Paulina Nowakowska* https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5316-3872 University of Life Sciences in Lublin

e-mail: paulina.nowakowska577@gmail.com

Sustainable economic development: analysing the relevance of theory and the integration of social, environmental and economic objectives

https://doi.org/10.25312/2391-5129.37/2023_07PANW

The subject of this paper is the management strategy for re- mote working teams. In an era of globalisation and technolog- ical advancement, remote working has become commonplace, presenting organisations with the challenge of managing such teams effectively. At the outset, the paper highlights the role of trust in the management of virtual teams. By building trust, em- ployees are given more autonomy and clear guidelines. Virtual communication is at the forefront of this process, where the use of different communication tools is essential. Another important point is to create a common culture within the virtual team. Hold- ing online meetings, or even occasional face-to-face meetings, can help the team develop a sense of belonging and identifica- tion with the organisation. The paper also highlights the impor- tance of continuously improving virtual team management skills, considering new technologies and best practices.

In the changing work environment of the 21st century, the effec- tive management of virtual teams is becoming an increasingly essential in the success of an organisation. The cultivation of trust, communication, work-life balance, team culture and the development of leadership skills are all determinants of suc- cessful team management.

Keywords: management, online working, team, employees, work, enterprise, management strategies, communication, com- pany, human resources

* Paulina Nowakowska – Eng., a student at the University of Life Sciences in Lublin, and a member of the Student Scientific Circle of Management and Economics at the Faculty of Pro- duction Engineering, Her research areas include management, entrepreneurship, development, eco- nomics, HR, accounting, sustainable development, IT, digitization and robotization.

Introduction

Today’s social, environmental and economic challenges, such as climate change, environmental degradation, social inequality, and narrow circumstances, create an urgent need for society to seek innovative solutions. These solutions simultaneously promote economic development, improve the quality of life and protect the environ- ment. In this context, the modern concept of sustainable economic development is emerging, which involves the harmonious integration of social, environmental and economic objectives. Economic sustainability is a concept that has been gaining in importance on the global stage over the last few decades. It is a mindset that com- bines economic development and environmental protection to improve the quality of life for all people – present and future generations (Goodland, 1995). It is therefore not just a matter of pursuing economic growth, but of balancing social, environmen- tal and economic needs. The idea is that humanity’s economic activities should not only bring economic benefits, but also improve the quality of life of society and respect the limits of the environment. There are numerous reasons why this concept is important. Firstly, it recognises that our planet’s resources are limited. Our planet has physical limits that do not allow it to grow infinitely, as Meadows (1972) noted in his work Granice wzrostu. In this way, sustainable economic development challenges the traditional economic model of unlimited growth. On the other hand, economic sustainability emphasises the importance of social and economic justice. According to this approach, economic development should benefit all people, not just the richest elite. The implication is that issues such as income inequality, poverty, education, and health care are integral to sustainable economic development (Sachs, 2015).

Various aspects need to be integrated to achieve sustainable economic develop- ment. The social objectives focus on the improvement of the quality of life of peo- ple, the reduction of inequalities and recognising the legitimacy of all social groups. The environmental objectives relate to environmental protection, sustainable man- agement of natural resources, minimising greenhouse gas emissions and reducing the negative impact of economic activities on ecosystems. The economic objectives include stimulating economic growth, creating jobs and improving the efficiency and competitiveness of the economy.

This paper focuses on analysing the importance of economic sustainability and the integration of social, environmental and economic objectives. There will be an analysis of the different theories, models, and strategies by which sustainable eco- nomic development can be achieved. It will present examples of organisations, sec- tors, or countries that are successfully integrating sustainable development objec- tives. In addition, the challenges that exist in the context of the implementation of sustainable development and the benefits of this process for society, the environment and the economic sector will be discussed. This article emphasises that economic sustainability is not just a theoretical idea, but a practical model that can be applied in different contexts, from local to global.

The importance of sustainable economic development

Sustainable economic development is a term that is often used in the context of glob- al efforts to balance the future of the economy. Experience has shown that there are many interpretations and definitions of this issue, coming from different scientif- ic disciplines, approaches, and perspectives. At its most basic level, economic sus- tainability refers to a model of development that promotes a balance between eco- nomic progress, social equity and environmental protection (Goodland, 1995). This three-dimensional model, also known as the triad of sustainability, emphasises that all three aspects are important and have an impact on each other.

