Sustainability

Overview

When to Use

• Evaluating whether a business strategy, product, or policy is genuinely sustainable
• Designing circular economy or cradle-to-cradle business models
• Mapping organizational activities to SDGs for reporting or strategy alignment
• Assessing ESG performance and identifying greenwashing risks

When NOT to Use

• When the analysis is purely financial without sustainability dimensions
• When short-term crisis response requires setting aside long-term sustainability
• When the scope is narrowly environmental without social or economic integration

Assumptions

IRON LAW: Sustainability requires simultaneous consideration of economic,
social, AND environmental dimensions — optimizing one at the expense
of others is NOT sustainable development.

1. Planetary boundaries set non-negotiable ecological limits (Rockstrom et al.)
2. Social foundations set minimum thresholds for human well-being (Raworth's doughnut)
3. Linear "take-make-dispose" models are inherently unsustainable at scale
4. Sustainability is a dynamic process, not an end state — continuous improvement is required

Methodology

Step 1: Define the Scope and System Boundary

Step 2: Assess the Three Dimensions

Step 3: Identify Trade-offs and Synergies

Step 4: Evaluate Against Standards and Design Interventions

Output Format

## Sustainability Assessment: [Context]

### Scope Definition
- Subject: [firm/product/policy/supply chain]
- Time horizon: [short/medium/long-term]
- System boundary: [what is included/excluded]

### Three-Dimension Assessment
| Dimension | Current State | Key Metrics | Rating |
|-----------|--------------|-------------|--------|
| Economic | [description] | [metrics] | [strong/adequate/weak] |
| Social | [description] | [metrics] | [strong/adequate/weak] |
| Environmental | [description] | [metrics] | [strong/adequate/weak] |

### SDG Alignment
| SDG | Relevance | Contribution | Gap |
|-----|-----------|-------------|-----|
| [SDG #] | [why relevant] | [current contribution] | [what is missing] |

### Trade-offs and Synergies
- Synergies: [where dimensions reinforce each other]
- Trade-offs: [where dimensions conflict]
- Hidden externalities: [costs shifted to others or the future]

### Circular Economy Assessment
- Current model: [linear / partially circular / circular]
- Waste streams: [key waste and resource loss points]
- Circularity opportunities: [reuse, repair, remanufacture, recycle]

### Recommendations
1. [Intervention addressing the weakest dimension]
2. [Circular economy redesign opportunity]
3. [Reporting and transparency improvement]

Gotchas

• The triple bottom line was retracted by its creator Elkington (2018) because companies used it for accounting, not transformation — use it critically
• ESG ratings vary wildly across providers — do not treat any single rating as objective truth
• "Net zero" claims often rely on offsets rather than actual emission reductions — scrutinize the pathway
• Circular economy is not just recycling — it requires redesigning products, business models, and supply chains from the start
• SDG alignment is not SDG impact — many firms claim alignment without measurable contribution
• Doughnut economics (Raworth) sets both a ceiling (planetary boundaries) and a floor (social foundation) — traditional sustainability often ignores the floor

References

• Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Capstone.
• Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. Chelsea Green.
• Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015). Towards a Circular Economy: Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition.