Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to Sharpen Our Discourse on Corporate Sustainability and Business Ethics—A View from the Section Editors

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this editorial is to help authors better understand how to contribute to discourse on corporate sustainability and business ethics. We do this in two ways. First, we clarify our expectations for publication in the “Corporate Sustainability and Business Ethics” section at the Journal of Business Ethics (JBE). As section editors at the journal, we want to make explicit the criteria we apply in our decisions to accept or reject a submission. We argue that authors should explicitly reflect upon what corporate sustainability means in the context of their research. We also stress that publishing in JBE requires an explicit central focus on ethics. We do not take a position on how authors must do either of these two, only that it should be done. In short, there are good business ethics papers that do not add to corporate sustainability theory building or practice, and there are good corporate sustainability papers that are not framed in a business ethics discourse. For the “Corporate Sustainability and Business Ethics” section, we expect authors to strive for both. Second, we provide several illustrations of how corporate sustainability research can be framed from a business ethics perspective around three central sustainability constructs: objective function, carrying capacity, and generational sustainability. These examples are not intended to be comprehensive or to bound the range of acceptable research for JBE’s “Corporate Sustainability and Business Ethics” section. Rather, we aim to provide representative examples of potentially publishable research on business ethics and corporate sustainability to spur innovative thinking and constructive discussion. We hope this editorial will help authors better understand what we expect from submissions to the “Corporate Sustainability and Business Ethics” at JBE.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

No data is available for this editorial since no primary or secondary data was used in the production of this article.

References

  • Agrawal, A., & Hockerts, K. (2019). Impact investing strategy: Managing conflicts between impact investor and investee social enterprise. Sustainability, 11(15), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K., Bolin, B., Costanza, R., Dasgupta, P., Folke, C., & Holling, C. S. (1996). Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment. Environment and Development Economics, 15(2), 91–95. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X00000413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avetisyan, E., & Hockerts, K. (2017). The consolidation of the ESG rating industry as an enactment of institutional retrogression. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(3), 316–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In: T. Urdan, F. Pajares (Eds.) Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, chap. 14 (pp. 307–337). Greenwich: IAP Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & DesJardine, M. (2014). Business sustainability: It is about time. Strategic Organization, 12(1), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127013520265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & Song, H. C. (2017). Similar but not the same: Differentiating corporate sustainability from corporate responsibility. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 105–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.57318391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., Sengul, M., Pache, A.-C., & Model, J. (2015). Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: the case of work integration social enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1658–1685. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, R. J., & Rauter, R. (2017). Strategic perspectives of corporate sustainability management to develop a sustainable organization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjørn, A., Bey, N., Georg, S., Røpke, I., & Hauschild, M. Z. (2017). Is Earth recognized as a finite system in corporate responsibility reporting? Journal of Cleaner Production, 163, 106–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bocken, N. M. P., & Short, S. W. (2016). Towards a sufficiency-driven business model: Experiences and opportunities. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18, 41–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Bolle, M. (2019). The Amazon Is a Carbon Bomb: How Can Brazil and the World Work Together to Avoid Setting It Off? Policy Briefs PB19–15. Peterson Institute for International Economics.

