Sustainability in Higher Education

Although the concept of sustainable development (SD) was defined in the eighteenth century and pushed to more audiences by the Brundtland Report in 1987, in the literature, the impact of organisations on society and the environment has always been a central issue. Several studies have investigated how firms create value for and with a broad range of stakeholders, not just shareholders and investors. A specific stream of research has focused on higher education institutions (HEIs) due to their key role in promoting the principles of SD in society. However, a strategic framework for interpreting and measuring how HEIs incorporate sustainability to gain a competitive advantage is still lacking. This chapter aims to address these issues by, first, examining how the principles of sustainability have appeared and evolved in the literature, with a specific focus on Italian business studies. Second, this chapter intends to analyse how sustainability has been considered and which tools have been used by the strategic management of HEIs over time to understand whether the meaning of sustainability has evolved concomitantly with the role of HEIs. Third, following a strategic perspective, a conceptual framework for the diagnosis of sustainability integration into the different elements of an HEI’s business model is proposed. From a theoretical point of view, this chapter contributes to increasing the understanding of how to adopt a strategic approach to integrate sustainability into HEIs systematically, whereas from a practical point of view, it helps HEI management, at least potentially, to implement sustainability holistically and assess the sustainability performance of HEIs.

While the CareLab’s initiatives have not resulted in significant structural changes within the university, they have brought attention and visibility to the connections between care and sustainability and have also bolstered participants’ sense of self-determination and emancipatory self-empowerment. The CareLab’s activities have thereby supported members of the academic community to ‘navigate the challenging academic waters’ with more awareness and hope, and to create trust in ripple effects for wider institutional transformation. This chapter contributes to a better understanding about the importance of care and invites higher education institutions to develop a more caring profile that enables their communities to thrive today and in the future.

This study focuses on how the global goals adopted by the United Nations in 2015 as a universal call to action protect the planet and improve the social situation within the perspective of global constitutionalism. Considering constitutional orders in a comparative approach, in light of the widespread trend which considers environmental protection and sustainable development as fundamental principles, how do higher education institutions (HEIs) act in order to implement sustainable development in their activity and strategical view? This chapter aims to analyse constitutional and primary legislation frameworks and, in particular, legislation and policies of HEIs located in democratic constitutional orders, in order to identify best practices for the promotion of sustainable development and the role of higher education in it. A focus is dedicated to the important role of national and international university networks for sustainable development. The final purpose is to prove that HEIs all over Europe are unequivocally constitutional instruments and vehicles for constitutional implementation.

This chapter analyses the fundamental concepts within Sustainable Development Goal 9’s (SDG 9’s) targets to explore in-depth the role of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in supporting the industry in developing inclusive and sustainable industrialisation. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was constituted by the U.N. General Assembly in 2015, popularly known as Transforming Our World. This agenda provides a valuable global framework for U.N. member states to be used at national, regional and local levels to accomplish Sustainable Developments Goals (SDGs). The Sustainable Development Goal 9 (SDG 9) promotes inclusive and sustainable industrial development. In particular, the essential concepts of resilient infrastructure, innovation, information and communications technologies and financial services are debated to understand their influence in promoting inclusive and sustainable industrialisation. SDG 9 aspires to accomplish a twofold mandate: sustainability and inclusion.

Progress towards sustainable industrialisation has been relatively acceptable, although inconsistent with the initial targets. On the other hand, initiatives towards inclusive industrialisation are evolving into a political battlefield, making progress unlikely for industry leaders. In this context, HEIs have played a critical role in supporting and facilitating collaboration between researchers and practitioners to make the industry more responsive to society’s demands.

Embedding sustainability in the education and research portfolios of higher education institutions requires a process of transformational change at multiple interconnected levels: (1) the central, administrative level; (2) the intermediate, school/faculty/department level and (3) the individual lecturer/researcher level. The research literature often overlooks the second level, and in particular, the role of deans and heads of departments in supporting these change processes. Hence, this chapter focuses on the second – the middle-out level.

While deans are highly motivated to pursue sustainability transformations in their department, they often face several constraints: limited time and resources and an overload of trade-offs and options to consider.

The following research questions are addressed in this chapter:

To answer the questions, a review of the literature was carried out, followed up by two surveys and interviews with over 30 deans from across Europe. The theoretical background of this chapter draws upon the literature on organisational change and policy levers. The insights from theory and practice point to a set of tools, approaches and strategies that deans may use for building a roadmap towards sustainability for their department. The roadmaps will differ, depending on the mission at stake and an assessment of the department’s current strengths and future opportunities.

This chapter provides theory-grounded and empirically based design guidelines for academic leaders looking for the building blocks of sustainability roadmaps for their departments.

