Before we get into the how of assessing key competencies for sustainability, let’s first look at the why (other than that is part of what we get paid to do, and that students need to somehow get certified for courses we teach in order to complete their studies). Assessment always also serves a double purpose with regard to improving both learning and teaching: It gives students an idea of how they are doing in relation to teacher expectations, and it gives the teacher feedback on how well their teaching is working.
Of course, these last two points are really difficult in practice. Is what we measure really aligned with what we are hoping students will have learned? And can we even measure what we have hoped they have learned? If we think about Teaching for Sustainability as mainly teaching key competencies, i.e. embedded performances or internal cognitive processes, rather than disciplinary content (often factual), we face a task that is both exciting and challenging. How are we going to teach and assess competencies like whether someone can think in systems or envision different futures in ways that actually capture that competence fully? I don’t have all the answers, but here are some thoughts.
First, let us start backwards and “constructively align” our instruction by thinking about the Intended Learning Outcomes, how we would know if students meet them (i.e. the assessment), and then lastly how we might actually go about organising teaching and learning so students have the chance to show us in the assessment that they have met the learning outcomes (i.e. the learning activities).
Intended Learning Outcomes: Key Competencies for Sustainability
Let’s say our learning outcomes are key competencies for sustainability. There are several frameworks in the literature that have converged so much over time that it does not really make a difference which one we pick, so let us just go for the one by Redman & Wiek (2021).
Redrawn after Redman & Wiek (2021)
One thing is always important to mention about this framework: Areas in the figure are obviously neither proportional to importance of competencies, nor the time that should be spent on each!
With that out of the way, the framework in a nutshell: Students always learn a lot of disciplinary competencies that range from fairly generic to highly specialised. But they also need content-independent general and professional competencies, like for example critical thinking (an all-time favourite!) or good communication skills. They also need to develop and practice inter-personal and intra-personal competencies, and that is where we come into the realm of key competencies for sustainability: Together with planning competencies and implementation competencies, they can become integrated competencies. The key here is that while competencies can be practised each on their own to some extent, they need to also be practised together. Btw, note how all these competencies seem to make a lot of sense to master to be prepared for what the future might bring, regardless of whether we want to tackle sustainability challenges (There is an almost complete overlap with the requirements of the 1993 law that sets the requirements for a Swedish Master of Science in Engineering!). So it’s basically the common-sense understanding of preparedness for the future put into a framework that shows how the competences build on and relate to each other and to disciplinary content.
But what do those competencies entail in detail? Some of them were operationalised for higher education in Wiek et al. (2015), which is very helpful (and also a little scary because there is so much that we should be able to do!) Below, I am sharing one slide on collaboration (or interpersonal competence) because it feels like the one competence that we might be most familiar with, both when it comes to our own skills and teaching it. I share similar slides for the other competencies here.
In the levels of “novices”, “intermediates” and “advanced learners can …” is some kind of progression indicated, maybe with novice being incoming students and advanced what students will have mastered over the 5 years of a program. And of course we can also consider whether all these competencies need to be mastered by everybody, or whether we should rather count on working in teams with distributed expertise, as Wiek et al. (2011) suggest (and to be fair, the article is specifically about sustainability programs). In any case, the Wiek et al. (2015) article provides a very detailed account of how each of the key competencies can be operationalised, and that is a great start that then every teacher, every program needs to adapt to their own context to formulate their Intended Learning Outcomes on module, course, program level. But keep in mind that practising elements in isolation is not enough, they need to also be practised in an integrated way. So there needs to be some progression over time.
Now, let’s assume we have formulated the Intended Learning Outcomes. How would we be able to know if students every achieve them?
Assessment Tools
This is actually a really difficult question. Redman et al. (2021) gives an overview over common assessment tools, which I summarise in the slide below. But note that this is study about what is most common, and then discussing pros and cons, it is not a necessarily a list of what is most desirable!
One distinction that I find helpful when thinking about this is whether we want to measure or judge a student performance (you might want to read Hagen & Butler (1996) on this). In a measurement mindset, we assume that we can actually find objective measures of performance, whereas in a judging model we rely on holistic assessment by experts. But to ensure fairness, even those experts need to communicate about their criteria and indicators, and make sure they are more or less on the same page. So developing a rubric might still a good idea (and this might of course include negotiation with students both to give them ownership and to ensure that they know what is expected of them).
I am not sure if I want to open this can of worms here and now, but the thought of student ownership of assessment leads me to a thing called “sustainable assessment“. In a nutshell, it means an assessment that is useful to learning beyond the frame of the course it is related to, not just in terms of retaining the learnt information and skills for longer, but to support future learning. Of the assessment tools in the figure above, “reflective writing” might be the most obvious candidate for sustainable assessment, because it includes learning to identify where someone is at, where they want to get to (whether that is to reach our Intended Learning Outcomes or maybe explicitly and purposefully something else), some thoughts about how to get there, and thoughts looking back evaluating how things went, and then using this to plan future steps. The skills learnt in that process can obviously be useful beyond just the one course where reflective writing is used as assessment tool.
And of course, a summative assessment situation should never be the first time that students are faced with a specific type of task, so the assessment should be tied in, and practised with, the learning activities.
Learning Activities
This is probably where the overwhelming majority of literature has their focus, but usually without explicitly connecting them to either ILOs or assessment.
I like to use the figure below, which I re-imagined after Brundiers et al. (2021) (now that I know I didn’t invent it myself…), to show where, in a typical project, each sustainability competency can be practised, and how some of them necessarily have to go together.
For example, to understand a complex, current problem and how it came to be, we do need systems thinking, but we also need interpersonal competence to be able to talk to, and empathise with, people who maybe were part of creating the problem (or just people on our team who also want to understand the problem!), and normative competence so we understand what values led to the status quo. Similarly, to envision both intervention and non-intervention futures, we need to have anticipatory competences. Developing strategies requires obviously some strategic competence, and at all stages we need to be able to understand and work with other people, and also ourselves. And this is obviously the most simplified way of talking about those competencies, I would like to remind you of their operationalisations I mentioned above…
And in the end, in most learning activities, we go from some input through some process to some output. And in those steps, we can always practice all those competencies if we open up for it, for example by including opportunities to communicate with peers or people that we might not typically communicate with, or to relate things to our own values or understanding of the world. However, some pedagogical approaches are more likely to be connected with learning of sustainability competencies than others (see Lozano & Barreiro-Gen, 2022, or my summary). For example working with case studies means that we can simultaneously get insights into specific cases (ha!) from industry or anywhere else and practice disciplinary skills and acquire disciplinary knowledge as well as sustainability competencies, whereas “just” calculating a solution might practice relevant disciplinary skills, but is a missed opportunity in terms of practising sustainability competencies.
A suggested approach
Steven Curtis shared his suggested general approach to assessment in the ISCC course:
Identify relevant competence(s) clearly expressed in ILOs
Select assessment methods that align with chosen competence
Ground assessment tasks in real-world contexts
Create rubrics with transparent criteria for each competency level (e.g. novice, intermediate, advanced)
Include opportunities for reflection and peer feedback
Collect and analyse student performance to refine and improve teaching
Use iterative assessments to support ongoing competency development
With this — good luck, and please don’t hesitate to be in touch if you have questions or comments, or just want to discuss!
Brundiers, K., Barth, M., Cebrián, G., Cohen, M., Diaz, L., Doucette-Remington, S., … & Zint, M. (2021). Key competencies in sustainability in higher education—toward an agreed-upon reference framework. Sustainability Science, 16, 13-29.
Lozano, R., & Barreiro-Gen, M. (2022). Connections between sustainable development competences and pedagogical approaches. In Competences in Education for Sustainable Development: Critical Perspectives (pp. 139-144). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Redman, A., & Wiek, A. (2021, November). Competencies for advancing transformations towards sustainability. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 6, p. 785163). Frontiers Media SA. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.785163
Redman, A., Wiek, A., & Barth, M. (2021). Current practice of assessing students’ sustainability competencies – a review of tools. Sustainability Science, vol. 16, pp. 117-135.
Wiek, A., Withycombe, L., & Redman, C. L. (2011). Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development. Sustainability science, 6, 203-218.
Wiek, A., Bernstein, M. J., Foley, R. W., Cohen, M., Forrest, N., Kuzdas, C., … & Keeler, L. W. (2015). Operationalising competencies in higher education for sustainable development. In Routledge handbook of higher education for sustainable development (pp. 241-260). Routledge.
When teaching for sustainability, we need to give students the chance to practice working with Wicked Problems (as many of us are already doing, see for example what LTH teachers are doing in air pollution courses, or a more general suggestion for introductory courses by other LTH teachers), and we as teachers need to figure out where they are at in terms of thinking about the problem itself, possible solutions, and the way there. Lönngren, Ingerman & Svanström (2017) investigate this in the context of water availability in Jordan and find four typical ways students reason.
But first, a bit more about wicked problems. When it comes to sustainability wicked problems, they are typically
difficult, if not impossible, to clearly and unambiguously to describe.
addressable in different ways that can be conflicting
changing and evolving over time, there will be not ever be an “end” when everything is solved satisfactory
unique and therefore solutions cannot be reused or even generalized
tangled up in different value systems, so that approaches are often evaluated very differently by different people
So, in short, they are a mess (but one nice approach in higher education quality management summarised here). If we want to teach approaching wicked sustainability problems, we first need to understand how students think about them. Lönngren et al. (2017) do that based on 10 in-depth interview, and in that context find 4 different ways students discuss the problems (but sometimes switching between different ways within the same interview and topic).
I redrew their figure (see above), and in a nutshell, the four ways they find are
A: Simplify and avoid. Students see the problem as “problematic” and cannot describe it a lot more concretely than that, and they are not sure what a solution would look like or how to get there, but they expect one solution.
B Divide & control. Students describe a big problem that can be taken apart into smaller, independent components that they then address individually and put together as one big solution.
C. Isolate & succumb. Students see the problem as a system of interconnected parts, which they then address as if they were independently, but they realise that putting the solutions together does not actually solve the problem.
D. Integrate & balance. The problem is a system of interconnected parts, and it is approached as an interconnected systems of parts of both problems and solutions.
I find it really helpful to see these four ways (even though, of course, they are only based on how 10 students responded to a specific topic in an interview situation, so they are probably not generalisable). Nevertheless, it is useful to think about how students generally approach problems we confront them with, because this then helps us to scaffold instruction. It is not clear from just knowing how students talk about a problem what that would mean in terms of scaffolding, but maybe a first step would be to spend more time and discussions on the actual problem descriptions so all students understand and appreciate the “lots of smaller, interconnected problems” part. For example, letting students describe it themselves and prompting difficulties of “but when will the problem be solved?”, “how do you think about the neighbouring country and the effect it is going to have on them?”, etc, depending on what facets of the problem we might want to highlight, and only moving on from that step once the complexity of the problem seems to be appreciated. Of course, how that plays out depends completely on the context. But being aware of different ways students might potentially use might help us recognise where they need more time, reflection, support.
Lönngren, J., Ingerman, Å., & Svanström, M. (2017). Avoid, control, succumb, or balance: Engineering students’ approaches to a wicked sustainability problem. Research in Science Education, 47, 805-831.
Throughout our lives, transitions between old and new mark the passage of time, reminding us of the inevitability of change and the opportunities they bring. Too little do we spend the time to pause and reflect during this time of transition, like the changing of a calendar year… or something even more profound. It was this sentiment that guided our agenda at our final Task Force meeting of 2024.
On 18 November 2024, the Task Force gathered for its seventh meeting since its inception. The Task Force meets during each semester to receive information and provide input that guides the work of the Teaching for Sustainability initiative. A representative from every Faculty is invited to join the Task Force. Held in the “Stora konferensrummet” at the Ecology Building, this meeting reflected on our collective achievements while setting our sights on priorities for 2025. From sharing updates across faculties to discussing strategies for embedding sustainability into higher education, the session was both reflective and forward-looking.
Updates & Achievements
Our meeting began with participants sharing updates from their respective departments and faculties. Some highlights included:
At the Faculty of Social Sciences, the Centre for Sustainability Studies (LUCSUS) is celebrating the launch of its new master’s programme, Climate Change and Society, while also wrapping up its online course Agenda 2030: Knowing, Measuring, Leading. There’s hope to transform this course into a MOOC, ensuring continued access to its materials.
At the Faculty of Law, efforts are underway to integrate sustainability throughout the master’s programme European Business Law, exemplifying cross-disciplinary integration.
At the Joint Faculty of Humanities and Theology, the Department of Communication and Media shared plans to create a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on social sustainability with funding provided by EduLab.
Prioritising Community and Communication
A recurring theme in our discussion was the importance of clear and effective communication as a means to build a community of support. While some find email the best method for communication, others rely on platforms like Microsoft Teams, LinkedIn, or newsletters. Moving forward, we aim to harness a mix of these approaches, expanding our current reach among teaching staff at Lund University. Moreover, we propose more social events for community-building, engagement, and support.
We also brainstormed creative ways to engage students, such as leveraging Lund University’s Instagram accounts to feature student interviews on their sustainability learning journeys. We recognise that students’ experiences and expectations can be a significant motivating factor if this information reaches decision-makers, who are currently underrepresented in our community.
Challenges and Commitments for 2025
Looking ahead to 2025, the Task Force is committed to addressing both persistent challenges and emerging opportunities for advancing education for sustainability at Lund University.
A critical priority is securing resources to sustain and expand our efforts. This includes advocating collaboratively for institutional support from university leadership and emphasising the importance of both financial backing and recognition for sustainability-related teaching initiatives. To this end, an open letter is being drafted to bring these needs to management, highlighting the value of education for sustainability in attracting students, enhancing Lund University’s global standing, and addressing the concerns raised by teaching staff as well as students in their open letter to rectors at Swedish universities and colleges.
Another focus area is fostering stronger cross-departmental and faculty-wide collaboration. Many of our faculties still operate in silos, and we aim to strengthen communication channels to connect educators meaningfully across disciplines. Strategies include hosting lunch seminars at departments, developing accessible communication materials, and organising events that bring students and staff together to discuss sustainability challenges and solutions.
Embedding sustainability into course syllabi remains a key challenge, particularly ensuring that these efforts result in meaningful changes. To address this, we plan to engage more actively with deans and heads of departments through direct conversations and tailored workshops. Establishing long-term partnerships with pedagogical developers and expanding the Task Force membership to include other strategic groups will be important.
Lastly, we aspire to nurture the constructive and inspiring atmosphere within the Task Force. We will prioritise sharing good practices, structuring meetings around thematic and strategic discussions, and leveraging cross-university initiatives like the implementation of the LU Pedagogical Recognition Programme, Agenda 2030 Graduate School, as well as partnerships with EUGLOH and U21.
Looking Ahead
With the changing of a calendar year, we invite a moment of reflection. I often recall the wise words of Dougald Hine, who writes and speaks eloquently on living during the end of the world as we know it. He advocates for choices that 1) salvage the good things; 2) mourn what we cannot take with us; 3) notice the things that never were good; and 4) look for dropped threads from the past that still work. So, looking ahead, what good things do we want to take forward with us? What practices do we wish to leave behind? And, what new approaches do we wish to adopt in the future?
Answering these questions may feel deeply personal, though, I find it also feels deeply empowering, especially when shared with friends and colleagues. With this in mind, we always want the initiative to be a welcoming and supportive place. Thus, we welcome ideas and collaborations. If you’re interested in joining our efforts, contact Terese Thoni (terese.thoni@cec.lu.se) at the Sustainability Forum
By focusing on these areas in 2025, we aim to strengthen our collective efforts, knowing that meaningful change takes time, persistence, and collaboration. Together, we’ll continue building a community of teachers who support and inspire one another in navigating the complexities of sustainability in higher education. Thanks to all that have participated in making this community what it is, including those in attendance at the final Task Force meeting of 2024! Cheers to a new year!
Those Present:
Ann Åkerman, Centre for Sustainability Studies (LUCSUS)/Sustainability Forum
Carina Fasth, Department of Physics
Ebba Malmqvist, Planetary Health, Department of Laboratory Medicine
Marja-Liisa Öberg, Faculty of Law
Markus Gunneflo, Faculty of Law
Michael Bossetta, Department of Communication
Mirjam Glessmer, Centre för Engineering Education
Rhiannon Pugh, Department of Design Sciences
Sara Andersson, Division for Higher Education Development (AHU)
Steven Curtis, Division for Higher Education Development (AHU) – meeting facilitator
Susanne Brokop, Department of Health Sciences
Terese Thoni, Sustainability Forum – meeting minutes
As teachers within a large research university, we face challenges considering sustainability in our own teaching practice. This includes both content and our own personal example. How must we prioritise more intentional teaching, when we race from teaching to deadlines to meetings to research?
Perhaps one such way is to ask for support, which is exactly what Jakob Skovgaard of the Department of Political Science did on 22 October 2024. Joined by Terese Thoni – Educational Coordinator at the Sustainability Forum – we prepared a workshop for colleagues at the department, which introduced the sustainability competencies framework as one such approach to integrate sustainability in curriculum. Instead of focusing on sustainability content, this framework emphasises competencies that build on existing curriculum regardless of discipline in order to support students’ abilities to understand, address, and cope with our sustainability challenges.
The participatory workshop engaged those present on topics spanning from student emotional well-being, relevant national and organisational policy, and pedagogical approaches that promote transformative learning. Such approaches advance education for sustainability, which empowers learners with knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes to take informed decisions and make responsible actions for environmental integrity, economic viability, and a just society.
When asked what participants expected to gain from the workshop, they hoped to:
Exchange ideas and experiences
Learn how to deal with difficult or uncomfortable topics
Understand sustainability within their own teaching practice
When dealing with difficult or uncomfortable topics, we suggested creating space for students to navigate emotional effects from their learning. Participants exchanged experiences inviting students to practice breathing exercises to stimulate the parasympathetic nervous system, thus, reducing stress and anxiety. This is an example of embodying emotions, which is part of our efforts to create space, validate, and find actions to address emotional effects from learning.
Those present expressed challenges integrating sustainability for a variety of reasons. To address these challenges, we discussed dealing with complexity, for example, focusing on what you can control (e.g. ambition, approach, timeline); breaking tasks into more manageable chunks; and finding islands of simplicity or behaviours that reflect your values, which may reduce complexity over time.
In reaching more teachers within your department, we suggested harnessing windows of opportunity – those moments where conversations about sustainability can piggyback on existing dialogues. We brainstormed some relevant examples, such as educational quality reviews, course or programme revisions, development talks, pedagogical seminars, or staff retreats.
While we finished the provided content on time, we remained discussing with several engaged participants, demonstrating the passion and excitement evoked by this topic! Terese and I appreciated our time spent at the Department of Political Science. Thanks to Jakob for arranging and all those that were able to attend!
We’re happy to provide similar workshops for your colleagues at Lund University, tailored to your specific needs or requests.
If you are interested in Teaching for Sustainability, this blog post is for you. Last week I had the honor to go as a student representative to a workshop which discussed the critical question: what is the future sustainable university look like, and how do we reach it? What is the role of the university, and what is the role of the students? After an intense and inspiring day of workshopping, students and teachers alike wrote an to the headmasters of the universities in Sweden which declared what change we want to see in order for the universities to show their devotion to the sustainability goals and how to teach for the sustainable future.
Who am I? I am a last year student at the Environmental Engineering program at LTH, and I have been engaged as a student representative in our study council for the last three years. Last year I also worked part time at the Centre for Engineering Education at LTH with a focus project on the sustainability education at LTH. If you are more interested you can read a post about my research here. With this background and interested in the topic I was quick to jump on a night train to Örebro to participate in the workshop.
The purpose of the workshop was to learn about the student’s perspective on the question of the sustainability teaching at the universities. An invitation had been sent to all the student unions in Sweden and a handful were represented, with Umeå being the furthest north, and me from Lund the furthest south. In west we had Gothenburg and in east we had Stockholm. So although not student Union was able to participate, we had student coming in from all corners of the land.
The day started with a wonderful check in exercise led by Annika Göran Rodell from Örebro University, where we closed our eyes as a group of 30 strangers and after being led through a meditation process, where we connected to our bodies and this present moment, we opened our eyes again as 30 individuals curious about each other and what they day could bring. Although this day contained many valuable conversations, I especially valued this check in, seeming as the feeling in the room really changed to a wonderful climate for creative discussion. After a short presentation on the purpose of the day, we dug into a vegan lunch.
In the first exercise, we did a conversation — three by three — where we rotated the roles as speaker, active listener (who could ask clarifying questions), and observer (who observed without intervening). In these groups of three, we reflected on the question “What does the future, sustainable university look like” for 10 minutes each, after which both the listener and observer summarized what the speaker had said. This was a great way to gain perspective on others’ thoughts but also on your own, by having them summarized by two other persons. After everyone had spoken, we drew a picture on a white board that’s symbolized our views on the future sustainable university.
Takeaways from this exercise was that the room held a lot of ideas but also frustration and yearning for action from the universities. Some mentioned what the campus should look like, others mentioned leadership and cooperation as important factors, and others mentioned cooperation between of different educational programs (Tvärvetenskaplighet in Swedish).
The largest part of the workshop was devoted to an exercise called World Café. This exercise consists of parallel group discussions around tables, where every 10 or 15 minutes the participants rotate and changed between the tables but with a moderator staying at the table. The moderator then summarizes what the earlier groups discussed when new people arrive at the table for the next round. In this way the conversations are built on each other and a pool of knowledge or ideas is assembled. The questions discussed at the four tables were:
In what way does the universities need to change (including education)?
What is the universities’ role in the societal transition?
What is the students’ role in the transition?
What is the role of non-students?
The discussions from the World Cafe we’re summarized in full group into an open letter which is meant to be sent to the head masters of all universities in Sweden. The letter contained our joint perspective on how the university should act in order to educate for the sustainable future and an emphasis of the urgence of this matter.
Learningoutcome and take-home message
After this day of workshopping, I was filled with energy and inspiration. Finally, something was happening at this frontier! Having presented this topic at the past pedagogical inspirational conference at LTH I knew that there were teachers who are engaged in this question. But meeting this network and all of these students I understood once again I am not alone in this fight – We are not alone. There are a lot of teachers and students out there who want to see a change in the university and in the education and the workshops such as this can make it all one step closer.
My call to action from you is to talk with your colleagues, and with your students, and with anyone in your context about these questions – what is the future university, a sustainable university, supposed to look like? What has to change to for us to reach it? What can I do? Who can I inspire? And finally, if you are willing to become more engaged in this question, I warmly recommend you contact the network and to see how you can help or to just become one of the allies in this project.
What I hope to see from LTH and Lund University are more contexts where we can come together and discuss this question. More workshops, more meetings, more networks. This is an urgent question and we need to unite and work together to build the university to sustainable university we see in our future. The future is close and every decision we take now effects when, how and how soon we reach our common sustainability goals.
What clash? Carbon emissions must not exceed 2 tons carbon per capita by 2030 to stay within 1.5 degrees of warming, which is at odds with study abroad. One transatlantic flight emits about 1.6 tons of carbon. Yikes. Therefore, climate-focused study abroad relying on high-emitting travel poses a dilemma between study abroad and emission reductions. I investigated this dilemma as part of my MSc thesis for LUMES (Lund’s International Master’s Programme in Environmental Studies and Sustainability Science) looking at 156 climate-focused study abroad syllabi, surveying international climate educators, and interviewing affiliates of the Climate Action Network for International Educators. I considered whether studying climate change abroad is compatible with sustainability transformations for low carbon futures. The proceeding blog post is a summary of the study as it pertains to education for emission reductions.
Personal Clash
Originally from New York, I am an international educator—teaching International Baccalaureate students Environmental Systems and Societies, a course which prepares students with a “perspective of the interrelationships between environmental systems and societies,” and enables students “to adopt an informed personal response to the wide range of pressing environmental issues that they will inevitably come to face.” Further, I am also a graduate of the international Sustainability Science program LUMES. On the one hand, studying abroad is praised for equipping students with global perspectives, global citizenship, and intercultural exchange opportunities…on the other hand, it comes at a high carbon cost. The carbon cost of student mobility at large is up to 14 megatons of carbon/year. That’s equivalent to the emissions of entire countries like Jamaica! I am professionally and personally deeply embedded in the paradox of climate-focused international education which inspired my curiosity for this master’s thesis.
Education for Transformation
Education can be a key enabler of systematic behavioral change through knowledge dissemination, innovation, and social justice (Frick et al., 2021; Hale, 2019; Hindley, 2022). The institution of higher education plays an important role in promoting societal transformation by equipping the next generation of leaders and citizens for climate action (Leichenko & O’Brien, 2019; Leichenko & O’Brien, 2020; Shields, 2019; Stephens et al., 2018). However, educational research suggests climate change education falls short of teaching high-impact climate actions such as flying less to reduce personal carbon emissions (Kranz et al., 2022; R. Leichenko et al., 2022). The dilemma between study abroad programs and climate change has been studied in recent years (Campbell et al., 2022.; Feldbacher et al., 2023; Shields, 2019; Zhang & Gibson, 2021). However, less is understood about the potential of climate-focused study abroad for equipping students with the knowledge and skills for reducing carbon emissions.
Facts, Feelings, and Action for System Change
Climate scientists and educators alike advocate for the alignment of facts, feelings, and actions for effective learning and transformative change (Islam et al., 2022; Landon et al., 2019; Leichenko & O’Brien, 2019; Nicholas 2021; Tan et al., 2021). Research shows that further knowledge about climate change does not necessarily mean people act in alignment with the climate (Knutti, 2019; Leichenko & O’Brien, 2019; Wolrath Söderberg & Wormbs, 2022). To overcome this, environmental behavioral research shows that overcoming barriers of inaction requires integrating facts and feelings for climate action (Fraude et al., 2021; Woiwode et al., 2021; Wolrath Söderberg & Wormbs 2019). Thus, tapping into feelings and personal beliefs is essential for understanding individual and collective agency for sustainability transformations (Leichenko & O’Brien, 2019).
Knowledge and Skills in Climate Education
While education is key for transformation, we inadequately teach students the knowledge and skills for low-carbon futures. Study abroad courses related to climate change include themes of collaboration & communication, cross-cultural/global perspective, interdisciplinarity, place-based learning, risk assessment and management, solution-oriented learning, and systems thinking which mirrors the language of sustainability sciencebut neglects concrete climate-action knowledge. Study abroad courses related to climate change teach factual knowledge e.g. “fossil fuels contribute to climate change”. Very few courses talk about feelings or approaches to climate action (e.g. eating a plant-based diet, flying less).
Findings on what knowledge types were found in climate-focused study abroad program syllabi (Figure 10 in full thesis).
Knowledge & Skills
Inductively defined within the coded knowledge types and pedagogical approaches
Example Excerpt in Syllabus
Syllabus reference
1
collaboration & communication
mention of collab* or communica*
“Integrates the necessary knowledge, skills, and attitudes to learn interpersonal communication techniques.”
S13
2
cross-cultural and/or global perspective
Including internationally minded, multicultural, global understanding, exchanging information from different cultures, cross cultural
“Understand international environmental politics at local, regional and global scales.”
S60
3
interdisciplinarity
integration of multiple disciplines either content or methodological approaches
“Ability to encourage the knowledge of ecology with the integration of other social and biological sciences”
S17
4
place-based learning
learning topics related to the location of study and in the place of study
“By undertaking field trips to various conservation project sites, students gain first-hand information about different conservation challenges and approaches from diverse stakeholders such as decision-makers”
“and the role of risk assessments in risk-reduction strategies.”
S193
6
solution-oriented learning
mention of solutions to climate change, problem solving, and critical thinking
“Identify challenges and seek system-based solutions through dialogue and collaboration, establishing and respecting commitments”
S26
7
systems-thinking
explicit mention of a “systems*” thinking OR approach
“applies a systems thinking and understanding”
S23
Thematic findings on the knowledge and skills identified in the syllabi (Table 5 in full thesis)
Pedagogy for Transformation
Deductively coding syllabi (n=156) for pedagogy showed mixed approaches for how declarative, affective, and procedural knowledges are taught. I found there is a greater opportunity for more intentional place-based learning or service learning that can support host communities with climate adaptation and mitigation practices in support of emission reductions. The deductively coded pedagogical findings varied across the syllabi and less than 50% of the syllabi included information on the pedagogical approaches for the three knowledge types. Further, less than 30% of syllabi linked learning outcomes with the pedagogical approaches. Of the n=49 syllabi that included pedagogy, the most common pedagogical approaches for declarative knowledge were lecture, essay/paper, quiz/test/exam. The most common pedagogical approach for affective knowledge was through reflection/reflexive exercises. Lastly, the most common pedagogical approach for procedural knowledge was through place-based learning or service learning.
Knowledge Type
Pedagogical Approach
Examples in Syllabi
Referenced Syllabus
declarative (factual) pedagogy
“This seminar focuses on the analysis and use of climate models in understanding and projecting climate change in the future.”
S187
“The course will integrate course lectures and readings with group discussions and interactive excursions outside the classroom in order to thoroughly interrogate course topics”
S219
affective (feelings) pedagogy
“Promote empathy, self-reflection, and critical thinking as complementary and mutually reinforcing learning skills”
S198
“The purpose is to ask the students to reflect on their own positionality and make them aware of the ways positionality shapes the research question, relation with the research participants, approach in data collection, data processing, and the representation of research participants in the final project.”
S189
procedural (actions) pedagogy
“Students will analyze carbon footprints at three scales, create carbon scenarios for all scales, and determine the most efficient level of implementation.”
S187
“Aboriginal culture was a spoken culture of stories, and so students’ learning is based on the principles of close observation, discussions, and firsthand experience, in order to acquire a better understanding of the First Australians’ intimate understanding of ecology, environmental management, and Aboriginal cultural conservation and restoration.”
S176
Example excerpts of syllabi deductively coded for pedagogical approaches (Table 6 in full thesis)
Educational reform should emphasize climate literacy that centers on personal responsibility for climate action and effectively teach feelings knowledge and action knowledge—for how to reduce carbon emissions.
International Climate Educators Perspective
Climate educators believe courses should include holistic approaches to teaching climate education, but there is a mismatch between what international climate educators believe should be taught and what is taught in practice. Educators agree with “account budget thinking” “I do climate action in other aspects of my life to account for the travel emissions of students taking X course” and through “habituation” “I feel travel is so deeply ingrained in the practice of the program and therefore hard to change” (Wolrath Söderberg & Wormbs 2019). Further, international climate educators favor collective action over individual action for emission reductions.
Overcoming this knowledge-to-action gap requires new ways of understanding the dilemma and disrupting business-as-usual behaviors and norms.
The Climate Action Network for International Educators leverages transformation through knowledge dissemination on climate action, providing study-abroad affiliates with practical emission reduction pathways. Namely through, the CANIE accord—a roadmap of 70 climate actions international education programs and affiliates can take.
My study supports research in sustainability transitions and climate education. Further research could dig into the numbers of how CANIE influences emission reductions and if and how students reduce emissions after taking international climate education courses. Including students in this conversation would help provide a more holistic perspective on international education for systems change in alignment with sustainable futures.
Please reach out if you have additional insights or questions: Julia Roellkejroellke@gmail.com or are interested in getting involved with the Climate Action Network for International Educators. This is a brief overview of high-level takeaways from my thesis and you can find a link to my full study here.
