Comparision of traditional and sustainable business practices

Full text

S I L E S IA N U N I V E R S I T Y OF T E C H N O L O G Y P U B L IS H I N G H OU SE
SCIENTIFIC PAPERS OF SILESIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY 2023
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT SERIES NO. 177
http://dx.doi.org/10.29119/1641-3466.2023.177.39 http://managementpapers.polsl.pl/
COMPARISION OF TRADITIONAL AND SUSTAINABLE
1
BUSINESS PRACTICES
2
Radosław WOLNIAK1*, Wies GREBSKI2
3
1 Silesian University of Technology, Organization and Management Department, Economics and Informatics
4
Institute; rwolniak@polsl.pl, ORCID: 0000-0003-0317-9811
5
2 Penn State Hazletonne, Pennsylvania State University; wxg3@psu.edu, ORCID: 0000-0002-4684-7608
6
* Correspondence author
7
Purpose: The goal of the paper is to analyze the differences between traditional and sustainable
8
business practices.
9
Design/methodology/approach: Critical literature analysis. Analysis of international literature
10
from main databases and polish literature and legal acts connecting with researched topic.
11
Findings: The main principles of sustainable business practices include the Triple Bottom Line
12
principle, which considers people, planet, and profit; environmental stewardship; social
13
responsibility; stakeholder engagement; long-term thinking; innovation and collaboration;
14
transparency; and proactive compliance. These principles guide organizations in integrating
15
sustainability into their strategies and decision-making processes. Traditional business
16
practices, focused on short-term profitability, often neglect the environment and society.
17
In contrast, sustainable business practices emphasize long-term value creation, balance
18
economic, environmental, and social considerations, and actively mitigate environmental and
19
social impacts. They prioritize resource efficiency, eco-friendly technologies, fair labor
20
practices, and stakeholder engagement. Sustainable practices also embrace innovation,
21
transparency, and proactive compliance.
22
Originality/value: Detailed analysis of all subjects related to the problems connected with the
23
relation between traditional and sustainable business practices.
24
Keywords: Industry 4.0; business practices, sustainability, sustainable business, sustainable
25
business practices, CSR, environment.
26
Category of the paper: literature review.
27
1. Introduction
28
Sustainable business practices refer to the strategic integration of environmental, social, and
29
economic considerations into the core operations and decision-making processes of a business
30
entity. This concept is rooted in the understanding that businesses have a responsibility to not
31

672 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
only generate profit but also mitigate their negative impacts on the environment and society,
1
while simultaneously creating long-term value for stakeholders.
2
The goal of the paper is to analyze the main differences between traditional and sustainable
3
business practices.
4
2. Sustainable business practices- main concepts
5
From an environmental standpoint, sustainable business practices entail the adoption of
6
strategies and initiatives aimed at minimizing resource consumption, reducing greenhouse gas
7
emissions, and conserving biodiversity. This includes implementing energy-efficient
8
technologies, promoting the use of renewable energy sources, managing waste effectively
9
through recycling and waste reduction measures, adopting sustainable supply chain practices,
10
and considering the entire life cycle of products, from design to disposal (Liu et al., 2023).
11
The social dimension of sustainable business practices involves recognizing and addressing
12
the broader societal impacts of business activities (Sułkowski, Wolniak, 2015, 2016, 2018;
13
Wolniak, Skotnicka-Zasadzień, 2008, 2010, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2022; Wolniak, 2011, 2013,
14
2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022; Gajdzik, Wolniak, 2023; Michalak, Wolniak,
15
2023). This includes ensuring fair labor practices, providing safe and healthy working
16
conditions, promoting diversity and inclusion within the workforce, supporting local
17
communities through philanthropic activities, and engaging in responsible marketing and
18
consumer education. Businesses are encouraged to foster positive relationships with
19
stakeholders such as employees, customers, suppliers, and communities, taking into account
20
their needs and concerns (Cerciello et al., 2023).
21
Economically, sustainable business practices recognize that long-term profitability is
22
closely linked to environmental and social performance. By implementing sustainability
23
measures, businesses can achieve cost savings through improved resource efficiency, reduced
24
waste generation, and enhanced operational efficiency. Additionally, sustainable practices
25
contribute to building a positive brand reputation, increasing customer loyalty, and accessing
26
new markets that prioritize sustainability (Wolniak, 2016; Czerwińska-Lubszczyk et al., 2022;
27
Drozd, Wolniak, 2021; Gajdzik, Wolniak, 2021, 2022; Gębczyńska, Wolniak, 2018, 2023;
28
Grabowska et al., 2019, 2020, 2021). While there may be initial investment costs associated
29
with implementing sustainable practices, the potential for long-term economic benefits
30
outweighs these costs (Sani, Garg, 2023).
31
The main principles of sustainable business practices encompass a holistic approach that
32
considers the economic, environmental, and social dimensions of business operations.
33
These principles guide organizations in integrating sustainability into their strategies, decision-
34

