The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 100 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects
Open accessAbstract
The last decade has witnessed the emergence of a paradox perspective on corporate sustainability. By explicitly acknowledging tensions between different desirable, yet interdependent and conflicting sustainability objectives, a paradox perspective enables decision makers to achieve competing sustainability objectives simultaneously and creates leeway for superior business contributions to sustainable development. In stark contrast to the business case logic, a paradox perspective does not establish emphasize business considerations over concerns for environmental protection and social well-being at the societal level. In order to contribute to the consolidation of this emergent field of research, we offer a definition of the paradox perspective on corporate sustainability and a framework to delineate its descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects. This framework clarifies the paradox perspective’s contents and its implications for research and practice. We use the framework to map the contributions to this thematic symposium on paradoxes in sustainability and to propose questions for future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1994) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(94)92216-0 · Cited by 45,910
Brundtland, G. H. (1991) · Earth and Us · doi:10.1016/b978-0-7506-1049-0.50009-5 · Cited by 12,174
Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910 · Cited by 7,641
The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258887 · Cited by 5,846
Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business
Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556659 · Cited by 5,130
Toward a theory of organizational creativity
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258761 · Cited by 4,399
Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory
Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1023/b:busi.0000039399.90587.34 · Cited by 3,968
The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice
Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00275.x · Cited by 3,919
Creating Shared Value: How to Reinvent Capitalism—And Unleash a Wave of Innovation and Growth
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2019) · Managing Sustainable Business · doi:10.1007/978-94-024-1144-7_16 · Cited by 3,905
Knowledge flows within multinational corporations
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200004)21:4<473::aid-smj84>3.0.co;2-i · Cited by 3,672
Cited by
Promises and paradoxes of the sharing economy: An organizing framework
Acquier, A., Daudigeos, T., & Pinkse, J. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.006 · Cited by 783
Self-citationThe role of HRM in developing sustainable organizations: Contemporary challenges and contradictions
Podgorodnichenko, N., Edgar, F., & McAndrew, I. (2020) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.04.001 · Cited by 160
A qualitative examination of how accountability manifests itself in a circular economy
Kwarteng, A., Agyenim-Boateng, C., & Simpson, S. N. Y. (2023) · Journal of Global Responsibility · doi:10.1108/jgr-12-2021-0107 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Business Ethics
- Published
- 2017-06-07
- Volume
- 148
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 235-248
- ISSN
- 0167-4544 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-0697
- OpenAlex
- W2617735758
- Cited by
- 607
- References
- 100
- FWCI
- 66.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10551-017-3587-2
- The paper
- Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2018). A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3587-2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
