A Conceptual Model for Integrating Non-Material Components in Sustainability Assessment

Viégas, Osvaldo; Caeiro, Sandra; Ramos, Tomás B.

doi:10.1590/1809-4422asoc0201r1vu18l4ao

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As argued by Ramos [65] the challenges in the area of sustainability assessment indicators should be based on transdisciplinary, collaborative and innovative scientific development where communities and the individual play a central role. Greater emphasis should be given to the development of indicators to assess non-traditional aspects of sustainability, such as ethics, culture and art, aesthetics, governance efficiency, spirituality, solidarity, compassion and trust, which represent fewer tangible dimensions of society [65,87].…”

Section: Overall Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Assessment and Benchmarking in Higher Education Institutions—A Critical Reflection

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) play a crucial role in implementing practices for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). This implementation should be done in different dimensions according to a holistic and whole-school approach. Different tools have been adapted and developed to assess this integrated approach. The aim of this research is to critically reflect the existing tools to assess and benchmark ESD implementation and to discuss their applicability in two case studies. Two public Universities in Southern Europe, with headquarters in the capitals of Portugal and Spain were selected to assess and compare the integration of ESD according to a whole-school approach-Universidade Aberta in Portugal and Universidad Autónoma de Madrid in Spain. After a critical analysis of the existing tools based on literature review and a list of criteria classified by experts, two tools were selected to be applied in the case studies. The online Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System Reporting Tool was used in Universidade Aberta and Green Metrics tool was used in Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. The tools were complemented with focus group with key-actors in both universities. The results obtained allowed to identify the need to define a common objective of the assessment tools and limitations they still have. The tools need improvements on their development namely to integrate the external impact of Higher Education Institutions on sustainability, to integrate participatory processes and to assess non-traditional aspects of sustainability. This research hopes to contribute to the continuous research about the usefulness of these assessment and benchmarking tools as drivers to HEIs improve their sustainability performance and their role as agents of changes.

show abstract

Section: Overall Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Assessment and Benchmarking in Higher Education Institutions—A Critical Reflection

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SIs should be ready to rethink the "old" and "new" world challenges, and deal with the complexity, scale, and unpredictability of many of the current SD questions: A multifaceted mix of post-truth reality, scientific developments, global changes, globalization, social crises (e.g., environment, poverty, and war refugees), economic growth pressures versus de-growth thinking, and new technological opportunities and risks. SIs should also be able to respond to non-traditional aspects of sustainability [17,29], also referred to as a less tangible "fourth pillar" or "missing dimension" of sustainability [29,54], particularly those involving sustainability ethics, culture, esthetics, justice, compassion, mutual help, moderation, solidarity, and general non-material values, as well as goal and target uncertainty, new and old limits of natural-human systems, or the blurred distinction between peacetime and wartime, collaborative learning, voluntary monitoring, and crowd sourcing.…”

Section: Exploring New Frontiers and Paradigmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SIs should cover general non-material values or non-traditional aspects of sustainability, such as ethics, culture and arts, aesthetics, effectiveness of governance, legislation and norms, spirituality, solidarity, compassion, mutual help [17,29,54,71], which represent less tangible dimensions of human society.…”

Section: #10 Integration or Non-traditional Aspects Of Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Assessment: Exploring the Frontiers and Paradigms of Indicator Approaches

Ramos

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability assessment approaches could support all levels of decision-making and policy processes (including strategies, policies, plans, programs, projects, and activities/operations), thus improving the management of natural and human systems. Sustainability Indicators (SIs) have been extensively used to assess and communicate the progress toward sustainable development. However, despite all the SI initiatives and the well-known advantages and popularity, several risks have been pointed out, so there is a need to rethink the current state of SIs and build visions that could reshape the indicator reality. The main goal of this research is to develop a constructive debate around the possible futures and paths of SIs’, by conducting a critical analysis of a set of challenges and opportunities identified by the literature. This was explored through a critical perspective and viewpoint article that discusses what could be some of the new frontiers and paradigms in SIs. Exploratory research supported by a combination of methods was conducted, consisting of a search of the literature and qualitative document analysis, followed by an assessment procedure based upon an evaluation ranking scale. The classification scale integrated three main criteria of valuation: Relevancy, feasibility, and societal impacts. The findings showed that most of the challenges and opportunities analyzed are old and mainly technically oriented, with a low potential impact on society, including end-users and practitioners. The majority of the challenges have low-to-medium feasibility, showing that there would be difficulty in implementing them, and so they should be improved or redesigned. A set of key questions on SIs’ futures is proposed, aiming to represent a critical view of the relevant challenges and opportunities analyzed, but underpinned and observed from a crosscutting angle, represented by the societal role. The SI research community should be ready to adapt ways of thinking and doing, responding to new global and local paradigms and using transdisciplinary collaborative scientific development and innovation as the foundations for the change process, wherein communities and the individual have central roles to play.

show abstract

“…Vertical wellbeing does in fact influence the level of wellbeing experienced by the citizens in developed states; this does not rule out the condition that other aspects of the horizontal dimension do play a role in regulating the wellbeing of individuals. Economic conditions may not be optimal; however, with other forms of horizontal goods, such as social capital, a sense of belonging, and religious practices, individuals are able to attain higher levels of happiness (Gawlik, 2013;Hajbaghery, 2015;Newman & Graham, 2018;Seligman, 1997;Szczesniak, et al, 2020;Viegas et al, 2018).…”

Section: Vertical and Horizontal Social Inclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Inclusion Challenges and the Future of Relational Wellbeing: The Case of Indonesia and South-Korea

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research focuses on enriching the dynamics and contextual explanation of relational well-being as a representation of sustainable quality of life. Previous studies rely on economic explanations and have not shown an adequate synergy model with social factors in explaining social well-being conditions. This research intends to fill and enrich this gap by examining how vertical and horizontal forms of social inclusion have impacted on the well-being in its relational forms: the capacity to trust others, the degree of interaction, and proactivity in communal participation. By comparing the differing socio-economic conditions of Indonesian and South Korean society through correlation and multiple regression analysis, we found that a sustainable and balanced form of relational well-being does not only consist in economic attributes vertically, but also social-horizontal dimension, which is manifested through social capital and cohesion facilitated by cultural, religious and gender groups in local communities. Economic (material) factors are more dominant in explaining relational well-being at the individual level, while social (non-material) factors are dominant as explanations at the community level. This research presents a novelty related to the Easterlin Paradox thesis that the improvement of well-being in the context of societal development, does not only rely on economic attributes alone, however it is complemented and balanced by social dimension such as horizontal forms of social inclusion. The policy implications of this research show that inclusive government policies at the personal, relational, and societal level, is very fundamental to create sustainable well-being.

show abstract

A Conceptual Model for Integrating Non-Material Components in Sustainability Assessment

Cited by 4 publications

References 28 publications

Sustainability Assessment and Benchmarking in Higher Education Institutions—A Critical Reflection

Sustainability Assessment and Benchmarking in Higher Education Institutions—A Critical Reflection

Sustainability Assessment: Exploring the Frontiers and Paradigms of Indicator Approaches

Social Inclusion Challenges and the Future of Relational Wellbeing: The Case of Indonesia and South-Korea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About