The Influence of the Sustainable Development Goals on the Triple Bottom Line. An overview of for-profit organizations and social enterprises.

(1)

Emmy Huijsser

10801448

Nesrien Abu Ghazaleh

BA-Thesis Business Administration University of Amsterdam Word count: 14199 26-06-2018

The Influence of the Sustainable Development

Goals on the Triple Bottom Line

An overview of for-profit organizations and social enterprises

(2)

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Student Emmy Huijsser who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.

I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.

The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents

Emmy Huijsser 10801448

(3)

Abstract

Recently, the seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were introduced by the United Nations. Besides governments of member states, organizations are expected to contribute in achieving those goals. As a consequence, pursuing sustainable development by different types of organizations is a recurring theme nowadays. Concepts as social entrepreneurship, corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the triple bottom line are well discussed in contemporary literature. However, a detailed overview of the relationship between social enterprises and for-profit organizations pursuing CSR and their contribution to sustainable development is still absent. This thesis investigated such relations by describing the relationship between both types of organizations and sustainable development. Examples of both types of organizations are discussed. To limit the scope of the research, the food and beverage industry within the Netherlands was focused on. The information about the six chosen organizations was extracted from their annual reports and used as source to select the most common and important SDGs within the industry. In the end, the goals of the organizations were divided into the SDGs and categorized under the 3Ps (people, planet, profit) of the triple bottom line. An analysis of existing literature and the annual reports of the various organizations conclude that both types of organizations are concerned with sustainable development (goals). For-profit organizations remain too focused on the third P: profit. Nevertheless, the impact of both types of organizations on the 3Ps could not be measured through this literature research. Therefore, future quantitative research is recommended to measure the exact impact of the SDGs for both types of organizations, to provide a proper and substantiated answer on the distinction in progress and impact.

(4)

1. Introduction

During the last decades, the rise of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become a common theme among organizations who want to achieve sustainability and increase their social value (Crane, Matten, & Spence, 2013). According to Elkington (1999), sustainable development can be influenced by organizations and is often communicated through CSR. To help organizations and governments to pursue and achieve sustainability, the United Nations created a universal agenda effective from 2015 until 2030 (United Nations, 2015). In an open working group, UN-representatives originating from seventy countries made the first draft for the sustainable agenda during the Rio+20 Conference in 2012 (Griggs, Stafford-Smith, Gaffney, Rockström, Öhman, Shyamsundar, Steffen, Glaser, Kanie & Ian, 2013). Topics they emphasized included: ending poverty and tackling climate change (Ford, 2015; Servaes, 2017). As a result, seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were introduced, focusing on three dimensions of sustainable development: economic, social and environmental (United Nations, 2015). To achieve those goals by 2030, all UN-members have to take the SDGs into account while setting up new agendas within their countries. Understanding the manner of achieving sustainable development is critical, given that the global population is estimated to grow up to nine billion people by 2050 (Griggs et al., 2013). To ensure that the needs of the present population are met without compromising the needs of the future generations, sustainable development among organizations has to increase (United Nations, 1987).

Different approaches to pursue sustainable development by organizations are examined, amongst others: social entrepreneurship and the CSR approach. Existing research concerning CSR includes the definition of CSR (Bowen, 1953; Dahlsrud, 2008), how to measure CSR (Chatterji, Levine, & Toffel, 2009), the benefits of CSR for organizations (Burke & Logsdon, 1996; Carroll & Shabana, 2010; Fisk, 2010) and the focus and commitment to CSR (Holme & Watts, 1999; Lindgreen & Swaen, 2010). According to Bowen (1953), businesses who focus on CSR have to take the environment and society into account, besides earning profits. Thus, for-profit organizations have to keep this in mind with their operations, because their activities may have a direct impact on the quality of life (Bowen, 1953).

Besides the CSR approach, the approach of social enterprises also emphasizes the importance of an organization's impact on society and environment. Prabhu (1999) mentions that the main purpose of social entrepreneurs is to improve social value by focusing on a

(7)

social mission. Initially, most social enterprises do not focus on profit, but emphasize social and environmental topics (Seelos & Mair, 2005a). A framework that measures these topics is the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) (Fisk, 2010). The TBL framework focuses on the impact and performance of organizations related to three dimensions: People, Planet and Profit (Hall, 2011). These dimensions are also referred to as the 3Ps. Various research is done to define the TBL and the impact measurement of the 3Ps (Elkington, 1999; Fisk, 2010; Hall, 2011). Still, little research is done to define the emphasis of organizational goals and objectives on the separate Ps. Therefore, the TBL framework will be used as a guidance within this thesis. To provide a clear overview, a distinction will be made between social enterprises and for-profit organizations. Furthermore, the SDGs pursued within both kinds of organizations will be defined. Hence, this thesis tries to formulate an answer to the following question:

“Which ‘Ps’ of the triple bottom line are emphasized, and what are the differences in activities to achieve the sustainable development goals between social enterprises and for-profit organizations pursuing CSR?”

To achieve positive impacts on people, planet and profit, SDGs could contribute as guidelines for various kinds of organizations. However, this thesis will only investigate a selection of five SDGs. This selection will be made through examining the food and beverage industry, whilst giving examples of six Dutch organizations. An additional distinction will be made by selecting three Dutch social enterprises and three Dutch for-profit corporations. Further on in this thesis, an overview of this distinction will be shown.

1.1 Research Design

This thesis will be conducted as a literature research. First, the different key concepts will be defined in the theoretical framework. Definitions of the different key concepts shall be described and discussed through secondary literature of various authors. Throughout the theoretical framework, the different sub-questions shall be presented. The methodology used for this thesis will then be explained, as well as the limitations of the method. Furthermore, the arguments why certain companies are selected will be given. Subsequently the analysis of the research will be outlined. The analysis will be divided into sub-paragraphs in line with the sub-questions. Next, the relation between social entrepreneurs managing the SDGs will then be more thoroughly considered. The same shall be done for the relation between CSR

(8)

programs of for-profit organizations handling the SDGs. Thereafter a selection of the most relevant SDGs for both kinds of organizations will be made. Hereby, as previously indicated, this thesis focuses on the food and beverage industry in the Netherlands to limit the scope of research. Annual reports of different companies will be reviewed to provide a clear overview.

Finally, the SDGs will be examined and categorized into the triple bottom line’s 3Ps. As a result, the emphasis of the sustainable goals and activities of those organizations on the 3Ps could be defined. The conclusion will present an overview of both types of organizations and formulate a clear answer on the sub-questions in order to compose an answer on the research question of this thesis. In the discussion, the findings of this research will be linked to the expectations. Moreover, recommendations for future research will be introduced. Finally, a personal reflection on this thesis will be given.

(9)

2. Theoretical Framework

In this chapter, the theoretical framework will outline a review of existing literature to provide a clear understanding of the key topics relevant to this thesis. The key concepts will be described and discussed through investigating existing literature, and this will be done in the following order: Social Entrepreneurship, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the Triple Bottom Line (TBL).

To start off, the two types of organizational approaches will be described in order to be able to make a clear distinction throughout this thesis. Subsequently the SDGs and the TBL framework will be discussed and eventually linked to both types of organizations. From those linkages, sub-questions will be derived to give a legitimate answer on the main research question of this thesis.

2.1 Social Entrepreneurship

In this paragraph a thorough definition of the concept Social Entrepreneurship will be given and discussed in more detail. Different perspectives and studies about this concept will be presented. The findings should enable the possibility to make an appropriate comparison with the corporations’ CSR approach which will be described in paragraph 2.2.

Social entrepreneurship has become a popular approach over the last few decades (Dees, 1998). According to Dees (1998) social entrepreneurship exists of a combination of a passion for the social mission and an image of business-like discipline and innovation. Dees is convinced that current entrepreneurial approaches to social problems are the most efficient. Social enterprises could play an important part in accomplishing the development of new efficient business models focusing on social problems, according to Dees (1998).

The importance of the social mission objective is a recurring theme in most literature consisting of definitions of social entrepreneurship. As indicated in the introduction, Prabhu (1999) states that the main purpose of social entrepreneurship is social change and development of social value. Prabhu’s research focuses on social entrepreneurial leadership and their characteristics and behavior. In his research, he mentions that social entrepreneurial leaders manage innovative entrepreneurial organizations with a social mission to social change. In addition, Zahra, Gedajlovic, Neubaum and Shulman (2009) state that social entrepreneurship is about creating social wealth. They mention in their article that the serious social needs obtained limited attention in underdeveloped countries with emerging economies.

(10)

But with the rise of social entrepreneurs, an improvement in ameliorating adverse social conditions could be originated (Zahra et al., 2009). As a consequence, the changes of social entrepreneurs become highly visible. The use of innovative and cost-effective methods points to persistent social problems, for instance poverty, gender inequality, etc. (Cox & Healey, 1998).

The definition of social entrepreneurship from Zahra et al. (2009) is relevant for this thesis as it is stated that there is no perfect definition of the concept. Rather, Zahra et al. provide an integration of various common points. A list of twenty definitions and descriptions of social entrepreneurship by different authors is given to provide a general overview. Most common points among the various definitions are: creating social wealth (Dees, 1998; Sullivan Mort et al., 2002; Mair & Marti, 2006; Peredo & McLean, 2006; Martin & Osberg, 2007), total wealth (Fowler, 2000; Schwab Foundation, 2005; Tan, Williams, & Tan, 2005), social justice (Thake & Zadek, 1997), or the determination of social problems (Drayton, 2002; Alford, Brown, & Letts, 2004; Said School, 2005). Consequently to investigate all these definitions, Zahra et al. (2009) believe that the definition, measurement or evaluation of the concept has to reflect on social and economic deliberations. As such they prefer the term of ‘total wealth’ which includes tangible (e.g., products, clients served) and intangible outcomes (e.g., wealth, happiness). They suggest the following definition of social entrepreneurship made out of all definitions and existing literature: “Social entrepreneurship encompasses the activities and processes undertaken to discover, define, and exploit opportunities in order to enhance social wealth by creating new ventures or managing existing organizations in an innovative manner” (Zahra et al., 2009). Both individuals and groups motivate, build or sustain new organizations and business models to contribute to society.

Besides the fact that social entrepreneurship focuses on the social mission and social wealth, another focus point of this thesis is to emphasize the contribution to sustainable development by social enterprises. According to Kerr (2007), social entrepreneurship is not only about looking at the community, but also focusing on growth and sustainability. Additionally, Seelos and Mair (2005a) state that social entrepreneurship could lead to new socially acceptable and sustainable business strategy ideas. According to them, social entrepreneurship could encourage larger corporations to implement more social responsibility and sustainable goals. As a consequence, social entrepreneurship could have a direct influence on the accomplishment of the sustainable development goals (Seelos & Mair, 2005a). Moreover, social value creation as the main objective of most social enterprises rather than profit maximization, aims to achieve sustainability more rapidly.

(11)

This paragraph has described the most relevant definitions of social entrepreneurship to be used within this thesis. The social entrepreneurial approach could emphasize the social mission as well as an environmental mission. Still, economic deliberations have to be taken into account. However, earning profit will not be the main objective for the enterprises most often. Summarizing, the focus of social enterprises could have different purposes. This will be investigated in the fourth chapter of this thesis.

2.2 For-Profits’ Corporate Social Responsibility

Besides social enterprises, various for-profit organizations also focus on social responsibility throughout their businesses. This paragraph shall define the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) within for-profit organizations. This will provide as a tool to eventually make a distinction between both types of organizations and the categorization of their sustainable goals.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a concept which has gained increased popularity over the last few decades. Many definitions for this concept exist. An early definition of corporations CSR was given by Bowen (1953) and publicized in ‘Social Responsibilities of the Businessman’. Bowen (1953) claims that there is a connection between the decisions made within organizations and society as a whole. He states that business operations have a direct impact on the quality of all lives. As a result, he defined the term ‘social responsibility’ as follows: “the obligations of businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society” (Bowen, 1953). Hereby, he argues that businesses cannot place their values above those of society or ignore socially accepted values.

Holme and Watts (1999) argue that CSR is the ethical and economic contribution of businesses improving the quality of life and, in the end, the local community and society at large. It is a commitment a business takes for society, even though the main purpose of a business is to earn profit. This is contrasting with the social entrepreneurial approach, where profit is not the main objective in most cases. However, for-profit organizations that pursue CSR have to focus on environmental norms while performing their day-to-day activities (Holme & Watts, 1999). Although many businesses sustain their commitment to CSR, Lindgreen and Swaen (2010) mention that some businesses continue to struggle with the accomplishment of it. This could be the reason of their profit objective, and will be analyzed in the fourth chapter.

(12)

As stated above, for-profit organizations committing to CSR are assumed to focus on social and/or environmental issues besides making profit. In addition to this, Burke and Logsdon (1996) state that implementing CSR in business strategies could cause advantages for the organizations itself too. The competitive advantage could be derived through five different dimensions that focus on the success of the firm as well as relating to CSR policies (Burke & Logsdon, 1996). The five dimensions of strategic CSR are: centrality, specificity, proactivity, voluntarism and visibility. When the dimensions are implemented perfectly, all five dimensions can create added value for the firm. Therefore, CSR programs not only have a positive effect on society and environment, the firm could also gain competitive advantage and create value for the firm itself. Nevertheless, the idea of gaining competitive advantage through CSR could have negative consequences in the elaboration of sustainable goals. A negative side effect of the growing interest in sustainable development and the CSR approach is that applying CSR could be an incentive for companies to enhance their brand and gain a positive reputation to win friends (Iyigün, 2015). Furthermore, media plays a major role in the behavior of companies because of their power to publicize information about unsustainable organizations and their negative impacts on society or environment, etc. (Jonkute & Staniskis, 2016; Pesmatzoglou, Nikolaou, Evangelinos, & Allan, 2014).

To summarize, the CSR approach pursued by for-profit organizations focuses on different aspects: society, environment, and the business’ profit. The CSR approach has to be integrated within the firm's whole strategy, and checked regularly. Otherwise the firm could abuse CSR to gain competitive advantage, positive attention by media and new customers. In the next paragraph sustainable development will be described and a relation between separate types of organizations with the SDGs will be illustrated.

2.3 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

In their report ‘Our Common Future’, the World Commission on Environmental and Development (1987) describes sustainable development as follows: “humanity has the ability to make development sustainable to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The United Nations introduced different agendas that emphasizes the urge of sustainability and social values. In 1990, the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were introduced, which were pursued in the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2012. The SDGs started during the end of the MDGs in 2015 (Taylor, Williams, Magnus, Goenka, & Modi, 2015). The

(13)

sustainable agenda consists of seventeen SDGs and 169 associated targets, which form a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity (United Nations, 2015).

As mentioned above, the United Nations created seventeen SDGs to combat several societal and environmental issues (United Nations, 2015). Each goal has its own purpose which is defined by the United Nations (2015; n.d.) [see Figure 1], namely:

1) End poverty in all its forms everywhere;

2) End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition; 3) Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages;

4) Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and ensure lifelong learning opportunities for all;

5) Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls;

6) Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all; 7) Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all;

8) Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all;

9) Build resilient infrastructure, sustainable industrialization and foster innovation;

Figure 1: A visual representation of the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations (n.d.). Retrieved from

(14)

10) Reduce inequality within and among countries;

11) Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable; 12) Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns;

13) Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts; 14) Conserve and sustainably use of oceans, seas and marine resources;

15) Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainable manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss;

16) Promote peace, justice and strong institutions;

17) Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.

The aim of these SDGs is to tackle those goals that were not met with the MDGs. The goals function as guidelines for existing and future initiatives to end major global problems such as inequality, poverty and hunger (United Nations, 2015). Although the SDGs are not legally binding, every UN-member country is expected to collaborate and achieve these goals by 2030. Organizations could use the SDGs as a framework to eventually achieve more sustainability. Furthermore, by adapting the SDGs in business strategies or responsibility programs, businesses can be guided towards the integration of sustainability in their organizations.

To limit the scope of this research, a selection shall be made out of the seventeen SDGs. Furthermore, the selection shall be based on the most important and common SDGs pursued within the food and beverage industry. Hereby, the following sub-question will be investigated:

“Which five SDGs are most important and common within the food and beverage industry?”

With the SDGs, the United Nations would like to assemble and engage local, national and international players to work together upon problems like poverty, health, climate change, etc. (Rahdari, Sepasi, & Moradi, 2016; United Nations, 2015). This indicates that governments cannot solve these economic, social and environmental challenges alone. Indeed businesses are also expected to take the SDGs into account. To implement this plan efficiently, everyone has to act in collaborative partnership (Kolk, Kourula, & Pisani, 2017).

(15)

The interest in sustainability and aspects such as ‘people, planet, prosperity, partnership’, ‘corporate social responsibility’, ‘social inclusion’, etc., increased after the turn of the century (Chandra, 2018). As this interest grew in society, businesses also became more aware about the long-term survival of life on earth. Kolk (2016) states that societal expectations have increased between businesses themselves and business and society. Nowadays corporations are expected to take social and environmental challenges into account more proactively (Seelos & Mair, 2005a). The responsibility of corporations to achieve more sustainable patterns within their businesses could be accomplished through corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs. Causing that responsibility expectations of businesses often are linked to CSR programs (Kolk, 2016).

Chandra (2018) states that social entrepreneurship chases sustainable goals and implement sustainable thinking. This involves multidisciplinary research where different research fields and perspectives meet. Seelos and Mair (2004) intent to look at social entrepreneurship from a sustainable perspective. According to them, the three main players

shown in Figure 2 could contribute to sustainable development. They define social entrepreneurship as: “The contribution of individual entrepreneurs to Sustainable Development.” (Seelos & Mair, 2004). The overlapping part between ‘Corporations CSR’ and ‘Individuals-Social Entrepreneurship’ is called ‘Social Intrapreneurship’. According to Seelos and Mair (2004) social intrapreneurship develop when entrepreneurial initiatives exist within corporations, while having a social purpose. In the end, as shown in Figure 2, both corporations CSR and social entrepreneurship could contribute to sustainable development.

(16)

2.3.1 The link between the SDGs and Social Enterprises

In the previous paragraph the SDGs were discussed and the relation between both types of organizations and sustainable development was described. In this paragraph the link between the SDGs and social enterprises will be discussed in more detail. Furthermore, in the analysis chapter, three social enterprises located in the Netherlands will be selected. Those enterprises are operating in the food and beverage industry, and the selection will be based on their annual reports.

Rahdari et al. (2016) states that social enterprises try to tackle social challenges by offering innovative and sustainable solutions. Hence, sustainable development will be taken into account. Furthermore, most social entrepreneurs could develop social innovation on an effective way to conquer difficult social and environmental issues and contribute to sustainable development in the end (Rahdari et al., 2016). In their study, Rahdari et al. (2016) mention that social entrepreneurs could contribute to achieving the objectives of the sustainable development agenda of the United Nations by starting within local communities and gradually scaling up. Consequently, many social enterprises aim to achieve the SDGs (Rahdari et al., 2016). To find out if the five most important and common SDGs pursued by social enterprises within the food and beverage industry have the same aim, the following sub-question is:

“How are the selected SDGs implemented and executed within social enterprises?”

