UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Win-Win-Win: Lineage, Definition and Contribution of a Constituency-Based Framework for Sustainable Decisions

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.2139/ssrn.7531038

Auteurs

Maria · Steven

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en · und

Type source

Article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.588573+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:07:01.652062+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Mahidol University

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

TH

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

"Win-win-win" is used widely and loosely. This paper traces its lineage and states what the Win-Win-Win framework (Kellis, 2026) adds. The vision goes back to Fuller, who asked how the world could be made to work for everyone without ecological offence. The term enters management scholarship with Elkington (1994), who described strategies in which a company, its customers and the environment all win. In 2002, Papakonstantinidis extended the idea to bargaining, with the local community as the third winner. In these accounts, the third party stays outside the decision. It is a beneficiary or a stakeholder whose interests others weigh. Win-Win-Win breaks with this lineage. The earlier accounts, and the traditions around them, tell a story in which the world is a victim, business its aggressor and frameworks its rescuers. In Karpman's terms, this is a drama triangle whose roles keep switching without end. Win-Win-Win places the actors outside that loop. The world is a constituent, not a victim. Its interests are a condition of the decision. Each party acts as a creator of the outcome rather than a persecutor or rescuer. We place the framework among adjacent traditions, including stakeholder theory, the triple bottom line, shared value, ESG, conscious capitalism and the rights of nature. We restate its three tests, its diagnostic question, its requirement to revisit decisions and its four positions of agency. We note a cultural parallel in Bali's Tri Hita Karana, state four testable propositions and set out the framework's limits.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7214750778

DOI

10.2139/ssrn.7531038

OPENAIRE

doi_________::85a1c06e612494c0e31ee5c422df078c

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

Article · preprint

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAIRE · Document 1

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.7531038
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7214750778

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w2010053310 · CITES
• openalex:w2149010029 · CITES
• openalex:w2154432883 · CITES
• openalex:w2167887585 · CITES
• openalex:w2252795400 · CITES
• openalex:w4281296357 · CITES
• openalex:w7131648476 · CITES
• openalex:w7155001097 · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.