Sustainable Development and Intangibles: Building Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Business Strategy and the Environment
Bus. Strat. Env. 20, 18–37 (2011)

Published online 24 November 2009 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/bse.666
Sustainable Development and Intangibles:

Building Sustainable Intellectual Capital
María D. López-Gamero,* Patrocinio Zaragoza-Sáez, Enrique Claver-Cortés and
José F. Molina-Azorín
University of Alicante, Alicante, Spain
ABSTRACT
Sustainable intellectual capital is a promising starting-point for the incorporation of envi-
ronmental aspects into the general management system of a firm. This paper examines
how sustainable intellectual capital helps to overcome the shortcomings of conventional
approaches to environmental management systems. It does this by extending the concept
of sustainability from relational capital to the three pillars of intellectual capital: human,
structural and relational intellectual capital. A multiple case study was carried out with
Spanish firms characterized by their high level of environmental leadership. The findings
indicated that sustainable human intellectual capital, environmental training, information
and awareness sessions help in the accumulation and utilization of knowledge. As for
sustainable structural intellectual capital, the environmental technology portfolio is improved
and new environmental departments are created. Regarding sustainable relational intel-
lectual capital, the firm–environment link is very important. In the primary and secondary
sectors suppliers become involved to a greater extent in the environmental management
process, whereas in the service sector it is the customer who becomes more involved.
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Received 31 October 2008; revised 17 September 2009; accepted 22 September 2009

