1 Comment

  1. Nailya Saifulina
    August 12, 2019 @ 9:42 pm

    First of all, I would like to thank Stanford for such a great ooportunity to have the webinars with a lot of useful information. Unfortunately, due to the timezone differences I could not participate in the webinar and ask some questions. However, I have some doubts. I honestly think that the diagram shown in 7:07 in the video is not correct for sustainability. Holding economic dimension of the triple bottom line in the middle is not that sustainable, because it still holds economic interests above social and enviornmental, only applying sustainability when it is strategically necessary, for instance, to make company image better off by saying "we are sustainable". Even if this sheme is "sqeezed" into sustainability debate, it is a weak sustainability approach, which is not acceptable due to the current environmental situation we are facing now. Maybe in was ok in 2010, but certainly not now. The one and only model of development that should be accepted is a model offered by strong sustainability where environmental dimension is in the middle, meaning that the interests of the environment should be perferred over other dimensions. If to hold economy in the middle, it is not really a shift to say so. It is saying "we are making sustainable business" to customers in order to gain more profits, but not being really sustainable when it comes to tensions between, say, environmental and economic goals, no matter that company leaders say in nice short videos. Please feel free to correct me if I sound wrong. Other thing, always giving an example of Unilever – the company that is responsible for a very large portion of plastic in the oceans, one of the major plastic polluter in Philippines may not be the best option when talking about sustainability…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *