The Green Value Paradigm: A Review on Advancing Corporate Environmental Sustainability in the 21st Century

Corporations worldwide face increasing pressure to align economic growth with environmental stewardship, yet sustainability practices remain fragmented across industries. Despite the growing prominence of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) frameworks, and sustainability-driven innovation, firms often struggle to integrate these approaches into a cohesive model that links environmental responsibility with value creation. Addressing this gap, this study explores the research landscape of corporate environmental sustainability through the lens of the Green Value Paradigm (GVP), proposing it as an integrative framework for aligning environmental values with corporate strategy. This study adopts a structured systematic literature review (SLR) guided by PRISMA principles to ensure transparency and methodological rigor. Drawing on Scopus-AI analytics (as of 25 September 2025) and supported by manual screening and critical synthesis, 184 peer-reviewed publications were analyzed using a comprehensive search string encompassing green values, corporate sustainability, and environmental performance. The analysis utilized concept mapping, thematic clustering, and expert identification to examine patterns across consistent, rising, and emerging themes. The findings indicate that CSR and ESG remain foundational pillars of sustainability research, while rising themes—such as the relationship between environmental and financial performance, Green Human Resource Management (GHRM), and sustainability-driven innovation—reflect evolving corporate priorities. Additionally, sustainability disclosure and reporting emerge as critical mechanisms for enhancing transparency, accountability, and corporate legitimacy. Importantly, the study demonstrates that the GVP extends beyond existing frameworks by positioning environmental values as the central driver of strategy, innovation, and value creation. This study contributes to the literature by offering a holistic and integrative perspective on corporate environmental sustainability. It provides practical insights for managers, policymakers, and investors seeking to embed sustainability into strategic decision-making, while also establishing a foundation for future empirical and theoretical advancement in sustainability research.