Keywords: sustainable development; sustainable intellectual capital; environmental management; stakeholders
Introduction
A
CADEMICS AND PRACTITIONERS CURRENTLY AGREE THAT THE INFORMATION DELIVERED BY TRADITIONAL FINANCIAL
accounts no longer suffices to respond to the demand for more comprehensive reports from both inter-
nal and external stakeholders (Fraj-Andrés et al., 2008; Perrini and Tencati, 2006; Yongvanich and
Guthrie, 2006). In fact, the European Commission’s Green Paper (European Commission, 2001) high-
lights the need for a greater effort on the part of firms in the social and environmental fields, which implies the
development of three essential pillars (also known as the ‘triple bottom line’), namely economic, social and envi-
ronmental adequacy. In this regard, the European Union itself suggests numerous environmental, social and
economic sustainable development indicators.
Sustainable development is a forward looking concept. It is therefore not enough to merely look at present
performance (Figge and Hahn, 2005). The future performance of firms will be determined by how well firms
* Correspondence to: María D. López-Gamero, University of Alicante, San Vicente del Raspeig Campus, P.O. Box. 99, E-03080 Alicante, Spain.
E-mail: md.lopez@ua.es
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment
Sustainable Development and Intangibles: Building Sustainable Intellectual Capital 19
produce goods and services that satisfy needs while using economic, environmental and social resources efficiently
in the future (Hahn et al., 2007). Figge and Hahn (2005) indicate that a firm contributes to sustainable develop-
ment whenever it uses every a simple form of capital more efficiently than another firm. Firms usually use some
forms of capital more efficiently and other forms of capital less efficiently than others firms. These authors remark
that this aggregation problem has been dealt with by environmental impact assessment approaches.
As a consequence, in recent years, quite a few experts have placed special emphasis on the environmental prob-
lems arising from certain environmental aspects linked to the evolution of society as well as that of the economy
(Blomquist and Sandström, 2004; Siebenhüner and Arnold, 2007). The increased social awareness brought about
by the deterioration of the environment has led to the emergence of a new framework characterized by the demand
for firms to make their productive activity compatible with environmental protection and a proper management
of natural resources (Buysse and Verbeke, 2003). This demand becomes increasingly more strident every day, due
to the frequent ecological catastrophes caused by industries that bring about pressures from different agents on
the environmental behaviour of firms (Sharma and Henriques, 2005).
These pressures have forced firms to understand that they must assume responsibility and face the environmen-
tal challenge through the development of knowledge, which can allow them to follow a sustainable development
approach and which in turn, can give them the opportunity to improve their ability to compete in the business
environment of which they are part (Wagner, 2005, 2007). Thus, not only are firms largely built on intangibles,
such as skills, competences, procedures and information systems, but they also tend to generate intangibles of a
‘collective’ nature by their actions, such as, for example, the protection of the environment (Del Bello, 2006).
Firms adopt different approaches for accumulating and utilizing their knowledge and these approaches manifest
themselves as distinct aspects of intellectual capital – namely, human, structural and relational capital (Davenport
and Prusak, 1998; Schultz, 1961). At a basic level, the conceptual separation of these three aspects of intellectual
capital is evident from how each aspect accumulates and distributes knowledge differently: either through (1)
individuals, (2) organizational structures, processes and systems or (3) relationships and networks (Subramaniam
and Youndt, 2005).
Newson and Chalk (2004) consider that sustainable development and solutions to existing environmental prob-
lems depend heavily on information and its translation into usable knowledge. However, only a few authors have
considered that environmental indicators should be included in intellectual capital (CIC, 2003; Claver et al., 2007;
Guimón, 2005). In fact, these authors, specifically, classify environmental issues as relational capital (CIC, 2003;
Guimón, 2005). Like Sharma (2009), we consider that societal knowledge about sustainability may be evolving,
ambiguous, complex and still be in the process of being codified. Therefore, due to the multiple social and envi-
ronmental impacts of a firm’s operations, rich information should flow and be exchanged through face-to-face
contact (Daft and Lengel, 1986) for joint problem solving by managers in different functional areas, in order to
facilitate the transfer of sticky knowledge (Sharma, 2009). To manage this transference of knowledge, firms need
structures, technologies and culture. Moreover, information should be made available to employees and the inclu-
sion of environmental criteria in decision-making is also useful because they create an organizational context
within which employees may perceive environmental issues as opportunities, which may enhance their motivation
to undertake proactive environmental practices (Sharma, 2000; Sharma et al., 1999). That is, knowledge is utilized
through different approaches in an organization (Subramaniam and Youndt, 2005). From this idea, sustainability
should be extended from relational capital to the three pillars of intellectual capital; that is, human, structural and
relational capital. Thus, the present study proposes the creation of a new construct of ‘sustainable intellectual
capital’. We define sustainable intellectual capital as ‘the sum of all knowledge that an organization is able to lever-
age in the process of conducting environmental management to gain competitive advantage’. It is the conceptu-
alization of different aspects of sustainable intellectual capital that offers a means to synthesize the approaches by
which knowledge is accumulated and used in firms at various levels (individual, network and organizational). Fol-
lowing the classification of intellectual capital from the studies of Johnson (1999) and Bontis (1999), we consider
sustainable intellectual capital to be the result of combining human sustainable intellectual capital, structural
sustainable intellectual capital and relational sustainable intellectual capital, as will be set out in the following
section.
The motivation for this paper comes from two basic premises. The development and spread of sustainable intel-
lectual capital first allows the firm to identify the extent to which it has accepted environmental responsibility for
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. Strat. Env. 20, 18–37 (2011)
DOI: 10.1002/bse
20 M. D. López-Gamero et al.
the impact caused by its products and productive processes, thus avoiding surprises. Second, sustainable intel-
lectual capital facilitates environmental action by means of the knowledge achieved through, for instance, coopera-
tion and the creation of green alliances with various environmental groups (suppliers, customers, administration,
opinion groups, NGOs etc) (González-Benito and González-Benito, 2005; Hart, 1995; Pagell et al., 2004; Thomas,
2001).
From these ideas, and using a multiple case study, the present paper aims to answer the following questions:
(1) how can environmental issues be integrated into the intellectual capital of a firm? (2) how do sustainable human,
structural and relational intellectual capital influence environmental management? and (3) how does sustainable
intellectual capital differ across sectors?
The paper contributes to the literature in a number of ways. First, sustainable intellectual capital is a promising
starting-point for the incorporation of environmental aspects into the general management system of a firm. Sus-
tainable intellectual capital helps to overcome the shortcomings of conventional approaches to environmental
management systems by extending the sustainability from relational capital to all three pillars of intellectual capital:
human, structural and relational capital.
Second, while the strategic implementation process is critical to the success of an environmental strategy (Aragón-
Correa et al., 2004; Maxwell et al., 1997), only a few studies have focused on factors or variables that facilitate
implementation (Epstein and Roy, 2006; Russo and Harrison, 2005). We focus on the development of proactive
environmental practices that depend on sustainable human, structural and relational intellectual capital.
Third, we also conduct in-depth case studies to identify a sequence of steps for managers to follow on a proac-
tive environmental management path. A search of the literature has not identified any previous research that
examines the use of the three pillars of sustainable intellectual capital of firms across different sectors, using
a comparative case study in the way that has been done in the present study. The present paper establishes a
comparative analysis between the different sectors considered.
The paper is structured as follows. After an initial literature review, the research methodology used in the paper,
based on the multiple case study approach, is described. The presentation of the results obtained in the analysis
of eight Spanish firms belonging to the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors follows. The paper closes with a
summary of the most relevant conclusions drawn from the study, the main limitations and future lines of
research.
Sustainable Intellectual Capital from Intellectual Capital
A first set of reasons for the competitiveness of a firm corresponds to its own internal factors; i.e., a firm with
greater resource availability stands a better chance of achieving higher profitability levels. Among these factors
intangible resources stand out, especially if they are strategic, since, due to their characteristics, they can provide
sustainable competitive advantage (Barney, 1991; Grant, 1991; Peteraf, 1993; Wernerfelt, 1984).
Closely related to the above is the concept of intellectual capital, defined by Stewart (1997) as intellectual material
(knowledge, information, intellectual property, experience), which can be exploited in order to generate wealth. It
offers a quantitative perspective and is linked to the identification and measurement of existing intangible assets
created within the firm. Other research conceptualizes intellectual capital as the sum of all knowledge and knowing
capabilities that can be used to give a firm competitive advantage (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998; Stewart, 1997).
All intellectual capital researchers agree that it is not a uni-dimensional construct, but resides at various levels
(individual, network and organizational).
Edvinsson and Malone (1997), for example, view intellectual capital as being comprised of two primary compo-
nents: human capital (i.e. the knowledge skills and experience of employees) and structural capital (i.e. the sup-
portive infrastructure of human capital). Some authors divide structural capital into two components: organizational
capital (i.e. the systems and tools) and customer capital (i.e. relationships a firm has with its customers). Bontis
(1996) introduces the notion of relational capital as an expanded version of customer capital that includes the
value of all relationships including those of customers. Synthesizing the above discussions, intellectual capital may
be conceptualized as consisting of three distinct subcategories: human, structural and relational (Bontis, 1999;
Johnson, 1999).
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Human capital is defined as the knowledge, skills and abilities residing with and utilized by individuals (Schultz,
1961). Organizational capital is the institutionalized knowledge and codified experience residing within and utilized
through databases, patents, manuals, structures, systems and processes (Youndt et al., 2004). Relational capital is
the value assigned by the organization to its relationships with the public administrations, the mass media and
corporate image, the corporate reputation and social relationships (CIC, 2003). Thus, relationships are not limited
to internal knowledge exchanges among employees, but extend to linkages with customers, suppliers and alliance
partners (Youndt et al., 2004).
A few authors have considered that environmental indicators should be included in intellectual capital (CIC,
2003; Claver et al., 2007; Guimón, 2005). These authors classify environmental issues inside relational capital
(CIC, 2003; Guimón, 2005).
Traditionally, in the field of sustainable development, economists have used the capital theory approach to
sustainability (Harte, 1995). This comprises man-made capital (such as goods produced), human capital (such as
knowledge and skills), social capital (relationships between individuals and institutions) and natural capital (such
as natural resources) (Figge and Hahn, 2004). Stern (1997) explains that natural capital is a term used for the
aggregation of natural resource stocks that produce inputs of services or commodities for the economy. Thampa-
pillai and Thangavelu (2004) say that natural capital has a value in terms of its use in producing outputs when
economies deviate from the condition of perfect competition, because natural capital would be perfectly sustainable
in the context of perfect competition. Following Figge and Hahn (2004), development can be called sustainable
if it ensures constant capital stocks or at least constant capital services over time (Costanza and Daly, 1992; Pearce
and Atkinson, 1998). Figge and Hahn (2005) indicate that firms use capital, which is undesirable because capital
is valuable and limited. Moreover, a firm’s output, that is, the products and services they produce, is desirable.
Thus, firms need to optimize the way in which they use capital. These authors focus on value creation and they
incorporate the concept of ‘sustainable value’, which is the value created by a hyper-efficient use of all forms of
capital.
Following these ideas, natural capital should not only be distinguished from natural resources. Firms should
be catalysts, generators and managers not only of resources explicitly classified as natural resources to create sus-
tainable value, but also of resources classified as intangible (human, relational and organizational capital), even
though the management literature does not explicitly classify natural capital as an intangible resource. Natural
capital, as a result of intangible resources, is described in this study as ‘sustainable intellectual capital’.
In the conceptualization of sustainable intellectual capital, following Youndt et al. (2004), we focus on two
aspects. First, sustainable intellectual capital is the sum of all knowledge created about environmental manage-
ment, implying that this knowledge that exists at different levels both within and outside the organization has to
be taken into account as part of sustainable intellectual capital. Second, sustainable intellectual capital requires the
use of knowledge about environmental management for competitive advantage, implying that this knowledge has
to be leveraged to be considered as sustainable intellectual capital. Thus, we have defined sustainable intellectual
capital as ‘the sum of all knowledge that an organization is able to leverage in the process of conducting environ-
mental management to gain competitive advantage’.
Sustainable intellectual capital (SIC) is conceptualized as consisting of three distinct subcategories: human SIC,
structural SIC and relational SIC (Claver-Cortés et al., 2007). Human SIC refers to the contribution made by
employees to the sustainable value of the firm through their competencies, attitudes and mental agility. It is
operational, mainly based on knowledge and skills; and emotional, based on motivation, leadership and loyalty.
Talent and skills of individuals can be measured for formal or specialized environmental training, by personal
development and experience and finally by collaboration and knowledge exchange levels.
Structural SIC can be organizational and technological. Organizational SIC is formed by the set of intangibles
that structure and develop the firm’s environmental management (culture, structure, organizational learning and
processes) effectively and efficiently. A firm has to recognize the need to adapt the culture and the formal organi-
zation through the definition of new environmental occupations. Technological SIC is represented by the group
of intangibles directly linked to the introduction and development of new ecological products, cleaner productive
processes or less polluting machinery.
Finally, relational SIC has to do with the organization’s links to the stakeholders and to the market in which it
operates (green or ecological brands, ecological labels and certifications). Relational SIC refers to the value assigned
DOI: 10.1002/bse
by the firm to its relationships with the principal agents linked to its environmental management, that is, the value
assigned by the firm to its relationships with government, the mass media and corporate image, protection of the
environment, the corporate environmental reputation and social relationships.
The following sections show the empirical evidence provided by Spanish firms regarding the accumulation and
utilization of sustainable intellectual capital in eight different sectors.
Methodology
Sample
Sampling is crucial for a case study, since the choice of a sample influences the results of the study (Miles and
Huberman, 1994). Different cases have been selected in order to obtain a diverse sample that can provide many
possibilities for comparison, as this enables a richer theory development (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and
Corbin, 1990). The intention was to contrast firms placed in different economic sectors (primary, secondary and
tertiary) and different in terms of environmental pollution levels through comparative case studies. This allows
for cross-site comparisons and gives the researcher the chance to see idiosyncratic aspects of any one site in per-
spective (Miles, 1979). To achieve the study aim, a selection of cases is offered belonging to the different categories
proposed by Hutchinson (1996), who provided a classification of sectors according to the pollution levels caused
by each of them. The assumption is that the different sectors generate various levels of environmental impact,
from which it can be inferred that firms’ responses to environment-related opportunities and threats will vary too.
In fact, a number of studies that relate a firm’s environmental attitude to the type of activity it conducts reveal a
stronger environmental commitment by firms that find themselves in those sectors with the most serious pollu-
tion-related problems (Cairncross, 1992). The least polluting firms, instead, suffer less pressure, since the main
environmental protection measures have focused on industrial activities with a direct, visible impact on the envi-
ronment (Bowen, 2000). Eight cases belonging to the primary (food and agriculture), secondary (plastics, textiles
and construction) and tertiary (new technologies, transport, tourism and industrial waste management) sectors
were ultimately selected.
We tried to identify environmental leaders within the sectors selected. According to the literature, ‘environmen-
tal leaders’ are firms that have taken the lead in reducing the environmental impact of their activities, usually at
levels beyond regulatory compliance, and have achieved recognition as being green compared with their competi-
tors (Runhaar et al., 2008). We adopted the following criteria. First, they had to be firms that adhered to the EMAS
Regulation or the ISO 14001 Norm as a reflection of their environmental proactivity. Second, they had to have
integrated environmental issues before other firms operating in their sector. Finally, they had to be firms with
wide national and international recognition in the environmental field. Since firms with a high degree of environ-
mental responsibility attempt to meet the needs of their multiple stakeholders, they will most probably seek out
an environmental management system that would both be credible to all parties and fulfill the firm’s environmen-
tal performance goals. The EMAS Regulation and the ISO 14001 Norm both have a high degree of credibility
among such stakeholders as governments, consumers, NGOs, suppliers and competitors, and can improve corpo-
rate environmental performance and, therefore, confirm an organization’s commitment to social responsibility
(Bansal and Hunter, 2003). After several preliminary conversations with relevant staff at each firm, a number of
senior managers were identified as key informants. The criterion used to select these respondents was that they
had to be either the most senior person directly responsible for environmental issues or a senior manager with
substantial responsibilities in this field. All the selected respondents were directly responsible for developing,
executing and monitoring their firm’s environmental strategies.
Data Collection
Given the qualitative nature of most of the data sought, triangulation appeared to be one of the best means to
increase construct validity and substantiate findings (Denzin, 1978). Three data sources were used: (a) interviews
DOI: 10.1002/bse
with environmental managers; (b) direct observation (visits to the facilities and contact with employees);
(c) access to internal documents (in-house information bulletins, environmental declarations, annual reports
for the 1997–2003 period, web pages etc.), as well as external ones (press, commercial registries etc.). This
triangulation technique provides a stronger validation of the results if they converge (Yin, 1994). The issue of
internal validity was handled by conducting multiple iterations and follow-ups throughout the analyses. As for the
problem of reliability, this was addressed by drawing up detailed case study protocols and following the required
documentation and transcription standards. External validity was increased through the examination of multiple
firms and the analysis of comparative findings. To test the credibility of data interpretation, the analysis was
subjected to checks. The emerging insights were continually verified with the informants, who were asked to
give feedback, sometimes in telephone calls, when some aspect was not sufficiently clear. In addition, the
interviewers supervised the analysis of the findings discussed below, helping to establish their dependability and
conformability.
Data Analysis
The extended case method (Burewoy, 1991) has served as a guide to data analysis. This methodological approach
uses empirical data gathered through case studies to reconceptualize and extend theory. The extended case method
consists of two ‘running exchanges’: (a) between the literature review and data analysis and (b) between data
analysis and data collection.
The first phase of the data analysis consisted of exploring the relevant concepts and theories found in the
literature. After this, the second phase followed Coato’s comprehensive case description based on the identified
patterns. The research concern was to identify issues in the areas of interest rather than drawing conclusions about
the strength of managers’ views. This was the basis for a within-case and a cross-case analysis, after which inter-
views were held for the remaining cases. Each interview had as its main objective to identify issues that should be
considered in human SIC, structural SIC and relational SIC. Managers who were directly concerned with envi-
ronmental issues would help to provide a richer description of these categories. The interview began with respon-
dents answering general questions in order to find out whether managers had been increasingly confronted by
business decisions with environmental implications. More specific questions were asked as the interview pro-
gressed, e.g. about what sorts of environmental issue related to the different types of sustainable intellectual capital
used to develop their environmental management in the firm (asking them to give examples). The questions were
developed following the theoretical arguments, which link sustainable intellectual capital and environmental man-
agement. The structured interview was held with the environmental manager. He or she was interviewed face to
face. Each interview lasted 4 hours and was audio taped. During the visits to the facilities, it was possible to speak
to other members of the firm’s staff, who also highlighted some of the environmental tasks they carried out. Data
collection stopped when additional data resulted in minimal incremental understanding (Lee, 1999). The fully
taped interviews were transcribed later. Furthermore, the drawing of a matrix provided a visual identification of
the similarities and differences between the firms examined. The third step was to analyze the interviewees’ feed-
back on the first draft of case descriptions to check their validity. The interviewees checked and accepted the
transcripts of their interviews. The fourth step was a category-based comparative analysis of the cases, which
reached closure when additional iterations did not result in a better accord between findings and cases. Some
results derived from the literature review were systematically compared with the evidence from each case for the
purpose of assessing how satisfactorily or poorly they fitted in with the case data (Eisenhardt, 1989). The fifth step
was the construction of a table that summarized the study findings.
Findings
As has already been mentioned, the blocks shaping sustainable intellectual capital are human SIC, structural SIC
and relational SIC. Reference has been made to the main resources, which form part of the sustainable intellectual
capital of the firms under study.
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Human Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Concerning human SIC, the effort made by managers to integrate environmental issues into the organization
must be highlighted. There are different ways to involve the firm’s staff (Table 1).
It is inferred from Table 1 that firms publish their environmental policy, which includes the firm’s commitment
to the environment in three senses: pollution prevention, legislative compliance and ongoing improvement. Inter-
nal communication within the firm is mainly possible through training courses, meetings, manuals and suggestion
boxes (Déniz-Déniz and De Saá-Pérez, 2003; Maitlis, 2004). In general, all firms invest in the training and educa-
tion of their employees as well as of the top and middle management. The largest part of this flow of environmen-
tal information takes place by the introduction of an environmental management system in the firm, which focuses
on the earlier stages of the process. Once the system is implemented and certified, disparate behaviours can be
observed in firms. It can be said in this respect that the most polluting firms in the primary and secondary sectors
– with the exception of Construcciones Deco, as well as Cartera Ambiental, have been characterized by the ongoing
organization of environmental training and information courses for their employees at all levels, which had as
their aim the annual up-dating of the knowledge of their operating staff about the changes in the productive process
resulting from the integration of new environmental improvements. However, firms with a high staff turnover
rate, such as Construcciones Deco, Futurespace, Transportes Davi and Corona del Mar, have opted for the incor-
poration of a section dedicated to quality and the environment in the welcome manual that is handed to new
employees or in the manuals of good practice that can help disseminate their environmental philosophy among
the employees, while the environmental training efforts focus on the middle and top management levels. In this
case, not only was the investment of resources in the people who work for these organizations smaller, but also
the degree of motivation and involvement shown by those people was reduced, essentially because the feeling that
they belong to the firm is less strong. These findings confirm those obtained by Clarke and Roome (1999), who
suggest that the type of learning carried out in the firm depends on a number of factors, among which the most
prominent are position in the market, the context or sector in which the activity is developed and the capacity to
facilitate the inputs from different internal and external stakeholders.
On the other hand, Enplater, Aznar Textil and Futurespace have managed to achieve a higher degree of employee
involvement by holding annual meetings dedicated to environmental quality. During these meetings, managers
and employees adopt joint decisions on both the future environmental approach to be followed by the firm during
the next few years and the potential environmental objectives and analyse the findings obtained in previous years.
This type of meetings is also productive because employee involvement and participation favours the emergence
of personal contributions (Siebenhüner and Arnold, 2007).
An employee’s involvement is related to the incentive offered by the firm. For example, Coato and Enplater have
motivated their staff to provide ideas or suggestions by means of participative quality and environmental systems
and later rewarded those ideas and suggestions with various public acknowledgements and different types of
award.
Coato: We yearly reward the best suggestions or ideas offered by our partners for the purpose of improving
our environmental performance. Last year, two of them were given as a present a trip to the Canary Islands
for two people. The experience has been very good, as the quantity and quality of the ideas provided has
increased considerably.
Enplater: At first, nobody said anything. The suggestion box was not too useful; so we decided to hold a meeting
where the importance of their participation was highlighted. Suddenly, one day we received an idea (. . .), which
we published in our quarterly bulletin. That recognition was highly appreciated and quite a few suggestions
started to arrive. Of course, not all of them were useful, but we always send a letter to all the contributors as
a token of our thankfulness.
The environmental talent and skills of employees can be measured from formal or specialized training, personal
development and experience, along with collaboration and knowledge exchange (Sharma, 2009). This is why
attending seminars, sessions and workshops and preparing textbooks on good practices, which provide the main
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Coato Enplater Aznar Textil Construcciones Deco Futurespace Transportes Davi Corona del Mar Cartera Ambiental
Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental

