Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
- 2013 (2) (entfernen)
Dokumenttyp
- Dissertation (2) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Sustainability (2) (entfernen)
Institut
- Nachhaltigkeitsmgmt./-ökologie (1)
- VWL (1)
This dissertation concerns the question of how economics can contribute to the analysis of trade-offs between values (or normative objectives). The analysis is illustrated for the case of policies that pursue the goal of sustainability. Methodologically, this is done by reflecting economic concepts in light of philosophical theories and using generic models to analyze trade-offs between particular values. In sum, the work shows how economics can help in analyzing the factual relationships between values by clarifying the set of feasible acts and outcomes. The first paper of this cumulative dissertation concerns the question what a general definition of efficiency with respect to normative objective implies about relationships between two values. In order to conceptualize relationships between values carefully, the analysis distinguishes instrumental from intrinsic values and discusses the question whether there is one intrinsic value (value monism) or many intrinsic values (value pluralism). Next, a small economic model is used to show that there can be different relationships between values such as win-win relationships and trade-offs in value-efficient states if there are three or more values. Further, the distinction between Pareto-efficiency (based on individual preferences) and value-efficiency (which can also include non-preference values) is used to study relationships between values. The second paper uses the definition of sustainability as inter- and intragenerational justice to discuss the relationship between these two objectives. The general aim of this paper is to discuss what economic concepts can contribute to the discussion of tradeoffs between justices. For this, a syntax of the concept of justice is employed, different relationships between justices are defined and economic concepts such as scarcity, efficiency and opportunity costs are transferred to the justice context. One result from this analysis is that there must be a trade-off between these two justices in such respective efficient outcomes. The third paper concerns an intertemporal mechanism leading to the well-known equity-efficiency trade-off in an intergenerational setting. For this, two central characteristics of intergenerational policy making are taken into account: irreversibility and ignorance (or unawareness). A pertinent example is the irreversible use of fossil fuels before and after the discovery of the effect of CO2 emissions on climate change. The trade-off between Pareto-efficiency and intergenerational equity that results from these two characteristics is shown in a model with two non-overlapping generations which use a non-renewable resource. In the model there is initial unawareness about an intergenerational externality from resource use that is only discovered after the irreversible use of the resource. A central result of the paper is the trade-off between intergenerational equity and efficiency that emerges if initially unknown sustainability problems arise after irreversible policies have been enacted. The fourth paper concerns the question what the concept of merit goods can contribute to discussions of sustainability. For this, the history of the concept is discussed, then merit goods are defined and connected to the philosophical literature on different conceptions of well-being. In the next step different challenges and opportunities of merit good arguments are discussed for the sustainability context. For example, it becomes clear that merit good arguments concern conceptions of well-being and do not directly concern the aspect of intergenerational distribution in sustainability problems.
In spite of growing interest in companies’ contribution to sustainable development, the implementation of corporate sustainability, i.e. the integration of environmental, social, and economic issues, is not well understood. This cumulative PhD thesis aims to answer the research question whether sustainability management is only a transitory management fashion, or whether an effective implementation is actually taking place. The thesis consists of five papers, which are either published in refereed academic journals, accepted to be published, or planned to be resubmitted. The papers analyze three important elements of the implementation of corporate sustainability: motivation (why?), organizational units (who?) and management tools (how?). Combining these three elements supplies a framework for discussing the implementation of corporate sustainability management. The results, which are mostly based on surveys of large German companies, reveal that companies predominantly manage corporate sustainability because they seek legitimacy, rather than a competitive advantage, and because they follow acknowledged standards, guidelines, or ratings (institutional isomorphism) – possibly out of uncertainty on how to best handle a concept so complex and novel. Public relations is the organizational unit engaging in sustainability management most strongly, whereas accounting, finance, and management control engage the least. Hence, corporate sustainability is currently not implemented as a crossfunctional approach. Yet, there is indication of a growing strategic relevance of corporate sustainability. This is also reflected in the awareness and application of sustainability management tools, which have been increasing continuously between 2002 and 2010 – especially in terms of integrative tools serving to balance environmental, social, and economic issues. Furthermore, market incentives are gaining in importance over time. The thesis relates these results to management fashion theory. Although there is some indication that sustainability management might in fact be a transitory fashion, an analysis over time reveals an ongoing development of the elements analyzed. Thereby, the thesis demonstrates that corporate sustainability management can be considered more than a management fashion. One implication of the analysis is that both companies and researchers are called upon to foster the implementation of corporate sustainability, with positive incentives, e.g. by markets and consumers, turning out to be promising starting points. As opposed to pressure and expectations by stakeholders, focusing on opportunities might be more suitable to induce actual change of processes, products, services, or even business models in companies. In conclusion, the author hopes to make a significant contribution to the discussion on the implementation of corporate sustainability and to stimulate the development of new theoretical approaches.