The focus on those SDGs will be investigated for social enterprises operating in the Netherlands. Many social entrepreneurs operate also in developing countries to create social value. Therefore they have to restructure or create new business models (Seelos & Mair, 2004). In a different study, Seelos and Mair (2005b) describe three sets of activities for social entrepreneurs to focus on accomplishing sustainable development [see Figure 3]. The emphasis of those activities are the following: satisfying basic human needs, the needs for enabling structures within communities that ascertain norms, rights and collaboration to eventually contribute in social and economic development, and a need for maximizing choices for future generations. By also taking the different levels of society into account (individuals, communities, future generations), social entrepreneurs could contribute to sustainable development (Seelos & Mair, 2005b). This relation between sustainable development and social entrepreneurship is described by Seelos and Mair (2004; 2005a; 2005b). Besides satisfying the needs of today’s population and not knowing the exact needs of future

(17)

generations, social entrepreneurs put an emphasis on a dynamic model to react to social needs over time (Seelos & Mair, 2005a; Seelos & Mair, 2005b; Seelos & Mair, 2004). Hence, future needs and social value creation could be satisfied.

According to Rahdari et al. (2016), four crucial steps are necessary for establishment of a sustainable social enterprise. First the awareness about sustainability must increase. This could be done by educating or training people. Second, a sustainable culture has to exist within the enterprise by implementing a strategy, mission, vision and values pursuing sustainable traits and goals. Thirdly sustainable production and consumption have to be created. Lastly, a sustainable and responsible business model has to be made for the enterprise. By following these criteria, social enterprises could synchronize with the sustainable agenda and operate towards the realization of the SDGs (Rahdari et al., 2016). However, to achieve various SDGs, Seelos and Mair (2004) state that it is essential to define the exact needs of the social enterprise and focus on a few goals. Therefore, this thesis only focuses on the most relevant SDGs within the social enterprises.

2.3.2 The link between the SDGs and for-profit organizations

In this paragraph the link between the SDGs and for-profit organizations will be discussed in more detail. The same shall be done as in the previous paragraph. Afterwards, three for-profit organizations shall be selected, which will be described in the methodology and analysis chapters.

The responsibility taken by for-profit organizations through applying CSR programs within their business strategies can contribute to sustainable development (Carroll & Shabana, 2010). Some studies mention that large corporations have more impact on development than

Figure 3: An operation model of the contribution of social entrepreneurship(SE) to sustainable development

(18)

small organizations, because of their power and economic benefit (Iygün, 2015). Therefore, large corporations have to take more responsibility in their actions. As a result, the large corporations could inspire small and medium sized enterprises to be socially and/or environmentally responsible as well (Hopkins, 2007; Iygün, 2015).

According to Rahdari et al. (2016), the sustainable agenda of the United Nations could provide new opportunities for businesses. Furthermore they claim that the business sector is important in exceeding the global sustainable development agenda. In their study about CSR in Transnational Corporations (TNCs), Schönherr, Findler and Martinuzzi (2017) state that the CSR approach is constantly trying to satisfy environmental, economic and social standards. This includes that businesses have to contribute by achieving goals of society. According to Schönherr et al. (2017), the CSR approach is therefore strongly related to sustainable development. Furthermore, effective CSR includes the involvement of all stakeholders along the value chain. Lastly, the implementation of the CSR approach could be done in different ways to improve the social, environmental and economic performance of an organization. Hence, organizations needs to integrate environmental or social issues into their business model to eventually create value (Schönherr et al., 2017). Effective implementation of the goals within organizations could lead to the achievement of the SDGs (Schönherr et al., 2017). As a result, the third sub-question will be the following:

“How are the selected SDGs implemented and executed within for-profit organizations?”

The SDGs could create benefits for the organization by creating common interests, building partnerships and contribute to sustainable development by achieving the targets (Schönherr et al., 2017). However, the whole value chain of the organization has to be investigated to approach each sustainable issue from its specific context. To summarize, existing literature can suggest that there are several links between sustainable development (goals) and social enterprises or CSR programs within for-profit organizations.

2.4 Triple Bottom Line: People, Planet, Profit

The relation between both types of organizations and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was explained in the previous paragraphs. Different sub-questions were conceived. To provide a complete answer on the research question of this thesis, the triple

(19)

bottom line framework has to be described and investigated. This will be discussed in more detail throughout this section.

According to Fisk (2010), society as a whole is encountering a time of unprecedented changes. Therefore, not only social enterprises and governmental sectors are interested in adapting their strategies. For-profit organizations have also become interested in the new trend. Besides the fact that social and environmental issues are more important than ever, incorporating sustainability within the business strategy could benefit an organization's competitive advantage (Fisk, 2010; Burke & Logsdon, 1996).

During the mid-1990s, John Elkington introduced a new framework to measure sustainability and performance within the corporate world (Elkington, 1999; Hall, 2011). This new framework is called the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) and acts as improvement on the traditional profit frameworks. The TBL framework focuses on the performance of organizations related to three dimensions: People, Planet and Profit, also referred to as the 3Ps (Hall, 2011). According to Fisk (2010), the 3Ps are representative of profitable growth, innovation, competitive advantage and leadership.

With ‘profitable growth’ Fisk (2010) means adapting strategies and structuring an organization to cope with a changing environment that could be threatening and uncertain. Subsequently, innovation can stand for the connection between capitalism and environmentalism. In addition, organizations could differentiate from other companies by focusing on social and environmental aspects as their basis. Lastly, appropriate leadership could inspire businesses to eventually rethink, reframe and reinvest the organization for a sustainable future (Fisk, 2010). Additionally, Hall (2011) argues that by taking the 3Ps into account, the framework could support and help to achieve sustainable goals.

To integrate the TBL framework in this thesis, the SDGs could be categorized into the separate 3Ps. This shall be done by investigating the annual reports of the six chosen companies. This will be considered via the last sub-question:

“Into which triple bottom line’s 3Ps can the selected SDGs be categorized?”

The sub-questions shall be conducted in the fourth chapter of this thesis. Through the use of a conceptual model, the link between the different key concepts is visualized [see Figure 4]. This model will be applied for both for-profit organizations using CSR programs within their business strategy and social enterprises. As a result, an overview of those two types of organizations could be examined.

(20)

Eventually, the emphasis of the sustainable goals and objectives from both types of organizations on the different Ps will be examined. To measure the impact, all 3Ps have a diverse unit of measure (Hall, 2011). Profits could be measured in dollars, but to measure social capital and environmental or ecological health could be a challenge. This will be described in the discussion section of this thesis.

(21)

3. Methodology

In this chapter the method that has been used for this research will be described. Because this thesis is based on a literature research, the methodology will not be as large as a quantitative or qualitative research method. The advantages and disadvantages of this approach will be shortly outlined, and existing literature about this method will be described and discussed. The following paragraphs describe how this research is done in different steps. First, the data and relevant articles have been gathered. Secondly, a selection of the most relevant articles and data was made. Finally, the most relevant data has been interpreted and used in this research with the aim to formulate an answer to the main research question of this thesis.

3.1 Data sources and gathering

The first step of gathering articles was a search in different databases on the topics relevant to this thesis. However, only the key topics have been used to filter within these databases. The key topics include the following: social entrepreneurship, corporate social responsibility (CSR), sustainable development goals (SDGs) and the triple-bottom line (TBL) approach. These key concepts were explained and described in the theoretical framework. To find enough literature with the content of the given key concepts, the search has been done in four different databases, namely: Web of Science, JSTOR, Google Scholar and Science Direct. Different academic articles from different journals were briefly investigated. Subsequently, according to an ordered manner, every article that was found interesting according to the title and keywords, was put in an Excel file. In total, 20 searches were done with 96 results of academic (research) articles [see appendix: Table 1].

3.2 Data selection

After the data gathering, data was selected according to relevance. After reviewing all titles, keywords and abstracts of the 96 articles that were found, 25 articles were selected to use for this research. The articles chosen are those that describe the relationship between two key concepts. The Excel file describes why each article was found useful or not [see appendix: Table 1]. In many cases, an article was not useful because it focused too much on an aspect that is not a key concept or was too specific about a country, business, etc.. In

(22)

addition, other, more relevant articles were added later during the analysis, to substantiate arguments.

Besides the academic articles, annual reports of social enterprises and for-profit organizations were used to sketch an image to clarify some situations. The annual reports were issued from Dutch companies in the food and beverage sector. The data of the following three for-profit organizations was issued by their transparency in pronouncing complete and correct data. The Dutch Ministry of Economics made a rank of Dutch organizations and their transparency. The first three for-profit organizations on this list that operate in the food and beverage industry were selected. These three organizations include the following: Vitens N.V., Heineken N.V. and Albron Nederland B.V. (Ministerie van Economische Zaken, 2017). The organizations at the top of the transparency benchmark were selected in order to gather sufficient and reliable data.

For social enterprises there was no rank made by the Dutch Ministry of Economics. Therefore, three Dutch popular social enterprises with extensive annual reports were chosen at random, after which the availability and usefulness of the annual reports was investigated. The three chosen social enterprises are: Tony Chocolonely’s, Fair Trade Original and Dopper. Eventually, those organizations and their annual reports contributed to this research by providing examples and clarifications to the existing literature. Furthermore, a selection of the five SDGs was easier to make because of the emphasis on the food and beverage industry.

3.3 Data analysis

As previously mentioned, this thesis provides a secondary literature research approach. Therefore, the investigation was done on a qualitative level. The research is based on a coding method, more specifically the ‘grounded theory’ method. According to Strauss and Corbin (2008), the grounded theory is a qualitative research method, based on the use of coding. The first step in this method is to start with open coding, in which data parts with the same content are labelled in order to create different categories (Saunders, et al., 2007). The second step is to look for the relationships between those categories. This is called axial coding (Saunders, et al., 2007). The last step is selective coding, in which the goal is to classify a main category. In the end, the grounded theory is developed by the selective codes (Strauss et al., 2008).

During the use of this research method, some limitations became apparent. Firstly, the coding method is time consuming because of all the different steps. Because of the time intensive nature of this methodology, the second step of axial coding was not conducted in

(23)

detail. The first and third steps of the method were found more important for this research. As a result, the methods of open and selective coding were mostly used. The codes that were used for this thesis can be found in the code scheme [see appendix: Table 2]. Within this scheme the categorized codes are listed. An implication of the grounded theory methodology is to end with little significant results. Therefore, this research is more descriptive, explaining the difference between for-profit organizations and social enterprises. This thesis provides an overview of the different situations of both types of organizations pursing the SDGs and their influence on the TBL. Because of the extensive existing research concerning social enterprises and CSR programs pursued by for-profit organizations, it is more relevant to consider an overview of both types of organizations and their emphasis on the separate 3Ps of the TBL.

The academic articles were analyzed by the coding scheme mentioned above. This was done through coding software Atlas.ti. By using this software, the codes that were given to relevant parts of the articles were managed and saved in an orderly way. In the next chapter all relevant data that was found during the analysis will be described and presented.

(24)

4. Analysis

In the following paragraphs the results of the analysis and review will be presented. As mentioned in the theoretical framework, the paragraphs will be in line with the sub-questions. Paragraph 4.1 will focus directly on the most common and important Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) pursued within the food and beverage industry. The paragraph will focus more specifically on what kind of SDGs both types of organizations prefer and pursue. Based on the information obtained from existing literature and the annual reports from the six selected companies, the five most important and commonly pursued SDGs shall be identified. Paragraph 4.2 shall examine the objectives and goals of the three social enterprises, related to the selected SDGs in the previous paragraph. The activities taken by those enterprises shall be looked at. Subsequently, the separate SDGs will be categorized into the triple bottom line’s 3Ps. The same shall be done for paragraph 4.3. However, instead of the social enterprises the three for-profit organizations will be emphasized.

4.1 Selection of the SDGs

As indicated above, this paragraph will focus on the most common SDGs within the food and beverage industry. Jonkute and Staniskis (2016) argue that the communication, managing and controlling of sustainable development within companies could be reviewed in their annual reports. To bring this into practice, a few companies within the food and beverage industry will be emphasized. To narrow the scope of this research, only Dutch organizations are investigated. As described in the methodology chapter, three social enterprises (Tony’s Chocolonely, Fair Trade Original, Dopper) and three for-profit corporations (Heineken N.V., Vitens N.V., Albron B.V.) have been selected. By using their annual reports as a guide, the most common and important SDGs in the food and beverage industry can be identified.

4.1.1 Appearance within Social Enterprises

Goal setting is a crucial part of the strategy process within all kinds of organizations (Palmer & Flanagan, 2016). In their article, Palmer and Flanagan (2016) state that goals could provide as controlling methods to judge performance and will lead and motivate an organization and its employees. They mention that it is easy for organizations to make those goals, although some organizations will not follow them up which results in empty promises.

(25)

For organizations which intend to set sustainability goals, the implementation of developing strategies are needed to attain them. In addition, corrective action may be needed. Hence, only continuous efforts by organizations will lead them to really contribute to a sustainable world (Palmer & Flanagan, 2016). Therefore, the SDGs could help in the strategy process and lead or motivate the organization.

As mentioned in paragraph 2.1, social enterprises are concerned with social and/or environmental issues. To achieve their mission, the SDGs could constitute as a framework to achieve sustainability targets. In the annual reports of different Dutch social enterprises, the most important goals will be identified. In addition, the most common goals will be selected and compared with the most common goals of the three for-profit corporations.