In the context of economics, sustainability is typically interpreted as the pursuit of stable and sustainable economic growth that does not lead to the depletion of the natural resources necessary for human survival and well-being. In other words, it is a model of development that seeks to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundt- land et al., 1987). Regarding society, economic sustainability is linked to striving for social justice and equality. This means that the benefits of development should be shared equitably among all sectors of society, and not concentrated in the hands of a few. This perspective emphasises the importance of including local communi- ties and marginalised groups in development planning and decision-making (Sachs, 2015). In terms of the environment, economic sustainability means the promotion of practices that respect and protect the planet. Economic development should not lead to environmental degradation, but rather to protecting and improving it.

All these perspectives are important because they show the complexity and diver- sity of approaches to the issue of sustainable future development. Indeed, economic sustainability is a process requiring constant negotiation between different interests and values. Fundamental to the concept of sustainable economic development is the integration of social, environmental and economic objectives. But creating such in- tegration is no easy task – it requires people to understand and manage complex and often conflicting interests in a balanced way.

The following is a description of the three main aspects of economic sustainability:

1. Social aspects of sustainable economic development – include issues of equal- ity, social justice, education, health, and citizen participation. Sustainable economic development should contribute to building societies that are fair, inclusive and provide equal opportunities for all citizens. Integrating social objectives into sustainable economic development plans and strategies is es- sential to ensure that the benefits of development are evenly distributed and available to all, not just a select few (Sachs, 2015).

2. Environmental aspects of sustainable economic development – relates to the protection and management of our natural environment. These include the con- servation of biodiversity and ecological systems, the management of natural resources like water, soil and air, and the fight against climate change. Without

   integrating environmental objectives into sustainable economic development, we risk environmental degradation and the loss of resources essential to our survival and well-being (Goodland, 1995).

3. Economic aspects of sustainable economic development – concern the creation of strong, stable and equitable economies. This is essential for long-term pros- perity and improved quality of life for citizens. This requires managing econ- omies in ways that promote equity, principles of responsible production and consumption, and sustainable and balanced growth (Brundtland et al., 1987).

Ensuring that social, environmental and economic objectives are properly inte- grated remains crucial to achieving sustainable development.

It is also worth noting in this chapter that economic sustainability brings numer- ous benefits that can be considered in terms of three main dimensions: social, envi- ronmental and economic (Tab. 1).

Tab. 1. The benefits of sustainable economic development

Source: Own elaboration based on Sachs, 2015; Goodland, 1995; Brundtland et al., 1987.

To sum up, the benefits of sustainable economic development are complex and multidimensional. These benefits translate into healthier societies, a healthier envi- ronment and stronger economies.

Economic theories and models that incorporate social and environmental factors

A review of economic theories such as ecological economics and behavioural eco- nomics provides a more profound understanding of the complexities of sustainable economic development. In this context, it is worth highlighting two areas in particular.

1. Ecological economics – a field that has emerged in response to growing con- cern about the impact of human activity on the environment. In contrast to traditional economics, which often treats the environment as external to the

   economy, ecological economics recognises that the economy is embedded in and dependent on ecological systems. Ecological economics recognises that the value of ecosystems does not depend solely on how humans use them. Instead, ecosystems are considered to have value in themselves, providing a wide range of ecosystem services, such as clean air and water, that contrib- ute to human and economic well-being. The concept of natural resources as a constraint on the economy is also closely linked to ecological economics. It recognises that these resources are not only finite, but that their overexploita- tion can lead to irreversible environmental degradation (Costanza et al., 1997).

2. Behavioural economics, which considers the influence of social, emotional and psychological factors on decision-making, is an important extension of classical economic theory. Traditional economic theory assumes that people are rational agents who make decisions in pursuit of the maximisation of their utility or satisfaction. Meanwhile, behavioural economics suggests that human decisions are often suboptimal or “irrational” as defined by classical economic theory. People frequently make decisions under the influence of their emo- tions, their prejudices, or their misconceptions. Such an analysis of human behaviour can be useful in the context of economic sustainability – for ex- ample, by understanding how people make decisions about natural resource consumption or sustainable product choices (Kahneman, 2011).

   Each of these theories – ecological economics and behavioural economics – considers social and environmental factors differently, extending the tradition- al economic approach.

