Journal of Business Ethics:1-19 (forthcoming)

This paper explores the role of learning in organizational responses to sustainability. Finding meaningful solutions to sustainability challenges requires companies and other actors to broaden their thinking, go beyond organizational boundaries and engage more with their stakeholders. However, broadening organizational perspective and collaborating with diverse stakeholders involves inherent political and process-related tensions. Learning has been identified as a key organizing process for overcoming the challenges that arise through collaborative action for sustainability. In order to understand the role of learning in organizational responses to sustainability, we conduct a cross-disciplinary systematic review of the literature on learning for sustainability and incorporate perspectives from diverse disciplines including business, management, environmental science, sociology, policy, urban planning, and development. The review explores how different disciplines conceptualize and operationalize learning for sustainability and identifies the common themes and challenges. Our findings highlight the different ways that power relations influence learning and decision-making processes, and how entrenched traditional value structures and ‘reflexive complicity’ limit practitioners and researchers alike in finding meaningful sustainability solutions. We conclude that shifting how we motivate business and management research on learning for sustainability, in a way that prioritizes sustainability outcomes over firm performance, could bring us a step closer to more meaningful responses to sustainability. Similarly, breaking patterns of ‘reflexive complicity’ by key actors in business could assist in shifting toward more radical and long-term responses to sustainability in practice.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10551-022-05072-7
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,436
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Anti-Reflexivity.Aaron M. McCright & Riley E. Dunlap - 2010 - Theory, Culture and Society 27 (2-3):100-133.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On the Nature of Cross-Disciplinary Integration: A Philosophical Framework.Michael O'Rourke, Stephen Crowley & Chad Gonnerman - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 56:62-70.
Cross-Disciplinary Research as a Platform for Philosophical Research.Stephen J. Crowley, Chad Gonnerman & Michael O'rourke - 2016 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 2 (2):344-363.


Added to PP index

Total views
1 ( #1,553,135 of 2,520,400 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,718 of 2,520,400 )

How can I increase my downloads?


Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes