As there has been no evidence of the kind of environmental decoupling necessary to allow for green economic growth, academic and activist discussions alike have turned to exploring post-growth pathways. Such a transformation entails a significant shift in economic institutions, yet post-growth analyses of what is problematic about businesses and how to resolve these issues are piecemeal. This article offers an overview and synthesis of key findings in the emerging post-growth business literature. Using institutional analysis, it develops a framework that conceptually ties together five dimensions of business that have been identified as most important for post-growth transformations: relationship-to-profit, incorporation structure, governance structure, strategy, and size and geographical scope. The intention of developing this five-dimensions framework is to offer a more coherent and concrete theoretical basis for ongoing discussions about which types of business are compatible, or incompatible, with post-growth pathways.

How does the relationship between business and profit affect social and ecological sustainability? Many sustainability scholars have identified competition for profit in the market as a key driver of social exploitation and environmental destruction. Yet, studies rarely question whether businesses and markets have to be profit-seeking. The widespread existence of not-for-profit forms of business, which approach profit as a means to achieving social benefit, suggests that there are other ways of organizing business and markets that might be more sustainable.

In this thesis, I use a critical institutional economics lens and systems thinking to synthesize existing theory and knowledge about how business, markets, and profit affect sustainability outcomes, in order to explain how alternative approaches to these institutions might produce different outcomes. The result is a new theory about how relationship-to-profit (the legal difference between for-profit and not-for-profit forms of business) plays a key role in the sustainability of an economy, due to the ways in which it guides and constrains actors’ behavior, and drives larger market dynamics.

In Paper 1, I develop a conceptual framework for understanding the tradeoffs and synergies between profit and social-ecological sustainability. I show how profit-seeking strategies can be examined to assess whether they derive profit from: efficiency gains; willing and informed contributions from social stakeholders; or exploitation of social or ecological stakeholders. These bounded sources of profit imply limits to profit. Therefore, in order for businesses and markets to be sustainable, they should treat profit as a means rather than an end in itself. In Paper 2, I explain that whether profit is treated as a means or an end manifests through both voluntary objectives (i.e., if a business explicitly pursues profit as a goal) and financial rights (i.e., the right or obligation to distribute profit to private owners). 

Some forms of business encourage profit-as-an-end more than others. In Paper 3, I outline ideal types of for-profit and not-for-profit economies, and describe the expected dynamics of these systems based on the regulative aspects of relationship-to-profit. The legal purpose, ownership (i.e., private financial rights), and corresponding investment structures of for-profit forms of business all encourage firms to treat profit as an end. The pursuit of unlimited financial gain and the private distribution of the surplus by for-profit businesses tend to drive the growth of consumerism, environmental degradation, inequality, market concentration, and political capture. In a not-for-profit type of economy, businesses do not have a financial gain purpose or private financial rights. Profit in such a system is used as a means to achieve social benefit. This results in higher levels of equality and opens up the space for more effective sustainability interventions.

Yet, relationship-to-profit is only one dimension of business that is important for sustainability. In Paper 4, I develop a framework to structure analyses and wider discussions of post-growth business around five key dimensions of business: (1) relationship-to-profit, (2) incorporation structure, (3) governance, (4) strategy, and (5) size and geographical scope. 

The theory developed in this thesis offers an explanation of how key institutional elements of business and markets drive social and ecological sustainability outcomes.

This conceptual article contributes to the post-growth strand of political ecology literature, which seeks to find sustainable ways of organizing the economy that do not require economic growth. It explores the idea that transitioning to post-growth societies requires a transition in the relationship-to-profit of business. I first conceptualize relationship-to-profit as the intersection of purpose, investment, and ownership of firms. Specifically, for-profit business structures entail a financial gain purpose, private ownership, and unlimited returns on investment; whereas not-for-profit business structures have a social benefit purpose, collective ownership, and limited returns on investment. I then outline ideal types of for-profit and not-for-profit economies, based on the differences between these two kinds of relationship-to-profit. The first ideal type shows how the for-profit business structure drives consumerism, economic growth, and ecological harm, as well as inequality and political capture, preventing post-growth transitions. These dynamics might be slowed down by businesses that seek to balance private financial gain with social benefit (known as dual-purpose businesses). The second ideal type describes the dynamics that might be expected in an economy consisting of not-for-profit businesses, which have a legal mandate to pursue only social benefit. This analysis explains how transitioning from for-profit to not-for-profit forms of business might change some of the most problematic dynamics of the economy, allowing for post-growth transformations. A brief discussion of the possible shortcomings of a not-for-profit economy is also offered.

This paper discusses tradeoffs between sustainability objectives and profit, examining the implications of the argument that sustainable businesses should see profit as a means, not an end. It highlights that there are two main ways in which a business can see profit as a means: first, by maintaining its focus on a different end (namely social and ecological objectives); and secondly, by ensuring that profit is not an end in itself by excluding private financial rights. These two criteria are applied to examine a range of theoretical approaches, incorporation structures, and third-party certifications that have been developed with the aim of making business sustainable. The discussion highlights inconsistencies, ambiguities, and shortfalls of these approaches and outlines ways to advance the theory and practice of sustainable business.

