Analyzing companies' interactions with the Sustainable Development Goals through network analysis: Four corporate sustainability imperatives

Abstract

The alignment between corporate strategies and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) can be an indicator of long-term sustainability success. But which types of companies are most, and which are least, aligned with the SDGs? This paper scores how 67 economic activities-as a proxy for companies' operations and the goods or services they deliver-interact with 59 SDG targets. It then uses network analysis to define which activities are most and least aligned with the SDG Agenda. The results reveal four types of corporate activities, each having a strategic sustainability imperative: (i) "core activities" predominantly generate positive, while having few negative, impacts on the SDGs, challenging companies to scale their contributions to further align with the SDG Agenda; (ii) "mixed activities" have moderate/high degrees of both negative/positive impacts, posing a decoupling imperative; (iii) "opposed activities" provide few benefits yet cause significant adverse impacts, implying that companies must transform in order to better align with the SDGs; and (iv) "peripheral activities" have immaterial positive and negative impacts, creating an imperative to explore innovative avenues for creating SDG contributions. Detailed network graphs are presented that map companies' interactions with the SDGs and guide the creation of corporate sustainability strategies. Policy implications include the potential for using companies' activities as a lever for adopting a "nexus approach" to the SDGs.

Improving companies' impacts on sustainable development: A nexus approach to the SDGS

“…For instance, to date, companies have been prioritizing SDGs focused on economic growth and industrialization, while they least prioritize SDGs focused on ecosystems, both on land and below water (PwC, 2018; WBCSD & DNV‐GL, 2018). Whereas the economic activities that companies undertake indeed frequently positively contribute to growth and industrialization, these positive effects also typically coincide with negative impacts on SDGs that are focused on the natural environment or by causing pollution that harms human health (van Zanten & van Tulder, 2020b, 2021). If companies fail to account for these interactions, there is a clear risk that their corporate sustainability strategies fall short of advancing the SDGs.…”

Towards Effective Environmental Sustainability Reporting in the Large Industrial Sector of Bahrain

“…From 2016 onward, company sustainability reports have focused on the SDGs of the UN 2030 Agenda [27]. As companies vary in their activities, they differ in their contributions to the implementation of SDGs [33]. Therefore, the content of sustainability reports differs among companies in terms of environmental aspects and reporting quality, and presents substantial sustainability issues and practices [34].…”

“…Significantly, however, SDGs can play an essential role in the promotion of sustainability reporting [35], and the complete achievement of all 17 SDGs requires companies to contribute greatly to the organizational, administrative, and reporting aspects [36]. In this regard, van Zanten and van Tulder noted that if companies can improve their ability to include all SDGs, their sustainability strategies will be more successful [33]. Further, PwC stated that the innovative characteristics of the SDGs can broaden the reporting quality concept [37].…”

Ecological Contradictions of the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Malaysia

“…For example, Target 8.10 calls to strengthen the capacity of domestic financial institutions to encourage and expand access to banking, insurance and financial services for all. While van Zanten and van Tulder (2021b) find that financial services have a potentially high positive influence on the SDGs, this issue must be treated with caution. Most financial flows are insufficiently regulated for environmental impacts, neither for biodiversity nor climate change (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2019; Rainforest Action Network, 2019).…”