14676370710817174

International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education
Dissonance in students' perceptions of sustainable development and sustainability:

Implications for curriculum change
Fumiyo Kagawa
Article information:
Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)
To cite this document:

Fumiyo Kagawa, (2007),"Dissonance in students' perceptions of sustainable development and
sustainability", International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 8 Iss 3 pp. 317 - 338
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14676370710817174
Downloaded on: 16 April 2016, At: 21:32 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 40 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 5346 times since 2007*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

(2011),"College students' perceptions of campus sustainability", International Journal of Sustainability in
Higher Education, Vol. 12 Iss 1 pp. 79-92 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14676371111098320
(2015),"Sustainable campus: engaging the community in sustainability", International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 16 Iss 1 pp. 57-71 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-07-2013-0080
(2010),"Competences for sustainable development and sustainability: Significance and challenges
for ESD", International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 11 Iss 4 pp. 391-403 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/14676371011077603
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:231834 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1467-6370.htm
Dissonance in students
perceptions of sustainable
development and sustainability
Implications for curriculum change
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
317
Fumiyo Kagawa
Centre for Sustainable Futures, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
Abstract
Purpose An online questionnaire survey was conducted to explore University of Plymouth
students perceptions and understandings of, and attitudes towards, sustainable development and
related concepts and issues. In general, student perceptions of sustainable development have been
under-researched. This research sought to go some way towards filling the gap by providing insights
for those working in the field of education for sustainable development (ESD) in higher education.
Design/methodology/approach The survey was administrated in autumn 2005 by the Centre for
Sustainable Futures at the University of Plymouth. The closed-category statements were analyzed in
terms of frequencies and percentages. A comprehensive set of cross tabulations and x 2 tests were also
conducted using SPSS. Responses to open-ended questions were coded and categorized according to
emerging themes.
Findings Key findings include, first, that a majority of student respondents think sustainability is
a good thing their positive response not particularly correlating with their degree of familiarity with
either of the concepts of sustainable development or sustainability. Second, students strongly associate
the concepts of sustainable development and sustainability with their environmental as against
economic and social aspects. Third, in terms of personal change for a sustainable lifestyle, light green
actions addressing responsibility as consumers such as changing purchasing habits, recycling, and
saving energy and/or water were most frequently articulated. Fourth, respondents harbour mixed
feelings regarding the future of society in the face of sustainability-oriented challenges.
Originality/value The paper highlights the importance of ESD curriculum development that more
explicitly addresses the interconnectedness of different aspects of sustainable development and which
also employs pedagogies that help students to take action towards realizing their preferred futures. It
also suggests future study directed towards identifying various means of facilitating students
pro-sustainability behaviours.
Keywords Education, Sustainable development, Students, Perception, Learning, Change management
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Education for sustainable development
Education for sustainable development (ESD) currently enjoys huge momentum.
Internationally, there exists a strong political will and commitment to integrate ESD at
The author would like to express her appreciation to Jackie Palmer for her support in
implementation of the online questionnaire survey, and to Paul Hewson for his support on
statistical data analysis using SPSS. She would also like to express her appreciation for comments
on the first draft of this paper by Debby Cotton, Brian Chalkley, and James Gray-Donald. She is
particularly indebted to David Selby for his thorough editing of and detailed comments on the first
and all successive drafts. However, the responsibility for the paper remains her own.
International Journal of Sustainability

