Current issue
Modern Management Systems
Topics of next issues
Current issue
Archive
About the Journal
International Editorial Office
International Scientific Board
Reviewers
Open Access policy
Indexation
Publisher
Journal revenues
Principles of publication ethics by COPE
For authors
Procedure securing the originality of the publication
Principles of developing a scientific publication
Review procedure
Rules for submitting articles
Fees
For reviewers
Ethical standards
ORIGINAL PAPER
Same goal, different approaches? A comparative study on sustainability in private and public sectors
1
National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, Romania
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article
Submission date: 2026-04-24
Final revision date: 2026-07-10
Acceptance date: 2026-07-12
Online publication date: 2026-07-31
Publication date: 2026-07-31
NSZ 2026;21(3):167-190
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Research objectives and hypothesis/research questions:
This study examines the complementary roles of the public and private sectors in advancing sustainability, focusing on the role of partnerships (SDG 17) in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The objectives are comparing the institutional frameworks shaping sustainability practices, analyzing how differences in governance mechanisms influence sustainability outcomes, and evaluating the contribution of public-private partnerships for SDG implementation. The study hypothesizes that, despite their distinct institutional logics, the two sectors are complementary rather than incompatible, and that partnerships, supported by strong leadership, enhance sustainability outcomes.
Research methods:
The study proposes a narrative literature review and conceptual comparative analysis, synthesizing approximately 40 academic and institutional sources published primarily between 2007 and 2026, together with foundational international policy documents, to examine institutional, managerial, and governance approaches to sustainability in the public and private sectors.
Main results:
The results show that the effectiveness of governance depends on regulatory governance, stakeholder engagement, and network cohesion, with the public sector often constrained by bureaucratic fragmentation. The paper concludes that sustainability should be understood as a collective and interdependent effort rather than the responsibility of any single sector. Achieving the SDGs depends on the capacity of public and private actors to collaborate within well-designed governance frameworks that combine leadership, innovation, legitimacy, efficiency, and equity. Strengthening partnerships, fostering cross-sector leadership, and promoting continuous learning are therefore essential for enhancing the impact of sustainability initiatives.
Implications for theory and practice:
The analysis shows that divergent institutional logic does not necessarily create incompatibility, but rather reveals significant potential for complementarity. This document highlights the complexity of institutional environments and the need for coherent frameworks that remove sectoral barriers and strengthen governance.
This study examines the complementary roles of the public and private sectors in advancing sustainability, focusing on the role of partnerships (SDG 17) in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The objectives are comparing the institutional frameworks shaping sustainability practices, analyzing how differences in governance mechanisms influence sustainability outcomes, and evaluating the contribution of public-private partnerships for SDG implementation. The study hypothesizes that, despite their distinct institutional logics, the two sectors are complementary rather than incompatible, and that partnerships, supported by strong leadership, enhance sustainability outcomes.
Research methods:
The study proposes a narrative literature review and conceptual comparative analysis, synthesizing approximately 40 academic and institutional sources published primarily between 2007 and 2026, together with foundational international policy documents, to examine institutional, managerial, and governance approaches to sustainability in the public and private sectors.
Main results:
The results show that the effectiveness of governance depends on regulatory governance, stakeholder engagement, and network cohesion, with the public sector often constrained by bureaucratic fragmentation. The paper concludes that sustainability should be understood as a collective and interdependent effort rather than the responsibility of any single sector. Achieving the SDGs depends on the capacity of public and private actors to collaborate within well-designed governance frameworks that combine leadership, innovation, legitimacy, efficiency, and equity. Strengthening partnerships, fostering cross-sector leadership, and promoting continuous learning are therefore essential for enhancing the impact of sustainability initiatives.
Implications for theory and practice:
The analysis shows that divergent institutional logic does not necessarily create incompatibility, but rather reveals significant potential for complementarity. This document highlights the complexity of institutional environments and the need for coherent frameworks that remove sectoral barriers and strengthen governance.
REFERENCES (46)
1.
AFZAL, A., RASOULINEZHAD, E., MALIK, Z., 2022. Green finance and sustainable development in Europe, Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, No. 35(1), pp. 5150-5163.
2.
AKSOM, H., VAKULENKO, V., 2024. Revisiting the scope and suggesting novel domains of institutional theory in public administration research, Teaching Public Administration, No. 42(2), pp. 230-250.
3.
ALQASIMI, S.A., ZERVOPOULOS, P.D., SHARKER, A.E., FOUSTERIS, A.E., 2025. A Review of the Impact of Institutions on Public Sector Efficiency, International Review of Management and Marketing, No. 15(3), pp. 352-390.
4.
CALABRESE, A., COSTA, R., GHIRON, N.L., TIBURZI, L., MONTALVAN, R.A.V., 2022. Is the private sector becoming cleaner? Assessing the firms’ contribution to the 2030 Agenda, Journal of Cleaner Production, No. 363.
5.
CHEN, Y., ZHANG, F., 2026. Advancing Social Equity in Local Government Sustainability Actions: An Institutional Perspective, The American Review of Public Administration, No. 56(2), pp. 135-151.
6.
CIORNEI, I., 2022. Despre Taxonomia UE și principiul DNSH – “Do No Significant Harm”, Bucovina Forestieră, No. 22(2), pp. 167-195.
7.
DAMAYANTHI, S., 2022. Review of the book The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process by P. H. Thornton, W. Ocasio & M. Lounsbury, Colombo Business Journal, No. 13(1), pp. 193-196.
8.
DRAGOMIR, L., CROITORU, I. M., NICOLETA DANIELA, I., CHIVU, M., 2026. Reflecting the alignment of key administrative performance indicators with the UN’s sustainable development goals in the public sector in the specialized literature, International Conference of Management and Industrial Engineering, No. 12, pp. 546-554.
9.
DUMITRESCU, A., GIL-BAZO, J., ZHOU, F., 2022. Defining greenwashing, SSRN Electronic Journal, 10.2139/ssrn. 4098411, pp. 8-31.
10.
ELKINGTON, J., 2018. 25 Years Ago I Coined the Phrase “Triple Bottom Line.” Here’s Why It’s Time to Rethink It, https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-yea... (accessed: 4.04.2026).
11.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, MAZZUCATO, M., 2018. Mission-oriented research & innovation in the European Union – A problem-solving approach to fuel innovation-led growth, https://op.europa.eu/en/public... (accessed: 17.04.2026).
12.
FRIEDMAN, M., 2007. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits, [in:] W.C. Zimmerli, M. Holzinger, K. Richter (eds.), Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 173-178.
13.
GHOBAKHLOO, M., 2020. Industry 4.0, digitization, and opportunities for sustainability, Journal of Cleaner Production, No. 252.
14.
HACKING, T., 2019. The SDGs and the sustainability assessment of private-sector projects: theoretical conceptualization and comparison with current practice using the case study of the Asian Development Bank, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, No. 37(1), pp. 2-16.
15.
HAYWOOD, L.K., FUNKE, N., AUDOUIN, M., MUSVOTO, C., NAHMAN, A., 2019. The Sustainable Development Goals in South Africa: Investigating the need for multi-stakeholder partnerships, Development Southern Africa, No. 36(5), pp. 555-569.
16.
HINOJOSA, N.D.R. F., SANDOVAL, L.M.A., HUGO, V., COX, M., 2024. Approach to Organizational Management in the Public Sector, International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, No. 5(2), pp. 1855-1859.
17.
KPMG, 2020. The time has come: The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020, https://assets.kpmg.com/conten... (accessed: 15.04.2026).
18.
KUHLMAN, T., FARRINGTON, J., 2010. What is sustainability?, Sustainability, No. 2 (11), pp. 3436–3448.
19.
LATORCAI, C.J., STRAUSZ, P., CSEDŐ, Z., 2025. Impact of institutional change programs on digital and sustainable public sector governance, International Journal of Public Sector Management, No. 38(5), pp. 610-626.
20.
LEAL FILHO, W., DIBBERN, T., DINIS, M.A.P., CRISTOFOLETTI, E.C., MBAH, M.F., MISHRA, A., CLARKE, A., SAMUEL, N. CASTILLO APRAIZ, J., ABUBAKAR, I.R., AINA, Y.A., 2024. The added value of partnerships in implementing the UN sustainable development goals, Journal of Cleaner Production, No. 438.
21.
MANES ROSSI, F., BRUSCA, I., COHEN, S., CAPERCHIONE, E., THOMASSON, A., 2025. Public Financial Management for Sustainable Development Goals: Challenges, Experiences, and Perspectives, Financial Acc & Man, No. 41, pp. 484-489.
22.
MARINESCU, A.O., 2020. Assessment of the environmental reporting practices of the companies indexed in the GRI Database, [in:] R. Pamfilie, V. Dinu, L. Tăchiciu, D. Pleșea, C. Vasiliu (eds.), 6th BASIQ International Conference on New Trends in Sustainable Business and Consumption, Messina, Italy, 4–6 June 2020, Bucharest: ASE, pp. 634-641.