References
Campbell, A. C., Nguyen, T., & Stewart, M. (2023). Promoting International Student Mobility for Sustainability? Navigating Conflicting Realities and Emotions of International Educators. Journal of Studies in International Education, 27(4), 621–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153221121386
Feldbacher, E., Waberer, M., Campostrini, L., & Weigelhofer, G. (2023). Identifying gaps in climate change education—A case study in Austrian schools. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2023.2214042
Fraude, C., Bruhn, T., Stasiak, D., Wamsler, C., Mar, K., Schäpke, N., Schroeder, H., & Lawrence, M. (2021). Creating space for reflection and dialogue: Examples of new modes of communication for empowering climate action. GAIA – Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 30(3), 174–180. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.30.3.9
Frick, M., Neu, L., Liebhaber, N., Sperner-Unterweger, B., Stötter, J., Keller, L., & Hüfner, K. (2021). Why Do We Harm the Environment or Our Personal Health despite Better Knowledge? The Knowledge Action Gap in Healthy and Climate-Friendly Behavior. Sustainability, 13(23), Article 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313361
Hale, B. W. (2019). Wisdom for Traveling Far: Making Educational Travel Sustainable. Sustainability, 11(11), 3048. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113048
Hindley, A. (2022). Understanding the Gap between University Ambitions to Teach and Deliver Climate Change Education. Sustainability, 14(21), Article 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142113823
Islam, Md. A., Haji Mat Said, S. B., Umarlebbe, J. H., Sobhani, F. A., & Afrin, S. (2022). Conceptualization of head-heart-hands model for developing an effective 21st century teacher. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 968723. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.968723
Kates, R. W., Clark, W. C., Corell, R., Hall, J. M., Jaeger, C. C., Lowe, I., McCarthy, J. J., Schellnhuber, H. J., Bolin, B., Dickson, N. M., Faucheux, S., Gallopin, G. C., Grübler, A., Huntley, B., Jäger, J., Jodha, N. S., Kasperson, R. E., Mabogunje, A., Matson, P., … Svedin, U. (2001). Sustainability Science. Science, 292(5517), 641–642.
Kranz, J., Schwichow, M., Breitenmoser, P., & Niebert, K. (2022). The (Un)political Perspective on Climate Change in Education—A Systematic Review. Sustainability, 14(7), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074194
Landon, A. C., Woosnam, K. M., Keith, S. J., Tarrant, M. A., Rubin, D. M., & Ling, S. T. (2019). Understanding and modifying beliefs about climate change through educational travel. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27(3), 292–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1560452
Leichenko, R., Gram-Hanssen, I., & O’Brien, K. (2022). Teaching the “how” of transformation. Sustainability Science, 17(2), 573–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-00964-5
Leichenko, R., & O’Brien, K. (2020). Teaching climate change in the Anthropocene: An integrative approach. Anthropocene, 30, 100241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2020.100241
Nicholas, K. (2021). Under the sky we make: How to be human in a warming world. G.P. Putnam’s Sons.
Shields, R. (2019). The sustainability of international higher education: Student mobility and global climate change. Journal of Cleaner Production, 217, 594–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.291
Stephens, J. C., Frumhoff, P. C., & Yona, L. (2018). The role of college and university faculty in the fossil fuel divestment movement. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene, 6, 41. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.297
Tan, D. Y., Tay, E. G., Teo, K. M., & Shutler, P. M. E. (2021). Hands, Head and Heart (3H) framework for curriculum review: Emergence and nesting phenomena. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 106(2), 189–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10003-2
Woiwode, C., Schäpke, N., Bina, O., Veciana, S., Kunze, I., Parodi, O., Schweizer-Ries, P., & Wamsler, C. (2021). Inner transformation to sustainability as a deep leverage point: Fostering new avenues for change through dialogue and reflection. Sustainability Science, 16(3), 841–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020-00882-y
Wolrath Söderberg, M., & Wormbs, N. (2022). Internal Deliberation Defending Climate-Harmful Behavior. Argumentation, 36(2), 203–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-021-09562-2
Zhang, H., & Gibson, H. J. (2021). Long-Term Impact of Study Abroad on Sustainability-Related Attitudes and Behaviors. Sustainability, 13(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041953
Meet the Task Force on Education for Sustainability and read about the most pressing issues and upcoming events that we discussed at our most recent meeting! If you are interested in engaging with us, our next meeting will take place on November 18.
On September 16, the Task Force on Education for Sustainability met for updates, feedback and general discussions. We talked about, among other topics,
Seminar: Joy, passion, purpose 16 October, 12:10-13:00. The aim of this seminar is to help teachers reconnect with what gives them a sense of joy, purpose, and passion in their teaching, as well as to start developing strategies for how to create situations where these emotions are likely to be experienced, and how they can be shared with students. More information and registration: Teaching for Sustainability: Cultivating a Sense of Joy, Passion, and Purpose in Your Teaching | Sustainability Forum (lu.se)
LUTL24: The Lund University Teaching and Learning conference 2024 with the overarching theme of “connecting teachers — changing from within”. The Teaching for Sustainability-working group is contributing with a presentation about the initiative. The initiative is also organizing a workshop about serious games. In addition, the IIIEE organizes events on groupwork and online learning. Read more about the conference here: https://www.ahu.lu.se/en/educational-development/lutl-2024/
National networks and their activities:
The national H.E. Climate Network is organizing three online seminars this semester – see below for dates and titles. If you are interested in attending any of the seminars or want to know more about the network, contact Terese Thoni (terese.thoni@cec.lu.se). Read more about the network here: Higher educations’ climate network | Externwebben (slu.se)
The Swedish Council for Higher Education hosts online breakfast seminars (pedagogiska temacaféer). Four seminars on Education for Sustainability have been planned and Lund University is one of the organisers. See below for dates and titles. Read more about the seminars here: Temacaféer | hpu.uhr.se.
Courses:
We are excited that the new course Integrating Sustainability Competencies in Curriculum (ISCC) is now up and running! The course is equivalent to one week of pedagogical training with six workshops and individual work: Integrating Sustainability Competencies in Curriculum | Division for Higher Education Development At the meeting we discussed, inter alia, the possibility and need for a reiteration of the course.
The online course and global network Higher Education Didactics for Sustainability (HEDS) HEDS241 (kau.se) ran this year for the first time with LU as one of several host universities. The course is free of charge for participants, but each host contributes with working hours to facilitate the course. The next opportunity to take the course is 2025, but LU needs new facilitators. If you are looking for teaching opportunities and want more information, please contact Terese. Compensation for your time is available.
We also received updates from participating units/institutions/faculties, including from:
LTH on their planning a specialized course for teachers affiliated with the Circular Building-profile area,
The Faculty of Science on their plans to remake the introductory course for PhD students,
The IIIEE on their collegial project course on teamwork as well as life-long learning courses on sustainability,
The Faculty of Medicine on their plans for a tailor-made workshop for teachers on 15 October as well as a recent U21 conference in Amsterdam,
The Faculty of Social Sciences and the Department of Political Science on their Sustainable Development-working group, cooperation with the University of Copenhagen, as well as their course on planetary politics,
And the Faculty of Law and their current focus on the sustainability plan.
On the topic of the sustainability plan, Lund University’s central sustainability plan is up for its second and final revision this autumn. The deadline to suggest new activities is the 1 November. Contact Terese for more information on the process and possibilities to engage! See also: Hållbarhetsstrategi och hållbarhetsplan | Hållbarhetsforum (lu.se) for the current strategy and plan.
As always: If you would like to get in touch, we would love for you to contact us and join our activities! 🙂 You are also welcome to contact us with suggestions on activities and resources that you think would make a difference to educators for sustainability. If you are interested in a tailor-made presentation or workshop about Education for Sustainability for your unit, team of educators, or other interested participants, please contact terese.thoni@cec.lu.se for more information and time-booking.
About the initiative:
The Teaching for Sustainability-initiative, coordinated by the Sustainability Forum in close collaboration with colleagues the Centre for Engineering Education (CEE) and the Division of Higher Education Development (AHU) can be loosely described as a three-step effort organized as follows:
Working Group: Engages in operational planning and implementation of activities and resources. This is the group that engages in operational planning, with meetings at least every month (currently, Terese, Steven, Karin, and Mirjam - we welcome everyone who would like to get engaged!).
Task Force: Receives information and provides input that guides the work of the working group, with meetings twice per semester. The aspiration is to have at least one member per faculty to make sure that the working group receives input from all faculties.
Community of Practice: Our community engages and empowers members to explore real approaches to integrate sustainability into their teaching practice. We welcome everyone interested in education for sustainability – welcome to join our Teams-group for inspiration and to engage in discussions: Community of Practice | Division for Higher Education Development (lu.se)
As the initiative continues to grow, we invite members of our community to contribute their time, effort, skills, and passions to the operationalisation and implementation of our work. Currently, we are seeking additional members to join the Working Group or Task Force. If interested, we welcome you to join any of our meetings to observe how we work. Working group-member Steven Curtis writes more about what engaging in the initiative entails in this blog post: Contributing to Our Community: How You Can Support “Teaching for Sustainability” – Teaching for Sustainability (lu.se)
Summary, upcoming events and activities:
26 September, 10.15-12.00, workshop: Teaching for Sustainability – Sustainability in STEM Education, Study Centre, LTH, room “Brunnen”, John Ericssons väg 4. Join us for a workshop on integrating sustainability into science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education, by exploring interactive methods and educational research. More information and registration: Teaching for Sustainability: Sustainability in STEM Education | Avdelningen för högskolepedagogisk utveckling (lu.se)
27 September 13:15-15:00 webinar Lärosätenas klimatnätverk* on online platforms for exchange of knowledge and experiences in education for sustainability
Our previous experiences with teaching for, or even about sustainability, is very limited. It has often been something on the periphery, something we knew was important but lacked insights to implement in a meaningful way. The topic of sustainability is something that has come more recently, in a field of education fraught with tradition. We teach courses in structural engineering, a discipline which has experienced few disruptive breakthroughs in recent decades. This has meant that we have become quite comfortable teaching what we learned ourselves when we were students. Meanwhile, the construction sector, accounting for about 21% of the global greenhouse gas emissions [1], is trying to navigate through a green transition. Thus, we don’t know exactly what the construction sector will look like in 10-20 years. One thing is for sure, the sector must become more sustainable. So, while structural engineering as a subject remains unchanged, the boundary conditions for structural engineers are changing in real time. We feel it our duty to equip students for this uncertain future – however, how can we effectively teach sustainability when we ourselves have not been formally educated in this area?
The courses we give at the division of structural engineering all revolve in some way on structures; how they stand, how they fail, how we build them, and how we maintain them. Typical decisions faced by structural engineers include determining the appropriate materials and proper dimensions for a structure such as a building or bridge. These decisions are made considering risk and uncertainty but carry with them potentially high consequences in terms of economic, environmental, as well as social impacts. Historically, these decisions have been made with the ideology of design conservatism. The implicit assumption is that we could increase material consumption (and by extension carbon footprints) as long as our design decisions were on the safe side. This philosophy, however, clashes with the environmentally oriented sustainability goals.
This brief report describes one of our efforts to incorporate sustainability aspects more explicitly into our teaching. As we have limited prior experience with this subject, and given our background as engineers, we have adopted a more careful but practical approach. Thus, although we admit that grander action is required (and especially at curriculum level), we have chosen to focus on one of our courses – a basic course on structural engineering in the second year of the Civil Engineering program (V). Our focus was on incorporating a dedicated two-hour seminar on aspects of sustainability. The aim of the seminar is to actively engage our students, as well as ourselves, in thinking about how the decisions made by structural engineers can affect sustainability and to challenge the traditional ideology of design conservatism. The next section describes in more detail the methodology we used for developing the seminar.
Methodology
To help us in planning the seminar, we utilized three primary methods:
Short literature review
Inspirational discussions with more experienced colleagues
Internal brainstorming sessions
To start, we scoped the literature and read a few review articles on the topic of sustainability. To reduce the number of results, the scoping study revolved around the keywords sustainability, education, and engineering. The search was also limited to journal articles which were in English. The second screening was then based on our own subjective screening of article titles and abstracts – this left us with nine articles we thought would be the most relevant for us; see Table 1. The articles gave us a basis for research on the topic of sustainability education (as well as its other variations education for sustainability and education for sustainable development). Included in this research were some key learning outcomes and educational approaches which supported teaching for sustainability. However, the articles usually stopped short of providing concrete support of precisely how we could implement our seminar. This is where the latter two methods compensated.
We were not able to perform an exhaustive systematic review of each of the nine articles. However, based on our preliminary and unstructured review, we have identified the following key insights:
Education for sustainability is essentially good teaching, i.e., not something ad-hoc or external to our courses. This makes it quite relevant for all our courses.
Some general frameworks or guidelines for implementation seem to exist, which can highlight some useful practices, teaching approaches and learning outcomes. However, it is not always clear for us (the teaching laymen) what this means specifically for our courses.
There are many people out there doing this kind of teaching with some good results. However, it is often difficult to grasp the specifics as the articles may be on a higher level and when cases are presented, we may not easily see how our specific courses could benefit from what was described.
When concrete cases are provided, these can be very revealing (peeling away the abstract to reveal something tangible and concrete). It can provide inspiration for what to do with some added confidence that comes with seeing the results it provided. Now, we should be careful to generalize, but our own experience is that we as teachers need to braver in applying new things in our courses.
As teachers our focus is often on our own courses, but the issue also needs to be addressed at higher levels (e.g., integration into program curricula). Perhaps this is a calling for us to try and influence the administration in these questions. In any case, we think a bottom-up and top-down approach should occur simultaneously (and ideally somewhere in there are the wishes of the students).
At the face of it, sustainability as a concept appears complex with multiple components (pillars, etc). On the other hand, it is perhaps not necessary to try and incorporate all of these into all our courses. Choose those aspects which you find most relevant or exciting.
Table 1: Nine relevant articles we identified during our scoping of the academic literature
We also sought inspiration from colleagues who had more experience with sustainability in their courses. In total, we discussed and took notes with three other teachers, for about an hour each. We both took notes during the sessions and cross checked afterwards to summarize whether we came to the same conclusions. The discussions provided us with some inspiration as to how teaching for sustainability could be achieved and helped shape our perspectives towards the task at hand. We also came up with some concrete examples, or case studies, that could be included in our seminar. Now that we had a firmer basis for proceeding, we started to focus more specifically on how we should plan our own seminar.
As a third method we utilized internal brainstorming sessions to come up with a concrete plan for how the seminar could be implemented. These sessions took place at the end as we then had a better understanding of the concept of teaching for sustainability as well as to identify possible case studies. Thus, we started by asking ourselves what it is we want our students to experience and learn during the seminar. As this was to the steppingstone for future developments, and as we wanted to facilitate a shared learning experience (teachers & students), we also concluded that it would be important to document how the seminar went and to disseminate lessons for the next course iteration. This final aspect is critical as we have the possibility to adjust more in the course than simply one seminar the following year. The outcome was a concrete plan for the seminar which would include two external observers helping us with post-seminar reflections. The students would also be required to provide reflections – which is another promising source of further development.
Seminar plan
Our objective is to design and implement a 2-hour active learning seminar integrating sustainability as a key complementary aspect to consider in the design of structures, specifically structural engineering design. We want to provide the students with some basic building blocks to enable them to reflect about how their design choices affect sustainability, and how structural safety can be achieved without excess material use. In this way we hope to also help normalize the discussion about sustainability and hopefully also provide some inspiration for doing the same in other courses. As we intend to implement this in an ongoing course (this semester) we also hope to learn some valuable lessons along the way. The seminar is intended to support the following learning outcomes:
The students shall have a broad understanding for sustainability as a concept.
The students shall be able to identify how structural engineering design and verification decisions in terms of their sustainability impacts.
The students should be able to discuss these issues with their peers, in groups, and with the teachers in the course.
