PDF | This study examines the relationship between 'Sustainability' and 'Triple bottom line' (TBL) as two related concepts that are used. PDF | On Jan 1, , Tavis Potts and others published TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE REPORTING: A TOOL FOR MEASURING, COMMUNICATING, AND. PDF | On May 23, , Paulina Księżak and others published Triple Bottom Line : The Pillars of CSR.

Language:English, Spanish, French
Published (Last):14.08.2016
Distribution:Free* [*Registration Required]
Uploaded by: OLYMPIA

49529 downloads 140787 Views 10.33MB PDF Size Report

Triple Bottom Line Pdf

Summary: The article presents the concept of the triple bottom line, which proposes a Kraków, terney.info% terney.info bottom line (TBL), went beyond the traditional measures triple bottom line reporting can be an important tool .. terney.info 4. The triple bottom line (TBL) refers to the social, environ- mental, and economic terney.info), as well as a practitioner's guide with.

Skip to search form Skip to main content. Triple Bottom Line and Sustainability: A comprehensive review of the relevant literature was conducted and revealed an inconsistent use of the term sustainability. On the other hand, consistency in terms of referring to the three lines simultaneously is built into the structure of TBL as the construct is explicitly based on the integration of the social, environmental, and economic lines. View via Publisher. Save to Library. Create Alert. From This Paper Figures and tables from this paper. Citations Publications citing this paper. Highly Influenced. Fishing Community Sustainability Planning: References Publications referenced by this paper. Sort by: Influence Recency.

SIA should be an integral part of the development process, involved in all stages from inception to follow-up audit. There should be a focus on socially sustainable development, with SIA contributing to the determination of best development alternative s — SIA and EIA have more to offer than just being an arbiter between economic benefit and social cost. In all planned interventions and their assessments, avenues should be developed to build the social and human capital of local communities and to strengthen democratic processes.

In all planned interventions, but especially where there are unavoidable impacts, ways to turn impacted peoples into beneficiaries should be investigated.

The SIA must give due consideration to the alternatives of any planned intervention, but especially in cases when there are likely to be unavoidable impacts.

Full consideration should be given to the potential mitigation measures of social and environmental impacts, even where impacted communities may approve the planned intervention and where they may be regarded as beneficiaries. Local knowledge and experience and acknowledgment of different local cultural values should be incorporated in any assessment.

Triple bottom line

There should be no use of violence, harassment, intimidation or undue force in connection with the assessment or implementation of a planned intervention.

Developmental processes that infringe the human rights of any section of society should not be accepted. Consultants who undertake impact assessments or TBL accounting are limited to what is specified in their Terms of Reference, but they also need to be mindful of what constitutes acceptable professional practice, duty of care considerations, and to some extent professional culture.

Unfortunately, the case history of impact assessment presents a poor record reflecting inadequate consideration of social issues.

Too often the only impacts that are considered are economic impacts and demographic changes. A further problem is that there are groups with narrow sectoral interests who have advocated new fields of impact assessment. Persons with this mindset do not understand—and are often antithetical to—the social processes and social scientific theories and methodologies which are very different in form from those in the physical sciences in which these people are often trained. The SIA community of practitioners considers all issues affecting people, directly or indirectly, are pertinent to SIA.

SIA is thus best understood as an umbrella or overarching framework that embodies the evaluation of all impacts on humans and on the ways in which people and communities interact with their socio-cultural, economic and biophysical surroundings.

SIA thus encompasses a wide range of specialist sub-fields involved in the assessment of areas such as: aesthetic impacts landscape analysis , archaeological and cultural heritage impacts both tangible and non-tangible , community impacts, cultural impacts, demographic impacts, development impacts, economic and fiscal impacts, gender impacts, health and mental health impacts, impacts on indigenous rights, infrastructural impacts, institutional impacts, leisure and tourism impacts, political impacts human rights, governance, democratisation etc , poverty, psychological and psychosocial impacts, resource issues access and ownership of resources , impacts on social and human capital, and other impacts on societies.

As such, comprehensive SIA cannot be undertaken by a single person; it requires a team approach. Elsewhere, I have identified over 80 social impact concepts that should be considered in SIA Vanclay b. The field of SIA has considered these issues at length and have a far broader consideration of social than those who utilise a TBL framework. Conclusion The triple bottom line provides nothing original other than a quaint turn of phrase. Its originators and progenitors are largely ignorant of broader sustainability discourses and of other developments in the social sciences that could make a greater contribution.