training and training and training and training and training and training and training and training and
information information information information sessions information information information information
sessions for sessions for sessions for for employees sessions for sessions for sessions for sessions for
employees employees employees Quality, environment employees employees employees employees
Presence at Web pages Annual and prevention good Welcome dossier Good practice Welcome manual Participation in
events, Environmental environmental practice manual with sections manual (quality and workshops and
seminars, declaration quality assembly Environmental dedicated to Environmental environment seminars
workshops Environmental declaration on the quality and the declaration on policy)
Participation report (private) Web environment the Web Environmental
in the World’s Participation in Participation in Annual meeting declaration on the
Day of the fairs and workshops, seminars to present the Web
Environment sponsorships and master’s results of the Participation in
in Totana sessions firm’s workshops and
environmental seminars
action, future
annual
objectives and
how to achieve
them
Table 1. Human sustainable intellectual capital

Sustainable Development and Intangibles: Building Sustainable Intellectual Capital
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Bus. Strat. Env. 20, 18–37 (2011)
25
rules of behaviour when faced with potential emergency situations related to waste, dumping or emissions, are
usual activities within this context.
Structural Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Structural SIC can be organizational, as it has to consider the need to adapt formal organization and culture
through the definition of new occupations (Linnenluecke et al., 2007), and/or technological, with the introduction
of new ecological products, cleaner productive processes or less polluting machinery (Blomquist and Sandström,
2004; Geibler et al., 2006).
When investments in environmental practices appear to be in conflict with, or at least not contributing to, core
organizational goals, managers face a decision-making dilemma. This bias affects managerial expectations of the
future strategic value of environmental management and therefore the investments managers may make to deploy
them (Sharma, 2009). Managerial expectations are influenced by the level of moral development and personal
characteristics of the persons holding top management positions in the firm. Involvement in environmental issues
will depend on the amount of personal resources (time and effort) that managers are willing to expend to reduce
the environmental pollution caused by their organizations. Table 2 shows the largest recent investments made by
these firms in the fields of technological and organizational development.
It can be observed in Table 2 that all firms carry out continuous innovations and improvements of the environ-
mental technology portfolio,1 which, except for the case of Construcciones Deco, is mainly formed of prevention
practices. The environmental technology portfolio is the result of combining pollution control and pollution pre-
vention technologies (Klassen and Whybark, 1999).
Control technologies allow firms to focus their actions on the short term. Their objective is to undertake envi-
ronmental impact corrective actions through end-of-pipe measures, which do not imply the development of new
skills or new environmental processes. The measurement of waste, emissions and dumping, the study of machin-
ery changes, the study of equipment maintenance and breakdown repairs, the establishment of filters and the
creation of treatment plants are some of the most common control practices in the organizations under study.
This type of practice does not generate value and may imply quite a high cost, apart from being unproductive for
the firm, as it does not correct the environmental impact (Claver et al., 2007). It simply moves the impact some-
where else. The stringency of environmental regulation favours control technologies. The manager of Enplater
explains this idea.
Enplater: Because command-and-control regulations conform to engineering rather than to business standards,
they induce unnecessary capital investments and prevent good sitting decisions. Sometimes, environmental
regulations exempt older plants and equipment, penalizing newer-generation equipment and discouraging
investments that could reap gains in terms of efficiency. Moreover, lengthy permit-acquiring processes add to
the inefficiency.
Prevention technologies make it possible to reduce or eliminate the environmental impact from the source: for
example, the use of more sustainable raw materials, the adoption of process modification to reduce waste from
the source and the reduction of packaging improve the environmental performance of firms. For this purpose,
organizations have had to modify and redesign their productive processes and install new technologies, thus con-
tributing to the development of internal routines and know-how. The greater complexity involved in this type of
technology has forced firms to meet new needs linked to employee learning, training and involvement at all orga-
nizational levels, and to define new environmental responsibilities and to address the functional coverage required
to solve specific technical and environmental management problems (Buysse and Verbeke, 2003). However, thanks
to this technology, firms have managed to reduce certain costs (Claver et al, 2007) through the achievement of
higher eco-efficiency, which has made it easier for them to find external funding and has equally favoured the
1
Environmental technologies are defined as the equipment, production methods and procedures, product designs and product distribution
mechanisms that preserve energy and natural resources, minimize the environmental problems generated by human activities and protect
the natural milieu (Shrivastava, 1995).
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Coato
Control logic Prevention logic
Investment on emission/pollution control Development of decision-taking support systems

systems Recycling programmes
Introducing fuel machine collection facilities Used residues closed-circuit within the firm
Information technology research and development and networks to access
sources of reusable and recyclable materials
Process modification to reduce waste from the source
Changes in material and product specifications
Reduction of the total amount of material used
Replacement with renewable material
Use of recycled material
Fertilizers with a lower environmental impact
Packaging reduction
Environmental audits
Enplater
Measurements at emission points Cyclical use of cloths

Selective waste collection DISPENSING ink preparation and recovery equipment
Compacter acquisition or rental Replacement of gas oil with natural gas
Storage space for copper mud and other types (INPLANT) equipment, which makes it possible to prepare the different ink
of waste which must be protected against the colours needed to print from a reduced number of basic colours
damp Recycling programmes
Treatment plant Information technology research and development and networks to access
Toxic/dangerous waste disposal reusable and recyclable materials
Investments in alarm and control equipment and systems
Procedures for immediate response before emergencies
Essential changes in process and product design to reduce/eliminate
environmental accidents, spillages and leakages, as well as dangerous waste
Aznar Textil
Study on loom speeds, on machinery changes Integral quality and environmental management
and energy-saving through new acquisitions Development of a computer programme, which helps to minimize yarn
Noise measurement at the premises and on the movements and to exploit the rest of batches
road Implementation of a water change system in the gas wash site
Collection by authorized toxic/dangerous waste Introduction of materials with a lower environmental impact
manager Packaging reduction
Correct waste segregation Use of recycled materials
Machinery maintenance and breakdown repairs Recycling programme
Acquisition of small buckets to collect the oil, Closed circuit of waste used with other organizations
which falls on the floor if there is a spillage Development of decision making support systems
Two-phase decanter for garden irrigation (patent)
Continued
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Construcciones Deco
Activity Control logic Prevention logic
Development of control technologies Development of decision-making support

