Suchergebnisse

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to posit that a key sustainability tool can help provide a needed guide for the many forms of new curricula for academic, public and professional learning communities. The authors demonstrate that key sustainability competency (KSC) research can highlight and provide an array of learning outcomes that can be back cast to co-design flexible, detailed curriculum, pedagogy, practice and assessment structures. They also briefly outline the connection of KSC to education for sustainability (EfS) to provide the educational basis for designing and facilitating classrooms that contribute directly to the sustainability movement.


Design/methodology/approach
This paper is a review of literature with a specific focus on Glasser's (2018b) promising use of the tree as an analogy and metaphor for KSCs.


Findings
Some, for example, Glasser and Hirsh (2016) claim significant progress in identifying a KSC framework (Wiek et al., 2011) However, the authors raise concerns about the impasse that the literature has demonstrated because these stand in the way of the co-creation of sustainable societies by adjusting how we learn and interact with the world. The authors argue that we must realize and disrupt the destructive actions that form their usual approach and replace them with sustainable habits (Glasser, 2018a), and this requires the emergence of a new class of sustainability practitioners with the skills, attitudes and dispositions that are consistent with being wise, future-oriented, interdisciplinary and global decision-makers (Biasutti, 2015; Biasutti and Frate, 2016; Corney and Reid, 2007; McNaughton, 2012; Scoullos, 2013).


Research limitations/implications
Using Glasser's metaphor, the authors assert a process through which the future sustainability practitioner might shift their values and understanding such that their habits and norms shift to create a new, sustainable way of being. The practitioner might demonstrate the competencies of implementing transformative change, modelling sustainable behaviour and wise decision-making. The competency of "empathy, mindfulness and social learning" implies critical reflection on one's actions in comparison to their social context. Thus, reflection at this stage (tree branches and fruits) could create transformation that shifts one's values and commitments (tree roots); the cyclical process could potentially begin again.


Practical implications
An adaptive and flexible framework of KSC could provide learning benefits by building the capacity for learners to think critically and tackle complex sustainability problems in novel ways (Brown, 2017; Glasser and Hirsh, 2016; Sterling et al., 2017; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 2017; Vare and Scott, 2007). Innovation and knowledge generation are possible since the KSC could teach "students how to think, rather than what to think, while letting [them] apply this thinking to real-world sustainability problems" (Wiek and Kay, 2015, p. 29). Through the KSC, people could also learn how to transform knowledge into action in their communities (Sterling et al., 2017, p. 160) and create real-world change. This is important, since unsustainable habits that comprise the "business-as-usual" case must be replaced with life-affirming actions and facilitate a new way of being in the world. After all, "[g]ood ideas with no ideas on how to implement them are wasted ideas" (Scott, 2013, p. 275).


Social implications
The authors have asserted that the implementation of the KSC could have social benefits because its associated pedagogies aim to actively involve learners in transforming society. The sequence sees the individuals' reflecting upon and evaluating one's growth vis-à-vis KSC and promotes the development of learning and other habits that betters ones' competencies (Rieckmann, 2012). Such reflection and empathy are more likely to be inherent to people who contribute to their own learning about the need to be truly compassionate for each other and the planet (Glasser and Hirsh, 2016). In achieving this level of empathy, it is a relatively simple matter then to understand that technology and policy alone are not adequately able to facilitate large-scale and positive change; unsustainability is a problem created by human action and therefore must be counteracted with theories of and solutions to unsustainable behaviours. Integrating a responsive KSC tool into higher education could help build the capacities, capabilities, competencies and eventually mastery and habits of mind and body that give rise to sustainable well-being societies.


Originality/value
The authors summarize and critique the KSC literature with an eye to creating a flexible and adaptive tool for individuals to chart their own path towards being a sustainability practitioner. The conceptual work herein is the first of its kind, and it will assist program who wish to accentuate contextual factors and individual learning objectives into their design.

The proponents of the infrastructural megaprojects promise much but often fail to deliver. These projects are complex interactions of numerous stakeholders often providing technical solutions to many end-users. The extent to which megaprojects identify and adequately address risks to sustainability is of concern to the societies employing the megaproject framework for investing in infrastructure. The goal of infrastructural engineering is to design and build infrastructure that supports society. Sustainability in megaprojects is concerned with the delivery of products and services that benefit society over the long-term. Failure to do so can result in social pushback such as protests seeking accountability and a refusal to pay. The result is a burden on society who do not reap the benefits promised to them by the project proponents. This paper seeks to establish the strategic risks which have an impact on sustainability in megaprojects. The research has emerged from interviews with professionals and documented sources. The study uses a qualitative research approach of grounded theory to investigate how megaprojects can better stay on track to deliver the infrastructure they promised for the benefit of society, both now and for future generations. A model was developed using a theory building process based on a concern variable and the seven core categories that emerged during data collection and analysis. The model likened the strategic risks to sustainability to those of the semi-generic archetype of Shifting the Burden. The model was then applied to the case of the Gauteng Freeway Improvements Project to test for practical adequacy. Recommendations for further research are to investigate government guarantees, risk allocation, and responsibility as they relate to sustainability. Of importance is the lack of resilience in megaprojects, which prevents stakeholders from adapting to a changing world. Building resilience in mega-projects would allow for better adaption in the face of uncertainty.

