B Impact Assessment as a Driving Force for Sustainable Development: A Case Study in the Pulp and Paper Industry

Abstract

This study evaluates the effectiveness of the B Impact Assessment (BIA) as a catalyst for integrating sustainability into industrial firms through a qualitative case study of LC Paper, the first B Corp-certified tissue manufacturer globally and a pioneer in applying BIA in the pulp and paper sector. Based on semi-structured interviews, organizational documents, and direct observation, this study examines how BIA influences corporate governance, environmental practices, and stakeholder engagement. The findings show that BIA fosters structured goal setting and the implementation of measurable actions aligned with environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and economic resilience. Tangible outcomes include improved stakeholder trust, internal transparency, and employee development, while implementation challenges such as resource allocation and procedural complexity are also reported. Although the single-case design limits generalizability, this study identifies mechanisms transferable to other firms, particularly those in environmentally intensive sectors. The case studied also illustrates how leadership commitment, participatory governance, and data-driven tools facilitate the operationalization of sustainability. By integrating stakeholder and institutional theory, this study contributes conceptually to understanding certification frameworks as tools for embedding sustainability. This research offers both theoretical and practical insights into how firms can align strategy and impact, expanding the application of BIA beyond early adopters and into traditional industrial contexts.

1. Introduction

Sustainability has become a key component for companies seeking to maximize their economic benefits and contribute positively to the environment and society [1,2,3]. This paradigm shift has led to the search for tools and evaluation frameworks that allow companies to measure, manage, and communicate their sustainability performance [4,5]. The B Impact Assessment (BIA) evaluates a company’s performance in various areas, including its environmental, social, and economic impact [6]. However, despite its growing popularity and adoption, important questions about the effectiveness and scope of the BIA must be explored. Although prior studies have analyzed the sustainability trade-offs in business models [7], there is a critical need to explore in depth how BIA addresses these trade-offs, which leads to our RQs.

Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of the BIA, although they have not reached definitive conclusions. For example, Li and Leonas [8] found that B Corp performance varies significantly across different impact areas. Similarly, Liute and De Giacomo [9] noted the evidence of these differences and that companies tend to prioritize their social performance over environmental performance. Indeed, Hunter and De Giacomo [10] noted that, in seeking certification, some companies neglect the environmental aspect and focus on improving their social performance. Finally, Fernhaber and Hawash [11] observed a negative relationship between the social and environmental impacts. This prioritization often reflects broader structural incentives; for instance, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) may overemphasize environmental initiatives due to the availability of state or EU grants for projects such as solar panels or energy-efficient retrofitting [12,13]. As several scholars argue, this reveals the persistence of a fragmented approach in corporate sustainability, where financial and business motivators tend to outweigh a truly integrated vision. Consequently, some have proposed frameworks such as the integrated bottom line to move beyond the limitations of the traditional triple bottom line (TBL) [14,15]. From these findings, the RQs that arise are as follows:

-

RQ1: How can the BIA direct the case study firm towards comprehensive sustainability in all areas beyond its traditional focus on economic considerations, including social and environmental dimensions?

-

RQ2: Among the different impact areas assessed by the BIA (e.g., governance, workers, community, environment, and customers), which ones exhibit the greatest improvements in the company’s sustainability performance?

Several studies have identified perceived effects and limitations after obtaining B Corp certification. Paelman et al. [16,17], for example, noted a positive impact on turnover growth rates after certification. In contrast, Parker et al. [18] observed a slowdown in growth in the short term after certification. Patel and Dahlin [19], on the other hand, indicated that obtaining certification does not offer financial benefits, although there are social benefits. Romi et al. [20] found that firms with an “area of excellence” in the area of workers have significantly higher productivity. Likewise, Carvalho et al. [21] illustrated how B Corp certification, which is obtained through the BIA, can positively influence the mission, capabilities, and practices of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), highlighting the BIA as an effective instrument to unlock the potential for business sustainability. However, the existing literature on the outcomes or limitations associated with certification is scarce and sometimes contradictory, highlighting the need for further research in this area. While previous studies have explored the effects of B Corp certification on financial and social performance, including stability and the trade-offs between economic and non-economic goals [19,22,23], further research is needed to understand the perceived benefits and practical challenges of BIA as a tool for integrated sustainability, thus motivating our RQs. From this, the following RQs arise:

-

RQ3: What perceived benefits are associated with implementing the BIA as a guiding tool for sustainability analysis?

-

RQ4: What are the practical challenges, success factors, and limitations of implementing the BIA?

Hence, the goal of this study is to critically evaluate the effectiveness of the BIA as a tool for business sustainability, identifying the areas of greatest impact and the challenges faced by companies. This analysis contributes to the existing literature by providing practical and theoretical insights that can guide future research and business practice towards improving comprehensive sustainability.

Specifically, this study considers the pulp and paper industry (PPI), a sector characterized by its significant industrial footprint and notable environmental challenges. Unlike many other industries, the PPI faces unique obstacles such as high levels of pollution, substantial water and energy consumption, and critical waste management issues. Our case study of LC Paper, the first paper manufacturer in the world to obtain B Corp certification, is particularly relevant as it navigates these specific industry challenges while striving to achieve comprehensive sustainability.

The relevance of this research lies in its potential to provide a deeper understanding of how the BIA influences companies’ sustainability practices. Given the increasing pressure on companies to demonstrate tangible commitments to sustainability [24,25], understanding the effectiveness of the BIA is crucial for companies seeking to improve their impact, as well as for stakeholders seeking to assess and benchmark sustainability performance in a meaningful way [2,26,27]. Therefore, by examining the perceived benefits, values, outcomes, and challenges associated with the application of the BIA, this study enriches the existing body of knowledge, providing guidance for future research and practice in realizing more integrated and effective corporate sustainability.

The structure is as follows: Section 2 delves into the B Corp and BIA. Section 3 focuses on the case study company. Section 4 describes the methodology and data collection. Section 5 presents the results and discussion obtained, and, finally, Section 6 presents the conclusions, limitations, and future lines of research.