in Higher Education
Vol. 8 No. 3, 2007
pp. 317-338
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1467-6370
DOI 10.1108/14676370710817174
IJSHE
8,3
318
all levels of education, including the higher education sector. Its importance was
recognized with the establishment of the United Nations Decade for Education for
Sustainable Development (2005-2014). According to UNESCO, the lead agency for the
decade, ESD is a process of learning how to make decisions that consider the
long-term future of the economy, ecology and equity of all communities (UNESCO,
2004). Haigh (2005, p. 32) states that the decade:
. . . offers academes best chance to date for making the deep and radical changes that will be
necessary if the worlds higher education institutions (HEIs) are to enact their responsibilities
for creating a better and self-sustainable world.
The term, sustainable development has been widely accepted and used since our
common future, commonly known as the Brundtland Commission Report (WCED,
1987). The report defines sustainable development as development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their needs (WCED, 1987, p. 43). It points out the importance of eradication of poverty
and meeting the basic needs of all; of promoting the principles of intergenerational and
intra-generational equity, of recognizing the link between a healthy economy and
healthy environment, and of accepting the limitations set by the carrying capacity of
the environment (WCED, 1987). The notion of sustainable development was further
popularized in the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
in Rio de Janeiro. The outcome of this conference, Agenda 21, delineates a wide range
of strategies for realizing sustainable development, highlighting the role of education
in Chapter 36. With a view to reorienting education towards sustainable development
it suggests accessibility to environmental and development education in formal and
non-formal education for all age groups and integrating cross-cutting issues in all
disciplines using both innovative and traditional pedagogies. In terms of tertiary
education, Agenda 21 encourages cross-disciplinary courses which promote research
and common teaching approaches on sustainable development as well as university
partnerships with other sectors (WCED, 1987, p. 266).
In the context of the UK, there are increasing government commitments to
mainstreaming sustainable development in both school and higher education sectors
(SQW Ltd, 2006). Securing the future, the UK Governments sustainable development
strategy (HM Government, 2005) emphasizes the importance of equipping people
with skills for building a sustainable society, emphasizing that we need to make
sustainability literacy a core competency for professional graduates (p. 39). In the
higher education sector, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE)
published strategy paper, Sustainable development in higher education (2005). The
paper states that:
Within the next ten years, the higher education sector in this country will be recognized as a
major contributor to societys efforts to achieve sustainability through the skills and
knowledge that its graduate learn and put into practice (HEFCE, 2005, p. 1).
The Higher Education Academy (HEA)[1] is also working to include components of

sustainable development in the higher education curriculum. At the time of writing,
15 out of 24 HEA Subject Centres are working to address ESD in their own subject
areas. HEA (2006, p. 6) describes examples of skills and knowledge necessary for an
action-oriented, sustainability literate graduate as follows:
.
.
.
.
an appreciation of the importance of environmental, social, political and

economic contexts for each discipline;
a broad and balanced foundation knowledge of sustainable development, its key
principles and the main debate within them, including its contested and
expanding boundaries;
problem-solving skills in a non-reductionist manner for highly complex real-life
problems;
ability to think creatively and holistically and to make critical judgements;
ability to develop a high-level of self-reflection (both personal and professional);
ability to identify, understand, evaluate and adopt values conducive to
sustainability;
ability to bridge the gap between theory and practice; in sustainable
development, only transformational action counts;
ability to practice creatively in inter-disciplinary teams; and
ability to initiate and manage change.
Against this backdrop, there are endless discussions about what constitutes education
for sustainability (Dawe et al., 2003). Proponents of ESD are not a single homogeneous
group with similar beliefs, values, politics, and practices (Huckle, 1999, p. 41). Many
academics have agreed that there is no single framework, conceptualization, and
understanding of either sustainable development or sustainability. They think that the
concept is rather an evolving one (Hopkins and Mckeown, 2002; Sauve 1996, Selby,
2006).
The Centre for Sustainable Futures at the University of Plymouth
Following a successful bid to HEFCE for a five-year Centre for Excellence in Teaching
and Learning[2], the Centre for Sustainable Futures (CSF)[3] at the University of
Plymouth was opened on 1 June 2005. The University of Plymouth locates in the
South West of England. It is one of the largest universities in the UK and is
consistently ranked as one of the top five modern universities[4] in the UK. The
university consists of seven faculties: arts, education, health and social work, social
science and business, science, technology and a partner colleges faculty.
The goal of CSF is to:
. . . transform the University of Plymouth from an institution characterized by significant
areas of excellence in ESD to an institution modelling university-wide excellence and, hence,
able to make a major contribution to ESD regionally, nationally and internationally (Dyer and
Selby, 2004b, p. 7).
CSF takes a holistic concept of sustainability which embraces the complementary

notions of environmental security, intra-generational and inter-generational equity,
economic betterment, and social and environmental justice (Dyer and Selby 2004a,
p. 1). To achieve the goal of transformation, CSF takes a whole university approach to
sustainability through simultaneous engagement with four key aspects of university
life in order to build synergies and energy flows between different change initiatives:
.
Curriculum (i.e. developing curriculum content/modules which address
sustainability and which use a pedagogy predicated on sustainability
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
319
IJSHE
8,3
.
320
principles; providing continuing professional development programmes for

sustainability; building student action research and work placements with local
and regional sustainability organizations).
Campus (i.e. greening of the campus; enabling active student participation in
decision making and student-led sustainability projects on campus; creating a
sustainability-oriented pedagogy of place).
Community (i.e. building a network of partnerships with local and regional
communities and organizations to advance the sustainability agenda in the
South West of England).
Culture (e.g. identifying and challenging the hidden curriculum of the university
taken-for-granted assumptions about the nature and modus operandi of a
university).
CSF is providing students across the university with increasing opportunities to