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 673
making processes, and daily practices. Here are the key principles of sustainable business
1
practices (Moghrabi et al., 2023; george et al., 2022; Das et al., 2021; D’Adamo et al., 2022):
2
 The Triple Bottom Line (TBL) principle emphasizes the consideration of three
3
interconnected dimensions: people, planet, and profit. It entails measuring
4
organizational performance not only in terms of financial profitability but also by
5
assessing social and environmental impacts. By striving for a balance between these
6
three bottom lines, businesses can create long-term value and contribute to sustainable
7
development.
8
 Sustainable business practices prioritize environmental stewardship by minimizing
9
negative impacts on natural resources, ecosystems, and climate. Organizations commit
10
to reducing their carbon footprint, conserving energy and water resources, adopting
11
sustainable sourcing and production practices, promoting waste reduction and recycling,
12
and integrating environmental considerations into product design and lifecycle
13
management.
14
 Social responsibility entails actively addressing the well-being and interests of various
15
stakeholders, including employees, customers, local communities, and society at large.
16
Sustainable businesses prioritize fair labor practices, safe working conditions, diversity
17
and inclusion, ethical sourcing, and human rights. They also engage in philanthropic
18
activities, support community development, and contribute to the advancement of social
19
causes.
20
 Sustainable businesses recognize the importance of stakeholder engagement in
21
decision-making processes. They actively involve employees, customers, suppliers,
22
investors, local communities, and NGOs in shaping business strategies, policies,
23
and practices. By soliciting input, fostering collaboration, and considering diverse
24
perspectives, organizations can align their actions with stakeholder expectations, build
25
trust, and ensure accountability.
26
 Sustainable business practices focus on long-term thinking rather than short-term gains.
27
Organizations consider the potential social, environmental, and economic impacts of
28
their decisions and actions over time. By prioritizing the long-term well-being of
29
stakeholders and the planet, businesses can ensure their own resilience, adaptability,
30
and continued success in a rapidly changing world.
31
 Sustainable businesses embrace innovation and collaboration as drivers of positive
32
change. They seek innovative solutions to sustainability challenges, develop new
33
technologies, and implement sustainable practices across their value chains.
34
Collaboration with stakeholders, industry peers, academia, and governments enables the
35
sharing of best practices, knowledge exchange, and collective efforts to address
36
complex sustainability issues.
37

674 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
 Transparency is a vital principle of sustainable business practices. Organizations are
1
encouraged to disclose information about their sustainability performance, goals,
2
targets, and progress. Transparent reporting allows stakeholders to assess the
3
environmental and social impacts of a business, fostering accountability and trust.
4
Adhering to recognized reporting frameworks, such as the Global Reporting Initiative
5
(GRI) or Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), helps ensure consistency
6
and comparability.
7
 Sustainable businesses go beyond mere regulatory compliance by proactively
8
identifying and addressing sustainability challenges. They adhere to applicable laws and
9
regulations while also striving to exceed minimum requirements and anticipate future
10
sustainability standards. By adopting voluntary initiatives, industry certifications,
11
and best practices, organizations demonstrate their commitment to continuous
12
improvement and responsible business conduct.
13
By embracing these principles, businesses can drive positive change, mitigate risks, enhance
14
reputation, and create shared value for all stakeholders. Sustainable business practices not only
15
contribute to a more sustainable future but also foster innovation, resilience, and long-term
16
profitability.
17
3. Sustainable and traditional business practices
18
Business practices play a crucial role in shaping the economic, environmental, and social
19
landscape of our society. Traditional business practices have long been focused on short-term
20
profitability and financial gains, often neglecting the broader impacts on the environment and
21
society (Jonek-Kowalska, Wolniak, 2021, 2022; Jonek-Kowalska et al., 2022; Kordel, Wolniak,
22
2021, 2023; Rosak-Szyrocka et al., 2023; Gajdzik et al., 2023; Orzeł, Wolniak, 2021, 2022;
23
Ponomarenko et al., 2016; Stawiarska et al., 2020, 2021; Stecuła, Wolniak, 2022; Olkiewicz
24
et al., 2021; Wolniak, 2013, 2016; Hys, Wolniak, 2018). In contrast, sustainable business
25
practices aim to strike a balance between economic prosperity, environmental stewardship,
26
and social responsibility. This chapter delves into the significant differences between traditional
27
and sustainable business practices, highlighting their implications and emphasizing the
28
transformative potential of adopting sustainable approaches (Anaman et al., 2023).
29
From economic perspective traditional business practices prioritize immediate profit
30
maximization and often overlook the long-term implications. On the other hand, sustainable
31
business practices recognize the value of long-term thinking and take a holistic approach by
32
considering the triple bottom line - people, planet, and profit. Sustainable practices have been
33
shown to generate economic benefits through cost savings achieved via resource efficiency,
34
waste reduction, and energy conservation. Moreover, sustainable businesses enjoy enhanced
35

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 675
brand reputation and customer loyalty, providing access to new markets and emerging
1
opportunities (Sanchez-Planelles et al., 2022).
2
In the case of environmental impact traditional business practices tend to be resource-
3
intensive, resulting in excessive consumption, waste generation, and pollution. Sustainable
4
business practices, however, embrace the concept of environmental stewardship.
5
They prioritize resource conservation, employ eco-friendly technologies, and actively seek to
6
reduce their carbon footprint. Sustainable practices integrate renewable energy sources,
7
implement sustainable supply chain management, and adopt eco-design principles that consider
8
the entire lifecycle of products. By doing so, they mitigate environmental impacts and
9
contribute to the preservation of natural resources and biodiversity (Lathabhavan, 2022).
10
The next important factor is connected with social responsibility. Traditional business
11
practices often exhibit limited social responsibility, focusing primarily on profit generation and
12
neglecting the welfare of employees and communities. In contrast, sustainable business
13
practices recognize the importance of social responsibility. They foster employee well-being,
14
promote diversity and inclusion, ensure fair labor practices, and provide safe and healthy
15
working conditions. Sustainable businesses actively engage with local communities, supporting
16
their development through philanthropic activities, responsible marketing, and ethical sourcing.
17
By prioritizing social responsibility, sustainable practices foster positive relationships with
18
stakeholders and contribute to the overall welfare of society (Yacob et al., 2022).
19
In the case of stakeholders engagement traditional business practices typically involve
20
minimal stakeholder engagement beyond immediate customers and investors. In contrast,
21
sustainable business practices embrace stakeholder engagement as a core principle.
22
They actively involve employees, customers, suppliers, and local communities in decision-
23
making processes, seeking their input and considering their concerns. Sustainable businesses
24
prioritize transparent communication, accountability, and collaboration with stakeholders,
25
recognizing the importance of their perspectives and needs. This engagement fosters trust,
26
enhances reputation, and ensures the alignment of business practices with the broader societal
27
context (Jananipriya, Usha, 2022).
28
The long-term visibility also differs traditional and sustainable business practices.
29
Traditional business practices often face challenges in a rapidly changing business landscape.
30
Their focus on short-term gains can hinder adaptation to emerging trends and market demands.
31
In contrast, sustainable business practices demonstrate resilience and long-term viability.
32
They anticipate regulatory changes, proactively comply with evolving standards, and embrace
33
innovations that align with sustainability principles. Sustainable businesses possess the agility
34
to respond to emerging challenges and capitalize on sustainability-driven opportunities, thereby
35
securing their long-term success (Singh et al., 2022).
36
In the table 1 there is a detailed analysis of differences between traditional and sustainable
37
business practices.
38
39

