MEASURING THE SUSTAINABILITY OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT IN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS:  A CASE STUDY OF NORTHERN INDUSTRIES

Original article

Download article

 Vladimir S. Zharov

Luzin Institute for Economic Studies of the Kola Science Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Apatity, Russia, zharov_vs@mail.ru, ORCID 0000-0002-1877-9214

Abstract. Sustainable development stands as the principal paradigm for global economic progress in the 21st century. However, the challenge of measuring the sustainability of economic systems across various types and levels persists.  This study introduces a novel methodological approach to assessing the sustainability levels of production systems.  The objective is to substantiate a method for quantifying the sustainability of production systems. Building upon a previously devised graphical model depicting the life cycle of technological development in production, the proposed method involves scoring the sustainability of production systems at different hierarchy levels (manufacturers, industries, production types). The resulting sustainability index enables making comparisons across different periods and entities. Practical implementation of the proposed method is demonstrated through a twelve-year analysis of three major companies operating in the North and the Arctic (Alrosa, Novatek, and Norilsk Nickel) and the Kola Mining and Metallurgical Company, a subsidiary of Norilsk Nickel. Additionally, a fifteen-year analysis of industrial production by type in four Russian Arctic regions is presented. Calculations reveal a generally low level of sustainability across all analyzed entities. The study identifies the cyclical nature of technological development in manufacturing enterprises as a significant influence on sustainability levels. Accounting  for this factor in sustainability assessments will equip authorities and corporate managers in the Arctic regions to make more informed strategic decisions.

Keywords: sustainability measurement, quantitative assessment, production systems, method, sustainability index, technological development, life cycle

For citation: Zharov V. S. Measuring the sustainability of technological development in production systems: A case study  of Northern industries. Sever i rynok: formirovanie ekonomicheskogo poryadka [The North and the Market: Forming the Economic Order], 2023, no. 4, pp. 19–33. doi:10.37614/2220-802X.4.2023.82.002.

