Search results

The shift to the fourth industrial revolution presents new sustainable development challenges. The externalities of the second and third industrial revolutions were related to the degradation of the biosphere. It is suggested that the externalities of the fourth industrial revolution, underpinned by artificial intelligence, are extending the repertoire of externalities to include the degradation and manipulation of cognition and by extension the fabric of society. The implications for South Africa’s transformation within the fourth industrial revolution are highlighted. It is shown that digital nudging and choice architecture are tools that are capable of maximising profit while externalising social value through the algorithmic manipulation of our decision-making processes. The case for an alternative explanatory framework is presented because the limitations of the prevailing conception of physical reality appear unable to adequately resolve these super-wicked problems. Constructor theory is introduced as an alternative explanatory framework, and the constructor-theoretic conception is suggested as an ontological framework that will provide better explanations. Some principles of the theory are introduced.

In this chapter, we examine the interplay between external legitimacy judgments, internal identity beliefs, and conceptions of sustainability. Based on observation at industry events and interviews with key stakeholders, we examine how organizational actors interpret the concept of sustainability in civil aviation, an industry subject to intense legitimacy threat for its environmental impact. We find that the concept of sustainability is interpreted through a process of naturalization, by which conceptual ties to past practices are forged, and the concept becomes corrupted. We describe three mechanisms (relabeling, bundling, and zooming out) through which concept naturalization occurs, and we show how this process creates resonance between sustainability and an industry ethos, which captures the aspirations, ideals and values of the industry.

Purpose: This conceptual paper aims to identify how financial inclusion relates to sustainability and the level of sustainable development.

Methodology: The paper used discourse analysis to identify how financial inclusion relates to sustainability and the level of sustainable development.

Finding: The paper argued that granting access to basic formal financial services contributes to greater sustainable development by ensuring that access to finance is guaranteed sustainably, and basic financial services are provided sustainably and based on sustainability principles to yield a lasting impact for sustainable development. The paper also argued that financial inclusion increases the level of sustainable development because financial inclusion increases the economic opportunities and social welfare of banked adults while it only provides limited benefits for the environment. This approach links financial inclusion to sustainable development by adopting sustainability principles in offering basic financial services to banked adults.

Implication: Consequently, a synergy between financial inclusion and sustainable development is needed. The synergy should be based on sustainability principles, requiring policies integrating financial inclusion into the sustainable development agenda.

Originality: This paper is the first to identify the relationship between the financial inclusion agenda, the sustainable development agenda and the sustainability agenda.

Since Thomas Kuhn (1962), a historian of science who gave ‘paradigm’ its contemporary meaning, the term ‘paradigm’ has been widely used in science and social sciences to refer to a theoretical framework or thought pattern in any given discipline, or broadly, a set of experiences, beliefs and values that affect individual perceptions of a reality and their subsequent reactions. A dominant paradigm is the widely held system of thought in a society at a particular period of time. For Kuhn, a dominant paradigm can be changed and replaced by a new one, which often occurs in a revolutionary manner in science. In social sciences, ‘paradigm shift’ implies the changing ways of understanding and organising a social reality.

The Anthropocene is commonly explained as a current epoch that began when human activities started bearing a major impact on the natural world. As an area of study, it has a logical disciplinary home, addressed widely in geology (Gibbard & Walker, 2014). However, it is also gaining traction in other disciplines, especially the social sciences (Bonneuil & Fressoz, 2017). In most accounts, it involves examining how the relationship between humans and the planet has changed and what can be done to monitor the balance.

Sustainability represents a more familiar challenge and discussion area in higher education. Nevertheless, two areas of questioning about it endure: what is sustainability and should students be taught about it? One established account is the “three-pillar model” which presents sustainability as an intersection of economic, social, and environmental issues (Brundtland Report, 1987). There are, however, different views as to how sustainability curriculum change should be implemented (Hopkinson, Hughes, & Layer, 2008; Stubbs & Schapper, 2011) but students appear to want sustainability better represented in their institutions (Drayson, Bone, Agombar, & Kemp, 2013).