3. The ecological economy and the environmental factors. Ecological economics places a strong emphasis on environmental factors. Above all, it recognises that the economy operates within the limits of the Earth’s ecosystems. This means that all economic activity depends on natural resources and ecosys- tem services, which are finite and non-renewable. Ecological economics gives us the tools to assess the extent to which the economy exceeds these limits, for example through the measurement of ecological footprints. Furthermore, ecological economics recognises that environmental degradation has conse- quences not only for economic well-being but also for social well-being, as poorer communities are often most vulnerable to the effects of such degrada- tion (Wackernagel, Rees, 1998).

4. Behavioural economics and social factors. Behavioural economics, by con- trast, focuses on social and psychological factors influencing economic deci- sions. This theory recognises that people do not always act rationally and that their decisions are typically influenced by factors such as social norms, biases, emotions or cognitive errors. Behavioural economics, for example, shows that people may be inclined to ignore the long-term environmental consequences of their actions because of phenomena such as discounting (the tendency to

underestimate future benefits compared to immediate ones) or the status quo effect (the tendency to maintain the status quo even when it is wrong to do so). An understanding of these cognitive mechanisms can contribute to the design of more effective policies and strategies for the promotion of sustainable be- haviour (Kahneman, 2011).

In the context of the green economy, policies and strategies aim to protect and regenerate natural resources and increase the efficiency of their use. The following examples illustrate how ecological economics can work in practice:

1. Protection of ecosystems. Providing tools and approaches for ecosystem pro- tection. For example, the ecosystem valuation method allows the economic value of ecosystem services, such as water purification or carbon retention, to be assigned. This makes it possible to better understand the impact of econom- ic activities on these services and to make decisions that take these values into account (Costanza et al., 1997).

2. Green technologies. Support for the development and implementation of green technologies that have a lower impact on the environment. Developing renew- able energies such as solar, wind or geothermal energy is one example. Envi- ronmental economics is also a study of what the economic and social benefits of a shift to green technologies are.

3. The economics of landscape. Analysis of landscape and ecosystem values. Landscape valuation methods make it possible to assess the economic value of aesthetic and cultural aspects of the natural environment, such as national parks or protected areas. This information can be used to make decisions about the conservation and management of natural areas (Boyd, Banzhaf, 2007).

4. Sustainable management of natural resources. Analysis of the sustainable management of natural resources such as forests, fisheries, or water. For ex- ample, the valuation of natural resources allows the economic value of these resources and their sustainable use to be assessed (Arrow et al., 2004).

In behavioural economics, policies and strategies can be aimed at influencing people’s behaviour to make it more sustainable. This is what behavioural economics looks like in practice:

1. Environmentally friendly behaviour – Analyses the factors that influence be- haviour that is environmentally friendly, such as recycling or energy saving. For example, behavioural techniques can be used to develop programmes based on nudges (subtle cues) to encourage people to act more sustainably, for example by displaying information about the carbon footprint of products or showing comparisons with the behaviour of others (Allcott, 2011).

2. Purchase decisions – Develops understanding of how psychological factors af- fect how people buy. For example, research indicates that the use of appropri- ate labels that make consumers aware of the environmental impact of products can influence their purchasing decisions. This can lead to a greater preference for products with a lower environmental impact (Thøgersen, 2004).

3. Health policy – Develops health policies such as tobacco control or the pro- motion of healthy diets. Research in this area suggests that changes in the presentation of information, such as the introduction of clear health warnings on cigarette packs, can influence smokers’ decisions and reduce tobacco con- sumption (Chaloupka, Straif, Leon, 2019).

4. Environmental behaviour in the business world. Behavioural economics can be a tool for the promotion of environmental behaviour in business. For ex- ample, creating reward and incentive systems for employees who engage in environmentally friendly activities in the workplace can encourage sustainable behaviours such as reducing energy consumption or sorting waste (Thaler, Sunstein, 2008).

Tools for the measurement and assessment of sustainability

Sustainability Indicators are important tools used to assess the progress made in achieving sustainability. They enable the quantification and monitoring of different aspects of sustainability, allowing for effective planning and policy decisions (Singh et al., 2012). These indicators can be grouped into the three main categories shown in Table 2.

Tab. 2. Sustainability indicators

Source: Own elaboration.

The integration of social, environmental and economic objectives

Sustainability is based on three fundamental pillars: the social, the environmental and the economic. Focusing on one of these pillars at the expense of the others will not bring long-term benefits and may even have negative consequences (Adams, 2006). It is there- fore crucial to adopt an approach that integrates these three pillars into a single strategy for development. Social inequalities, poverty, lack of access to education and health care can contribute to social and economic instability. This, in turn, has a negative impact on the ability of societies to achieve sustainable development (Raworth, 2012).

On the other hand, the exploitation of natural resources and environmentally dam- aging business practices lead to environmental degradation, loss of biodiversity and climate change. These changes not only threaten people’s health and well-being, but can also undermine long-term business viability (Steffen et al., 2015). Focusing on economic growth alone, excluding social and environmental consequences, is not the answer either. The excessive pursuit of economic growth can lead to a widening of so- cial inequalities and environmental degradation, which can ultimately be detrimental to long-term economic stability (Jackson, 2009). As a result, there is a growing need

for the integration of social, environmental and economic objectives into sustainable development planning and action. This approach recognises the interdependencies be- tween these three pillars and aims to create strategies that simultaneously promote social justice, environmental protection and a healthy economy (Le Blanc, 2015).

The triple-bottom-line approach has implications at many levels – from local in- dividuals to companies and countries. The following is a selection of examples of the successful integration of social, environmental and economic objectives. An example at the country level is Costa Rica, which is often cited as a country that successfully com- bines social, economic and environmental objectives. Costa Rica is on track to become the first decarbonised country in the world and is achieving high levels of quality of life and citizen satisfaction. Years of investment in education, healthcare and environmental protection have contributed to this success (Hicks et al., 2018). Many companies use the triple bottom-line approach at an organisational level. A case in point is Patagonia, an outdoor clothing manufacturer. Patagonia is committed to doing business in a way that minimises its negative impact on the environment, while at the same time providing good working conditions for its employees and supporting local communities. The com- pany is known for its investments in renewable energy, product recycling programmes and charitable activities (Chouinard, 2016). At the local level, many communities are undertaking initiatives that combine social, environmental and economic objectives. The city of Curitiba in Brazil, for example, is known for its innovative solutions to public transport, recycling and urban planning, which have improved the quality of life for res- idents, protected the environment and created jobs (Rabinovitch, 1992).

Integrating social, economic and environmental objectives when making deci- sions is not easy and requires conscious management. Here are recommendations to assist integrate social, economic and environmental objectives:

1. Holistic thinking. In planning and decision-making, it is important to have an un- derstanding of the interdependencies between different objectives. This requires a holistic approach that considers social, economic and environmental aspects as parts of a single system rather than separate elements (Max-Neef, 2005).

2. Involving all stakeholders. Different groups may prioritise and view sustain- ability in different ways. Involving all stakeholders – from employees to cus- tomers to the community – in the decision-making process ensures that all perspectives are considered and increases the chances of widespread support for the decisions taken (Reed, 2008).

3. Adaptive management. Managing for sustainability means being prepared for change and uncertainty. Adaptive management allows organisations to respond flexibly to these changes and continuously learn from experience (Armitage, Marschke, Plummer, 2009).

4. Setting goals and measuring progress. Setting goals that are specific, mea- surable, achievable, realistic and time-bound (SMART) can help to maintain focus and track progress. Regular measurement and evaluation of progress is

   key to managing the integration process and making adjustments where nec- essary (Doran, 1981).

5. Transparency and accountability. To build trust and support for sustainability activities, transparency in decision-making and accountability for results are essential. This includes regularly communicating progress and challenges, and holding each other accountable for results (Bovens, 2007).

The challenges in the implementation of a sustainable economic development

Despite the endorsement of the principle of sustainability at many levels, there are many practical challenges that can hinder the achievement of this goal. A few of these are described below:

1. Lack of awareness and understanding. Although the term sustainability is widely used, its meaning and implications are often misunderstood in practice. It can be difficult for many people to understand the complex relationships be- tween society, the economy, and the environment, making it difficult for them to make sustainable decisions (Kates et al., 2005).

2. Limited resources. Resources – both financial and human – are needed to achieve sustainability. However, many organisations, communities, and coun- tries face constraints in these areas that can hinder the achievement of sustain- able development goals (Sachs et al., 2012).

3. Difficulties in accessing finance. Access to finance can be a key challenge for many sustainability projects. There are a number of funds and initiatives aimed at financing sustainability measures. However, they often require com- plex application procedures, which can be a barrier for many potential benefi- ciaries (Buchner et al., 2011).