Green Value Paradigm, Corporate Environmental Sustainability

1. Akshita, Mahajan, S., Jarolia, P., & Pandey, P. K. (2024). Digital sustainability and corporate governance: Examining the integration of information technology in green marketing strategies. *International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 23*(4), 448–469. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGENVI.2024.144466 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Angeles, R. (2016). Framing private sphere consumer behavior: Likelihood of using GoodGuide.com information as explained by the value-belief-norm theory and NEP scale. *International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 7*(2), 14–38. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSESD.2016040102 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Ayentimi, D. T., Nyarkoh, B. J., & Kuuyelleh, E. N. (2021). Green business practices in emerging economies. In *Palgrave Studies of Marketing in Emerging Economies* (pp. 13–28). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73007-9_2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Baklanov, P. Ya., Moshkov, A. V., Badenkov, Y. P., Bocharnikov, V. N., Bazarov, K. Y., & Karakin, V. P. (2023). Sikhote-Alin: A mountain territory with unique potential for green development. *Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya, 87*(7), 1005–1018. https://doi.org/10.31857/S258755662307004X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Carvalho, H., Azevedo, S. G., Duarte, S., & Cruz-Machado, V. (2012). Green and lean paradigms influence on sustainable business development of manufacturing supply chains. In *International and Interdisciplinary Studies in Green Computing* (pp. 113–129). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-2646-1.ch009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Cerchione, R., Passaro, R., & Sicardi, V. (2025). Do no significant harm (DNSH) principle in corporate sustainability strategies: Towards a methodological framework. *Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management*. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.70070 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chen, S. C.-I., Xu, X., & Own, C.-M. (2024). The impact of green finance and technological innovation on corporate environmental performance: Driving sustainable energy transitions. *Energies, 17*(23), 5959. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17235959 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chou, D. C., & Chen, H.-G. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and green IT: The linkage and case analysis. In *Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS 2016)*. Association for Information Systems. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chou, D. C., Chen, H.-G., & Lin, B. (2023). Green IT and corporate social responsibility for sustainability. *Journal of Computer Information Systems, 63*(2), 322–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2022.2058643 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Choudhary, S., Nayak, R., Dora, M., Mishra, N., & Ghadge, A. (2019). An integrated lean and green approach for improving sustainability performance: A case study of a packaging manufacturing SME in the U.K. *Production Planning & Control, 30*(5–6), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1501811 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Costa, F., Alemsan, N., Bilancia, A., Tortorella, G. L., & Portioli Staudacher, A. (2024). Integrating industry 4.0 and lean manufacturing for a sustainable green transition: A comprehensive model. *Journal of Cleaner Production, 465*, 142728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142728 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Darmanata, J., Somohano, C., Saad, S., & Perera, T. (2010). A sustainability value system principle for a global supply chain. In *IET Conference Publications, 2010*(565 CP), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2010.0453 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. DeLacy, T., Jiang, M., Lipman, G., & Vorster, S. (2014). *Green growth and travelism: Concept, policy and practice for sustainable tourism*. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203115329 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Deveciyan, M. T. (2023). Green organizational identity and green competitive advantage [Yeşil Örgüt Kimliği ve Yeşil Rekabet Avantajı]. *Romaya Journal: Researches on Multidisciplinary Approaches, 3*(2), 23–30. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Dieste, M., & Panizzolo, R. (2018). On the relationship between lean practices and environmental performance. *IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 151*(1), 012034. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/151/1/012034 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Childe, S. J., Shibin, K. T., & Wamba, S. F. (2017). Sustainable supply chain management: Framework and further research directions. *Journal of Cleaner Production, 142*, 1119–1130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.117 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Dyllick, T., & Muff, K. (2016). Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: Introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability. *Organization & Environment, 29*(2), 156–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575176 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Elkington, J. (1997). *Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business*. Capstone. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Goyal, P., & Kumar, D. (2017). Modeling the CSR barriers in manufacturing industries. *Benchmarking: An International Journal, 24*(7), 1871–1890. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-03-2016-0042 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2015). Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework. *Journal of Business Ethics, 127*(2), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2047-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Hart, S. L., & Dowell, G. (2011). A natural-resource-based view of the firm: Fifteen years after. *Journal of Management, 37*(5), 1464–1479. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310390219 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Jamali, D., & Karam, C. (2018). Corporate social responsibility in developing countries is an emerging field of study. *International Journal of Management Reviews, 20*(1), 32–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12112 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Jin, K. G., & Zailani, S. (2010). Green value chain in the context of sustainability development and competitive advantage. *Journal of Global Business Advancement, 3*(2), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1504/JGBA.2010.034316 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kraus, S., Rehman, S. U., & García, F. J. S. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and environmental performance: The mediating role of environmental strategy and green innovation. *Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 160*, 120262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120262 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Lozano, R., Barreiro-Gen, M., Lozano, F. J., & Sammalisto, K. (2019). Teaching sustainability in European higher education institutions: Assessing the connections between competences and pedagogical approaches. *Sustainability, 11*(6), 1602. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061602 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mehrajunnisa, S., Ahmad, T., & Siddiqui, F. A. (2023). Green HRM practices and employee commitment: Mediating role of green employee engagement. *Management of Environmental Quality, 34*(3), 716–734. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-06-2022-0160 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Ping, L., Yu, H., & Zhao, W. (2023). ESG performance, corporate value, and ecological civilization construction: Evidence from China. *Journal of Environmental Management, 341*, 118071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118071 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. *Harvard Business Review, 89*(1/2), 62–77. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Sardá, R., & Pogutz, S. (2018). Corporate sustainability in turbulent times: The role of resilience and value creation. *Business Strategy and the Environment, 27*(6), 833–844. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2047 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Surbakti, H., Aryanto, V. D. W., & Nugroho, Y. (2025). Corporate sustainability, green innovation, and firm performance: Evidence from Asia. *Sustainability, 17*(1), 321. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17010321 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987). *Our common future*. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Yi, Y., Kim, S., & Park, J. (2024). Linking green HRM and sustainable competitive advantage: The mediating role of green organizational behavior. *Journal of Business Research, 171*, 114089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114089 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Yoo, S. (2024). Green HRM, employee green behavior, and sustainability performance: Evidence from SMEs. *Sustainability, 16*(2), 827. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16020827 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Methane Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste - Case Study in Cai Rang District, Can Tho City, Vietnam
• Youth Activism, Intentional Integration of Policies to Raise Awareness on Climate Change Action among the Youth
• Breathing Spaces: Environmental & User Experience in Dhanmondi and Zigatola Multistoried Apartments, Dhaka, Bangladesh
• Effects of Solid Waste Disposal on Soil Quality in Makurdi Metropolis, Benue State, Nigeria
• Environmental Impact of Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining in Borgu Local Government Area