References

  1. Alsayegh M. F., Abdul Rahman R., Homayoun S. Corporate Economic, Environmental, and Social Sustainability Performance Transformation through ESG Disclosure. Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12 (9), 3910. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093910
  2. Taliento M., Favino C., Netti A. Impact of Environmental, Social, and Governance Information on Economic Performance: Evidence of a Corporate ‘Sustainability Advantage’ from Europe. Sustainability, 2019, vol. 11 (6), 1738. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061738
  3. Hummel K., Schlick C. The relationship between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure — Reconciling voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy theory. Account. Public Policy, 2016, vol. 35, pp. 455–476. doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2016.06.001.
  4. Glushakova O. V., Chernikova O. P. Institualizatsiya ESG-printsipov na mezhdunarodnom urovne i v Rossiiskoi Federatsii, ikh vliyanie na deyatel’nost’ predpriyatii chernoi metallurgii. Soobshchenie 1 [Institutionalization of ESG-principles at the international level and in the Russian Federation, their impact on ferrous metallurgy enterprises. Part 1]. Izvestiya vuzov. Chernaya metallurgiya [Izvestiya. Ferrous metallurgy], 2023, no. 66 (2), pp. 253–264. (In Russ.). doi.org/10.17073/0368-0797-2023-2-253-264.
  5. León‐Soriano R., Jesús Muñoz‐Torres M., Chalmeta‐Rosaleñ R. Methodology for sustainability strategic planning and management. Industrial management & data systems, 2010 Mar 16, vol. 110 (2), 249–68.
  6. Hristov I., Chirico A., Appolloni A. Sustainability value creation, survival, and growth of the company: A critical perspective in the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC). Sustainability, 2019, vol. 11 (7), 2119.
  7. Pazienza M., de Jong M., Schoenmaker D. Why Corporate Sustainability Is Not Yet Measured. Sustainability, 2023, no. 15, doi.org/10.3390/su15076275.
  8. Kates R. W., Parris T. M., Leiserowitz A. A. What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev., 2005, no. 47, pp. 8–21.
  9. Strange T., Bayley A. Sustainable development: Linking economy, society, environment. Paris: OECD Insights, 2008.
  10. Kuhlman T., Farrington J. What is Sustainability? Sustainability, 2010, vol. 2, pp. 3436–3448.
  11. Meshalkin V. P., Dovi’ V. G., Marsanich A. Strategy of Chemical Supply Chain Management and Sustainable Development. Moscow, Mendeleyev University of Chemical Technology of Russia, 2003, 542 p.
  12. Elkington J., Rowlands I. H. Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Alternatives Journal, 1999, vol. 25, no. 4, p. 42.
  13. Kocmanová A., Šimberová I. Determination of environmental, social and corporate governance indicators: Framework in the measurement of sustainable performance. Bus. Econ. Manag., 2014, no. 15, pp. 1017–1033.
  14. Dočekalová M. P., Kocmanová A. Composite indicator for measuring corporate sustainability. Indic., 2016, no. 61, pp. 612–623.
  15. Nikolaou I. E., Tsalis T. A., Evangelinos K. I. A framework to measure corporate sustainability performance: A strong sustainability-based view of firm. Prod. Consum., 2019, no. 18, pp. 1–18.
  16. Journeault M. The Integrated Scorecard in support of corporate sustainability strategies. Environ. Manag., 2016, no. 182, pp. 214–229.
  17. Christofi A., Christofi P., Sisaye S. Corporate sustainability: Historical development and reporting practices. Res. Rev., 2012, no. 35, pp. 157–172.
  18. Diez-Cañamero B., Bishara T., Otegi-Olaso J. R., Minguez R., Fernández J. M. Measurement of corporate social responsibility: A review of corporate sustainability indexes, rankings and ratings. Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, 2153.
  19. Bamford D., Yang J.-B., Sureeyatanapas P. Evaluation of corporate sustainability. Eng. Manag., 2014, no. 1, pp. 176–194.
  20. Büyüközkan G., Karabulut Y. Sustainability performance evaluation: Literature review and future directions. Environ. Manag., 2018, no. 217, pp. 253–267.
  21. Kaplan R. S., Norton D. P. The Balanced Scorecard — Translating Strategies into Action. 1997. Boston, Dt. Übersetzung: Stuttgart.
  22. Figge F., Hahn T., Schaltegger S., Wagner M. The sustainability balanced scorecard-linking sustainability management to business strategy. Strategy Environ., 2002, no. 11, pp. 269–284.
  23. Chalmeta R., Palomero S. Methodological proposal for business sustainability management by means of the Balanced Scorecard. Journal of the operational research society, 2011, vol. 62 (7), pp. 1344–56.
  24. Schaltegger S. Sustainability as a driver for corporate economic success. Consequences for the development of sustainability management control. Society and Economy. In Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of the Corvinus University of Budapest, 2011, vol. 33 (1), pp. 15–28.
  25. Chowdhury P., Paul S. K. Applications of MCDM methods in research on corporate sustainability: A systematic literature review. Environ. Qual. Int. J., 2020, no. 31, pp. 385–405.
  26. Rao S.-H. A hybrid MCDM model based on DEMATEL and ANP for improving the measurement of corporate sustainability indicators: A study of Taiwan High Speed Rail. Transp. Bus. Manag., 2021, no. 41, 100657.
  27. Virtanen T., Tuomaala M., Pentti E. Energy efficiency complexities: A technical and managerial investigation. Management Accounting Research, 2013, vol. 24 (4), pp. 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2013.06.002
  28. Pencle N. Motivating Corporate Sustainability Research in Management Accounting Through the Lens of Paradox Theory. Perspect., 2022, no. 21, pp. 663–696.
  29. Bendig D., Kleine-Stegemann L., Gisa K. The green manufacturing framework — A systematic literature review. Cleaner Engineering and Technology, 2023, vol. 13, 100613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2023.100613
  30. Bhatt Y., Ghuman K., Dhir A. Sustainable manufacturing. Bibliometrics and content analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, vol. 260,120988. DOI  10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120988.
  31. Ozlem Ayaz Arda, Frank Montabon, Ekrem Tatoglu, Ismail Golgeci, Selim Zaim. Toward a holistic understanding of sustainability in corporations: resource-based view of sustainable supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 2021, vol. 28 (2), pp. 193–208.DOI 10.1108/SCM-08-2021-0385.
  32. Naghmeh Taghavi. Sustainable Development of Operations: Actors’ Involvement in the Process of Energy Efficiency Improvements. Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13 (11), 6121.DOI 10.3390/su13116121.
  33. Ming K. Lim, Ming Lai, Chao Wang, Sir Yee Lee. Circular economy to ensure production operational sustainability: A green-lean approach. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2022, no. 30, pp. 130–144.DOI  10.1016/j.spc.2021.12.001.
  34. Wiegand T., Wynn M. Sustainability, the Circular Economy and Digitalisation in the German Textile and Clothing Industry. Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15 (11), 9111.DOI  org/10.3390/su15119111.
  35. Wynn M., Jones P. Digital Technology Deployment and the Circular Economy. Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14 (15), 9077. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159077
  36. AlMashaqbeh S., Munive-Hernandez J. E. Risk Analysis under a Circular Economy Context Using a Systems Thinking Approach. Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15 (5), 4141. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054141
  37. Ross S. A., Westerfield R. W., Jordan B. D. Fundamentals of Corporate Finance. Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1991.
  38. Damodaran A. Corporate Finance. Theory and Practice. John Wiley & Sons, 2001.
  39. Copeland T., Weston F., Shastri K. Financial Theory and Corporate Finance. Addison Wesley, 2004.
  40. Oncioiu I., Petrescu A.-G., Bîlcan F.-R., Petrescu M., Popescu D.-M., Anghel E. Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Financial Performance. Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, 4297. doi.org/10.3390/su12104297
  41. Zharov V. S. Sistema pokazatelei dlya otsenki effektivnosti razlichnykh vidov tekhnologicheskikh innovatsii [A system of indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of various types of technological innovations]. Drukerovskii vestnik [Drukerovskij Vestnik], 2022, no. 2 (46), pp. 243–250. (In Russ.). DOI 10.17213/2312-6469-2022-2-243-250.
  42. Zharov V. S. Tekhnologicheskaya ustoichivost’ kak osnova ustoichivogo promyshlennogo razvitiya regionov [Technological sustainability as a basis for sustainable industrial development of regions]. Drukerovskii vestnik [Drukerovskij Vestnik], 2022, no. 5, pp. 167-176. (In Russ.). DOI 10.17213/2312-6469-2022-5-167-176
  43. Zharov V. S. Vzaimosvyaz’ tekhnologicheskogo i ekonomicheskogo razvitiya proizvodstvennykh sistem [The interrelation of technological and economic development of production systems]. Nauchno-tekhnicheskie vedomosti Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo politekhnicheskogo universiteta. Ekonomicheskie nauki [Scientific and Technical Bulletin of St. Petersburg State Polytechnic University. Economic Sciences], 2018, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 32–44. (In Russ.).
  44. Meshalkin V. P., Zharov V. S., Leontiev L. I., Nzioka A. M., Belozersky A. Y. Sustainable Environmental Impact Assessment Using Indicators for Sustainable Energy-Intensive Industrial Production. Energies, 2023, vol. 16 (7), 3172. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16073172