2. Theoretical Framework

Sustainability is an essential component in today’s business environment, which is facing increasing environmental and social challenges [28,29,30]. Companies are adopting practices that consider social well-being and environmental protection in addition to economic profitability, known as the TBL approach [31,32,33]. This corporate commitment to sustainability encompasses an integrated strategy to reduce negative environmental impacts, promote collective well-being, and ensure long-term economic sustainability [34,35,36].

To frame the sustainability performance of the case company, this study primarily adopts the TBL framework, which enables a structured assessment of environmental, social, and economic dimensions. However, it is important to note that other theoretical perspectives—such as stakeholder theory [37], institutional theory [38,39], or integrated corporate sustainability frameworks [40]—could offer valuable complementary insights. While these approaches were beyond the scope of this analysis, they provide promising avenues for future research aiming to explore the systemic, relational, or institutional implications of sustainability certification tools such as the BIA.

The PPI is traditionally associated with a high environmental impact, and critical challenges such as deforestation, significant water and air pollution, and energy-intensive processes have emerged [41,42]. These industry-specific issues highlight the importance of examining cases such as LC Paper, whose commitment to sustainability in such a challenging environment offers enriching insights. LC Paper implements strategies that optimize resource use, promote renewable energies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and improve waste management systems.

Beyond environmental concerns, business ethics encompass a broader spectrum of commitments. Companies proactively engage with employees, customers, suppliers, communities, and society as a whole to address social issues and promote collective well-being [43,44]. This includes initiatives that promote diversity and inclusion, ensure fair labor practices, support local community development, and promote philanthropic efforts [45,46,47].

Adopting sustainable and ethical practices offers numerous benefits. Integrating sustainability into business strategies helps mitigate the risks associated with resource scarcity, climate change, and regulatory changes. It also increases operational efficiency by optimizing resource use, reducing waste generation, and minimizing energy consumption [48,49,50]. This commitment strengthens corporate reputation, fosters customer loyalty, and attracts talent, thus increasing market competitiveness [51,52,53].

Furthermore, responsible business practices positively impact local communities and society [51]. By engaging with communities, companies contribute to socioeconomic development, create employment opportunities, and support educational initiatives [54,55,56]. These practices also align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, addressing social challenges such as poverty reduction, gender equality, and environmental conservation [57,58,59]. Achieving these goals requires a comprehensive approach that includes robust governance structures, active stakeholder engagement, transparent reporting, and continuous improvement. Companies must incorporate these principles into their culture, decision-making processes, and supply chain management [60].

In short, integrating sustainability is now essential for companies. By implementing sustainable practices and actively engaging with stakeholders, companies can create shared values [57,58,59] and value [61,62,63], drive positive social and environmental change, and ensure their long-term success in a challenging global environment.

2.1. Benefit Corporations and B Corporations

Benefit Corporations and B Corporations have emerged as game changers in the business world, redefining success beyond financial gains to include positive impacts on society and the environment [64,65,66]. A Benefit Corporation is a legal entity that formalizes a company’s commitment to creating a positive impact on society and the environment [67]. Unlike traditional corporations focused solely on maximizing shareholder value, Benefit Corporations are legally required to consider the interests of various stakeholders in their decision-making processes [67,68]. This legal framework distinguishes them from traditional entities, focusing on a triple bottom line (TBL) strategy that harmonizes their social, environmental, and economic objectives [69].

B Corporations certified by the non-profit entity B Lab demonstrate an exceptional commitment to social and environmental responsibility, voluntarily undergoing a rigorous evaluation process [6,70,71]. This process measures their overall impact on governance, employees, community, customers, and the environment, and ensures they operate with maximum transparency and credibility, serving as catalysts for good [27,72,73,74].

Both corporation models promote systemic change in the business world, urging companies to incorporate strategies that favor their contribution to sustainable development [65,73,75,76]. They can therefore position themselves as leaders in their sectors and inspire other companies to adopt more responsible and holistic practices [17,77].

These innovative models attract investors, talent, and consumers who value social and environmental impacts, thus enhancing brand reputation, customer loyalty, and market differentiation [4,78,79,80,81]. Moreover, they facilitate collaboration and network formation among like-minded businesses, fostering the enrichment of knowledge exchange and joint efforts towards common goals [4,6,70].

However, adopting these models presents challenges that range from integrating social and environmental considerations into all operational facets to modifying corporate culture and governance structures [17,82].

In sum, Benefit Corporations and B Corporations offer innovative approaches to the business world that promote social and environmental responsibility. They provide a roadmap for companies to integrate sustainable practices into their core operations [83,84].

2.2. B Impact Assessment

In the evolving landscape of corporate responsibility and ethical business practices, a variety of sustainability standards, certifications, and specific frameworks have emerged, covering a wide range of areas including quality management, occupational health and safety, social responsibility, and environmental sustainability [4,16,84]. Standards such as ISO 9001, ISO 45001, ISO 26000, and SA8000, along with certifications such as The Green Seal, Fair Labor Association (FLA), and WRAP, illustrate organizations’ commitment to quality, safety, social, and environmental standards [57,85,86,87].

Within this complex mosaic of ethical and sustainability standards, the BIA stands out as a comprehensive tool designed by B Lab to assess the holistic impact of companies on society, the environment, and their overall operations [8,9,21,88]. Unlike other standards and certifications that focus on specific aspects of business operations, the BIA offers a broader and more inclusive approach, evaluating a company’s performance across multiple dimensions [4,16,84].

Specifically, it is a free tool that enables companies to compare their impact with that of others, taking into account the country, industry, and company size. It also identifies improvement opportunities, best practices, and long-term progress through customized improvement reports, guides, and case studies [6]. It therefore enables companies to assess, manage, and enhance their positive contributions to the environment, community, customers, suppliers, and employees, according to Carvalho et al. [21], Fonseca et al. [84], and Silva et al. [89], making it a globally recognized tool for measuring social and environmental impact. The United Nations has adopted the BIA to help companies assess their compliance with its sustainable development goals, which has led to the integration of these two standards through the SDG action manager [69,76].

