Search results

In Denmark, there has been, over decades, an intensified political focus on how humanities research and doctoral education contribute to society. In this vein, the notion of impact has become a central part of the academic language, often associated with terms like use, effects and outputs, stemming from neoliberal ideologies. The purpose of this paper is to explore how humanities academics are living with the impact agenda, as both experienced researchers and as doctoral supervisors educating the next generation of researchers in this post-pandemic era. Specifically, the authors are interested in the supervisor-researcher relationship, that is, the relationship between how the supervisors navigate the impact agenda as researchers and then the way they tell their doctoral students to do likewise.

The authors have studied how the impact agenda is accommodated by humanities academics through a series of qualitative interviews with humanities researchers and humanities PhD supervisors, encompassing questions of how they are living with the expectation of impact and how it is embedded in their university and departmental context.

The study shows that there is no link between how the supervisors navigate the impact agenda in relation to their own research work and then the way they tell their doctoral students to approach it. Within the space of their own research, the supervisors engage in resistance practices towards the impact agenda in terms of minimal compliance, rejection or resignation, whereas in the space of supervision, the impact agenda is re-inscribed to embody other understandings. The supervisors want to protect their students from this agenda, especially in the knowledge that many of them are not going to stay in academia due to limited researcher career possibilities. Furthermore, the paper reveals a new understanding of the impact agenda as having a relational quality, and in two ways. One is through a positional struggle, the reshaping of power relations, between universities (or academics) and society (or the state and the market); the other is as a phenomenon very much lived among academics themselves, including between supervisors and their doctoral students within the institutional context.

This study opens up the impact agenda, showing what it means to be a humanities academic living with the effects of the impact agenda and trying to navigate this. The study is mapping and tracking out the many different meanings and variations of impact in all its volatility for academics concerned about it. In current, post-pandemic times, when manifold expectations are directed towards research and doctoral education, it is important to know more about how these expectations affect and are dealt with by those who are expected to commit to them.

Higher education institutions and their lecturers are strategic agents and main drivers that contribute to circular economy transition. This requires them to understand the key circular economy competencies and how to integrate circular economy holistically into their curricula with the suitable teaching and learning approaches. This study aims to support them by providing an overview on the characteristics of education for the circular economy (ECE) and suggestions to lecturers to further develop their curricula.

The data consisted of scientific articles (n = 22) describing circular economy courses in higher education. Qualitative content analysis with quantitative features was performed on the selected articles to answer the research question.

The findings confirm that the system’s focus is the key issue in ECE. However, to integrate circular economy holistically into the curricula, ECE should be implemented more widely in the context of different industries and market contexts to find innovative teaching and learning approaches. The demand side needs to be incorporated in the courses, as systemic transformation is also about transforming consumption. All levels of implementation and circular economy objectives should be included in courses to promote systems thinking. In addition, innovative forms of real workplace interaction should be increased.

As ECE has started to emerge as a new field of study, this article provides the first integrated overview of the topic.