the tasks noted below:

Herzog, L., 2017. No Company is an Island. Sector-Related Responsibilities as Elements of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Journal of Business Ethics. [online]. 146,135–148 (Please see the article attached in pdf file)

Section 1: Produce a literature review which critically evaluates the development and value of sustainability as a concept in business. Evaluate examples from real organisations in a comparative approach with evidences from their sustainability policies reports (examples: Willmott Dixon UK against leaders in the field, Tesco PLC against IKEA ) including the organisation (IKEA) you used for the Group Task, to support your discussions. (1,000 words) (LO: 1 & 2)

Here we used in our group IKEA supply chains, ““2020 Planet and people report”

Our group topic: “critical evaluation of IKEA’S sustainability policies”

We looked at how IKEA values and manage sustainability Ikea’s “People and Planet Positive 2020” –https://www.ikea.com/ms/en_US/pdf/reports-downloads/sustainability-strategy-people-and-planet-positive.pdf

Consider these 7 steps approach to sustainability below and compare how chosen companies are doing and ranked them. Choose our own ranking frame work (0-100) Paris climate agreement.

• Perform a stakeholder analysis

• Formulating a sustainable development policy

• Design and execute an implementation plan

• Develop a supportive corporate culture

• Develop measures and standards of performance

• Prepare reports

• Enhance internal monitoring processes

 Section 2: In this section of the report, critically evaluate the potential benefits and challenges faced by organisations when implementing CSR, to enhance their ethical and sustainable approach. Again, include examples from real organisations, including the organisation (IKEA) you used for the Group Task, to support your discussions. (1,000 words) (LO: 2, 3 & 4)

Section 3: Based on Sections 1 and 2 and the outcome of your Group Task, provide your individual conclusions and recommendations to improve the sustainable performance of the chosen

organisation for the Group Task. (600 words) (LO4) Page 4 of 8 0118

example of UK Government cut in subsidies in renewable energy sector in 2016 which stopped Ikea from investing £524m in UK in renewable energy sector –https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ikea-renewable-energy-fund-wont-invest-in-uk-government-climate-change-policies-a7529921.html  

Look at some company ranking on Footsie 4Goods and Dow Johns to find competitors for the companies chosen for the assignment.

Section 4: Produce a reflective appraisal of what you have learned in undertaking the Group Task and what you would do differently for similar assignments in the future. (400 words) (LO5) For this section, you could use one or more of the models of reflection that were explored in the module materials.

Atkins and Murphy (1994) developed a reflective model based on six stages of reflection, as shown in the following Figure.

Sustainability 2010, 2(11), 3436-3448; doi:10.3390/su2113436

Review

 What is Sustainability?

Tom Kuhlman ^1,*  and John Farrington ²

¹Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 29703, 2502LS, The Hague, The Netherlands

²Institute for Rural Research, Geography and Environment, University of Aberdeen, Elphinstone Road, Aberdeen AB24 3UF, Scotland, UK

^*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Received: 17 September 2010; in revised form: 15 October 2010 / Accepted: 19 October 2010 / Published: 1 November 2010

History of the Concept

The concept of sustainability was originally coined in forestry, where it means never harvesting more than what the forest yields in new growth [2]. The word Nachhaltigkeit (the German term for sustainability) was first used with this meaning in 1713 [3]. The concern with preserving natural resources for the future is perennial, of course: undoubtedly our Palaeolithic ancestors worried about their prey becoming extinct, and early farmers must have been apprehensive about maintaining soil fertility. Traditional beliefs enjoined thinking in terms of stewardship and concern for future generations, as expressed in the oft-quoted words of a Nigerian tribal chief who saw the community as consisting of “many dead, few living and countless others unborn” [4,5]. Perhaps there have always been two opposing views of the relation between humankind and nature: one which stresses adaptation and harmony, and another which sees nature as something to be conquered. While this latter view may have been rather dominant in Western civilization at least in recent centuries, its counterpoint has never been absent.

Sustainability (without necessarily using the word) is a natural topic of study for economists: after all, the scarcity of resources is of central concern to the dismal science. A famous example is the work of Thomas Malthus, who published his theory about looming mass starvation (due to the inability of available agricultural land to feed an expanding population) in 1798. A theory on the optimal rate of exploitation of non-renewable resource which is still relevant today was formulated by Harold Hotelling, an American economist, in 1931 [6]. We shall have more to say about his views later.