This tool covers a wide variety of topics, such as labor practices, supply chain management, environmental footprint, community engagement, and transparency. According to Silva et al. [89], the BIA comprises five indicators—governance, workers, community, environment, and customers—measured using 16 variables that represent the performance practices and outputs achieved by companies. It also assesses a company’s accountability and transparency through its reporting practices, stakeholder engagement, and governance structure.

Companies can use the tool for self-assessment, or they may choose to pursue B Corp certification, which requires scoring a minimum of 80 points out of 200. In cases of certification, companies must pay an annual fee proportional to their revenue.

3. The Case: LC Paper

This case study focuses on a company in the PPI sector in Spain. This sector is a very important part of the Spanish manufacturing industry, accounting for 4.5% of the total GDP and almost 8.8% of the turnover [90]. According to ASPAPEL, the Spanish Association of Pulp, Paper and Cardboard Manufacturers, the sector has 73 factories—63 paper and cardboard factories, 5 cellulose factories, and 5 integrated factories—located mainly in Catalonia, Aragon, and Valencia, and it is clearly committed to sustainability as a driver of growth, promoting the circular economy, sustainable forest management, and responsible production [91].

At the European Union level, Spain is the sixth largest producer of paper and the fifth largest producer of pulp, with a total sector production for 2023 of 7.7 million tons, comprising 1.7 million tons of pulp and 6 million tons of paper and cardboard. With a recycling rate of 80%, the Spanish PPI is the third highest recycler in Europe [91].

Shifts in consumer behavior driven by the rise of digitalization have led to a structural transformation within the PPI sector, which is undergoing a major process of product replacement. In the packaging sector, for instance, many suppliers, packers, designers, and distributors are looking for more sustainable solutions in response to the demands of end consumers and are therefore turning to paper and cardboard, the natural choice for trade, logistics, and transport.

We chose LC Paper for this case study because it is the only globally certified B Corporation tissue paper manufacturer and the first paper manufacturer to obtain B Corp certification. LC Paper is located in Catalonia (Spain). Like other companies in the sector, LC Paper faces some common environmental challenges such as deforestation, water and air pollution, high energy consumption, chemical use, and waste production. These environmental concerns are compounded by odor emissions and noise pollution, often leading to opposition from local communities. However, LC Paper’s efforts in sustainable manufacturing, including reduced energy and water consumption and the use of renewable resources, highlight a proactive approach to these challenges. This commitment not only demonstrates industry responsibility but also sets a precedent for environmental stewardship in the face of the growing global demand for paper products.

While other certified brands do not have their own manufacturing facilities, LC Paper serves as the supplier for several of these brands, such as The Good Roll NL and Naked Sprout UK. Additionally, LC Paper received the Best of the World award for two consecutive years (2021 and 2022), acknowledging its exceptional achievements in environmental sustainability. This award is granted by B Lab, the organization that certifies B Corporations. These accolades and distinctions reinforce the choice of LC Paper as a noteworthy case for examining the implementation and impact of the BIA in guiding comprehensive sustainability practices. Selecting LC Paper as the primary case for this study offers unique and valuable insights into the challenges, successes, and overall effectiveness of the BIA in the context of a leading sustainable paper manufacturer.

4. Materials and Methods

Our methodology provides a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the BIA as a guiding tool for companies on the path to comprehensive sustainability. To achieve this goal, a qualitative approach based on case research methodology was taken [92], and LC Paper was carefully selected as our case study due to its unique positioning within the environmentally intensive PPI. Following the recommendations of Yin (2018) [93] and Stake (1995) [94], we adopted a single-case design, as LC Paper represents a unique and information-rich case for exploring the integration of sustainability practices through the BIA. Single cases can provide valuable and persuasive insights [95] and are particularly suited for theory building [96]. In addition, we followed Flyvbjerg (2006) [97] in emphasizing the contextual depth and practical relevance of case-based inquiry, while ensuring methodological rigor through data triangulation [98]. This methodological choice enabled us to explore how sustainability practices can be effectively implemented in an industry often criticized for its ecological footprint.

Details of the methodological approach, including orientation techniques, fieldwork duration, primary and secondary sources of information, participant selection, and data analysis procedures, are summarized in

Table 1. Main methodological characteristics.

Main Methodological Characteristics
Methodological orientation	Qualitative Exploratory research Discourse analysis
Technique	Case study
Number of cases	One
Field work	October 2022–November 2023
Primary source of information	Semi-structured interviews, organizational documents (sustainability reports, certifications, industry publications)
Participant selection	Key stakeholders at LC Paper: executives, sustainability managers, employees involved in sustainability initiatives
Instrument used	Semi-structured interviews; documentary analysis
Main topics of the interview	Motivations, challenges, outcomes associated with B Corp certification, sustainable practice integration, strategies, and policies employed by LC Paper
Setting and data collection	Semi-structured interviews; documentary analysis; direct observation of company operations
Data analysis	Three coders Qualitative analysis of interviews and documents; iterative manual coding approach
Secondary sources of information	Organizational documents (sustainability reports, certifications, industry publications); observation of company operations

.

This methodology enables the detailed examination of a particular company’s experience with the BIA, allowing a deeper understanding of its implementation process, perceived benefits, challenges, and overall impact on its sustainability practices. By conducting interviews, analyzing relevant documents, and observing the company’s operations, this study uncovered valuable insights and generated rich data to address the RQs. The findings highlight how LC Paper, operating within a traditionally contaminating PPI industry, has made significant strides in sustainability. This is particularly noteworthy given the industry’s historical struggle with environmental concerns, ranging from resource depletion to pollution. LC Paper’s initiatives represent not only an internal shift but also a potential model for industry-wide transformation. Through this qualitative case study, a nuanced and context-specific understanding of the role and effectiveness of the BIA in guiding companies towards comprehensive sustainability is obtained.

4.1. Data Collection

A total of 9 interviews were conducted from October 2022 to November 2023 with key stakeholders from LC Paper, including executives, sustainability managers, and employees involved in sustainability initiatives. Additionally, two external stakeholders—one shareholder and the managing director of B Lab Spain—were interviewed to provide broader perspectives on the BIA’s influence. Interviewees were selected based on their direct involvement in the company’s sustainability strategy, ensuring relevant and insightful data. Data from these stakeholders were also leveraged to enrich our response to RQ2, offering a multi-perspective view and reinforcing the triangulation of findings. In addition to these stakeholder interviews, we triangulated the data using publicly available secondary sources to complement the primary findings and broaden the empirical base. These included industry-level benchmarks from the ASPAPEL 2023 Statistical Report [99], LC Paper’s official B Corp and EU Ecolabel certifications [100,101], and independent media coverage—such as press articles from El Economista and El Món Economia—covering the company’s investments in renewable energy and other sustainability initiatives [102,103]. These external sources provided contextual validation of the company’s reported performance in environmental management, governance, and workforce-related practices.

The interviews were recorded and later transcribed. Each interview lasted between 60 and 120 min. The semi-structured interview guide covered the following areas: motivations for pursuing B Corp certification, challenges and success factors, sustainability integration, and perceived outcomes of implementing the BIA. This structure ensured that each RQ was addressed systematically during the interviews, aligning data collection with this study’s objectives.

In addition to the interviews, relevant organizational documents were analyzed. These documents included sustainability reports, certifications, and industry publications. They provided valuable information for corroborating the insights gathered through interviews and helped to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the company’s sustainability practices, specifically as follows:

Sustainability reports were used to assess LC Paper’s sustainability goals, progress, and specific outcomes.

Certification documents related to BIA compliance offered insights into the company’s areas of strength and opportunities for improvement.

Each document was reviewed and linked directly to a specific RQ to ensure coherence in the methodology. For example, sustainability reports provided direct data on which areas of sustainability were most impacted by the BIA framework.

To supplement the interviews and document analysis, direct observations of LC Paper’s operations were conducted. This allowed the researchers to gain real-world insights into how sustainability practices were implemented on the ground, including energy efficiency measures, waste management, and employee engagement in sustainability initiatives. This direct observation added an important layer of contextual evidence to demonstrate how the BIA was integrated into LC Paper’s decision-making processes.

4.2. Data Analysis

Data collected from interviews, documents, and observations were analyzed using a qualitative coding approach. Three independent researchers coded the interview transcripts, organizational documents, and observational data through a manual iterative process [92]. This approach was chosen to ensure that the coding process captured the full range of insights available in the data.

First-order coding identified key themes and concepts directly related to the RQs.

Second-order coding aggregated those concepts into broader categories (e.g., environmental sustainability, community engagement, employee development).

The coders worked together to validate and refine the final set of themes, ensuring consistency and reliability in the interpretation of the data. The methodology of this study was designed so that each data collection method (interviews, document analysis, and direct observation) was clearly linked to the four RQs. This connection was ensured by coding the key dimensions identified in the interviews and documents, which corresponded to each RQ.

Table 2. Coding tree.

Aggregate Dimensions	Second-Order Themes	Concepts	Combined Data and Source References
BIA Effectiveness (RQ1)	Comprehensive Sustainability	Environmental, Social, and Economic Sustainability	“BIA has pushed us to look beyond environmental factors and consider social and economic dimensions in our sustainability efforts.” Pau Vila (LC Paper); onboarding document: commitment to continuous improvement, environmental protection, and energy efficiency; sustainability report: commitment to generating positive impact and leading the transition towards environmentally and socially neutral paper consumption.
	Business Strategy Alignment	Integration with Business Goals	“The BIA framework aligns well with our strategic goals, particularly in sustainability.” Joan Vila (LC Paper); onboarding document: OnePly® technology for reduced energy consumption; sustainability report: agile, daring, and transparent approach in paper tissue and kraft product development.
BIA Impact (RQ2)	Environmental Practices	Eco-Friendly Innovations	“Since implementing BIA, we’ve innovated in several eco-friendly processes.” Sergi Álvarez (LC Paper); onboarding document: paper tissue standard and sustainable product lines; sustainability report: adoption of OnePly® technology, renewable energy initiatives.
	Community Involvement	Local Community Engagement	“Our community programs have been significantly influenced by BIA guidelines.” Fina Cuadros (LC Paper); onboarding document: promoting environmental awareness; sustainability report: transparency and myth breaking in the industry.
	Workforce Development	Employee Well-Being and Development	“BIA has made us rethink our approach to workforce development and welfare.” Mónica Ricart (LC Paper); onboarding document: employee training and risk assessment; sustainability report: emphasis on employee training, job creation, and gender equality.
BIA Benefits and Value (RQ3)	Business Advantages	Competitive Edge and Market Position	“BIA certification has definitely given us an edge in the marketplace.” Pau Vila (LC Paper); onboarding document: exporting to over 30 countries; sustainability report: leading position in sectoral sustainability rankings, first global paper manufacturer to achieve B Corp status.
	Stakeholder Relations	Improved Stakeholder Relations	“Our transparency through BIA has positively impacted stakeholder trust.” Anna and Emili Garcia (Garcia de Pou); onboarding document: commitment to certified sourcing; sustainability report: emphasis on transparency with customers and suppliers.
BIA Challenges (RQ4)	Operational Integration	Implementing BIA in Business Processes	“The biggest challenge was integrating BIA principles into our daily operations.” Eloi Alcaraz (LC Paper); sustainability report: balancing innovative sustainability practices with operational efficiency.
	Resource Needs	Resource and Financial Investment	“Allocating resources for BIA compliance was initially challenging due to budget constraints.” Mónica Ricart (LC Paper); onboarding document: investment in sustainable technologies; sustainability report: significant investment in sustainability initiatives and energy-efficient technologies.
BIA Success Factors (RQ4)	Leadership Involvement	Role of Top Management	“Our leadership’s direct involvement was crucial for successful BIA implementation.” Joan Vila (LC Paper); onboarding document: CEO’s commitment to monitoring environmental, social, and ethical impact; sustainability report: CEO’s active role in guiding towards sustainability.
	Staff Participation	Engaging Employees in Sustainability	“Employee engagement in sustainability practices was vital for BIA success.” Fina Cuadros (LC Paper); onboarding document: employee engagement in sustainability; sustainability report: emphasis on internal and external stakeholder relationships.
BIA Limitations (RQ4)	Scope Restrictions	Coverage Limitations of BIA	“BIA doesn’t cover every single aspect of our operations, but it’s a solid framework.” Pablo Sánchez (B Lab Spain); sustainability report: acknowledgment of the challenges in fully encompassing all operational aspects.
	Process Complexity	Difficulty in BIA Procedure	“Understanding and implementing BIA’s complex procedures was a learning curve for us.” Carla Iglesias (Garcia de Pou); onboarding document: navigating the complexity of BIA implementation.

provides a detailed overview of how the aggregate dimensions and second-order themes corresponded to each RQ and how the data from interviews, documents, and observations were combined to answer them.