23.
MASSEY, A., 2022. Sustainable Development Goals and their Fit with Good Governance, Global Policy, No. 13 (Suppl. 1), pp. 79-85.
24.
MINTZBERG, H., 2015. Time for the Plural Sector, Stanford Social Innovation Review, No. 13(3), pp. 28-33.
25.
MONTIEL, I., 2008. Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: Separate pasts, common futures, Organization & Environment, No. 21(3), pp. 245-269.
26.
OECD, 2016. Private Sector Engagement for Sustainable Development: Lessons from the DAC, Paris: OECD Publishing.
27.
OECD, 2019. Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2019: Empowering People and Ensuring Inclusiveness and Equality, Paris: OECD Publishing.
28.
OLIVEIRA‐DUARTE, L., REIS, D.A., FLEURY, A.L., VASQUES, R.A., FONSECA FILHO, H., KORIA, M., BARUQUE‐RAMOS, J., 2021. Innovation ecosystem framework directed to sustainable development goal# 17 partnerships implementation, Sustainable Development, No. 29 (5), pp. 1018-1036.
29.
PÎNZARU, F., DIMA, A.M., ZBUCHEA, A., VEREȘ, Z., 2022b. Adopting sustainability and digital transformation in business in Romania: A multifaceted approach in the context of the just transition, Amfiteatru Econ, No. 24(59), pp. 27-44.
30.
PÎNZARU, F., SĂNIUȚĂ, A., SĂLĂGEANU, B.R., 2022a. Managing innovation for sustainability in public administration: the challenges of capacity-building, Modern Management Systems, No. 17(3), pp. 65-79.
31.
PORTER, M.E., REINHARDT, F.L., 2007. Grist: A Strategic Approach to Climate, Harvard Business Review, No. 85(10), pp. 21-44.
32.
RADIN, D., 2019. Book review: Sustainable Development Goal 16: Focus on public institutions, World Public Sector Report 2019. United Nations, Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York, 2019, 219, Public Sector Economics, No. 43(4), pp. 477-483.
33.
RASHED, A.H., SHAH, A., 2021. The role of private sector in the implementation of sustainable development goals, Environment, Development and Sustainability, No. 23(3), pp. 2931-2948.
34.
SAXENA, A., RAMASWAMY, M., BEALE, J., MARCINIUK, D., SMITH, P., 2021. Striving for the United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals (SDGs): what will it take?, Discover Sustainability, No. 2(1).
35.
SHEEHY, B., FARNETI, F., 2021. Corporate social responsibility, sustainability, sustainable development and corporate sustainability: what is the difference, and does it matter?, Sustainability, No. 13(11).
36.
SILVA, S., 2021. Corporate contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals: an empirical analysis informed by legitimacy theory, Journal of Cleaner Production, No. 292.
37.
SMITH, P. A., SHARICZ, C., 2011. The shift needed for sustainability, The Learning Organization, No. 18(1), pp. 73-86.
38.
THÜRER, M., TOMAŠEVIĆ, I., STEVENSON, M., QU, T., HUISINGH, D., 2018. A systematic review of the literature on integrating sustainability into engineering curricula, Journal of Cleaner Production, No. 181, pp. 608-617.
39.
TRONDAL, J., 2021. Public administration sustainability and its organizational basis, International Review of Administrative Sciences, No. 87 (2), pp. 399-415.
41.
UNITED NATIONS, 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development “Our Common Future”, https://digitallibrary.un.org/... (accessed: 17.04.2026).
42.
UNITED NATIONS, 2015. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/7... (accessed: 2.04.2026).
43.
VAN DER WAAL, J.W., 2024. Is the private sector beginning to embrace the SDGs?, CABI Reviews, No. 19(1).
44.
VAZQUEZ-BRUST, D., PIAO, R.S., DE MELO, M.F.D.S., YARYD, R.T., CARVALHO, M.M., 2020. The governance of collaboration for sustainable development: Exploring the “black box”, Journal of Cleaner Production, No. 256.
45.
WORLD BANK. 2019. Maximizing Finance for Development (MFD): Leveraging the Private Sector for Growth and Sustainable Development, https://documents1.worldbank.o... (accessed: 15.04.2026).
46.
ZHAN, J.X., SANTOS-PAULINO, A.U., 2021. Investing in the Sustainable Development Goals: Mobilization, channeling, and impact, Journal of International Business Policy, No. 4(1), pp. 166-183.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2719-860X |
| ISSN: | 1896-9380 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
