School of Languages (ScOLa)

Undergraduate English Programme

Sustainability, Intergenerational Social Equity, and the Socially Responsible Organization

Edmund C. Stazyk, Alisa Moldavanova, and H. George Frederickson
1. Perhaps no word in modern languages means so little and much as sustainability. As both a word and
concept, sustainability reflects a growing awareness that current human needs and expectations must be
balanced against the immediate and long-term capacity of supporting ecosystems (IUCN/UNEP/ WWF,
1991; UN General Assembly, 1987). The most commonly utilized depiction 1 of sustainable development
traces from the Brundtland Commission, which describes the process as “development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising 2 the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (UN
General Assembly, 1987). Without maintaining supporting ecosystems today and into the future, the
continued health and survival of humanity is questionable. Sustainability provides a seemingly neat and
simple lens through which many of the conflicting demands facing modern societies may be viewed. Efforts
to address these conflicting demands require balancing a complex mix of environmental, social, and
economics pressures—the so-called three pillars of sustainability (UN General Assembly, 2005).

2. Sustainability has come primarily to be associated with the environmental movement. However,
sustainability is hardly a new concept. In fact, 2,500 years ago, citizens of the Athenian city-state took the
following oath:

We will ever strive for the ideals and sacred things of the city, both alone and with many; we will
continuously seek to quicken the sense of public duty; we will respect and obey the city’s laws; we
will transmit this city not only not less, but greater, better and more beautiful than it was left to us.

With this oath, Athenian citizens accepted the responsibility to effectively conduct the affairs of the city. They
pledged to leave the city better for future generations—in other words, to practice sustainability.

3. From the Greeks, we learn that sustainability has long been valued. We also learn that sustainability
encompasses more than a narrow emphasis on environmental management. In this broader historical
context, sustainability can be understood primarily as a form of intergenerational fairness, which claims that
current generations have obligations toward future generations abound. Rawls (1971) is one of the leading
advocates for including future generations in the domain of justice and suggests classical reflections on
morality and ethics frequently include future generations as worthy of consideration. In other words, current
generations have a moral obligation to future generations.

Sustainability as a Form of Equity

4. Taken together, the perspectives reviewed above indicate future generations are a valid and important
domain of consideration. We do, in fact, have an inherent obligation to future generations that must be met
when possible. The challenge is this: How can and should our obligations to future generations be balanced
against current needs and expectations? The best method for sorting out our obligations to present and

1
“the way that something is presented or shown. ” Depiction. (2018). In Cambridge dictionary Online. Retrieved Jan.18,2018 from
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/depiction
2
“to risk having a harmful effect on something.” Compromise. (2018). In Cambridge dictionary Online. Retrieved Jan.18,2018 from
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/compromise

ENG 101 Spring 2018 1

School of Languages (ScOLa)
Undergraduate English Programme

future generations rests in treating sustainability as a concept that has primarily to do with equity across
generations. Therefore, sustainability addresses the universal sense of belonging and emphasizes shared
values of humanity.

Environmental Sustainability and Intergenerational Fairness

5. The most advanced conceptual view of sustainability is found in ecology. The fundamentals of our
understanding in ecology is not by chance, because sustainability is one of the most urgent issues in
environmental policy, associated with the depletion 3 of natural resources and environmental deterioration 4.
In this context, sustainability claims that environmental and natural resources must be shared with future
generations, because natural resources are a common heritage of mankind to which every generation should
have the same right of access (Asheim, Buchholz, & Tungodden, 1999). A fair treatment of future generations
presupposes the recognition and protection of their right to enjoy at least the same capacity of economic
and ecological resources that present generations enjoy (Padilla, 2002).

Economic Sustainability and Intergenerational Fairness

6. Economic sustainability is the ability of an economy to support a level of economic production. The idea of
intergenerational sustainability in economy is based on the notion that the “current generation is failing to
meet its societal and public responsibility to maintain ‘environmental assets’ for the purposes of sustaining
income for the benefit of future generations” (Brätland, 2006, p. 13). Thus, sustainability is concerned with
emerging scarcities and how humans deal with them.