676 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
Table 1.
1
Comparison of traditional and sustainable business practices
2
Traditional Business Practices
Sustainable Business Practices
Focus primarily on short-term profitability
and financial gains
Emphasize long-term value creation and consider the triple
bottom line (people, planet, profit)
Primarily driven by profit maximization
Balance economic, environmental, and social considerations
Resource-intensive and inefficient
Strive for resource efficiency and conservation
Limited consideration for environmental
impacts
Actively mitigate and reduce environmental impacts
Minimal social responsibility and stakeholder
engagement
Engage stakeholders and address social and community
needs
Linear production and consumption models
Promote circular economy principles and sustainable supply
chain practices
Reactive approach to regulations and
compliance
Proactive compliance and go beyond regulatory
requirements
Short-term cost savings prioritized
Recognize the long-term economic benefits of sustainable
practices
Lack of transparency and accountability
Transparent reporting and accountability for sustainability
performance
Limited consideration for social and
environmental risks and opportunities
Identify and capitalize on social and environmental risks and
opportunities
Emphasis on individualistic decision-making
Collaborative decision-making involving stakeholders and
considering diverse perspectives
Single bottom line (financial performance)
Triple bottom line approach (people, planet, profit)
Extractive approach to natural resources
Conservation and responsible use of natural resources
Reactive approach to social and
environmental issues
Proactive identification and mitigation of social and
environmental risks
Focus on short-term customer satisfaction
Prioritization of long-term customer relationships and
satisfaction
Limited innovation and adaptation to
changing market needs
Focus on innovation and adaptation to address sustainability
challenges and market demands
Limited consideration for employee well-
being and development
Employee-centric approach, promoting well-being, diversity,
and professional growth
Lack of engagement with local communities
Active engagement with local communities, addressing their
needs and supporting their development
Limited transparency and disclosure
Transparent reporting of environmental, social, and
governance (ESG) performance
Minimal consideration for climate change and
carbon emissions
Efforts to reduce carbon footprint and mitigate climate
change impacts
Inefficient use of energy and water resources
Implementation of energy and water efficiency measures
Focus on short-term cost reduction
Long-term cost savings through resource efficiency and
waste reduction
Risk of reputational damage from
unsustainable practices
Enhanced reputation and brand value through sustainable
practices
Ignoring potential regulatory and legal risks
Proactive compliance with regulations and anticipation of
future requireme
Source: Authors own work on the basis of: George et al., 2022; Das et al., 2021; Lathabhavan, 2022;
3
Singh et al., 2022; Cerciello et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2023; Pietro et al., 2021.
4
The differences between traditional and sustainable business practices are significant and
5
far-reaching. Sustainable practices encompass a broader perspective, taking into account the
6
economic, environmental, and social dimensions of business operations. By adopting
7
sustainable practices, businesses can achieve not only financial success but also contribute to
8
the well-being of the planet and society. The transformation towards sustainability is not only
9
an ethical imperative but also a pathway to resilience and long-term viability. It is crucial for
10

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 677
businesses to recognize the profound implications of sustainable practices and actively embrace
1
them, playing a vital role in creating a sustainable and prosperous future for all.
2
4. Examples of sustainable business practices
3
Sustainable business practices have gained increasing recognition as organizations strive to
4
address environmental and social challenges while pursuing long-term profitability.
5
This chapter highlights exemplary examples of sustainable business practices implemented by
6
companies across various industries. These examples demonstrate how businesses can
7
successfully integrate sustainability into their core operations, contributing to positive
8
environmental outcomes, social well-being, and economic prosperity. The examples of selected
9
sustainable business practices were described in the table 2.
10
Table 2.
11
Examples of sustainable business practices
12
Organization
Type of
sustainable
practice
Description
Patagonia
Embracing
Environmental
Stewardship
Patagonia, an outdoor clothing company, exemplifies a commitment to
environmental sustainability. They have implemented innovative practices,
such as using recycled materials, reducing waste through repair and
recycling programs, and advocating for fair labor practices throughout their
supply chain. Patagonia's transparency and efforts to raise awareness about
environmental issues set them apart as a leader in sustainable business
practices.
Interface
Leading the
Path to a
Circular
Economy
Interface, a global carpet tile manufacturer, has made substantial progress
in transitioning to a circular economy. They introduced a product take-back
program, enabling the recycling and reuse of old carpet tiles. Interface also
focuses on sustainable sourcing, energy-efficient manufacturing processes,
and carbon-neutral operations. Their "Mission Zero" commitment
demonstrates how sustainable business practices can drive innovation and
profitability while minimizing environmental impact.
Unilever
Driving
Sustainable
Consumption
Unilever, a multinational consumer goods company, has embarked on
a sustainability journey encompassing their entire value chain. They have
set ambitious goals for reducing their environmental footprint, promoting
responsible sourcing, and improving the well-being of billions of people
worldwide. Unilever's Sustainable Living Plan showcases their dedication
to sustainable business practices and serves as a model for engaging
consumers in making sustainable choices.
Tesla
Revolutionizing
the Automotive
Industry
Tesla, an electric vehicle manufacturer, has revolutionized the automotive
industry with its sustainable business practices. By prioritizing the
development of electric vehicles, Tesla aims to reduce dependence on fossil
fuels and combat climate change. They have built an extensive network of
charging stations, fostered renewable energy integration through energy
storage solutions, and revolutionized the energy sector with their innovative
products such as the Powerwall. Tesla's commitment to sustainability
extends beyond their products to the way they produce and deliver them.
13

