Problematizing eurocentric sustainability within the context of business management and exploring the pluriversality of sustainability

Abstract

Business is held responsible for much of the world’s unsustainability and despite over 50 years of sustainable development and corporate social responsibility (CSR) discourse and practice, the state of sustainability continues to deteriorate. This is because businesses within a capitalistic system tend to approach sustainability the same way they do business, bastioned by ideals of profit maximization and the commodification of nature. Additionally, sustainability discourse and practice are largely based on Western values, judgment, and epistemology, which determines the construction, framing, and understanding of sustainability problems and responses. This study refers to this as eurocentric sustainability whereby the mindset that created the problem, is the same mindset used to solve it. As such, there is an imperative to understand and pursue sustainability in pluralistic ways, which includes not only the perspectives of people who have traditionally been excluded from the discourse (plurality) but also approaches to knowledge and meaning beyond the limited parameters of Western epistemology and hermeneutics (pluriversality). Thus, the central aims of this dissertation are to problematize eurocentric sustainability and explore the pluriversality of sustainability through three separate but interconnected studies. The first study is a systematic literature review of eurocentrism and Just Sustainabilities (JS) within business management and the implications for sustainability and corporate social responsibility, by understanding what characterizations of eurocentrism and Just Sustainabilities are presented in business management literature. The findings suggest four key features of eurocentrism - the superiority of Western people, countries, ideas, knowledge, and values, which are expressed through the domination and oppression of people and nature, universalism, particularly of knowledge and culture, and modernity. These characteristics are also reflected in the broader eurocentrism scholarship and serve as the lens for this dissertation. JS is one approach for conducting plurality research that centers on sustainability injustices, largely created by the consequences of eurocentrism. The study illuminates the importance of problematizing eurocentrism within the sustainability discourse which continues to promote the superiority and universality of Western knowledge and epistemology that serves to exacerbate sustainability issues and maintain inequities. Next through an empirical inquiry using semi-structured interviews, the second study examines how the climate and sustainability discourses are perceived by owner-managers of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and what influence spirituality has on these understandings. Eight discourses emerged, each illuminating a distinct way of thinking and speaking about climate and sustainability. The four discourses of interdependency, social, longevity, and responsibility present a collectivist framing. Whereas the four discourses of superiority, power, paradoxical, and pessimism speak to perceptions of and reactions to eurocentric sustainability, which may be the cause of inaction by some participants. However, this inaction should not be mistaken as a lack of motivation, knowledge, or resources as it is more likely to do with not wanting to engage in eurocentric sustainability given the maladaptive outcomes it produces and/or their high costs. Further, many spoke of sustainability through ideas of totality, interdependency, equilibrium, and harmony; and that nature is intertwined with spirituality, which is also conveyed through themes of interdependency and equilibrium, revealing common threads between sustainability and spirituality. A key contribution of the second study is that it empirically demonstrates sustainability means different things to different people and also suggests that sustainability leaders and experts avoid viewing themselves as the only knowledge holders. The third study examines what motivates, supports, and limits participants in pursuing climate and environmental action using thematic analysis of the same dataset. The findings demonstrate that most respondents show deep concern for sustainability issues and see their role as minimizing environmental harm; often grounded by a culture of ‘no waste’. Outwardly, the biggest enablers and barriers are related to financial considerations. However, a deeper examination reveals that the inauthenticity of sustainability and CSR practices also creates cynicism and distrust, shaping attitudes and engagement in environmental action. This is a noteworthy finding as extant studies show the engagement of SMEs in environmental action is largely influenced by owner-managers’ values. This dissertation makes several scholarly, empirical, and practical contributions to sustainability management scholarship, including novel associations as a result of integrating data points from euroentrism, business management, SME, spirituality, and collectivism-individualism scholarship to create or strengthen relationships among these discourses through a problem-focused approach. As pluriversality studies are relatively nascent in most academic domains, this research also serves to trailblaze a path for empirical pluriversality studies examining sustainability in business management.