The potential of certain organisational factors to hinder the successful implementation of sustainable development (SD) initiatives in higher education institutions (HEI) has been reported. Whereas previous studies have identified communication as a significant factor impeding successful SD implementation performance, limited studies have attempted to investigate the various communication archetypes to ascertain the most appropriate for engendering SD implementation in HEIs. Also, limited attempts have been made in extant literature to determine the moderating effect of governance functions on the utility of the appropriate communication archetype to engender success SD implementation performance in HEIs. To address these gaps, this study deployed a comparative case study research design involving two HEIs situated in South Africa and the United Kingdom, respectively, to not only establish the most appropriate communication archetype but also to determine the moderating effect of governance functions on the contribution of such archetype towards improved SD implementation. Data elicited from two focus group discussion sessions was analysed using interpretative structural modelling (ISM). The data derived from these sessions confirmed the communication for sustainability (CfS) archetype as most appropriate for enhancing SD implementation performance. Furthermore, the difference in the findings as it pertained to sustainability communication between both cases was traced to the presence or lack of certain governance functions in these institutions. Findings showed that governance functions such as a dedicated strategic portfolio for SD and, a sustainability unit impacted on the CfS contribution towards improved SD implementation performance. This finding highlighted the moderating effect of governance functions on the nexus between effective communication and successful SD implementation performance in HEIs. It is hoped that this study’s findings will assist relevant stakeholders in designing appropriate strategic communication strategies for facilitating optimal SD implementation performance in their respective institutions.

Many higher education institutions (HEIs) profile themselves by means of emphasising their activities around the Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs). As part of this, they increasingly share examples with the general public about their efforts and accomplishments in terms of addressing the sustainability challenges. Similar to private companies, they report on their sustainability efforts and performance by means of participating in SDG impact rankings and measurement tools, joining networks of institutions and subscribing to SDG agreement. Based on a document analysis, this chapter aims to critically examine the sustainability information disclosed by HEIs in their annual reports, sustainability reports and official (i.e. publicly available) documents. This chapter analyses the character of the information (e.g. quantitative, qualitative, indicators, narratives) and the actual SDGs themes and dimensions covered. This is done for the HEIs in Italy and the Netherlands, to analyse the differences both between the countries and within the countries and reveal the role of national regulatory frameworks and other coordinated national efforts around sustainability reporting by HEIs. Our chapter will discuss the underlying rationales behind different SDG reporting tools and their adoption by HEIs in recent years. It presents the ‘state of the art’ with respect to sustainability reporting in the Dutch and Italian higher education systems.

This chapter fills a gap in the literature on SDGs reporting by HEIs by providing an international comparative perspective, and it contributes to the broader debate regarding the use of managerial tools aimed at measuring, assessing and disclosing SDG results. It also highlights their contribution to supporting HEIs in adopting SDGs. The analysis led to the identification of the peculiarities, the differences and the limits of those systems to provide helpful information to policymakers and higher education governing bodies on how to create a shared framework to measure and share sustainable practices to deliver public value.

The description of learning outcomes in Education for Sustainability (EfS) literature and the operationalisation of these into higher education assessment tools as well as in quality/reporting frameworks (such as accreditation standards) shape how the desired learning outcomes of EfS are defined, conceptualised, operationalised and assessed. As previously identified, educational assessments on sustainability are prone to validity issues regarding the contested nature of the concept. In this chapter, we aim to add clarity about what learning outcomes in the context of EfS are, based on how they are conceptualised in the literature as well as operationalised in frameworks and tools. Existing theories on the foci of EfS learning outcomes are extended by introducing the dispositions, knowledge, skills and behaviour (DKSB) framework. Using the DKSB framework, this chapter examines how EfS learning outcomes are articulated in the literature and policy documents, as well as operationalised into quality standards and assessment frameworks. In the discussion, how EfS outcomes are related is described, validity issues that can arise when assessing EfS are noted, and some useful tools for assessing EfS learning outcomes are discussed.

The field of sustainable development (SD) in higher education institutions (HEIs) is now well established. HEIs are instrumental in promoting the principles of sustainability, which contribute to changing attitudes towards the current situation and a sustainable future. Holistic SD – which includes physical characteristics and education – is a field of progressive learning. There is an increasing number of academic publications and literature pointing towards the growing field of SD. India, being the largest democracy and having a large number of educational institutions, has committed herself to the agenda of promoting sustainable development in HEIs by stressing on SD parameters. This chapter studies the different sustainability practices followed /adopted in various HEIs around the world (with a focus on Indian universities), along with the frameworks and tools for measuring sustainability performance in HE. The focus is to understand whether the sustainability practices are different for different higher education settings or if they are the same. It also discusses the primary focus of the frameworks and tools in various countries’ HEIs. Case studies and literature studies from different settings of HEIs – developed, developing and underdeveloped countries are analysed to conclude and further provide solutions for the promotion of sustainable development in educational Institutions. This chapter assesses whether different HE settings require a common goal that could be achieved and assessed through a common assessment framework or whether institutions from different HE settings need a specific assessment system to recognise their achievements.