678 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
Cont. table 2.
1
Danone
Nurturing
Communities
and
Empowering
Farmers
Danone, a multinational food company, embraces sustainability by focusing
on community engagement and responsible sourcing. They work closely
with farmers to promote regenerative agricultural practices, ensuring the
sustainability of their supply chain. Danone's initiatives for empowering
local communities and improving access to nutritious food demonstrate the
broader social impact that sustainable business practices can achieve.
Grameen
Bank
Financial
Inclusion and
Social Impact
Grameen Bank, founded by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, exemplifies
sustainable business practices in the realm of microfinance. By providing
financial services to the unbanked and marginalized populations, Grameen
Bank empowers individuals to start sustainable businesses, fostering
economic growth and reducing poverty. Their focus on social impact and
financial inclusion showcases the transformative potential of sustainable
finance models.
Source: Authors own work on the basis of: George et al., 2022; Das et al., 2021; Lathabhavan, 2022;
2
Singh et al., 2022; Cerciello et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2023, Alfaras, Alfaras, 2021; Mohaghegh et al.,
3
2021.
4
The examples provided in this paper illustrate the diverse ways in which businesses can
5
adopt sustainable practices, creating a positive impact on the environment, society, and the
6
economy. These companies serve as inspirations, demonstrating that sustainable business
7
practices can be successful and profitable while contributing to a more sustainable future.
8
By embracing sustainability, businesses can drive innovation, engage stakeholders, and create
9
shared value. The transformative power of sustainable business practices extends far beyond
10
individual companies, inspiring a new paradigm of responsible and ethical business conduct.
11
5. Conclusion
12
Sustainable business practices are essential for addressing the environmental, social,
13
and economic challenges of our time. From an environmental standpoint, businesses must adopt
14
strategies to minimize resource consumption, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and conserve
15
biodiversity. Socially, they must recognize and address the broader impacts of their activities,
16
ensuring fair labor practices, safe working conditions, and engagement with stakeholders.
17
Economically, businesses must understand that long-term profitability is closely linked to
18
environmental and social performance.
19
The main principles of sustainable business practices include the Triple Bottom Line
20
principle, which considers people, planet, and profit; environmental stewardship; social
21
responsibility; stakeholder engagement; long-term thinking; innovation and collaboration;
22
transparency; and proactive compliance. These principles guide organizations in integrating
23
sustainability into their strategies and decision-making processes.
24
Traditional business practices, focused on short-term profitability, often neglect the
25
environment and society. In contrast, sustainable business practices emphasize long-term value
26
creation, balance economic, environmental, and social considerations, and actively mitigate
27

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 679
environmental and social impacts. They prioritize resource efficiency, eco-friendly
1
technologies, fair labor practices, and stakeholder engagement. Sustainable practices also
2
embrace innovation, transparency, and proactive compliance.
3
Examples of sustainable business practices include companies like Patagonia, Interface,
4
Unilever, Tesla, Danone, and Grameen Bank. These companies demonstrate a commitment to
5
environmental stewardship, circular economy principles, sustainable consumption, renewable
6
energy, community engagement, and financial inclusion. Their success showcases the
7
transformative potential of sustainable business practices.
8
In summary, adopting sustainable business practices is crucial for creating a more
9
sustainable future. By integrating economic, environmental, and social considerations into their
10
operations, businesses can drive positive change, mitigate risks, enhance reputation, and create
11
shared value for all stakeholders. The examples provided serve as inspirations for other
12
companies, demonstrating that sustainability and profitability can go hand in hand. Sustainable
13
business practices are not only an ethical imperative but also a pathway to resilience,
14
innovation, and long-term success.
15
References
16
1. Alfaras, K.A., Alfaras, R.S.A. (2021). Kabankalan city accommodation industry:
17
Sustainable business attitudes and practices. Journal of Environmental Management and
18
Tourism, 12(8), pp. 2232-2239.
19
2. Anaman, P.D., Ahmed, I.A., Suleman, A.-R., Dzakah, G.A. (2023). Environmentally
20
Sustainable Business Practices in Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises: A Sub-Saharan
21
African Country Perspective. Business Perspectives and Research, 12, 53-67.
22
3. Cerciello, M., Busato, F., Taddeo, S. (2023). The effect of sustainable business practices
23
on profitability. Accounting for strategic disclosure. Corporate Social Responsibility and
24
Environmental Management, 30(2), pp. 802-819.
25
4. D’Adamo, I., Lupi, G., Morone, P., Settembre-Blundo, D. (2022). Towards the circular
26
economy in the fashion industry: the second-hand market as a best practice of sustainable
27
responsibility for businesses and consumers. Environmental Science and Pollution
28
Research, 29(31), pp. 46620-46633.
29
5. Das, J.K., Taneja, S., Arora, H. Corporate social responsibility and sustainable
30
development: Strategies, practices and business models, Corporate Social Responsibility
31
and Sustainable Development: Strategies, Practices and Business Models, pp. 1-252.
32
6. Drozd, R., Wolniak, R. (2021). Metrisable assessment of the course of stream-systemic
33
processes in vector form in industry 4.0. Quality and Quantity, 1-16, DOI: 10.1007/s11135-
34
021-01106-w.
35

680 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
7. Drozd, R., Wolniak, R. (2021). Systematic assessment of product quality. Journal of Open
1
Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(4), 1-12.
2
8. Fortino, A. (2023). Data Mining and Predictive Analytics for Business Decisions. New
3
York: Mercury Learning and Information.
4
9. Gajdzik, B., Grebski, M., Grebski, W., Wolniak, R. (2022). Human factor activity in lean
5
management and quality management. Toruń: Towarzystwo Naukowe Organizacji
6
i Kierownictwa. Dom Organizatora.
7
10. Gajdzik, B., Jaciow, M., Wolniak, R., Wolny R., Grebski, W.W. (2023). Energy Behaviors
8
of Prosumers in Example of Polish Households. Energies, 16(7), 3186;
9
https://doi.org/10.3390/en16073186.
10
11. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R. (2021). Digitalisation and innovation in the steel industry in
11
Poland - selected tools of ICT in an analysis of statistical data and a case study. Energies,
12
14(11), 1-25.
13
12. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R. (2021). Influence of the COVID-19 crisis on steel production in
14
Poland compared to the financial crisis of 2009 and to boom periods in the market.
15
Resources, 10(1), 1-17.
16
13. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R. (2021). Transitioning of steel producers to the steelworks 4.0 -
17
literature review with case studies. Energies, 14(14), 1-22.
18
14. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R. (2022). Framework for R&D&I Activities in the Steel Industry
19
in Popularizing the Idea of Industry 4.0. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market,
20
and Complexity, 8(3), 133.
21
15. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R. (2022). Influence of Industry 4.0 Projects on Business Operations:
22
literature and empirical pilot studies based on case studies in Poland. Journal of Open
23
Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 1-20.
24
16. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R. (2022). Smart Production Workers in Terms of Creativity and
25
Innovation: The Implication for Open Innovation. Journal of Open Innovations:
26
Technology, Market and Complexity, 8(1), 68.
27
17. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R., Grebski, W.W. (2022). An econometric model of the operation
28
of the steel industry in Poland in the context of process heat and energy consumption.
29
Energies, 15(21), 1-26, 7909.
30
18. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R., Grebski, W.W. (2023). Electricity and heat demand in steel
31
industry technological processes in Industry 4.0 conditions. Energies, 16(2), 1-29.
32
19. Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R. Grebski, W.W. (2023). Process of Transformation to Net Zero
33
Steelmaking: Decarbonisation Scenarios Based on the Analysis of the Polish Steel
34
Industry. Energies, 16(8), 3384; https://doi.org/10.3390/en16083384.
35
20. Gębczyńska, A., Wolniak, R. (2018). Process management level in local government.
36
Philadelphia: CreativeSpace.
37
21. George, G., Haas, M.R., Joshi, H., McGahan, A.M., Tracey, P. (2022). Handbook on the
38
Business of Sustainability: The Organization, Implementation, and Practice of Sustainable
39

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 681
Growth. Handbook on the Business of Sustainability: The Organization, Implementation,
1
and Practice of Sustainable Growth, pp. 1-584.
2
22. Grabowska, S., Saniuk S., Gajdzik, B. (2022). Industry 5.0: improving humanization and
3
sustainability of Industry 4.0. Scientometrics, 127(6), 3117-3144, https://doi.org/10.1007/
4
s11192-022-04370-1.
5
23. Grabowska, S., Grebski, M., Grebski, W., Saniuk, S., Wolniak, R. (2021). Inżynier
6
w gospodarce 4.0. Toruń: Towarzystwo Naukowe Organizacji i Kierownictwa –
7
Stowarzyszenie Wyższej Użyteczności "Dom Organizatora".
8
24. Grabowska, S., Grebski, M., Grebski, W., Wolniak, R. (2019). Introduction to engineering
9
concepts from a creativity and innovativeness perspective. New York: KDP Publishing.
10
25. Grabowska, S., Grebski, M., Grebski, W., Wolniak, R. (2020). Inżynier – zawód
11
przyszłości. Umiejętności i kompetencje inżynierskie w erze Przemysłu 4.0. Warszawa:
12
CeDeWu.
13
26. Hąbek, P., Wolniak, R. (2013). Analysis of approaches to CSR reporting in selected
14
European Union countries. International Journal of Economics and Research, 4(6), 79-95.
15
27. Hąbek, P., Wolniak, R. (2016). Assessing the quality of corporate social responsibility
16
reports: the case of reporting practices in selected European Union member states. Quality
17
& Quantity, 50(1), 339-420.
18
28. Hąbek, P., Wolniak, R. (2016). Factors influencing the development of CSR reporting
19
practices: experts' versus preparers' points of view. Engineering Economy, 26(5), 560-570.
20
29. Hąbek, P., Wolniak, R. (2016). Relationship between management practices and quality of
21
CSR reports. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 220, 115-123.
22
30. Hys, K., Wolniak, R. (2018). Praktyki przedsiębiorstw przemysłu chemicznego w Polsce
23
w zakresie CSR. Przemysł Chemiczny, 9, 1000-1002.
24
31. Jananipriya, R., Usha, S. (2022). Green Brands Representation Through Colour
25
Trademarks for Sustainable Business Practices and Environmental Concerns. ECS
26
Transactions, 107(1), pp. 11479-11486.
27
32. Jonek-Kowalska, I., Wolniak, R. (2021). Economic opportunities for creating smart cities
28
in Poland. Does wealth matter? Cities, 114, 1-6.
29
33. Jonek-Kowalska, I., Wolniak, R. (2021). The influence of local economic conditions on
30
start-ups and local open innovation system. Journal of Open Innovations: Technology,
31
Market and Complexity, 7(2), 1-19.
32
34. Jonek-Kowalska, I., Wolniak, R. (2022). Sharing economies’ initiatives in municipal
33
authorities’ perspective: research evidence from Poland in the context of smart cities’
34
development. Sustainability, 14(4), 1-23.
35
35. Jonek-Kowalska, I., Wolniak, R., Marinina, O.A., Ponomarenko, T.V. (2022).
36
Stakeholders, Sustainable Development Policies and the Coal Mining Industry.
37
Perspectives from Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. London:
38
Routledge.
39