systems
Building materials
Introduction of materials with a lower
environmental impact
Insulation and ventilation Development of low-energy applications and
Energy control systems at buildings and other clean technologies
Energy consumption
automatic controls
Use of energy monitors and managers
Environmental impact assessment
Location
Forecasting of safe areas for product and waste storage
Investment in emission/pollution control equipment
Emissions, waste Toxic/dangerous waste disposal
and dumping Selective waste collection and proper waste
management
Investments in alarm and control equipment and
systems
Emergency situation
Procedures of immediate response before emergencies
Transportes Davi
Activity Control logic Prevention logic
Maintaining vehicles in operation Lorries and forklift trucks (CCE) with a low aerodynamic
Suitable vehicle choice according to resistance and built with recyclable materials
the weight of the load to be Valuation of the real needs regarding engine power and
transported and to the operation to be fuel consumption
carried out Use of radial tyres with a steel ring on the outside part
Management Vehicles
Utilization of air-conditioning systems which are not
harmful to the ozone layer
CCE with a diesel or unleaded petrol engine with a
catalytic converter
Elimination of brake shoes and linings made of asbestos
Routes Logistic distribution study (routes, vehicle size etc.)
Storage of tyres in where they can be
recycled
Adapting the storage area to the
Waste/ nature of the waste (waterproof cover, Purchase of vehicles that remain longer in operation
emissions spillage contention system etc.) Purchase of lubricants, grease removers and polish that
Dangerous substance labelling and are not aerosols
storage Use of higher-quality oils, which extend the useful life-span
Waste management of vehicles
Avoiding engine warming when the
car is stopped
Avoiding sharp braking (screeching),
Driving
sudden starts, excessive speed and Planning of routes to be followed
unnecessary stops Firm staff training and awareness campaigns
Correct use of the gearbox Environmental audits
Continued
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Corona del Mar
Dangerous waste segregation and management Installation of credit card holders (wallets) in rooms, built-in
Maintenance activities at its industrial security facilities fluorescent screens, ‘down light’ spotlights, switches in terrace
Periodical machinery inspections sliding doors etc., to reduce energy and water consumption
Selective paper and glass collection Installation of a high-performance boiler with insulated
Control and measurement of environmental aspects of the accumulators
establishment and the activities related to those aspects Installation of a high-performance laundry system
Convection-steam oven with an electronic control and
consumption reduction system
Installation thermal insulation of heating and SHW (sanitary hot
water) columns
Lifts with Triples stop memory manoeuvre
Solar plate installation
Cartera Ambiental
Dangerous waste management Reuse, recovery or recycling treatments

Authorization for dangerous waste transport Prevention integral management: quality and environment
Equipment for waste conditioning and pre-treatment: Changes in process and product design to reduce/eliminate
disposal units, baler, can crushers, mixing tanks etc. environmental accidents, spillages and leakages
Waste analysis equipment: gas chromatography technology, Reduction of the total amount of material used
atomic absorption equipment, calorimeters Process modification to reduce waste from the source
Equipment and installation programmes maintenance and Information technology research and development and networks
measurement equipment gauging to access sources of reusable and recyclable materials
Equipment for the collection and treatment of gases Development of decision-making support systems
coming from the inside the premises Environmental audits
Emission, in mission and noise measurement
Water analysis
Futurespace
Thermostat control Installation of volume reducers at tanks, mixer taps with a saving
Selective waste collection and management system, low-consumption bulbs or fluorescent tubes
Smoke analyser Rejected paper and cardboard recycling
Boiler evaluation and control with emission maintenance Utilization of reusable internal mail envelopes, paper printed on
and verification programmes both sides etc.
Purchase of raw materials or products in bulk in larger-sized
containers, phosphate-free detergents etc.
Use of returnable containers
Drawing up good practice instructions by departments and train
employees in the correct management of water
Table 2. Structural sustainable intellectual capital
DOI: 10.1002/bse
establishment of market image as a differentiating factor (Chen, 2008). The managers of Enplater and Futurespace
provide the following examples.
Enplater: Significant cost advantages can result from environmental improvements such as better waste man-
agement, use of cheaper recycled materials and pollution prevention, which limits the costs of compliance
with the environmental regulation.
Futurespace: Our environmental reputation is a general organizational attribute that reflects the extent to which
external stakeholders see the firm as ‘good’ and not ‘bad’. It is one of the most important intangible resources
that provide our firm with a sustainable competitive advantage.
Thus, the possibility of obtaining cost savings and a green image tend to favour pollution prevention technolo-
gies while the stringency of environmental regulation favours control technologies. These results suggest that the
application of end-of-pipe measures depends at least partially on regulatory pressure, whereas prevention measures
may be motivated, among other factors, by market forces. Moreover, decision-making support systems and specific
environmental management tools such as control equipment and systems or environmental audits seem to support
the implementation of pollution prevention technologies, presumably by improving the necessary information
base for the development of such technologies (Frondel et al., 2004). Furthermore, the introduction of pollution
prevention technologies is supported by R&D investment specifically related to environmental issues. The manager
of Enplater offers the following explanation.
Enplater: Shifts from a reactive approach toward pollution prevention require substantial resource allocations
in multiple domains: investments in green product and manufacturing technologies, in employee skills and
participation, in organizational competencies, in formal (routine-based) management systems and procedures
and even in the reshaping of the strategic planning process.
The organizational structure turns out to be another vital factor when firms come to face environmental chal-
lenges. Three differentiated structural options can be identified: the creation of an environmental department
(Enplater); the appointment of a top management representative (Coato, Aznar Textil, Construcciones Deco and
Corona del Mar); functional managers are responsible for their environmental practices and there is an environ-
mental executive who coordinates and supervises all actions (Transportes Davi, Futurespace and Cartera Ambien-
tal). Regardless of the option chosen by the firms, they all refer to the need for a person to assume the ultimate
responsibility in strategic, planning, control and even operational aspects. Their mission is to act as catalysts of
wills, in order to foster a higher degree of attention to environmental preservation (Siebenhüner and Arnold,
2007).
Relational Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Relational SIC links the firm with both its stakeholders and the market in which it operates (green or ecological
brands, ecological labels and certifications) (Claver-Cortés et al., 2007). Table 3 shows the connections of the
organizations analysed with the different agents.
In relation to stakeholders, our study suggests, as did that of Roome and Wijen (2006), that influence is far
from absolute; in part it is possessed by stakeholders, in part it is vested in organizations involved in learning or
stakeholder engagement and in part it is determined by the ambition of organization and the type of learning and
relationships they have with other groups. Moreover, it has been found that the level of influence exerted by these
groups varies according to their importance, relevance or priority for the firm to which they are related (Céspedes-
Lorente et al., 2003), i.e. the attention they deserve from the management team, the agents with a direct relation-
ship being the ones that have the greatest importance (Zutshi and Sohal, 2003). It must be stressed in this respect
that the primary and secondary sectors tend to show a stronger involvement on the part of suppliers than the
tertiary sector. The managers of some of the firms under study provide the following examples.
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Coato Enplater Aznar Textil Construcciones Deco Futurespace Transportes Davi Corona del Mar Cartera Ambiental
Characteristics of the relationships

Investors: Caja Society: Industrial Customer: 80% Customer: Customers and Competitors: the Society: rejection
Murcia office, which commitment to customer (it government (the government main suppliers: the environment as a toward the firms at its
benefits farmers who population depends on the valuation of the customer (valuation firm’s competitive argument; early stages; now left
practise integrated (Agenda 21) and end consumer); environment in up to 30% of the environmental cooperation with other behind.
or ecological tourist sector end consumer certifications is not concession), private responsibility is hotels in the search for Competitors: the
agriculture (firm in harmony (non-existent very high); private sector (much lower not recognized environmental environment as a
Open-door society with the natural fidelization); sector (low valuation) demand because it improvements strategic differentiation
Competitors: and urban milieu) greater Competitors: the firm is a low-polluting Customers: valuation of factor
cooperation Competitors: international carries out an sector) the environment as a Customer: no
Customers: greater environmentally awareness organizational Suppliers and hotel quality environmental
international aware (German) change in order to subcontractors own improvement, but not responsibility is
sensitivity multinationals Suppliers: the firm make the structure ISO 14001 as something which demanded; it is only
Suppliers: products Customer: the demands more flexible and certification (a determines its selection valued
that are compatible environment as a minimum become more demand of the firm) Suppliers: no demands Greater international
with sustainable characteristic, not environment competitive; if they provide less awareness: role in
Competition: the
agriculture as a demand; protection criteria Trade associations environment as just harmful products multinationals
more to work with them prefer to focus on another Society: greater Suppliers: no demands
international Society: firm’s work safety characteristic, which demands on the part of Relevant role of sector
awareness harmony with the Industrials and differentiates the all stakeholders associations in search
(Germany, the natural subcontractors: the service but does not Tour operators: no of environmental
Netherlands) environment firm established improve it; there are demands because they solutions. It is
Highly aware minimum criteria to no customer work with Britons (they compulsory to have the
suppliers in the work with them; differences by have demands in the ISO norm
petrochemical example: ISO norms countries case of Germans) certifications.
sector
Type of cooperation
Creation of an Suggestion box Collaboration of Suggestions box Transmission of Suggestions box Suggestions box Collaboration with
eco-park Direct suppliers to Transmission of possible Communication Questionnaires to different associations
Communication communication achieve ideas and opinions to improvements to of suggestions customers who provide and the university
channels with other systems (security environmental any manager in the superior or complaints to ideas and suggestions Suggestions box or
national and and health objectives firm Annual managers Collaboration with communication to
international committee; Provision of ideas, environmental other hotels superior (dangerous
cooperatives annual note to suggestions and planning report waste haulage
Participation in section managers complaints in Cooperation with contractor)
Sustainable Development and Intangibles: Building Sustainable Intellectual Capital
various associations to prepare annual meetings other firms

