TY - JOUR
T1 - Odd couples
T2 - reconciling academic and operational cultures for whole-institution sustainability governance at universities
AU - Robinson, John
AU - Alhakim, Andi Darell
AU - Ma, Grace
AU - Alam, Monisha
AU - Brando, Fernanda da Rocha
AU - Braune, Manfred
AU - Brown, Michelle
AU - Côté, Nicolas
AU - Espinosa, Denise Crocce Romano
AU - Garza, Ana Karen
AU - Gorman, David
AU - Hajer, Maarten
AU - Madden, John
AU - Melnick, Rob
AU - Metras, John
AU - Newman, Julie
AU - Patel, Rutu
AU - Raven, Rob
AU - Sergienko, Kenneth
AU - Smith, Victoria
AU - Tariq, Hoor
AU - van der Lem, Lysanne
AU - Wong, Christina Nga Jing
AU - Wiek, Arnim
N1 - Funding Information:
We observed that most operational sustainability units – by their nature – perform top-down action according to their mandates, and many also have complementary bottom-up components. UBC has two operational units responsible for sustainability work: the Sustainability and Engineering unit under the Campus and Community Planning group, which handles policy development and planning, and the Facilities group under the Finance and Operations portfolio, which handles operational implementation. Those units work closely with the academic-oriented USI to implement collaborative, bottom-up initiatives such as Campus as a Living Lab (CLL) and Social Ecological Economic Development Studies, both of which support faculty and student engagement in sustainability projects. A similar bottom-up focus was observed at the MITOS, which adopted a framework beyond an operational focus with the campus as a test-bed for innovation and knowledge creation through research and education that engages faculty, students and other staff to collaborate on Living Labs. This bottom-up approach was complementary to its primarily top-down work on a GHG inventory and whole-institution scans, which are part of a top-down mandate to deliver on MIT’s Climate Action Plan and GHG emissions targets. Similarly at USP, the SGA delivered on central mandates in Environmental Policy strategic plans by supporting faculty and student projects through its Pilot Projects program – synonymous to Living Labs, as it bridges research, community engagement, financial support and external partnerships. Another example is Utrecht’s Green Office, the primary actor to accomplish the university’s GHG goals for 2030 set as a top-down Strategic Plan. Implementation for that policy also featured bottom-up elements through work with researchers on Living Labs and students on behavioural change campaigns, among others. At UofT, the CECCS promotes a bottom-up approach, leveraging its ties with operational units such as University Planning, Design and Construction, Facilities and Services and the Sustainability Offices on the three campuses, in identifying and facilitating access to information about potential learning opportunities to be included in CLL courses. Many of these projects have informed the top-down work such as sustainable building design standards, a student engagement plan for one of the sustainability offices or food security framework at one of the campuses.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited.
PY - 2023/11/27
Y1 - 2023/11/27
N2 - Purpose: This study aims to explore barriers and pathways to a whole-institution governance of sustainability within the working structures of universities. Design/methodology/approach: This paper draws on multi-year interviews and hierarchical structure analysis of ten universities in Canada, the USA, Australia, Hong Kong, South Africa, Brazil, the UK and The Netherlands. The paper addresses existing literature that championed further integration between the two organizational sides of universities (academic and operations) and suggests approaches for better embedding sustainability into four primary domains of activity (education, research, campus operations and community engagement). Findings: This research found that effective sustainability governance needs to recognise and reconcile distinct cultures, diverging accountability structures and contrasting manifestations of central-coordination and distributed-agency approaches characteristic of the university’s operational and academic activities. The positionality of actors appointed to lead institution-wide embedding influenced which domain received most attention. The paper concludes that a whole-institution approach would require significant tailoring and adjustments on both the operational and academic sides to be successful. Originality/value: Based on a review of sustainability activities at ten universities around the world, this paper provides a detailed analysis of the governance implications of integrating sustainability into the four domains of university activity. It discusses how best to work across the operational/academic divide and suggests principles for adopting a whole institution approach to sustainability.
AB - Purpose: This study aims to explore barriers and pathways to a whole-institution governance of sustainability within the working structures of universities. Design/methodology/approach: This paper draws on multi-year interviews and hierarchical structure analysis of ten universities in Canada, the USA, Australia, Hong Kong, South Africa, Brazil, the UK and The Netherlands. The paper addresses existing literature that championed further integration between the two organizational sides of universities (academic and operations) and suggests approaches for better embedding sustainability into four primary domains of activity (education, research, campus operations and community engagement). Findings: This research found that effective sustainability governance needs to recognise and reconcile distinct cultures, diverging accountability structures and contrasting manifestations of central-coordination and distributed-agency approaches characteristic of the university’s operational and academic activities. The positionality of actors appointed to lead institution-wide embedding influenced which domain received most attention. The paper concludes that a whole-institution approach would require significant tailoring and adjustments on both the operational and academic sides to be successful. Originality/value: Based on a review of sustainability activities at ten universities around the world, this paper provides a detailed analysis of the governance implications of integrating sustainability into the four domains of university activity. It discusses how best to work across the operational/academic divide and suggests principles for adopting a whole institution approach to sustainability.
KW - Embedding sustainability
KW - Governance
KW - Institutional culture
KW - Operational and academic foundations
KW - Sustainability
KW - Whole-institution approach
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85165658564&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1108/IJSHE-07-2022-0244
DO - 10.1108/IJSHE-07-2022-0244
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85165658564
SN - 1467-6370
VL - 24
SP - 1949
EP - 1969
JO - International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education
JF - International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education
IS - 8
ER -