Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the strategy used for achieving change towards sustainability at Chalmers University of Technology (Chalmers). Examples of how this strategy has been used are described and discussed, and exemplified with different lines of activities in a project on Education for Sustainable Development, the ESD project.Design/methodology/approachThe strategy consists of three important building blocks: Create a neutral arena; Build on individual engagement and involvement; and Communicate a clear commitment from the management team. The analysis is made along three different lines of activities in the ESD project: The work to improve the quality of the compulsory courses on sustainable development; The efforts to integrate ESD into educational programmes; and The work to collect and spread information on good teaching practices within ESD. Some other related examples where the strategy has been applied are also presented.FindingsThe ESD project functioned as a neutral arena since it was not placed at any specific department but rather engaged participants from many departments. This neutral arena has been important, for example, to increase the willingness of teachers to share their good teaching examples. The process was successful in creating a shared responsibility and for starting learning processes in many individuals by the involvement of a broad range of educational actors at Chalmers. The strong and clear commitment from the management team has worked as a driving force.Originality/valueThis paper can provide valuable input to universities that struggle with change processes.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to ascertain the engagement and response of students to the teaching of engineering ethics incorporating a macro ethical framework whereby sustainability is viewed as context to professional practice. This involves incorporating a broader conception of engineering than is typically applied in conventional teaching of engineering ethics.Design/methodology/approachA real life wicked problem case study assignment was developed. Students' understanding and practical application of the concepts were considered. A survey was conducted to gauge students' appreciation of the professional importance and their enjoyment of the subject matter.FindingsIt was found that students appreciate and enjoy a macro ethical sustainability informed approach, but find it more challenging to apply in practice.Practical implicationsThe paper demonstrates an approach to the teaching of engineering ethics using a practical example, which can help broaden engineers' self‐perceived role towards one where sustainability is context. It also shows how students can find such an approach to teaching ethics to be both enjoyable and relevant.Social implicationsEngineers educated to perceive the importance of engaging with macro ethical issues as part of professional practice will be significantly better placed to inform public and industry policy towards greater good and engage with other professional and expert groups.Originality/valueIn this paper, an approach to engineering ethics which diverges from the traditional is proposed. This can be of value to those involved in the teaching of engineering ethics, particularly those seeking to incorporate sustainability and other macro ethical issues.

PurposeThe purpose of the paper is to examine how a number of key themes are introduced in the Master's programme in Engineering for Sustainable Development, at Cambridge University, through student‐centred activities. These themes include dealing with complexity, uncertainty, change, other disciplines, people, environmental limits, whole life costs, and trade‐offs.Design/methodology/approachThe range of exercises and assignments designed to encourage students to test their own assumptions and abilities to develop competencies in these areas are analysed by mapping the key themes onto the formal activities which all students undertake throughout the core MPhil programme. The paper reviews the range of these activities that are designed to help support the formal delivery of the taught programme. These include residential field courses, role plays, change challenges, games, systems thinking, multi criteria decision making, awareness of literature from other disciplines and consultancy projects. An axial coding approach to the analysis of routine feedback questionnaires drawn from recent years has been used to identify how a student's own awareness develops. Also results of two surveys are presented which test the students' perceptions about whether or not the course is providing learning environments to develop awareness and skills in these areas.FindingsStudents generally perform well against these tasks with a significant feature being the mutual support they give to each other in their learning. The paper concludes that for students from an engineering background it is an holistic approach to delivering a new way of thinking through a combination of lectures, class activities, assignments, interactions between class members, and access to material elsewhere in the University that enables participants to develop their skills in each of the key themes.Originality/valueThe paper provides a reflection on different pedagogical approaches to exploring key sustainable themes and reports students' own perceptions of the value of these kinds of activities. Experiences are shared of running a range of diverse learning activities within a professional practice Master's programme.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to report on methods developed, within a three‐year Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) project at Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden, to achieve a higher degree of embedding of ESD in engineering programmes. The major emphasis is on methods used, results achieved and lessons learned from the work.Design/methodology/approachThe basic idea that methods and activities were built on was that the only way to achieve long‐term changes is to increase the motivation and capacity of lecturers and program directors to perform the required changes.FindingsActivities that were developed and tested focused on coaching discussions and on workshops for teachers, gathering teachers from one programme at a time. These activities aimed at starting learning processes in individuals. Special care was taken into keeping the feeling of responsibility and initiative in the faculty members within the programmes. A special "resource group" of experienced ESD teachers was available as support for programme directors and lecturers.Originality/valueThe methods reported on are further developments of a method that has been used in Delft University of Technology (the Individual Interaction Method) in the Netherlands. The experiences from Chalmers are discussed in such a way that they provide useful insights for others aiming at similar changes at university.

There are several different methods for implementing curricular elements, but fairly few procedures for determining the success of the implementation. The central question is whether the student has mastered the desired set of skills and the expertise that fulfil the ambitions of the original policy documents. This paper presents a procedure for analyzing how ambitions related to education for sustainable development (ESD) are implemented in educational programmes, i.e. how political ambitions are cascaded down to the level that the student meets in the courses. The method was applied to the programmes in chemical engineering, mechanical engineering and engineering physics at two Swedish universities. The methodological framework is based on analyses of how ambitions on ESD are handled in texts in relevant documents at different levels and the relation between these. The selected texts were: the national degree ordinance, university policy documents, programme curricula, intended course learning outcomes, and learning assessment texts. While the study is focused on the inclusion of sustainable development competences in engineering education, the presented procedure should be general enough for application to any studied aspect of skills in a programme, in particular when this skill is developed in several different courses. The described procedure can also be used to monitor changes over time.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the issues involved in designing appropriate problems or scenarios suitable for sustainable development (SD) education, in the context of problem‐based learning (PBL) and experiential learning. Manchester's PBL approach to interdisciplinary Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) has been well reported, for example, in papers at the Educating Engineers in Sustainable Development conference in 2008. This paper poses the question: to achieve transformational education, is design of student problems for ESD itself a wicked problem? The design process that has been used to generate ESD projects for one PBL unit is reflected upon, to share good practices and highlight points of ongoing contention.Design/methodology/approachWorking from the background to the original pilot project to develop an inter‐disciplinary course to heighten student skills in sustainability and change management, the paper looks at some of the theoretical approaches taken to the design of PBL scenarios and tries to place these in the context of education for SD.FindingsThe initial project found that using inter‐disciplinary, problem‐based approaches to embedding SD in the curriculum is not only practicable but also desirable. However, the approach to design of problem scenarios has to be adjusted to the nature of the "wickedness" of sustainability issues and be appropriate to the student cohort and institution.Research limitations/implicationsThe approaches are felt to be applicable to a much wider range of situations than is demonstrated in the paper but, clearly, the findings can only be grounded on the particular situation of the project.Originality/valueThe 2006 curriculum development action research project was intended to help other institutions to replicate the process but, much of the external attention since that time has focussed, inappropriately, on simply re‐using the scenarios that were described in the initial project rather than applying the design process that has been developed in order to devise new scenarios more appropriate to another course or institution.

PurposeThis paper sets out to discuss the commonalities that can be found in learning outcomes (LOs) for education for sustainable development in the context of the Tbilisi and Barcelona declarations. The commonalities include systemic or holistic thinking, the integration of different perspectives, skills such as critical thinking, change agent abilities and communication, and finally different attitudes and values.Design/methodology/approachAn analysis of LOs that are proposed in the Tbilisi and Barcelona declarations is conducted, showing specific issues for the commonalities presented. Examples of LOs from Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM) in Mexico, as well as various associations from the USA is shown. A brief discussion is done on the means to achieve these LOs and learning evaluation.FindingsIn the example sets of LOs shown, the commonalities presented in the paper's first section appear in the LOs proposed by the institutions. Based on current knowledge and perception, sustainability is properly addressed in the examples.Practical implicationsThe paper can be used to foster a wider discussion and analysis of LOs for sustainability education, also further work on teachers' capacity building for sustainability, as well as the assessment needed for future professionals in higher education institutions.Originality/valueThe paper presents the onset of discussing and comparing commonalities among higher education institutions regarding sustainability LOs.

PurposeThe aim of this study is to contribute to the quality improvement and long‐term strategic development of education for sustainable development (ESD) in engineering education curricula.Design/methodology/approachThe content in 70 courses in environment and SD were characterized and quantified using course document text analysis. Additionally, two questionnaires were sent to students and alumni at Chalmers, and interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with representatives from 16 Swedish companies and five organizations.FindingsIt was found that industry demands a broader range of competences in SD amongst engineers in general than what is currently provided. In total, 35 per cent of alumni claim they encounter sustainability issues from sometimes to daily in their work. However, only half of them believe they possess enough competences to make decisions from a sustainability perspective. Quantity, coverage and the level of integration in the educational programme all appear to be important for the students' perceived competences on SD and for the importance that they put on achieving SD.Originality/valueEarlier research has reported on how to further develop the idea and design of ESD and on competence needs in general. Few attempts have been made to assess industry's needs of competences in SD. This paper sheds light on how engineering universities educate for SD and benchmarks this to industry's needs in an exploratory case study, using Chalmers as an example.

Towards a bio-economy: the role of the forest Biomass has an increasingly important role in replacing fossil and mineral resources, and it is central in environmental impact-reduction strategies in companies and governments, locally, nationally and internationally. The European Union (EU) has recently taken action to strengthen the bio-economy, defined as "…the sustainable production and conversion of biomass into a range of food, health, fibre and industrial products and energy". Two thirds of the land area in Sweden is covered by forests, and forestry has been an important industry for centuries. Increased and/or more efficient use of forest biomass thus has a great potential for replacing the use of fossil and mineral resources in Sweden. There are two main reasons for why forest- and other bio-based products are seen as environmentally beneficial. Biomass is (most often) a renewable resource, in contrast to finite fossil and mineral resources, and there is often a balance between CO2 captured when the biomass grows, and CO2 released when the bio-based product is incinerated. The challenge: calculate carbon footprints Moving towards a bio-economy means replacing non-renewable fuels and materials with bio-based fuels and materials. This is a transition on many levels: technology, business models, infrastructure, political priorities, etc. To guide such a grand transition, there is a need to understand the environmental implications of new bio-based products. This includes assessing their climate impact, so-called carbon footprinting. Carbon footprinting of forest products is not as simple as saying that forest products are carbon and climate neutral by definition. Fossil energy used for producing and transporting the products has a carbon footprint. Also, the carbon balance can differ between forest products, which can influence their carbon footprint. For example, carbon stored in products, while CO2 is captured in the re-growing forest, can mitigate climate change. The modelling of the carbon balance is influenced by the study's geographical system boundaries – national, regional, landscape and single-stand perspectives often yield different results. Forestry can also lead to positive or negative changes in the levels of carbon stored in the soil, the levels of aerosols emitted by the trees (influencing cloud formation), and the albedo (surface reflectivity) of the forest land. An indirect effect of forestry can be increased competition for land, with expanding or intensified land use elsewhere, with positive or negative climate effects. All these factors are potentially important when calculating carbon footprints. There is limited knowledge about how and to which extent the aforementioned factors influence the carbon footprint of forest products. Also, there is a lack of methods for assessing some of these factors. In light of this, can the carbon footprints of today be trusted? And can we ensure that they provide relevant and robust decision support? Our approach: testing three different carbon footprint methods in five case studies In this study, we have: Identified different carbon footprint methods. Used the identified methods to calculate the carbon footprint of different forest products and non-forest benchmarks (using life cycle assessment, LCA). Compared the results to find out how and why they differ. We identified three main categories of carbon footprint methods: (i) the common practice in LCA, (ii) recommendations in standards and directives (we tested the EU sustainability criteria for biofuels and bioliquids and the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) guide), and (iii) more advanced methods proposed in the scientific literature (we tested dynamic LCA). For dynamic LCA, we tested different time horizons (20 and 100 years) and different geographical system boundaries, based on (a) the national level, assuming a net annual growth of biomass (which is the case in Sweden); (b) the landscape level, assuming a balance between the annual harvesting and growth (the level at which forests are often managed); and (c) the stand level, assuming regrowth during a time period of 80 years (a stand is the part of a landscape that is harvested in one year, a level often used by researchers developing new methods for modelling the dynamics of forest carbon flows). These methods were applied to five forest products: two automotive fuels (a lignin-based fuel produced from black liquor and butanol), a textile fibre (viscose), a timber structure building, and a chemical (methanol, used for different end products). Our findings We found that different carbon footprint methods can give different results. The common practice is close to the recommendation in the EU sustainability criteria and the PEF guide. Results from dynamic LCA differ considerably, as it accounts for the timing of (fossil and biogenic) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and CO2 capture, which is ignored by the other methods. The results of dynamic LCA depend primarily on the geographical system boundaries, but also on the time horizon. When applying dynamic LCA with a stand perspective, we assumed that the CO2 uptake occurs after harvest. Alternatively, one could assume that the CO2 uptake occurs before harvest, which would give different (lower) results. When comparing the carbon footprints of the forest products with products they could be expected to replace, we see that the results for the forest products could range from being definitely favourable to worse. More results can be found in the full report. Results were produced to answer the research questions of this study, and should not be used out of context. Conclusions and recommendations Because there is (still) limited knowledge about how forest products influence the climate, and as carbon footprints will always depend on value-based assumptions (e.g. regarding geographical system boundaries), it is not possible to recommend one specific method which is suitable regardless of context. As different carbon footprint methods can give very different results, our key message is that we need to increase consciousness on these matters. It is important to be aware of the assumptions made in the study, the effects of those assumptions on results, and how results can and cannot be used for decision support in a certain context. More specific recommendations for decision makers are listed below. Further details and results can be found in the main report, along with recommendations for LCA practitioners and researchers. Decision makers must be aware that the main methodological choices influencing carbon footprints of Swedish forest products are the choice of geographical system boundaries (e.g. national-, landscape- or stand-level system boundaries) and whether the timing of CO2 capture and GHG emissions is accounted for. This is because Swedish forests are, in general, slow growing. If the aim of the decision is to obtain short-term climate impact reduction – for example, the urgent reduction that is possibly needed for preventing the world average temperature to rise with more than 2°C – the timing of CO2 capture and GHG emissions should be taken into account. Decision makers must be aware that a particular method for capturing timing (such as dynamic LCA) can be combined with different system boundaries, which can yield different results. When conclusions from existing LCA studies are synthesized for decision support, the decision maker must be aware that most existing studies do not account for the timing of CO2 capture and GHG emissions. This is particularly important when the decision concerns the prioritization of forest products with different service lives (e.g., fuels versus buildings). When timing is considered, decision makers must be aware that there are different views on when the CO2 capture occurs, which will influence the carbon footprint. One could either consider the CO2 captured before the harvest (i.e., the capture of the carbon that goes into the product system), or the CO2 captured after the harvest (i.e., the consequence of the harvest operation). In this study, we tested the second alternative when we applied dynamic LCA with a stand perspective – this does not mean we advocate the use of the second alternative over the first alternative. Decision makers must be aware that the location and management practices of the forestry influence the climate impact of a forest product. For example, growth rates, changes in soil carbon storages and fertilisers (a source of GHGs) differ between locations. Based on our results, we cannot say that the carbon footprints of some product categories are more robust than for others, i.e. less influenced by choice of methodology. However, the more forest biomass use in the product system, the higher the influence of the choice of method. As many interactions between the forest and the climate are still not fully understood, it is important to be open to new knowledge gained in methodology development work. Regarding how to use Swedish forests for the most efficient climate impact reduction, it is impossible to draw a general conclusion on the basis of our results. Factors that influence the "optimal" use are:Which fraction of forest biomass that is used. Various products use different fractions (as was the case in our case studies) and do not necessarily compete for the same biomass. However, a production system may be more or less optimised for a specific output. So there may be situations of competition also when feedstocks are not directly interchangeable. Which non-forest product