Education and Technology as Levers for Sustainable Change

A New Framework of Interaction Between Business and Environment
  • Carlo Alberto Amadei
  • Monica Baraldi BorgidaEmail author
Part of the Studies on Entrepreneurship, Structural Change and Industrial Dynamics book series (ESID)


In the last decade, researchers have increasingly analyzed the interaction between business and environment under new perspectives. We join this effort focusing on the positive change that can arise from new collaborative opportunities between business and the environment, in order to embrace environmental challenges and pursue reciprocal benefits. We evaluate this synergetic activity using system thinking which identifies pivotal center, has the power to originate connections, and regulates a system’s behavior. In this regard, we believe education and technology are among the most important elements in the system. They play a major role in determining and weighing the interactions between environment and business. The two scenarios presented here are (1) the status quo system and (2) a system in which technology and education are empowered and serve as leverage points to develop a more efficient use of the world resources, thus using a smaller portion of the world’s physical capacity. This last scenario focuses on one environmental sphere (water), but the same tool could be applied to other environmental aspects. We build our analysis balancing the contributions coming from both professional and academic spheres. Progress has been made to integrate sustainability into strategy, such as the adoption of science-based targets by organizations aiming to reduce the effect of climate change. The authors believe that this process explains new ways in which business and society can thrive for generations to come.


  1. Auth, K. (2015). The oceans: Resilience at risk. In The state of the world 2015 (pp. 79–91). Washington: Island Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Caradonna, J. (2014). Sustainability. A history. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, S. A., DeFrancia, K. L., & Martinez, H. J. (2016). A positive vision of sustainability. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 6(1), 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Commission, B. (1987). Towards sustainable development. In V. Hauff (Ed.), Report of the world commission on environment and development: Our common future (p. 41). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Davidson, C. H., Johnson, C., Lizarralde, G., Dikmen, N., & Sliwinski, A. (2007). Truths and myths about community participation in post-disaster housing projects. Habitat International, 31, 100–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dowell, G., & Muthulingam, S. (2016). Will firms go green if it pays? The impact of disruption, cost, and external factors on the adoption of environmental initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 38(6), 1287–1304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835–2857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ernst & Young, & Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship. (2013). Value of sustainability reporting [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from$FILE/EY-Value-of-Sustainability-Reporting.pdf
  9. Foods, W. (2012). Nutrition for kids and teens [Online]. Accessed December 1, 2018, from
  10. Gambino, L. (2015). The Guardian [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  11. GRI. (2018a). Global reporting initiative [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  12. GRI. (2018b). Sustainable development goals [Online]. Accessed December 1, 2018, from
  13. Hackman, R. (2015). The Guardian [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  14. Hanna-Attisha, M., LaChance, J., Sadler, R. C., & Schnepp, A. C. (2016). Elevated blood lead levels in children associated with the flint drinking water crisis: A spatial analysis of risk and public health response. American Journal of Public Health, 106, 283–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harvard, U. (2018). Harvard University Center for the Environment [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  16. Hawken, P. (2017). Drawdown. The most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse global warming. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  17. Henderson, R., Gulati, R., & Tushman, M. (2015). Leading sustainable change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Institute, P. (2018). Business case for water sustainability [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  19. Irwin, E. G., et al. (2018). Bridging barriers to advance global sustainability. Nature, 1(July), 324–326.Google Scholar
  20. Jennifer, L., et al. (2017). Reframing the evidence base for policy-relevance to increase impact: A case study on forest fragmentation in the oil palm sector. Journal of Applied Ecology, 54, 731–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Knights, C. (2018). 2018 Global 100. [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  22. Kolbert, E. (2015). Fields notes from a catastrophe. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  23. Lovelock, J. (2009). The vanishing face of Gaia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  24. Matson, P., Clark, W. C., & Andersson, K. (2016). Pursuing sustainability. Princeton, NJ: Princeton.Google Scholar
  25. Mattei, U. (2013). Protecting the commons: Water, culture, and nature: The commons movement in the Italian struggle against neoliberal governance. South Atlantic Quarterly, 112(2), 366–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2014). Scarcity: The new science of having less and how it defines our lives. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  27. NCA. (2018). National climate assessment [Online]. Accessed December 1, 2018, from
  28. Paredis, C. J. J., Bishop, C., & Bodner, D. (2013). Using system dynamics for sustainable water resources management in Singapore. Procedia Computer Science, 16, 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Porter, M., & Kramer, M. K. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1), 62–77.Google Scholar
  30. Sachs, D. (2014). The age of sustainable development. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Sachs, J. (2015). The age of sustainable development. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sadler, R. G., & Evans, J. (2008). Methods and technologies to improve efficiency of water use. Water Resources Research, 44(7), W00E04.Google Scholar
  33. SASB. (2018). Sustainable accounting standard board [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  34. School, S. J. F. (2018). Sustainable Jersey for school [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  35. Sheffi, Y. (2018). Balancing green. When to embrace sustainability in a business (and when not to). Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sloan/BCG, M. (2017). Corporate sustainability at a crossroads [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  37. Sterman, J. (2000). Business dynamics: System thinking and modeling for a complex world. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  38. Tirole, J. (2017). Economics for the common good. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tubiana, C. H. A. L. (2018). Earth at risk. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  40. UN. (2015). Sustainable development goals. [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  41. UNESCO. (2010). Teaching and learning for a sustainable future [Online]. Accessed November 30, 2018, from
  42. Wang, Z., Song, H., Watkins, D. W., Ong, K. G., et al. (2015). Cyber-physical systems for water sustainability: challenges and opportunities. IEEE Communications Magazine, 53(5), 216–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Warburton, K. (2003). Deep learning and education for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 4(1), 44–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weeks, C., Delalonde, C., & Preist, C. (2016). Power law of engagement. In CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Santa Clara, CA.Google Scholar
  45. Werber, J. R., Osuji, C. O., & Elimelech, M. (2016). Materials for next-generation desalination and water purification membranes. Nature Reviews Material, 1, 44–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Winz, I., Brierley, G., & Trowsdale, S. (2009). The use of system dynamics simulation in water resources management. Water Resources Management, 23(7), 1301–1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Woo, Y., et al. (2016). Effect of powdered activated carbon on integrated submerged membrane bioreactor–nanofiltration process for wastewater reclamation. Bioresource Technology, 210, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yarime, M., et al. (2012). Establishing sustainability science in higher education institutions: Towards an integration of academic development, institutionalization, and stakeholder collaborations. Sustainability Science, 7, 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlo Alberto Amadei
    • 1
  • Monica Baraldi Borgida
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied SciencesCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Northeastern UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations