Sustainability in higher education

Her current research inter-ests include sustainability in high education and green campus, environment manage-ment, management of urban infrastructure, sustainable cities, and green buil

AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • CAMBRIDGE • HEIDELBERG LONDON • NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO

Chandos Publishing is an imprint of Elsevier

Langford Lane, Kidlington, OX5 1GB, UK

Copyright © 2015 by J Paulo Davim, Published by Elsevier Ltd., All Rights Reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance

This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).

Notices

Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.

To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Control Number: 2015942347

ISBN 978-0-08-100367-1

For information on all Chandos Publishing

visit our website at http://store.elsevier.com/

A Abdul-Aziz Centre of Engineering Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,

Johor, Malaysia

L Brandli Passo Fundo University, Passo Fundo, RS, Brazil

M Buhr Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

G.A de la Riva de la Riva Instituto Tecnológico Superior de Irapuato (ITESI),

Irapuato, GTO, México

A do Paço University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal

C.C Espinosa Fajardo Centro de Estudios Científicos y Tecnológicos del Estado de

Guanajuato (CECYTEG), Irapuato, México

C Hesselbarth Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

M Juárez Nájera Basic Sciences and Engineering Division, México, DF, México

W Leal Filho Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany

K Mohd-Yusof Centre of Engineering Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,

Johor, Malaysia

W O’Brien Clark University, Worcester, MA, USA

A.N Sadikin Centre of Lipid Engineering and Applied Research, Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia

J Sarkis Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, USA

S Schaltegger Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

C Shiel Bournemouth University, Dorset, UK

S.R Wan Alwi Process Systems Engineering Centre (PROSPECT), Universiti

Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia

Sustainability is a multidisciplinary discipline of study, research, and practice

Brundtland Report defines sustainability as “development that meets the needs of

the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The three core pillars of sustainability are environment, society, and econ-omy Recently, more than two important pillars were incorporated: culture and pol-itics Currently, the application of sustainability for universities is a relatively new phenomenon and a great challenge The study of sustainability is of interest to those who work to improve communication between, professors, researchers, and students

in universities, institutes, and research laboratories

The main objective of this book is to provide information about sustainability in higher education The initial chapter of the book covers campus greening as a tool for institutional sustainability efforts (putting sustainable development in practice) Chapter 2 is dedicated to management education for sustainability (deriving learn-ing formats from competence requirements) Chapter 3 covers US and international community-based sustainability projects for deep learning Chapter 4 is dedicated to inculcating sustainability among first-year engineering students using cooperative problem-based learning Finally, the last chapter of the book covers sustainability in engineering education (an approach to reach significant learning and character skills).This book can be used as research tool for undergraduate students or as a text

on sustainability in higher education at the postgraduate level Also, this book can serve as a useful reference for academics, educators, researchers, managers, engi-neers, and professionals in higher education related to sustainability The informa-tion presented in this book is researched from many important schools, institutes, and universities throughout the world Therefore, we hope this book will inspire other research in this field

The editor acknowledges Dr Glyn Jones and the Elsevier/Chandos team for this opportunity and for their enthusiastic and professional support Finally, I would like to thank each of the chapter authors for their contributions to this work

J Paulo Davim Aveiro, Portugal June 2015

J Paulo Davim received his PhD in mechanical engineering from the University of

Porto in 1997, the Aggregate title from the University of Coimbra in 2005, and DSc from London Metropolitan University in 2013 He is currently professor of Mechanical Engineering at University of Aveiro and head of Machining and Tribology Research Group He has more than 28 years of teaching and research experience in manufac-turing, materials, and mechanical engineering with special emphasis in machining and tribology Recently, his interests include management/industrial engineering and higher education for sustainability He is the editor of nine international journals, guest editor, editorial board member, reviewer, and scientific advisory for many interna-tional journals and conferences He is an editorial board member of 30 international journals and serves as reviewer for than 80 prestigious ISI Web of Science journals

He has also published more than 50 book chapters and 350 articles as author or thor in refereed international journals (more than 200 in ISI Web of Science journals, h-index=32+) and conferences

coau-Authors

Chapter 1

Walter Leal Filho is a senior professor at Hamburg University of Applied Sciences

in Germany, where he coordinates an extensive portfolio of international projects on matters concerned with sustainable development He holds a number of doctorates for his work on environmental and sustainability issues, and has more than 300 publica-tions to his credit

Chris Shiel is an associate professor in Life and Environmental Sciences at

Bournemouth University She has played a leading role in developing the concepts of global citizenship and ESD within higher education and has led participative action research with university leaders, students, community stakeholders, and NGOs in the areas of globalization and sustainable development She is a Principal Fellow of the Higher Education Academy

Arminda do Paço holds a PhD in management and is auxiliary professor at

University of Beira Interior, Portugal She is currently researcher of NECE—Research Unit of Business Sciences, as well as director of the first cycle in marketing Her areas of interest are environmental marketing, sustainability, public and nonprofit

marketing, and entrepreneurship education She has published several articles in ternational journals and contributed chapters in international books Additionally she participates in consultant projects directed to SME.

in-Luciana Londero Brandli holds a PhD in production engineering and has done

postdoctoral research at Hamburg University of Applied Sciences She is associate professor at the University of Passo Fundo, Brazil, where she works in the master’s program in engineering, infrastructure, and environment Her current research inter-ests include sustainability in high education and green campus, environment manage-ment, management of urban infrastructure, sustainable cities, and green buildings She supervises a number of master students on engineering, environment and sustainabil-ity issues, and has in excess of 100 publications

Chapter 2

Charlotte Hesselbarth holds a PhD, and is a university lecturer in the fields of

sus-tainability management, general management, quality management, and human source management Following her studies in business administration, she worked as

re-a resere-arch re-assistre-ant re-and re-as the coordinre-ator of the MBA Sustre-ainre-ability Mre-anre-agement re-at Leuphana University in Lüneburg, Germany Her fields of research relate to emissions trading and carbon management, the link between corporate sustainability manage-ment and human resource management as well as to higher management education for sustainability

Maike Buhr is a research assistant at the Centre for Sustainability Management

(CSM) at Leuphana University Lüneburg, Germany As a part of the MBA Sustainability Management team, her field of activity is the E-Tutoring linked to the online learning platform She is a PhD candidate in corporate sustainability manage-ment concerned with the question of how individuals can become effective change agents to foster corporate sustainability After her study of political science, cultural and social anthropology at Muenster University, Buhr completed her master of science degree in human ecology at Lund University, Sweden Her research interests include change agents, organizational and competence development, corporate sustainability, education for sustainable development, and sustainability transitions

Stefan Schaltegger holds a PhD and is a professor of Sustainability Management

and head of the Centre for Sustainability Management (CSM) and the MBA Sustainability Management program at Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Germany His research deals with corporate sustainability management with a special focus on per-formance measurement, accounting, management methods, sustainable entrepreneur-ship, strategic and stakeholder management, and business practices in sustainability management

Chapter 3

Will O’Brien is an experienced business executive, entrepreneur, consultant, teacher,

and attorney He has lectured at Bentley University, Johns Hopkins University, Peking University, and Vietnam National University His courses focus on CSR and

sustainability management O’Brien teaches a capstone course for the master’s degree

in sustainability and environmental management at Harvard Extension School He spearheaded the creation of Clark’s MBA in sustainability and manages the MBA

in social change In June 2014, he spoke at the AACSB Sustainability Conference

O’Brien serves on the editorial board of International Journal of Higher Education

& Sustainability He consults with Gjovik University College in Norway regarding

their sustainability management curriculum and with the WPI School of Business to establish a Center for Sustainability in Business

Joseph Sarkis is a professor of management in the Foisie School of Business at

Worcester Polytechnic Institute He holds a PhD from the University of Buffalo His research and teaching interests are in operations and supply chain management, and organizations and the natural environment He has published in more than 350 publi-cations in a wide variety of academic and professional outlets

Chapter 4

Khairiyah Mohd-Yusof is the director of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM)

Centre of Engineering Education (CEE), which promotes meaningful research and scholarly practices in engineering education An associate professor in the Department

of Chemical Engineering, UTM, she has been an invited speaker in various ing education conferences and workshops in Asia, Europe, and North America Mohd-Yusof’s engineering education research focuses on innovative teaching and learning

engineer-practices and EESD Currently, she serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Engineering Education, ASEAN Journal of Engineering Education, IChemE Journal

of Education for Chemical Engineers, European Journal of Engineering Education, and Journal of PBL in Higher Education She is also the secretary for the Society of

Engineering Education Malaysia, and board member for the Research in Engineering Education Network

Sharifah Rafidah Wan Alwi is the director of Process Systems Engineering Centre

(PROSPECT) of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) She specializes in process systems engineering with an emphasis on resource conservation She has published in more than 140 publications and has been extensively involved in 28 research projects,

17 industrial-based projects for various companies and government agencies, and has trained engineers from more than 100 companies She has received various awards such

as Maal Hijrah 2008 State Award, IChemE Highly Commended Sir Frederick Warner Prize 2011, and ASEAN Young Scientist and Technologist Award (AYSTA 2014) She

is currently on the editorial advisory board for Applied Thermal Engineering Journal and International Journal of Higher Education and Sustainability.

Aziatul Niza Sadikin is a lecturer in the Department of Chemical Engineering, on

the faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Her main research interest areas are separation processes and engineering education She is one

of the class facilitators for a first-year chemical engineering course called Introduction

to Engineering, that employs cooperative problem-based learning (CPBL) as the teaching and learning methodology She is an active member of an engineering re-search team in UTM

Azmahani Abdul-Aziz is a senior lecturer at the Department of Hydraulics and

Hydrology, Faculty of Civil Engineering, and is a Fellow at the Centre of Engineering Education at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Her disciplinary background is water en-gineering and education Currently, she is pursuing her PhD in engineering education Her doctoral research focuses on the impact of a student-centered learning environ-ment in inculcating sustainable development among engineering students

Chapter 5

Gustavo Alberto de la Riva-de la Riva studied biochemistry and has a master’s

de-gree in chemistry (1984) from Donetsk National University (Ukraine) and a PhD in biology (1995) from Havana University Since 2007 he has worked as a full professor

in the Departments of Mechatronics and Biology at Irapuato Institute of Technology (ITESI) and gives postgraduate courses in the Schools of Engineering and Agrimony

at De la Salle University in Leon, Guanajuato, Mexico His fields of expertise are biology, environmental microbiology, bacterial and yeast genetic engineering In bi-ology, he has published 48 papers and registered two patents In engineering, he has studied the problems related with character curriculum and sustainability in the in-stitute ITESI He is a member of the American Society of Engineering Education and Society for Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, and also a member of National System of Researchers (SNI) in Mexico

Cristina Caridad Espinosa-Fajardo is an electric engineer (1986), has a

mas-ter’s degree in higher education and curriculum development (2008) She started her professional career (1987) at National Electric Enterprise in VillaClara, Cuba From

1988 to 1995 she worked in the industry and building sector as a planning nator, and thereafter worked in different technical schools and institutes Currently she is a teacher of mathematics, physics, and chemistry at the technical high school CECYTEG in Irapuato, Guanajuato, Mexico

coordi-Margarita Juárez-Nájera is a chemical engineer, with a master’s degree in

en-vironmental engineering (1986) and a PhD in sustainability in higher education (2010) from Erasmus University Rotterdam, Netherlands Currently she is working

as a professor at the Metropolitan Autonomous University in Mexico City She is a professional expert in environmental protection by the Mexican College of Chemical Engineers and Chemists She is a founding member of the National Environmental Engineering Academy and is certified by the Mexican Cleaner Production Center to evaluate pollution prevention activities She has published on pollution prevention, environmental protection, and education for sustainability issues

Sustainability in Higher Education

1

Putting sustainable development

in practice: campus greening as a

tool for institutional sustainability

is concerned with energy efficiency, resources use, and a commitment to enhancing environmental quality by educating for sustainability, also creating healthy living and learning environments The greening process of a campus is a process targeted toward reducing the multitude of on- and off-site environmental impacts resulting from cam-pus activities and operations, and raising environmental awareness within the human communities of a college or university (Creighton, 1999)

Due to their structure and character, university campuses are being increasingly used as an experimental platform for the application of greening processes On the one hand, higher education institutions generate environmental impacts through the use of classrooms, laboratories, offices, catering, commuting, and consumption of food and drink, among others (Lukman, Tiwary, & Azapagic, 2009) But on the other hand, they can also be places where new approaches and methods to reduce the same impacts can

be tried, tested, and implemented

For instance, based on the results of the evaluation of the environmental performance

of the faculty of engineering at the University of Maribor, Slovenia, researchers gested that the significant environmental impacts from the university’s operation are global warming, acidification, human toxicity, and terrestrial eco-toxicity (Lukman

sug-et al., 2009) Hence, the university is now trying very hard to reduce its emissions and the pollution it creates

In addition, many universities are developing tools and techniques needed to plement innovative green technologies Furthermore, a number of them are active in trying to integrate best green practices into their teaching programs, research initia-tives, student engagement opportunities, and collaborative partnerships These best practices, according to Humblet et al (2010) might include one or more of the follow-ing measures:

● Development of alternative transportation strategies.

A further element of campus greening is that by involving students in the process

it is possible to enable them to develop skills that will enhance employability The success of a green campus depends on an integrated approach to planning and imple-menting sustainability initiatives (Humblet et al., 2010)

In 2012, the leaders of the international academic community acknowledged the importance of the problem and agreed to support the greening of campuses through the following activities: reducing the environmental footprint through energy, water, and material resource efficiencies in universities’ buildings and facilities; adopting sustainable procurement practices in supply chains and catering services; providing sustainable mobility options for students and faculty; adopting effective programs for waste minimization, recycling, and reuse, and encouraging more sustainable lifestyles (UN, 2012)

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) also plays an active role in promoting greening universities’ objectives As part of its activities, UNEP launched the Global Universities Partnership on Environment and Sustainability (GUPES) The partnership promotes greening of university infrastructure/facilities/operations and enhancing students’ engagement and participation in sustainability activities both within and beyond universities (UNEP, 2014)

UNEP’s Environmental Education and Training Unit set up the Greening Universities Education Initiative In partnership with other UN agencies and leading experts and researchers from green universities, under the umbrella of GUPES, the initiative developed a toolkit to inspire, encourage, and support universities to develop and implement their own transformative strategies for establishing green, resource- efficient, and low-carbon campuses (Osmond et al., 2013)

Given the important role of campus greening as one aspect of a university’s bution toward sustainability this chapter will reflect on the current situation, highlight examples of various projects that institutions have taken forward, and then reflect on the lessons learned and needs yet to be addressed

contri-1.2 Role and areas of campus greening

The greening of campuses and universities has many benefits for institutions, students, and the local community Campus greening also contributes to solving global environ-mental issues

Several authors have suggested that the primary role of campus greening is to able universities to serve as living laboratories for practicing sustainability initiatives (Hansen & Wells, 2012; Shriberg & Harris, 2012) Thus, campus greening can create

en-a len-aboren-atory not only for implementing environmenten-al projects but en-also for developing the knowledge and skill set in students that lead to deep changes in academia, their

future professional practices, and their own lifestyles (Shriberg & Harris, 2012) As a result, campus greening serves as a model for students, who are more likely to adopt sustainable behavior that can continue after university life Furthermore, living labo-ratories allow faculty to teach and staff to work within a system that is understood as being a model for the community beyond the university (Legacy, 2004).

Campus greening efforts are inclusive and may engage all the members of the versity community (e.g., students, staff members, professors, and leading adminis-tration officials) to ensure top-down support Although, as stated by Savelyeva and Park (2012), campus community members engage in greening policies with different levels of responsiveness and involvement, suggesting that it is necessary for different approaches to sustainability to engage everyone

uni-Campus greening may stimulate innovative projects and approaches and is ant for testing the field for change of not only new knowledge but also for changes

import-in the future (Müller-Christ et al., 2014) The campus can be a site for showcasing innovative approaches, methods, and projects of sustainability (Leal Filho, 2014), for example, renewable energy installations, initiatives with solar arrays, wind tur-bines, geothermal projects, biomass production facilities, conservation retrofits, and energy-efficient designs (Thomashow, 2014)

Greening initiatives also provide transferable models for the surrounding community The university acts as an example of sustainability for their neighboring communities and for the society As the generation of knowledge today is considered as separate from the implementation of policy recommendations, campus greening is an opportunity to transcend the barriers between theory and practice The experience of a green-oriented campus environment is important to visitors, because they can be inspired to act and think deeply about the meaning and practice of sustainability (Thomashow, 2014) As examples of greening initiatives, Savelyeva and Park (2012) show the construction of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified buildings and ret-rofitting old campus facilities at Duke University and the University of Hong Kong.The other role, and maybe the most visible, is to promote economic gain through the campus greening actions As campus life can be recognized as an interdependent and com-plex small city that consumes energy, food, water, and generates different types of waste including organic and solid waste, carbon dioxide, liquid waste, and more (McMillin

& Dyball, 2009; Wells, 2013), campus greening actions can save money by decreasing wasteful practices and reducing the consumption of resources Reports from Spelman College in Atlanta show that the institution saved about $200,000 a year in utility costs

by reducing water use and energy consumption The investment cost for changes to the buildings’ heating and cooling systems was about $150,000, and the return of this investment was paid back in one year, reducing energy costs overall (Tatum, 2013).Green actions can also promote gains in the reuse and recycling of waste (Mason, Brooking, Oberender, Harford, & Horsley, 2003; Smyth, Fredeen, & Booth, 2010; Vega, Ojeda-Benítez, & Barreto, 2003) and in food production (Thomashow, 2014) Campus greening presents opportunities for awareness about consumption and pro-cesses that are more eco-efficient

Visibility and documentation is another role of campus greening Campus greening practices involve recording what the institutions are doing This is important to track

performance measures and to (re)define targets Reports increase the university ity both for their internal members and for external community According Saleh et al (2011) legislations and regulations in this regard are becoming more stringent there-fore higher education institutions (HEIs) must take measures to ensure compliance.The other important role is that campus greening can be an opportunity for the students to apply what they learn in the classroom Hands-on practices can encourage them to engage in real-world green development and to promote creativity (Müller-Christ et al., 2014) As a result, many subjects can be explored and many principles can be demonstrated (Leal Filho, 2014) Karol (2006) relates a case study in Curtin University of Technology in Perth, which uses campus sustainability as an education opportunity The students from the School of Architecture were tasked with designing

visibil-a sustvisibil-ainvisibil-able solution for visibil-a lvisibil-ake on cvisibil-ampus thvisibil-at served visibil-as visibil-a hvisibil-abitvisibil-at for birds visibil-and visibil-mal life but was in decline The project involved the points of access and discharge of water from the lake, observation, and resting platforms at these water points, elevated walkways over the water and through a tree canopy, thus leaving the ground level less disturbed The project was very successful

ani-Campus greening is an educational response to the world’s economic, ecological, and educational challenges The HEI has the potential to change how people think about the world and to generate knowledge, awareness, and solutions that can help confront those challenges (Thomashow, 2014) As stated in the People and Planet Green Education Declaration, the educational sector has a key role to play in address-ing the challenge of climate change, and education is critical to achieving the transi-tion to a low carbon economy and society This means that universities have a key role

to play and green campuses can contribute to this (Brown, 2013; Glor-Bel & Clarke,

2011) The Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU, 2014) is taking this sibility seriously The institution has set as its target to reduce carbon emissions from its buildings and vehicles by 35% and 50% from the 2005/6 baseline by July 2016 and July 2021, respectively In addition, the university is taking actions to reduce its carbon footprint One example of this effort is the project and installation of one of the largest photovoltaic arrays in the city, which converts solar energy into direct current electricity via the photovoltaic effect

respon-Some areas are very popular in respect to campus greening activities Two of them are, for instance, solid waste and energy management, often considered starting points for a greening process Initiatives in these two areas are relatively easy to implement, with opportunities for financial payback within reasonably short periods of time

A successful realization of such actions could give a university a positive impression

of greening, and thereby catalyze the implementations of further greening initiatives Effective energy and waste management offer good examples for students and faculty that demonstrate how principles of environmental awareness and stewardship apply in practice (Creighton, 1999)

For example, universities in the Netherlands have made substantial progress in greening their campuses, mainly by reducing energy use, and, in some cases, enhanc-ing curriculum provisions (Betts, 2001) In addition, the results of a study conducted

at the Prince George campus of the University of Northern British Columbia, indicate that approximately 71% of waste generated in the campus may be diverted through

waste reduction, recycling, and composting activities (Smyth et al., 2010) In the case

of the University of Maribor, Slovenia (Engineering Campus), a study carried out based on the life cycle indicated that the option of combining 70% recycling, 29% incineration, and 1% landfill was found to be most economically and environmentally sustainable (Lukman et al., 2009)

But things are as not as simple as they seem The successful implementation of the campus greening process is aggravated by various factors The results of a study conducted in 2001 show that the main barriers are budgetary constraints, a lack of knowledge concerning how greening initiatives can save costs, and an institutional reluctance to change (Dahle & Neumayer, 2001) In Europe, it is often difficult for public universities to construct new greener buildings due to budgetary limitations (Betts, 2001) According to Smyth et al (2010), comprehensive solid waste manage-ment programs are one of the greatest challenges to achieving institutional sustain-ability (Smyth et al., 2010) Another area of concern is the rapid and constant rise in energy consumption due to the proliferation of computers and associated technologies (Sharp, 2002)

1.3 Overview and evaluation of campus greening efforts

As noted, campus greening involves the process of reducing environmental impacts, both on- and off-site, that occur as a result of all campus decisions and operations (Creighton, 1999), as well as efforts to enhance environmental awareness within the communities of educational institutions Unfortunately these two activities have not always proceeded hand in hand: efforts to go green have a long history but have not always been communicated (let alone coordinated) across the different parts of insti-tutions; they rarely involve the whole community Therein lies one of the most chal-lenging aspects of campus greening: how to align actions (and participation) across a university, especially when different stakeholders have very different perceptions of what is implied by “sustainable development,” and where institutional structures may inhibit cross-institutional work We will consider the challenge of coordination later, but for now, suffice it to say that evidence suggests that although such barriers may be significant (Shiel & Williams, 2014), many more institutions (as compared to 10 years ago) recognize that any efforts to reduce the ecological footprint have to be coupled with campaigns to engage students and staff in behavior change, if they are to be fully successful

Within the United Kingdom, “campus greening” projects were part of an early response to environmental concerns, although it might be argued that some of this early activity was as much to address rising utility costs than out of genuine concern

to secure the planet for future generations Quite often such projects (e.g., using cycled paper, waste management, introducing energy-saving devices) were led by the estates function within a university, with little involvement (at least in the early days)

re-of academic staff or students, who may have been indifferent to environmental issues Such indifference is noted in an evaluative study of a sample of London institutions

at the beginning of the 21st century (Dahle & Neumayer, 2001) The study finds that

“although the sampled institutions were not at ground zero with respect to greening, their overall environmental performance was relatively poor” … “indifference” (p 3)

is one of the barriers cited, but the most significant barrier to further greening was a lack of financial resources Other significant barriers include a lack of environmental awareness (indifference but also lack of understanding), and a lack of space in an ur-ban environment for developing more energy-efficient buildings and for storing waste The authors comment that “few HE institutions are vigorously pursuing greening ini-tiatives throughout their campus operations” (p 3) and in their conclusions reflect that although the results were confined to a particular sample, they are reflective of a general reluctance across the sector for greening

Since 2001, the picture has shifted slightly: external drivers, including Green League tables, green awards, policy development, new funding streams, and the on-campus arrival of more environmentally aware students All of these have served to increase engagement and to drive some change in approaches National Union of Students campaigns such as “Switch-off” and “Green Impact” have had some success in getting environmental management out of “estates and into the academic community.”Wals and Blewitt (2010, p 56), reflecting on the history of sustainable development

in higher education across the world, shed light on the various stages of engagement They suggest that in the “first wave” (1970s and 1980s), “environment” (as a prede-cessor to “sustainability”) was introduced into the curriculum in Western education, albeit in a limited way The “second wave,” following from the Talloires Declaration (1990), saw the emergence of numerous “Declarations for Sustainability” in higher education A rising number of university presidents, chancellors, rectors, and the like, demonstrated public commitment through signatories, but beyond that, impact on universities practices was less evident (Bekessy, Samson, & Clarkson, 2007), with the exception that a new role started appearing within academia—the “environmental manager.” Tilbury (2013, p 81) suggests that senior leaders have struggled to “pri-oritise the reorientation of higher education towards sustainability,” but perhaps they anticipated that having appointed someone to manage environmental concerns (the environment manager), that their responsibility had been discharged

Wals and Blewitt (2010) and later Wals (2014) suggest that higher education might initially have focused attention on the parts of the agenda that were more easily ad-dressed: environmental management and projects to reduce the ecological footprint

of the estates Both authors suggest that greening now represents the most visible changes and commitment to the sustainability agenda on the part of HEIs Drawing

on their analyses of articles published in the International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education between 2000 and 2009 (Wals & Blewitt, 2010), it is apparent that most of the papers focused on environmental management and campus greening; far fewer articles addressed reorienting teaching U.S articles focused on such topics as food services, purchasing, mobility, waste, and housing, although a few projects en-compassed student learning Wals and Blewitt (2010), completing a further review one year later, reinforces that it was more common for articles to address “environmental management, university greening and reducing a university's ecological footprint.” The environmental sustainability component might have received more attention be-cause it had greater resonance with university employees (Wright & Wilton, 2012)

In the United States, after the Talloires Declaration (1990), the Campus Earth Summit (1994) at Yale University attracted delegates from 50 states and 22 countries,

and triggered momentum for campus greening The resulting publication, a Blueprint for a Green Campus, documented practical steps toward campus sustainability It had significant impact across the academic community (Heinz Family Foundation, 1995) and, given its strong environmental emphasis, undoubtedly resulted in further green-ing initiatives with an environmental management focus The report determined that

A green campus is one that integrates environmental knowledge into all relevant ciplines, improves environmental studies course offerings, provides opportunities for students to study campus and local environmental problems, conducts environmen- tal audits of its practices, institutes environmentally responsible purchasing policies, reduces campus waste, maximizes energy efficiency, makes environmental sustain- ability a top priority in land-use, transportation, and building planning, establishes

dis-a student environmentdis-al centre dis-and supports students who seek environmentdis-ally sponsible careers (p 2).

re-Across the United States, institutions moved forward projects that displayed ing degrees of commitment and success, ranging from token gestures to profound institutional transformations (Calder & Clugston, 2002; McIntosh, 2001) A useful illustration of the range of campus greening activity, 10 years later, is provided in a report for Bucknell University (El-Mogazi, 2005) The report, which served to develop institutional strategy, provides a “summary of sustainability programs” and usefully details sustainability initiatives at 18 peer institutions (including “aspirational peers” such as Harvard University), mentor institutions, and “other notable” programs; a number of umbrella and support organizations for campus sustainability were also reviewed Strong evidence is provided in the report that in 2005, the environmental management aspects of sustainable development were being taken seriously There is also evidence of institutions seeking to move beyond campus greening with a desire

vary-to develop broader approaches, as some of the cases presented below will illustrate.The last five years has witnessed a further shift both in the United Kingdom and the United States: campus greening projects have continued but have become more struc-tured and have increasingly involved students; more institutions have attempted to integrate sustainability into learning and teaching (shifting from a “bolt-on” approach); several have taken forward approaches which represent a more holistic view that em-braces “transformative learning”—evidence of “third-wave” sustainability (Wals & Blewitt, 2010) The sector is undoubtedly doing more (as every institution’s website that details their sustainability efforts testifies) although there is undoubtedly further

to go (Sterling, Maxey, & Luna, 2013; Wals, 2014)

Exceptional illustrations of the breadth of engagement and an exciting agenda come from Harvard University, and the University of British Columbia (UBC), which has made substantial progress since 2006 The UBC website details:

At UBC, we embrace sustainability as a societal conversation about the kind of world

we want to live in, informed by an understanding of the ecological, social and nomic consequences of our individual and collective actions, the first university in Canada to adopt a sustainable development policy and the first to open an office

eco-devoted to campus sustainability In 2007, we met our Kyoto targets, reducing house gas emissions by six percent below 1990 levels, this despite double-digit in- creases in floor space and student enrolment.

green-The entire campus at UBC is viewed as “a living laboratory, a kind of giant box in which there is the freedom to explore—creatively and collaboratively—the technological, environmental, economic and societal aspects of sustainability” (UBC Living Lab)

sand-At Harvard there is evidence of similar commitments and a similar range of ects Harvard emphasizes that everyone has a role to play but also makes an interest-ing and crucial point on the role of “governance,” suggesting that “[i]mplementing Harvard’s sustainability goals requires an unprecedented level of collaboration among our decentralized and diverse community.”

proj-Within the United Kingdom, on the basis of a trawl through institutional websites,

it would be easy to conclude that most institutions are now very green indeed Most sustainability pages cover more or less the same topics of carbon, waste, travel, food, biodiversity, and the like, with a few heavily promoting the latest innovation; for ex-

ample, the University of Roehampton has an interesting project called growhampton

This is a £226,900 eco-project that has created a café, which is open to the public The idea is to bring fresh food to the community and to use food grown on campus, and in poly-tunnel and allotments, run by a full-time worker

Evaluating the reality of the state of play in relation to campus greening within universities is, however, very challenging, given that there are many examples such

as the café at Roehampton, and everyone has a need to put a positive spin on their achievements Website statements such as “we aim to be one of the greenest universi-ties” are common within both the United Kingdom and the United States Activities and intentions are heavily promoted; most sites include a list of all the various projects and their objectives, for example, the University of Brighton suggests on its website:

“Developing a green campus is extremely important, not only to reduce our mental impact but also to provide an inspiring and welcoming environment in which to study and work” (University of Brighton, n.a.; http://sustain.ubc.ca/our-commitment).The web page goes on to outline responsibilities: “A number of central departments have responsibilities towards maintaining the physical environment of the university, but greening the campus is something that staff and students can also influence, and have influenced!” and also refers to “climate change, reducing carbon, bio-diversity, planet-friendly travel, sustainable food, recycling.”

environ-The University of Bradford, well-known for its “Eco-Versity” work is a British ample of where “campus greening” has set the foundations for much greater engage-ment with sustainability (see Hopkinson & James, 2013) The initiative had a strong estates dimension, in a regional context where there was a need for regeneration The latter meant funding was more easily secured Lead by an environmental manager, they progressed in a number of large projects by 2007 (Hopkinson & James, 2013) Since then they have continued to expand their activity Discussing the success of the project, Hopkinson and James comment that “[t]he campus has been transformed, with more green space, new high performance buildings and effective refurbishment

ex-of existing ones.” The institution is on “track to achieve 50% reduction ex-of carbon

by 2015.” The institution’s website promotes its “Green Impact Tours” as a way of demonstrating some of the things they are doing to help improve the environmen-tal sustainability of the campus, including biodiversity, energy production, buildings, composting, and the like They also have a map showing areas where medicinal plants and “edible foods” such as fruit and potatoes are grown in campus gardens (University

of Bradford, 2014)

In turn, Warwick University has developed environmental policies and procedures

to promote its best practice in the area of environmental sustainability (University of Warwick, 2013) The university targets to cut down the amount of energy it uses, and

to reduce its emissions by 34% compared to 1990 levels; by 2020 the reduction will reach over 50% The average launched project will pay for itself after around 5.5%

In addition, the university plans to reduce waste that is sent to the landfill by 2.6%

of “total waste” by the end of 2015–2016 It is committed to ensuring all new versity buildings have Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM) “excellent” ratings and recycle at least 70% of construction waste by 2015 Warwick communicates annually to all users the current recycling and waste disposal practices It aims to improve its recycling rate to over 60% by the end

uni-of its 2015–2016 year from its current level uni-of 54.5% Today, 41.8% uni-of the ty’s waste is converted to electricity, 52.3% gets recycled, and 2.2% is reused The university also plans to achieve a 2% rolling reduction in absolute water consumption per annum Moreover, Warwick intends to investigate and encourage more water re-cycling and rainwater harvesting opportunities, especially when a property is being refurbished, to increase the proportion of gray water/rainwater used in new buildings

universi-by 2020 to 50% Warwick University also plans to ensure its on-campus supermarket provides a wide selection of seasonal produce and install water refilling stations at all facilities across campus The university is going to reduce the availability of purchased bottled water and review annually the success of reducing the sales to inform where additional facilities are required

Manchester Metropolitan University, which holds the official title of “UK’s Greenest University” offers an outstanding example of the whole-institution approach

to campus greening Its new campus at Birley Fields features zeros waste and has a zero emissions approach

Within Europe, things have also changed since Wals and Blewitt (2010, p 60) mented that “progress in integrating sustainability in HE [in Europe] has been variable but rarely spectacular.” It is now possible to highlight many examples of European universities that have engaged enthusiastically with campus greening

com-The Central European University (CEU) in Hungary is committed to sustainability and to becoming a model of sustainability in higher education (CEU, 2013a) One

of its greening activities is the maintenance of the campus buildings to ensure that heating, cooling, and air circulation systems are performing at optimum efficiency, and to encourage energy and resource conservation (CEU, 2013b) In addition, the university promotes waste reduction and separation Different types of waste bins (e.g., for paper, plastic, used batteries, glass and metal waste collection) are distributed evenly throughout the campus to make smart waste management convenient for all users Because CEU’s campus is surrounded by access points to the city’s wide array

of public transport options and regional and international train connections, the versity encourages the use of bicycles as a sustainable, healthy, and environmentally friendly form of transportation In 2013, the university launched a bike share program that allows CEU community members to use bikes for short-term borrowing periods Since 2012, CEU committed to purchasing 100% recycled printing paper as the de-fault paper selection for all university printers and to use recycled and unbleached hand towels and paper products in kitchens and wet block areas (CEU, 2013b).The University of Copenhagen has set a number of climate actions, one of which

uni-is Green Campus, with the aim of reducing the university’s carbon footprint The university also developed its Energy Action plan, which, according to Ravn (2009), included an overall strategy for the university, called “Destination 2012.” According

to the plan, the university would be one of the most sustainable universities in Europe

by 2012 “Strategic Action Plan 2008–2012” outlined the need for carbon neutral buildings, green accounts, the development of strategy and action plans for reducing environmental impacts, and encouraging the involvement of students and employees

“Faculty Contracts” include faculty responsibilities for their own energy efficiency, yearly review, local energy management, and proposals for energy-saving initiatives The university has also targeted the reduction of energy consumption by staff and students, as well as CO2 emissions by 20% between 2006 and 2013 The University

of Copenhagen has realized a pilot project for a climate-friendly building, the “Green Lighthouse,” Denmark’s first carbon-neutral public building that provides its total en-ergy needs with 35% of solar energy and 65% of district heating with a heat pump The university targets improving thermal performance of existing buildings, installing en-ergy smart systems in buildings, facilitating energy smart behavior of employees and students, and making energy-efficient purchases (Osmond et al., 2013) Furthermore, the university launched its Green Action movement to improve energy-efficient be-havior The campaign includes giving concrete advice and recommendations about energy-efficient habits for laboratories, office areas, and spaces for education, green IT, and the like It offers such technical devices as energy-saving plug sockets for PCs and other equipment, provides automatic switches for printers/copiers, coffee ma-chines, water coolers, and other devices, and recommends that an energy expert visit departments (Ravn, 2009)

In Portugal engagement with sustainability has been a little slow in comparison However, it is possible to point some good practices, for example, at the University

of Coimbra and Lisbon In Coimbra the “Energy for Sustainability” initiative was launched in 2006, bringing together a set of disciplines, researchers, departments, faculties, and research units The university took several measures to foster energy savings and energy efficiency, such as energy audits in several buildings, power factor correction, or retrofit of lighting systems and electrical systems in general (in 2007 the institution became a partner of the EU initiative “GreenLight”) Undergraduate and graduate students are encouraged to develop activities strongly associated with the improvement of energy efficiency, integrated within their curricular activities, and including development projects or theses Additionally, the university has ad-opted waste minimization procedures of several waste categories and has a policy of

“Environmentally Preferable Purchasing” on a growing number of products In turn,

the University of Lisbon is a member of the network of universities UGAF (UNICA Green Academic Footprint) Together with the other members, the institution has car-ried out several green practices, examples being the Energy Efficiency project (elec-tricity production from renewable resources through the placement of photovoltaic panels on the roofs of buildings, car parks, and areas of leisure); the reduction of water consumption (installing flow reducers on water taps); the project “AmbientALL—All for Mobility” (creation of working groups from different areas: culture, sustainabil-ity, communications, and sport to implement the adoption of sustainable practices especially on mobility, and energy efficiency, social responsibility, and healthy food consumption).

1.4 Discussion

It is apparent that not just in the United Kingdom but across Europe and the world, HEIs have engaged in substantial efforts to address campus greening Shiel and Williams (2014) suggest that the external context has served to favor campus greening over education for sustainable development; marketing one’s green credentials has become

a significant aspect of institutional branding to the extent that it quite often masks the reality on the ground A number of external drivers within the United Kingdom have increased campus greening activity (Shiel & Williams, 2014) since the publication

of the government’s “Securing the Future: Delivering UK Sustainable Development Strategy” for HM government (2005) and the response from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) HEFCE consulted with the sector (HEFCE, 2005a) and then published “Sustainable Development in Higher Education” (HEFCE, 2005b) summarizing the strategic stance and the issues to be addressed As several universities responded with outrage to the original consultation document, HEFCE softened its approach; environmental management became more strongly emphasized and the educative agenda was placed in the shadow

In a further consultation update (HEFCE, 2009), challenging carbon reduction gets (aligning with national targets) were proposed; the requirement for a reduction in carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, and at least 34% by 2020 (against 1990 levels) lent further support for an environmental management perspective

tar-The publication of the “Carbon Reduction Target and Strategy for Higher Education”

in England (HEFCE, 2010) confirmed the sector-level carbon reduction target, a requirement for institutions to set their own targets for “scope 1 and 2 emissions,” and introduced a link between capital funding and carbon management performance through the Capital Investment Framework (second iteration) Such targets focused the mind of senior HE leaders (Shiel & Williams, 2014) and established a context that increased the significance and influence of environment managers, who were more able to argue for new posts to expand the environmental management function.External funding opportunities followed strategy, including those available through the Leadership Governance and Management Fund, and the Revolving Green Fund The Revolving Green Fund (HEFCE in partnership with Salix Finance Ltd.) is now in its fourth cycle and provides recoverable grants to help HEIs in England reduce emissions

and save money So far it has provided £61 million of repayable grants; Round 4 will provide 34 million to fund small-scale energy efficiency programs and large-scale proj-ects that may retrofit old technology, create new technology, or assist with other projects such as space rationalization which meet the objectives of the fund The chief executive

of Salix commented on the funding: “We know that this will stimulate innovation and leading edge projects in energy efficiency and we look forward to supporting our uni-versities with their projects Every project will be a contribution to the UK Carbon Plan, reducing our carbon emissions is worthwhile and urgent”1 (Shepperd, 2014)

The continued emphasis on energy efficiency and carbon reduction has pushed these issues to the top of the agenda; carbon management has become something that universities must do, rather than something they should do (Shiel & Williams, 2014) Such a spotlight on these issues has tended to favor an environmental management approach led, and largely owned, by environmental managers This shift may have served to disenfranchise academics and the educative agenda

Another important driver for campus greening in the United Kingdom has been the “Green League” table, launched in 2007 by People & Planet (the organization that awarded Manchester Metropolitan University its title) The rankings, published

in the Times Higher Education Supplement and later The Guardian have been high

profile As McGowan (2007) noted when he presented People & Planet with a British Environment and Media Award for Best Campaign in 2007, “[T]he green league suc-ceeded in dragging environmental issues in from the fringes and making them a cen-tral concern for many Vice Chancellors.” As questions in relation to education and learning for sustainability were not included in the Green League until 2011, it is hardly surprising that many of the actions required to do well to that point were envi-ronmental management related Aspirations to climb a league table have resulted in further campus greening activity, where that activity also gets public recognition on

a national stage; for example, in the Environmental Association of Universities and Colleges’ Green Gown Awards a virtuous/vicious circle is set