 

A milestone in capturing the attention of global public policy was the report of the Club of Rome [7], which predicted that many natural resources crucial to our survival would be exhausted within one or two generations. Such pessimism is unbecoming in public policy which is, after all, supposed to be about improving things. Therefore, the report of the UN World Commission on Environment and Development, better known as the Brundtland Report after its chairperson, was welcomed for showing a way out of impending doom. It was this report which adopted the concept of sustainability and gave it the widespread recognition it enjoys today.

The question which Brundtland and her colleagues posed themselves was: how can the aspirations of the world’s nations for a better life be reconciled with limited natural resources and the dangers of environmental degradation? Their answer is sustainable development, in the Commission’s words:

 Resources for the assignment

Robertson, M., 2014. Sustainability Principles and Practice. London: Routledge

Crow, D. and Boykoff, M., 2014. Culture, Politics and Climate Change. London: Routledge – Chapters 1 and 10

Leipziger, D., 2003. The Corporate Responsibility Code Book. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing

Parker, P., 2014. Critiquing Sustainability, Changing Philosophy. London: Routledge

Silvius, G., Schipper, R., Planko, J., Brink, J.v.d and Köhler, A., 2012. Sustainability in Project Management. Farnham: Gower Publishing.

Thiele, L.P., 2013. Sustainability. London: Polity

Urry, J., 2011. Climate Change & Society. London: Polity

Campbell, J.L., 2007. Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 946-967.

Chamberlain, M., 2013. Socially Responsible Investing: What You Need To Know Forbes Magazine [online] Available from:http://www.forbes.com/sites/feeonlyplanner/2013/04/24/socially-responsible-investing…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

Friedman, M., 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits,. New York Times Magazine. September 13, 1970.

Friends of the Earth, 2009. Overcomsumption? Our use of the world’s natural resources.[online] Available from:http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/overconsumption.pdf  [Accessed 12 January 2015].

Gregory, J.R., 2013. Accountability of sustainability [online]. Available from: http://tenetpartners.com/assets/pdfs/corebrand_accountabilitysustainability_journalb…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

Hopkins, M. 2004. Corporate social responsibility: an issues paper [online]. Working Paper No. 27. Policy Integration Department World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization. International Labour Office, Geneva. Available from: https://www.ilo.org/legacy/english/integration/download/publicat/4_3_285_wcsdg-wp-27.pdf  [Accessed 13 April 2018].

Jackson, T., 2009. Prosperity without growth: economics for a finite planet. 1st edition. London: Earthscan.

Karim, K., Suh, S.H., Carter, C. and Zhang, M., 2015. Corporate Social Responsibility; Evidence from the United Kingdom. Journal of International Business Research. Volume 14. No.1: 85-100

Maritime Executive, 2014. Human Rights Supporters Rally to Protect Seafarers [online]. The Maritime Executive site at: http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/Human-Rights-Supporters-Rally-to-Protect-S…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

OECD 2001, Codes of corporate conduct: Expanded review of their contents, Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs, Working Papers on International investment No. 2001/6, Paris.

Schieg, M., 2009. The Model of Corporate Social Responsibility in Project Management. Business Theory and Practice. Vol.10 (4) pp. 315-321

Urminsky, M., (ed.) 2001. Self-regulation in the workplace: Codes of conduct, social labelling and

socially responsible investment, Series on Management Systems and Corporate Citizenship. MCC

Working Paper No. 1, Geneva, ILO.

UNEP, 2014. Priorities UNEP [online]. Available from: http://web.unep.org/about/

[Accessed 24 August 2016].