In planning the seminar, we have relied on previous experiences with (1) active learning methods, and (2) the use of the case method in teaching. The former is rooted in the concept of experiential learning (originally formulated by Kolb), is well-known for improving engagement, and can improve student learning2 [11]. Active learning can be briefly defined as instructional activities involving students in doing things and thinking about what they are doing [12]. The latter is, as the name suggests, about a ‘case’. Cases help facilitate learning problem-solving; the characteristics of the cases used are thus inherently connected with the types of problems to be solved and ultimately the intended learning objectives [13]. The case method is usually conducted in seminars and the teachers’ active participation is central to guide the students and to support learning [14].
An overview of the seminar is provided in Table 2. Three cases were included, chosen to support the learning outcomes. The student activities included think-pair-share in groups of two to three, followed by larger group discussions at each table. We, the teachers, then positioned ourselves in a larger discussion based on input from some of the groups. To facilitate participation, we sometimes collected responses using the interactive presentation tool Mentimeter (mentimeter.com). During the seminar, we also allow students to ask questions through the Q&A function to ensure any unanswered queries are communicated and addressed. As teachers we adopted the attitude of co-learners with the students and try to communicate this early on and throughout. Although we still need to moderate the class, we highlight for the students that their answers may be just as relevant and perhaps even more so than our own – we are in it together, navigating a wicked problem that has no single right answer. The cases are also chosen to provide some personal connection to the teachers – who are either directly involved in the research or got the information from very close colleagues
Table 1: Overview of 2-hour seminar with planned activities
After the seminar, the teachers and observers have a quick discussion to summarize their findings and identify important lessons for improving the concept and for making broader changes to the course (and perhaps even other courses).
Results & lessons
This section summarizes our own reflections from the seminar as well as input from the observers.
There was a low number of participants in the seminar in relation to the total number of students in the course. We were able to put together three groups of students, each having about four students. The low number of participants was not surprising as the seminar was voluntary, was placed at the end of the course near the exam and the topic was not included in the course syllabus (kursplan). This can be improved for next years by including the topic in the course syllabus.
The student engagement for the topic was positive and the observers commented that the teachers were approachable. It was also mentioned that having two teachers was good as it demonstrated for the students that it was acceptable to participate and even disrupt if they had something they wanted to say (as this was the dynamic we had with each other as teachers). As a result, we did not observe much of an issue in discussing this challenging topic and in that way thought it helped normalize the discussion. It should be noted that the low number of participants may have had a positive impact on this aspect, as it may be easier for students to voice their ideas in a smaller group.
The seminar revealed for the teachers that the students had some prior knowledge on the topic, and this was a way to reinforce the importance of this topic in later courses in the program. This made us realize that we need to learn more about the exact background they have in the subject based on the previous course they took. For future development, we see potential in making more explicit connections between our examples and knowledge from previous courses, thus reinforcing the idea of course alignment.
The primary focus was on environmental or ecological sustainability while the other pillars were less prominent. This is most likely as our examples were quite focused on this – we could do better in the future. In the discussion with the observers, it was also highlighted that it would be better to talk about the subject in more specific terms rather than the overall subject of sustainability. For example, we can say ecological sustainability directly, and then possibly include discussion topics connected to the other pillars of sustainability (social and economic).
Some specific ideas for how we could improve this next year:
Change the course plan for the course to include sustainability in some way (most likely the focus will be on environmental sustainability as this is very relevant for the topic of study)
Make smaller changes to the lecture material to have some connections to sustainability throughout (e.g., by referring to SDGs)
Include sustainability considerations and incorporate relevant tasks in the project work (while trying not to have it as something ad-hoc or supplementary).
Further develop the seminar concept and include other pillars of sustainability (e.g., indoor climate issues can lead to health issues for users)
As a final note, it should be emphasized that these reflections focus primarily on a particular seminar format, and how this can be improved for next years. In parallel, we have discussed other ways to integrate sustainability in the course. For example, it may be favorable to integrate sustainability aspects in other lectures and seminars instead of having a dedicated session. After all, sustainability is a multifaceted concept that intersects with most topics in structural engineering
References
[1] United Nations Environment Programme (2024). Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction: Beyond foundations: Mainstreaming sustainable solutions to cut emissions from the buildings sector. Nairobi. https://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/45095.
[2] Holdsworth & Sandri (2021). Investigating undergraduate student learning experiences using the good practice learning and teaching for sustainability education (GPLTSE) framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 311, 127532.
[3] Gutierrez-Bucheli, Kidman & Reid (2022). Sustainability in Engineering Education: A Review of Learning Outcomes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 330, 129734.
[4] Oswald Beiler MR & Evans JC (2015). Teaching sustainability topics to attract and inspire the next generation of civil engineers. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 141(2), C5014001.
[5] Tejedor G et al (2019). Didactic strategies to promote competencies in sustainability. Sustainability, 11(7), 2086.
[6] Hensley N (2020). Educating for sustainable development: Cultivating creativity through mindfulness. Journal of Cleaner Production, 243, 118542.
[7] Kevern JT (2011). Green building and sustainable infrastructure: Sustainability education for civil engineers. Journal of Professional issues in engineering education and practice, 137(2), 107-112.
[8] Riley DR, Grommes AV & Thatcher CE (2007). Teaching sustainability in building design and engineering. Journal of Green Building, 2(1), 175-195.
[9] Viegas CV et al. (2016). Critical attributes of Sustainability in Higher Education: A categorisation from literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 126, 260-276.
[10] Barth M & Rieckmann M (2012). Academic staff development as a catalyst for curriculum change towards education for sustainable development: an output perspective. Journal of Cleaner production, 26, 28-36.
[11] Freeman S et al. (2013) Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. PNAS, 111(23), 8410-8415
[12] Bonwell CC & Eison JA (1991). Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports.
[13] Jonassen DH (2011) Learning to Solve Problems – A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group, New York.
[14] Maufette-Leenders LM, Erskine JA & Leenders MR (1997) Learning with Cases, 2 ed. Ivey Publishing, London, Ontario.
[15] Björnsson I et al. (2024 – submitted) Resource expenditure for bridges in Sweden – do we build greener bridge now compared to 50 years ago? IABSE Congress San Jose 2024 – Beyond Structural Engineering in a Changing World.
[17] Björnsson I, Thöns S, Celati S & Hergart B (2024). Towards a service life extension of the Øresund Fixed Link. IABMAS 2024, 24-28 June, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Figure 3- Level of education in the considered literature.
The rising concerns around sustainability have led to the urgent need to update higher education curricula with sustainability-related knowledge and skills. Among the various tools, frameworks, and approaches available to educators are the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) developed by the UN for the Agenda 2030. The SDGs act as a multifunctional tool, not only steering sustainability-focused curricula but also weaving environmental and social perspectives into subjects that traditionally are not focused on sustainability. Although the SDG framework, with its 17 goals, is widely applied, its use in higher education remains fragmented and is perceived as underutilized in connecting courses and programs to the three pillars of sustainability, especially in non-sustainability focused curricula. Nevertheless, integrating the SDGs into the functioning and activities of universities has been a rapidly increasing trend globally noted by researchers (Albareda-Tiana et al., 2018; Leal Filho et al., 2021; Purcell et al., 2019).
There are different ways in which the SDGs have been incorporated into the work and activities of the university, via its missions of teaching, research, and engagement which means working with organizations and actors outside the university including businesses, government, and civil society. For example, Borrero and Yousafzai (2024) explain how the university works with the sustainability mission via the “quintuple helix” with other stakeholders (business, government, third sector, communities) to drive forwards the development of the circular economy. There is a wealth of research about how universities work with SDGs in various ways, but here we are not focusing on this wider engagement work with businesses and other actors, nor are we focusing on sustainability research per se, of which of course there is a huge amount currently taking place across all disciplines (see, for example: Nordström et al., 2020; Bergmann et al., 2021; Walsh et al., 2021). Instead, we shine a light on developments in teaching sustainability in higher education. Our starting point was a large framing research question, as follows:
RQ: How SDGs are used in teaching in higher education?
We already know from our previous explorations into the sphere of teaching for sustainability that there are a number of important insights available from already published research. For example, particular disciplinary approaches to sustainability education using subject-specific frameworks and methods have been proposed by scholars in different fields ranging from engineering (Hadgraft et al., 2020), entrepreneurship (Hermann & Bossle, 2020), AI (Chiu & Chai, 2020), and religious education (Altmeyer, 2021). There have also been cases published on a locational basis, with scholars examining sustainability education in Sweden (Argento et al., 2020), Qatar, Singapore, and New Zealand (Zguir et al., 2021), to name but a few examples.
It is clear that research and publications relating to teaching SDGs in higher education are rapidly expanding at the current time. But how do we get an overview of this bustling field, and how can we succinctly gather state-of-the-art knowledge about this area for our own use in our teaching practice and also to share with our colleagues how to embed SDGs in their teaching? To address this puzzle, we have devised a systematic literature review methodology to help us get an overview of this emerging field of research and figure out what knowledge is out there and how we can access it. Specifically, we need an efficient way to identify the most effective and promising tools and approaches that we ourselves can incorporate into our teaching across different courses and disciplines to ensure we are fulfilling our commitment both as academics and global citizens to be teaching to the latest state of the art regarding the SDGs, and ensuring our students gain the best education possible within the confines of our working lives.
Methodology
This study employs a systematic literature review methodology to explore the integration of the SDG framework in higher education across various disciplines and educational formats. It follows the protocols established by Cook et al. (1997) in the medical field and adapted for the management field by Tranfield et al. (2003).
EBSCOHost and Scopus search engines were used to identify an initial pool of articles with the Boolean operators and the core terms with search string – TI sustainable development goals AND TI teach* OR TI sustainable development goals AND TI learn* OR TI sustainable development goals AND TI educat* in article titles. Specifically, the search focused on scientific articles and conference proceedings with titles that included “sustainable development goals” and terms related to teaching and education (i.e., teach*, learn*, educat*). Besides the publication type (i.e., peer-reviewed article and conference proceedings), the inclusion criteria for the search included English as the language of publication, and a chronological frame (i.e., only materials published in 2015 and onwards were included to assure the focus on the current format of SDGs). The search result led to the finding of 2.146 (Ebscohost) and 284 (Scopus) potentially relevant articles. From there, the material summary was downloaded, and duplicates were excluded. This step narrowed down the material pool to 706 potentially relevant articles. In the next step, titles and abstracts were scanned to assess the articles’ relevance. During this step, the following inclusion criteria were applied: articles that focused on teaching in higher education courses and programs and articles that looked into incorporating SDGs into education. This yielded 39 articles, which were accepted for the analysis. During the analysis, the content of the selected materials was carefully studied by the authors in order to identify existing practices and approaches for incorporating SDGs into higher education teaching. Our approach to analyzing the shortlisted articles was to first devise an analytical framework, which consisted of a shared spreadsheet with different columns for the themes we were searching for in the papers. We pre-decided amongst the research group the sub-questions we should ask of each paper in order to answer our overall question, and settled on the following sub-questions:
Where is the research conducted (country)?
Which level of education is addressed (undergraduate, postgraduate, PhD, or mixed)?
What is the level of application (department, course, whole university etc.,)?
Which teaching techniques or methods are featured in the paper?
From these questions we were able to analyze the papers more systematically and fill in the gaps in our knowledge about how SDGs are used in teaching.
Results and Discussion
In this section we will highlight the main results we found when we conducted the systematic literature review as per the methodology described above. The results are grouped into categories according to the analysis we conducted following the four main themes we were interested in exploring. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the double trend of the rise in concern about sustainability and climate crisis, and general trends of increased scientific publication across all fields, we saw a rapid rise in publications on the topic in recent years. The speed of growth in the last two years was even more than we expected from general academic trends, suggesting that the use of SDGs in teaching is becoming rapidly a hot topic (Fig. 1).
Figure 1- Number of publications per year relating to SDGs in higher education teaching.
1. Where are SDGs used?
We were interested to see the geographic location of the studies present in the published literature about using SDGs in teaching. We also wondered if there were going to be geographically differentiated trends in how they are used (though we did not find this in the analysis). What we did find was that the map of the globe was surprisingly patchy when it comes to where the publications and cases are emanating from (Fig. 2).
Figure 2- Country location of identified studies.
What is perhaps surprising is that large countries such as China and India are missing from the identified papers. It is difficult to explain this apart from reflecting on the possibility that the SLR methodology does not capture the cases being published because they are not in journals featured on the EBSCOHost and Scopus search engines. This is a more likely explanation for the possibility that SDG teaching is not being conducted or that research on this is lacking (which could also be the case) in those countries. Also interesting is Spain’s strong presence.
2. Level and field of education in SDG teaching
Figure 3 shows the percentage of the education level where SDGs are integrated into teaching. This analysis was fairly inconclusive. We found a mixture of levels being profiled, with 12 cases profiling undergraduate teaching, 6 for postgraduate, 2 mixing both levels and another 10 covering higher education in general or with unclear indication. From this spread, it seems SDG teaching is present at all levels of university education. What was not featured, but which would
be an interesting question to explore further, is to what degree SDGs are being used to “teach the teachers” in the manner of the course in teaching sustainability that we are currently taking and for which this report is an element. We did not find any papers covering such courses.
As Appendix C shows, the fields of education were also quite mixed, with a spread across different disciplines. The most high-frequency featured disciplines are business/ management/ economics and engineering/ technology. What is perhaps interesting, given the size and scale of education in medicine and health that it features so little. This could be explained by the motivation or necessity to publish in different outlets and the fact that medical or health researchers might be less inclined to make sustainability-themed outputs. We would need to conduct interviews with researchers to test this hypothesis. An interesting question is to dig more into the apparent success in the business and engineering educations in implementing SDGs (and publishing results from these studies). Again, we should consider the size of disciplines, as these are often the largest faculties in many universities.
Figure 3- Level of education in the considered literature.
Discussion and Conclusions
We presented in this report an exploratory approach to find out how SDGs are used to date in higher education teaching. We followed the systematic literature review (SLR) methodology, which is outlined above. After identifying a shortlist of relevant articles according to the established approach, we undertook a qualitative analysis of the papers. The initial scoping assessed various aspects – research methodologies of the selected articles, their chronological and geographic distributions, subject areas, levels of education, sample sizes in empirical studies, and the typologies of SDG application techniques. Subsequent meta-analysis provided insights into different methods of using the SDG framework for various purposes. These included strategies for aligning traditional non-sustainability-focused syllabi and curricula with the SDG goals, methods for teaching the SDGs, and approaches for instructing sustainability-focused courses and programs with SDGs. These are fully presented in Appendix B.
Key findings reveal a trend towards interdisciplinary approaches and the necessity for more cohesive incorporation of SDGs into academic programs. We find overall a rapid development in efforts to implement SDGs in universities, across their various activities and including in teaching. The study highlights successful practices that have been implemented by educators worldwide, and give us a comprehensive list of approaches that have been found to work elsewhere, that we might be able to draw on to influence our own efforts towards integrating SDGs into our teaching. The shortlisted articles from the SLR methodology also provide us with an easy to access list of inspiration.
An important issue to note, from our reading of these texts, is the degree of effort or work needed to integrate SDGs into education in different manners. It is highlighted by some of the studies that work with curriculum development and adding new SDG inspired courses, that whilst this could be very important for improving sustainability education overall, this could be a much more consuming undertaking for teachers versus, for example integrating a workshop on SDGs into an existing course.
Our analysis also threw up a knowledge gap that we cannot address at this point. A substantial research stream is dedicated to the exploration of the connection between various disciplines and higher education programs to the achievement of SGGs, which in itself is a very relevant topic but is out of the scope of this study. If this knowledge gap is filled in further research, holistic knowledge can be synthesized on (1) understanding and communicating how certain disciplines, courses, and programs are connected to the achievement of SDGs, which is then to be complemented by (2) practical approaches and strategies on how to incorporate SDG framework into education. Notably, this project only looked into the second part/point. We did not explore the underlying rationales or science behind the SDGs themselves and how they connect to different disciplines. Another point the project threw up for us, which we don’t have an answer to currently but could research further in the future, is the issue of teaching SDGs to the teachers
and to what extent this is happening across universities worldwide. Thirdly, our approach, which identified a number of different cases and examples from universities around the world, cannot answer to what extent these efforts are overlapping. So, are students receiving different educations around SDGs which overlap, or not? And what is the coordination process across universities, departments, and faculties around this.