The demand for access to electricity in developing countries is rapidly increasing as intergovernmental organisations, national governments, and business leaders recognise the social and economic value of infrastructure investment. The institutions that govern energy investment and planning recognise a 'trilemma' of system development: low-carbon energy sources are needed to meet global climate change mitigation goals, while also meeting service reliability demands and energy security measures alongside maintaining service affordability, particularly for residents on the lowest incomes in rural, urban, and peri-urban communities. Integrating traditional, centralised grid networks based upon large-scale generation technologies (in the case of Mozambique, this includes hydropower from the Cahora Bassa Dam) with decentralised off-grid renewables such as solar projects in rural communities is a significant technical and governance challenge. Energy providers are tasked with a social mandate to deliver good quality electricity at an affordable price to consumers while widening access to underserved populations. Providing access to clean and reliable energy sources is embodied in Sustainable Development Goal 7 as one of the preconditions for socioeconomic development, poverty reduction, and human wellbeing (Pueyo and Maestre, 2019; UN Energy, 2005). International development practitioners and policy networks recognise the tangible benefits of electricity as a form of energy service provision. These tangible benefits include lighting and powering appliances at domestic, private, and institutional levels and increased telecommunications coverage, which collectively provide new personal and business development opportunities, healthcare and food safety benefits, and improved leisure and night-time education prospects (UN Energy, 2005). They also minimise the health risks and ecological impacts associated with black-carbon fuels such as charcoal, which diminish air quality within residential buildings (Anenberg, 2017) and lead to deforestation (Sedano et al., 2016). In order to enhance electricity sector performance, many sub-Saharan African countries have implemented significant governance reforms. It is necessary, however, to evaluate whether such reforms facilitate expanded social access to electricity, whether they improve service quality, public utility, and financial stability, and whether they lead to broader social and environmental sustainability goals. In this policy brief, we assess these dimensions related to the case of Mozambique, a country where major progress has been made to increase population-wide access to electricity from around 6% in 2004 (Chambal, 2010) to 32% in 2019 (EDM, 2020a). Though policy progress is significant, challenges remain, particularly in rural areas, where only around 6% of the population have electricity access (EDM, 2018a).

Autonomous Shipping – from autonomy to sustainability
Autonomy has been in the R&D roadmaps for over a decade, and it is getting serious. Contrary to common- places, it is not a goal by itself, but it can have a terrific impact on the shipping sector's sustainability, safety, and environmental targets. As a matter of fact, recent and famous projects like Yara Birkeland and ASKO show that environmental targets have driven investments into autonomous shipping vessels by cargo owners. Here Marco Molica Colella, Senior Innovation Consultant at CiaoTech (PNO Group) looks at the autonomous shipping industry and the journey it will take to improve its sustainability.

The Research Institute for Sustainability Science and Technology under the Master degree in Sustainability Science and Technology organises the course action research workshop on Science and Technology for Sustainability (5 ECTS). The authors have been coordinating the course during the academic years 13/14, 14/15 and 15/16. The purpose of the workshop is to put together civil society organisations, local administrations, students and educators to collaboratively undertake responsible research, performing transdisciplinary learning environments and by an action research framework, to answer questions such as: Who are we researching for? Who profits from our research? What are the impacts of our research? Which methodologies and tools should be used when dealing with sociotechnical sustainability challenges? Students work on real projects, related to local sustainability problems, represented by a community entity (Service learning and Campus Lab). Action research methodology is used with a two-cycle approach. In each real-life project, students, faculty and stakeholders are asked to follow the action–reflexion process of action research projects: Action 1—Jointly defining: Project purpose; Customer and interest; Involved actors; Reflexion 1—Students define: research question, initial situation, needed additional information, action Strategy, Tasks planning and distribution: Action 2—Items returning and discussing with stakeholders, Reflexion 2—Revising and reformulating. Having now run the workshop three times, we can conclude that: first, students realised the significance of framing an investigation under a research methodological framework that allows bringing research to the community, enhancing transdisciplinarity in any initiative or action in sustainability science. They set out the importance of some topics and the difficulty to hold them. Second, the formulation of the problem became one of the most arduous tasks in the process; difficulties were mainly related to the perception of the problem from distinct community group motivations. Third, interaction and communication with stakeholders and the recognition of their role was problematic as engineering students are not usually trained to work in wicked problems nor accompany stakeholders during the whole process. Finally, it is relevant to highlight that during the process students faced conflict and frustrating situations both within their team and with stakeholders. To help tackle this problem, an Emotional Intelligence module was introduced in the workshop which proved useful in helping students to solve some paralysing situations, which could otherwise have stopped the progress of the project. We suggest that engineering students need specific training in transdisciplinary research and in conflict resolution, to avoid collapsing in frustration when dealing with real transdisciplinary sustainability transitions.