7. There are two models of economic sustainability. According to Heal (1998), environmental assets should
be regulated by the government since it is a public good to be provided to future generations. It’s the
government’s responsibility to protect future interests against the effects of irrational short-term
preferences for meeting present over future needs. Everybody deserves to be treated equally. However,
Brätland (2006) finds this transfer of property to a government authority unethical and argues that this
cannot be justified as a moral obligation. Instead, he argues that private ownership is the only way to ensure
resources are managed ethically. Ownership imposes responsibilities on the property owner. Property
owners are to take precautionary measures against natural resource abuse and pollution.

Social Sustainability and Intergenerational Fairness

8. Social sustainability is generally defined as a system which not only meets the needs of current members
but supports the ability of future generations to maintain a healthy community.

9. A well-known theory, the tragedy of the commons, arises from the self-interested behavior of individuals
who use a common pool of limited resources; in such cases, resources are scarce and each individual tries to
maximize his or her benefit, eventually leading to the complete consumption of common resources (Hardin,
3
“a reduction in something.” Depletion. (2018). In Cambridge dictionary Online. Retrieved Jan.18,2018 from
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/depletion
4
“the process or fact of becoming worse.” Deterioration. (2018). In Cambridge dictionary Online. Retrieved Jan.18,2018 from
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/deterioration

ENG 101 Spring 2018 2

School of Languages (ScOLa)
Undergraduate English Programme

1968). Although individuals are aware of the fact that they will not benefit from exhausting 5 common
resources in the long-term, their collaboration is still impossible as their short-term interests gain priority.
Consequently, the tragedy of the commons suggests that sustainable social interaction and cooperation in
the conditions of resource scarcity appear unrealistic.

10. Another popular view on social sustainability can be seen in the prisoner’s dilemma, as it produces similar
outcomes, highlighting participants’ failure to collaborate (Flood, 1952). The prisoner’s dilemma game allows
two prisoners to reach an acceptable outcome if they do not defect. Yet, if one prisoner defects and
collaborates with the police whereas the other does not, then the first prisoner receives a better payoff 6
whereas the other is left worse off. According to the game logic, the prisoners, as self-interested individuals,
have no motivation to act collaboratively with one another and would rather go for their own best payoff.
Consequently, prisoners defect from their collaborative agreement and end up spending more time in prison;
yet, if they collaborated, both would suffer less. Both the tragedy of the commons and the prisoner’s
dilemma are used as evidence supporting their argument that sustainable collaboration is impossible.

11. However, Axelrod (1881, 1997) offers a modification to the prisoner’s dilemma game: the principle of
repeated interaction, which allows prisoners to adjust their behavior and arrive at a mutually optimal
outcome even in games prone to defection. Axelrod’s theory is based on the assumption that no rational
individual wants to defect from a commitment in the first place; he or she would rather defect only in the
case of the other party’s defection. This theory implies how social sustainability can be maintained from
generation to generation through formal (traditional governmental mechanisms) and informal (non-
governmental organizations and self-regulation) collaborative institutions.

Implications for Socially Responsible Organizations

12. What, then, does it mean for an organization to be sustainable or pursue sustainable policies and
practices? Organizations striving7 to be socially and environmentally responsible would be affected positively
by treating sustainability as a form of intergenerational social equity or fairness. When sustainability is
conceptualized as intergenerational social equity, it is easier to determine what socially and environmentally
responsible organizations look like in practice.

