No abstract

No abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to connect participatory sustainability implementation with sustainability assessment, exploring learning theories, the principles of Higher Education for Sustainable Development (HESD) and respective indicators applied in the university context. Even though participation is partly considered in existing assessment practices, it is still unclear what and how to measure participatory processes that envision implementing sustainability principles in higher education institutions. Holistic approaches are often proclaimed, but reductionist assessment methods are frequently followed. Design/methodology/approach – The study followed a qualitative approach, inspired by the Delphi method, and includes semi-structured expert interviews (N = 15) and two focus group discussions (N = 23), with participants coming from a total of 17 different countries. Data were analysed and compared according to qualitative content analysis and systemized according to the underlying theoretical strands. Findings – The findings suggest that participatory processes can be better assessed from a social learning and organisational learning perspective, emphasizing non-linear criteria for the quality of the process in terms of depth and meaningfulness as well as criteria for the quality of the outcome in terms of knowledge generation and innovation. The findings also point implicitly to the need of considering double- and triple-loop learning, if a culture of participation towards sustainability is to be pursued, and underline the high impact of institutional governance. Originality/value – Although a great volume of literature about sustainability implementation in higher education exists, studies focusing on participatory processes in this context are rather scarce. This research pays attention to sustainability experts working in universities rarely heard in a more systemic manner and also applies a reflective participatory approach itself by using qualitative methods.

This paper is aimed at presenting some trends and developments with respect to renewable energy sources in the EU and how these sources can be used in the Romanian economy. It outlines the need of considerable reduction of emissions of greenhouse gasses, transforming the Romanian economy into a region with low emissions of CO 2 and at the same time into an efficient country in terms of energy consumption.

No abstract

PurposeTo report on a project involving European and Latin American universities, focusing on curriculum greening.Design/methodology/approachThis paper presents the experiences gained in connection with the “ACES Project” which is a model of the implementation of sustainability principles in higher education, with a special emphasis on curriculum greening. This paper presents the principles and main results of the project, which involved 11 European and Latin American universities, with financial support from the ALFA programme of the European Commission.FindingsThe paper identifies ten characteristics of the initial model of curriculum greening which were validated in the process and were interpreted in the paper.Research limitations/implicationsThe type of action‐oriented research carried out in the context of the ACES Project, by means of cooperative efforts and the accumulation of diverse fields of knowledge, presented working difficulties which are different from those experienced by more homogeneous groups. Nevertheless, the knowledge generated is very consistent in response to environmental issues and problems and reflects the need for collaboration between all areas of knowledge in order to preserve and improve environmental conditions.Practical implicationsThe paper introduces not only the results obtained with the ACES model, but also ten components which characterise curriculum greening and may be used elsewhere.Originality/valueThe approach used and the emphasis on international cooperation illustrate ways in which a multi‐stakeholders project may be successfully undertaken.

No abstract

Background The implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires much planning and the provision of resources, especially regarding the necessary investments, technologies and infrastructures needed. Yet, it is presently unclear how available these elements are, what gaps exist, what changes have taken place in terms of their availability since the adoption of the SDGs and what their requirements will be in the future. The knowledge gap has become even more concerning because of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a bibliometric analysis, an assessment of the global progress of SDG implementation and requirements, identifying challenges through the development of a matrix, and a set of 11 case studies to triangulate the holistic analysis, an assessment of the global progress of the SDGs implementation and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on this process was carried out. Results The findings suggest that the scope and width of resources limitation are currently undermining the implementation of the SDGs. Apart from the fact that the pace of progress has been insufficient, the potential of the SDGs in pursuing sustainability and improving life quality is not fully realised. This trend suggests that a substantial acceleration of the efforts is needed, especially for the five SDGs whose progress since 2015 has not been optimal, namely SDG2, SDG11, SDG13, SDG15, and SDG16, while SDG3, SDG7, SDG9, SDG14, and SDG17 show signs of progress. The case studies showed that different industries have dissimilar effects on achieving the SDGs, with the food sector correlating with 15 SDGs, as opposed to the energy sector correlating with 6 SDGs. Accordingly, the priority level assessment in terms of achieving the SDGs, points to the need to further advance the above-mentioned five SDGs, i.e., 2, 11, 13, 15 and 16. Conclusions This study fills in a knowledge gap in respect of the current need for and availability of investments, new technologies, and infrastructures to allow countries to pursue the SDGs. It is suggested that this availability is rather limited in specific contexts. In respect of the needs to be addressed, these include resource-related constraints, limited technologies and infrastructures, affecting SDG2, SDG11, SDG13, SDG15, and SDG16, whose progress needs to be enhanced. Since the global progress in the process of implementation of the SDGs depends directly and indirectly on addressing the resource gaps, it is suggested that this topic be further investigated, so that the present imbalances in the three dimensions of sustainable development: the economic, social and environmental, be adequately addressed.