What Happened to the ‘Development’ in Sustainable Development? Business Guidelines Two Decades After Brundtland

Over twenty years ago ‘Our Common Future’ presented a conceptualization and explanation of the concept of sustainable development. Since then numerous alternative definitions of the concept have been offered, of which at least some are exclusive to each other. At the same time, the role of business in the transition to sustainable development has increasingly received attention. Bringing these two trends in sustainable development together, this paper returns to the Brundtland version of the concept to examine to what extent the original principles of sustainable development are still embedded within key business guidelines, namely the UN Global Compact, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the ICC Business Charter for Sustainable Development, the CAUX Principles, the Global Sullivan Principles and the CERES Principles. The findings suggest that these business guidelines tend to emphasize environmental rather than social aspects of sustainable development, in particular to the detriment of the original Brundtland prioritization of the needs of the poorest. Furthermore, the attention to environmental aspects stresses win-win situations and has a clear managerialist focus; whereas more conceptual environmental issues concerning systems interdependencies, critical thresholds or systemic limits to growth find little attention. The normative codes and principles targeted at the private sector thus not only add another voice to the multiple discourses on sustainable development but also contribute to a reinterpretation of the original agenda set by Brundtland towards conceptualizations of sustainable development around the needs of industrialised rather than developing countries. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

A self-reported work sampling study in community pharmacy practice

Lack of time to implement pharmaceutical care has been cited as a barrier to the routine provision of this extended patient-care service. Using self-reported work sampling methodology, this study investigated how community pharmacists utilise their time. Pharmacists working in community pharmacies in the Greater Belfast area were found to spend approximately 49% of their time engaged in professional activities, 29% in semi-professional activities and 22% involved in non-professional activities. The activity to which pharmacists devoted the majority of their time was product assembly and labelling, this being a task which can be performed by trained technical staff. Only 9.5% of community pharmacists' time was devoted to counselling patients on their prescription medicines. Wide variation in the amount of time apportioned to each activity was observed between the participating community pharmacists (n=30). Staffing levels within the community pharmacy were found to significantly influence pharmacists' involvement in a number of activities, with pharmacists who worked in pharmacies employing multiple pharmacists devoting more time to the assembly and labelling of products and less time to administrative tasks, non-professional encounters and to miscellaneous professional activities. Pharmacists working in pharmacies with a high prescription turnover were found to devote significantly less time to counselling patients regarding OTC products and in responding to patient symptoms.