682 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
36. Kordel, P., Wolniak, R. (2021). Technology entrepreneurship and the performance of
1
enterprises in the conditions of Covid-19 pandemic: the fuzzy set analysis of waste to
2
energy enterprises in Poland. Energies, 14(13), 1-22.
3
37. Kwiotkowska, A., Gajdzik, B., Wolniak, R., Vveinhardt, J., Gębczyńska, M. (2021).
4
Leadership competencies in making Industry 4.0 effective: the case of Polish heat and
5
power industry. Energies, 14(14), 1-22.
6
38. Kwiotkowska, A., Wolniak, R., Gajdzik, B., Gębczyńska, M. (2022). Configurational paths
7
of leadership competency shortages and 4.0 leadership effectiveness: an fs/QCA study.
8
Sustainability, 14(5), 1-21.
9
39. Lathabhavan, R. (2022). Sustainable business practices and challenges in Asia:
10
a systematic review. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 30(3), pp. 778-794.
11
40. Liu, R., Yue, Z., Ijaz, A., Lutfi, A., Mao, J. (2023). Sustainable Business Performance:
12
Examining the Role of Green HRM Practices, Green Innovation and Responsible
13
Leadership through the Lens of Pro-Environmental Behavior. Sustainability (Switzerland),
14
15(9), 7317.
15
41. Michalak A., Wolniak, R. (2023). The innovativeness of the country and the renewables
16
and non-renewables in the energy mix on the example of European Union. Journal of Open
17
Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 9(2), https://doi.org/10.1016/
18
j.joitmc.2023.100061.
19
42. Moghrabi, I.A.R., Bhat, S.A., Szczuko, P., Al Khaled, R.A., Dar, M.A. (2023). Digital
20
Transformation and Its Influence on Sustainable Manufacturing and Business Practices.
21
Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(4), 3010.
22
43. Mohaghegh, M., Blasi, S., Größler, A. (2021). Dynamic capabilities linking lean practices
23
and sustainable business performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 322, 129073.
24
44. Olkiewicz, M., Olkiewicz, A., Wolniak, R., Wyszomirski, A. (2021). Effects of pro-
25
ecological investments on an example of the heating industry - case study. Energies,
26
14(18), 1-24, 5959.
27
45. Orzeł, B., Wolniak, R. (2021). Clusters of elements for quality assurance of health worker
28
protection measures in times of COVID-19 pandemic. Administrative Science, 11(2), 1-14,
29
46.
30
46. Orzeł, B., Wolniak, R. (2022). Digitization in the design and construction industry - remote
31
work in the context of sustainability: a study from Poland. Sustainability, 14(3), 1-25.
32
47. Pietro, L.D., Renzi, M.F., Edvardsson, B. (2021). Sustainable business practices for
33
transformative change: The case of Eataly. Business Transformation for a Sustainable
34
Future, pp. 55-69.
35
48. Ponomarenko, T.V., Wolniak, R., Marinina, O.A. (2016). Corporate Social responsibility
36
in coal industry (Practices of Russian and European companies). Journal of Mining
37
Institute, 222, 882-891.
38

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 683
49. Rosak-Szyrocka, J., Żywiołek J., Wolniak, R. (2023). Main reasons for religious tourism -
1
from a quantitative analysis to a model. International Journal for Quality Research, 1(17),
2
109-120.
3
50. Saini, A., Garg, V. (2023). Transformation for Sustainable Business and Management
4
Practices: Exploring the Spectrum of Industry 5.0. Transformation for Sustainable
5
Business and Management Practices: Exploring the Spectrum of Industry 5.0, pp. 1-338.
6
51. Sanchez-Planelles, J., Segarra-Oña, M., Peiro-Signes, A. (2022). Identifying different
7
sustainable practices to help companies to contribute to the sustainable development:
8
Holistic sustainability, sustainable business and operations models. Corporate Social
9
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(4), pp. 904-917.
10
52. Singh, R.K., Kumar Mangla, S., Bhatia, M.S., Luthra, S. (20220. Integration of green and
11
lean practices for sustainable business management. Business Strategy and the
12
Environment, 31(1), pp. 353-370.
13
53. Stawiarska, E., Szwajca, D., Matusek, M., Wolniak, R. (2020). Wdrażanie rozwiązań
14
przemysłu 4.0 w wybranych funkcjonalnych obszarach zarządzania przedsiębiorstw branży
15
motoryzacyjnej: próba diagnozy. Warszawa: CeDeWu.
16
54. Stawiarska, E., Szwajca, D., Matusek, M., Wolniak, R. (2021). Diagnosis of the maturity
17
level of implementing Industry 4.0 solutions in selected functional areas of management
18
of automotive companies in Poland. Sustainability, 13(9), 1-38.
19
55. Stecuła, K., Wolniak, R. (2022). Advantages and Disadvantages of E-Learning Innovations
20
during COVID-19 Pandemic in Higher Education in Poland. Journal of Open Innovation:
21
Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(3), 159.
22
56. Stecuła, K., Wolniak, R. (2022). Influence of COVID-19 Pandemic on Dissemination of
23
Innovative E-Learning Tools in Higher Education in Poland. Journal of Open Innovations:
24
Technology, Market and Complexity, 8(1), 89.
25
57. Sułkowski, M., Wolniak, R. (2016). Przegląd stosowanych metod oceny skuteczności
26
i efektywności organizacji zorientowanych na ciągłe doskonalenie. Zeszyty Naukowe
27
Politechniki Śląskiej. Seria Organizacja i Zarzadzanie, 67, 63-74.
28
58. Sułkowski, M., Wolniak, R. (2018). Poziom wdrożenia instrumentów zarządzania jakością
29
w przedsiębiorstwach branży obróbki metali. Częstochowa: Oficyna Wydawnicza
30
Stowarzyszenia Menedżerów Produkcji i Jakości.
31
59. Wolniak, R, Skotnicka-Zasadzień, B. (2014). The use of value stream mapping to
32
introduction of organizational innovation in industry. Metalurgija, 53(4), 709-713.
33
60. Wolniak, R. (2011). Parametryzacja kryteriów oceny poziomu dojrzałości systemu
34
zarządzania jakością. Gliwice: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej.
35
61. Wolniak, R. (2013). A typology of organizational cultures in terms of improvement of the
36
quality management. Manager, 17(1), 7-21.
37
62. Wolniak, R. (2013). Projakościowa typologia kultur organizacyjnych. Przegląd
38
Organizacji, 3, 13-17.
39