  • Braungart, M., McDonough, W., & Bollinger, A. (2007). Cradle-to-cradle design: Creating healthy emissions - a strategy for eco-effective product and system design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(13–14), 1337–1348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiado, R. G. G., de Freitas Dias, R., Mattos, L. V., Quelhas, O. L. G., & Leal Filho, W. (2017). Towards sustainable development through the perspective of eco-efficiency - A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 165(1), 890–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carollo, L., & Guerci, M. (2018). ‘Activists in a Suit’: Paradoxes and metaphors in sustainability managers’ identity work. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(2), 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3582-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clift, R., Sim, S., King, H., Chenoweth, J. L., Christie, I., Clavreul, J., et al. (2017). The challenges of applying planetary boundaries as a basis for strategic decision-making in companies with global supply chains. Sustainability (switzerland), 9(2), 279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A. (2000). Corporate greening as amoralization. Organization Studies, 21(4), 673. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840600214001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., Henriques, I., Husted, B., & Matten, D. (2016). What constitutes a theoretical contribution in the business and society field? Business & Society, 55(6), 783–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L. (2012). Why I recommended that your manuscript be rejected and what you can do about it. Publishing in the Organizational Sciences. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452240466.n14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlmann, F., Stubbs, W., Griggs, D., & Morrell, K. (2019). Corporate actors, the UN sustainable development goals and earth system governance: A research agenda. Anthropocene Review, Forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019619848217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1992). Population, Sustainability, and Earth’s Carrying Capacity. BioScience, 42(10), 761–771. https://doi.org/10.2307/1311995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H. E. (1991). Steady-state economics: with new essays. Washington DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. A., Lyon, T. P., & Maxwell, J. W. (2019). Understanding the Role of the Corporation in Sustainability Transitions. Organization and Environment, 32(2), 87–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drempetic, S., Klein, C., & Zwergel, B. (2019). The Influence of Firm Size on the ESG Score: Corporate Sustainability Ratings Under Review. Journal of Business Ethics, forthcomin.

  • Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the Business Case for Sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11, 130–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dzhengiz, T., & Hockerts, K. (2022). Dogmatic, instrumental and paradoxical frames: A pragmatic research framework for studying organisational sustainability. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(4), 501–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, J. R. (2005). Eco-efficiency: Philosophy, theory, and tools. In Journal of Industrial Ecology (Vol. 9). https://doi.org/10.1162/108819805775248070

  • Epstein, M. J., Buhovac, A. R., & Yuthas, K. (2015). Managing Social, Environmental and Financial Performance Simultaneously. Long Range Planning, 48(1), 35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M. (2003). Making the business case for sustainability. Linking social and environmental actions to financial performance. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 9, 79–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ethiraj, K., Gambardella, A., & Helfat, C. (2016). Replication in strategic management. Straegic Entrepreneurship Journal, 37(11), 2191–2192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiksel, J. (2007). Sustainability and resilience: Toward a systems approach. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 2(2), 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freudenreich, B., & Schaltegger, S. (2020). Developing sufficiency-oriented offerings for clothing users: Business approaches to support consumption reduction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119589

  • Gao, J., & Bansal, P. (2013). Instrumental and Integrative Logics in Business Sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(2), 241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gertler, P., Galiani, S., & Romero, M. (2018). How to make replication the norm. Nature, 554(7693), 417–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M., & Freeman, R. E. (2017). Focusing on ethics and broadening our intellectual base. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M., & Freeman, R. E. (2018). Deepening ethical analysis in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 147, 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haffar, M., & Searcy, C. (2017). Classification of trade-offs encountered in the practice of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 495–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haffar, M., & Searcy, C. (2019). How organizational logics shape trade-off decision-making in sustainability. Long Range Planning, 52(6), 101912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, T., & Figge, F. (2011). Beyond the bounded instrumentality in current corporate sustainability research: Toward an inclusive notion of profitability. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(3), 325–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2018). A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(2), 235–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2015). Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(2), 297–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, T., Preuss, L., Pinkse, J., & Figge, F. (2014). Cognitive frames in corporate sustainability: Managerial sensemaking with paradoxical and business case frames. Academy of Management Review, 39(4), 463–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haigh, N., Walker, J., Bacq, S., & Kickul, J. (2015). Hybrid organizations: Origins, strategies, impacts, and implications. California Management Review, 57(3), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.3.5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamschmidt, J., & Dyllick, T. (2001). ISO 14001 profitable? Yes! But is it eco-effective? Greener Management International, 34(Summer), 43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, N., McGregor, P. G., Swales, J. K., & Turner, K. (2009). Do increases in energy efficiency improve environmental quality and sustainability? Ecological Economics, 68(3), 692–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L., Milstein, M. B., & Caggiano, J. (2003). Creating sustainable value. Academy of Management Executive. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2003.10025194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Häyhä, T., Lucas, P. L., van Vuuren, D. P., Cornell, S. E., & Hoff, H. (2016). From Planetary Boundaries to national fair shares of the global safe operating space — How can the scales be bridged? Global Environmental Change, 40, 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hediger, W. (1999). Reconciling “weak” and “strong” sustainability. International Journal of Social Economics, 26(7–9), 1120–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heikkurinen, P., Young, C. W., & Morgan, E. (2019). Business for sustainable change: Extending eco-efficiency and eco-sufficiency strategies to consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 218, 656–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hockerts, K. (2015). How hybrid organizations turn antagonistic assets into complementarities. California Management Review, 57(3), 83–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hockerts, K., Hehenberger, L., Schaltegger, S., & Farber, V. (2022). Defining and Conceptualizing Impact Investing: Attractive Nuisance or Catalyst? Journal of Business Ethics, 179(4), 937–950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05157-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. J. (2001). From heresy to dogma: An institutional history of corporate environmentalism. Stanford University Press.

  • Holling, C. S. (2013). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. The Future of Nature: Documents of Global Change, 4(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honey-Rosés, J., Le Menestrel, M., Arenas, D., Rauschmayer, F., & Rode, J. (2014). Enriching intergenerational decision-making with guided visualization exercises. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(4), 675–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, G., & Greenwood, M. (2021). Reconnecting to the social in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 170, 1–4, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04775-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Islam, G., & Greenwood, M. (2022). The metrics of ethics and the ethics of metrics. Journal of Business Ethics, 175, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-05004-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivory, S. B., & Brooks, S. B. (2018). Managing corporate sustainability with a paradoxical lens: lessons from strategic agility. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(2), 347–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, R. H., Bousquet, P., Bussmann, I., Haeckel, M., Kipfer, R., Leifer, I., et al. (2016). Effects of climate change on methane emissions from seafloor sediments in the Arctic Ocean: A review. Limnology and Oceanography, 61(1), 283–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kannampuzha, M. J., & Hockerts, K. (2019). Organizational social entrepreneurship: Scale development and validation. Social Enterprise Journal, 15(3), 290–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Haanaes, K., & von Streng Velken, I. (2012). Sustainability nears a tipping point. Strategic Direction, 53(2), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/sd.2012.05628gaa.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klettner, A., Clarke, T., & Boersma, M. (2014). The governance of corporate sustainability: Empirical insights into the development, leadership and implementation of responsible business strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(1), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1750-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnenluecke, M. K., & Griffiths, A. (2010). Corporate sustainability and organizational culture. Journal of World Business, 45(4), 357–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2009.08.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longoni, A., & Cagliano, R. (2018). Sustainable innovativeness and the triple bottom line: The role of organizational time perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 1097–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, R. (2008). Envisioning sustainability three-dimensionally. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.02.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magis, K. (2010). Community resilience: An indicator of social sustainability. Society and Natural Resources, 23(5), 401–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, M., & J., & Lutz, E. (2015). Navigating institutional plurality: Organizational governance in hybrid organizations. Organization Studies, 36(6), 713–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840615580007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar, A. B. (2019). The fiduciary responsibility of directors to preserve intergenerational equity. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(1), 149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McElroy, M. W., & Van Engelen, J. M. (2012). Corporate sustainability management—the art and science of managing non-financial performance. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1108/meq.2012.08323daa.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. USA: Chelsea Green Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meuer, J., Koelbel, J., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2019). On the Nature of Corporate Sustainability. Organization and Environment, forthcomin.

  • Moizer, J., & Tracey, P. (2010). Strategy making in social enterprise: The role of resource allocation and its effects on organizational sustainability. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 27(3), 252–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montiel, I. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: Separate pasts, common futures. Organization and Environment, 21, 245–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moran, M., & Ward-Christie, L. (2022). Blended social impact investment transactions: Why are they so complex? Journal of Business Ethics, Forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05153-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumayer, E. (2003). Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms, third edition. Weak versus Strong Sustainability: Exploring the Limits of Two Opposing Paradigms, Third Edition. Edward Elgar Publishing.

  • Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., et al. (2015) Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348(6242), 1422–1425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, D. W., Fanning, A. L., Lamb, W. F., & Steinberger, J. K. (2018). A good life for all within planetary boundaries. Nature Sustainability, 1(2), 88–95. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0021-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. A., & Reichart, J. (2000). The environment as a stakeholder? A fairness-based approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(2), 185–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pryshlakivsky, J., & Searcy, C. (2017). A heuristic model for establishing trade-offs in corporate sustainability performance measurement systems. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(2), 323–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quarshie, A. M., Salmi, A., & Leuschner, R. (2016). Sustainability and corporate social responsibility in supply chains: The state of research in supply chain management and business ethics journals. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 22(2), 82–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawhouser, H., Cummings, M., & Crane, A. (2015). Benefit corporation legislation and the emergence of a social hybrid category. California Management Review, 57(3), 13–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raworth, K. (2017). A Doughnut for the Anthropocene: humanity’s compass in the 21st century. The Lancet Planetary Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30028-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, D. C. (1993). Empiricism in business ethics: Suggested research directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 12, 585–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roloff, J., & Zyphur, M. (2019) Null findings, replications and preregistered studies in business ethics research. Journal of Business Ethics, 160, 609–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., Pogutz, S., & Misani, N. (2021). Paving the road toward eco-effectiveness: Exploring the link between greenhouse gas emissions and firm performance. Business Strategy and the Environment (forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasse-Werhahn, L. F., Bachmann, C., & Habisch, A. (2018). Managing tensions in corporate sustainability through a practical wisdom lens. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3994-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., & Sturm, A. (1992). Ökologieorientierte Entscheidungen in Unternehmen - Ökologisches Rechnungswesen statt Ökobilanzierung: Notwendigkeit, Kriterien, Konzepte. Basel: Institut für Betriebswirtschaft des Wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Zentrums (WWZ) der Universität Basel.

  • Schaltegger, S., Beckmann, M., & Hockerts, K. (2018). Sustainable entrepreneurship: Creating environmental solutions in light of planetary boundaries. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 10(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEV.2018.090990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Hansen, E. G. (2012). Business cases for sustainability: The role of business model innovation for corporate sustainability. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 6(2), 95–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searcy, C. (2012). Corporate sustainability performance measurement systems: A review and research agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searcy, C. (2016). Measuring enterprise sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(2), 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seelos, C., & Mair, J. (2005). Sustainable development, sustainable profit. European Business Forum, 20, 49–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Som, C., Hilty, L. M., & Köhler, A. R. (2009). The precautionary principle as a framework for a sustainable information society. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(3), 493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., et al. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223), 736–746. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Upward, A., & Jones, P. (2016). An ontology for strongly sustainable business models: Defining an enterprise framework compatible with natural and social science. Organization and Environment, 29(1), 93–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615592933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Byl, C. A., & Slawinski, N. (2015). Embracing tensions in corporate sustainability: A review of research from win-wins and trade-offs to paradoxes and beyond. Organization and Environment, 28(1), 54–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2–3), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023331212247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WBCSD. (2000). Eco-efficiency. Creating more Value with less Impact. World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Geneva: World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

  • Whiteman, G., Walker, B., & Perego, P. (2013). Planetary boundaries: Ecological foundations for corporate sustainability. Journal of Management Studies, 50(2), 307–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, W., & Tilley, F. (2006). Can businesses move beyond efficiency? The shift toward effectiveness and equity in the corporate sustainability debate. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5(6), 402–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M., Moingeon, B., & Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010). Building social business models: Lessons from the Grameen experience. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 308–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Copenhagen Business School, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    Kai Hockerts

  2. Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada

    Cory Searcy

Authors
  1. Kai Hockerts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cory Searcy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kai Hockerts.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Editors at the Journal of Business Ethics are blinded from decisions on manuscripts on which they are listed as authors. Such manuscripts are handled by an independent editor at the journal and subject to peer review processes.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hockerts, K., Searcy, C. How to Sharpen Our Discourse on Corporate Sustainability and Business Ethics—A View from the Section Editors. J Bus Ethics 187, 225–235 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05386-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05386-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation