Tensions in sustainability decisons

Example: electric car, batteries controversial due to human-rioghts violations along the supply chain

Tensions are everywhere in sustainable systems however managers do not manage them in the same way -> we can distinguish thess perspectives

A tension is a competing demand between or within the different dimensions of sustainability, such as economic, social or environmental aspects

Tensions are inherent in sustainability problems and are fundamental to our understanding of sustainability -> e.g. packaging more environmental friendly but costs more -> tension between environmental and economic belongings

Next to the tensions arising between different diemsntions of sustainability, tensions can also arise over time and space

• Time: i.e. Resources used today bs. the availability of resources in the future -> e.g. projects on climate change long-term benefits but less benficial on short-time scale

• Spatial: i.e. local impact vs. global impact -> e.g. on global perspective GHG emissions need to be avoided but however, on local scale may be unavoidable if food production relise on fossil fuels

most straight forward, economic perspective, not prioritizing environment

The win-win perspective suggests that financial profitability can be easily aligned with the social and/or environmental dimenstions of sustainability

From the win-win perspective, sustainability experts or may not recognize the tensions inherent in sustainability, but in either case they will engage in sustainability only if it is financially beneficial

This perspective deals with tensions by demonstrating the business case for sustainability, i.e. showing clearly the financial returns of investing in sustainability initiative

e.g. instaling PV to lower dependencies on fossil fuels

But some may be overlooked by only focusing on simple solutions

difficult, decision needs to be taken, favours only one sustainability area

The trade-off perspective is an exchange of one benefit for another benefit that is seen as most desirable

Thus, this perspective suggests that managers must choose between two competing demands with ont sustainability aspect being prioritized over the other

e.g. clothing retailer donates clothes to developing countries and therefore prioritizing the environmental benefits over the social damages

For that, an extensive assessment of the impacts of the two alternatives is desirable to make the best decision possible -> imediate and more long term impact

most complex, let tensions insist, implement strategies to work along the tensions, more innovative, more transformation

the paradox perspective does not force a choice and rather pushed firms to innovate ways to reconcile several sustainability aspects over time

By maintaining the tensions, managers learn to understand the complexity of the competing demands and work through the tension rather than resolving it

Acknowledging that competing demand can coexist over time can also bring about additional benefits such as innovation, creativity and employee commitment

e.g. for clothing retailer this would mean that it sccepts the tension and tries to lower consumption in industrial countries and to improve local clothing industry in developing countries

e.g. plastic waste in ocean:

• trade-off perspective: still use plastic because its cheap

• paradoxical: recognize the problem and look for innovative solutions