Visible league tables and awards for green endeavors quickly attract the attention

of senior leaders keen to advertise success Such promotions as that referred to in

“We have been awarded a 1st by People & Planet and ranked 17th out of 143 other University’s” (University of Reading, 2013) are common and desirable across the sector Unfortunately, the reputational benefits of being seen to be a green university (Savelyeva & Park, 2012; Shiel & Williams, 2014), while a driver for campus green-ing, also mean that initiatives get caught up with “branding”; as such they may be presented in a more positive light than the reality on the ground It is very difficult, for example, to find any case studies critical of campus greening initiatives: the contradic-tions between greening and other strategies such as maximizing growth or expanding estates are rarely explored Case studies are often a description of projects with few examples of transformative approaches that embrace all stakeholders

The unintended consequences of such strong external drivers may have actually served to disadvantage education for sustainable development and to contribute to

a culture of compliance (alienating academics) but also to a reputation-oriented

1 http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/newsarchive/2014/news87476.html

focus Further, although the context has undoubtedly strengthened the environmental management function (spawning campus greening activity), it has also resulted in the subordination of the broader environmental program of that function, as the concerns

of senior leaders become dominated by carbon (Shiel & Williams, 2014)

1.5 Lessons learned and needs to be addressed

Lukman et al (2009) found that in general the most significant environmental impact from a university’s operations that significantly impacts global warming arises from heating and building construction Thus, to reduce environmental damage alternative measures need to be considered (e.g., use of solar heating system, green buildings) that would benefit the university and the broader region Different waste management scenar-ios for paper and plastic should also be considered: the authors suggest a combination of 70% recycling, 29% incineration, and 1% landfill Such improvements might then serve

to influence other parts of the university system: education, research, and community.Many universities have been active in incorporating sustainability as part of their campus life (Leal Filho, 2000) In some regions, such as in the United States and partly

in Europe, many universities are already a long way down the road of such initiatives; others are more recently engaging The higher education sector is without question do-ing more to address sustainability (as the previous examples illustrate) However, what any evaluation of campus greening quickly reveals is that “greening” the estates is the most visible aspect of higher education’s engagement with sustainable development with a long history of initiatives Momentum has developed from ad hoc activities and one-off campaigns to what is now a more sophisticated and structured approach managed by a professional function Projects have been taken forward across the sec-tor with a clear environmental management focus, and although sometimes they have involved academics and students, more often they have been led by a practitioner within the estates function of the university Although it is obviously beneficial to have a person, or in many cases a team of practitioners, leading on this agenda there are undoubtedly potential concerns as well: campus greening, for example, may be seen as a separate aspect of sustainable development and thus be isolated (rather than integrated); or senior managers may believe that once they have appointed someone to discharge the task, their responsibility is thereby discharged

Most institutions now have an environmental manager; some have a whole team of staff Interviews with environmental managers suggest that even though they have a budget, projects to green the campus can sometimes be hard won As one environmen-tal manager explained, “During the ‘estates planning’ process a ‘value engineering stage’ may mean that projects focused on achieving environmental goals may fall

in to the ‘nice to have but not essential’ list and are abandoned in subsequent stages

of decision making.” Another environmental manager “would benefit from academic support, particularly academic arguments to support decision making”; this manager would also benefit from “working with academics to increase impact and student in-volvement”—unfortunately too often the institutional context creates a binary divide between academics and practitioners (Shiel & Williams, 2014)

This is certainly true within the United Kingdom where campus greening projects have become an integral part of universities’ efforts to address sustainability, but not every university has an integrated view, and the “link between the administrative and academic realms has not been fully developed” (Acevedo, Bonner, Johnson, & Malevicius, 2012, p 382) Even where there are links between the estates function and the curriculum and research activities of the university, such links are not without their challenges (Shiel & Williams, 2014).

In summarizing the points we have covered, the following may be useful:

sustainabil-ity; there is much further to go, however, if the goal is to fully embrace students and staff.

“carrots” and “sticks.” The most powerful drivers include targets for carbon reduction and energy efficiency, funding streams, awards, and league tables.

greening may be a silo activity that gets caught up with branding Marketing the success of green projects and green buildings may impede the publication of the learning and critical analysis that may be helpful to others.

institution that may challenge structural boundaries.

academic background The culture of estates and the way decisions are made may mean that some projects that have an educative agenda are difficult to move forward It can also mean that environmental goals may be secondary to other estates goals, and/or conflict with key performance indicators.

Furthermore, there are some areas in which it is necessary to improve efforts

to get a greener campus, as in the case of the absence of awareness among faculty and students, the lack of experience and legislation, and the usual budgetary finan-cial restrictions Koester et al (2006, p 777) stress that “at the curricular level, increasing the acquisition of environmental and sustainability knowledge among all campus users—students, faculty, staff, and community members alike—should

be an ongoing goal.”

1.6 Conclusions

The literature provides many examples that can help to improve the implementation

of campus greening processes at various levels According to Betts (2001), to yield maximum outputs, the entire campus community must participate in examining and altering the overall use of food, energy, wastewater, and materials to minimize a uni-versity’s environmental impact Nevertheless, the advancements within Europe con-tinue to suggest that “progress in integrating sustainability in HE has been variable but rarely spectacular” (Wals & Blewitt, 2010, p 60)

Another important measure is the environmental awareness within campus munities, and introduction of information about sustainability in all aspects of a uni-versity’s curriculum, as a long-term goal (Betts, 2001; Dahle & Neumayer, 2001)

com-Faculty should also be more engaged in the process to green a campus, by ducting research to assist an institution in determining its path to a ‘green’ campus (Mosher & Desrochers, 2014), but also via concrete initiatives as well (Horhota et al., 2014; Mikhailovich & Fitzgerald, 2014), identifying behavioral barriers to campus sustainability.

con-In addition, students should be encouraged to participate through courses, ships and volunteer programs or to focus their BSc/MSc theses on projects on the re-lated topics Education and training are critical to providing continuity and long-term success of an institution’s ‘green’ campus plan (Humblet et al., 2010)

intern-Additional approaches aimed at maximizing the expansion of ‘green’ campus tiatives are management support, effective coordination, maximization of face to face communication, and coordination of environment programs (Sharp, 2002)

ini-To preserve and enhance campus biodiversity and ecosystem services, some sures which may be recommended, as suggested by Osmond et al (2013) are:

It is also recommended that inventories of existing campus ‘green’ activities, so as

to benchmark progress and better understand in-house capabilities and to seek LEED/BREEAM certification for facilities to ensure sustainability goals are met for individ-ual building projects (Humblet et al., 2010)

Campus greening is and remains one of the central areas in the implantation of sustainability in higher education Learning about how sustainability comes alive on a campus, is a gratifying experience Campus greening help to demonstrate that univer-sities can practice what they preach

References

Acevedo, B., Bonner, C., Johnson, S., & Malevicius, R (2012) Students’ [passionate]

engage-ment with processes of greening the campus’ In W Leal Filho (Ed.), Sustainable

de-velopment at universities: New horizons (pp 374–383) Frankfurt: Peter Lang Scientific Publishers, 33.

Bekessy, S A., Samson, K., & Clarkson, R E (2007) The failure of non-binding declarations

to achieve university sustainability: A need for accountability International Journal of

Sustainability in Higher Education , 8(3), 301–316.

Betts, K S (2001) Greening the campus Environmental Science & Technology, 198A, 198–203

Brown, L (2013) Realising sustainability commitments: A UK university case-study from a

ground level perspective Turkey: ERSCP-EMSU, June 4–7 Istanbul.

Campus Earth Summit (2014) Campus Earth Summit held at Yale University on February

18–20, 1994.

Calder, W., & Clugston, R (2002) Progress toward sustainability in higher education: A

United States assessment http://www.ulsf.org/dernbach/chapter.htm , Available from: University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (Accessed: 20.08.05).

CEU (2013a) Sustainable CEU Available from: http://www.ceu.hu/campus/sustainable

(Accessed: 20.08.14).

campussustainability (Accessed: 20.08.14).

Creighton, S H (1999) Greening the Ivory Tower Improving the environmental track record of

universities, colleges, and other institutions Cambridge: MIT Press.

Dahle, M., & Neumayer, E (2001) Overcoming barriers to campus greening: A survey among

higher educational institutions in London, UK International Journal of Sustainability in

Higher Education , 2(2), 139–160.

El-Mogazi, D (2005) Fertile ground for campus greening: Programming and Organizational

Recommendations for the Ecological Sustainability of Bucknell University Report pared for the Bucknell University Environmental Center. Available from: http://www bucknell.edu/Documents/EnvironmentalCenter/GreeningReportFinal.pdf (Accessed: 20.08.14).

pre-Glor-Bel, J., & Clarke, A (2011) Community engagement in university of British Columbia’s

Climate In Walter Leal Filho (Ed.), World Trends in Education of Sustainable Development

New Horizons (pp 39–60) Frankfurt: Peter Lang Scientific Publishers, 32.

Government, H M (2005) Securing the future: Delivering UK sustainable development strategy

data/file/69412/pb10589-securing-the-future-050307.pdf (Accessed: 22.08.14).

Hansen, S S., & Wells, C W (2012) The campus as a teaching tool: A case study of Macalester

College’s EcoHouse In Walter Leal Filho (Ed.), Sustainable development at universities:

New Horizons (pp 479–492) Frankfurt: Peter Lang Scientific Publishers, 34.

HEFCE 2005a Sustainable development in higher education: Consultation on a support

strat-egy and action plan Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England.

HEFCE 2005b Sustainable development in higher education: Strategic statement and action

plan Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England.

HEFCE (2009) Sustainable development in higher education: 2008 update to strategic

state-ment and action plan Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England.

HEFCE (2010) Carbon reduction target and strategy for Higher education in England

29.09.14).

Heinz Family Foundation (1995) Blueprint for a green planet: The campus earth summit

ini-tiatives for higher education [report online]. Available from: http://www.hfp.heinz.org/ pdfs/Blueprint-For-Green-Campus.pdf (Accessed: 03.12.05).

