Suchergebnisse

Contextual factors for sustainable development such as population growth, energy, and resource availability and consumption levels, food production yield, and growth in pollution, provide numerous complex and rapidly changing education and training requirements for a variety of professions including engineering. Furthermore, these requirements may not be clearly understood or expressed by designers, governments, professional bodies or the industry. Within this context, this paper focuses on one priority area for greening the economy through sustainable development—improving energy efficiency—and discusses the complexity of capacity building needs for professionals. The paper begins by acknowledging the historical evolution of sustainability considerations, and the complexity embedded in built environment solutions. The authors propose a dual-track approach to building capacity building, with a short-term focus on improvement (i.e., making peaking challenges a priority for postgraduate education), and a long-term focus on transformational innovation (i.e., making tailing challenges a priority for undergraduate education). A case study is provided, of Australian experiences over the last decade with regard to the topic area of energy efficiency. The authors conclude with reflections on implications for the approach. ; Full Text

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present the case for engineering departments to undertake rapid curriculum renewal (RCR) towards engineering education for sustainable development (EESD), to minimise the department's risk exposure to rapidly shifting industry requirements, government regulations and program accreditation. This paper then outlines a number of elements of RCR. Design/methodology/approach: This paper begins by proposing that Higher Education Institutions face a "time lag dilemma", whereby the usual or "standard" curriculum renewal approach to embed new knowledge and skills within the curriculum may take too long, lagging behind industry, regulatory, and accreditation shifts. This paper then outlines a proposed RCR approach. This paper presents a number of preliminary "elements of RCR" formulated from a literature review of numerous existing but largely ad hoc examples of curriculum renewal within engineering and other discipline areas, together with the authors' experience in trialling the elements. Findings: This paper concludes that a strategically implemented process of curriculum renewal to EESD can help a department address its risk exposure to likely and impending shifts in industry, regulations and accreditation. A number of examples of implementing "elements of RCR" are emerging and this literature can inform a strategic approach to curriculum renewal. Practical implications: The aim of this paper is to highlight the potential risks and opportunities for engineering departments as they consider "how far" and "how fast" to proceed with curriculum renewal for EESD, along with providing an overview of a range of options for implementation. Originality/value: This paper fulfils an identified information/resources need.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present the case for engineering departments to undertake rapid curriculum renewal (RCR) towards engineering education for sustainable development (EESD), to minimise the department's risk exposure to rapidly shifting industry requirements, government regulations and program accreditation. This paper then outlines a number of elements of RCR. Design/methodology/approach: This paper begins by proposing that Higher Education Institutions face a "time lag dilemma", whereby the usual or "standard" curriculum renewal approach to embed new knowledge and skills within the curriculum may take too long, lagging behind industry, regulatory, and accreditation shifts. This paper then outlines a proposed RCR approach. This paper presents a number of preliminary "elements of RCR" formulated from a literature review of numerous existing but largely ad hoc examples of curriculum renewal within engineering and other discipline areas, together with the authors' experience in trialling the elements. Findings: This paper concludes that a strategically implemented process of curriculum renewal to EESD can help a department address its risk exposure to likely and impending shifts in industry, regulations and accreditation. A number of examples of implementing "elements of RCR" are emerging and this literature can inform a strategic approach to curriculum renewal. Practical implications: The aim of this paper is to highlight the potential risks and opportunities for engineering departments as they consider "how far" and "how fast" to proceed with curriculum renewal for EESD, along with providing an overview of a range of options for implementation. Originality/value: This paper fulfils an identified information/resources need.

Cents and Sustainability is a clear-sighted response to the 1987 call by Dr Gro Brundtland in Our Common Future to achieve a new era of economic growth that is 'forceful and at the same time socially and environmentally sustainable'. The Brundtland Report argued that not only was it achievable, but that it was an urgent imperative in order to achieve a transition to sustainable development while significantly reducing poverty and driving 'clean and green' investment. With some still arguing for significantly slowing economic growth in order to reduce pressures on the environment, this new book