References
Albareda-Tiana, S., Vidal-Raméntol, S., & Fernández-Morilla, M. (2018). Implementing the sustainable development goals at University level. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 19(3), 473-497.
Altmeyer, S. (2021). Religious education for ecological sustainability: an initial reality check using the example of everyday decision-making. Journal of Religious Education, 69(1), 57-74.
Argento, D., Einarson, D., Mårtensson, L., Persson, C., Wendin, K., & Westergren, A. (2020). Integrating sustainability in higher education: a Swedish case. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 21(6), 1131-1150.
Bergmann, M., Schäpke, N., Marg, O., Stelzer, F., Lang, D. J., Bossert, M., … & Sußmann, N. (2021). Transdisciplinary sustainability research in real-world labs: success factors and methods for change. Sustainability Science, 16, 541-564.
Borrero, J.D. and Yousafzai, S. (2024), “Circular entrepreneurial ecosystems: a Quintuple Helix Model approach”, Management Decision, Vol. 62 No. 13, pp. 141-177. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2023-1361
Chiu, T. K., & Chai, C. S. (2020). Sustainable curriculum planning for artificial intelligence education: A self-determination theory perspective. Sustainability, 12(14), 5568.
Cook, D.J., Greengold, N.L., Ellrodt, A.G., and Weingarten, S.R. (1997), The relation between systematic reviews and practice guidelines, Annals of internal medicine, Vol. 127 No. 3, pp. 210- 216.
Hadgraft, R. G., & Kolmos, A. (2020). Emerging learning environments in engineering education. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 25(1), 3-16.
Hermann, R. R., & Bossle, M. B. (2020). Bringing an entrepreneurial focus to sustainability education: A teaching framework based on content analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 246, 119038.
Leal Filho, W., Frankenberger, F., Salvia, A. L., Azeiteiro, U., Alves, F., Castro, P., … & Avila, L. V. (2021). A framework for the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in university programmes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 299, 126915.
Norström, A. V., Cvitanovic, C., Löf, M. F., West, S., Wyborn, C., Balvanera, P., … & Österblom, H. (2020). Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nature sustainability, 3(3), 182-190.
Purcell, W. M., Henriksen, H., & Spengler, J. D. (2019). Universities as the engine of transformational sustainability toward delivering the sustainable development goals:“Living labs” for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 20(8), 1343- 1357.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., and Smart, P. (2003), Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review, British journal of management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 207-222.
Walsh, Z., Böhme, J., & Wamsler, C. (2021). Towards a relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice, and education. Ambio, 50, 74-84.
Zguir, M. F., Dubis, S., & Koç, M. (2021). Embedding Education for Sustainable Development
(ESD) and SDGs values in curriculum: A comparative review on Qatar, Singapore and New
Zealand. Journal of Cleaner Production, 319, 128534.
APPENDIX A: Analyzed Articles
1. García-Rico, L., Martínez-Muñoz, L.F., Santos-Pastor, M.L., et al. 2021. “Service-Learning in Physical Education Teacher Education: A Pedagogical Model towards Sustainable Development Goals.” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. doi:10.1108/IJSHE-09-2020-0325.
2. Mitarlis, A., Utiya, Y., Bertha. 2023. “The Integration of Green Chemistry Principles in Basic Chemistry Learning to Support Achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through Education.” Journal of Technology and Science Education. N/A.
3. Fang, J., O’Toole, J. 2019. “Embedding Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in an Undergraduate Business Capstone Subject Using an Experiential Learning Approach: A Qualitative Analysis.” The International Journal of Management Education. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100749.
4. Ehnberg, J. 2020. “Teaching the Sustainable Development Goals based on Smart Grids and Vice Versa.” Proceedings of the 2022 31st Annual Conference of the European Association for Education in Electrical and Information Engineering, EAEEIE 2022. doi:10.1109/EAEEIE54893.2022.9820505.
5. Mikhailova, E.A., Post, C.J., Nelson, D.G. 2024. “Integrating United Nations Sustainable Development Goals in Soil Science Education.” Soil Systems. doi:10.3390/soilsystems8010029.
6. Andreoni, V., Richard, A. 2020. “Exploring the Interconnected Nature of the Sustainable Development Goals: The 2030 SDGs Game as a Pedagogical Tool for Interdisciplinary Education.” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. doi:10.1108/IJSHE-11- 2022-0378.
7. Annan-Diab, F., Molinari, C. 2023. “Interdisciplinarity: Practical Approach to Advancing Education for Sustainability and for the Sustainable Development Goals.” International Journal of Management Education. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2017.03.006.
8. Nabila, N., Tapilouw, M.C., Sucahyo, S. 2024. “Biology Learning Innovation in the Water Pollution Sub Material Based on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Using the Problem- Based Learning.” Bio-Inoved: Jurnal Biologi-Inovasi Pendidikan. doi:10.20527/bino.v5i3.16718.
9. Avelar, A.B.A., Farina, M.C., da Silva Oliveira, K.D. 2024. “The Integration of the Sustainable Development Goals into Curricula, Research and Partnerships in Higher Education.” International Review of Education.
10. Ohta, R., Yata, A., Sano, C. 2023. “Students’ Learning on Sustainable Development Goals through Interactive Lectures and Fieldwork in Rural Communities: Grounded Theory Approach.” Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su14148678.
11. Ramirez-Mendoza, R.A., Morales-Menendez, R., Melchor-Martinez, E.M., et al. 2022. “Incorporating the Sustainable Development Goals in Engineering Education.” International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM). doi:10.1007/s12008-020-00661-0.
12. Sanchez-Carracedo, F., Segalas, J., Bueno, G., et al. 2023. “Tools for Embedding and Assessing Sustainable Development Goals in Engineering Education.” Sustainability.
13. Sprenger, S., Peter, C. 2022. “An Analysis of the Representation of Sustainable Development Goals in Textbook Maps and Atlases in Educational Contexts.” International Journal of Cartography. doi:10.1080/23729333.2019.1613615.
14. Saitua-Iribar, A., Corral-Lage, J., Pena-Miguel, N. 2022. “Improving Knowledge about the Sustainable Development Goals through a Collaborative Learning Methodology and Serious Game.” Sustainability.
15. Crespo, B., Míguez-Álvarez, C., Arce, M.E., et al. 2022. “The Sustainable Development Goals: An Experience on Higher Education.” Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su9081353.
16. Pan, A.-J., Cheng, B.-Y., Chou, P.-N., et al. 2023. “Using Augmented Reality Games to Support Sustainable Development Goal Learning among Young Students: A True-Experimental Study.” Library Hi Tech.
17. García-Puchades, W., Martos-García, D. 2023. “Politicizing the Learning of Sustainable Development Goals through Drama Performances and Agonistic Debates: A Teacher Training Experience from the Perspective of Radical Democracy.” Environmental Education Research. doi:10.1080/13504622.2022.2085248.
18. Cottafava, D., Cavaglià, G., Corazza, L. 2023. “Education of Sustainable Development Goals through Students’ Active Engagement: A Transformative Learning Experience.” Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal. doi:10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2018-0152.
19. Dean, B.A., Gibbons, B., Perkiss, S. 2020. “An Experiential Learning Activity for Integrating the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals into Business Education.” Social Business. doi:10.1362/204440818X15445231830058.
20. Llopis-Albert, C., Rubio, F., Mata-Amela, V., et al. 2023. “Project-Based Learning Methodology (PBL) for the Acquisition of Transversal Competences (TCs) and Integration of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Mechanical Engineering Subjects.” Multidisciplinary Journal for Education, Social and Technological Sciences. doi:10.4995/muse.2024.21101.
21. Klemow, K.M., Cid, C.R., Jablonski, L.M., et al. 2018. “How a Multidimensional Ecology Education Approach Can Enhance College Curricula to Implement the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.” Sustainable Earth Reviews. doi:10.1186/s42055-024-00082-x.
22. Addo, R., Koers, G., Timpson, W.M. 2024. “Teaching Sustainable Development Goals and Social Development: A Case Study Teaching Method.” Social Work Education. doi:10.1080/02615479.2022.2112168.
23. Collier, E., Odell, K.E., Rosenbloom, A. 2023. “Teaching Sustainable Development: An Approach to Rapidly Introducing the UN Sustainable Development Goals into an Undergraduate Business Curriculum.” Journal of Global Responsibility. doi:10.1108/JGR-11-2021-0100.
24. Ghazali, M., Musa, M., Yakob, N., et al. 2023. “Promoting Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in an Undergraduate Preservice Teachers’ Mathematics Course Using DeCoRe+ Methodology and Assessing Students’ SDG Understanding through Concept Mapping.” Asian Journal for Mathematics Education. doi:10.1177/27527263241231997.
25. Chen, P.-H. 2023. “Integrating Sustainable Development Goals into Project-Based Learning and Design Thinking for the Instructional Design of a Virtual Reality Course.” Engineering Proceedings. doi:10.3390/engproc2023055078.
26. Hübscher, C., Hensel-Börner, S., Henseler, J. 2017. “Social Marketing and Higher Education: Partnering to Achieve Sustainable Development Goals.” Journal of Social Marketing. doi:10.1108/JSOCM-10-2020-0214.
27. Weber, J.M., Lindenmeyer, C.P., Liò, P., et al. 2022. “Teaching Sustainability as Complex Systems Approach: A Sustainable Development Goals Workshop.” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. doi:10.1108/IJSHE-06-2020-0209.
28. Weybrecht, G. 2023. “How Management Education is Engaging Students in the Sustainable Development Goals.” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. doi:10.1108/IJSHE-10-2020-0419.
29. Kioupi, V., Voulvoulis, N. 2023. “Education for Sustainable Development as the Catalyst for Local Transitions Toward the Sustainable Development Goals.” Frontiers in Sustainability. doi:10.3389/frsus.2022.889904.
30. Mitchell, S., Swayne, H., Fulton, K.A., et al. 2022. “Infusing the UN Sustainable Development Goals into a Global Learning Initiative.” International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning. doi:10.14324/IJDEGL.12.2.02.
31. Larrondo Ureta, A., Meso Ayerdi, K., Peña Fernández, S., et al. 2021. “University Teaching Experiences with Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): Promoting Transversal Competencies in Online Journalism.” Applied Environmental Education and Communication. doi:10.1080/1533015
32. Vasconcelos, C., Silva, J., Calheiros, C.S.C., et al. 2023. “Teaching Sustainable Development Goals to University Students: A Cross-Country Case-Based Study.” Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su14031593.
33. Alvarez, I., Etxeberria, P., Alberdi, E., et al. 2019. “Sustainable Civil Engineering: Incorporating Sustainable Development Goals in Higher Education Curricula.” Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su13168967.
34. Manolis, E.N., Manoli, E.N. 2022. “Raising Awareness of the Sustainable Development Goals through Ecological Projects in Higher Education.” Journal of Cleaner Production. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123614.
35. Michalopoulou, E., Shallcross, D.E., Atkins, T., et al. 2019. “The End of Simple Problems: Repositioning Chemistry in Higher Education and Society Using a Systems Thinking Approach and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals as a Framework.” Journal of Chemical Education. doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00270.
36. Kopnina, H. 2024. “Teaching Sustainable Development Goals in The Netherlands: A Critical Approach.” Environmental Education Research. doi:10.1080/13504622.2017.1303819.
37. McLean, M., Phelps, C., Smith, J., et al. 2023. “An Authentic Learner-Centered Planetary Health Assignment: A Five-Year Evaluation of Student Choices to Address Sustainable Development Goal 13 (Climate Action).” Frontiers in Public Health. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.1049932.
38. Mammadova, A. 2022. “Sustainable Development Goals as Educational Tools to Raise Students’ Awareness of the Rural Development of Biosphere Reserves: A Case Study of Mount Hakusan Biosphere Reserve.” Business Strategy & Development. doi:10.1002/bsd2.88.
39. Voola, R., Carlson, J., Wyllie, J. 2022. “Transformational Learning Approach to Embedding UN Sustainable Development Goal 1: No Poverty, in Business Curricula.” Social Business. doi:10.1362/204440818X15445231830049.
Appendix B: Thematically Clustered Teaching Techniques for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
Project-Based Learning (PBL) Methodology:
Combining PBL with industry collaboration to understand SDGs in a business context (3)
Implementing PBL methodology to integrate SDGs and transversal competences in mechanical engineering (20)
Integrating PBL and design thinking using VR for SDG education (25)
Integrating SDGs into real-world civil engineering projects (33)
Creating web-only reports linked to SDGs through PBL (31)
Students working on sustainability projects and presenting to the community (34)
Interdisciplinary Learning:
Using the SDGs Game for interdisciplinary sustainability education (6)
Combining different perspectives of sustainability in education (7)
Employing collaborative learning methodologies for SDG education (14)
Engaging students across departments in global citizenship through SDG workshops (30)
Adopting an interdisciplinary approach to education for sustainable development (7)
Assessing master’s programs with an interdisciplinary case study approach for SDG integration (29)
Collaborative Learning and Critical Reflection:
Employing critical reflection for transformational learning on SDGs (39)
Utilizing artistic performances and debates to teach SDGs (17)
Engaging students in cooperative learning through web-based reports (31)
Analyzing student attitudes and career choices post SDG course (10)
Innovative Learning Tools:
Improving learning outcomes with 360° video learning media and water purification tools (8)
Comparing augmented reality and traditional board games for SDG learning (16)
Developing transversal competences through multimedia journalism projects (40)
Creating a free online course (MOOC) for teaching sustainability (35)
Using interactive learning platforms like Kahoot! and PollEverywhere for workshops (30)
Integrating SDGs into Curricula:
Incorporating SDGs into soil science curriculum (5)
Embedding and assessing SDGs in engineering education (11, 12)
Developing SDG-focused mathematics modules using DeCoRe+ methodology (24)
Reviewing and mapping curricula to align with SDGs (29)
Creative and integrated approaches to curriculum development for sustainability (35)
Analyzing the global integration of SDGs in higher education (9)
Meta-review of university reports on SDG activities (28)
Real-World Case Studies:
Using case studies to teach SDGs in social development education (22)
Case-based teaching to enhance SDG knowledge (32)
Focusing on real-world civil engineering problems from the SDG perspective (33)
Practical and Field-Based Learning:
Developing sustainability-oriented products as final projects (37)
Conducting field practice and coursework in rural universities (26)
Field trips featuring sustainability-oriented community service activities (38)
Employing project-based learning for web-based reports linked to SDGs (31)
Experiential learning on CSR practices and SDGs through real-world organizations (19)
Conducting workshops for sustainable development leadership training (18)
Traditional Classroom Teaching Methods:
Lectures and in-class discussions to critically evaluate SDGs (36)
Combining business cases, literature, and data analysis for SDG education (23)
Reflecting on student attitudes and career choices post SDG course (10)
Combining 4DEE framework and SDGs in ecological education (21)
Figure 1: Example of output from SDG impact assessment tool (Wexsus). The wicked problem in this
example is climate change, and the proposed example solution is to ban fossil fuels in all parts of
society. In the assessment tool, the students will go through each of the SDG goals 1-17 and motivate
if the impact on this specific goal is positive, negative, no impact or more knowledge needed. Each
impact will also include a short motivation, which will be shown in a longer report.
Teaching for and about sustainability is more than teaching the subject matter. New students often arrive at university with very black-and-white thinking; ideas are either right or wrong (Perry, 1970). When exposed to diverging ideas and opinions during their university education and the complexities of the issues that they study, this black-and-white perspective becomes more “grey”, and they can begin to understand the multiplicity of perspectives. However, to achieve this understanding, they need to develop other skills to allow them to appreciate the complexities, for example, reflection, analysis, and metacognition. For students to understand and work with sustainability challenges, both during their university education and further into their professional careers, they require a set of skills that allow them to appreciate the complexity and multiplicity of sustainability.
