S.A. Bekessy, K. Samson and R.E. Clarkson
This paper aims to assess the impact and value of non‐binding agreements or declarations in achieving sustainability in universities.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to assess the impact and value of non‐binding agreements or declarations in achieving sustainability in universities.
Design/methodology/approach
A case study of Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University is presented, analysing the reasons for lack of progress towards sustainability and evaluating best ways forward. Using a timeline and analysis of historical records for the 12 years since RMIT first engaged in the sustainability agenda, major trends in the process of implementing policies are identified. Secondly, 15 semi‐structured interviews with university leaders and key sustainability stakeholders from across the university are analysed to provide insight into how and why the university has failed to achieve sustainability.
Findings
New implications for successfully achieving sustainability arise from these findings. Accountability is a key issue, as RMIT appears to reap benefits from being signatory to declarations without achieving genuine progress. To ensure that declarations are more than simply greenwash, universities must open themselves up to scrutiny of progress to determine whether commitments have been honoured.
Practical implications
Relying on small‐scale “club” activities establishing demonstrations and raising awareness is unlikely to lead to permanent change. The evidence of RMIT's engagement with sustainability shows that, for example, even when successful pilot studies are conducted, these initiatives may do little to affect the mainstream practices of a university unless certain conditions exist. Furthermore, given the on‐paper commitments institutions have made, and the role of the university in society, small‐scale and gradual changes in university practice are a far from adequate response to the urgent sustainability imperative.
Originality/value
The initial engagement of RMIT University with the sustainability agenda 12 years ago marked it as a world leader in sustainability best‐practice. Analysing how and why such a disappointing lack of action has resulted from such promising beginnings provides insight into future directions for implementing sustainability in universities. The paper argues that considering the key responsibility of universities in leading the sustainability agenda, a more systemic and serious response is required.
Details
Keywords
Almut Beringer, Tarah Wright and Leslie Malone
The purpose is to ascertain the state of sustainability in higher education (SHE) in Atlantic Canada (sustainability education/curriculum; research and scholarship; operations;…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose is to ascertain the state of sustainability in higher education (SHE) in Atlantic Canada (sustainability education/curriculum; research and scholarship; operations; faculty/staff development and rewards; community outreach and service; student opportunities; and institutional mission, structure and planning).
Design/methodology/approach
All Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) member institutions in Atlantic Canada were sampled in 2005/2006 to examine sustainability performance. Data were collected using the sustainability assessment questionnaire (SAQ) and were triangulated with document, webpage, and additional survey research.
Findings
The majority of higher education institutions in Atlantic Canada are engaged in sustainable development work, most notably in the area of curriculum. Sustainability research and scholarship is spread amongst faculty and students; many institutions have inter‐ or multi‐disciplinary research structures to address sustainability questions across campus and in collaboration with community partners. Much unrealized potential remains within physical operations, faculty/staff development and rewards, and student opportunities. No single university emerges as the Atlantic Canadian SHE leader; Acadia University (Wolfville, Nova Scotia), St Francis Xavier University (Antigonish, Nova Scotia) and Mt Allison University (Sackville, New Brunswick) excel in a regional peers comparison.
Research limitations/implications
The Atlantic Canada study commences a series of five regional SHE assessments in Canada.
Practical implications
The study strengthens ongoing efforts for creative institutional solutions to reduce the ecological footprint of higher education institutions. It contributes to SHE knowledge transfer and capacity‐building.
Originality/value
The study is the first regional SHE performance assessment in Canada. It serves as a pilot study and strategic planning tool.
Details
Keywords
Juliette M. O’Keeffe, Edward Simpson, M. Ehsan Jorat and Margi Vilnay
Higher education institutions (HEIs) face unique barriers to implementation of environmental management systems (EMSs) compared to the private sector, where formal EMS approaches…
Abstract
Higher education institutions (HEIs) face unique barriers to implementation of environmental management systems (EMSs) compared to the private sector, where formal EMS approaches such as ISO 14001 are widely used. HEIs across the world have tended to adopt structured EMSs through less formal methods or apply bespoke approaches based on institutional drivers for implementation. This chapter explores organizational factors specific to HEIs that impact on their ability to implement and sustain formal EMS approaches. An in-depth review was undertaken examining key organization barriers to EMS adoption, and organizational factors specific to HEIs that can affect the successful implementation and sustainability of EMS approaches. The study finds that considerations of the key actors, existing organizational structures, governance and leadership, and resistance to change are important areas to consider in the implementation of an EMS within an HEI. UK HEIs are used as a case study to examine the relationship between EMS uptake and performance, and identify trends toward the adoption of various types of systems. We find that a trend toward the adoption of more formalized EMS approaches among UK HEIs contradicts the suggestion from the literature that less-formal approaches may be more suitable. The study challenges the assumption that formal approaches to environmental management such as ISO 14001 and Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) provide the gold standard EMS, suggesting that alternative standards may be more suitable in the context of the unique organizational structures and key barriers to EMS implementation faced by HEIs.
Details
Keywords
This paper aims to investigate the strategy, accounting and accountability interface in sustainability implementation in a large public tertiary education organisation in New…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate the strategy, accounting and accountability interface in sustainability implementation in a large public tertiary education organisation in New Zealand.
Design/methodology/approach
The study uses ethnography as an “engaging research” to help explain the real-life enactment of accounting and accountability in advancing/deterring sustainability initiatives. The study draws upon neo-institutional theoretical perspectives to help interpret the findings.
Findings
Accounting and accountability are powerful conduits for strategy implementation. Successful sustainability strategy implementation requires the embedding of financial accountability within the implementation process.
Practical implications
A strong ideological commitment from senior management is required to firmly embed sustainability in the tertiary organisation's belief systems, values and norms to get wider organisational acceptance and institutionalisation. Accounting needs to take a position of centrality within organisations to help facilitate sustainability implementation.
Social implications
Government policy needs to incorporate specific concepts of sustainability into the tertiary education strategy and funding framework to make public tertiary organisations accountable for sustainability to the wider society.
Originality/value
This study provides unique insights into the sustainability implementation process. It complements existing literature on sustainability accounting and accountability.
Details
Keywords
Paula Mariel Reyes-Carrasco, Enzo Ferrari, Camilo Ruíz Méndez and Angela Barrón Ruíz
This study aims to describe the process leading the climate emergency declaration (CED) at the University of Salamanca. In contrast to similar initiatives, this was achieved with…
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to describe the process leading the climate emergency declaration (CED) at the University of Salamanca. In contrast to similar initiatives, this was achieved with the participation of students on the social movement Fridays For Future Salamanca.
Design/methodology/approach
The context of the CED is described. Statements in Spanish universities are used for comparison and internal reports and evaluations were analyzed to measure the progress. Testimonies from the proponents of the declaration and from the agents implementing actions were classified to describe the roles and dynamics involved in the participatory process. Twitter and newspapers are also used to complete the data triangulation.
Findings
The results show that Climate Emergency has been enriched by a bottom-up approach, generating challenges and opportunities to take into account when considering community participation. A university that aspires to be a role model for a low-carbon future needs to address how to construct efficient participatory mechanisms. In that matter, the authors propose their experience that might be useful for other institutions.
Originality/value
The CED is a common practice in universities but it is not always associated with specific actions and policies. In this case, the main feature is the students participation, in particular the social movement Fridays For Future.
Details
Keywords
Maria Cadiz Dyball, Andy F. Wang and Sue Wright
The purpose of this paper is to explore how the lack of staff engagement with a university’s strategy on sustainability could be an enabling lever for organisational change. It…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore how the lack of staff engagement with a university’s strategy on sustainability could be an enabling lever for organisational change. It examines the attitudes and views of employees of a business faculty at an Australian metropolitan university as it attempts to adopt a holistic approach to sustainability.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper opted for a case study using data from an on-line survey, semi-directed interviews with key management personnel and archival material. Responses were analysed using Piderit’s (2000) notion of ambivalence.
Findings
The paper provides empirical insights into why staff lacked engagement with the university’s strategy on sustainability. It suggests that staff were ambivalent, displaying dissonance in their personal beliefs on sustainability, the university’s strategy and the extent of their intentions to support the university. Staff were willing to offer ideas on how the university could, in the future, change towards sustainability. These ideas allow the possibility for the university to learn to adjust the scope of the implementation of its sustainability strategy.