Participation with environmental
government objectives)
(experimental estate)
and university
Table 3. Relational sustainable intellectual capital
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Bus. Strat. Env. 20, 18–37 (2011)
31
Enplater: Some of our suppliers are firms which belong to the petrochemical sector, considered to be one of
the most polluting but, at the same time, one of the most advanced in environmental matters. They demand
from us the compliance of several minimum environmental efficiency criteria in our business performance.
Aznar Textil: Our environmental objectives require the involvement of our suppliers. For example, when we
thought about reducing the generation of paper and cardboard by 1%, yarn providers had to remove cardboard
boxes from packaging. Achieving this goal was quite complicated, since it meant changing their productive
systems.
On the other hand, the customer has been the most involved agent in the service sector. Corona del Mar,
for example, has questionnaires that involve the customer in their decision making about potential measures
to be adopted in the hotel. In addition, if there is a shadow of a doubt that these environmental practices might
diminish the service offered to this group, they are eliminated.
Corona del Mar: We came back to jam/marmalade sachets, which we had replaced by product in bulk, because
the customer used the dish to take it, which eventually meant that they used more dishes, which in turn
implied more washing and therefore, a higher consumption of water and detergent. All this demonstrates the
need for a change in the customer’s perception.
This supplier–customer orientation seems logical if we take into account that proactive firms try to extend their
environmental policy to the complete life cycle of their products and services (Geibler et al., 2006). In the case of
the primary and secondary sectors, the process includes the entry of raw materials, their transformation into
product and their later distribution. For this reason, the involvement of suppliers (to a greater extent) and the
customer is a constant in the process of adoption of environmental practices. The life cycle of firms operating in
the service sector is shorter and mainly oriented toward the end consumer. Even more reduced is the cycle for
Cartera Ambiental, which acts as a transference centre for industrial waste managers.
At this stage, it is important to highlight the influence of the more relevant environmental groups in the popu-
lation, which have focused on turning the public opinion against polluting firms and encouraging the intervention
of the authorities.
However, business associations cannot be said to have carried out any actions encouraging firms to go beyond
legislative compliance. One can only highlight their performance in the Cartera Ambiental context, in which the
affiliation to these groups is linked to the fulfilment of minimum criteria, such as, for example, being certified
according to the ISO 14001 Norm.
It must finally be said that, as far as the concession of loans and credits is concerned, as Blomquist and
Sandström (2004) found, some firms have received preferential treatment when their objective was to improve
their environmental performance. This was the case of the Coato farming cooperative.
Coato: Our facilities include a Caja Murcia office (branch) which attends to all the financial needs of our
partners and employees. This office equally grants certain credit in preferential situations to those farmers
who require financing to carry out the conversion of their traditional crops toward ecological agriculture.
Furthermore, information about environmental standards, practices, regulations, technologies and societal
expectations provides managers with the capacity to undertake proactive environmental practices (Sharma, 2009).
Stakeholders may enable firms to benchmark these practices. Information related to the benchmarking of a firm’s
environmental practices and sector standards allows performance to be monitored and improved, when the goal
is to achieve sector standards. This idea is applied in the collective cooperation scheme that Coato, Corona del Mar
and Cartera Ambiental adopted during their search for new green solutions or improvements. Cooperation largely
relates to communication and information, the first step in cooperation being the exchange of information and
the active commitment of all parties (Chattopadhyay et al., 1999). However, the success of cooperation does not
only depend on its start date but also on its scope (Schenk et al., 2007). In fact, managers argue that cooperation
does not affect their competitiveness. The environmental manager of Corona del Mar hotel put it this way.
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Corona del Mar: Communication with other hotels does not reduce our competitiveness in the market, since
the hotel is always at the top in green issues. In general, we have an advantage of 6 to 12 months. Moreover,
we must remember that these hotels took in the new natural environmental improvement that we suggested
to them. By the time their practices become effective, we will have already developed other new, more advanced
green actions. To sum up, we give information about environmental technologies so that other hotels can have
an environmentally responsible attitude, because we know that it is practically impossible for our competitors
to overtake us.
In relation to the market in which firms operate, the adoption by environmental managers of green brands,
ecological labels and certifications in the development of green products, technologies or services wins out over
managers of dirty products, technologies or services. In fact, all the firms have an environment management
system in accordance with the ISO 14001 Norm. There are also specific certifications by sector, like the Q quality
stamp or the green Q stamp in the tourism sector, or the Öko Tex labelling in the textile sector. Coato, Enplater,
Construcciones Deco, Transportes Davi, Corona del Mar and Cartera Ambiental are firms that are certified accord-
ing to the EMAS Regulation. The manager of Aznar Textil points out the following.
Aznar Textil: We implemented the ISO 14001 because we believed that the potential transaction costs associ-
ated with acquiring that certification would be offset by the perceived benefits the certification would ultimately
bring us. It could send a signal to customers regarding the environmental improvements achieved by our
firm.
Thanks to the adoption of these certifications, these firms may benefit from an increased demand for their green
products, technologies or services. Managers consider, as is pointed out by Carpenter and Nakamoto (1994) and
Zhang and Markman (1998) in their respective studies, that this affects the memory of consumers, the perception
of the products’ characteristic features and the formation of value judgments about the competing brands, insofar
as consumers learn more about the pioneers in environmental protection. Apart from including environmental
considerations about technology use and development, new product development and process improvements, these
firms can also serve niche markets of ecological consumers (Banerjee, 2002). The Coato manager reviews such
processes.
Coato: We have been the first firm to obtain the ISO 14001 and the EMAS certifications within the food and
agriculture sector. Moreover, Coato’s record in this field has favoured the recognition of its activities, both
nationally and internationally, by diverse bodies and institutions, which has materialized in the achievement
of such awards as the 2001 Award to the Best Spanish Food Firm in Environmental Matters and the 2002
National [Spanish] Environmental Award for Firms− or the 2002 European Union Environmental Award,
Coato being the only Spanish firm that has obtained this last award so far.
Conclusions
This paper has as its aim to answer of the following questions: (1) how can environmental issues be inte-
grated into the intellectual capital of a firm? (2) how do human, structural and relational sustainable intellectual
capital influence environmental management? and (3) how does sustainable intellectual capital differ across
sectors?
The paper has contributed to the literature because sustainable intellectual capital helps to overcome the short-
comings of conventional approaches to environmental management systems by extending sustainability from
relational capital to the three pillars of intellectual capital (human, structural and relational). Moreover, we have
focused on the implementation and development of proactive environmental management depending on human,
structural and relational SIC. Only a few studies have focused on factors or variables that facilitate implementation
DOI: 10.1002/bse
of environmental strategies (i.e. Epstein and Roy, 2006; Russo and Harrison, 2005). Finally, a search of
the literature has not identified any previous research that examines the use of the three pillars of sustainable
intellectual capital by the firms across different sectors, using a comparative case study approach.
The findings indicate that, from the point of view of human SIC, the firms analysed publish their environmen-
tal policy in order to show the extent to which they are committed to the environment, organize environmental
training, information and awareness sessions and often attend seminars, sessions and workshops in order to obtain
new knowledge related to this field. As for structural SIC, all the firms continuously introduce innovations and
improvements in their environmental technology portfolio, which is composed of preventive practices, the creation
of an environmental department, the appointment of a management representative and the existence of an envi-
ronmental manager. These are the key options adopted by the firms examined. Finally, the analysis of relational
SIC reveals that the firm–environment link is very relevant. In relation to this, it must be said that primary and
secondary sectors tend to involve suppliers in the environmental management process, whereas in the service
sector the customer is the most directly involved agent.
The approach proposed in this paper can help to choose the most pertinent intangible resources for environ-
mental management. This will enhance both effective and efficient environmental management and sustained
economic success (Figge and Hahn, 2004). We now move on to some managerial implications. One of the main
challenges is to understand the role of natural capital, not exclusively limited to natural resources, but also intan-
gible resources. Once managers recognize the value of sustainable intellectual capital, they must take a leading
role in the promotion of environmental initiatives and processes. It is very important for managers to empower
employees to participate proactively in environmental management through environmental training, awareness
sessions and attending seminars, sessions and workshops in order to obtain new knowledge related to this field.
The establishment of an incentive system to reward the best environmental ideas or suggestions is also a good
way to improve the environmental activity of the firm.
The study shows that it is necessary to build an internally consistent organizational design that favours environ-
mental action. The creation of an environmental department, or the existence of a top management representative
or an environmental manager who will assume responsibility for the environment, are good options. We also
suggest that managers undertake both pollution control and pollution prevention techniques. The former is
favoured by the stringency of environmental regulation, while the latter is favoured by the possibility of obtaining
cost savings and a green image.
We would encourage managers to extend their environmental management to the life cycle of their products
and services, achieving a strong supplier–customer orientation. Collective cooperation through benchmarking will
allow firms to exchange information about environmental issues and it will help to improve the capacity of the
firm to undertake proactive environmental practices. Green brands, ecological labels and certification will improve
the image of the firm. They may benefit from an increased demand for green products, technologies or services,
affecting the memory of consumers and the perception of the products’ characteristic features.
Finally, some limitations and future lines of research must be mentioned. One limitation is the specific nature
of the multiple case approach and the fact the firms studied stand out as being some of the most advanced in
environmental matters within their respective sectors. A suggestion for a future line of research would be to use
a cluster based analysis in order to explore and identify groups or clusters of sustainable intellectual capital. In
this way, we shall be able to study the similarities and differences, if any, in sustainable intellectual capital across
these clusters.
There is much more theoretical work to be done. It might be the case that human SIC, structural SIC and
relational SIC themselves consist of multiple dimensions. For example, we divided structural SIC into organiza-
tional SIC and technological SIC. We conceptualize organizational SIC as knowledge stored in a firm’s culture,
structure, organizational learning, processes and so on. Each one of these dimensions may need to be examined
more deeply in an effort to develop finer grained theoretical arguments and empirical measures (Youndt et al.,
2004).
Moreover, many theoretical underpinnings of the intellectual capital approach developed in the literature suggest
strong interdependencies in the creation, development and leveraging of its subcategories (Tsai and Ghoshal,
