514
A. C. W. Z. Jayme et al.
national and international policy, registered in the work The Path to Sustainable
Development (Sachs 2000).
With this brief account this survey aims to highlight that it is possible to find in literature different perspectives that add up creating a theoretical set about sustainability
and sustainable development. For Purvis et al. (2019) this variety of conceptualization of terms brings together, in short, a critique of the economic status quo based
on the incessant pursuit for economic growth, short-term agriculture, industrialism
and lack of consideration to the fragility of complex ecosystems.
In other studies, authors such as Dovers and Handmer (1992) advocate sustainability as the ability of a natural or mixed human system to resist or adapt to
endogenous or exogenous changes indefinitely. Bolis et al. (2014) complement this
link considering possible positive reflexes in the economy and society. Jabareen
(2008) resumes the idea of the economic and socio-environmental tripod by advocating that sustainable development has the capacity to solve the ecological crisis
without affecting economic relations; since it aims to solve the paradox between
environmental (sustainability) and economic (development) biases.
Another line of thought gains prominence with the placements of Grober (2007),
who punctuates the cultural factor of sustainability, defending it as a way of thinking
and acting. This connection of the idea of sustainability with behavioral bias is also
cited by authors who interpret sustainability as a result of sustainable development,
feasible only from a long-term strategy that aims the improvement of society’s quality
of life. (Hove 2004; Dovers and Handmer 1992; Feil and Schreiber 2017).
In more critical approaches, Boff (2014) and Feil and Schreiber (2017) sees with
skepticism the corporate use of the term Triple Bottom Line and condemns the
decontextualized use of the term sustainability, stating that it has become “a fad,
without its content being clarified or critically defined”. Boff (2014) also points
out that “sustainable development” is proposed either as an ideal to be achieved
or as a qualification of a production process or a product, made allegedly within
sustainability criteria, which, in most cases, does not correspond to the truth. (Boff
2014).
It is possible to realize that even after more than thirty years after the definition of the Brundtland Report, the concept of sustainable development still attracts
significant criticism (Yolles and Fink 2014) which stimulates the study of society’s
understanding of this theme in view of its social relevance.
Over the years, increasing attention has been paid to the ethical, environmental
and social dimensions of business, usually under the title of corporate social responsibility (Kolk 2016). Since 2002, the World Bank has developed a CSR practice to
support governments in developing countries on roles and instruments to be adopted
to encourage CSR, because they recognize that companies are part of society and
have the potential to make a positive contribution to its goals and aspirations.
While many organizations subscribe to the triple P and sustainable development,
it is debatable to what extent this is just a pretense for more positive public relations
or indeed a strategy being held (Kolk and Van Tulder 2010). However, CSR activities
are becoming increasingly strategic in the sense that they affect the company’s core
business and its growth, profitability and survival (Kolk and Pinkse 2008; Verbeke
A. C. W. Z. Jayme et al.
national and international policy, registered in the work The Path to Sustainable
Development (Sachs 2000).
With this brief account this survey aims to highlight that it is possible to find in literature different perspectives that add up creating a theoretical set about sustainability
and sustainable development. For Purvis et al. (2019) this variety of conceptualization of terms brings together, in short, a critique of the economic status quo based
on the incessant pursuit for economic growth, short-term agriculture, industrialism
and lack of consideration to the fragility of complex ecosystems.
In other studies, authors such as Dovers and Handmer (1992) advocate sustainability as the ability of a natural or mixed human system to resist or adapt to
endogenous or exogenous changes indefinitely. Bolis et al. (2014) complement this
link considering possible positive reflexes in the economy and society. Jabareen
(2008) resumes the idea of the economic and socio-environmental tripod by advocating that sustainable development has the capacity to solve the ecological crisis
without affecting economic relations; since it aims to solve the paradox between
environmental (sustainability) and economic (development) biases.
Another line of thought gains prominence with the placements of Grober (2007),
who punctuates the cultural factor of sustainability, defending it as a way of thinking
and acting. This connection of the idea of sustainability with behavioral bias is also
cited by authors who interpret sustainability as a result of sustainable development,
feasible only from a long-term strategy that aims the improvement of society’s quality
of life. (Hove 2004; Dovers and Handmer 1992; Feil and Schreiber 2017).
In more critical approaches, Boff (2014) and Feil and Schreiber (2017) sees with
skepticism the corporate use of the term Triple Bottom Line and condemns the
decontextualized use of the term sustainability, stating that it has become “a fad,
without its content being clarified or critically defined”. Boff (2014) also points
out that “sustainable development” is proposed either as an ideal to be achieved
or as a qualification of a production process or a product, made allegedly within
sustainability criteria, which, in most cases, does not correspond to the truth. (Boff
2014).
It is possible to realize that even after more than thirty years after the definition of the Brundtland Report, the concept of sustainable development still attracts
significant criticism (Yolles and Fink 2014) which stimulates the study of society’s
understanding of this theme in view of its social relevance.
Over the years, increasing attention has been paid to the ethical, environmental
and social dimensions of business, usually under the title of corporate social responsibility (Kolk 2016). Since 2002, the World Bank has developed a CSR practice to
support governments in developing countries on roles and instruments to be adopted
to encourage CSR, because they recognize that companies are part of society and
have the potential to make a positive contribution to its goals and aspirations.
While many organizations subscribe to the triple P and sustainable development,
it is debatable to what extent this is just a pretense for more positive public relations
or indeed a strategy being held (Kolk and Van Tulder 2010). However, CSR activities
are becoming increasingly strategic in the sense that they affect the company’s core
business and its growth, profitability and survival (Kolk and Pinkse 2008; Verbeke