5. Discussion

The BIA framework enables companies to evaluate and enhance their social, environmental, and economic impact through five key indicators—governance, workers, community, environment, and customers—each assessed through a set of specific variables [78].

Table 3. LC Paper’s actions and outcomes aligned with BIA indicators.

Indicator	Variable	Actions/Outcomes by LC Paper
Governance	Mission and Engagement	LC Paper integrates sustainability at its core, supported by clearly defined environmental and social policies. Stakeholder engagement initiatives reflect a proactive commitment to reducing environmental impact and enhancing corporate responsibility.
	Ethics and Transparency	The company has implemented a code of ethics emphasizing integrity, transparency, and respect for human rights, as reflected in its internal governance policies. These standards are reinforced through regular compliance audits and ethical training sessions. All external audits (e.g., FSC, ISO 14001) have been passed without major nonconformities, and no ethical breaches have been reported.
	Mission Locked	LC Paper maintains B Corp certification and aligns its operations with ISO 14001 and ISO 50001 standards. This ensures that sustainability is structurally embedded in its long-term strategy and across all functions.
Workers	Financial Security	Wage structures exceed Spain’s legal minimums, and all employees benefit from fixed contracts with full social security coverage, as documented in payroll samples and contribution records. The ratio between the highest and lowest salary is below 5:1, and 0% of employees are on minimum-wage contracts.
	Health, Wellness, and Safety	LC Paper conducts annual occupational health checks in collaboration with QuirónPrevención. Internal protocols and risk assessments are in place and periodically updated. The company achieves 100% preventive medical coverage, and no serious workplace accidents have been reported in the past three years.
	Career Development	An individual development program (PID) is in place to guide training in sustainability, digital tools, and operational competencies. Roughly 40% of the management team has been promoted internally, based on internal records and interview data.
	Engagement and Satisfaction	LC Paper has earned the “Great Place to Work” certification, indicating strong internal cohesion, trust, and inclusive management. Surveys show high levels of employee satisfaction, and participation in team development programs exceeds 90%.
Community	Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion	A formal anti-discrimination policy is enforced to ensure equal treatment across gender, age, ability, and origin. Inclusive employment practices are verified through partnerships with Aniser and adherence to updated diversity, equity, and inclusion guidelines since 2022.
	Economic Impact	The company sources from local suppliers and participates in industrial clusters such as ASPAPEL. More than 60% of procurement volume is allocated to vendors within a 100 km radius, reinforcing regional economic resilience.
	Civic Engagement and Giving	LC Paper collaborates with entities like Aniser Facility, outsourcing support services while ensuring training in occupational risks and legal compliance. These partnerships reflect a socially inclusive supply strategy.
	Supply Chain Management	LC Paper evaluates suppliers on environmental and social criteria. Hazardous materials are managed through documented safety protocols, and raw materials are certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC). Audits confirm supplier adherence to sustainability requirements.
Environment	Environmental Management	The firm applies waste reduction strategies, including a sludge treatment system that reduces residue volumes by over 50%, as reported in third-party environmental project documents (e.g., biomass valorization studies).
	Air and Climate	With an 832.4 kWp solar power plant and biomass-based heating, LC Paper covers ~80% of its electricity needs with renewables, reducing emissions in line with ISO 14067 carbon footprint targets.
	Water	Advanced on-site treatment and recycling systems are in place to limit freshwater consumption. Wastewater discharges meet regulatory thresholds, and the internal water cycle has been optimized through investment in closed-loop processes.
	Land and Life	The firm actively monitors and protects nearby natural ecosystems (e.g., riverside zones), based on evidence provided by the “Estudi Riu C18X7077”, a technical study on the local biodiversity and ecological conditions. Conservation practices help reduce risks to surrounding habitats.
Customers	Customer Stewardship	LC Paper produces sustainable paper products using recyclable cardboard packaging. Customer-facing environmental claims are verified by third-party certifications, including Ecolabel, FSC, and B Corp.

summarizes LC Paper’s alignment with these dimensions, incorporating both concrete actions and verifiable outcome metrics. These indicators are supported by internal documentation (e.g., payroll records, occupational health protocols, supplier declarations) and certified external references (e.g., ISO 14001, FSC, B Corp), providing a robust evidence-based view of the firm’s sustainability performance.

As illustrated in Table 3, LC Paper has implemented a comprehensive range of actions across each BIA indicator, contributing to its overall sustainability mission. In the governance domain, the company’s B Corp certification, adherence to ISO standards, and implementation of a formal code of ethics underscore its commitment to ethical operations and transparency. For workers, LC Paper’s certification as a “Great Place to Work” reflects strong employee engagement. In addition, concrete indicators such as a wage ratio below 5:1, full social security coverage, regular medical check-ups, and a 40% internal promotion rate illustrate its tangible investment in workforce welfare and professional development. Community-focused initiatives, including local economic support and civic engagement partnerships, reflect LC Paper’s commitment to social impact. This includes efforts to foster diversity and inclusion through internal anti-discrimination policies and compliance with Spanish equality legislation, which embeds diversity, equity, and inclusion principles into organizational and labor practices. Notably, over 60% of suppliers are local, reinforcing the company’s regional economic footprint. Environmentally, LC Paper’s innovative waste management practices, including sludge valorization and water reuse systems, are supported by technical documentation. The firm’s 832.4 kWp solar installation covers approximately 80% of its total electricity usage, contributing significantly to the reduction of its carbon footprint. Finally, in customer stewardship, LC Paper meets the growing market demand for sustainability by offering recyclable packaging and products certified by FSC, PEFC, and the EU Ecolabel, aligning with its circular economy goals.

This section presents the findings of our in-depth case study of LC Paper, focusing on the implementation and impact of the BIA within the PPI. Drawing on the RQs underpinning this study, we structured the findings to meticulously explore the BIA’s multifaceted role in guiding companies towards full sustainability. Each section corresponds to one of the four key RQs, providing a focused examination of the BIA’s effectiveness, its areas of impact, the benefits and outcomes it fosters, and the challenges and success factors encountered during its implementation. This structured approach facilitates a thorough understanding of the BIA’s influence on LC Paper and offers insights into the broader implications for sustainability practices within the industry. Through a qualitative analysis of the interviews, organizational documents, and direct observations, this chapter delves into the transformative journey of LC Paper, illustrating how the BIA has served as a catalyst for embedding comprehensive sustainability into the fabric of the company’s operations and culture.

RQ1: How can the BIA support the case study firm towards comprehensive sustainability in all areas beyond its traditional focus on economic considerations, including social and environmental dimensions?

LC Paper’s experience validates the BIA’s effectiveness as a framework for achieving balanced sustainability across social, environmental, and economic dimensions, aligning with the triple bottom line principles commonly emphasized in the corporate sustainability literature [31]. The company’s adoption of the BIA has enabled structured goal setting that advances environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and economic resilience, creating an integrated approach to sustainability.

Environmental sustainability has been a prominent focus, with the BIA supporting LC Paper in implementing targeted and measurable environmental improvements. For example, LC Paper’s installation of an 832.4 kWp photovoltaic system has reduced dependency on non-renewable energy and lowered CO₂ emissions by over 80%, exemplifying the BIA’s role in facilitating decarbonization efforts within the organization. The company’s biological water treatment plant further aligns with the BIA’s resource efficiency objectives, reflecting practices advocated by studies on corporate environmental responsibility [104]. The BIA’s structured approach aligns with ISO 14001 requirements, enhancing LC Paper’s ability to systematically manage environmental impacts within a certified framework.

In terms of social sustainability, the BIA has reinforced LC Paper’s policies on diversity, equity, and inclusion. The company’s anti-discrimination and health monitoring programs have created a safer and more inclusive workplace, a principle further supported by health monitoring programs that prioritize both physical and mental well-being. The head of People and Culture, Fina Cuadros, described BIA as “a transformative tool for embedding social sustainability within company culture,” noting increased employee engagement and cohesion as a result. These policies reflect the social aspect of the BIA’s sustainability model, supporting the integration of socially responsible practices.

Economically, the BIA has bolstered LC Paper’s market reputation, positioning it as a preferred partner for clients who prioritize ethical business practices. B Corp certification has strengthened LC Paper’s market differentiation, particularly with clients who value third-party verification of sustainability efforts. This supports findings by Porter and Kramer [105], who suggest that shared values can simultaneously drive profitability and positive societal impact. LC Paper’s experience thus confirms the BIA’s efficacy in fostering a triple bottom line approach that balances profitability with sustainability.

RQ2: Among the different impact areas assessed by the BIA (e.g., governance, workers, community, environment, and customers), which ones exhibit the greatest improvements in a company’s sustainability performance?

LC Paper’s implementation of the BIA has produced notable changes in its environmental practices, employee engagement, and corporate governance, areas frequently highlighted in sustainability research as critical to long-term corporate resilience [106].

In environmental management, the BIA has driven LC Paper’s optimization of production processes. The adoption of OnePly^® technology, which decreases energy consumption by 70%, exemplifies the BIA’s role in fostering sustainable innovation. This aligns with recent studies that emphasize the importance of innovation in reducing operational emissions [107]. Furthermore, LC Paper’s rigorous waste management practices, including protocols for hazardous materials, reflect the BIA’s influence on resource use efficiency and align with standards such as the FSC and PEFC certifications, which further reinforce sustainable sourcing commitments.

Employee engagement has been significantly impacted by the BIA. Structured individual development programs have fostered greater job satisfaction, supporting studies that link employee well-being with corporate sustainability [108]. LC Paper’s Great Place to Work certification further illustrates the BIA’s impact on workplace quality, indicating a high level of employee morale and alignment with organizational values.

In governance, the BIA has reinforced LC Paper’s commitment to transparency and ethical accountability. The internal code of ethics, combined with risk prevention policies, has become the key component of daily operations, creating a culture of responsibility and adherence to high ethical standards. This supports research emphasizing the importance of ethical governance in sustainable business practices [109]. LC Paper’s adherence to BIA guidelines has thus catalyzed positive changes in environmental, social, and governance areas, embedding sustainability in the organization’s core functions.

These internally reported changes were further reinforced by external stakeholder perspectives. The representative for B Lab Spain, for instance, described LC Paper as a paradigm within the industrial sector, highlighting its longstanding commitment to environmental transformation and cultural change. Likewise, a customer shareholder emphasized the company’s evolution from its local perception as a polluting actor to a benchmark for sustainability. These viewpoints validate the internal claims and strengthen the credibility of the areas identified as most affected—the environment, workforce, and governance.

Beyond the specific outcomes, the case of LC Paper also reveals concrete organizational mechanisms that have enabled its sustainability transformation. These include the use of structured assessment tools like the BIA; reliance on external certifications (e.g., ISO 14001, FSC, B Corp) as both compliance and learning instruments; participatory design of internal policies with employee input; digital platforms for tracking social and environmental indicators; ethical sourcing procedures; and investment in renewable energy infrastructure. These mechanisms, grounded in the firm’s industrial operations, demonstrate how sustainability can be operationalized at scale.

RQ3: What perceived benefits are associated with implementing the BIA as a guiding tool for sustainability analysis?

The BIA framework has yielded multiple strategic benefits for LC Paper, enhancing transparency, stakeholder trust, and market differentiation. These benefits align with the findings that certifications often enhance corporate reputation and trust [110].