4. Lack of coordination and integration. Sustainable development requires coor- dination and integration between different sectors and levels of governance. In practice, however, organisational silos and a lack of communication and collaboration regularly hinder such integration (Le Blanc, 2015).

The implementation of sustainable economic development policies and strategies faces many obstacles. These are often related to the nature and complexity of such an approach. Types of handicaps can be mentioned, such as:

1. Institutional barriers. Many institutions lack the appropriate structures, pro- cesses, and skills to manage sustainability effectively. This can include a lack of knowledge or understanding of sustainability issues, as well as a lack of skills and tools to effectively implement and monitor sustainability policies (Biermann et al., 2009).

2. Lack of political will. Sustainability requires long-term thinking and planning. These often do not coincide with short-term political cycles. Without strong

   political will and support, the implementation of sustainable development pol- icies can be problematic (Dryzek, 2013).

3. Conflicting interests. Different groups of interest may have different priorities and objectives, which sometimes conflict with sustainability goals. For exam- ple, companies may be more interested in short-term profits than long-term sustainability, which can make it difficult to implement sustainability policies (Levin et al., 2012).

4. Evaluation and monitoring challenges. Assessing and monitoring progress to- wards sustainability can be difficult due to a lack of data, the complexity of sustainability indicators and the challenge of measuring some aspects of sus- tainability, such as impacts on communities or ecosystems (Sachs, 2012).

Meeting the challenges of sustainability also requires a multifaceted approach that integrates different sectors, disciplines, and perspectives. Some solutions and initiatives that are proposed to address these challenges are described below:

1. Educating and raising awareness. The key to changing attitudes and behaviour is to increase public understanding of sustainability. This can be achieved through formal education, such as teaching sustainability in schools, and in- formal education, such as awareness campaigns and staff training (Tilbury, 2011).

2. Creating supportive institutional structures. To facilitate the implementation of sustainable development policies and strategies, favourable institutional struc- tures are needed. This can include establishing dedicated sustainability com- mittees or agencies, as well as introducing project management procedures that incorporate sustainability (Biermann et al., 2012).

3. Promoting innovation and entrepreneurship. The key to overcoming resource and financial constraints to sustainability can be innovation and entrepreneur- ship. Fostering sustainable entrepreneurship, such as green start-ups, and en- couraging innovation in sustainable technologies can help create new solu- tions and opportunities (Cohen, 2017).

4. Cooperation and partnerships. The key to effective sustainability management is cooperation between different sectors and decision-making levels. This can be done by partnering between public and private sectors, collaborating be- tween academia and practitioners, and involving local communities in deci- sion-making (Bäckstrand, 2006).

Summary

The paper addressed key aspects of economic sustainability, focusing on tools to measure and assess it. It also highlighted the importance of integrating social, envi- ronmental and economic objectives. Various sustainability indicators were analysed, considering the different categories they fall into, including social, environmental

and economic. The specific use of these indicators in the assessment of progress to- wards sustainable development has also been explored.

It discusses how social, environmental and economic goals must be combined. It discusses how social, environmental and economic objectives should be combined. Concrete examples are used to show how organisations, communities, and even coun- tries can successfully integrate these goals. The paper also provides guidance on ef- fectively managing the integration process. Both the theory and practice of sustainable development face challenges and obstacles in implementing sustainable economic de- velopment policies and strategies. Efforts should be made to overcome these barriers, for example through the solutions and initiatives described in this paper.

For the future of the planet and its people, economic sustainability is essential. While intended to help understand this complex subject, this paper is only an in- troduction to exploring the many aspects of the field. This issue requires ongoing research and innovation to show how best to achieve sustainable economic develop- ment on a global scale. Through the study and analysis of these issues, people can work towards the realisation of these important goals of the concept discussed in this paper.

References

Adams W.M. (2006), The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century, Report of the IUCN Renowned Thinkers Meeting.

Alkire S., Santos M.E. (2010), Acute Multidimensional Poverty: A New Index for Developing Countries, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative.

Allcott H. (2011), Social Norms and Energy Conservation, “Journal of Public Eco- nomics”, no. 95(9–10), pp. 1082–1095.

Armitage D., Marschke M., Plummer R. (2008), Adaptive Co-management and the Paradox of Learning, “Global Environmental Change”, no. 18(1), pp. 86–98.