Research limitations/implications
The research results may lack generalisability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to further examine staff attitudes on sustainability in higher education using Piderit’s notion of ambivalence. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions could allow a better understanding of harmony and dissonance in cognition of and intention for university sustainability strategies and initiatives by academic, professional and sessional staff.
Practical implications
The paper includes implications for staff engagement with sustainability in higher education.
Originality/value
This paper fulfils an identified need to study how staff engagement with sustainability in higher education can be enabled for organisational learning.
Details
Keywords
Ruth Bookbinder, Anna Mdee and Katy Roelich
This paper aims to discuss the practical dilemmas of institutional change to tackle the climate crisis in a UK university, identifying key assumptions and issues that block…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to discuss the practical dilemmas of institutional change to tackle the climate crisis in a UK university, identifying key assumptions and issues that block meaningful change. The research was part of an initiative to define a theory of change (ToC) to meet the university’s institutional climate commitments.
Design/methodology/approach
The findings are based on interviews with members of an inter-disciplinary ToC working group, a staff–student climate coalition and student representatives at the university. Interviewees were purposively selected to gain insights into assumptions about the nature of the university and its role in tackling the climate crisis, which must be addressed for the university to effectively implement its climate plan.
Findings
This paper identified tensions between the university’s role as a public and commercial institution, a lack of clarity over decision-making processes and the difficulties in balancing (and being transparent about) actions with commitments to tackle the climate crisis. A democratic and flexible approach to change is essential to mitigate these issues, providing an opportunity to reflect on the diversity of the university community and openly debate goals and commitments.
Originality/value
In setting out the initial steps of a ToC in a UK university, this paper offers practical insights for higher education institutions looking to change practices. By highlighting assumptions at a particular institution, this paper also contributes a level of granularity to a growing field of research on efforts in higher education institutions to tackle the climate crisis.
Details
Keywords
Erica Udas, Monique Wölk and Martin Wilmking
Nowadays, several higher education institutions around the world are integrating sustainability topics into their daily operations, functionality and education systems. This paper…
Abstract
Purpose
Nowadays, several higher education institutions around the world are integrating sustainability topics into their daily operations, functionality and education systems. This paper presents a case study from a pilot project implemented by the Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald (hereafter, Greifswald University), Germany on its way towards a “carbon-neutral university”. The purpose of this paper is to share an institutional process targeting a gradual transformation towards achieving carbon neutrality. This might be relevant to other higher education institutions striving for a systematic and progressive change from a traditional system to a low emission or carbon-neutral pathway.
Design/methodology/approach
To achieve carbon neutrality, three major transformative strategies were adopted: carbon reduction, carbon offsetting and mainstreaming sustainable actions via teaching and research.
Findings
A locally adaptable institutional framework on sustainability was successfully developed to: promote changes in daily operations, implement interdisciplinary research, incorporate sustainability into teaching and education and enhance outreach programs. Strong commitment from all stakeholders resulted in reduction of the university’s carbon footprint from 8,985 to 4,167 tCO2e year−1. Further, the unavoidable emissions could be locally offset through enhanced carbon sequestration on the university-owned forests.
Originality/value
Based on the experiences of Greifswald University, this paper presents major challenges and success lessons learned during the process of gradual institutional transformation to achieve the target of carbon neutrality.
Details
Keywords
Gavin Melles, Stefan Lodewyckx and Thangatur Sukumar Hariharan
This study provides a country-specific and sector-wide study of campus sustainability. Campus sustainability is a key consideration for the higher education (HEI) sector, and…
Abstract
Purpose
This study provides a country-specific and sector-wide study of campus sustainability. Campus sustainability is a key consideration for the higher education (HEI) sector, and campus sustainability officers and managers manage its reporting and planning. Global and country-specific studies to date have focussed on individual organisation narratives, interviews with faculty and management and content analysis of reports and plans. Findings show wide divergence on scope and scale of formalised planning and reporting, few references to sustainability officers and managers’ perspectives and limited reference to organisational theory to explain tactics and strategies adopted. As a result, there are a few country-specific and sector-wide studies. The purpose of this paper is to address the scarcity of country-specific and sector-wide studies into campus sustainability practices in HEI by combining qualitative and quantitative analysis.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors provide the first sector-wide overview of formal campus sustainability commitments for the Australian public sector HEI (n = 41) in terms of several key indicators – plans, reports and other indicators. Second, the authors use reflexive thematic analysis of interviews (n = 21) with current and former sustainability officers and managers to examine sector organisational reasons for such variation. Third, the authors analyse HEI sector isomorphism and divergence on planning and reporting of campus sustainability from the perspective of institutional theory of organisations.