1998). Therefore, a future line of research might focus on how firms exhibit different combinations of human
SIC, structural SIC and relational SIC.
DOI: 10.1002/bse
References
Aragón-Correa JA, Matías-Reche F, Senise-Barrio ME. 2004. Managerial discretion and corporate commitment to the natural environment.
Journal of Business Research 57: 964–975.
Banerjee SB. 2002. Corporate environmentalism. The construct and its measurement. Journal of Business Research 55: 177–191.
Bansal P, Hunter T. 2003. Strategic explanations for the early adoption of ISO 14001. Journal of Business Ethics 46: 289–299.
Barney J. 1991. Firms resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17(1): 99–120.
Blomquist T, Sandström J. 2004. From issues to checkpoints and back: managing green issues in R&D. Business Strategy and the Environment
13: 363–373. DOI: 10.1002/bse.402
Bontis N. 1996. There’s a price on your head: managing intellectual capital strategically. Business Quarterly Summer: 41–47.
Bontis N. 1999. Managing organizational knowledge by diagnosing intellectual capital. International Journal of Technology Management 18(5–8):
433–462.
Bowen FE. 2000. Environmental visibility: a trigger of green organizational response? Business Strategy and the Environment 9(2): 92–107.
Burewoy M. 1991. Reconstructing social theories. In Ethnography Unbound, Burawoy M et al. (eds). University of California Press: Berkeley,
CA; 8–27.
Buysse K, Verbeke A. 2003. Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal 24:
453–470.
Cairncross F. 1992. Costing the Earth. The Challenge for Governments, the Opportunities for Business. Harvard Business School Press: Boston,
MA.
Carpenter GS, Nakamoto K. 1994. Reflections on consumer preference formation and pioneering advantage. Journal of Marketing Research 31:
570–573.
Céspedes-Lorente J, Burgos-Jiménez J, Álvarez-Gil MJ. 2003. Stakeholders’ environmental influence. An empirical analysis in the Spanish
hotel industry. Scandinavian Journal of Management 19(3): 333–358.
Chattopadhyay P, Glick WH, Miller CC, Huber GP. 1999. Determinants of executive beliefs: comparing functional conditioning and social
influence. Strategic Management Journal 20: 763–789.
Chen Y-S. 2008. The positive effect of green intellectual capital on competitive advantages of firms. Journal of Business Ethics 77: 271–286.
DOI: 10.1007/s10551–006–9349–1
CIC. 2003. Model for the Measurement and Management of Intellectual Capital: Intellectus Model, Intellectus Documents 5. CIC-IADE: Madrid.
Clarke SF, Roome N. 1999. Sustainable business: learning-action networks as organizational assets. Business Strategy and the Environment 8(5):
296–310.
Claver E, López MD, Molina JF, Tarí JJ. 2007. Environmental management and firm performance: a case study. Journal of Environmental
Management 84: 606–619.
Claver-Cortés E, López-Gamero MD, Molina-Azorín JF, Zaragoza-Sáez PC. 2007. Intellectual and environmental capital. Journal of Intellectual
Capital 8(1): 171–182.
Costanza R, Daly H. 1992. Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology 6: 37.
Daft RL, Lengel RH. 1986. Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science 32: 554–
571.
Davenport TH, Prusak L. 1998. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Harvard Business School Press: Boston,
MA.
Del Bello A. 2006. Intangibles and sustainability in local governments reports. Journal of Intellectual Capital 7(4): 440–456.
Déniz-Déniz MC, De Saá-Pérez PD. 2003. A resource-based view of corporate responsiveness toward employees. Organization Studies 24(2):
299–319.
Denzin NK. 1978. The Research Act. McGraw-Hill: New York.
Edvinsson L, Malone MS. 1997. Intellectual Capital. Harper: New York.
Eisenhardt K. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14: 532–550.
Epstein MJ, Roy M-J. 2006. Implementing a corporate environmental strategy: establishing coordination and control within multinational
companies. Business Strategy and the Environment 16: 289–403.
European Commission. 2001. Green Paper. Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility, Workpaper 366.
Figge F, Hahn T. 2004. Value-oriented impact assessment: the economics of a new approach to impact assessment. Journal of Environmental
Planning and Management 47: 921–941.
Figge F, Hahn T. 2005. The cost of sustainability capital and the creation of sustainable value by companies. Journal of Industrial Ecology 9:
47–58.
Fraj-Andrés E, Martínez-Salinas E, Matute-Vallejo J. 2008. Factors affecting corporate environmental strategy in Spanish industrial firms.
Business Strategy and the Environment. DOI: 10.1002/bse.611
Frondel M, Horbach J, Rennings K. 2004. End-of-Pipe or Cleaner Production? An Empirical Comparison of Environmental Innovation Decisions
Across OECD Countries, Discussion Paper 04–82.
Geibler J, Liedtke C, Wallbaum H, Schaller S. 2006. Accounting for the social dimension of sustainability: experiences from the biotechnology
industry. Business Strategy and the Environment 15: 334–346. DOI: 10.1002/bse.540
Glaser BG, Strauss A. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies of Qualitative Research. Wiedenfeld and Nicholson: London.
González-Benito J, González-Benito O. 2005. Environmental proactivity and business performance: an empirical analysis. Omega 33: 1–15.
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Grant R. 1991. The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review 33(3):
114–135.
Guimón J. 2005. Intellectual capital reporting and credit risk analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital 6(1): 28–42.
Hahn T, Figge F, Barkemeyer R. 2007. Sustainable value creation among companies in the manufacturing sector. International Journal of
Environmental Technology and Management 7: 496–512.
Hart S. 1995. A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review 20(4): 986–1014.
Harte MJ. 1995. Ecology, sustainability, and environment as capital. Ecological Economics 15: 157–164.
Hutchinson C. 1996. Integrating environment policy with business strategy. Long Range Planning 29(1): 11–23.
Johnson WHA. 1999. An integrative taxonomy of intellectual capital: measuring the stock and flow of intellectual capital components in the
firm. International Journal of Technology Management 18(5–8): 562–575.
Klassen RD, Whybark DC. 1999. The impact of environmental technologies on manufacturing performance. Academy of Management Journal
42(6): 599–615.
Lee TW. 1999. Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.
Linnenluecke MK, Russell SV, Griffiths A. 2007. Subcultures and sustainability practices: the impact on understanding corporate sustain-
ability. Business Strategy and the Environment. DOI: 10.1002/bse.609
Maitlis S. 2004. Taking it from the top: how CEOs influence (and fail to influence) their boards. Organization Studies 25(8): 1275–1311.
Maxwell J, Rothenberg S, Briscoe F, Marcus A. 1997. Green schemes: corporate environmental strategies and their implementation. California
Management Review 39(3): 118–134.
Miles MB, Huberman AM. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis. An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage: Beverly Hills, CA.
Miles MW. 1979. Qualitative data as an attractive nuisance: the problem of analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly 24(4): 590–600.
Nahapiet J, Ghoshal S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review 23: 242–
266.
Newson MD, Chalk L. 2004. Environmental capital: an information core to public participation in strategic and operational decicions – the
example of river ‘best practice’ projects. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 47(6): 899–920.
Pagell M, Yang C-L, Krumwiede DW. 2004. Does the competitive environment influence the efficacy of investments in environmental
management? Journal of Supply Chain Management 40(3): 30–50.
Pearce D, Atkinson G. 1998. The concept of sustainable development: an evaluation of its usefulness ten years after Brundtland. Swiss Journal
of Economics and Statistics 134: 251–269.
Perrini F, Tencati A. 2006. Sustainability and stakeholder management: the need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting
systems. Business Strategy and the Environment 15: 296–308. DOI: 10.1002/bse.538
Peteraf M. 1993. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 14(3): 179–191.
Roome N, Wijen F. 2006. Stakeholder power and organizational learning in corporate environmental management. Organization Studies 27(2):
235–263.
Runhaar HC, Tigchelaar, Vermeulen WJV. 2008. Environmental leaders: making a difference. A typology of environmental leaders and
recommendations for a differentiated policy approach. Business Strategy and the Environment 17: 160–178.
Russo MV, Harrison NS. 2005. Organizational design and environmental performance: clues from the electronics industry. Academy of
Management Journal 48: 582–593.
Schenk A, Hunziker M, Kienast F. 2007. Factors influencing the acceptance of nature conservation measures – a qualitative study in
Switzerland. Journal of Environmental Management 83(1): 66–79.
Schultz TW. 1961. Investment in human capital. American Economic Review 51: 1–17.
Sharma S. 2000. Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy
of Management Journal 43: 681–697.
Sharma S. 2009. The mediating effect of information availability between organization design variables and environmental practices in the
Canadian hotel industry. Business Strategy and the Environment 18: 266–276.
Sharma S, Henriques I. 2005. Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management
Journal 26: 159–180.
Sharma S, Pablo A, Vredenburg H. 1999. Corporate environmental responsiveness strategies: the role of issue interpretation and organizational
context. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 35(1): 87–109.
Shrivastava P. 1995. Environmental technologies and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal 16: 183–200.
Siebenhüner B, Arnold M. 2007. Organizational learning to manage sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment 16:
339–353. DOI: 10.1002/bse.579
Stern DI. 1997. The capital theory approach to sustainability: a critical appraisal. Journal of Economic Issues 31(1): 145–173.
Stewart TA. 1997. Intellectual Capital: the New Wealth of Organizations. Doubleday Currency: New York.
Strauss A, Corbin J. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage: Newbury Park, CA.
Subramaniam M, Youndt MA. 2005. The influence of intellectual capital on the nature of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management
Journal 48(3): 450–464.
Thampapillai DJ, Thangavelu SM. 2004. Towards unitary economics: valuation of environmental capital for environmental stewardship.
International Journal of Social Economics 31(3/4): 430–442.
Thomas A. 2001. Corporate environmental policy and abnormal stock price returns: an empirical investigation. Business Strategy and the
Environment 10(3): 125–134.
Tsai W, Ghoshal S. 1998. Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal 41: 464–478.
DOI: 10.1002/bse
Wagner M. 2005. How to reconcile environmental and economic performance to improve corporate sustainability: corporate environmental
strategies in the European paper industry. Journal of Environmental Management 76: 105–118.
Wagner M. 2007. Innovation and competitive advantages from the integration of strategic aspects with social and environmental management
in European firms. Business Strategy and the Environment. DOI: 10.1002/bse.585
Wernerfelt B. 1984. A resource based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5(2): 171–180.
Yin R. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd edn). Sage: Newbury Park, CA.
Yongvanich K, Guthrie J. 2006. An extended performance reporting framework for social and environmental accounting. Business Strategy and
the Environment 15: 309–321. DOI: 10.1002/bse.541
Youndt MA, Subramaniam M, Snell SA. 2004. Intellectual capital profiles: an examination of investments and returns. Journal of Management
Studies 41(2): 335–361.
Zhang S, Markman AB. 1998. Overcoming the early entrant advantage: the role of alignable and nonalignable differences. Journal of Marketing
Research 35: 413–426.
Zutshi A, Sohal MS. 2003. Stakeholder involvement in the EMS adoption process. Business Process Management Journal 9(2): 133–148.
DOI: 10.1002/bse

Sustainable Development and Intangibles: Building Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainable Development and Intangibles: Building Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Business Strategy and the Environment

Bus. Strat. Env. 20, 18–37 (2011)

Sustainable Development and Intangibles:

Received 31 October 2008; revised 17 September 2009; accepted 22 September 2009

Sustainable Intellectual Capital from Intellectual Capital

Human Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental

Table 1. Human sustainable intellectual capital

Structural Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Control logic Prevention logic

Investment on emission/pollution control Development of decision-taking support systems

Control logic Prevention logic

Measurements at emission points Cyclical use of cloths

Control logic Prevention logic

Activity Control logic Prevention logic

Development of control technologies Development of decision-making support

Activity Control logic Prevention logic

Corona del Mar

Control logic Prevention logic

Control logic Prevention logic

Dangerous waste management Reuse, recovery or recycling treatments

Control logic Prevention logic

Table 2. Structural sustainable intellectual capital

Relational Sustainable Intellectual Capital

Characteristics of the relationships

various associations to prepare annual meetings other ﬁrms

Table 3. Relational sustainable intellectual capital

You might also like