Hopkinson, P., & James, P (2013) Whole institutional change towards sustainable universities—

Bradford’s ecoversity initiative In S Sterling, et al (Eds.), Earthscan: The Sustainable University.

Horhota, M., Asman, J., Stratton, J P., & Halfacre, A C (2014) Identifying behavioral barriers

to campus sustainability: A multi-method approach International Journal of Sustainability

in Higher Education , 15(3), 343–358.

Humblet, E M., Owens, R., & Roy, L P (2010) Roadmap to a Green Campus, Washington, DC

5.16.11.pdf (Accessed: 29.09.14).

Karol, E (2006) Using campus concerns about sustainability as an educational

opportu-nity: A case study in architectural design Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(9–11),

780–786.

Koester, R., Eflin, J., & Vann, J (2006) Greening of the campus: A whole-systems approach

Journal of Cleaner Production , 14(9–11), 769–779.

Leal Filho, Walter (Ed.) (2000) Sustainability and university life Frankfurt: Peter Lang

Scientific Publishers.

Leal Filho, W (2014) Campus Greening: Why it is worthy it In W Leal Filho, N Sima Muhue, &

G Edwin (Eds.), Implementing campus greening initiatives: Approaches, methods and

perspectives Berlin: Springer: World Sustainability Series.

Legacy, C L (2004) Campus Sustainability: Sustainability Assessment Framework at the

University of Waterloo ERS 490/475 Fall 2003/Winter 2004.

Lukman, R., Tiwary, A., & Azapagic, A (2009) Towards greening a university campus: The

case of the University of Maribor, Slovenia Resources, Conservation and Recycling,

53(11), 639–644.

Mason, I G., Brooking, A K., Oberender, A., Harford, J M., & Horsley, P G (2003)

Implementation of a zero waste program at a university campus Resources, Conservation

and Recycling , 38(4), 257–269.

McGowan, A (2007) Presentation at British environment & media awards Available from:

http://peopleandplanet.org/bema_award_2007 (Accessed: 14.03.14).

McIntosh, M (2001) State of the campus environment: A national report card on

environmen-tal performance and sustainability in higher education: A National Wildlife Federation report Reston, VA: National Wildlife Federation.

McMillin, J., & Dyball, R (2009) Developing a whole-of-university approach to educating for

sustainability Journal of Education and Sustainable Development, 3(1), 55–64.

Mikhailovich, K., & Fitzgerald, R (2014) Community responses to the removal of bottled

water on a university campus International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education,

15(3), 330–342.

MMU (2014) Carbon management plan creating a greener future Environment Team

pdf/carbon-management-plan.pdf (Accessed: 18.09.14).

Mosher, H R., & Desrochers, M (2014) The effects of information regarding sustainability sues and behavioral self-management instruction on college students’ energy conservation

is-International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education , 15(3), 359–370.

Müller-Christ, G., Sterling, S., van Dam-Mieras, R., Adombent, M., Fischer, D., & Rieckmann,

M (2014) The role of campus, curriculum, and community in higher education for

sus-tainable development—a conference report Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 134–137.

Osmond, P., et al (2013) Greening universities toolkit Transforming universities into green

and sustainable campuses Available from: http://www.unep.org/roe/Portals/139/ documents/GE/Greening_university_toolkit.pdf (Accessed: 29.09.14).

Ravn, C (2009) Climate actions at University of Copenhagen—Who, What, Why, How Available

at: http://www.projects.aegee.org/sustaining/fileadmin/user_upload/Copenhagen_Green_ Campus_Sustainable_SCANdinavia.pdf (Accessed: 29.09.14).

Saleh, A A., Kamarulzaman, N., Hashim, H., & Hashim, S Z (2011) An approach to ities management (FM) practices in higher learning institutions to attain a sustainable

facil-campus (case study: University Technology Mara—UiTM) Procedia Engineering, 20,

269–278.

Savelyeva, T., & Park, J (2012) Complexity of campus sustainability discourse In Walter Leal

Filho (Ed.), Sustainable development at universities: New horizons Vol 34 (pp 183–192)

Frankfurt: Peter Lang Scientific Publishers.

Sharp, L (2002) Green campuses: The road from little victories to systemic transformation

International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education , 3(2), 128–145.

newsarchive/2014/news87476.html (Accessed: 29.09.14).

Shiel, C., & Williams, A (2014) Working together, driven apart: Reflecting on a joint endeavour to

address sustainable development within a university In 2nd World Symposium on Sustainable

Development at Universities (WSSD-U-2014) Conference, 3–5 Sept 2014, Manchester.

Shriberg, M., & Harris, K (2012) Building sustainability change management and leadership skills in students: Lessons learned from “Sustainability and the Campus” at the University

of Michigan Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 2(2), 154–164.

Smyth, D P., Fredeen, A L., & Booth, A L (2010) Resources, Conservation and Recycling Reducing solid waste in higher education: The first step towards “greening” a university

campus Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(11), 1007–1016.

Sterling, S., Maxey, L., & Luna, H (Eds.), (2013) The Sustainable University: Progress and

prospects London and New Tork: Earthscan Routledge.

programs_talloires_td.html (Accessed: 20.08.14).

Tatum, B D (2013) The journey to green: Becoming sustainable Spelman In P F Barlett &

G W Chase (Eds.), Sustainability in higher education Stories and strategies for

transfor-mation (pp 153–162) Cambridge: MIT Press.

Thomashow, M (2014) The nine elements of a sustainable campus London: The MIT Press,

236 p.

Tilbury, D (2013) Another world is desirable: A global rebooting of higher education for

sustainable development In S Sterling, L Maxey, & H Luna (Eds.), The sustainable

university: Progress and prospects (pp 71–86) London & New York: Routledge/Earthscan.

uncsd2012.org/hei_engage.html (Accessed: 20.08.14).

UNEP (2014) Global universities partnership on environment and sustainability (GUPES)

20.08.14).

Report-2011-12.pdf (Accessed: 20.08.14).

about.brighton.ac.uk/sustainability/campus (Accessed: 20.08.14).

http://www.reading.ac.uk/about/about-environ-ment.aspx (Accessed: December 2013).

warwick.ac.uk/about/environment (Accessed: 20 August 2014).

Vega, C.A.de., Ojeda-Benítez, S., & Barreto, E R (2003) Mexican educational institutions and

waste management programmes: A University case study Resources, Conservation and

Recycling , 39(3), 283–296.

Wals, A E J (2014) Sustainability in higher education in the context of the UN DESD: A review

of learning and institutionalization processes Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 8–15.

Wals, A E J., & Blewitt, J (2010) Third-wave sustainability in higher education: Some (inter)national trends and developments In P Jones, D Selby, & S Sterling (Eds.),

Sustainability: Perspectives and practice across higher education (pp 55–74) London: Earthscan.

Wells, C E (2013) Metabolism and resiliency: Key concepts for catalyzing transformational

change In P Barlett & G W Chase (Eds.), Sustainability in Higher Education Stories and

Strategies for Transformation (pp 316) London: The MIT Press.

Wright, T S A., & Wilton, H (2012) Facilities management directors’ conceptualizations of

sustainability in higher education Journal of Cleaner Production, 31, 118–125.

Other web references consulted

http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Documents/2008/GreeningSpires.pdf

http://sustain.ubc.ca/our-commitment/campus-living-lab (Living Lab Project).

http://sustain.ubc.ca/our-commitment (UBC Sustainability).

http://sustain.ubc.ca/ (University of British Columbia—UBC).

http://ugaf.eu/documents (University of Lisbon).

http://www.uc.pt/en/efs/green_uc (University of Coimbra).

http://peopleandplanet.org (People & Planet).

http://green.harvard.edu/commitment

Sustainability in Higher Education

2

Management education for

sustainability: deriving learning

formats from competence

to have to be most effective and efficient in managing the organization toward ability The increasing importance of structured knowledge and capabilities to master corporate sustainability has generated the new profession of a sustainability manager Along with a growing number of academic courses and study programs in corpo-rate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate sustainability management, research is challenged to define competence requirements of sustainability managers Related to this is the question of what pedagogical approaches are particularly apt for sustain-ability and sustainability business courses Yet, there is little research in management education dealing with the relationship between specific competence requirements and appropriate learning formats This article first discusses the competence profile

sustain-of a sustainability manager based on a literature review and experiences from the first worldwide MBA program in sustainability management in Lüneburg, Germany Second, by proposing a T-matrix, this contribution links competence requirements

of sustainability managers with a combination of learning formats Taking the MBA Sustainability Management program as a case example, several learning formats are assessed by MBA lecturers with regard to their potential for competence development

in a blended learning-based MBA program Two learning formats implemented in the MBA are selected and further analyzed with respect to competence development of students

2.2 New profession requires profound management education for sustainability

For the last two decades, having the knowledge and capabilities to manage rate sustainability have become an ever more significant component of various career paths In addition to the growing demand from companies positioned as sustainability

corpo-pioneers, we observe an increasing interest from consultancies, financial service viders, nonprofit and public institutions, as well as multinational companies in hiring sustainability management experts, even though most of these organizations have not established a strong sustainability agenda so far (for a similar observation see e.g., Haanaes et al., 2012) Visser and Crane (2010, p 4) observe a new occupational field and a “flourishing profession” for sustainability managers At the same time, tradi-tional courses and programs in business administration appear inadequately prepared

pro-to produce the structured expert knowledge and capabilities required pro-to cope with the complex field of corporate sustainability As an answer to the growing demand and the perceived deficits in conventional management education, a growing number of universities and business schools have started to engage in CSR and sustainability management for the last few years (e.g., Wu, Huang, Kuo, & Wu, 2010)

The need to include sustainability in professional practices (e.g., Banerjee, 2011) and the central role of universities in educating responsible leaders (e.g., Osiemo,

2012) and for the transition to sustainable societies (e.g., Ferrer-Balas et al., 2010) have been emphasized in an extant body of literature Furthermore, the influential role

of companies in the economy and society as well as in sustainable development (e.g., Schaltegger & Burritt, 2005) raises the question of how sustainability and CSR are regarded in management education, particularly in qualified practice-oriented higher management education which addresses middle and top management In the following

we give a literature overview of the role of sustainability in management education

2.2.1 Increased activities in sustainability-oriented

management education

Prior research has examined sustainability and CSR in existing curricula and in curriculum development for undergraduate and bachelor (e.g., Lambrechts, Mulà, Ceulemans, Molderez, & Gaeremynck, 2013), graduate, masters, and PhD programs (e.g., Bergeå, Karlsson, Hedlund-Åström, Jacobsson, & Luttropp, 2006), as well as postgraduate and tertiary education (e.g., Naeem & Peach, 2011) Whereas some au-thors have investigated sustainability-specific courses and programs (e.g., Marshall

& Harry, 2005), others have dealt with the integration of sustainability into existing curricula (e.g., Bacon et al., 2011), regular courses (e.g., Boks & Diehl, 2006), and the curricula of a choice of universities (e.g., Savelyeva & McKenna, 2011) Lozano (2010) developed a tool to measure the integration and diffusion of sustainable devel-opment contents in the course curricula of a university

In-depth studies dealing with the integration of sustainability into curricula and the education of educators in cleaner production have been conducted particularly for engineering and broad interdisciplinary environmental programs (e.g., Segalas, Ferrer-Balas, & Mulder, 2010) Stubbs and Schapper (2011) discuss two approaches

to management curriculum development, and Rusinko (2010) proposes a matrix proach to integrating sustainability in business education

ap-Although a growing number of sustainability-related modules and courses ists, recent studies of business schools in the United States and Europe show that in many cases CSR, sustainability, and sustainable development topics “were not well

ex-integrated across […] curricula or with each other within courses as complementary and synergistic topics” (Doh & Tashman, 2014, p 132) The institutionalization and

“mainstreaming” of CSR and sustainability management into business leader tion is still poorly developed (Doh & Tashman, 2014; Matten & Moon, 2004).Another stream of literature discusses the question of which pedagogic methods are apt for sustainability and sustainable business courses and programs A variety of approaches has been researched, such as active learning (MacVaugh & Norton, 2012), action research as an approach to integrating sustainability into an MBA program (Benn & Dunphy, 2009); student praxis projects (e.g., Bacon et al., 2011; Rosenbloom

educa-& Cortes, 2008); collaborative concept maps to learn how theory can become practice (Miranda Correia & Infante-Malachias, 2010); transformative learning experiences (e.g., Bergeå et al., 2006); the consideration of boundary objects (Benn & Martin,

2010); real-world learning experiences (e.g., Brundiers, Wiek, & Redman, 2010); transdisciplinarity in sustainability education (e.g., Clark & Button, 2011); courses in collaboration with companies (e.g., Eagan & Streckewald, 1997); and e-learning (e.g., Oprean, Brumar, Canţer, & Bărbat, 2011)

Different pedagogical approaches are often discussed theoretically (Bliesner, Liedtke, & Rohn, 2013; Wiek, Withycombe, & Redman, 2011), referring either to a single course (Marshall & Harry, 2005; Rusinko, 2010) or skill such as systems think-ing (e.g., Connell, Remington, & Armstrong, 2012) In addition, research is scarce

on how academically qualified sustainability practitioners can acquire the necessary competences (Hesselbarth & Schaltegger, 2014) These two observations reveal lim-ited knowledge about appropriate combinations of learning methods with respect to the complex competence profile of sustainability managers This is why we address the identified research gap based on the case of the MBA in sustainability manage-ment offered by the Centre for Sustainability Management in Lüneburg, Germany This MBA program with its blended learning concept is fully dedicated to sustainabil-ity management and introduced in the following

2.2.2 The MBA program in sustainability management at CSM

in Lüneburg, Germany

The MBA Sustainability Management of the Centre for Sustainability Management (CSM) at Leuphana University Lüneburg enrolled the first students in 2003 in re-sponse to a lack of systematically qualified sustainability management experts As the first worldwide MBA program in this area, the program deals with a broad set of sus-tainability topics from a management perspective and aspires to support sustainable development through educating change agents in business and society

The ultimate educational goal is defined to educate so-called change agents for tainability: knowledgeable, competent individuals who are able to tackle ecological and social problems with entrepreneurial means and thus contribute to sustainable de-velopment of organizations and society (see more detailed information in Section 2.3) This educational goal refers to individual, organizational, and societal objectives On the individual level, the study program aims at personal development and enhance-ment of future-oriented knowledge and learning competences of students to qualify

sus-for management positions On the organizational level, improved management petence leads to increased competitiveness of more sustainable companies and their capacity to contribute to the societal objectives of a sustainable development through higher corporate sustainability performance.

com-The two-year, postgraduate, extra-occupational masters program is designed with a modern blended-learning approach MBA Sustainability Management includes the typ-ical elements of blended learning such as face-to-face teaching, live e-learning, tutor- supported and self-paced e-learning, and structured off-line study including set readings and assignments (Bentley, Selassie, & Parkin, 2012; see Section 2.4.1 for details).Blended learning is widely considered to be a particularly effective and efficient concept with the potential to maximize the advantages of face-to-face and online ed-ucation (Wu, Tennyson, & Hsia, 2010; Zhao & Breslow, 2013 for a recent meta-analysis

of effectiveness studies) In general, a blended-learning concept with its e-delivery ments is well suited to part-time MBA students working in companies who are not only geographically dispersed and time-limited but ‘relatively mature, already business-aware, conversant with information technology, and have access to the learning facilities and resources required’ (Priestman, 2010, p 14) Nevertheless, face-to-face elements such as company-internal workshops and on-campus seminars play a large role in the MBA pro-gram to train soft skills, motivate students, and strengthen solidarity, network building, and the sense of togetherness On these occasions students can experience a “sustain-able university” in Lüneburg (for a discussion of what a sustainable university could

ele-be and why Lüneburg has ele-been laele-beled as such, see e.g., Adomssent, Godemann, & Michelsen, 2007)

In addition to compulsory modules, elective learning offers the opportunity to cialize according to occupational requirements and individual preferences Particular priority is given to the development of methodological, social, and personal compe-tences (generic competences): soft skill courses sum up to one-third of the content Figure 2.1 provides an overview of the MBA curriculum (see www.sustainament.de).The curriculum is organized into six core modules, three soft skill modules, and

spe-a mspe-aster thesis despe-aling with spe-a sustspe-ainspe-ability mspe-anspe-agement topic of prspe-acticspe-al interest Each module consists of five or six course units The successful completion of a mod-ule earns five credit points and the master thesis earns 15 of 60 credit points for the whole program

The core modules systematically discuss strategic management, along with ods and tools of sustainability management in combination with a strong emphasis on entrepreneurship and innovation management The curriculum addresses the follow-ing occupational requirements of sustainability management:

impact on corporate success.

l Coordinating intra- and interorganizational projects, material flows, and supply chain cooperation.

develop and implement solutions.

performance.

The MBA sustainability management program has attracted people with diverse educational and occupational backgrounds who predominantly deal with sustainabil-ity in their daily work or who aspire to a more sustainability-related occupation The part-time students can directly apply new skills to their jobs and transfer developed competences to their professional working environment The possibility for immedi-ate and continuous application and trial of new knowledge allows increasing both the motivation of the students and their real-world impact already during their studies Almost all industry sectors are represented (with slightly higher proportions in recent years of consulting, financial services, and energy/renewable energy), in addition

to MBA students working for nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), development aid organizations, and public institutions or as self-employed persons About 17%

of the students are engineers and a considerable share of almost 35% has fully completed studies in economics or business administration before entering the program Students without a first management degree or a qualified long-term ex-perience in a superior management position have to complete a preparatory course

success-on fundamentals of business management before they enter the core courses of the program The MBA program in sustainability management requires at least two years

of professional experience More than 35% of the students have less than 4 years of

Core module 1:

Core module 2:

Core module 4a:

Core module 4b:

Soft skill module 1:

Person & interaction (5 CP)

Soft skill module 3:

Society & responsibility (5 CP) Soft skill module 2: Organisation & change (5 CP)

Core module 6:

Master thesis Core module 5b:

Core module 3: Core module 5a:

Measurement & ment of corporate sustainability (5 CP)

Assess-Entrepreneurship &

foundation management (5 CP)

Production, logistics &

technology management (5 CP)

Corporate social responsibility (5 CP)

(15 CP) Strategic corporate

sustainability management (5 CP)

Core modules Soft skill modules Elective modules

2nd Semester 3rd Semester 4th Semester

Figure 2.1 Curriculum of the MBA sustainability management.

work experience when entering the program, but the MBA also attracts students with

a much longer working life (30% have working experiences of more than 11 years) Overall, the students share the desire to strengthen their profile as actors for sus-tainable development in and with their organizations, intending to become effective change agents for sustainability

In the following we analyze the competence profile of a corporate change agent for sustainability based on both literature review and empirical findings from a survey of MBA alumni today working as sustainability managers

2.3 Corporate change agents for sustainability:

competence requirements to manage corporate sustainability

Companies have traditionally operated in an unsustainable manner, using able resources, causing pollution, creating disposable products and waste, and the like The task of sustainability management is thus to change strategy, business models, operations, products, and whatever is needed to more sustainable ways of economic value creation This is why a program for higher management education should enable managers to organize change processes, that is, the education is challenged to support actors to become change agents for sustainability

nonrenew-2.3.1 Defining a corporate change agent for sustainability

To qualify corporate change agents for sustainability as an educational objective of a program for higher management qualification in sustainability management is rooted

in the multifaceted literature on the role of individuals as change agents (e.g., Pugh, Bahn, & Gakere, 2013; Kanter, 2000) A change agent can be considered an

Barratt-“internal and external individual (…) responsible for initiating, sponsoring, directing, managing or implementing a specific change initiative, project or complete change program” (Caldwell, 2003, pp 139–140)