Arrow K., Dasgupta P., Goulder L., Mumford K., Oleson K. (2004), Are We Consum- ing Too Much?, “Journal of Economic Perspectives”, no. 18(3), pp. 147–172. Bäckstrand K. (2006), Multi-stakeholder Partnerships for Sustainable Development: Rethinking Legitimacy, Accountability and Effectiveness, “Environmental

Policy and Governance”, no. 16(5), pp. 290–306.

Biermann F., Abbott K., Andresen S., Bäckstrand K., Bernstein S., Betsill M.M., Zelli F. (2012), Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Gov- ernance, “Science”, no. 335(6074), pp. 1306–1307.

Biermann F., Betsill M.M., Gupta J., Kanie N., Lebel L., Liverman D., Zondervan R. (2009), Earth system governance: people, places and the planet, Earth Sys- tem Governance Project.

Bovens M. (2007), Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Frame- work, “European Law Journal”, no. 13(4), pp. 447–468.

Boyd J., Banzhaf S. (2007), What Are Ecosystem Services? The Need for Standard- ized Environmental Accounting Units, “Ecological Economics”, no. 63(2–3),

pp. 616–626.

Brundtland G.H., Khalid M., Agnelli S., Al-Athel S., Chidzero B., Fadika L., Oki- ta S. (1987), Our Common Future (‘Brundtland Report’), Oxford University Press.

Buchner B., Falconer A., Hervé-Mignucci M., Trabacchi C., Brinkman M. (2011), The Landscape of Climate Finance. A CPI Report, Climate Policy Initiative, Venice.

Chaloupka F.J., Straif K., Leon M.E. (2019), Effectiveness of Tax and Price Policies in Tobacco Control, “Tobacco Control”, no. 28(6), pp. 616–619.

Chouinard Y. (2016), Let my People Go Serfing: The Education of a Reluctant Busi- nessman – Including 10 More Years of Business Unusual, Penguin, New York.

Cohen B. (2017), The Emergence of the Urban Entrepreneur: How the Growth of Cities and the Sharing Economy Are Driving a New Breed of Innovators, ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara.

Costanza R., d’Arge R., de Groot R., Farber S., Grasso M., Hannon B., Paruelo J. (1997), The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital, “Nature”, no. 387(6630), pp. 253–260.

Doran G.T. (1981), There’s a S.M.A.R.T. Way to Write Management’s Goals and Ob- jectives, “Management Review”, no. 70(11), pp. 35–36.

Dryzek J.S. (2013), The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, Oxford University Press.

Global Environment Outlook – GEO-6: Healthy Planet, Healthy People (2018), United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP.

Goodland R. (1995), The Concept of Environmental Sustainability, “Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics”, no. 26(1), pp. 1–24.

Hicks C.C., Cohen P.J., Graham N.A., Nash K.L., Allison E.H., D’Lima C., Thilst- ed S.H. (2018), Harnessing Global Fisheries to Tackle Micronutrient Defi- ciencies, “Nature”, no. 574(7776), pp. 95–98.

Hoekstra A.Y., Chapagain A.K., Aldaya M.M., Mekonnen M.M. (2011), The Wa- ter Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London.

Human Development Report 2010. The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development (2010), United Nations Development Programme.

Jackson T. (2009), Prosperity Without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet, Earth- scan, London.

Kahneman D. (2011), Thinking, Fast and Slow, Macmillan, New York.

Kates R.W., Parris T.M., Leiserowitz A.A. (2005), What is Sustainable Development Goals, Indicators, Values, and Practice, “Environment”, no. 47, pp. 9–21.

Le Blanc D. (2015), Towards Integration at Last? The Sustainable Development Goals as a Network of Targets, “Sustainable Development”, no. 23(3),

pp. 176–187.

Levin K., Cashore B., Bernstein S., Auld G. (2012), Overcoming the Tragedy of Su- per Wicked Problems: Constraining our Future Selves to Ameliorate Global Climate Change, “Policy Sciences”, no. 45(2), pp. 123–152.

Magurran A.E. (2004), Measuring Biological Diversity, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken. Max-Neef M. (2005), Foundations of Transdisciplinarity, “Ecological Economics”,

no. 53(1), pp. 5–16.

Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J., Behrens III W.W. (1972), The Limits to Growth, New York.

OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being (2013), OECD Publishing. Porter M.E., Stern S., Green M. (2015), Social Progress Index 2015: A Global Index

Ranking 133 Countries on their Social and Environmental Performance, So- cial Progress Imperative, Washington.

