Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract The purpose of this research is to explore the extent to which companies are setting organization‐centric versus resilience‐based environmental targets in their sustainability reports. We define ecological resilience through the planetary thresholds identified by the Planetary Boundaries (PB) framework. On this basis, we define resilience‐based targets as corporate environmental targets that are connected (quantitatively or qualitatively) to these thresholds. Sustainability reports issued by 50 sustainability leader firms in Canada were analyzed to identify environmental sustainability targets. These targets were classified as resilience‐based and organization‐centric based on their connection to the PB framework. A total of 303 targets were identified, distributed across eight different corporate performance areas. None of these targets was found to be quantitatively tied to any PB thresholds. A small number of targets did nevertheless make reference to the global/regional ecological processes that underpin some of the Boundaries. These targets made reference to only five of the nine Boundaries described by the framework. This study highlights the extent of organization‐centric environmental targets in corporate sustainability reports. The implications of setting such targets are discussed, along with the challenges of adopting resilience‐based targets. This study also discusses the reasons why companies may not be adopting a resilience‐based approach to set sustainability targets and measure performance, despite increasing calls from stakeholders to do so. On this basis, several recommendations are also provided for managers to guide resilience‐based target‐ and goal‐setting.
Haffar et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: