The concept of sustainability originates from “sustainable development“, first defined in the 1987 UN publication Our Common Future. After 900 days of global meetings, the report emphasized the need to balance economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity.

This balance is often summed up as people, planet, and profit. In business, it is known as the triple bottom line, a concept introduced by sustainability expert John Elkington in the 1990s. The diagram to the right illustrates how these three areas overlap.

While some mistakenly believe sustainability is only about the environment, it also includes human rights, equity, and economic opportunity. As the Our Common Future report notes:

“Poverty is a major cause and effect of global environmental problems.”

In 2005, Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) was coined by the United Nations Environment Programme Initiative, as outlined in the Freshfields Report and the Who Cares Wins Brief from the UN Global Compact.

Today, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer a global blueprint for addressing climate change, reducing inequality, and building inclusive prosperity.

To explore a more in-depth development of ESG over time, see this timeline and history of ESG investing and this overview of ESG’s evolution and impact.

Companies that follow the triple bottom line framework consider both the intended and unintended impacts of their operations on people.

Internal practices may include:

• Comprehensive healthcare
• Paid maternity and paternity leave
• Fair working hours
• Advancing diversity and inclusion

External efforts may include:

• Protecting labor rights across the supply chain
• Prioritizing supplier diversity
• Evaluating the social impact of investments
• Supporting local communities by addressing inequalities in access to:
  • • Education
    • Healthcare
    • Clean drinking water

Triple bottom line companies aim to reduce or eliminate their ecological footprint by evaluating the full life cycle of their operations and products and measuring environmental costs at both global and local levels.

Global impacts may include:

• Climate change
• Ocean acidification
• Loss of biodiversity
• Pandemics
  

Local impacts may include:

• Water use and pollution
• Soil degradation
• Localized air pollution
• Damage to natural areas

Fairphone’s modular smartphone design keeps devices in use longer by making parts easily replaceable and repairable. This reduces electronic waste and promotes sustainable use of materials

One of the most widely recognized responses to today’s social, economic, and environmental challenges is the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These 17 interconnected goals aim to address global issues such as poverty, education, and climate change by 2030. The SDGs are commonly referenced in sustainability and ESG conversations, particularly among organizations committed to impact-driven work. Tools like the SDG Compass support efforts to integrate the goals into strategy, culture, and operations.

Critique #1: Sustainability is about sustaining the business– attracting employees and customers, accessing new markets, lowering costs and avoiding regulations–and not about making any measurable changes to how it impacts people and the planet.

“What we call ‘eco-business’–taking over the idea of sustainability and turning it into a tool of business control and growth that projects an image of corporate social responsibility–is proving to be a powerful strategy for corporations in a rapidly globalizing economy marked by financial turmoil and a need for continual strategic repositioning…True or ‘deep’ sustainability requires restoring and protecting ecosystems and communities, and not, as every big brand is doing, first and foremost trying to use sustainability to enhance the efficiency of production and the quality of products to speed along growth.” (Peter Dauvergne and Jane Lister, Eco-Business: A Big Brand Takeover of Sustainability, 2013)

Critique #2: Sustainability is a distraction and drain on the profit-making function and legal responsibility of the enterprise

“The business [people] believe that they are defending free enterprise when they declaim that business is not concerned ‘merely’ with profit but also with promoting desirable ‘social’ ends; that business has a ‘social conscience’ and takes seriously its responsibilities for providing employment, eliminating discrimination, avoiding pollution and whatever else may be the catchwords of the contemporary crop of reformers.”

“In fact they are—or would be if they or any one else took them seriously— preaching pure and unadulterated socialism. Businessmen who talk this way are unwitting puppets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades.” (Milton Freedman, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”, NY Times, 1970)