Rabinovitch J. (1992), Curitiba: towards Sustainable Urban Development, “Envi- ronment and Urbanization”, no. 4(2), pp. 62–73.

Raworth K. (2012), A Safe and Just Space for Humanity: Can We Live Within, Oxfam Discussion Papers.

Reed M.S. (2008), Stakeholder Participation for Environmental Management: A Lit- erature Review, “Biological Conservation”, no. 141(10), pp. 2417–2431.

Sachs J.D. (2012), From Millennium Development Goals to Sustainable Develop- ment Goals, “The Lancet”, no. 379(9832), pp. 2206–2211.

Sachs J.D. (2015), The Age of Sustainable Development, Columbia University Press, New York.

Singh R.K., Murty H.R., Gupta S.K., Dikshit A.K. (2012), An Overview of Sus- tainability Assessment Methodologies, “Ecological Indicators”, no. 15(1),

pp. 281–299.

Steffen W., Richardson K., Rockström J., Cornell S.E., Fetzer I., Bennnett E., Biggs R., de Vries W. (2015), Planetary Boundaries: Guiding Human Devel- opment on a Changing Planet, “Science”, no. 347(6223).

Thaler R.H., Sunstein C.R. (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness, Yale University Press, London.

The Sustainable Economic Development Assessment (2012), Boston Consulting Group. BCG.

Thøgersen J. (2004), Consumer Decision-making with Regard to Organic Food Products, [in:] H. Kjærnes (ed.), Agriculture and Rural Development, CABI Publishing, pp. 115–128.

Tilbury D. (2011), Education for Sustainable Development: An Expert Review of Processes and Learning, UNESCO.

Wackernagel M., Rees W.E. (1998), Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth, New Society Publishers, Gabriola.

Wang Y., Li Y., Jiang L., Wang X. (2016), Air Pollution and Air Quality, “Compre- hensive Analytical Chemistry”, no. 73, pp. 381–403.

Wiedmann T., Minx J. (2008), A Definition of ‘Carbon Footprint’, “Ecological Eco- nomics Research Trends”, no. 1(1), pp. 1–11.

World Development Indicators: Distribution of Income or Consumption (2021), World Bank.

Zrównoważony rozwój ekonomiczny: analiza znaczenia egracji celów społecznych, środowiskowych ych

Tematyką artykułu jest strategia zarządzania zespołami pracu-

W erze globalizacji i postępu technologicznego praca na odległość stała się powszechna, co stawia przed or- zwania związane z efektywnym zarządzaniem

takimi zespołami. Artykuł rozpoczyna się od podkreślenia roli zaufania w zarządzaniu zespołem wirtualnym. Budowanie za- ufania w konsekwencji daje pracownikom większą autonomię i jasne wytyczne. Komunikacja wirtualna stanowi naczelny ele- esu, w którym wykorzystanie różnych narzędzi komunikacyjnych jest nieodzowne. Kolejnym istotnym punktem wspólnej kultury w zespole wirtualnym. Organi-

ń online, a nawet okazjonalnych spotkań twarzą w twarz, może wesprzeć zespół w rozwoju poczucia przyna- yfikacji z organizacją. Artykuł podkreśla ponad-

ciągłego doskonalenia umiejętności zarządzania

zespołem wirtualnym z uwzględnieniem nowych technologii

i najlepszych praktyk. W zmiennym środowisku pracy XXI wieku skuteczne zarządzanie zespołem wirtualnym staje się głównym cesu organizacji. Dbałość o zaufanie, komuni-

gę między pracą a życiem prywatnym, kulturę

zespołową i rozwijanie umiejętności liderów to determinanty

rządzania zespołem.

Słowa kluczowe: zarządzanie, praca online, zespół, pracowni- cy, praca, przedsiębiorstwo, strategie zarządzania, komunika- cja, firma, zasoby ludzkie

O autorce

Paulina Nowakowska – inżynier, studentka Uniwersytetu Przy- rodniczego w Lublinie, związana ze Studenckim Kołem Nauko- wym Zarządzania i Ekonomii na Wydziale Inżynierii Produkcji. Dziedziny badawcze: zarządzanie, przedsiębiorczość, rozwój, ekonomia, HR, księgowość, zrównoważony rozwój, informaty- ka, cyfryzacja, robotyzacja.

Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Na tych samych warunkach 4.0 Międzynarodowe.