4.1.1.1 Tony’s Chocolonely

Tony’s Chocolonely is an enterprise focused on the production of cocoa and chocolate (bars). Their main purpose is to end slavery and child labor within the cocoa industry (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). Customers could for instance notice this by the appearance of the chocolate bars which are divided into unequal pieces. In this way, Tony’s refers to the inequality within the cocoa industry. In their annual report they state that modern slavery and child labor are caused by poverty (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). Cocoa farmers in Western Africa could end up in a poverty trap, because of the low prices of cocoa. Farmers are unable to support their families, causing that they agree with low payments to earn some money. Consequently, they could not afford education for their children which could result in child labor (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). The mission of Tony’s Chocolonely therefore is as follows: “Together we make 100% slave free the norm in chocolate”. They state that money is not their mission, only a tool to realize their vision. As described in paragraph 2.1, most social enterprises focus on their social mission (Prabhu, 1999). The social mission of Tony’s is represented throughout their whole annual report. Their strategy to contribute to the well-being of the farmers and their families is clearly shown (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016).

Tony’s accepted the sustainable coalition agreement, causing that their policies are determined based on the SDGs from the United Nations. Hence, the SDGs are described in their report. As mentioned above, Tony’s main goal is to end poverty because it is the source of child labor and modern slavery. SDG 1 aims to end poverty in all its forms everywhere, as mentioned in the theoretical framework. Other important goals described by Tony’s are the 4th, 8th, 12th, and 13th SDG [see Figure 1]. They mention in their annual report that besides

(26)

combating poverty, environment and climate change is an important part of their business strategy (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). By keeping the environmental impact of their activities in control, they try to reduce their negative impact on the climate. Besides, Tony’s is focusing on decent work and economic growth (SDG 8) for the cocoa farmers in Western Africa. The bad payment conditions for cocoa farmers is also a consequence of the low market price of cocoa (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). Likewise Tony’s is also concerned with the 12th SDG: Responsible consumption and production.

4.1.1.2 Fair Trade Original

Fair Trade Original is a Dutch social enterprise and focuses on their products through five factors: (1) locally made; (2) for the farmer; (3) with each other; (4) trust in the future; and (5) for people not for profit. The last factor is also meant for people that are focused on eating natural and looking after the farmers instead of the price of the product (Fair Trade Original, 2016). The mission of Fair Trade Original is to provide more fair-trade products in supermarkets, create opportunities for local farmers, transparency among international supply chains and involvement of consumers. In short, they would like “to achieve social impact by setting up supply chains in emerging countries” (Fair Trade Original, 2016). This mission shows the social entrepreneurial approach of Fair Trade Original as described in paragraph 2.1 of this thesis. They focus on social change and development of social value (Fair Trade Original, 2016; Prabhu, 1999). To maintain this vision, they emphasize their social mission throughout their annual report. From the annual report we can assume that Fair Trade Original emphasizes the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 8th, 12th and 13th SDGs [see Figure 1; Table 3]. The goals are not mentioned by the enterprise, but are derived from the information and different activities stated in the annual report.

4.1.1.3 Dopper

The last social enterprise which is investigated for this thesis is Dopper. Dopper provides a sustainable design for water bottles to create awareness regarding single-use plastic waste. The enterprise states that the bottle is the message. A message “to stop people from using PET bottles and make people rethink about the way of using products” (Dopper, 2016). In their report, they mention that making profit is not their main purpose. Dopper calls itself a benefit corporation with the aim to make an impact. Therefore they organize campaigns and coordinate local ambassadors to create awareness among society (Dopper, 2016). Their

(27)

annual report consists of videos. Out of those video’s the various goals of the enterprise could be divided into different SDGs, namely the 3rd, 6th, 12th and 14th SDGs. This could be derived from the information that they try to ensure healthy lives (SDG 3), by providing clean drinking water for all (SDG 6), through the production of sustainable bottles (SDG 12) which is intended to make the oceans, seas and marine resources clean of plastic (SDG 14) (Dopper, 2016). For this reason, there could be assumed that Dopper focuses on both the environmental and social mission. As mentioned in paragraph 2.1, social enterprises can also have an environmental mission or both social and environmental (Kerr, 2007).

Summarized, the three social enterprises described above all have a social and/or environmental mission. All of them state that making profit is not their main objective, only a tool to realize their mission. In the next paragraph, the for-profit organizations and their missions and main objectives will be discussed. Subsequently, the most common and important SDGs pursued within the food and beverage industry based on these samples can be identified.

4.1.2 Appearance within for-profit organizations emulating CSR programs

Besides the social enterprises, for-profit corporations set up goals to lead their organizations and motivate their employees as well (Palmer & Flanagan, 2016). For those corporations, most often the profit will remain the main purpose though. Nevertheless, because of the increasing interest in sustainable development, many for-profit organizations implement the CSR approach within their business strategies nowadays. Moreover, as mentioned in paragraph 2.2, if CSR is implemented well it could gain a competitive advantage for the company (Burke & Logsdon, 1996). In this paragraph, the three chosen companies are investigated by their annual reports and their sustainability reviews.

4.1.2.1 Vitens N.V.

Vitens N.V. is active in the beverage industry. They strive to provide good and clean drinking water and therefore their mission states “to produce, distribute and deliver drinking water of top quality” (Vitens N.V., 2017). Vitens focuses on two strategic goals: (1) Customer excellence; (2) Sustainable use of their resources and infrastructure. This indicates their interest in customer experience and sustainability. In their annual report, they already introduce the SDGs they would like to achieve. The SDGs presented by Vitens are the 6th, 9th, 11th, 13th and 15th SDGs. Pursuing the 6th SDG is obvious as a water distributing- and

(28)

producing company. The goal act as their main objective and therefore Vitens would like to ensure availability and sustainable management of water for all (Vitens N.V., 2017).

4.1.2.2 Heineken N.V.

The sustainability review of Heineken is part of their business strategy (Heineken N.V., 2017). They describe their sustainable performance in the report called ‘Brewing a Better World’. In the report, Heineken directly refers to the SDGs. An alignment with the SDGs of the United Nations was made whilst focusing on the long-term. The sustainable mission of Heineken is “to make a difference in areas which needs it the most and inspire their brands to align their brand purpose with environmental and social issues.” (Heineken N.V., 2017). To achieve this mission, Heineken emphasizes: climate action (SDG 7, SDG 13); access to water (SDG 6); good health (SDG 3, SDG 8); and sustainable production (SDG 2; SDG 12). Those goals are put together into a framework based on the strategy and mission of Heineken itself [see Figure 5]. Heineken focuses on environmental and social norms while performing day-to-day activities, even though their main purpose is to earn profit (Heineken

(29)

N.V., 2017). Therefore Heineken commits to the CSR approach as described in the theoretical framework of this thesis [see paragraph 2.2].

4.1.2.3 Albron Netherlands B.V.

Although Vitens and Heineken are active in the beverage industry, Albron B.V. is more focused on the food industry. Albron’s main activity is food catering. They emphasize healthy food produced and delivered with ‘common sense’ (Albron B.V., 2016). In their sustainability report they focus on three main themes, being: people, food & beverages, and environment & surrounding. For each theme a mission is described. Subsequently a few SDGs could be linked to those missions. The SDGs derived from the people mission are the 3rd, 5th and 8th. Food and beverage missions pursue the 12th SDG. Lastly, the mission of environment and surrounding could be pursued through the 6th, 7th, 12th and 13th SDGs. In the end, their main vision is “to create every day valuable moments for all involved, from a positive perspective.” (Albron B.V., 2016).

Overall, there is a clear CSR approach among the three for-profit organizations. All three organizations have a sustainable report within their annual report. Nevertheless, there is a distinction with the social enterprises which show their social and/or environmental mission throughout their whole report. In the next paragraph, the most important and common SDGs pursued within the food and beverage industry, according to the six above described organizations, shall be presented. Furthermore, an overview of the individual organizations and their missions shall be made.

4.1.3 The most important and common SDGs pursued in the food and drink industry

After the investigation of all six annual reports, the most important and common goals per individual company have been described above. Some companies already state the SDGs they are focusing on (Tony’s Chocolonely, Vitens, N.V., Heineken N.V.). However, for the other companies the SDGs are estimated based on their objectives and information given in their annual reports. In Table 3 a short overview of the companies and their missions, strategy and most important SDGs is conducted [see Table 3].

(30)

Table 3: The different organizations within the food and drink industry, retrieved from the annual reports of 2016 and

20171

Organization Mission Strategy Main SDGs

Tony’s Chocolonely Together we make 100% slave free the norm in chocolate

Five sourcing principles: 1. Traceable beans 2. Higher price 3. Strong Farmers 4. The long-term 5. Better quality and

productivity

Social enterprise: “Money is not our goal, simply a mean to realize our vision”.

SDG 1 SDG 4 SDG 8 SDG 12 SDG 13

Fair Trade Original To achieve social impact by setting up supply chains in emerging countries

Five fixed ‘ingredients’ to contribute to social impact:

1. Locally made 2. For the farmer 3. With each other 4. Confidence in the

future

5. For people not for profit

Social enterprise: “Fair Trade Original is a

foundation – without profit objective”. SDG 1 SDG 2 SDG 3 SDG 8 SDG 12 SDG 13

Dopper “The bottle is the

message”.

To stop using PET bottles: “With this bottle we can make it a lifestyle and make people aware and rethink about the way of using products.” “Less plastic waste and more clean drinking water all across the globe.”

They want to create

awareness all over the world about the impact of single-use plastic. - Selling Dopper Bottles - Create awareness through projects and media. Social enterprise: “The aim is not to make a profit – above all we want to make an impact.”

SDG 3 SDG 6 SDG 12 SDG 14

Vitens N.V. To produce, distribute and deliver drinking water of top quality.

Vitens has two strategic goals:

1. Customer Excellence 2. Sustainable use of

their resources and infrastructure to provide people with reliable and good

SDG 6 SDG 9 SDG 11 SDG 13 SDG 15

1_{Information derived from the annual reports of: Tony’s Chocolonely (2016); Fair Trade Original (2016); Dopper (2016);}

(31)

drinking water for the long term. For-profit organizations with CSR approach

Heineken N.V. In 2018 they target to be the most fast growing business in naturally brewed drinks and a business with the newest and best innovations. In short they want to be: ‘In Ieders Glas, In Ieders Hart’

Sustainability strategy/ mission:

Intend to focus on: “areas where we can make the biggest difference and inspire our brands to align their brand purpose with environmental and social issues”.

The Heineken strategy is built around four business priorities for action:

1. Deliver top line growth

2. Drive end2end performance

3. Brew a Better World

4. Engage and develop our people

For-profit organization with CSR approach SDG 2 SDG 3 SDG 6 SDG 7 SDG 8 SDG 12 SDG 13

Albron B.V. Every day, Albron creates valuable moments for all involved, from a positive perspective.

‘Albron. Kom Verder.’ Their strategic path was extended by: - A SWOT analysis - Analyzing trends, customers and stakeholders Their emphasis: - People

- Food and Drinks - Environment and

Surrounding For-profit organization with CSR approach SDG 3 SDG 5 SDG 6 SDG 7 SDG 8 SDG 12 SDG 13

The SDGs which are mostly pursued by the six companies are:

1. SDG 3, ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages;

2. SDG 6, ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all; 3. SDG 8, promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and

productive employment and decent work for all;

4. SDG 12, ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns; 5. SDG 13, take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.

Those five selected SDGs out of the seventeen SDGs mentioned in the theoretical framework, are most common within the food and beverage industry in the Netherlands. The selection is

(32)

derived from the annual reports of the six companies. It does have to be noted that this is only based on 3 social enterprises and 3 for-profit organizations. However, as mentioned in the methodology the for-profit companies were chosen by their transparency of data formulation within their annual reports. The social enterprises have been chosen randomly. Transparency is also important among social enterprises. For instance, the Merchandise and Sourcing director of Albert Heijn mentioned, nowadays customers value the way businesses and products are transparent (Fair Trade Original, 2016). This means the way the product is produced, where it comes from, living conditions of animals or humans and the environmental impact.

The next paragraph will investigate the selected SDGs. The activities of the different companies to pursue their goals will be described. An overview in how social enterprises and for-profit organizations implement the SDGs, describe the SDGs or pursue the SDGs will be given.

4.2 The activities of Social Enterprises to pursue the SDGs

As mentioned in the theoretical framework of this thesis, the triple bottom line was developed to measure sustainability and performance within the corporate world (Hall, 2011). In their study, Palmer and Flanagan (2016) mention that at the heart of sustainable strategies, the triple bottom line, common goals of stakeholders, and long-term horizons function as a basis. Adding of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) could lead a sustainable strategy and provide organizations desirable performance results. By categorizing the SDGs into the triple bottom line’s 3Ps (People, Planet, Profit), Palmer and Flanagan (2016) state that this action could function as a strategy to reveal insights and lead organizations. However, due to a simultaneous pursuance of economic, social, and environmental goals by social enterprises, Gillis and James (2015) state that there is a stronger relationship between social entrepreneurship and the triple bottom line in contrast to for-profit organizations.

