Author
Abstract
This paper has been written in response to the perception that ‘sustainable development’ (hereafter SD) and its derivatives are being used in, amongst others, the accounting literature in a way which equates SD development with ‘good environmental management’. Further, the paper assumes that such usage of SD arises, at least in part, from a lack of awareness of the origins of the concept and of the debates which surrounded its origin. The paper, therefore, seeks to remedy this perceived problem by sketching the origins of debates about SD. The literature focused on is the international development literature because it was from this that the Brundtland Report originated. The paper then goes on to briefly outline how SD has been used in the business literature and in the accounting literature and contrasts this usage with its origins. As this task progresses it becomes evident that the meaning of SD is not at all fixed. Rather, SD has been moulded by various discourses to mean a variety of, often mutually exclusive, outcomes. In addition, as the concept has moved from one literature to the next its meaning has been modified as it has been translated into the terminology (and ideology) of the receiving discourse. The main conclusion of this paper, therefore, is that one should be careful about following the business literature and using SD to mean ‘good environmental management’. Rather, from a review of the international development literature it becomes clear that SD was originally thought to address the question: what kind of economic system would lead to everyone's needs being met in an environmentally sustainable and socially just manner? While ‘good environmental management’ is part of the answer to such a question, this paper argues that it is not the core issue at stake.
Suggested Citation
Jan Bebbington, 2001.
"Sustainable development: a review of the international development, business and accounting literature,"
Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 128-157, June.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:accfor:v:25:y:2001:i:2:p:128-157
DOI: 10.1111/1467-6303.00059
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:accfor:v:25:y:2001:i:2:p:128-157. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/racc .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.