Change agents are opinion leaders and drivers of change processes They vince superiors, form coalitions, allay fears, and motivate and inspire employees and teams to leave old paths and take responsibility for social and environmental issues (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992; Rogers, 2003) Typically, change agents incorpo-rate the multiple roles of manager, consultant, leader, expert, team player, catalyst, promoter, and entrepreneur (Caldwell, 2003 for a classification of change agency models)

con-In the specific context of sustainability management, a change agent for ability can be defined as an actor who deliberately tackles social and ecological problems with the entrepreneurial means to effectively put sustainability manage-ment into organizational practice and to contribute to a sustainable development of the economy and society (these goals link to the concept of corporate sustainabil-ity; see Schaltegger & Burritt, 2005) These change agents develop sustainability

sustain-as a factor of organizational, business, and personal success in their working ronment, integrate sustainability criteria into business processes and organizational structures, initiate sustainability-related projects that enact substantial change in the organization and beyond, and, they are those who transfer the vision of sustain-able development through cooperation and public relations to a wider group of the society As Visser and Crane (2010) point out, multiple roles such as sustainability experts, facilitators, catalysts, and activists are part of being a change agent for sustainability Change agents for sustainability are not necessarily senior managers but can be individuals on all levels internal or external of an organization The defi-nition of a change agent for sustainability thus also includes those who successfully initiate and promote change toward sustainable development on a lower hierarchy level and without a specific mandate (e.g., as production managers acting for sus-tainable production).

envi-2.3.2 Competences of a change agent for sustainability—

theoretical findings

Competence-oriented educational concepts focus on the “output” of educational cesses, whereas the conventional pedagogic paradigm emphasizes the “input” (con-tents and subjects) which students should learn (cf EQF, 2012; Sterling, 2004) The output approach does not primarily ask what should be taught, but starts with the question of what should be learned: What kind of managing abilities, which analytical concepts and problem-solving strategies should students acquire in the learning pro-cess? By considering the learning process and the output, the question of what should

pro-be taught is addressed We refer to the elements typically mentioned in definitions

of competence (e.g., Rychen & Salganik, 2003; Weinert, 2001) Apart from a broad foundation of disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge, cognitive and practical skills, as well as attitudes and capabilities to successfully perform complex tasks in real-life work environments are emphasized together with the ability to cooperate and motivate

The question of what kind of competences sustainability education should foster has become a core topic in sustainability education research (e.g., Barth, Godemann, Rieckmann, & Stoltenberg, 2007; De Haan, 2006) Reviewing this literature reveals an increasing convergence about the critical role of key competences (Sipos, Battisti, & Grimm, 2008; Wiek et al., 2011 for an integrative framework) In higher education for sustainable development the commonly mentioned competences have been specified and broadened to include skills, motivations, and affective dispositions for the success-ful solving of real-world sustainability problems and the identification and realization of opportunities Key competences are described as multifunctional, context- independent, and important for all individuals and particularly relevant to achieve the objective of sustainable development (Rieckmann, 2012) Table 2.1 provides a selection of litera-ture marking the debate to define (key) competences in sustainability education

In spite of the convergence no common agreement exists about the “right” approach

to select, define, and rank key competences required for sustainable development (e.g., Fadeeva & Mochizuki, 2010) Each of the approaches aggregates and emphasizes

Source of literature Main content

l Learning to live together

OECD (2005) l Key competences for the interactive use of tools, such as

knowledge, media, and resources

Sterling and Thomas

(2006)

Values, knowing, skills, and understanding:

different aspects of an overall educational objective: to enable individuals to pate in sociopolitical processes and move the society toward sustainable development Recent studies (Rieckmann, 2012; Wiek et al., 2011) highlight that systemic, antic-ipatory, strategic, and critical thinking accompanied by normative and interpersonal competences are most crucial for higher education for sustainable development.The question of what competences education for sustainability management should consider has also been addressed recently (Lozano, Lukman, Lozano, Huisingh, & Lambrechts, 2013; Stubbs & Schapper, 2011) and agreement seems to exist that knowl-edge, skills, and attitudes are three crucial components With regard to knowledge various authors emphasize the importance of knowledge about ecological concepts, en-vironmental management systems, and practices, specific approaches to nature and sus-tainability, and concepts of social global justice (e.g., Waddock, 2007) Several scholars point out the need to include the development of advanced communication, negotia-tion, critical analysis, and change management skills into postgraduate studies (Hind, Wilson, & Lenssen, 2009) With respect to attitudes, as the third highlighted component

partici-in management education for sustapartici-inability, research emphasizes the importance to courage students to question their view of the world and to develop reflective thinking and their own understanding of complex and challenging issues (e.g., Rands, 2009).Although the mandate of sustainability education to contribute to transforming unsustainable structures, processes, and behavioral patterns into sustainable ones is commonly mentioned, the competence profile of a change agent for sustainability is not usually the center of the debate The literature reveals that the outcome- oriented research on competences of graduate sustainability management studies and postgrad-uate MBA programs is still in an early stage of development The growing body of theoretical literature on management education for sustainability mainly discusses the integration of sustainability into mainstream management curricula (e.g., Benn

en-& Dunphy, 2009), selected interdisciplinary competences (e.g., Parker, 2010), flexive abilities” (e.g., Hind et al., 2009), and environmental aspects (e.g., Bootsma

“re-& Vermeulen, 2011) A comprehensive survey that provides an overview of tences of sustainability managers in corporate practice was conducted by Willard et al (2010) Svanström, Lozano-Garcia, and Rowe (2008) examined the activities of the U.S initiative ACPA (American College Personnel Association), which defines a set

compe-of 44 abilities and traits compe-of change agents who engage in creating a sustainable future Whereas the study of Willard et al (2010) deals with corporate practice but does not discuss curriculum consequences, the rather comprehensive compilation of ACPA

Source of literature Main content

Wiek et al (2011) l Systems-thinking competence

refer neither to management and MBA education nor to the real-world requirements

of sustainability professionals

Reviewing the literature on sustainability competences for organizational and corporate change agents reveals a need to further explore both—the competences required to be successful in corporate practice and the consequences that can be drawn for postgraduate management education to help students develop the needed competence profile of a change agent for sustainability These competences include the key competences considered es-sential for sustainability education in general and the more detailed set of subject-specific, methodological, social, and personal competences (see Heyse & Erpenbeck, 1999 for this often used classification of competences) of sustainability management

2.3.3 Competences of a change agent for sustainability:

empirical findings from an alumni study in the MBA

contrib-of what competences and topics have been considered to be particularly useful, less important, or missing in the practical work of the sustainability professionals In the Section 2.3.4 we present some key results of this empirical survey

The survey was conducted by an online questionnaire with a total of 68 questions in autumn 2011 It covered five cohorts of the MBA Sustainability Management program with 85 students with a high response rate of 80% We used predominantly closed questions based on a six-point Likert scale to inquire about the assessment of the participants with 1 indicating strongest agreement with a statement and 6 indicating strongest disagreement

A crucial question for curriculum development in sustainability management is whether there are significant differences between the competences required for sus-tainability managers as opposed to the competences necessary for conventional man-agers and, if such differences exist, which competences prove to be the most important for sustainability managers to be successful in corporate practice

To investigate in detail which competences sustainability professionals perceive to

be highly relevant for their job we compared the survey results for those alumni with

a position in sustainability management (group 1: full-time sustainability manager,

n = 35) with those respondents who only occasionally or hardly ever deal with

sustain-ability issues (group 2: other occupational focus, n = 25) Although all respondents have

similar mind-sets and intentions to contribute to sustainable development and although many work in comparable hierarchical management positions we can observe some statistically significant differences in all fields of competences (Figure 2.2) Although these differences could be expected for subject-specific competences, they are remark-able for methodological, social, and personal competences (generic competences)

Figure 2.2 Relevance of competences for daily work (* indicates where the mean of group 1

is statistically significant lower than group 2 with p < 0.05).

Group 1: full-time sustainability manager

Group 2: other occupational focus Relevance for daily work (1—very important, 6—not important), average

Subject-specific competences

Fundamentals of sustainability management 1.68* 3.61

Strategic sustainability management 1.91* 3.96

Sustainability marketing 2.79* 4.53

Instruments of Sustainability Management 3.08* 5.15

Sustainability communication and reporting 2.44* 4.19

Measurement and assessment of sustainability performance 2.38* 4.92

Technology and innovation management 3.52* 4.46

Commitment to principles and values 2.26* 3.52

Ability to reflect ethical questions 2.57* 3.65

Entrepreneurial thinking 2.20 2.54

When comparing the two columns in Figure 2.2, we can conclude that the relevance of generic competences for their job seems to be given higher importance by sustainability professionals than for managers working in other occupational fields Although the differ-ence is not statistically significant for all competence elements there is a clear tendency Possible factors in explaining these results may be cross-departmental function, inter- and transdisciplinary tasks, not yet fully established sustainability management positions, and requirements of both a general management and a sustainability expert position.

As the survey did not explicitly investigate the reasons for this difference, the higher rating of all competences by sustainability professionals would be an interesting topic for future research

Examining the top 15 competences considered most relevant by sustainability fessionals (Figure 2.3) shows that profound knowledge in sustainability management tops the list This indicates that this subject-specific competence is indeed highly im-portant for the practical work of sustainability managers The vast majority of the following positions in Figure 2.3 refer to methodological, social, and personal compe-tences This result underpins the approach to incorporate intensive soft-skill training into the curriculum of a higher degree program in sustainability management

pro-2.3.4 Competence profile of a change agent for sustainability

Taking together the literature review and the empirical findings of the alumni vey, we suggest using a functional approach (e.g., Cheetham & Chivers, 1996) to develop competence profiles for change agents for sustainability Figure 2.4 shows

sur-a msur-atrix thsur-at sur-attempts to integrsur-ate sur-a clsur-assificsur-ation of competences often mentioned

Figure 2.3 Top 15 competences as perceived by sustainability practitioners with successful

completion of their studies MBA sustainability management.

Sub-competence Relevance for

sustainability managers

Type of sub-competence

1 Fundamentals of sustainability management 1.68 Subject-specific

3 Motivational capabilites 1.70 Personal

4 Analytical skills 1.72 Methodological

5 Ability to cooperate 1.73 Social

6 Communication skills 1.79 Social

8 Decision-making skills 1.83 Personal

10 Presentation techniques 1.88 Methodological

11 Strategic sustainability management 1.91 Subject-specific

12 (Self-)Leaming abilities 1.97 Personal

13 Ability to handle conflict and criticism 2.00 Social

14 Project management 2.09 Methodological

15 Entrepreneurial thinking 2.20 Personal