The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Partnerships for sustainable development: a review of current literature
Abstract
Academic interest in intersectoral partnerships took off in the mid-1990s and the number of publications on this topic has increased rapidly since. This article reviews current academic knowledge on partnerships for sustainable development. This review defines intersectoral partnerships as ‘collaborative arrangements in which actors from two or more spheres of society (state, market and civil society) are involved in a non-hierarchical process, and through which these actors strive for a sustainability goal’. We observe two major perspectives in the partnership literature, focusing on different aspects of the partnership phenomenon and addressing quite distinct questions. The first, the institutional perspective, looks at partnerships as new arrangements in the environmental governance regime. The second, the actor perspective, frames partnerships as possible strategic instruments for the goal achievement and problem solving of individual actors. Our review is organized around these perspectives. We identify the research questions that are being addressed in partnership literature, assess the type of knowledge that has been acquired and identify prevailing knowledge gaps. Important conclusions are, firstly, that research on partnerships has delivered many insights in their functioning and their role in contemporary society. Secondly, the concepts of partnerships and sustainable development are more clearly linked discursively than empirically. The current knowledge base mostly lacks clear definitions of success and therefore criteria for the evaluation of partnerships. Therefore, future research should, on empirical instead of reasoned grounds, pay more attention to the link between intersectoral partnerships and sustainable development. Preferably this should be done in a way that combines the actor and the institutional perspective.
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
Cited by
Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Gawankar, S. A. (2020) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.05.022 · Cited by 1,015
Trade‐offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it
Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2010) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.674 · Cited by 732
Blok, V., & Lemmens, P. (2015) · Responsible Innovation 2 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-17308-5_2 · Cited by 362
Kassem, H. S., Aljuaid, M., Alotaibi, B. A., & Ghozy, R. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12177178 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Van Huijstee, M. M., Francken, M., & Leroy, P.
- Venue
- Environmental Sciences
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-06
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 75-89
- ISSN
- 1569-3430 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-4225
- OpenAlex
- W2098359231
- Cited by
- 246
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Partnerships for sustainable development: a review of current literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/15693430701526336
- The paper
- Van Huijstee, M. M., Francken, M., & Leroy, P. (2007). Partnerships for sustainable development: a review of current literature. Environmental Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1080/15693430701526336
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.