684 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
63. Wolniak, R. (2014). Korzyści doskonalenia systemów zarządzania jakością opartych
1
o wymagania normy ISO 9001:2009. Problemy Jakości, 3, 20-25.
2
64. Wolniak, R. (2016). Kulturowe aspekty zarządzania jakością. Etyka biznesu
3
i zrównoważony rozwój. Interdyscyplinarne studia teoretyczno-empiryczne, 1, 109-122.
4
65. Wolniak, R. (2016). Metoda QFD w zarządzaniu jakością. Teoria i praktyka. Gliwice:
5
Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej.
6
66. Wolniak, R. (2016). Relations between corporate social responsibility reporting and the
7
concept of greenwashing. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Seria Organizacji
8
i Zarządzanie, 87, 443-453.
9
67. Wolniak, R. (2016). The role of QFD method in creating innovation. Systemy
10
Wspomagania Inżynierii Produkcji, 3, 127-134.
11
68. Wolniak, R. (2017). Analiza relacji pomiędzy wskaźnikiem innowacyjności
12
a nasyceniem kraju certyfikatami ISO 9001, ISO 14001 oraz ISO/TS 16949. Kwartalnik
13
Organizacja i Kierowanie, 2, 139-150.
14
69. Wolniak, R. (2017). Analiza wskaźników nasycenia certyfikatami ISO 9001, ISO 14001
15
oraz ISO/TS 16949 oraz zależności pomiędzy nimi. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej.
16
Seria Organizacji i Zarządzanie, 108, 421-430.
17
70. Wolniak, R. (2017). The Corporate Social Responsibility practices in mining sector in
18
Spain and in Poland – similarities and differences. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej.
19
Seria Organizacji i Zarządzanie, 111, 111-120.
20
71. Wolniak, R. (2017). The Design Thinking method and its stages. Systemy Wspomagania
21
Inżynierii Produkcji, 6, 247-255.
22
72. Wolniak, R. (2017). The use of constraint theory to improve organization of work.
23
4th International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts.
24
SGEM 2017, 24-30 August 2017, Albena, Bulgaria. Conference proceedings. Book 1,
25
Modern science. Vol. 5, Business and management. Sofia: STEF92 Technology, 1093-
26
1100.
27
73. Wolniak, R. (2018). Functioning of social welfare on the example of the city of Łazy.
28
Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły, Humanitas. Zarządzanie, 3, 159-176.
29
74. Wolniak, R. (2018). Methods of recruitment and selection of employees on the example of
30
the automotive industry. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Seria Organizacja
31
i Zarządzanie, 128, 475-483.
32
75. Wolniak, R. (2019). Context of the organization in ISO 9001:2015. Silesian University of
33
Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 133, 121-136.
34
76. Wolniak, R. (2019). Downtime in the automotive industry production process - cause
35
analysis. Quality, Innovation, Prosperity, 2, 101-118.
36
77. Wolniak, R. (2019). Leadership in ISO 9001:2015. Silesian University of Technology
37
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 133, 137-150.
38

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 685
78. Wolniak, R. (2019). Support in ISO 9001:2015. Silesian University of Technology
1
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 137, 247-261.
2
79. Wolniak, R. (2019). The level of maturity of quality management systems in Poland-results
3
of empirical research. Sustainability, 15, 1-17.
4
80. Wolniak, R. (2020). Design in ISO 9001:2015. Silesian University of Technology Scientific
5
Papers. Organization and Management Series, 148, 769-781.
6
81. Wolniak, R. (2020). Operations in ISO 9001:2015. Silesian University of Technology
7
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 148, 783-794.
8
82. Wolniak, R. (2020). Quantitative relations between the implementation of industry
9
management systems in European Union countries. Silesian University of Technology
10
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 142, 33-44.
11
83. Wolniak, R. (2021). Internal audit and management review in ISO 9001:2015. Silesian
12
University of Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 151,
13
724-608.
14
84. Wolniak, R. (2021). Performance evaluation in ISO 9001:2015. Silesian University of
15
Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 151, 725-734.
16
85. Wolniak, R. (2022). Engineering ethics – main principles. Silesian University of
17
Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 155, 579-594.
18
86. Wolniak, R. (2022). Individual innovations. Silesian University of Technology Scientific
19
Papers. Organization and Management Series, 166, 861-876.
20
87. Wolniak, R. (2022). Management of engineering teams. Silesian University of Technology
21
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 157, 667-674.
22
88. Wolniak, R. (2022). Problems of Covid-19 influence on small and medium enterprises
23
activities – organizing function. Silesian University of Technology Scientific Papers.
24
Organization and Management Series, 167, 599-608.
25
89. Wolniak, R. (2022). Project management in engineering. Silesian University of Technology
26
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 157, 685-698.
27
90. Wolniak, R. (2022). Project management standards, Silesian University of Technology
28
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 160, 639-654.
29
91. Wolniak, R. (2022). Sustainable engineering, Silesian University of Technology Scientific
30
Papers. Organization and Management Series, 160, 655-667.
31
92. Wolniak, R. (2022). The role of the engineering profession in developing and
32
implementing sustainable development principles. Silesian University of Technology
33
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 155, 595-608.
34
93. Wolniak, R. (2022). Traits of highly innovative people. Silesian University of Technology
35
Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 166, 877-892.
36
94. Wolniak, R. (2023). Analiza danych w czasie rzeczywistym, Zarządzanie i Jakość, 2(5),
37
291-312.
38