This chapter considers whether the relatively recent focus on the Anthropocene can help us develop sustainability teaching in higher education. My project draws on desk-based research, comprising a review of academic sources on the Anthropocene and on sustainability, as well as teaching materials on these areas. The author also draws on five conversations with staff involved in teaching and researching the Anthropocene.

The outcomes point to some support for further teaching about the Anthropocene and in a way which links to sustainability, and the author argues that as a concept and proposition, the Anthropocene has important potential for informing future sustainability teaching. However, the relationship between the Anthropocene and sustainability needs exploring further in follow-up research with both staff and learners.

Inequities among people all around the world as well as indifference towards the environment continue to be a constant reality despite the efforts of some organizations worldwide for a better future. We consider that these efforts need to be amplified by many other organizations, therefore, the role of managers as practitioners who conduct organizations' actions need to be explored in the sense of their contribution for improving our reality. Hence, for a better future, a sustainable world that could be more fair, honest and concerned towards nature. To us, this calls into question the role of management education to this regard. Our research studies indicate that one way to contribute to this aim is by means of introducing in contents and pedagogical practices of our courses, the appropriateness of human values in students, as they are the future managers. In this chapter, we present some of these human values, sometimes considered by many religious traditions as spiritual values, which are: wholeness, forethought, solidarity and compassion. We conceptualize these values, and throughout critical reflections, we show how they are taken into account, or simply disregarded, in various courses and domains of Business Schools. At the end, we present some suggestions for pedagogical practices.

A work system may be said to exhibit social sustainability if it utilizes its human, social, economic, and ecological resources with responsibility. This entails using these resources in a non-exploitive way, regenerating them, and paying due attention to the needs and ambitions of its stakeholders in the short- and long-term. For most presently existing organizations attaining and maintaining sustainability requires a midcourse correction, a transformation process. This chapter reviews the main concepts regarding sustainability and previous research of organizational development in this context. It presents a four-phase model for this transformation process and illustrates the model's application in four different contexts. The results are discussed and directions for further research are presented.

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Target 4.b calls to “substantially expand globally the number of scholarships” for enrollment in overseas higher education between 2015 and 2020. To advance knowledge on international scholarships and sustainability, this chapter examines notions of sustainability in literature related to international scholarships for students in the Global South. Based on an exploratory review of literature, ways that sponsored international student mobility – programs, students, graduates, and networks – maintain and sustain systems and outcomes are explored. Findings are presented through four frames: (a) programmatic sustainability, (b) organizational development, (c) national sustainable development, and (d) international and global actions. Challenges to sustainability, such as poor coordination between degrees earned and local market conditions, are also discussed. In addition, the findings point to several prominent ways that scholarships could contribute to sustainability that are mostly absent from the literature: transformative education for sustainable development, and international education for environmental sustainability. The chapter closes with a vision of alumni networks – both within and among programs – to work together to transform societies and tackle the most pernicious international challenges of our time.

There is growing apprehension about climate change and the role played by fossil fuels. Exploration of renewable sources of energy as an alternative to fossil fuels reveals that there is no path forward toward a true green economy that does not have negative environmental side effects. Thus, the improvement of managerial and financial accounting to provide more environmental information and accountability by governmental and nongovernmental institutions is increasingly important in guiding us toward wiser choices. Since the 1970s, the increasing concerns about the environment in the United States have led to improved regulation and more comprehensive environmental reporting requirements and accounting standards. Also, global institutions have been created to foster voluntary reporting of both direct and indirect environmental impacts of their activities by institutions. However, evidence suggests that, while some large global firms have found it useful to engage in sustainability reporting throughout their operations, in general, the US organizational environmental reporting is not strong and is oriented toward the legal minimum when present. If we are to take account of the many direct and indirect ways in which our production choices affect our environment, then our institutions need to play a larger role in informing our choices. Both the Environmental Managerial Accounting Initiative and an enhanced balanced scorecard approach are recommended as frameworks for future efforts; public and private institutions must also include life cycle analysis in decision-making systems in order to enhance their ability to help achieve sustainable economic progress.