Search results

Purpose
In recent decades, the concepts of sustainable development (SD) and sustainability have become a part of the everyday information flow. Is there real impact on students who have potential to become stakeholders and decision-makers? To be able to answer this question, the authors focussed on the following problems: whether the discourse of SD has any impact on students of economics concerning their knowledge of the environmental pillar of SD; and whether it has an impact on their individual value orientation towards the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP).


Design/methodology/approach
A group of 120 university students of economics programs from the Czech Republic was chosen for the quantitative research of this study. About a half of them have already encountered environmental education. The questionnaire included topics of environmental pillar of SD and revised NEP scale.


Findings
Using correlation analysis, the results show that the discourse of SD does have an impact on the students' knowledge of the environmental pillar of sustainability and it also has an impact on their individual value orientation towards the NEP in general. The knowledge of the environmental pillar of SD is not significantly influenced by the study of a subject which included the topic of SD and its principles. Value orientation towards NEP is not significantly influenced by the study of a subject which, among other things, included the topic of SD and its principles.


Research limitations/implications
Findings should be accepted with the knowledge of the limited sample from one country, on the other hand, information flow – usual discourse of SD is global.


Social implications
There is positive NEP orientation among the students of economics – young women and men have pro-environmental attitudes. This can be considered as great unused social potential in higher education.


Originality/value
This study deals with knowledge of SD, environmental education and value orientation. It is broader concept taking into account the real social environment in terms of usual SD discourse and individual value orientation, not only direct influence of education on knowledge. The study rejected direct impact of the environmental education on knowledge and value orientation in terms of SD discourse among the students of economics. The findings bring several important questions regarding the effective forms of environmental education.

AbstractWhile alternative food networks (AFNs) have become the leading conceptualisation of sustainable food systems, vibrant scholarship on food self‐provisioning (FSP) in Central and Eastern Europe has remained confined to the geopolitical region it investigates. This article brings these two bodies of thought closer together in two steps. First, we trace four framings of FSP deployed over the last three decades—coping strategy, cultural practice, hobby and source of good food and reading FSP as transformative practice—to demonstrate its progressive affinity with AFNs. Second, we follow the most recent framing in highlighting the material reality of local food production as a feature shared by both FSP and AFNs. From this perspective, FSP can be understood as a more radical variant of AFNs given its more substantial environmental and social impact (FSP is more widespread and socially inclusive and less dependent on market transactions). By uncovering the epistemological underpinnings of these different framings of FSP and exploring their implications for food practices on the ground, this article draws general lessons for scholarship aiming to advance food system transformation.

AbstractThis article presents the results of an international comparative study on food self‐provisioning, an activity still widespread in the countries of the Global North. We collected the data in a sociological survey done in 2010 as a part of the household energy use research project GILDED. We selected a region with urban and rural areas as a case study in each of the five EU countries, including Scotland, the Netherlands, Germany, the Czech Republic, and Hungary. Our article raises two main research questions: (1) What is the level of food self‐provisioning in the regions? (2) Who participates in it? Additionally, we inquired into the motivations of self‐provisioners using the results of analyses of sociodemographic and food consumption habits for their interpretation. We found that the level of self‐provisioning varies considerably among the regions. Its share ranges from 13 percent in Dutch urban areas to 58 percent in German rural areas. The effects of some sociodemographic and geographic factors differ significantly among the countries. However, we can summarize that living in one's own property, living in a house or in a rural area, having a partner or children, being retired, or having a low income increases the probability of food self‐provisioning.