Externally, LC Paper’s shift to recyclable cardboard packaging, in line with the BIA’s environmental priorities, has appealed to eco-conscious clients, strengthening the brand’s appeal. This packaging innovation aligns with studies suggesting that consumers increasingly value environmental responsibility, viewing it as a marker of corporate trustworthiness [111]. Additionally, the BIA’s framework for transparent communication has allowed LC Paper to reinforce relationships with stakeholders, including suppliers, clients, and the local community, by openly sharing sustainability goals and achievements. This is consistent with ASPAPEL’s ethical standards and demonstrates LC Paper’s commitment to responsible practices within the industry.

Internally, the BIA has bolstered employee morale, as evidenced by the Great Place to Work certification, which reflects the company’s commitment to a supportive and inclusive workplace. This internal alignment has improved job satisfaction, a benefit commonly associated with strong corporate sustainability initiatives [112]. The combination of external and internal benefits confirms the BIA’s strategic value as a tool for strengthening corporate identity and stakeholder relationships.

RQ4: What are the practical challenges, success factors, and limitations of implementing the BIA?

While beneficial, implementing the BIA presents challenges, primarily in resource allocation and compliance. The financial and operational demands are significant, especially in areas such as energy management and waste reduction. This aligns with research that highlights the cost-intensive nature of sustainability certifications [113].

Leadership support has been a critical success factor, enabling alignment between the BIA’s standards and LC Paper’s strategic objectives. CEO Pau Vila emphasized that “Executive support has been essential for embedding sustainability into our culture, prioritizing long-term impact over short-term gains,” highlighting the importance of top-down advocacy in successful BIA adoption. Leadership commitment cultivates employee engagement and facilitates the operational changes required by the BIA.

However, limitations include the financial burden associated with maintaining the BIA and supplementary certifications, such as FSC and PEFC, which address industry-specific requirements not covered by the BIA alone. Moreover, the BIA’s broad framework requires complementary standards like ISO 14001 for comprehensive environmental compliance, indicating that the BIA alone may not fully meet all operational needs. This reflects the dual nature of the BIA’s impact; while it provides valuable guidance, successful implementation demands substantial resources and adaptability to supplementary standards.

While several prior studies have examined the impact of B Corp certification and the BIA process on organizational performance—such as those documenting mixed outcomes in Latin American SMEs using structuration theory to explain the translation of B Corp frameworks into firm-level practices [75]—few cases offer empirical clarity within industrial sectors in advanced economies. Unlike general overviews, our study presents the longitudinal case of LC Paper—a certified B Corp in Spain—demonstrating how the BIA has tangibly influenced governance structures, workforce conditions, environmental practices, and community relations. This complements the existing literature, which tends to emphasize financial returns, or the certification processes themselves, rather than the detailed mechanisms and outcomes observed in operational Spanish industry [2,114,115]. In addition, recent studies on rooftop photovoltaic systems and energy communities in Spain [116] support our findings regarding the economic and environmental viability of local renewable energy deployment at an industrial scale. By situating LC Paper within both the sustainability certification literature and the national technical implementation of renewables, our case bridges the theoretical frameworks of hybrid governance with sector-specific operationalization in Spain’s manufacturing sector [113,117].

Theoretically, this study contributes to the literature on sustainability-driven transformation by illustrating how the BIA operates not merely as a reporting tool but also as an instrument of institutional change. In line with conceptualizations of the BIA as a hybrid governance mechanism [3], our findings show how LC Paper embedded sustainability across its organizational routines, policies, and stakeholder practices. Unlike prior research focused on mission-driven startups or service firms [2,115], this case presents empirical insights from a legacy manufacturing firm operating in a mature industrial context, thus expanding the application of sustainability frameworks beyond early adopters. It also complements the work of Battilana et al. (2009) and Bocken et al. (2014) [118,119] by illustrating how hybrid logics are operationalized at multiple levels—strategy, governance, and operations—through structured assessment and certification. As such, the case strengthens the theoretical models of institutional entrepreneurship and sustainability integration in the traditional sectors, particularly within the context of Southern European economies.

From a practical standpoint, the case of LC Paper offers concrete insights into how established industrial firms can embed sustainability logics across their operations without compromising productivity or competitiveness. The case reveals mechanisms such as the use of structured self-assessment tools (e.g., the BIA), external certifications (e.g., B Corp, ISO 14001, FSC), and stakeholder engagement (e.g., employee co-design of policies) as enablers of internal transformation.

While the firm operates within the Spanish regulatory and cultural context—characterized by public healthcare and strong labor protections—many of the practices implemented (e.g., integrated renewable energy generation, ethics-based procurement, formalized inclusion policies) are transferable across industrial firms regardless of geography. The case thus offers sector-level relevance by illustrating how sustainability frameworks can be applied in legacy manufacturing environments, providing a roadmap for other firms aiming to reconcile profitability with impact.

6. Conclusions

This study presents an exploratory examination of the BIA within the PPI, focusing on LC Paper, a recognized leader in sustainable practices in this sector. Employing a qualitative case study approach, we offer significant insights into the role of the BIA as a catalyst for comprehensive sustainability, one that extends beyond environmental considerations to embrace social and economic dimensions.

The main contribution of this research lies in its thorough analysis of BIA implementation and outcomes within a complex industry context. By focusing on LC Paper, we present empirical evidence on the BIA’s capacity to guide companies toward a holistic understanding of sustainability in practice. This research enriches the existing literature by providing a nuanced analysis of the BIA’s multidimensional impact, demonstrating the tool’s versatility and wide-ranging applicability.

Our findings reveal that LC Paper’s experience affirms the BIA’s effectiveness as a framework for balanced sustainability across social, environmental, and economic dimensions. BIA adoption has empowered LC Paper to enhance environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and economic resilience through structured goal setting, resulting in an integrated sustainability approach. Environmental sustainability has been notably advanced, with the BIA guiding LC Paper toward targeted measurable improvements. In the social dimension, BIA has strengthened LC Paper’s commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Economically, the BIA has bolstered the company’s market reputation, distinguishing it as a preferred partner for clients who prioritize ethical business practices, with B Corp certification enhancing its market differentiation.

