Search results

To describe the development and structure of a new Master's‐level subject entitled “Aspects of sustainability: an international perspective” as a potential model, adoptable by other tertiary‐level educators.

This paper describes the evolution and re‐shaping of a subject designed for postgraduate students from diverse programmes (from science‐based to sociology‐based). It was re‐designed in 2004, in part to support the co‐introduction by Lincoln University of two new, globally innovative Masters degrees, but also as a contribution to the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD, 2005‐2014). The two new degrees are taught and awarded jointly by Lincoln University and a partner European University, and thus are based on unique Northern‐Southern hemisphere linkages. We describe the subject content (including its major assignment), and its evaluations by students.

A successful subject has been developed, but it required a step change in its structure in order to (a) retain connectedness and common themes across its wide‐ranging topics, and (b) meet the expectations and aspirations of multi‐disciplinary, multi‐national classes.

This paper details the key ingredients of a subject designed to prepare postgraduate students for careers involving sustainability at international or regional level. The subject's structure is a potential model for adoption in other tertiary programmes.

The subject's structure is highly appropriate for a multi‐disciplinary, multi‐national student group, and demonstrates one university's efforts to contribute to DESD. The format of the main assignment is offered as a model for adoption by others engaged in education for sustainability.

This study focuses on ad hoc policy advisory committees that bring together experts and stakeholders to propose public policies on the basis of consensus. These kinds of committees are often considered to be a typical governance mechanism of the social democratic model of regulation and policy-making known from the Nordic countries. We challenge this view by comparing the Norwegian system of committee governance with those of Germany and the European Union and point out the central role of coordination and consensus in all three systems. Relying on existing and original research, and contrary to the assumption of a distinct Nordic regime, we find significant similarities between the three committee governance systems when it comes to organisational features, the kind of expertise produced and the committees' governance functions. Most remarkable is the prevalence of hybrid, tripartite committees that draw together interest groups, civil servants and researchers in all three systems. We show that these kinds of ad hoc advisory committees tend to generate a kind of coordinated, negotiated expertise where notions of validity and objectivity are connected not only to cognitive quality but also to the breadth of viewpoints that are integrated. Moreover, the Nordic committee system of Norway stands out with only few distinctive qualities, and it is not obvious how the notion of ‘social democracy’ helps illuminating these features. To help shed light on the striking resemblances we find across systems, we develop a notion of consensus-oriented political and epistemological systems, which may be a useful complement to the notion of Nordic social democracy.