Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sustainability has become one of the main drivers of organizational performance. This study investigates the integration of sustainability with the balanced scorecard (BSC) as a framework for translating environmental management strategy into organizational performance. This review also seeks to map sustainability balanced scorecard (SBSC) research, clarifying its current role and identifying gaps and opportunities for future research. To achieve this, we sourced and reviewed 247 publications from the Web of Science index, corresponding to 129 scientific journals and 57 conference proceedings. Our analysis included content analysis and bibliometric analysis performed using the R packages Bibliometrix (version: 4.3.5), Biblioshiny, and CiteSpace (6.3.R1 Basic). The findings revealed that the SBSC enhances organizational capacity to align sustainability with strategic objectives, although significant implementation barriers remain, such as the selection of appropriate sustainability indicators and organizational resistance. This study contributes to advancing the theoretical and practical understanding of the SBSC while offering pathways for future research and application across sectors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".