This study has been carried out at Klättermusen, a Swedish company producing outdoor clothingand equipment with a focus on durability, safety, function and environment. The purpose of thethesis was to investigate if Klättermusen should use Cradle to Cradle (C2C) in their sustainabilitywork. This was reviewed by studying the working procedure, by making a case study, byinvestigating if there are alternative ways to practise C2C, by studying the weak points of theC2C-certification and by investigating the compatibility with other sustainability tools.The C2C vision is inspired by the ecosystems and is based on the three rules Waste equals food, Usecurrent solar income and Celebrate diversity. An important aspect of C2C is the focus on attaining apositive impact on humans and the environment instead of doing things less bad by minimizingemissions. To make it possible for companies to communicate their effort and progress to theircustomers and become more competitive a C2C certification has been elaborated. The core ofthe certification is an assessment of the materials included in the product to make sure they aresecure, healthy and recyclable. Other parts included in the certification are energy, water andsocial aspects.When studying the C2C certification three of Klättermusen’s products were used as references.To certify these products Klättermusen has to gather information from their suppliers and makestrategies regarding Materials, Material Reutilization, Energy, Water and Social Responsibility. Forexample all the substances that contained in the garment at a concentration of at least 0.01 %must be reported, which means that all suppliers must be requested to list their substances. Thecertification cost of a pair of pants investigated in this study was estimated to 54 500 €.An assessment was made to find alternative ways to practise C2C and identify weak points of theC2C certification. It is based on interviews held with Jenny Pfau working for EPEA and threepersons in contact with C2C in their work; Kjersti Kviseth, Magnus Hedenmark and RichardBlume. According to Jenny Pfau Klättermusen can practise C2C by making a screening, a detailedassessment or a workshop. Both Magnus Hedenmark and Richard Blume practise the frameworkof The Natural Step and think that the C2C certification should be used as a tool within theframework. Some weak points found by these persons in the certification are that it is timeconsuming,not transparent enough and lack of a systems perspective.The C2C certification was compared with bluesign, a sustainability standard for the textileindustry, and Eco Index, a sustainability tool made for the outdoor industry. The purpose was toinvestigate if the C2C certification is compatible with other tools and the compared aspects weremainly lifecycle stages, impact categories and level of detail, but also purpose, procedure,workload, required knowledge and experience, cost, credibility and transparency.Both strengths and weaknesses were found when studying the C2C certification. It has got apositive approach to sustainability and develops safe products from a chemical perspective buthas a lack of systems perspective, is costly and time-consuming. The compatibility of the toolswas discussed with the comparison as a basis. Eco Index is modular and could be adjusted tocomplement the C2C certification but both tools have a big workload. bluesign and the C2Ccertification include the same lifecycle stages but have different strengths, which could makethem complementing each but possibly contradictive.Klättermusen is recommended to make a sustainability vision of their future products and thenchoose which tools to use. Since Klättermusen is already a bluesign system partner it could be agood idea to complement bluesign with Eco Index and C2C, but this choice should depend onthe future vision.

This research aims to support sustainability practitioners at the beginning of a change initiative towards sustainability to increase the success of the change. Moving towards sustainability is a complex journey and requires radical and structural transformational change in companies. Mutual understanding of the company and the practitioner is required to design a suitable change process. Existing tools related to sustainability, change management, corporate analysis and assessment were analyzed. In addition, practitioners in organizational change and sustainability were interviewed. Identified were eight Areas of Inquiry for the practitioner to focus on at the initial stage of an engagement: Vision; Purpose and Commitment; Urgency, Importance and Business Case; Level of Integration of Sustainability; Business Goals and Strategy; Culture and Capacities; Communication and Stakeholder Engagement; Measurement and Reporting. These areas form a platform for dialogue to guide sustainability practitioners in gaining understanding of the organizational change capacities and sustainability within the company and, in doing so, contributes to addressing the sustainability challenge at large.