Background: The Planetary Boundaries concept (PBc) has emerged as a key global sustainability concept in international sustainable development arenas. Initially presented as an agenda for global sustainability research, it now shows potential for sustainability governance. Weuse the fact that it is widely cited in scientific literature (>3500 citations) and an extensively studied concept to analyse how it has been used and developed since its first publication. Design: From the literature that cites the PBc, we select those articles that have the terms 'planetary boundaries' or 'safe operating space' in either title, abstract or keywords. Weassume that this literature substantively engages with and develops the PBc. Results: Wefind that 6% of the citing literature engages with the concept. Within this fraction of the literature we distinguish commentaries-that discuss the context and challenges to implementing the PBc, articles that develop the core biogeophysical concept and articles that apply the concept by translating to sub-global scales and by adding a human component to it. Applied literature adds to the concept by explicitly including society through perspectives of impacts, needs, aspirations and behaviours. Discussion: Literature applying the concept does not yet include the more complex, diverse, cultural and behavioural facet of humanity that is implied in commentary literature. Wesuggest there is need for a positive framing of sustainability goals-as a Safe Operating Space rather than boundaries. Key scientific challenges include distinguishing generalised from context-specific knowledge, clarifying which processes are generalizable and which are scalable, and explicitly applying complex systems' knowledge in the application and development of the PBc. We envisage that opportunities to address these challenges will arise when more human social dimensions are integrated, as we learn to feed the global sustainability vision with a plurality of bottom-up realisations of sustainability.

This thesis takes a post-growth perspective in order to answer the overarching research question:  How does business profit-orientation affect social-ecological sustainability? It is the result of putting different pieces of the puzzle together - across the microeconomic and macroeconomic scales - in order to build a stronger conceptual and theoretical basis for sustainable post-growth economies.

In Part 1, I describe what a post-growth perspective entails, as an inherently social-ecological systems approach. I give a brief overview of the state-of-the-art of post-growth thinking in terms of problem identification, drivers of growth, and solutions. I also identify important gaps in terms of the way post-growth scholarship has approached profit and business, particularly regarding profit-orientation. I also identify an important gap with regards to the lack of a post-growth theory of the firm. Part 2 describes my research objectives and the questions that I aim to answer in this study, as well as a brief description of the two manuscripts of the thesis in relation to these questions. In Part 3, I describe the ontological, epistemological, and methodological underpinnings of my approach. I also detail the steps I have taken in building up the concepts and theory that my manuscripts put forward. 

Part 4 describes the key results in the manuscripts and contributions to the relevant research communities. In essence, Manuscript 1 provides a conceptualization of profit-orientation as the nexus between the purpose, ownership, and investment of a firm. It then outlines how profit-orientation drives certain dynamics of the aggregate economy, through the development of ideal types of economies (i.e., a for-profit economy, a hybrid economy, and a not-for-profit economy). Key contributions of this paper include a clarification of what profit-orientation is and its role in driving consumerism, economic growth, inequality, market concentration, and political capture.  Building on this first paper, Manuscript 2 presents the diverse and complex aspects of business that are commonly mentioned in the sustainable business and post-growth literature, and offers a framework that organizes all of these aspects into five dimensions: profit-orientation; incorporation structure; governance structure; strategy; and size and geographical scope. Key contributions of this paper include simplifying and ordering the complexity of the firm, as well as offering a common terminology for discussing, analyzing, and assessing a business’s potential to contribute to post-growth transformations. I end this part with a brief discussion of how the papers complement each other, and contextualize this thesis in the broader sphere of sustainability and social-ecological resilience efforts. In Part 5, I describe the other manuscripts I am writing for my doctoral work and I explore future possibilities for building on this thesis.

This article seeks to unpack how the generation of profit impacts social and ecological sustainability. It begins by framing profit as not necessarily sustainable or exploitative. Social and ecological inputs and impacts are necessary for economic processes and when social and ecological stakeholders are not compensated for their contributions to the process, they can be considered unpaid inputs and, thus, sources of profit. This often overlaps with exploitation of stakeholders, which occurs when one party financially benefits at the expense of another party. The paper examines how profit is generated by several common types of profit-seeking strategies. In doing so, a conceptual framework is developed that clarifies how profit-seeking strategies generate profit from four basic sources: efficiency gains; willing and informed contributions from social stakeholders; exploitation of social stakeholders; and exploitation of nature. The fact that there are a bounded number of sources of benign profit (and that there are limits to those sources) indicates that there are limits to profit. It also indicates that much of the profit generated today comes from exploitation, which helps explain the sustainability crisis. This implies that profit should not be pursued as an end by businesses and reveals some inherent perils of a profit-driven economy. Thus, the paper adds clarity to the social and ecological sources and limits of profit, and gives guidance for how profit should be treated in a sustainable economy.