As teachers, incorporating or teaching sustainability is often a challenge for several reasons, for example not being an expert in the field of sustainability, not having the tools to adequately raise difficult and sometimes contested issues of sustainability, or not having the resources or organizational structure that may be required to infuse sustainability in the curriculum (Earle, 2021). Therefore, this project aims to give teachers at the university level some strategies and tools that can be used to help students develop a holistic approach to sustainability. This report will specifically focus on cases as a pedagogical tool to accomplish this.
A holistic approach to problem-solving considers the entire picture of the problem, where each change made to one part can directly affect all parts of the problem in different ways. To embrace sustainability, students should be provided with a holistic approach emphasizing the interdependence of environmental, social, and economic aspects of sustainability and their impact on the decision-making process. However, to view problems and solutions within the context of the entire system, students need a diverse set of skills and knowledge from various disciplines. The primary aim when teaching sustainability, therefore, is not to impart knowledge to students, but to equip them with the skills needed to engage with sustainability effectively in the future. So what competencies are necessary for sustainability education?
Sustainability problems cannot be addressed within one field alone, nor can solutions to sustainability problems be developed in isolation from other fields. Therefore, it is also important for students to develop communication and collaboration skills, learn to work in diverse teams and to listen and understand different perspectives, and how to communicate ideas clearly to those outside one’s discipline (Wiek, 2011). This also calls for interdisciplinary knowledge, in order to approach sustainability challenges in a multi-perspective and holistic manner. Also, intradisciplinary knowledge is important, to understand what aspects of a problem can be addressed within one’s discipline, and which aspects lie outside the bounds of the field and require collaboration (Barth, 2014).
Further, higher education for sustainability ought to ensure that students can consider ethical principles and values when addressing sustainability challenges including equity, justice, and respect for human rights and the environment. This is also relevant for the student’s ability to understand varying perspectives and experiences of diverse communities and practices, which is crucial for recognising the social dimension of sustainability and promoting inclusivity and equity (Samuelsson, 2022). Flexibility in handling uncertainty and change, adapting strategies to evolving sustainability challenges and opportunities is another important skill to develop. Teachers ought to promote self-regulated learning, meaning that students are metacognitively, motivationally and behaviourally active participants in their own learning process which, in addition to being an important skill for sustainability education, is important for higher education in general (Steiner, 2006; Sprain, 2012).
Finally, to understand and analyse different dimensions of sustainability (environmental, social and economic), and the interconnections between these dimensions, students need to develop systems thinking (Sprain, 2012; Wiek, 2011). In the analysis of sustainability problems, it is also necessary to develop critical thinking skills, which allows students to question their own assumptions and to evaluate evidence to develop well-informed opinions and solutions to sustainability problems. To develop these solutions, problem-solving and innovation skills are important, which paired with systems thinking and critical thinking enable students to consider the long-term implications of solutions, as well as teaching them to consider if there may be any unintended consequences of said solution (Barth 2014).
Case studies as a tool to teach sustainability
Cases as a pedagogical tool are considered to bring together and develop many of the previously listed skills that students ought to develop to handle the complexities of sustainable development (Steiner, 2006; Sprain, 2012). Cases are considered useful for uncertain or ill-defined problems (i.e. sustainability problems) as this method fosters flexibility, problem solving and critical thinking. A problem where both initial state and target are known usually leads to reproductive thinking and application of already known methods or knowledge – thus not developing above-mentioned skills. In addition, cases are a form of active learning, where the students take charge of their own learning process, developing the skill of self-regulated learning.
There are however some challenges with and critiques against case-based approaches in sustainability education. Cases require the students to have some level of comfort of confidence to deal with complex matters where multiple perspectives and perhaps emotions are present. If not, cases could cause some level of uncertainty with students. Another critique is that whilst cases can help students to see linkages between problems, behaviours and technology, they only provide contextual thinking but do not develop abilities to change the contexts or behaviours that cause the problem. Students may also look for solutions to problems within the boundaries of current paradigms and contexts. However, it is still argued that when used correctly, cases are useful in sustainability teaching (Georgallis, 2022).
How a case is defined and what is considered a case can vary across disciplines, and the way they are implemented and used in higher education also varies depending on the subject, objective, and education level of the students (e.g. first-year students or final-year students, introduction course or advanced course). There is a range of different types of cases that can be tailored to various teaching situations and needs. Lundberg et al. (2001) denote three different classifications depending on the objective of the teaching situation; Cases where the objectives are focused on acquiring, differentiating, and using ideas and information; cases where the objective is focused on issue identification and differentiation; and cases where the objectives are focused on formulation and implementation. Each of these three types of case studies involves different case objectives which can be related to the sets of skills necessary for sustainability education.
Cases can therefore be designed and tailored to a variation of teaching situations depending on the objective of the case and teaching scenario and with consideration to what competencies are targeted. Cases as a teaching method need to be specifically related to a certain sustainability problem or issue, but certainly can be, seeing as the teaching method helps develop competencies that are necessary for sustainability education. Determining the objectives of the case, defining the desired learning outcomes, and identifying the key competencies to focus on are good starting points when choosing the type of case to implement in teaching.
Wicked problems
A “wicked problem” is a term coined by social scientists Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber (Rittel, 1973) to describe complex, multifaceted issues that defy straightforward solutions. A “tame” problem, as defined in the article, is a problem that has a clear problem definition, and can be addressed using conventional problem-solving methods. In contrast, wicked problems are highly complex, often involving numerous interconnected factors and stakeholders. There is often uncertainty on the problem definition, underlying causes, and potential solutions to the problem due to incomplete or conflicting information (Blok, 2015). This makes wicked problems difficult to understand comprehensively; it is often hard to find a simple definition of a wicked problem, and analysis of them is open to interpretation. They are often dynamic, as they evolve over time and can manifest differently in different contexts, which requires flexible and adaptive responses. One major characterization is that there is no definitive solution to a wicked problem. Instead, it requires ongoing interventions and involves trade-offs among competing objectives.
Sustainable development fulfills many of the requirements of a wicked problem and has been defined as such in several research papers (see e.g., Blok, 2015; Earle, 2021; Wright, 2020). Sustainable development often involves complex systems without simple solutions and includes many different stakeholders with different interests. Often, proposed solutions to a problem within sustainability can have both negative and positive impact on different parts of society. Examples of wicked problems within sustainable development goals include climate change, poverty, inequality, public health crises, etc. Sustainability cannot be fully described without taking a holistic approach, where both the ecological, social and economic dimensions need to be considered together to reach an understanding of the complexity of the issue (Borg, 2021).
Addressing wicked problems requires innovative thinking, collaboration across disciplines and sectors, stakeholder engagement, and a willingness to experiment and learn from failures. Discussing wicked problems can be an excellent way to engage students in critical thinking and problem-solving within the context of sustainability.
Games
Typically, teaching sustainability courses at the university level consists of a sequence of lectures introducing fundamental sustainability concepts followed by case and project-based studies where the students apply theoretical knowledge to develop more sustainable products or processes within specific technological and life-cycle contexts (Hanning, 2012; Thürer, 2018; Cruickshank, 2012). However, this approach has faced criticism for being overly theoretical and technology-centric, missing the social dimensions of sustainability that impact practical design processes (Hanning, 2012). Games have emerged as valuable tools for bridging the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-world problems (Dieleman, 2006; Dallaqua, 2024; Tan, 2023). Thus, the games offer experiential learning opportunities and create shared experiences that facilitate mutual understanding (McConville, 2017; Susi, 2007). Selecting the appropriate game type for the target student groups is crucial to achieving specific course learning outcomes (Dieleman, 2006; Plass, 2015).
Three case-based strategies for teaching sustainability
Ironically, the question of how to teach sustainability to students can itself be defined as a wicked problem (Earle, 2021). Many of the subjects taught at university have a simple problem statement, and the teaching is built around finding a solution. In contrast, sustainable development is a wicked problem in part because there is not a clear problem definition about sustainable development, (Blok, 2015), and the lack of a clear problem definition is one of the things that makes it difficult to teach sustainability (Kanon, 2023). In this section, we will discuss three types of case studies for teaching sustainability. Each case employs a different strategy to achieve the goal, which is to encourage the students to think holistically about sustainability. The cases are structured to be able to run as workshops, but elements of each case can be incorporated into all teaching to integrate sustainability into the rest of the course material. Depending on the student group and the teaching situation, each of the cases has different advantages.
The starting part of each workshop should be to introduce the students to sustainability. Depending on the level of the students, this part can be structured differently. For first year students who are new to the concept and the program, this introduction can be a slightly longer lecture on the history of sustainability, with the aim to introduce the sustainability goals, discuss the complexity of sustainability and showcase the three dimensions (economic, social and ecological) of sustainability. It is important involve the students in the discussion from the start of the introduction lecture, since sustainability is not a topic where the teacher has the “right” answers, but instead a topic where the discussion and ideas the students bring with them is a central part of the teaching (Earle, 2021). For students who are already familiar with sustainability as a topic, the introduction part of the workshop lecture can instead be a shorter segment, where the students get together in smaller groups to discuss what they already know about sustainability. A useful tool here is to use a virtual or physical whiteboard and let the students write their most important ideas about sustainability, and let this form the basis of the topics that the rest of the workshop will be built on.
After the introduction, the workshop can progress using one of the three cases described here. Each case strategy has advantages or disadvantages depending on the background or interests of the students. Of course, even if one case has a focus on one skill specifically, all cases will help develop several skills and tools necessary to discuss and understand sustainability.
Prediction cases: to teach flexibility when discussing sustainability.
Wicked problems: to help the students develop critical thinking around sustainability.
Games: to develop social skills and communication which can be used to discuss sustainability.
Case A: Prediction cases – focus flexibility
Prediction cases provide the students with information in a structured format – in a series, but it is also the students’ task to seek out further information to be able to make predictions about a future scenario. This format of case studies can be tailored to suit many teaching contexts and to the students’ educational levels.
The students’ assignment is to make a series of predictions about how a situation will unfold or an actor’s actions, the outcome of the actions, and/or potential wider effects of said actions, using both the information provided in a series and seeking out relevant information about context, behaviors and other factors. Students will most likely rely on conceptual and theoretical models already known to them in predictive cases – but this format develops systems and critical thinking skills by engaging the students in reflection on how a situation or one actor is embedded in their context and consideration for wider effects of an action or happening.
As mentioned, predictive cases provide information to students in a series. First, students are presented with Part 1 – a scenario and information about the scenario from which they make a prediction as described above. When their predictions have been made, students are presented with Part 2 – the “most likely” prediction and further information about this new scenario. Before starting to work with the scenario for Part 2, a discussion on the students’ prediction accuracy, why they were correct or close to correct or why not, wraps up Part 1. These discussions are an important part of predictive cases as it helps students understand why their predictions were accurate or not, what information was overlooked or what additional information would have been necessary to make an accurate prediction. There is then the opportunity to continue with the format to Part 3, 4 and so on, depending on the case design and objectives, size of student groups or time allocated for the case. Being presented with new or altered scenarios in each step of the case also develops problem-solving skills and flexibility.
Prediction cases are adaptable to many teaching situations, depending on available resources and the desired learning outcome. In terms of preparation, one can choose to provide the students with more or less information in each part of the case, requiring them to seek out information individually to varying degrees. Also, it is possible to adapt how many scenarios the students are presented with and make predictions about depending on the resources available to prepare these. Part 1-3 are perhaps the minimum to be able to call it a series, however there is opportunity to expand these and increase the number of scenarios and predictions.
Prediction cases can also be used as a one-time occurrence in a course or teaching scenario – where students have between 10-30 mins per part to make predictions. They can also be designed as a reoccurring happening during a course, where students are presented with Part 1 during a lecture and work with Part 1 in groups over the course of a few days before the next scheduled teaching occasion, where they would engage in discussion and then be presented with Part 2.
The scenarios that students are presented with can either be related to sustainability problems connected to the subject, which aids in developing intradisciplinary sustainability knowledge. The cases can also be related to course or profession-specific challenges, as the format still develops sustainability competencies.
Case B: Wicked problems – focus critical thinking
This section describes a case intended to use in a class structure for getting students engaged in discussing wicked problems related to sustainability. This approach can be useful both for introducing students to the complex discussions on sustainability, and to help develop better critical thinking and problem-solving skills.
Unless the students are already familiar with the concept, the first step should be to introduce the concept of a “wicked problem”, using the definitions mentioned in e.g. (Rittel, 1972), as well as the history of the term “wicked problem” and its utilization in discussions and research on sustainability. Next, the students should be encouraged to discuss in groups and think of as many wicked problems as they can. These scenarios can serve as starting points for discussions on the interconnected nature of sustainability challenges and the need for holistic, interdisciplinary approaches to address them effectively. To keep the focus towards sustainability, the students should also connect each wicked problem they come up with, directly or indirectly, to one or more of the SDGs. In case the students are having problems getting started on discussions of wicked problems, the teacher can have a few examples of intriguing problems prepared. Ideally, the examples of wicked problems should be tailored to the interests of the students and the subject matter that they are studying.
The goal of the workshop is to emphasize the complexities around wicked problems: how difficult they are to solve, and how any solution can have both positive and negative impacts if seen from the perspective of different stakeholders (Borg & Gericke, 2021). One way to achieve this is to assign each group of students to discuss a specific wicked problem. To emphasize the complexity, students can be asked to discuss which sectors of society are impacted by this problem, which of the SDGs the problem is most strongly affecting, and how many different stakeholders and interests would be involved when discussing potential solutions to the problem. To emphasize critical thinking when attempting to analyse solutions to wicked problems, the students can be encouraged to come up with a proposed solution(s) to their wicked problem, and then tasked to evaluate their solution by what impact this action will have on different stakeholders and parts of society.
The online SDG impact assessment tool developed by West Sweden Nexus for Sustainable Development (Wexsus) can be used as a tool for evaluating the solutions to wicked problems in relation to the 17 SDGs. The tool is available free online, and its goal is to help students visualize the impact on the SDGs from proposed solutions to sustainability problems. For each of the goals, the students will write a short motivation for how the goal is impacted and if they judge the impact positive or negative. In some cases, the impact is direct, while for others, the impact can be indirect. Figure 1 below shows how the impact analysis is displayed, and the motivations will be shown in a longer report.
Figure 1: Example of output from SDG impact assessment tool (Wexsus). The wicked problem in this example is climate change, and the proposed example solution is to ban fossil fuels in all parts of society. In the assessment tool, the students will go through each of the SDG goals 1-17 and motivate if the impact on this specific goal is positive, negative, no impact or more knowledge needed. Each impact will also include a short motivation, which will be shown in a longer report.
By focusing the discussion on the intended and unintended impacts that can be caused by trying to solve a wicked problem, the discussion will encourage a critical thinking and holistic approach where all the complexities and impacts of a wicked problem will be evaluated. In the example in Figure 1, a ban on fossil fuels is a straightforward way to solve climate change (SDG 13) but will simultaneously have e.g. a direct negative impact on the food transports around the world, leading to worldwide hunger (SDG 3). Whatever the problem discussed, it should quickly become clear to the students that even if a solution has a clear positive impact on one goal, it will often directly or indirectly have a negative impact on the other goals or on different parts of society. This discussion will help the students develop problem-solving skills and critical thinking and teach them how to reflect on the complexities of sustainability issues, as well as fostering collaboration by working in a group to discuss the problems and solutions.
Case C: Gaming – focus social aspect and communication
This section discusses the implementation of two specific games designed to teach sustainability to students at various educational levels. Both games aim to emphasize the complexity of sustainability issues and provide students with real-world sustainability challenges. The successful realization of the game requires thorough preparation and enough time allocated to game instructions and debriefing section (Dieleman, 2006). The game begins with an introduction, during which students receive step-by-step instructions on the game rules and activities. This introduction may include a demonstration by the instructors to ensure all participants understand their roles and the context of the game. After playing the game, students participate in a debriefing session where they analyze and discuss their own decisions, the decisions made by other players, and the outcomes of these actions. This session thus provides a collaborative learning environment where the students reflect on differing perceptions and personal assumptions. It also encourages them to consider alternative strategies based on the ideas and experiences shared by the players.
