Abstract
AbstractThis paper critiques the two‐dimensional (hierarchical–spatial) focus on scales evident in management and organizational studies, and the capitalist ecological modernization (CEM) paradigm that dominates current corporate and governmental approaches to sustainability. Our contribution is to propose a more complex and nuanced understanding of scale, which incorporates social, political, temporal and material dimensions. We propose a heuristic framework from Harvey, in order to evaluate different paradigms of socio‐ecological organizing: specifically, the dominant paradigm of CEM against a social ecology (SE) alternative. We explore the divergent conceptions of, and relative importance placed upon, concepts of scale, grain, level and field in these two contrasting paradigms. Our analysis highlights the limitations and contradictions of the CEM expression of scale, namely its predominant focus on measurement and expansion through ‘economies of scale’. By offering an alternative conception of the links between scales, grains, levels and social fields, we show how this enriches the conceptualization of potential forms of socio‐ecological organizing and opens up the potential for alternative modes of organizing socio‐ecological sustainability.
Highlights
At the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), we are strongly engaged in translating the SDGs’ [the Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations] ambitions and words into business action underpinned by business solutions
In this article, we have argued that current corporate and governmental sustainability initiatives are animated by a conception of scale from the Capitalist Ecological Modernisation (CEM) paradigm that assumes the desirability of economies of scale in sustainability practice
We have shown that these assumptions are reproduced in a variety of management and organizational research that reproduces the CEM paradigm
Summary
At the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), we are strongly engaged in translating the SDGs’ [the Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations] ambitions and words into business action underpinned by business solutions. By drawing on ideas about scale from human geography and political ecology, and the emerging application of these ideas in management and organizational studies, we contribute by developing a concept of scaling for sustainability that integrates political, social, temporal, and material dimensions. We draw on human geography and political ecology to develop a more nuanced and complex understanding of scale that incorporates a wider range of relevant issues (including political, social, and material) through acknowledging the role of dimensions and fields This is developed and illustrated through a comparison of the CEM paradigm and the SE paradigm in order to enhance the understanding of management scholars and practitioners concerning the relationship between business and the natural environment. It is certainly a key point of difference with advocates of deep ecology, who would see it as an unwarranted privileging of the needs of human beings in the natural world (Sessions, 1995)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