United Nations Global Compact 2000. The Ten Principles [online]. Available from: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

Werther, W.B. and Chandler, D., 2006. Why Corporate Social Responsibility Matters [online]. Ethical Corporation Magazine. Available http://www.ethicalcorp.com/  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

 

BS., 1992. Business Strategy for Sustainable Development: Leadership and

Accountability for the 90s. International Institute for Sustainable Development in conjunction

with Deloitte & Touche and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. [online] Available https://www.iisd.org/business/pdf/business_strategy.pdf  [Accessed 24 August 2016]

Crow, D. and Boykoff, M., 2014. Culture, Politics and Climate Change. London: Routledge – Chapters 1 and 10

Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Haanaes, K., Reeves, M., Fuisz-Kehrbach, S-K. and Kell, G., 2015. Joining Forces: Collaborative Leadership for Sustainability. Rotman Management. Fall 2015. p30-36.

Leipziger, D., 2003. The Corporate Responsibility Code Book. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

Loeber, A. and Vermeulen, T., 2016. Reflexive Project Management in High-ambition Projects: Exploring the Comptencies for Managing Innovative Sustainable Designs. Social Business. Vol. 6 (1) pp.15-37.

Parker, P., 2014. Critiquing Sustainability, Changing Philosophy. London: Routledge.

Silvius, G., Schipper, R., Planko, J., Brink, J.v.d and Köhler, A., 2012. Sustainability in Project Management. Farnham: Gower Publishing.

Thiele, L.P., 2013. Sustainability. London: Polity.

Urry, J., 2011. Climate Change & Society. London: Polity.

Vox., 2012. “Making The Pitch: Selling Sustainability From Inside Corporate America”, VOX Global Weinreb Group Sustainability Reporting, Net Impact, Berkeley[online] Available from:

http://voxglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/VOX-Global-2012-Sustainability-Leaders-Surve…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

Sustainability in Theory and Practice Part 2: Individual Report

Sustainability in Theory and Practice

Part 2 Assignment Brief: 3000 words

As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a Sustainability in Theory and Practice assignment.

Learning Outcomes: After completing the module, you should be able to:

1. Critically analyse the concept of sustainability and its theoretical development.
2. Critically examine how sustainability is managed by a range of organisations and its value and appropriateness to a range of new scenarios.
3. Critically analyse and evaluate how the process of sustainability is applied within a range of organisations.
4. Critically evaluate the relationship between sustainability challenges, sustainability theory and sustainability practice.
5. Apply a reflective, ethical and professional approach to the application of sustainability strategy, the development of principles and implementation.

Maximum word count: An Individual Report of 3,000 words.

Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a reduction in grade by the same percentage that the word count is exceeded.

Task

This assignment is worth 60% of the total marks for the module. You should prepare an individual report of a maximum word count of 3,000 words. As discussed within the module materials, organisations are expected to take responsibility for the way in which their operations impact societies and the natural environment. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) can be seen as either an integral part of the business strategy and corporate identity, or as a defensive policy. Please read the following academic article and complete the tasks noted below:

Herzog, L., 2017. No Company is an Island. Sector-Related Responsibilities as Elements of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Journal of Business Ethics. [online]. 146,135–148 (Please see the article attached in pdf file)

Section 1: Produce a literature review which critically evaluates the development and value of sustainability as a concept in business. Evaluate examples from real organisations in a comparative approach with evidences from their sustainability policies reports (examples: Willmott Dixon UK against leaders in the field, Tesco PLC against IKEA ) including the organisation (IKEA) you used for the Group Task, to support your discussions. (1,000 words) (LO: 1 & 2)

Here we used in our group IKEA supply chains, ““2020 Planet and people report”

Our group topic: “critical evaluation of IKEA’S sustainability policies”

We looked at how IKEA values and manage sustainability Ikea’s “People and Planet Positive 2020” –https://www.ikea.com/ms/en_US/pdf/reports-downloads/sustainability-strategy-people-and-planet-positive.pdf

Consider these 7 steps approach to sustainability below and compare how chosen companies are doing and ranked them. Choose our own ranking frame work (0-100) Paris climate agreement.

