Search results

This paper aims to analyze the influences of context and methodological differences in how universities confront, report and manage carbon neutrality in selected Andean universities, contrasted with a university in the USA.

A sequential, mixed-methods design, using quantitative and qualitative approaches was applied. The data analysis is based on a systematic literature review with bibliometric analysis to identify how carbon neutrality in universities is understood and applied. Informed by the quantitative analysis, the qualitative phase compared the assessment methodologies, opportunities and obstacles in three Andean universities – EAFIT in Colombia, EPN in Ecuador and the UC in Chile – contrasted with MIT (USA) for comparative purposes beyond the region.

The bibliometric analysis points to the evolution of carbon management and carbon neutrality in universities and indicates how universities have applied methodologies and defined opportunities and obstacles. In this comparative experience, the contextual issues are brought to the fore. The conclusions highlight the importance of context in carbon neutrality assessment and argue against crude comparative metrics. While carbon assessment protocols provide data on which actions may be taken, the phase of carbon management development and the specifics of context – based on local institutional, geographical, climatic, cultural, socioeconomic and national policy conditions – are far more relevant for identifying actions.

This study only considered four universities, and the findings are not generalizable. The argument highlights the point that contextual factors generate important differences that may complicate simple comparisons based on the university's type or size. It also highlights the differences in the carbon calculation methodologies used by the institutions.

Results build on the recent publications that document the Latin American context. The article contributes to knowledge about Andean university commitments and actions relating to climate change and carbon neutrality. This knowledge can contribute to how universities in the region seek to apply different methodologies, set targets and the timing of actions and consider their contextual opportunities and obstacles.

Comparing university carbon footprints and carbon neutrality plans is an emerging topic, presenting methodological and institutional difficulties. This paper reveals some of these difficulties by comparing parameters, actions and implementation processes against contextual factors. While there is a drive for international and national comparisons and systematization of data on university carbon performance, significant methodological gaps still need to be resolved to account for these contextual factors.

This paper aims to derive a model that explores how the interplay between knowledge integration capability and innovation impacts strategic orientation, leading to the attainment of sustainable competitive advantage. The study considers the constituents of strategic orientation, namely, customer orientation, competitor orientation and technology orientation, as the basis for achieving sustainable competitive advantage. The study suggests that the firm’s capacity for integrating external and internal knowledge shapes how strategic orientation influences sustainable competitive advantage through service innovation.

This empirical research relies on qualitative and quantitative data gathered from telecom professionals to assess how knowledge integration and service innovation influence sustained competitive advantage. Structured equation modeling is used to examine the model and its interrelationships.

The research establishes significant relationships between strategic orientations, knowledge integration capability, service innovation and sustainable competitive advantage. Knowledge integration capability and service innovation are found to mediate the relationship between strategic orientations and the achievement of sustainable competitive advantage.

The study highlights the significant contribution of a firm’s knowledge integration capability in driving service innovation, especially in technology-intensive service industries facing hypercompetition. It also advocates prioritizing technology orientation and integrating knowledge from internal and external sources for competitive advantage.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to model the effect of knowledge integration capability and service innovation on strategic orientation-led sustainable competitive advantage.

The purpose of this article is for three teacher educators to reflect on their use of mapping and mapping-adjacent activities in university courses vis-à-vis the development of their own critical praxis toward spatial justice. The authors focus on how the centering of geospatial literacies through spatial justice issues impacts the development of criticality for preservice teachers and their teacher educators.

The paper opted for collaborative reflections about our teacher educator praxis through self-study and critical friends. Three teacher educators wrote vignettes about their experiences with place-based mapping approaches in teacher education coursework.

The paper suggests that mapping activities (broadly defined) create space(s) for courageous conversations on difficult topics (e.g. race and social-economic status). These spaces are not only between teacher and student but also can be extended to teacher educators by focusing on critical and collaborative self-study.

Because of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to use critical and collaborative reflection to inform their own praxis.

The paper shares pedagogical approaches and reflections for highlighting geospatial literacies and critical place consciousness within teacher education.

This has significance as there is a relative dearth of literature detailing how critical teacher educators can learn with and from each other when working to focus place-based learning in the context of teacher preparation.

The purpose of this study is to assess how higher education anchor institutions (HEIs) voluntarily report their non-economic impacts. Its goals are to quantify the ease of public access to this information; strengthen the conceptual foundation for HEI impact reporting; and provide guidance for making HEI voluntary disclosures more accessible, comparable and systematic.

Using an exploratory mixed methods design and purposeful sampling, this study analyzed voluntary public disclosures of 41 anchor institution universities in the USA to assess how they communicate their public value creation to stakeholders. Data sources included impact reports, donor reports, annual reports and sustainability reports. The study also analyzed the accessibility of this information by timing how long it took to locate.

The sampled US anchor institutions communicate their non-economic impact to stakeholders in myriad ways using a variety of formats. Time required to find the reports ranged from 37 to 50 min, with an average of 42.30 min. Disparate reporting formats inhibit comparability.

Only 41 anchor institutions were examined. The small sample may not be representative of the broader landscape of higher education institutions.

Findings offer guidance for improving voluntary nonfinancial disclosures to increase public confidence in higher education institutions while advancing community and global resilience. To strengthen voluntary disclosure practices, the study recommends using a standardized reporting format, framing HEI impact through socio-ecological resilience indicators, integrating reports and obtaining some form of assurance. These changes would enhance the credibility and comparability of the disclosures.

This research provides some of the first empirical insight into how US higher education anchor institutions report their value creation to the public. Its application of socio-ecological systems theory outlines an actionable conceptual foundation for HEI reporting by linking organizational, community and global resilience.