Simulation games
In simulation games, players engage with and influence the dynamic of complex systems, yet they are unable to fully control the outcomes of their interventions (Dieleman, 2006). Within the simulation, the students can recreate diverse scenarios and experience the consequences of their decisions on social, economic, and political system dynamics (Meya, 2018). The game provides an opportunity for participants to self-analysis, and evaluate their attitudes, values, and decision-making processes. It enables them to uncover underlying assumptions that may not be universally held, highlighting the constraints and potential for impact within the system (Jones, 2015). It also illustrates the limitations and possibilities to influence the system. The game also provides a shared experience for the participants through conducting the debriefing discussion about the consequent insights. This process encourages the development of empathy and negotiation skills (Liu, 2021).
Cruickshank and Fenner detailed the adaptation of the modified version of Fishbanks (Meadows, 1989) game in the master’s program “Engineering for Sustainable Development” at Cambridge University (Cruickshank, 2012). This game simulates the operations of fishing boats of various sizes as they compete to maximize their catches. The participants should make decisions on how to deploy the boats without complete information about the overall size of the diminishing fish reflecting the uncertainty of real-world scenarios and introducing the concept of environmental limits and the reality of the ‘tragedy of the commons. This is a good example of a simulation game related to sustainability.
Role – playing games
In role-playing games, the participants take on the roles of different stakeholders (Company leaders, government officials, general public) and experience the process of making decisions through the lens of sustainability in real-world scenarios (Duchatelet, 2019). This game introduces the students to the interconnectivity of the different stakeholders and helps them to understand different stakeholder perspectives, values, attitudes and behavior, and social dynamics affecting technology choice (Camargo, 2007).
One of the effective implementations of the role-playing game in learning sustainable development is related to sustainable water and sanitation management within civil engineering at Chalmers University of Technology (McConville, 2017). The game aimed to highlight the complex relationships between different stakeholders through role-playing and negotiation. The students are divided into groups (up to 6 students per group), and each group takes the role of a local stakeholder and represents their interests during the game. The objective is to negotiate a project outline while each stakeholder aims to maximize their project elements in their favor, which leads to potential conflicts among players. The player with the most points wins. In the course evaluation, the game was mentioned as a useful or very useful component for reaching the learning goals and as important to preserve for the following year. The authors stressed the preparation step before the game is crucial to support the role-play and the following discussion, good time planning as it may take time for the student to adapt their roles, and the clarification of the rules and instruction.
Conclusion
In summary, there are many ways to teach students about sustainability, and there is no absolute answer for the “right” way. The context where teaching for and about sustainability is an important point for reflection when choosing the optimal teaching strategy. The structure of higher education –departments, different campuses and university systems – complicate the collaboration and cross-disciplinary ways of working needed for sustainability teaching. For students to develop skills necessary to address sustainability challenges, these skills need to be developed beyond the boundaries of a certain course. Case-based approaches can help in achieving this, as cases make students familiar with complexity, and uncertainty, and can develop the ability to generate new ideas and strategies from many perspectives. However, for the best outcome, a case-based approach calls for case groups to be diverse and modelled on interdisciplinary research groups that together work to address sustainability challenges. This would further develop students’ interpersonal competence and familiarity with working across diverse contexts – skills that will be required in their future profession.
References
(Barth, 2014) Barth, M. (2014). Implementing Sustainability in Higher Education: Learning in an age of transformation (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi-org.ludwig.lub.lu.se/10.4324/9780203488355
(Blok, 2015) Blok, V., Gremmen, B., & Wesselink, R. (2015). Dealing with the Wicked Problem of Sustainability: The Role of Individual Virtuous Competence. Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 34(3), 297–327.
(Borg, 2021) Borg, F. & Gericke, N. (2021). Local and Global Aspects: Teaching Social Sustainability in Swedish Preschools. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 13(7), 3838–. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073838
(Camargo, 2007) Camargo, M. E., Pedro R. J., Ducrot, R. (2007). Role-playing games for capacity building in water and land management: Some Brazilian experiences. Simulation & Gaming, 38, 472-93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878107300672
(Cruickshank, 2012) Cruickshank, H., and Fenner. R. (2012). Exploring key sustainable development themes through learning activities. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 13, 249-62. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676371211242562
(Dallaqua, 2024) Dallaqua, M. F., Nunes, B., and Carvalho. M. M. (2024). Serious games research streams for social change: Critical review and framing. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55, 460-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13404
(Dieleman, 2006) Dieleman, H., and Huisingh. D. (2006). Games by which to learn and teach about sustainable development: exploring the relevance of games and experiential learning for sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 837-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.031
(Duchatelet, 2019) Duchatelet, D., Gijbels, D., Bursens, P., Donche, V., and Spooren. P. (2019). Looking at role-play simulations of political decision-making in higher educationthrough a contextual lens: A state-of-the-art. Educational Research Review, 27, 126-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.03.002
(Earle, 2021) Earle, A. G., & Leyva-de la Hiz, D. I. (2021). The wicked problem of teaching about wicked problems: Design thinking and emerging technologies in sustainability education. Management Learning, 52(5), 581–603. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507620974857
(Georgallis, 2022) Georgallis, P. and Bruijn, K. (2022). Sustainability teaching using case-based debates. Journal of International Education in Business. 15(1), 147-163
(Hanning, 2012) Hanning, A., Abelsson, A. P., Lundqvist, U., and Svanström. M. (2012). Are we educating engineers for sustainability? International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 13, 305-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14676371211242607
(Jones, 2015) Jones, R., and Bursens. P. (2015). The effects of active learning environments: how simulations trigger affective learning. European Political Science, 14, 254-65. https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2015.22
(Kanon, 2023) Kanon, M. & Andersson, T. (2023). Working on connective professionalism: What cross-sector strategists in Swedish public organizations do to develop connectivity in addressing ‘wicked’ policy problems. Journal of Professions and Organization. Epub ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joac020
(Liu, 2021) Liu, C., and Côté. R. (2021). Teaching Industrial Ecology to Undergraduate Students: Lessons Learned. Sustainability, 13, 10491. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910491
(Lundberg, 2001) Lundberg, C. C., Rainsford, P., Shay, J. P., and Young, C. A. (2001). Case Writing Reconsidered. Journal of Management Education, 25(4), 450-463. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290102500409
(McConville, 2017) McConville, J. R., Rauch, S., Helgegren, I., and Kain. J.-H. (2017). Using role-playing games to broaden engineering education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 18, 594-607. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-08-2015-0146
(Meadows, 1989) Meadows, D., Fiddaman, T., and Shannon. D. (1989). ‘Fish banks’, Institute for Policy and Social Science Research. University of New Hampshire, Durham. NH 03824
(Meya, 2018) Meya, J. N., and Eisenack. K. (2018). Effectiveness of gaming for communicating and teaching climate change. Climatic Change, 149, 319-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2254-7
(Perry, 1970) Perry, W. G., Jr. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. ISBN: 978-0-787-94118-5.
(Plass, 2015) Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., and Kinzer. C. K. (2015). Foundations of Game-Based Learning. Educational Psychologist, 50, 258-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533
(Rittel, 1973) Rittel, H. W. J., Webber, M.M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
(Samuelsson,2022) Samuelsson, L., Lindström, N. (2022). Ethics Teaching in Education for Sustainable Development, Athens Journal of Education, 9(2): 211-224. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.9-2-2
(Sprain, 2012) Sprain, L., Timpson, W. M. (2012). Pedagogy for sustainability science: Case-based approaches for interdisciplinary instruction. Environmental Communication, 6(4), 532-550–550. https://doi-org.ludwig.lub.lu.se/10.1080/17524032.2012.714394
(Steiner, 2006) Steiner, G., Posch, A. (2006). Higher education for sustainability by means of transdisciplinary case studies: an innovative approach for solving complex, real-world problems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(9), 877–890. https://doi-org.ludwig.lub.lu.se/10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.054
(Susi, 2007) Susi, T., Johannesson, M., and Backlund. P. (2007). Serious games: An overview. Technical Report HS- IKI -TR-07-001.
(Tan, 2023) Tan, C. K. W., and Nurul-Asna. H. (2023). Serious games for environmental education. Integrative Conservation, 2, 19-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/inc3.18
(Thürer, 2018) Thürer, M., Tomašević, I., Stevenson, M. Qu, T., Huisingh, D. (2018). A systematic review of the literature on integrating sustainability into engineering curricula. Journal of Cleaner Production, 181, 608-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.130
(Wals, 2002) Wals, A. E. J., and Jickling, B. (2002). “Sustainability” in higher education: From doublethink and newspeak to critical thinking and meaningful learning. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3(3), 221-232–232. https://doi-org.ludwig.lub.lu.se/10.1108/14676370210434688
(Wiek, 2011) Wiek, A., Withycombe, L., and Redman, C. L. (2011). Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development. Sustainability Science, 6(2), 203–218. https://doi-org.ludwig.lub.lu.se/10.1007/s11625-011-0132-6
(Wright, 2020) Wright, M. F., & Monsour, F. A. (2020). Sustainability Education Assessments in Teacher Education: Addressing “Wicked Problems” in a Postmodern World. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2020(161), 155–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20379
Figure 1. Aerosol related courses taught at the Departments of Physics, and Aerosol and Ergonomics for each study period
(”läsperiod”, LP). Environmental Monitoring (FKFN35), Aerosol Technology (MAMF55), Aerosol Technology Project
(MAMN20), Air, Particles and Health (MAMN75), Atmospheric Physics and Chemistry (FKFN45).
Air pollution in the form of aerosol particles has a controlling effect on several of our major societal and environmental challenges. Exposure to air pollution is the largest environmental health risk factor in Europe, including ambient, indoor and workplace exposure. Aerosol particles in the atmosphere are furthermore one of the major uncertainties when predicting future climate scenarios. Aerosols are also important as they have a controlling impact on disease transmission as demonstrated by the recent pandemic.
The engineers educated at LTH will develop the green technologies of the future (for example within transport and energy, circular materials and the built environment) and need to understand the overall sustainability aspects of the new technologies they develop. They also need to understand different viewpoints, interests, and consequences of the technologies. Theories and tasks on basic physics, chemistry and measurement of aerosols can be classified as “tame” problems using the terminology introduced by Rittel and Webber (1973). Tame problems can be taught with traditional methods used in natural science and engineering. However, societal challenges and problems differ substantially, and the solutions are often not “right or wrong” but “better or worse”, making traditional educational approaches less effective. These types of problems can be considered “wicked” problems (Rittel and Webber, 1973).
Using wicked problems in teaching and learning presents challenges due to their complex, interconnected nature and lack of clear-cut solutions and interconnection with other problems/issues (Lönngren, 2021). According to Conklin (2006), wicked problems are inherently different from ordinary problems because they have no definitive formulation and no true stopping rule. Therefore, in our opinion, using wicked problems in teaching as a basis for discussions presents an interesting tool to emphasize the complexity of real-world sustainability challenges. To cite Laurence J. Peter “Some problems are so complex that you have to be highly intelligent and well informed just to be undecided about them.” However, criticism has arisen regarding the treatment of complex problems as ‘wicked,’ as it can lead to the notion that ‘all is relative,’ resulting in indecision. This, in turn, often neglects the practical aspects for those who need to address and act on these complex issues (Noordegraaf et al., 2019). The use of the term “wicked problems” in sustainability literature was recently reviewed (Lönngren and van Poeck, 2021). It was found that the concept is not always consistently applied and authors in the literature ascribe many different meanings to the concept.
Wicked problems are typically addressed by different interest groups (stakeholders) with different, often conflicting, viewpoints. Hence, possible solutions require compromises and trade-offs. To address these issues already in the education of the next generation of engineers, Savin-Baden (2000) suggests embedding problem-based learning (PBL) in curricula, which encourages students to engage with real-world problems through critical thinking and collaborative learning. PBL has been shown to promote deeper understanding, increase student motivation and engagement and promote teamwork and collaboration. However, the problem formulations are often quite open, where students set up their own learning goals and it often lack the element of different conflicting viewpoints that may be needed to contribute to solve our major complex societal challenges.
The “wicked problem” approach has been used in teaching for some time. Positive aspects of such approach include active student participation, development of critical thinking, transdisciplinary learning, student-centered learning (through discussions, shaping the learning process, co-creation), situated learning (real-world context). Some challenges with using wicked problems in teaching have also been described for example frustration and stress from students who expect to be given a straightforward answer or solution to a problem. Such stress is not productive for the learing process (Cilliers et al. 2010) and may lead to students not daring to engage in discussions, not knowing how to approach the problem and not knowing what is expected from them. It is therefore important to help the students to reduce their stress and explain to them how they should approach the problem, without loosing the complexity in the problem itself (Lönngren 2021). It has been suggested to use a hopeful way to teach and learn about unwieldy and overwhelming issues that many of today’s undergraduates will inevitably be expected to confront in the future (Sharp et al. 2021).
The course “Sustainable development in Nano-Perspectives” at the engineering nanoscience program at LTH in Lund was initiated with a large degree of student involvement (Lönngren et al. 2010). The course includes a “matrix” approach with stakeholder groups and interdisciplinary groups. More recently, Lönngren (2021) describes design principles to formulate wicked problems for engineering and natural science education. Her recommendation is to start with a problem that engages the students and choose interest groups and stakeholders that make it possible to discuss the problem from different perspectives. Conflicts of interest between the groups are clearly marked in the problem formulations. At least one perspective and argument is included for each interest group. Most importantly, it is stressed to formulate a concrete context, a clear goal and a receiver for the task to reduce student’s stress and to get them to focus on the problem. It is further recommended not to formulate the right answer as yes or no and not recommended to give the students a set of solutions to choose from, as there is a risk that the students relatively fast decide for one solution and that there is nothing more to discuss (Dobson & Tomkinson, 2012). It is better to keep the potential solutions open so that the students get the chance to discuss the problem without preconceived notions and to come up with their own “solutions”.
There is a series of courses in aerosol science that we teach (Figure 1). The courses provide students the opportunity to gain extensive expertise in the field and to connect air pollution problems to their expertise at different engineering programs at LTH. Aerosol sciences are relevant for several of the SDGs as further elaborated in section 4 in this report. We as teachers always touch upon sustainability issues throughout these courses, even though sustainability itself is seldom the main character in our teaching activities/sessions.
Figure 1. Aerosol related courses taught at the Departments of Physics, and Aerosol and Ergonomics for each study period (”läsperiod”, LP). Environmental Monitoring (FKFN35), Aerosol Technology (MAMF55), Aerosol Technology Project (MAMN20), Air, Particles and Health (MAMN75), Atmospheric Physics and Chemistry (FKFN45).
In this work we explore if and how we can use “wicked problems” in teaching for sustainability in Aerosol education at LTH. Within this overarching goal we plan specifically to a) explore different approaches to introduce wicked problems in our courses and b) create portfolio of wicked problems in four different aerosol related areas put in a larger sustainability perspective.
We plan to introduce wicked problems in different courses taught by us as a means of fostering discussions among the students, helping them to engage and leading to active participation. This will in turn also help students to develop the skills needed to meet real-life challenges related to sustainable development and to contribute to solve complex problems such as air pollution, climate, spread of infectious deceases, and circular economy.
Introducing sustainability considerations throughout the course(s)
We aim to include the sustainability aspects and the concept of using wicked problems in the course syllabus and considered when aligning learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities and assessment/examination through constructive alignment (Biggs,1996). The students will be introduced to the wicked problem methodology already at the intro-meeting of the course, provided with experience from teachers and researchers who work with sustainability, along with examples on how the wicked problem approach can be applied to non-tame problems in the air pollution field. Also, the involved teachers shall be introduced to the concepts at an early stage – preferably during the planning of the course.