Three core areas of sustainability have been most impacted by the BIA within LC Paper: environmental practices, employee engagement, and corporate governance. In environmental management, the BIA has driven LC Paper’s production optimizations and reductions in operational emissions. Employee engagement has been enhanced through initiatives fostering greater job satisfaction, while governance commitments have strengthened transparency and ethical accountability.

Key benefits associated with BIA implementation include increased transparency, stakeholder trust, and market differentiation. However, challenges such as resource allocation and compliance are prominent. Strong leadership support has been instrumental, aligning BIA standards with LC Paper’s strategic goals. Notably, the financial challenges related to maintaining the BIA and additional certifications underscore that, while the BIA provides crucial guidance, successful implementation requires substantial resources and adaptability to supplementary standards.

For practitioners, particularly within the pulp and paper industry (PPI) and other environmentally intensive sectors, this study illustrates how the BIA can serve not only as an evaluative framework but also as a practical mechanism for embedding sustainability across operations. LC Paper’s experience demonstrates that the BIA enables companies to diagnose performance gaps, implement structured improvements, and reinforce ethical, social, and environmental practices. The integration of certifications, participatory governance, and digital tools further illustrates actionable mechanisms that may be replicated across industrial contexts.

From a policy standpoint, the findings support the case for incorporating BIA-like assessment tools into broader sustainability regulation, particularly for sectors with significant ecological footprints. By demonstrating the measurable gains in energy efficiency, workforce conditions, and stakeholder engagement, this case offers a grounded model that policymakers can reference when designing sustainability mandates.

At the theoretical level, this research advances the discourse on sustainability transformation by showing how the BIA functions as a hybrid governance mechanism. It validates prior frameworks (e.g., institutional entrepreneurship, hybrid logics) in an underexplored industrial setting within Southern Europe and adds empirical clarity to the operationalization of sustainability standards.

Beyond its practical insights, this study also contributes to the theoretical understanding of how sustainability certification tools such as the BIA can serve as vehicles for embedding TBL principles in industrial contexts. The empirical findings illustrate how the BIA enables the translation of environmental, social, and economic objectives into measurable practices while revealing organizational tensions and strategic trade-offs inherent in the process. Additionally, although it does not explore the subject in depth, this study acknowledges the potential relevance of stakeholder and institutional theory in interpreting the BIA’s dual role as a performance management system and a mechanism of institutional alignment. These theoretical considerations open avenues for further conceptual development and cross-disciplinary inquiry into the institutional dynamics of sustainability transformation in traditional industrial sectors.

Ultimately, this case study makes a multi-level contribution, illuminating how sustainability tools like the BIA can catalyze transformation at the firm, sector, and policy levels. It also provides a replicable roadmap for other industrial firms seeking to embed sustainability in a strategic and verifiable manner.

Focusing on the single case of LC Paper offers an in-depth understanding of BIA impacts within a specific context, but it limits generalizability to the broader industry. Different industries and regions may encounter unique challenges and opportunities in implementing the BIA, underscoring the need for comparative studies to evaluate its applicability across diverse settings. Additionally, the qualitative nature of this study provides detailed insights but lacks the statistical generalizability that quantitative methods might offer.

As Yin (2018) notes [93], case studies aim for analytical generalization—developing insights and theoretical propositions—rather than statistical generalization. In this sense, our single-case design follows the rationale that a well-chosen information-rich case can provide powerful and transferable insights [95] despite its inherent limitations in terms of statistical representativeness.

While this study demonstrates the effectiveness of the BIA framework within the context of LC Paper, it does not aim to establish the BIA as definitively more effective than other sustainability assessment tools. LC Paper’s experience shows how the BIA complements existing certifications (e.g., EcoVadis Gold, Ecolabel) by advancing sustainability practices in a more integrated manner.

Future research involving comparative, multi-case, and longitudinal designs will be crucial to evaluate the broader applicability and relative effectiveness of the BIA framework across diverse contexts.

Future studies integrating quantitative data can yield a more comprehensive view of the BIA’s impacts, offering a balanced understanding of its effectiveness. Time constraints also restrict this study, allowing only a snapshot of the BIA’s implementation at LC Paper. Long-term impacts and challenges remain unexplored, pointing to the potential for longitudinal studies to track the sustained influence of the BIA over extended periods. This research primarily examines LC Paper’s internal stakeholders, while the perspectives of external stakeholders such as customers, suppliers, and community members are not deeply addressed. Future research incorporating these viewpoints can provide a more holistic perspective on the external impacts of BIA implementation. Moreover, the limited financial analysis of the cost–benefit of the BIA and its effect on financial performance suggests a need for detailed studies, possibly including cost–benefit assessments and return on investment (ROI) analyses, to guide companies considering BIA adoption.

Future research could benefit from broadening the theoretical lens beyond the TBL framework employed in this study. While the TBL offers a useful foundation to assess the environmental, social, and economic dimensions of sustainability performance, additional theoretical approaches—such as stakeholder theory, institutional theory, or corporate sustainability frameworks—could provide complementary insights. For instance, stakeholder theory may help analyze how the BIA shapes relationships with key actors, institutional theory could illuminate the role of certification as a mechanism of normative and cognitive alignment, and corporate sustainability frameworks might offer more integrative perspectives on long-term strategic transformation. Incorporating these frameworks in comparative or multi-case research designs could further uncover the systemic drivers, constraints, and outcomes of BIA implementation across industries and geographies.

Based on these limitations, several avenues for future research emerge. Comparative studies across industries and regions can clarify the broader applicability and effectiveness of the BIA. Longitudinal research and detailed financial analyses can illuminate the long-term impacts of the BIA, assisting companies in making informed decisions about its adoption. Combining quantitative and qualitative methods can yield a more nuanced view of the BIA’s impacts, enhancing generalizability. Further exploration of external stakeholder perspectives, as well as an examination of sector-specific challenges, regulatory environments, and the role of organizational culture and structure, can provide deeper insights into the strategic application of the BIA in advancing sustainable business practices.