The rise in popularity of the concept of sustainability has brought along many theoretical models and tools that promise to facilitate the sustainability transition of those who use them. One of those tools is the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development, which several organisations have already used. However, what happens to this framework once it leaves its written format and is used by actual organisations? To help us answer this question, we have conducted semi-structured interviews with six organisations with the support of documentary research. All of which have used the framework. We then used thematic analysis to analyse the data. To interpret the results, we combined the perspectives of Scandinavian Institutionalism theory with a focus on translation and Change Management. The findings suggest that the motivation before selecting the framework plays a critical role in the way it is translated to practice. Early communication efforts may also influence the way the employees of an organisation perceive the framework and hence influence if they will resist its adoption. The framework does not maintain its integral theoretical form when organisations adopt it. Most of the organisations completely discarded one of its components. One organisation changed another almost beyond recognition. But at the same time, they recognise it as a uniquely good guiding tool. It also appears that among the components, the sustainability principles and the ABCD-procedure are almost always effectively translated and serve organisations’ sustainability objectives.

Considering the lack of clear guidance regarding the way business could include social sustainability into their operations, the objective of this research project was to study the functionality of social sustainability tools which are used worldwide by business practitioners and assess how useful these tools are to overcome barriers related with social aspects of sustainability as they are described in the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD): health, influence, competence, impartiality and meaning-making. A qualitative method analysis was selected, based upon direct content analysis. Elements from the 5 Level Framework (5LF) and the FSSD were used for designing two review processes to analyse selected social sustainability tools. The 5LF is useful for planning in complex systems, while the FSSD is designed to address complex challenges and recognize opportunities which aim to sustainability. The findings from the research show which tools, based on their functionality, can help a company move towards sustainability and illustrate how they address different social sustainability aspects. Based on these findings, recommendations were developed which included key features of the selected social sustainability tools. These recommendations could help business practitioners to choose the most appropriate tool for specific business context depending on the company’s needs.

Inom forskningen har social hållbarhet blivit allt mer uppmärksammat som en allt viktigare del för att skapa framtidens hållbara samhälle. Det finns en viss samsyn kring vad som behövs prioriteras för att främja social hållbarhet. Utan konkreta verktyg för att gå från ord till handling blir det dock svårt att nå en långsiktig omställning till en hållbar stadsutveckling. Denna studie syftar till att undersöka vilka verktyg som används för att integrera social hållbarhet i kommunal planering, samt att undersöka vilka hinder de tjänstepersoner som intervjuas i studien upplever vara kopplade till arbetet med social hållbar stadsutveckling. Undersökningen grundar sig i en kvalitativ metod i form av en jämförande fallstudie i fyra svenska kommuner. De kommuner som är undersökta är Upplands Väsby kommun, Haninge kommun, Huddinge kommun och Göteborgs Stad. Fallstudien bygger på semistrukturerade intervjuer med tjänstepersoner som arbetar med detaljplanering och strategisk planering på dessa kommuner. De teoretiska utgångspunkterna behandlar social hållbarhet som begrepp, vad det sociala hållbarhetskonceptet innehåller, social hållbarhet i planeringen samt vilken roll hållbarhetsverktyg har i planeringen. Resultatet visar att arbetet med social hållbarhet till viss del skiljer sig åt mellan kommunerna. De mest frekvent använda verktygen utgörs av olika typer av verktyg för medborgardialog, hållbarhetsbedömning för översiktsplanen (där social hållbarhet är inkluderat) och space syntax-analyser för att undersöka tillgänglighet. Resultatet från fallstudierna tyder på att verktygen främst används för att de passar den lokala kontexten och kommunernas sätt att arbeta. Verktygen används också för att de skapa en diskussion och en helhetssyn kring de sociala aspekterna. En del av verktygen var inte tillgängliga i den egna kommunen men kunde vid behov tillgängliggöras via privata aktörer. De olika intervjupersonerna hade olika uppfattning om användbarheten av verktyg för att integrera social hållbarhet. Resultatet från studien tyder även på att tjänstepersonerna upplever olika utmaningar relaterade till arbetet med social hållbarhet. Skillnader kan identifieras både mellan olika yrkesroller och kommuner. De mest betydande hinder som visat sig försvåra arbetet är bristande prioritering då andra frågor väger tyngre, otillräcklig samordning, bristande kunskap i kommunerna, avsaknad av riktlinjer på en högre strategisk nivå än den kommunala samt bristande uppföljning av åtgärder kopplade till sociala aspekter.