The emphasis in the TBL framework on empirical indicators is likely to reduce consideration of important social issues rather than to increase it.

Social Impact Assessment, by contrast, is a mature discipline, which has a broad understanding of social issues, a well-developed statement of values and guiding principles, and is far better placed to facilitate the path to sustainability than TBL. References Australia Australia Gene Technology Act No , Gene Technology Bill Explanatory Memorandum. Barrow, C. Social Impact Assessment. Arnold: London.

Becker, H. UCL Press: London. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham. BP Australia. Triple Bottom Line Report. BP Australia: Melbourne. Social Ecology Press: Middleton.

Burdge, R. In Vanclay, F. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. Wiley: Chichester. Donnelly, A. A Directory of Impact Assessment Guidelines, 2nd edn. International Institute for Environment and Development: London. Elkington, J. Cannibals with Forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone: Oxford. Goodland, R. Environmental sustainability. Hawkes, J.

Cultural Development Network: Melbourne.

Harvey, N. Environmental Impact Assessment: procedures, practice and prospects in Australia. Oxford University Press: Melbourne. Holliday, C.

Our Triple Bottom Line | The Ethical Property Company

Greenleaf: Sheffield. IAIA International Principles for Social Impact Assessment.

On-line resource [accessed 20 January ] www. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 21 1 : 5— International Association for Impact Assessment home page. Guidelines and principles for Social Impact Assessment. Impact Assessment 12 2 : — Lane, M. Social assessment in natural resource management: promise, potentiality, and practice. In Dale, A. Taylor, C. Lockie, S. SIA in Review: setting the agenda for impact assessment in the 21st century.

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 19 4 : — Ortolano, L. Environmental Impact Assessment.

The Triple Bottom Line: What Is It and How Does It Work?

Social Assessment: Theory, Process and Techniques 2nd edn. Taylor Baines and Associates: Christchurch. Vanclay, F. Rural Society 8 1 : 39— In Petts, J. However, such choices may be guided more by ideology than by economics. The primary benefit of embedding one approach to measurement of these deficits would be first to direct monetary policy to reduce them, and eventually achieve a global monetary reform by which they could be systematically and globally reduced in some uniform way.

The argument is that the Earth 's carrying capacity is at risk, and that in order to avoid catastrophic breakdown of climate or ecosystems , there is need for comprehensive reform of global financial institutions similar in scale to what was undertaken at Bretton Woods in With the emergence of an externally consistent green economics and agreement on definitions of potentially contentious terms such as full-cost accounting , natural capital and social capital , the prospect of formal metrics for ecological and social loss or risk has grown less remote since the s.

Similar studies have been undertaken in North America. Studies of the value of Earth have tried to determine what might constitute an ecological or natural life deficit.

The Kyoto Protocol relies on some measures of this sort, and actually relies on some value of life calculations that, among other things, are explicit about the ratio of the price of a human life between developed and developing nations about 15 to 1.

While the motive of this number was to simply assign responsibility for a cleanup, such stark honesty opens not just an economic but political door to some kind of negotiation — presumably to reduce that ratio in time to something seen as more equitable. As it is, people in developed nations can be said to benefit 15 times more from ecological devastation than in developing nations, in pure financial terms. According to the IPCC , they are thus obliged to pay 15 times more per life to avoid a loss of each such life to climate change — the Kyoto Protocol seeks to implement exactly this formula, and is therefore sometimes cited as a first step towards getting nations to accept formal liability for damage inflicted on ecosystems shared globally.

Advocacy for triple bottom line reforms is common in Green Parties.

Some of the measures undertaken in the European Union towards the Euro currency integration standardize the reporting of ecological and social losses in such a way as to seem to endorse in principle the notion of unified accounts, or unit of account , for these deficits. To address financial bottom line profitability concerns, some argue that focusing on the TBL will indeed increase profit for the shareholders in the long run.

The following are the reasons why: Reductive method: Concurrently the environment comes to be treated as an externality or background feature, an externality that tends not to have the human dimension build into its definition.