PurposeThis paper seeks to describe a framework used to help MBA students understand and reconcile the different sustainability perspectives.Design/methodology/approachA review of the corporate sustainability literature is undertaken to develop the sustainability framework.FindingsThe sustainability framework relates basic concepts and assumptions within the ecocentric, ecological modernization and neoclassical paradigms to organizational practice and behavior. For the most part, the MBA students have only been exposed to neoclassical economic thinking within the other MBA subjects. The aim of the sustainability framework is to shift the students' thinking by engaging with sustainability from different perspectives, rather than presenting one version of sustainability to them. The framework has proven to be useful in developing critical and reflective thinking and discussion.Originality/valueThe paper provides a summary of sustainability concepts as applied to business practices and describes how this is used in teaching sustainability to business students.

Intro -- Preface -- Contents -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- 1 Introduction -- Sustainability and Sustainable Goals -- Basic Economic Concepts and Their Awesome Power -- Model for Sustainability with the Concept of Social Distance -- United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) -- Intergenerational and Intragenerational Transforms -- A Word of Caution on Economic Models -- Plato's Allegory of the Cave (A Strange Interpretation) -- Government's Role in Defining Limits and Generational Transfers -- References -- 2 Economic Models -- Transitivity and Binary Choices -- Stated Versus Revealed Preference -- Portfolio Choice -- Consumption Utility Model -- Consumption Utility Model Through Time -- Fisher Approximation (1930) -- Sustainability Utility Model -- Line in the Sand or a Spectrum of Options -- Binomial Pricing Models for Uncertainty -- Edgeworth Box and Societal Agreement -- Infinity and Finance -- Infinite Costs -- Infinity and Going Concern -- References -- 3 Growth and Business Sustainability -- Leverage -- Innovation -- Demographics -- Role of Government -- 4 Certification of Sustainability -- Trust and Acceptance in the Certification -- Measurability of the Certification -- Relationship of Certification to Social Distance -- Relationship of Certification to Stakeholders -- Sustainable Accounting Standards Board (SASB) -- Governmental Role in Certification -- Stability and Consistency -- Reference -- 5 Corporate Implementation and Business Forms -- Net Present Value and Discounted Cash Flows -- Payback Period -- Internal Rate of Return (IRR) -- Equivalent Annual Cost: Long Versus Short Term -- Sustainable Net Present Value (SNPV) -- Manipulations to the Cash Flow Model -- Business Forms -- Sole Proprietorships -- Partnerships -- Limited Liability Corporations: Private -- Limited Liability Corporations: Public.

The last two centuries have seen extraordinary technological and economic advances. This growth has come at a cost - that of a rapidly degrading environment. Pollution, resource depletion, and climate change threaten human civilization. The current governance structures do too little too slow. In a planet with finite resources, this is not sustainable. We must act and act now to avert a catastrophe waiting to happen. But where do we start? 'Sustainability models for a better world' gives simple and elegant answers. Illustrative models form the basis of its 55 chapters. Each chapter only 3-4 pages in length, written in newspaper or magazine style language, this book will help to understand sustainability, plan action, implement, monitor progress and continue best practices. A simple approach in five steps will make things happen: 1. create a working model to understand and internalize sustainability; 2. break up big problems into smaller contributory causes and work back for solutions; 3. go for progressive risk reduction and resilience enhancement; 4. monitor change and be mindful of planetary limits; and 5. replicate best practices to promote green growth. The sustainability paradigm and its pathway, sustainable development, are more than the environment, it involves the economy and society. We need to maintain this balance. The ability to sustain stability seems to define sustainability. The book is written for a broad audience: students, teachers, universities, civil society, governments and quasi government organizations

This paper reviews representations of sustainability in the strategic plans of Canadian higher education institutions (HEIs). A content analysis of the strategic plans of 50 HEIs was undertaken to determine the extent to which sustainability is included as a significant policy priority in the plans, including across the five domains of governance, education, campus operations, research, and community outreach. We found 41 strategic plans with some discussion of sustainability, and identified three characteristic types of response: (i) accommodative responses that include sustainability as one of many policy priorities and address only one or two sustainability domains ; (ii) reformative responses that involve some alignment of policy priorities with sustainability values in at least a few domains ; and (iii) progressive responses that make connections across four or five domains and offer a more detailed discussion of sustainability and sustainability-specific policies. Accommodative responses were dominant. More progressive responses were typically from institutions participating in the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) of the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education. The paper concludes with consideration of the political and economic contexts contributing to this relative prevalence of accommodative responses to sustainability.

Crisis and opportunity in American agriculture -- Why we should stop promoting industrial agriculture -- Corporate agriculture and family farms -- The corporatization of America -- Rediscovering agriculture and new hope for farming -- Farming in harmony with nature and society -- Reclaiming the sacred in food and farming -- Do we really need to define sustainable agriculture? -- Foundational principles of soils, stewardship, and sustainability -- Economics of sustainable farming -- The renaissance of rural America -- Walking the talk of sustainable agriculture -- Survival strategies for small farms -- Marketing in the niches for sustainability -- Local organic farms save farmland and communities -- The triple bottom line of farming in the future -- The real costs of globalization -- Redirecting government policies for agricultural sustainability -- The new American food system -- American agriculture after fossil energy