Cents and Sustainability is a clear-sighted response to the 1987 call by Dr Gro Brundtland in Our Common Future to achieve a new era of economic growth that is 'forceful and at the same time socially and environmentally sustainable'. The Brundtland Report argued that not only was it achievable, but that it was an urgent imperative in order to achieve a transition to sustainable development while significantly reducing poverty and driving 'clean and green' investment. With some still arguing for significantly slowing economic growth in order to reduce pressures on the environment, this new book.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the case for engineering departments to undertake rapid curriculum renewal (RCR) towards engineering education for sustainable development (EESD), to minimise the department's risk exposure to rapidly shifting industry requirements, government regulations and program accreditation. This paper then outlines a number of elements of RCR.Design/methodology/approachThis paper begins by proposing that Higher Education Institutions face a "time lag dilemma," whereby the usual or "standard" curriculum renewal approach to embed new knowledge and skills within the curriculum may take too long, lagging behind industry, regulatory, and accreditation shifts. This paper then outlines a proposed RCR approach. This paper presents a number of preliminary "elements of RCR" formulated from a literature review of numerous existing but largely ad hoc examples of curriculum renewal within engineering and other discipline areas, together with the authors' experience in trialling the elements.FindingsThis paper concludes that a strategically implemented process of curriculum renewal to EESD can help a department address its risk exposure to likely and impending shifts in industry, regulations and accreditation. A number of examples of implementing "elements of RCR" are emerging and this literature can inform a strategic approach to curriculum renewal.Practical implicationsThe aim of this paper is to highlight the potential risks and opportunities for engineering departments as they consider "how far" and "how fast" to proceed with curriculum renewal for EESD, along with providing an overview of a range of options for implementation.Originality/valueThis paper fulfils an identified information/resources need.

PurposeThis paper aims to present key findings from an inquiry into engineering accreditation and curricula renewal. The research attempted to ascertain conceptions of requisite sustainability themes among engineering academics and professionals. The paper also reflects on the potential role of professional engineering institutions (PEIs) in embedding sustainability through their programme accreditation guidelines and wider implications in terms of rapid curricula renewal.Design/methodology/approachThis research comprised an International Engineering Academic Workshop held during the 2010 International Symposium on Engineering Education in Ireland, on "accreditation and sustainable engineering". This built on the findings of a literature review that was distributed prior to the workshop. Data collection included individual questionnaires administered during the workshop, and notes scribed by workshop participants.FindingsThe literature review highlighted a wide range of perspectives across and within engineering disciplines, regarding what sustainability/sustainable development (SD) themes should be incorporated into engineering curricula, and regarding language and terminology. This was also reflected in the workshop discussions. Notwithstanding this diversity, clusters of sustainability themes and priority considerations were distilled from the literature review and workshop. These related to resources, technology, values, ethics, inter‐ and intra‐generational equity, transdisciplinarity, and systems and complex thinking. Themes related to environmental and economic knowledge and skills received less attention by workshop participants than represented in the literature.Originality/valueThis paper provides an appreciation of the diversity of opinion regarding priority sustainability themes for engineering curricula, among a group of self‐selected engineering academics who have a common interest in education for SD. It also provides some insights and caveats on how these themes might be rapidly integrated into engineering curricula.

PurposeWhile a number of universities in Australia have embraced concepts such as project/problem‐based learning and design of innovative learning environments for engineering education, there has been a lack of national guidance on including sustainability as a "critical literacy" into all engineering streams. This paper was presented at the 2004 International Conference on Engineering Education in Sustainable Development (EESD) in Barcelona, Spain, outlining a current initiative that is seeking to address the "critical literacy" dilemma.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents the positive steps taken by Australia's peak engineering body, the Institution of Engineers Australia (EA), in considering accreditation requirements for university engineering courses and its responsibility to ensure the inclusion of sustainability education material. It then describes a current initiative called the "Engineering Sustainable Solutions Program – Critical Literacies for Engineers Portfolio" (ESSP‐CL), which is being developed by The Natural Edge Project (TNEP) in partnership with EA and Unesco.FindingsContent for the module was gathered from around the world, drawing on research from the publication The Natural Advantage of Nations: Business Opportunities, Innovation, and Governance in the Twenty‐first Century. Parts of the first draft of the ESSP‐CL have been trialled at Griffith University, Queensland, Australia with first year environmental engineering students, in May 2004. Further trials are now proceeding with a number of other universities and organisations nationally and internationally.Practical implicationsIt is intended that ESSP‐CL will be a valuable resource to universities, professional development activities or other education facilities nationally and internationally.Originality/valueThis paper fulfils an identified information/resources need.