IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v11y2018i1p125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is The Natural Step’s Theory about Sustainability Still Sustainable? A Theoretical Review and Critique

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Nathan

Abstract

With sustainability initiatives attracting quality employees, many businesses concentrate more on their ecological imprint than on sustaining their human capital. Theories such as Karl-Henrik Robèrt’s The Natural Step (1997, 2000, 2002) prize a balance with the environment above one with people. Yet, an increasingly ageing workforce with increasingly common chronic diseases has led corporations to hemorrhage money—from direct costs because of absenteeism to indirect costs because of decreased productivity. Although eligible in many countries for accommodations, many chronically ill employees choose not to self-disclose, instead, masking their illnesses from employers. Questioning the sustainability of The Natural Step (TNS) from this perspective, this paper also critiques TNS’ evolution as a theoretical construct through the lens offered by the General Method of Theory Building in Applied Disciplines.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Nathan, 2018. "Is The Natural Step’s Theory about Sustainability Still Sustainable? A Theoretical Review and Critique," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(1), pages 125-125, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/72384/40238
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/72384
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.