• Perform a stakeholder analysis

• Formulating a sustainable development policy

• Design and execute an implementation plan

• Develop a supportive corporate culture

• Develop measures and standards of performance

• Prepare reports

• Enhance internal monitoring processes

 Section 2: In this section of the report, critically evaluate the potential benefits and challenges faced by organisations when implementing CSR, to enhance their ethical and sustainable approach. Again, include examples from real organisations, including the organisation (IKEA) you used for the Group Task, to support your discussions. (1,000 words) (LO: 2, 3 & 4)

Section 3: Based on Sections 1 and 2 and the outcome of your Group Task, provide your individual conclusions and recommendations to improve the sustainable performance of the chosen

organisation for the Group Task. (600 words) (LO4) Page 4 of 8 0118

example of UK Government cut in subsidies in renewable energy sector in 2016 which stopped Ikea from investing £524m in UK in renewable energy sector –https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ikea-renewable-energy-fund-wont-invest-in-uk-government-climate-change-policies-a7529921.html  

Look at some company ranking on Footsie 4Goods and Dow Johns to find competitors for the companies chosen for the assignment.

Section 4: Produce a reflective appraisal of what you have learned in undertaking the Group Task and what you would do differently for similar assignments in the future. (400 words) (LO5) For this section, you could use one or more of the models of reflection that were explored in the module materials.

Atkins and Murphy (1994) developed a reflective model based on six stages of reflection, as shown in the following Figure.

Sustainability 2010, 2(11), 3436-3448; doi:10.3390/su2113436

Review

What is Sustainability?

Tom Kuhlman ^1,*  and John Farrington ²

¹Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 29703, 2502LS, The Hague, The Netherlands

²Institute for Rural Research, Geography and Environment, University of Aberdeen, Elphinstone Road, Aberdeen AB24 3UF, Scotland, UK

^*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Received: 17 September 2010; in revised form: 15 October 2010 / Accepted: 19 October 2010 / Published: 1 November 2010

History of the Concept

The concept of sustainability was originally coined in forestry, where it means never harvesting more than what the forest yields in new growth [2]. The word Nachhaltigkeit (the German term for sustainability) was first used with this meaning in 1713 [3]. The concern with preserving natural resources for the future is perennial, of course: undoubtedly our Palaeolithic ancestors worried about their prey becoming extinct, and early farmers must have been apprehensive about maintaining soil fertility. Traditional beliefs enjoined thinking in terms of stewardship and concern for future generations, as expressed in the oft-quoted words of a Nigerian tribal chief who saw the community as consisting of “many dead, few living and countless others unborn” [4,5]. Perhaps there have always been two opposing views of the relation between humankind and nature: one which stresses adaptation and harmony, and another which sees nature as something to be conquered. While this latter view may have been rather dominant in Western civilization at least in recent centuries, its counterpoint has never been absent.

Sustainability (without necessarily using the word) is a natural topic of study for economists: after all, the scarcity of resources is of central concern to the dismal science. A famous example is the work of Thomas Malthus, who published his theory about looming mass starvation (due to the inability of available agricultural land to feed an expanding population) in 1798. A theory on the optimal rate of exploitation of non-renewable resource which is still relevant today was formulated by Harold Hotelling, an American economist, in 1931 [6]. We shall have more to say about his views later.

 A milestone in capturing the attention of global public policy was the report of the Club of Rome [7], which predicted that many natural resources crucial to our survival would be exhausted within one or two generations. Such pessimism is unbecoming in public policy which is, after all, supposed to be about improving things. Therefore, the report of the UN World Commission on Environment and Development, better known as the Brundtland Report after its chairperson, was welcomed for showing a way out of impending doom. It was this report which adopted the concept of sustainability and gave it the widespread recognition it enjoys today.

The question which Brundtland and her colleagues posed themselves was: how can the aspirations of the world’s nations for a better life be reconciled with limited natural resources and the dangers of environmental degradation? Their answer is sustainable development, in the Commission’s words:

 

 

Resources for the assignment

Robertson, M., 2014. Sustainability Principles and Practice. London: Routledge

Crow, D. and Boykoff, M., 2014. Culture, Politics and Climate Change. London: Routledge – Chapters 1 and 10

Leipziger, D., 2003. The Corporate Responsibility Code Book. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing

Parker, P., 2014. Critiquing Sustainability, Changing Philosophy. London: Routledge

Silvius, G., Schipper, R., Planko, J., Brink, J.v.d and Köhler, A., 2012. Sustainability in Project Management. Farnham: Gower Publishing.

Thiele, L.P., 2013. Sustainability. London: Polity

Urry, J., 2011. Climate Change & Society. London: Polity

Campbell, J.L., 2007. Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 946-967.

Chamberlain, M., 2013. Socially Responsible Investing: What You Need To Know Forbes Magazine [online] Available from:http://www.forbes.com/sites/feeonlyplanner/2013/04/24/socially-responsible-investing…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

Friedman, M., 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits,. New York Times Magazine. September 13, 1970.

Friends of the Earth, 2009. Overcomsumption? Our use of the world’s natural resources.[online] Available from:http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/overconsumption.pdf  [Accessed 12 January 2015].

Gregory, J.R., 2013. Accountability of sustainability [online]. Available from: http://tenetpartners.com/assets/pdfs/corebrand_accountabilitysustainability_journalb…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

Hopkins, M. 2004. Corporate social responsibility: an issues paper [online]. Working Paper No. 27. Policy Integration Department World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization. International Labour Office, Geneva. Available from: https://www.ilo.org/legacy/english/integration/download/publicat/4_3_285_wcsdg-wp-27.pdf  [Accessed 13 April 2018].

Jackson, T., 2009. Prosperity without growth: economics for a finite planet. 1st edition. London: Earthscan.

Karim, K., Suh, S.H., Carter, C. and Zhang, M., 2015. Corporate Social Responsibility; Evidence from the United Kingdom. Journal of International Business Research. Volume 14. No.1: 85-100

Maritime Executive, 2014. Human Rights Supporters Rally to Protect Seafarers [online]. The Maritime Executive site at: http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/Human-Rights-Supporters-Rally-to-Protect-S…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

OECD 2001, Codes of corporate conduct: Expanded review of their contents, Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs, Working Papers on International investment No. 2001/6, Paris.

Schieg, M., 2009. The Model of Corporate Social Responsibility in Project Management. Business Theory and Practice. Vol.10 (4) pp. 315-321

Urminsky, M., (ed.) 2001. Self-regulation in the workplace: Codes of conduct, social labelling and

socially responsible investment, Series on Management Systems and Corporate Citizenship. MCC

Working Paper No. 1, Geneva, ILO.

UNEP, 2014. Priorities UNEP [online]. Available from: http://web.unep.org/about/

[Accessed 24 August 2016].

United Nations Global Compact 2000. The Ten Principles [online]. Available from: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

Werther, W.B. and Chandler, D., 2006. Why Corporate Social Responsibility Matters [online]. Ethical Corporation Magazine. Available http://www.ethicalcorp.com/  [Accessed 24 August 2016].

BS., 1992. Business Strategy for Sustainable Development: Leadership and

Accountability for the 90s. International Institute for Sustainable Development in conjunction

with Deloitte & Touche and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. [online] Available https://www.iisd.org/business/pdf/business_strategy.pdf  [Accessed 24 August 2016]

Crow, D. and Boykoff, M., 2014. Culture, Politics and Climate Change. London: Routledge – Chapters 1 and 10

Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Haanaes, K., Reeves, M., Fuisz-Kehrbach, S-K. and Kell, G., 2015. Joining Forces: Collaborative Leadership for Sustainability. Rotman Management. Fall 2015. p30-36.

Leipziger, D., 2003. The Corporate Responsibility Code Book. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

Loeber, A. and Vermeulen, T., 2016. Reflexive Project Management in High-ambition Projects: Exploring the Comptencies for Managing Innovative Sustainable Designs. Social Business. Vol. 6 (1) pp.15-37.

Parker, P., 2014. Critiquing Sustainability, Changing Philosophy. London: Routledge.

Silvius, G., Schipper, R., Planko, J., Brink, J.v.d and Köhler, A., 2012. Sustainability in Project Management. Farnham: Gower Publishing.

Thiele, L.P., 2013. Sustainability. London: Polity.

Urry, J., 2011. Climate Change & Society. London: Polity.

Vox., 2012. “Making The Pitch: Selling Sustainability From Inside Corporate America”, VOX Global Weinreb Group Sustainability Reporting, Net Impact, Berkeley[online] Available from:

http://voxglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/VOX-Global-2012-Sustainability-Leaders-Surve…  [Accessed 24 August 2016].