that is assumed to be replaced by the forest product (if any). The carbon footprint of the non-forest product matters, but also how large the substitution effect is (i.e., does the forest product actually replace the non-forest alternative, or merely add products to the market, and what are the rebound effects from increased production?). If all other factors are identical: the longer the service life of the forest product the better, due to the climate benefit of storing carbon and thereby delaying CO2 emissions. This effect is particularly strong if the aim is to obtain short-term climate impact reduction. Moreover, the effect supports so-called cascade use of forest biomass, e.g. first using wood in a building structure, then reusing the wood in a commodity, and at end-of-life, as late as possible, recovering the energy content of the wood for heat or fuel production. Traditional LCA practice and methods required by the EU sustainability criteria and PEF have limitations in the support they can provide for the transition to a bio-economy, as they cannot capture the variations of different forest products in terms of rotation periods and service lives. Thus, decision makers need to consider studies using more advanced methods to be able to distinguish better or worse uses of forest biomass. We have tested one such advanced method (dynamic LCA), that proved applicable in combination with several different geographical perspectives, but also other methods exist (e.g. GWPbio). Climate change is not the only environmental impact category which is relevant in decision making concerned with how to use forests. Other environmental issues, such as loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, are also important. There are also non-environmental sustainability issues of potential importance, e.g. related to indigenous rights and job creation. ; The method's influence on climate impact assessment of biofuels and other uses of forest biomass

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to analyse the process of changing engineering universities towards sustainable development (SD). It outlines the types of changes needed, both in respect of approaches, visions, philosophies and cultural change, which are crucial for engineering universities which want to implement sustainable development as part of their progammes.Design/methodology/approachThe paper describes various experiences which show how SD education programmes can be implemented at universities, and some of the challenges faced in efforts towards achieving such a goal. It considers the various processes involved and raises some questions which can help to understand how universities, as learning organisations, can engage in the implementation of SD programmes.FindingsThe paper has established that engineers have to learn to think long term and position their activities in a pathway towards long‐term sustainable solutions. This requires insight into the social environment of engineering as a technology, and the extent to which engineers should know about the intricacies of SD problems.Originality/valueThe paper shows that engineers should understand the complexities of the societal setting in which they are developing solutions, and the complexities of making short‐term improvements that fit into a long‐term SD.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to study how experts on teaching sustainability in engineering education contextualize sustainability; also to evaluate the understanding of sustainability by engineering students. The final aim is to evaluate what pedagogy experts believe provides better opportunities for learning about sustainability in engineering education.Design/methodology/approachThe authors used conceptual maps (cmaps) analysis with two taxonomies of four and ten categories. The first taxonomy clusters the significance of sustainability in environmental, technological, social and institutional aspects and shows the main trends; the second (of ten categories) divides the previous categories into greater detail. To evaluate the experts' cmaps two indices were defined that provide information about what experts think sustainability is most related to and evaluate how complex they see the sustainability concept. In total, 500 students from five European engineering universities were then surveyed and the results compared with those of the experts. Finally, interviews were held with experts to try to determine the best pedagogy to apply to achieve learning around sustainability.FindingsThe results show that Engineering Education for Sustainable Development (EESD) experts consider that institutional and social aspects are more relevant to sustainability than environmental and technological ones. The results were compared with the understanding of sustainability by a sample of more than 500 engineering students who had taken courses on sustainability at five technical universities in Europe. This comparison shows a mismatch among the EESD "experts'" and the students' understanding of sustainability, which suggest that sustainability courses in engineering degrees should emphasise the social and institutional aspects versus environmental and technological ones. Moreover, courses should emphasize more the complexity of sustainability.Originality/valueThe paper emphasizes the lack of priority that social and institutional aspects are given in sustainability courses and promotes a discussion about how these two elements and complex thinking can increase their importance in the engineering curriculum.