Wayne Norman and Chris MacDonald launch a strong attack against Triple Bottom Line or 3BL accounting in their article “Gettingto the Bottom of ‘Triple Bottom Line’” (2004). This response suggests that, while limitations to 3BL accounting do exist, the critique of Norman and MacDonald is deeply flawed.

This paper argues that many objections against, and limitations of, corporate codes of conduct can be addressed if a meaningful integration can be established between CSR and ethics management practices within corporations. It is proposed that the notion of the triple bottom‐line finally presents corporations with a mechanism to establish this integration. The paper draws on the second South African King Report on Corporate Governance, which succeeded in integrating corporate governance, ethics management and triple bottom‐line reporting by advocating what it (...) called ‘Integrated Sustainability’. The paper argues that this is an example of how ethics management initiatives like code development become more meaningful, if they can be related to the corporation's CSR initiatives and reporting practices. Integration between ethics management and CSR in the context of triple bottom‐line reporting reframes corporate success in a way that makes both ethics management and CSR activities more meaningful. In fact, it is argued that in the absence of a social grammar that establishes this integration, neither codes nor CSR can foster meaningful organizational integrity. (shrink)

This paper argues that many objections against, and limitations of, corporate codes of conduct can be addressed if a meaningful integration can be established between CSR and ethics management practices within corporations. It is proposed that the notion of the triple bottom-line finally presents corporations with a mechanism to establish this integration. The paper draws on the second South African King Report on Corporate Governance, which succeeded in integrating corporate governance, ethics management and triple bottom-line reporting by advocating what it (...) called ‘Integrated Sustainability’. The paper argues that this is an example of how ethics management initiatives like code development become more meaningful, if they can be related to the corporation's CSR initiatives and reporting practices. Integration between ethics management and CSR in the context of triple bottom-line reporting reframes corporate success in a way that makes both ethics management and CSR activities more meaningful. In fact, it is argued that in the absence of a social grammar that establishes this integration, neither codes nor CSR can foster meaningful organizational integrity. (shrink)

We respond to Moses Pava’s defense of the “Triple Bottom Line” (3BL) concept against our earlier criticisms. We argue that, pacePava, the multiplicity of measures (and units of measure) that go into evaluating ethical performance cannot reasonably be compared to the handful of standard methods for evaluating financial performance. We also question Pava’s claim that usage of the term “3BL” is somehow intended to be ironical or subversive.

Wayne Norman and Chris MacDonald launch a strong attack against Triple Bottom Line or 3BL accounting in their article “Gettingto the Bottom of ‘Triple Bottom Line’” (2004). This response suggests that, while limitations to 3BL accounting do exist, the critique of Norman and MacDonald is deeply flawed.

In this paper, we examine critically the notion of “Triple Bottom Line” accounting. We begin by asking just what it is that supporters of the Triple Bottom Line idea advocate, and attempt to distil specific, assessable claims from the vague, diverse, and sometimescontradictory uses of the Triple Bottom Line rhetoric. We then use these claims as a basis upon which to argue (a) that what issound about the idea of a Triple Bottom Line is not novel, and (b) that what (...) is novel about the idea is not sound. We argue on bothconceptual and practical grounds that the Triple Bottom Line is an unhelpful addition to current discussions of corporate social responsibility. Finally, we argue that the Triple Bottom Line paradigm cannot be rescued simply by attenuating its claims: the rhetoric isbadly misleading, and may in fact provide a smokescreen behind which firms can avoid truly effective social and environmental reporting and performance. (shrink)

After a quarter of a century in print, Capra's groundbreaking work still challenges and inspires. This updated edition of The Tao of Physics includes a new preface and afterword in which the author reviews the developments of the twenty-five years since the book's first publication, discusses criticisms the book has received, and examines future possibilities for a new scientific world.