Sustainability in Higher Education has been investigated mainly through examining institutional approaches, curricula content, or students’ and teachers’ perceptions of sustainability in practice. However, a deep characterisation of the foundations of this phenomenon is lacking. This article aims to address the existing lack of depth and comprehensiveness by identifying and categorising the critical attributes of Sustainability in Higher Education. Categories are the basic levels for knowledge classification, and critical attributes relate to the main perceived characteristics within categories. Both were structured through a literature review and a systematic analysis using the Proknow-C method. A set of 2,513 studies on sustainability in education and related fields, published between 2000 to 2015, enabled the identification of 259 as appropriate for devising four categories: foundations, knowledge, personal, and integrative assets with 4, 4, 4, and 3 attributes respectively. From these, 129 papers presented at least four relationships among attributes of all categories. An assessment between the attributes identified for the selected studies delivered 85 analyses, with the following findings: (i) epistemologies of Sustainability in Higher Education develop in learning context; (ii) creativity should better link foundational and personal assets; (iii) transdisciplinarity is an epistemic transgression; (iv) resilience of active learners emerges in knowledge and personal assets relationships; (v) knowledge deconstruction and affectiveness form active learning; (vi) personal assets need to fit to complex dynamics of reality. Our analysis provides a means of benchmarking existing practice for Sustainability in Higher Education, and can be used as the basis for building capacity in a systematic way
Redesign can reduce the environmental impact generated by product packaging. The literature presents the elements to be observed in a packaging redesign, as well as the important role of the retailer in delivering more sustainable outcomes through consideration of product packaging. However, the literature is almost silent on the motivations, opportunities and barriers faced by the retailers that try to improve the packaging of the items sold in their stores. To fill this gap, a case study approach was adopted which investigated a global supermarket chain through interviews with senior management and participant observation. Findings suggest that the greatest motivation to the packaging redesign seems to be the economic gains (for the supermarket and its suppliers), which cogenerate environmental gains. The opportunities include the adjustment of the packaging size or type. Sizes could be increased when consumers buy more than one package during a single visit to the supermarket, or reduced when consumers discard part of a perishable product without consuming it (due to over-large packaging). Barriers result from commercial uncertainties associated with: how the new packaging will affect the sales of other items? How the new design will influence the number of times that a consumer visits the supermarket? And how the new design will affect the amount of money spent by the consumer on each visit? Further studies could investigate: how to mitigate these uncertainties? How to leverage sustainability based on the economic focus? How to identify redesign opportunities among thousands of sold items? And how to better convince the suppliers that reject the supermarket proposals? The understanding developed from the case study has facilitated the derivation of a number of propositions aiming to leverage sustainability gains from packaging redesign in practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.