686 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
95. Wolniak, R. (2023). Analysis of the Bicycle Roads System as an Element of a Smart
1
Mobility on the Example of Poland Provinces. Smart Cities, 6(1), 368-391;
2
https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities6010018.
3
96. Wolniak, R. (2023). Design thinking and its use to boast innovativeness. Silesian
4
University of Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 170,
5
647-662.
6
97. Wolniak, R. (2023). Deskryptywna analiza danych. Zarządzanie i Jakość, 2(5), 272-290.
7
98. Wolniak, R. (2023). European Union Smart Mobility - aspects connected with bike road
8
systems extension and dissemination. Smart Cities, 6, 1-32.
9
99. Wolniak, R. (2023). European Union Smart Mobility–Aspects Connected with Bike Road
10
System’s Extension and Dissemination, Smart Citie, 6(2), 1009-1042;
11
https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities6020049.
12
100. Wolniak, R. (2023). Functioning of real-time analytics in business. Silesian University of
13
Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 172, 659-677.
14
101. Wolniak, R. (2023). Industry 5.0 – characteristic, main principles, advantages and
15
disadvantages. Silesian University of Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and
16
Management Series, 170, 663-678.
17
102. Wolniak, R. (2023). Innovations in industry 4.0 conditions, Silesian University of
18
Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 169, 725-742.
19
103. Wolniak, R. (2023). Smart biking w smart city. Zarządzanie i Jakość, 2(5), 313-328.
20
104. Wolniak, R. (2023). Smart mobility in a smart city concept Silesian University of
21
Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 170, 679-692.
22
105. Wolniak, R. (2023). Smart mobility in smart city – Copenhagen and Barcelona
23
comparision. Silesian University of Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and
24
Management Series, 172, 678-697.
25
106. Wolniak, R. (2023). Smart mobility jako element koncepcji smart city. Zarządzanie
26
i Jakość, 1(5), 208-222.
27
107. Wolniak, R. (2023). Team innovations, Silesian University of Technology Scientific
28
Papers. Organization and Management Series, 169, 773-758.
29
108. Wolniak, R. (2023). The concept of descriptive analytics. Silesian University of
30
Technology Scientific Papers. Organization and Management Series, 172, 698-715.
31
109. Wolniak, R. Sułkowski, M. (2015). Rozpowszechnienie stosowania Systemów
32
Zarządzania Jakością w Europie na świecie – lata 2010-2012. Problemy Jakości, 5, 29-34.
33
110. Wolniak, R., Grebski, M.E. (2018). Innovativeness and creativity as factors in workforce
34
development – perspective of psychology. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Ślaskiej. Seria
35
Organizacja i Zarządzanie, 116, 203-214.
36
111. Wolniak, R., Grebski, M.E. (2018). Innovativeness and creativity as nature and nurture.
37
Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Ślaskiej. Seria Organizacja i Zarządzanie, 116, 215-226.
38

Comparison of traditional and sustainable… 687
112. Wolniak, R., Grebski, M.E. (2018). Innovativeness and Creativity of the Workforce as
1
Factors Stimulating Economic Growth in Modern Economies. Zeszyty Naukowe
2
Politechniki Ślaskiej. Seria Organizacja i Zarządzanie, 116, 227-240.
3
113. Wolniak, R., Grebski, M.E., Skotnicka-Zasadzień, B. (2019). Comparative analysis of the
4
level of satisfaction with the services received at the business incubators (Hazleton, PA,
5
USA and Gliwice, Poland). Sustainability, 10, 1-22.
6
114. Wolniak, R., Hąbek, P. (2015). Quality management and corporate social responsibility.
7
Systemy Wspomagania w Inżynierii Produkcji, 1, 139-149.
8
115. Wolniak, R., Hąbek, P. (2016). Quality assessment of CSR reports – factor analysis.
9
Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 220, 541-547.
10
116. Wolniak, R., Jonek-Kowalska, I. (2021). The level of the quality of life in the city and its
11
monitoring. Innovation (Abingdon), 34(3), 376-398.
12
117. Wolniak, R., Jonek-Kowalska, I. (2021). The quality of service to residents by public
13
administration on the example of municipal offices in Poland. Administration Management
14
Public, 37, 132-150.
15
118. Wolniak, R., Jonek-Kowalska, I. (2022). The creative services sector in Polish cities.
16
Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 1-23.
17
119. Wolniak, R., Saniuk, S., Grabowska, S., Gajdzik, B. (2020). Identification of energy
18
efficiency trends in the context of the development of industry 4.0 using the Polish steel
19
sector as an example. Energies, 13(11), 1-16.
20
120. Wolniak, R., Skotnicka, B. (2011).: Metody i narzędzia zarządzania jakością – Teoria
21
i praktyka, cz. 1. Gliwice: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej.
22
121. Wolniak, R., Skotnicka-Zasadzień, B. (2008). Wybrane metody badania satysfakcji klienta
23
i oceny dostawców w organizacjach. Gliwice: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej.
24
122. Wolniak, R., Skotnicka-Zasadzień, B. (2010). Zarządzanie jakością dla inżynierów.
25
Gliwice: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej.
26
123. Wolniak, R., Skotnicka-Zasadzień, B. (2018). Developing a model of factors influencing
27
the quality of service for disabled customers in the condition s of sustainable development,
28
illustrated by an example of the Silesian Voivodeship public administration. Sustainability,
29
7, 1-17.
30
124. Wolniak, R., Skotnicka-Zasadzień, B. (2022). Development of photovoltaic energy in
31
EU countries as an alternative to fossil fuels. Energies, 15(2), 1-23.
32
125. Wolniak, R., Skotnicka-Zasadzień, B., Zasadzień, M. (2019). Problems of the functioning
33
of e-administration in the Silesian region of Poland from the perspective of a person with
34
disabilities. Transylvanian Review of Public Administration, 57E, 137-155.
35
126. Wolniak, R., Sułkowski, M. (2015). Motywy wdrażanie certyfikowanych Systemów
36
Zarządzania Jakością. Problemy Jakości, 9, 4-9.
37

688 R. Wolniak, W. Grebski
127. Wolniak, R., Sułkowski, M. (2016). The reasons for the implementation of quality
1
management systems in organizations. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Seria
2
Organizacji i Zarządzanie, 92, 443-455.
3
128. Wolniak, R., Wyszomirski, A., Olkiewicz, M., Olkiewicz, A. (2021). Environmental
4
corporate social responsibility activities in heating industry - case study. Energies, 14(7),
5
1-19, 1930.
6
129. Yacob, P., Peter, D., Chin, K.S. (2022). Sustainable business practices in manufacturing
7
SMEs: The mediating effect of dynamic capabilities. International Social Science Journal,
8
72(243), pp. 73-89.
9