13. Having defined sustainability as a form of intergenerational social equity, what do socially responsible
organizations look like in practice? At the very least, socially responsible organizations are those that (a) act
in accordance with laws and public policies, (b) behave ethically, (c) avoid socially harmful acts, and, in the
best case scenario, (d) proactively work to enhance social goals. Thus, the logic of the socially responsible
organization implies that organizations may be reactive (e.g., by simply adhering 8 to laws and other

5
“to use something completely.” Exhaust. (2018). In Cambridge dictionary Online. Retrieved Jan.18,2018 from
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/exhaust
6
“profit, reward.” Payoff. (2018). In Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved January 18,2018 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pay
%20off
7
“to devote serious effort and energy.” Strive. (2018). In Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved January 18,2018 from https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/strive
8
“to stick firmly.” Adhere. (2018). In Cambridge dictionary Online. Retrieved Jan.18,2018 from
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/adhere

ENG 101 Spring 2018 3

School of Languages (ScOLa)
Undergraduate English Programme

externally derived incentives) or proactive (e.g., by intentionally pursuing activities that advance social goals).
More importantly, because organizations frequently and voluntarily choose to be socially responsible, it is
important to consider which organizational characteristics and tendencies are most likely to increase
intergenerational social equity.

14. Socially responsible organizations that acknowledge a short-term focus on profitability will likely
disadvantage both the organization and future generations. An emphasis on short-term profitability often
results in the failure of survival in the long-run. Socially responsible organizations resist the siren call of
immediate and short-term gains. Instead, organizations striving for long-term survival—to be themselves
sustainable—are more likely to devote time, money, and other resources to Research & Development and
organizational innovation. They also invest in their local communities, recognizing the sustained health and
welfare of an organization is dependent on the long-term health and welfare of surrounding communities.

Conclusion

15. This brings us to the point of seeking overarching moral or ethical principles to inform our responsibilities
to future generations. How shall we represent the future in the present? How can we tap the human
instincts toward a moral community extended through time? Following the logic of intergenerational social
equity as sustainability, socially responsible organizations should seek to adopt and implement policies that
support intergenerational fairness. Short of that, socially responsible organizations should adopt policies and
practices likely to have a neutral effect on future generations. They should avoid policies and practices that
support intergenerational social inequity.

16. We recognize that we are ignorant of the distant future and can only imagine a little ahead. Still, we must
act on what we know, even at the risk of mistakes. If the challenges confronting businesses and governments
are defined as temporal and intergenerational, then practitioners must find initiatives that serve both. We
are more knowledgeable now of the likely effects of toxic waste, pesticide overuse, overgrazing, strip mining,
ground water depletion, and a host of other problems. The informed and non-exaggerated articulation of the
likely effects of these problems on future generations can powerfully influence both policy and practice. In
short, organizations have a responsibility for social equity between generations; organizations must act as
best as possible based on what they know.

Adapted and taken from Stazyk, E., Moldovanova, A. & Frederickson, H. G. (2016). Sustainability,
intergenerational social equity, and the socially responsible organization. Administration and Society, 48 (6),
655-682.

ENG 101 Spring 2018 4

School of Languages (ScOLa)
Undergraduate English Programme

References

Asheim, G. B., Buchholz, W., & Tungodden, B. (1999). Justifying sustainability (Norwegian School of and
Business Administration Working Paper). Retrieved from
http://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:fth:norgee:5/99
Axelrod, R. (1981). The emergence of cooperation among egoists. American Political Science Review, 75, 306-
318.
Axelrod, R. (1997). The complexity of cooperation: Agent based models of competition and collaboration.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Brätland, J. (2006). Toward a calculational theory and policy of intergenerational sustainability. Quarterly
Journal of Austrian Economics, 9(2), 13-43.
Flood, M. M. (1952). Some experimental games (Research Memorandum RM-789).
Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243-1248
Heal, G. (1998). Valuing the future: Economic theory and sustainability. New York, NY: Columbia University
Press.
IUCN/UNEP/WWF. (1991). Caring for the earth: A strategy for sustainable living. Gland, Switzerland: Author.
Padilla, E. (2002). Intergenerational equity and sustainability. Ecological Economics, 41, 69-83.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
UN General Assembly. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our
common future (Transmitted to the General Assembly as an annex to document A/42/427).
Retrieved from http://sustainabledevelopment. un.org/index.php? menu=1371
UN General Assembly. (2005, September 15). 2005 World Summit outcome. Resolution A/60/1, adopted by
the General Assembly. Retrieved from http:// www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?
symbol=A/RES/60/1

ENG 101 Spring 2018 5