How can companies integrate the concerns of the natural environment into their business decisions in order to make a valuable contribution to nature, environment and climate protection? An attempt to achieve this is made by integrating the natural environment into the stakeholder concept. Stakeholders are to be understood as “groups and individuals that can affect, or are affected by, the accomplishment of organizational purpose”[1]. That means when a company manages their stakeholders, they not only take into account their shareholders but also e.g. environmental activist groups and local communities.[2] However, there is a controversial discussion about the role the natural environment should play in companies’ stakeholder concepts. Is the natural environment a stakeholder of its own? I looked into three different positions[3][4][5] dealing with this question.

First, it is important to note that all of them are in favour of the stakeholder theory in its widespread understood and used sense in the business environment. They agree that the stakeholder approach is key for effective management and that a company benefits from its holistic method long-term. There is also consent, that environmental topics and concerns must be addressed by the manager or organisation. However, the authors are disagreeing over the way the issues of the natural environment should be addressed or implemented within the stakeholder concept or within the business environment in general.

Starik argues that the natural environment should have stakeholder status itself, whereas Phillips & Reichart state that this is not possible. They suggest the natural environment should be addressed through legitimate organisational stakeholder (like NGOs) to include it into stakeholder management. Orts‘ & Strudler‘s position conveys that they find stakeholder concepts of a company or organisation unable to provide the necessary perspective on moral issues. They argue for a restriction of stakeholders to only consist of participants who have an actual economic interest or risk. In their view, ethical considerations are to be left out of the stakeholder concept since moral topics are far too important to be weighed against other stakeholder interests. According to them, limiting the stakeholders to the key participants allows to directly and practically tackle moral issues such as environmental concerns. Phillips‘ & Reichart‘s stakeholder model has been criticised by Orts & Strudler to be too dependent on the legitimate stakeholders (e.g. an NGO). There is a vast number of NGO‘s pursuing to protect different environmental values. Which of these NGO‘s should a company choose as a stakeholder? In turn, Orts‘ & Strudler‘s approach depends strongly on the recognition and practice of these values through the firm or the manager if mandatory environmental laws are not (yet) in force. Taking the natural environment into account when conducting business decisions only works in Orts‘ & Strudler‘s approach if the company sets a moral background principle for itself.

The stakeholder concept provides a foundation which allows to set up well-worked out stakeholder models for specific business environment purposes, each with their own underlying background principles.[6] Jones et al. submit that there is not necessarily just one stakeholder model, but probably a vast number of versions. The stakeholder concept is not an instrument which can force the operator (e.g. a manager of a company) to be moral, but with a balanced and carefully considered choice of background principles, setting morally appropriate priorities, it can definitely guide decision-making regarding pressing moral dilemmas.

I can imagine a moral and social background that appreciates and strives to preserve environmental values as an underlying principle for a specific stakeholder approach, unlike Phillips & Reichart and Orts & Strudler. Furthermore, it could be supported that at least parts of the natural environment – especially animals and trees – can hold stakeholder status on their own. There has been recent progress in the field of cognitive science regarding animals and recent findings about tree communication within forests[7] which questions Orts‘ & Strudler‘s statement that only humans have a mind and therefore only humans can have stakeholder status.

The consideration of the natural environment in business decisions has to be secured. However, it will depend strongly on which kind of values that we as a society will prioritise and defend to be able to demand compliance with them from firms and managers in the business context.