Search results

This chapter aims to analyze the interrelationships between the elements of sustainability, socio-interculturalism, and governance. This analysis advances from the assumption that the sustainable socio-intercultural governance requires to be supported by the development of systems that enable the economic growth, the social development and environmental socio-ecosystems of communities, institutions, organizations, and individual levels. The method employed is the reflective-analytical based on the review of literature. It is concluded that the new geographies of sustainable socio-intercultural governance are affected by the coexistence that have solutions to the capacity deficits and dysfunctionalities of processes, institutions, and knowledge systems which have many systemic failures on the capacities of the natural resource management systems. This analysis proposes a new model of socio-intercultural sustainable governance.

Corporate governance has experienced numerous changes in chime with the exigencies of the time during which it has been introduced or the context in which it has been practiced. Its gestation can be divided into three stages of development namely the traditional governance, the current transitional governance, and the upcoming sustainable governance. Traditional governance refers to the period hitherto the industrial revolution when corporations have not yet been formed, in today’s sense, but the governance structures were already in place in the existing entities at the time. Transitional governance refers to a period between the industrial revolution and the information age when corporations started to rise as a new economic entity. Reviewing the dominant corporate governance models are integral to understanding the transitional era. At the end of the transitional governance era, a transmogrification in corporate governance is underway to prepare itself for the coming age of sustainability. Sustainable governance integrates the principles of systems thinking and appreciates the complexity of decision-making environment, contrary to its former iterations that welcomed oversimplification of interactive messes (systems of problems). The objective of this chapter is to review corporate governance developmental transition toward sustainable governance and its role in the age of sustainability.

Purpose – The aim of this chapter is to review the relationship of urban climate governance against the background of sustainability and to identify driving forces in a set of leading cities in the United States and Europe.

Design/methodology/approach – Case-study research indicates that efficient, creative and participatory urban governance is key for the quest for sustainability. It is theorized that dynamic governance is composed of high levels of both institutional and social capital or capacity. Each capacity category is composed of different indicators or ‘success factors’ taken from qualitative data in overall 84 cities in the United States and Europe. By triangulating desktop research, mail surveys and review of existing studies, the role and influence of these success factors is evaluated and compared.

Findings – In both the United States and in Europe, the key driving forces are those related to institutional capacity. Yet, cities tend to be more successful in sustainable development if levels of institutional and social capacity are high. Linkages between institutional and social dimensions can be successfully strengthened by capacity building measures.

Research limitations/implications – As the comparison is based on existing studies on leading cities in sustainability, driving factors likely to play a stronger role in the early phase of urban sustainability measures are underrepresented.

Practical implications – Local authorities are advised to encourage social capacities in order to help them pursue local sustainability over time.

Originality/value – This chapter compares and evaluates underlying success factors going beyond a case-study approach across the Atlantic in order to draw broader conclusions.

Since the publication of the 1987 Brundtland Report, discussions about sustainable development have been nothing short of a buzz among politicians and academics. This chapter takes stock of an emerging strand of the sustainable city literature that recognizes local political dynamics, conflicts of interest, and power struggles.

The review is organized into three sections. The first section reviews how past studies have utilized sustainable urban development as an opportunity for advancing theories of urban politics, highlighting recent developments in the growth machine, regulatory state, and risk society theses. The second section examines a range of studies that place the questions of scale, unit, and boundary at the center of inquiry. The third section draws together a body of research that interrogates different meanings of sustainability.

The first section discusses the extent to which social and political processes in the sustainability age exhibit a pattern consistent with established theoretical accounts. The second section focuses on studies that address how urban sustainable development has brought challenges to existing configurations of spatial relations. These studies pose important methodological and epistemological questions for studying environmental politics. In the third section, the focus is placed on political implications of urban sustainable development, which is subject to multiple interpretations.

This chapter ends with a review of an emerging thesis – strategic urbanism, which draws attention to the patterns of change in urban politics. Much of the contributions to this thesis are based on urban sustainability politics in recent years.

In the context of a changing global environment, governance is understood as one of the main strategic pillars of the shifting paradigm. Governance is an evolved model of governing which is conceptualized as a system to define and implement strategies, in which decisions are the result of interaction between public and private institutions and society. They need to work together within a set of values and principles: openness, participation, consultation, dialogue, innovation, coordination, strong leadership, effectiveness, accountability, and more. In tourism, governance is increasingly becoming a consolidated system to create and implement inclusive management processes. Thus, governance becomes the cornerstone for the success of destinations to achieve sustainable development.

Corporate governance (CG), initially associated with private organizations, has been adopted by higher education institutions (HEIs). These are being managed more as firms in this post-standardization phase, in which the commercialization of higher education, competition and selective choice, finite resources and sustainable development (SD) have become major requirements for accountability and action. Principles of CG can collaborate and guide the process of making universities sustainable. The chapter analyses the effects of CG on the creation of a culture of sustainability in universities. In doing so, it analyzes the websites of public HEIs in EU-15 countries for a set of social responsibility indicators and investigates the impact and practices of two young Portuguese universities regarding United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals. The results point out that CG and SD principles tend to guide the strategy of most public HEIs in the EU-15, confirming that they have made a commitment to good governance and sustainability.

The emerging challenges of the tourism market determine a strategic and urgent need to introduce the sustainability paradigm into destination planning in order to pursue balanced development and achieve or maintain a long-term competitive advantage. This chapter focuses on destination governance to build projects on the principles of sustainability by involving local stakeholders in decision making. The discussion on the application of an embedded governance model relates to marginal rural areas of Central European countries (Italy, Austria, Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovenia), where the European Project Listen to the Voice of Villages leverages sustainable tourism to improve the welfare and quality of life of local communities.

The purpose of this chapter is to contribute to the theory building of transformative university by delivering two conceptual models for legitimizing entrepreneurial university with a transformative role in quadruple helix for sustainability governance structures as being nominated as “responsible facilitator.” This chapter draws many theoretical insights sourced from Entrepreneurial University (Etzkowitz, 1988), Institutional Theory (Scott, 1987), quadruple/quintuple helix (Carayannis & Campbell, 2009a, b) and Responsible Innovation (Owen, Macnaghten, & Stilgoe, 2012) in order to frame the resulting conceptual models of transformative university for sustainability and quadruple helix for sustainability governance. The conceptual models offer a new paradigm discussion for the changing role of universities in knowledge economy and opens up for further investigation of quadruple helix actors namely as transformative university, society, industry and government for strategic capital, social capital, economic capital and culture–human capital interventions in sustainability governance. The second model illustrates the key interventions of quadruple helix actors in four pillars of capital delivering concrete examples of activities. The originality of this chapter lies in its discourse articulating a multilayered approach for the institutionalization of entrepreneurial university embedded in a responsible innovation ecosystem based on individual, organizational and macro-level perspectives. Quadruple helix actors are nominated as “responsible facilitator,” “hybrid hub,” “agile regulator” and “pressure beneficiary” roles for their relevant place in sustainability governance structure.