The following are examples to introduce sustainability throughout the course.
Discussions, of a topic and wicked problem defined by the teacher, during an ordinary lecture (for example 15-20 min group discussions or dedicated discussion sessions (seminars) lasting 1-2h). This is further elaborated in section 3 below.
Require that the students integrate sustainability considerations in the course project work, which will form part of the grade from the project. The projects are preferably based on wicked problems, enabling in-depth sustainability-oriented discussions in project reports and oral presentations.
Assessment of sustainability considerations at written and oral exams (learning outcome), where questions are designed to focus on sustainability issues in addition to topic specific (mono-disciplinary) knowledge and methods.
Since many of the aerosol courses involve several lecturers with different expertice, the course coordinators must ensure that all teachers in given courses are aware of the plans and link/emphasize sustainability issues in their lectures using the “wicked problem approach”. The students are expected to take leading roles in the teaching practice, but teachers must overview the discussions to ensure that the discussions are on-topic and to help students to advance if they are stuck to avoid the frustration that may arise if not.
How to conduct the discussions – practical approach
Wicked problems typically lack clear-cut solutions and involve multiple stakeholders with various interests and viewpoints. Our idea is to utilize this complexity to facilitate sustainability consideration discussions where students analyze information, consider diverse viewpoints, think critically, gain a holistic approach, and also train in negotiations, finding common grounds, reaching compromises, and agreeing on solutions with the least negative consequences (they can foresee). We see that this would suit teaching aerosol science in a very good way and widen the scope of education when creating discussion activities that allow students to reflect on their new gained knowledge.
Below we list four examples of wicked problems (portfolio of cases), within each author’s expertise, that can be used as basis for discussions. Depending on the subject, students’ knowledge of the subjects and their skills in team discussions, these can be introduced gradually – also depending on the number of lectures allocated to the specific topic (which varies between courses and topics):
Short discussions focused on finding arguments for pre-defined stakeholder representatives. A thorough background info to be given by the teacher followed by splitting the students into smaller groups of mixed pre-defined and assigned stakeholder representatives. After 10-15 min discussions in smaller groups – each group presents their discussions/agreements, and the teacher(s) summarizes the arguments for all course participants.
Longer discussions (30-45 min), where after introduction of the problem, students are asked to define stakeholder groups themselves and put forward the arguments/different viewpoints, session ends with summary for all course participants.
Matrix group discussions with stakeholder groups and interdisciplinary groups in 2 h sessions where students first define stakeholder perspectives, then are divided into stakeholder groups to prepare themselves. This is followed by interdisciplinary mixed groups with one representative from each stakeholder in each group, representing the viewpoints. Here students are asked to put forward the best possible solutions and describe the trade-offs. Session finishes with presentations from the mixed groups to all course participants in a session lead by the teacher(s) followed by the teacher(s) summary.
Aerosols and Sustainability
Aerosol science has a clear and direct impact on several of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). As air pollution poses a risk to human health globally and influences the climate, and thus, the link between air pollution and the SDGs is encapsulated particularly in SDG 3, which focuses on good health and well-being, in SDG 13, climate action, and in SDG 11, which emphasizes sustainable cities and communities. Reducing air pollution can improve public health by decreasing diseases, enhancing the quality of life, and increasing productivity. Furthermore, by specifically addressing air pollution, cities can become more sustainable, for example by offering more efficient public transport and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This not only improves the health of urban populations but also contributes to the mitigation of climate change under SDG 13 by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Aerosol particles and aerosol-cloud influence on the Earth’s radiation balance hold the largest uncertainties in the current climate projections. The uncertainties in future precipitation patterns are far larger than in the temperature. Decreased precipitation in dry regions will pose more stress on societies in the coming decades (SDG 6, clean water and sanitation). Our inability to predict future warming and precipitation accurately limits our ability to design effective mitigation strategies and to adapt to the changing climate (SDG 13), which indirectly influences several of the SDGs. Effective management of air quality therefore intersects with multiple sustainability objectives, from health to sustainable urban planning and climate action, highlighting the necessity of integrated approaches to pollution control and urban development. We aim to use hopefulness (Sharp et al. 2021) when teaching air pollution for sustainability using successful examples of how wicked air pollution problems from the past were solved e.g. acidification, ozone hole or tobacco smoking.
Portfolio of cases: Wicked problems for Air Pollution Courses
The authors of this work have expertise in different societal sectors and regularly interact with stakeholders in these sectors. We have designed four different cases formulated as wicked problems within aerosol science capturing sustainability aspects discussions. All these problems deal with aerosols and air pollution to different degrees and also address the larger sustainability contexts and the transition to new “green” technologies and that are central at different LTH programs (Examples below):
1. Indoor Air Quality and Energy Efficiency (V program),
2. Electrification of Road Traffic (M, W
programs),
3. Circular Economy and Secondary Use of Materials (N, V Programs),
4. Trade-offs between Climate and Health Impacts of Aerosols (W Program).
Wicked problem related to indoor air quality
Is use of portable air cleaners justified in Sweden?
Background info: Air cleaners based on mechanical filtration can effectively remove airborne particles (linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases) hence improving indoor air quality where we spend 90% of the time. There are various manufacturers of air cleaners, and some of heavily promoted solutions (e.g. ozone generators) lack scientific basis to prove positive effects on air quality and in the worst-case scenario can lead to formation of air pollutants (by-products) that can have negative health effects and cause airways and eyes irritation. In many parts of the world where outdoor air quality is very poor (high concentration of air pollutants) it might be that to maintain acceptable air quality indoors air cleaners are needed. Especially in the case of homes where sensitive subgroups of the populations reside (e.g. children, elderly, and individuals with existing respiratory and cardiovascular diseases). On the other hand, outdoor air quality in Sweden seldom exceeds EU ambient air quality limits. Considering climate change we all strive for energy use optimization, whereas use of portable air cleaners means increase in energy use. (Additional level of complexity depending on students’ skills: WHO air quality guidelines vs EU air quality limits, aspects of ventilation in buildings and filtration of supplied air in buildings (where such option is possible), different types of ventilation different possibilities, costs associated with it)).
Possible stakeholder groups: energy agency, company manufacturing ozone generators, company manufacturing portable air cleaners based on mechanical filtration, property owners, housing associations, parents of children with respiratory diseases, asthma and allergy association. (Additional: ventilation company, municipal environmental protection department))
Course where the problem may be implemented: TFRC06/MAMF55
Wicked Problem on Transport Emissions and Health – Clean Air Zones
Sweden is considering to introduce clean air zones in the central parts of it´s major cities. The aim is to reduce the population exposure to health relevant air pollutants and noise.
Combustion Vehicles using Gasoline and Diesel give rise to tailpipe emissions containing ultrafine particles, Black Carbon and Nitrogen Oxides with documented adverse health impacts (lung disease, cardiovascular disease etc). However, the latest vehicles following the Euro 6 emission legislation are equipped with advanced after treatment systems that have strongly reduced emission levels. Low carbon fuels such as Biodiesel, alcohols and biogas have lower emission levels compared to the fossil fuels, but exhaust emissions remain.
To reduce the climate footprint the vehicle fleet is now becoming increasingly electrified. Electrical vehicles eliminate tail-pipe emissions but non-exhaust particle emissions from brakes, tyres and road dust remain. Non-exhaust emissions already today dominate the transport particle emissions by mass (PM2.5 and PM10) and contain toxic substances such as metal oxides, microplastics and quartz. However, the health impacts of non-exhaust emissions remain poorly understood. EU has agreed on the world´s first emission standard for brake PM emissions and tyre wear as part of EURO7. However, the recently sharpened EU Air quality directive that each city need to fulfil does not include indicators/pollutants specific for non-exhaust emissions.
A suggestion has been put that in the clean air zone, all diesel and gasoline vehicles would be banned, only electric vehicles and combustion vehicles that use biogas would be allowed. Experts and stakeholders are invited to a meeting where the suggestion should be revised to a final agreement to be put for the politicians.
Stakeholder Groups: Environmental departments of our largest municipalities/cities, Swedish EPA, Astma & Allergiförbundet, NGO AirClim, Auto Manufacturers Association, Associations of Manufacturers of Brakes and Tyres (FKG).
Course where the problem may be implemented: FKFN35/MAMF55
Wicked problem on circular materials
There is a strive and need to go from a linear material system to circular materials streams. This will save the environment by reducing the environmental footprint of humanity – by reducing the need of primary materials and lowering the carbon footprint. On the other hand, the utilization of waste will introduce new environmental and human risks since these residual streams are not as “clean” and “well defined” as primary materials.
Today the regulations are not optimized for secondary use of materials. As an example, as soon as a product is classified as waste it falls under specific waste legislation which is typically much stricter than the legislation for and regulation of primary materials when it comes to content of potentially toxic elements. A key question is if the current legislation related to waste management and secondary use of waste streams is adopted to the new circular economy, and how it should help saving the environment from the new threats, without stopping the transition into a circular economy?
One example of a waste material that can be utilized is ash from waste incineration. The fraction of waste that cannot be recycled in any other way will, also in the future, be incinerated recovering the inherent energy. A residue from the incineration is ash, classified as hazardous waste due to the high content of metals that needs to be utilized, if not as today putting it to landfills. However, even though the levels of potentially toxic elements in the ash are above the limit values for the waste to be used for secondary purposes, the levels are below those valid for primary materials, and tests show that these are not leaching/bioavailable.
Example of stake holder/interest groups:
Regulators of materials, circularity, climate
Municipalities, Governmental agencies, EU organs
Regulators on environmental protection
Governmental agencies, EU organs
Activists that
Primarily sees the risks with utilizing materials without being 100 % sure they are safe from the perspective of human and environmental exposure to PTEs
Want to save natural resources and reduce CO2 emissions (somewhat contrary to the above “activist type”)
Citizens
Course where the problem may be implemented: MAMN75
Wicked problem on air quality and climate
Is our strive for improved air-quality in conflict with climate mitigation?
Air pollution leads to ~6-9 million deaths globally. Most of these are due to inhalation of airborne particles, so-called aerosols. Cutting the emissions of aerosols (and aerosol forming species) would result in improvement of the air quality, leading to saved lives (and explicitly target SDG 3). However, aerosols cool the climate, and reducing the aerosol concentrations will therefore result in climate warming, further adding to human caused climate change (SDG 13).
Targeting aerosol emissions is not an easy task. Most human activities cause increased aerosol load (adding to the complexity of solving AQ issues). Some examples of these are combustion, agriculture, forest management, mechanical ware of cars’ breaks and tires. All of these impacts both the AQ and climate.
Further consideration: Aerosols have short lifetimes compared with typical transport times in the atmosphere. Hence, they become local and regional AQ problems rather than global ones. Should only regional stakeholders and interest groups sit at the table when discussing the AQ-CC nexus?
Suggestion of stakeholders and interest groups:
Regulators on climate mitigation
Municipalities, Governmental agencies, EU organs
Regulators on air quality
Municipalities, Governmental agencies, EU organs
Activists (mostly climate oriented in Europe, could be more air-quality oriented in some more polluted regions).
UN organs (WMO, WHO, IPCC, etc.)
Actors impacting the aerosol load, for example:
Industry, Agricultural sectors, Forest owners and forest management companies
Courses where this problem may be implemented: FKFN45
References:
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher education, 32(3), 347-364.
Cilliers, F. J., Schuwirth, L. W., Adendorff, H. J., Herman, N., & Van der Vleuten, C. P. (2010). The mechanism of impact of summative assessment on medical students’ learning. Advances in health sciences education, 15, 695-715.
Conklin, J. (2006). Wicked Problems and Social Complexity, Chapter 1 in “Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems” Wiley, ISBN: 978-0-470-01768-5.
Dobson, H. E., & Bland Tomkinson, C. (2012). Creating sustainable development change agents through problem‐based learning: Designing appropriate student PBL projects. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 13(3), 263-278.
Lönngren, J., Ahrens, A., Deppert, K., Hammarin, G., & Nilsson, E. (2010). Sustainable Development in Nano-Perspectives: An Innovative Student Initiative. In Engineering Education in Sustainable Development, Gothenburg, Sweden, September 19-22, 2010.
Lönngren, J. (2021). Wicked problems i lärande för hållbar utveckling–Vägledning för att ta fram exempel och problembeskrivningar. Högre utbildning, 11(3). In Swedish.
Lönngren, J., & van Poeck, K. (2021). Wicked problems: a mapping review of the literature. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 28(6), 481–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2020.1859415
Noordegraaf, M., Douglas, S., Geuijen, K., & Van Der Steen, M. (2019). Weaknesses of wickedness: A critical perspective on wickedness theory. Policy and Society, 38(2), 278-297.
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences, 4(2), 155-169.
Savin-Baden, M. (2000). Problem-Based Learning in Higher Education: Untold Stories, Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Sharp, E. L., Fagan, J., Kah, M., McEntee, M., & Salmond, J. (2021). Hopeful approaches to teaching and learning environmental “wicked problems”. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 45(4), 621-639.
The initiative Teaching for Sustainability is intended to serve as a hub for educators at Lund University, offering a platform for training, resources, and community building. In growing our work and network, we continue to think about what our community needs. In the face of our environmental and societal challenges, I have been thinking more about what it means to belong to a community, to cultivate a community, and to contribute to a community.
Community can be defined as a social group with a shared sense of identity, values, and norms, where members are interconnected and interdependent, with an implicit desire to contribute and participate in the collective maintenance and development of the group [1]. Though, a functioning community is not free; it requires effort, legitimacy, and resources. Members shall feel a sense of belonging, trust, and shared purpose as well as receive benefits that serve their individual and collective needs.
Following the model proposed by University of Tasmania in Australia [2], we established a core group, an inner circle, and an outer circle.
Working Group: Engages in operational planning and implementation of activities and resources.
Task Force: Receives information and provides input that guides the work of the working group
Community of Practice: Our community engages and empowers members to explore real approaches to integrate sustainability into their teaching practice.
Members have the opportunity to engage with the community as much or as little as they like, based on their needs and capacity.
A Call to Action
As the initiative continues to grow, we invite members of our community to contribute their time, effort, skills, and passions to the operationalisation and implementation of our work. Currently, we are seeking additional members to join the Working Group or Task Force.
For those wishing to join the Task Force, we ask that you commit to the following:
Attend at least two meetings per semester.
Receive updates about content, events, and opportunities.
Share information with your respective stakeholders.
Provide strategic input and suggestions to steer our work.
For those wishing to join the Working Group, we ask that you commit to the following:
Attend at least one meeting per month.
Host one event (e.g. lecture, seminar, workshop, social event) per semester (with support from other members)
Actively contribute to the sharing of information in the Community of Practice.
Bring whatever ideas, skills, or passions to shape our work.
If interested, we welcome you to join any of our meetings to observe how we work. We’re quite easy – this is not a lifelong commitment, but an opportunity to contribute with whatever energy or capacity you have. Are you interested contributing in another way (e.g. dissemination, newsletter, photographer, graphic designer, etc.)?For more information, contact Terese Thoni (terese.thoni@cec.lu.se) – Education Coordination, LU Sustainability Forum.
As a member of the Working Group myself, I have found strength and inspiration working with my colleagues. Our work and their support has given me a sense of purpose, which has helped me find strength to continue working towards sustainability. I have planned events that speak to my interests; I have contributed my skills with web design and communication. I feel our efforts are appreciated by faculty and staff at the University. Ultimately, I’m proud of our work. My colleagues and I would love to work collaboratively and support you, too.
References
[1] Etzioni, A. (1994). Spirit of community. Simon and Schuster.
[2] Murray, S., & Salter, S. (2014). Communities of practice (CoP) as a model for integrating sustainability into higher education. In Handbook of research on pedagogical innovations for sustainable development (pp. 170-188). IGI Global. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5856-1.ch009
Comments