University rankings have almost 40 years of history. The introduction of the sustainable development concept in 1989 has increased sustainability awareness among higher education institutions worldwide. This awareness of the environmental, social and economic impacts that higher education institutions use via their daily operations as well as long-term by educating future engineers, decision-makers, entrepreneurs and future leaders leads to the reporting about their statuses and, finally, comparisons. The first sustainability ranking was launched in 2007 at the national level and in 2010 at a global one. This chapter introduces a comprehensive examination of sustainability rankings, from their emergence to the present day, encompassing both critiques and commendations associated with these rankings. It tracks the sustainability rankings research from the content perspective, addresses prevailing challenges and explores potential future directions in this domain, focusing on methodologies, indicators and data.

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) worldwide are urged to transform their core activities to address sustainability crises. As HEIs are key actors in educating future decision-makers and experts, they are called upon to reform their education and curriculum to actualise the sustainability transformation needed. However, despite global and national policies, HEIs still face great challenges in actually changing their curriculum. This chapter describes the curriculum reform process at the University of Helsinki, where sustainability competences were integrated into degree programmes, and reflects on its strengths and challenges. The research-based framework for future academic expertise, including sustainability competences created as part of the curriculum reform process, is presented, and the process is described. Institutional structures and different levels of supportive actions are analysed and discussed. The framework for future academic expertise includes discipline content knowledge and skills, generic academic skills and sustainability competences. The sustainability competences were embedded into generic academic competences by adding three new competences to be included in curriculum reform guidelines for degree programmes. The organisational strengths that supported the curriculum change at the University of Helsinki include clear action plans regarding sustainability education, support from top management, whole institution-level sustainability actions, creating networks of and workshops for academic staff and competence upskilling. The importance of multilevel co-agency for embedding sustainability is highlighted. This chapter strengthens the idea that the curriculum reform processes are possible intervention points to advance sustainability transition in higher education institutions.

The incorporation of the environmental dimension in higher education institutions (HEIs) in Latin America dates back to the first years of the fifties and is explicitly expressed in the seventies. In the middle of this decade, the monitoring of this process began in the fields of training, research and outreach, through a series of analysis and studies. In the following decades, the institutionalisation of the commitment to the environment and sustainability extended to the fields of management and governance. An analysis between 2014 and 2018 recorded an average performance of this commitment in 351 HEIs in 11 countries in the region. Since 2016, these institutions began to commit to the 2030 Agenda and its sustainable development goals (SDGs). The first results of an ongoing investigation show that 50 HEIs of six Latin American nations now have greater progress in their knowledge, commitment and contributions to the SDGs. In large part, these results can be explained by the work of many environmental institutions and university networks in the region, which promote and support HEIs in their commitments to the environment, sustainability and the 2030 Agenda. The main challenges for the coming years are to increase the number of higher education institutions in the region that assume these commitments and improve their performance in the environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainability.

This chapter focuses on the sense and nonsense of monitoring and quantifying sustainability course content in university curricula. Based on previous research on sustainability assessment in higher education, it discusses the experience of a French business school and its method to assess sustainability in course content. This chapter offers insights into the institutional context of sustainability in higher education in France, and identifies the challenges encountered at TBS Education, between 2019 and 2022, when systematising its assessment of sustainability in course content. A reflection is provided on the (non)sense of the method, the role of professors and the importance of an integrative approach towards sustainability integration. By stressing the importance of thorough pedagogical reflection resulting from the assessment, of finding synergies between internal and external stakeholders’ reporting needs and of involving and supporting professors, this chapter aims at guiding educators and sustainability practitioners on the challenging topic of assessing sustainability in (management) education, valuable for schools in France and other regions around the world.

This chapter discusses the primary role of higher education institutions (HEIs) promoting sustainable development as environments of education and training, by retracing the regulatory evolution starting from the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development (Rio, 1992) until the current 2030 Agenda. Specifically, this work will be based on the comparison between two countries, Spain and Italy, and will look at the best-performing universities according to the 2021/2022 sustainable development goal (SDG) international rankings. Among the 17 goals of the 2030 Agenda, this contribution will examine those concerning the person (1, 5, 10 and 16), investigating how universities contribute, through regulations and good practices, to the development of a more inclusive society.

Sustainability, meant as a key determinant of a decent socio-environmental heritage for future generations, is particularly impacting as far as peripheral and insular territories are concerned, which are usually overlooked by international networks and policies. This contribution aims to compare Italy and Spain regarding sustainable policies adopted by Sardinian and Canarian, first via a Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) outlook on the regulatory competences of the examined islands, on matters related to sustainability, even if marginally. Afterwards, the role of the involved HEIs in implementing projects for the development of the territories and the protection of environmental peculiarities will be highlighted, where islands have several geomorphological and environmental distinctive traits in a limited area. Finally, a comparison between operational projects of Sardinian and Canarian HEIs will be made, on the activities aiming at both environmental protection and cultural sustainability. This contribution aims to focus on the importance of the role played by HEIs to put into practice the links and interconnections between the concepts of sustainability and development, matched with insular peculiarities; it also highlights how every single island needs a specific, different project, customised depending on the single territorial distinctiveness. About this, a further comparison of the projects of two Sardinian HEIs (located in the North and South of Sardinia) and the projects of each Canarian university will be made.