In this paragraph, the selected SDGs from the previous paragraph will be investigated to categorize them into the triple bottom line’s 3Ps. Each SDG shall be described separately. The appearance of those SDGs within social enterprises will be looked at more closely. Examples will be given on the basis of the three social enterprises: Tony’s Chocolonely, Fair Trade Original and Dopper. Furthermore, a progress report is made every year by the United Nations. This report will be used to underpin some progress or activities.

(33)

4.2.1 SDG 3

According to the United Nations, the health targets of the third SDG made an impressive progress since 2000 (United Nations, 2017). Nevertheless actions to realize those targets have to increase, especially in regions with the highest burden of diseases. Fair Trade Original focuses on the health of their customers by ensuring biological and healthy food (Fair Trade Original, 2016). They try to add as less artificial additives as possible to their products. If that is not possible for certain reasons, they look for the most healthy alternative. Furthermore, they clearly provide information about the content of their products.

To contribute in developing countries, every activity and product has to satisfy the food safety system accredited by the GFSI (Global Food Safety Initiative), whereby the well-being of society is taken into account (Fair Trade Original, 2016). Furthermore, as a social enterprise, Fair Trade Original is also committed to the wellbeing of its employees and local farmers. They focus on fair trade and pursue fair salaries. By giving people the opportunity to organize and help them with their financial matters, health could be improved (Klapper, El-Zoghbi, & Hess, 2016). By providing financial inclusion, people are given the ability to manage medical expenses. According to Klapper et al. (2016), the main reason of poverty is because of payments on health care through out-of-pocket money.

The objectives and conducted activities result in the categorization of the third SDG into the first P of the TBL. In line with the descriptions above, the third SDG focuses on the well-being of all people (local farmers, employees, etc.).

4.2.2 SDG 6

“Access to safe water and sanitation and sound management of freshwater ecosystems are essential to human health and to environmental sustainability and economic prosperity”, was stated by the United Nations in 2017 in their progress report. This goal is pursued by many businesses within the beverage industry. Dopper, for example, created different programs to contribute to water projects (Dopper, 2016).

Dopper started a foundation - The Dopper Foundation - and donated money to the Changemaker Challenge. This challenge was a program for master students to conduct ground-breaking research into water and plastic issues (Dopper, 2016). Additionally, significant amounts of money were donated to water projects in Nepal, because clean drinking water is a precondition before introducing sustainable alternatives for bottled water.

Because of the lack of access to clean water and sanitation, severe health problems could occur within developing countries (Klapper et al., 2016). Many children die from

(34)

waterborne diseases. Another negative side-effect is the dropout rate on schools of girls after puberty, due to a lack of enclosed toilets. In their article about the SDGs, Klapper et al. (2016) mention that the goals which try to achieve clean water and sanitation, and affordable and clean energy have a significant impact on people’s quality of life. Therefore the impact of the 6th SDG should be categorized as the first ‘P’: people.

4.2.3 SDG 8

The targets set by the United Nations under the eight SDG are composed to increase labor productivity, to reduce the unemployment rate for young people and improving access to financial services. Namely, the financial services and benefits could be essential to the contribution of sustained and inclusive economic growth (United Nations, 2017). This could be a major help for individuals and organizations to manage changes. For instance: changes in income, deal with cash flow fluctuations, asset accumulation and to make productive investments. The United Nations stated that there was an increase in access to financial services of 55% worldwide from 2010 to 2015 (United Nations, 2017).

Fair Trade Original is focusing on fair-trade where farmers get a rightful share (Fair Trade Original, 2016). Therefore access to financial services could help farmers to manage their businesses. Awareness and growth of Fair Trade Original is necessary to fulfill their missions and to have an impact. They help individual farmers to compete and stand against the larger companies. In their article, Klapper, El-Zoghbi and Hess (2016) argue that the exclusion from financial systems and services of the poor is the result of a weak economic growth. Although the income of the world’s population increased over the last two decades, the gap between rich and poor remains at its highest level. To perceive higher returns on capital for all people, the access to financial services and institutions has to be made more accessible. According to Klapper et al. (2016), developed accessibility could lead to increase in people’s income and consequently have an effect on the economic growth.

Tony’s Chocolonely also emphasizes the importance of financial circumstances of the farmers (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). They are committed to the well-being of the farmers and therefore economic growth is of great importance. The price of cocoa is too low according to Tony’s to give the farmers a proper salary. Due to a decreased global market price, there is a negative effect on the farm gate price. The farm gate price is the guaranteed price farmers receive per kilogram of cocoa (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). However, Tony’s think there is a possibility for cocoa farmers to earn a living income. The contribution of Tony’s is the increased price of cocoa butter. By making their beans traceable, an additional premium is

(35)

added for the farmers. Because of the increasing price, farmers’ income will rise too. As a result of the successes and solid financial outcomes, other chocolate companies could be inspired and may also follow Tony’s example of having attention for the well-being of the farmers and their income. Eventually economic growth could occur among the local farmers. In short, both enterprises contribute to the achievement of the 8th SDG. They are concerned with local farmers and earn the fair amount of income to eventually decrease the gap between the poor and the rich (Klapper et al., 2016). Therefore this goal could be ascribed to ‘People’ and ‘Profit’ [see Table 4].

4.2.4 SDG 12

To ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns, social enterprises within the food and beverage industry are aware that they need to focus on the 12th SDG. According to the United Nations (2017), a strong national framework is required to accomplish this goal within business practices, consumer behavior, etc. State members of the United Nations are combating the challenges linked to air, soil and water pollutions. Most members are part of at least one of those conventions (United Nations, 2017). This is also shown by social enterprises in the food and beverage industry. It is a central goal within the industry that focuses on sustainable development. The packaging of products and properly dealing with waste is a common theme within the food and beverage industry.

For example, Tony’s Chocolonely is, besides the well-being of farmers, also concerned with the environment (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016). They focus on sustainable packaging of their products because they try to limit their impact on the environment as much as possible. By choosing different packaging materials, their preferences lie with locally produced raw materials. Hereby, the option to use recycled materials has their priority. However, they still struggle with the use of aluminum foil (Tony’s Chocolonely, 2016).

Meanwhile, Dopper’s main focus is the recycling of plastic. They want to create awareness among people and society about the negative side effects of single-use plastic (Dopper, 2016). The enormous amount of plastic pollution in oceans and on land has a negative impact on the environment. Therefore, recycling could contribute to sustainable production and development. To create awareness, Dopper started different projects and sponsored various events. They derived a silver Cradle2Cradle certificate in 2016, which indicates their responsibility for handling water, energy and raw materials (Dopper, 2016).