Findings
This study finds some convergence on the need for plans, reporting and other engagement elements, albeit without any sector-wide standards being followed. The authors observe a trend towards carbon-neutral (CN) declarations before 2030 although with nuances on emissions scope and increasing inclusion of renewable energy. Interviews identify a range of strategies and tactics adopted for campus sustainability relative to internal and external organisational pressures. Overall, the sector still exhibits weak institutionalisation of sustainability.
Research limitations/implications
This study interviews a specific and limited cohort (n = 21) and presents an overview of sector reporting, planning and target setting although not a detailed content analysis. Other interview cohorts may have different views on the strategic and tactical purposes of reporting practices, and more in-depth analysis of formal plans and reports should be conducted in the future.
Practical implications
This study concludes that the Australian HEI sector should consider greater public transparency of its data and reporting actions. Common standards and a benchmarking platform for the sector would improve overall engagement with all internal and external stakeholders. At present, the HEI sector’s message to its key internal and external stakeholders is mixed and needs to change towards a more in-depth institutionalisation of sustainability on campus.
Originality/value
Particular insights are the value of organisational strategies and tactics as an interpretive framework for HEI campus sustainability and how interviewees attribute sector competitors and self-different motives and tactics. Albeit limited, this is the first mapping of sector approaches to sustainability reporting and planning.
Details
Keywords
The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework that systematically captures the ambiguity of different understandings about science, the university and its relation to…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework that systematically captures the ambiguity of different understandings about science, the university and its relation to society, while conceptualising sustainability. Following Corley and Gioia (2004, p. 174) on identity ambiguity and change, it seems pivotal to better understanding the ambiguity of sustainability in relation to academic cultures and university models to manage the transition more effectively.
Design/methodology/approach
The nature of this paper’s objectives as well as the wide thematic scope leads to the need of exploring a broad knowledge base. This was best addressed by an exploratory literature review with data collection from primary and secondary sources. The data was interpreted through a hermeneutic analysis and resulted in the inductive development of first categories and goals (further referred to as category development). In addition, a multi-method approach further adjusted the categories and raised their empirical validity and social robustness.
Findings
Implementing sustainability involves dealing with a double bound ambiguity due to organisational and individual identity reasons. Five fields of ambiguity were developed to systemise the conceptualisation of a sustainable university along contradictory understandings of science, the university and sustainability. These fields offer a framework to qualitatively assess the degree of sustainability in higher education institutions. Arguments for and against sustainability in universities have been categorised around five criteria and associated to the fields of ambiguity. The finding indicates that meaning in organisational change management for sustainability can be considered both, a potential driver and barrier for a sustainability transition in universities.
Research limitations/implications
This paper exclusively focussed on the internal perspective and left aside any external factors that influence the sustainability transition, such as political measures to stimulate sustainability in higher education. In addition, the operational dimension of a sustainable university has been neglected, which is by all means a necessary and important aspect. The interrelation of the identified goals has not been discussed.
Originality/value
This paper focusses on the conceptualisation and understanding of sustainability within the institution, an often-forgotten but fundamental aspect of implementation. The fields of ambiguity are designed to be applied for assessing the “degree of maturity” of a sustainable university. The fields reveal the different understandings about the role, the mission and the governance of universities, stemming from competing preferences about goals and their assumed relations by various stakeholders of a higher education institutions. The five fields are not an attempt to resolve the hidden contradictions and tensions in a sustainability transition, but to state them clearly to anticipate resistances and conflicts that hinder the development of a shared understanding.