engage critically with sustainability agendas. It intends to help them to leave the
university equipped with the values, skills and knowledge to drive the sustainability
agenda forward in their personal and professional lives (Selby, 2005).
Research on student perceptions of sustainable development and sustainability
Although existing literature discusses what students should learn in terms of
sustainability, there is a scarcity of publications exploring what students actually
know about sustainability (Carew and Mitchell, 2002). An academic literature search
through the major library databases (e.g. Australian Education Index, British
Education Index, ERIC, Web of Knowledge) using combinations of keywords (e.g.
student perception, survey, sustainable development/sustainability, higher
education/university) elicited only a few articles. Personal communications with
people in the field of ESD have also confirmed a lack of research into university
students perceptions of sustainable development and/or sustainability[5]. In the UK
the Environmental Audit Committee (2005, p. 6) points out a general lack of statistics
which indicate exactly how many people, whether in formal or informal education, in
the workplace or at home, have a sense of what sustainable development means.
In a world-wide survey of undergraduate engineering students designed to explore
their understanding of sustainable development, Azapagic et al. (2005) highlight the
following key findings: students thought sustainable development was important
despite their low-level of knowledge of sustainable development; students considered
that sustainable development was more important for future generations than for them
personally; students knowledge was strong in terms of environmental issues and they
were relatively familiar with key environmental legislations, policies and standards,
but a significant knowledge gap existed in terms of the social and economic aspects of
sustainable development. Similarly, Summers et al.s (2004) research with students at
the University of Oxford revealed that a large percentage of research participants
recognized the centrality of the environmental dimension (87 per cent) and economic
dimension (69 per cent); however, only-half (49 per cent) of the participants identified
the social dimension of sustainable development. About a third mentioned all three
aspects and a third referred to two of them. By the same token, Stirs (2006, p. 830)
research with students at Griffith University, Australia, enrolled in pre-service teacher
education found that their knowledge of environmental issues was minimal, in spite of
their strong concern about them, and that their understanding of social, cultural and
economic dimensions of ESD was quite superficial.
The above-mentioned knowledge deficit among university students is in line with
findings in Darntons (2004) analysis of a number of UK public surveys on sustainable
development. Darnton (2004, p. 5) concluded that public awareness of sustainable
development runs at less than 30 per cent. When asked to explain the meaning of
sustainable development in one survey, respondents who expressed familiarity with
the term could not give even partially-accurate answers while in another survey
almost no one among the 20 per cent of respondents who claimed to be aware of
sustainable development could actually explain the term. Darnton (2004, pp. 6-7) points
out that the term sustainable development is a conversation stopper or a turn off
for members of the public. In 2006, HEA conducted an online national survey focusing
on UK university students skills associated with corporate social responsibility and
sustainable development. At the time of writing, the result is not available yet, but the
findings of this study will give important insights for people addressing issues of
sustainable development in higher education.
The survey
A main aim of the survey described here is to explore University of Plymouth students
current understandings and perceptions of, and attitudes towards, sustainable
development, and related concepts and issues. To optimize the impact of the various
initiatives of CSF, it was considered critical to understand students current
perceptions of sustainable development and sustainability, as they represent the key
stakeholder group. Prior to this survey, no survey of the whole University of Plymouth
student population with regard to their perceptions of sustainable development
and sustainability had been conducted. As the section above reported, university
students perceptions of sustainable development and sustainability have been
under-researched, so it was anticipated that this survey research would produce useful
data and insights for those who are working in the field of ESD in the UK and beyond.
The three key research questions are as follows:
RQ1. What are students understanding of sustainable development and
sustainability?
RQ2. What are students attitudes towards and concerns with respect to
sustainability-oriented challenges?
RQ3. What actions are students prepared to take towards realizing a more
sustainable lifestyle?
An online web questionnaire was developed in autumn 2005. In designing the
questionnaire, special attention was paid to including various sustainability-related
issues (e.g. environment, development, human rights, peace, inter/intra-generational
equity, social justice) at different levels (i.e. personal, university, regional/national,
international). The statements about the future of society were developed based on a
model suggested by Robertson (1983). Five open-ended questions were included in
order to elicit a fuller expression of student views. After a pilot test with a small sample
of students, adjustments were made. A central issue in the wake of the pilot concerned
whether definitions of sustainable development and sustainability should preface
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
321
IJSHE
8,3
322
the questionnaire. In the end it was decided that no definitions should be included so as
not to influence students own understandings and definitions of the terms. The online
questionnaire survey was administered over four weeks during the period of October
and November 2005 through the University of Plymouth Student Portal as well as via
the University e-mail message system with a covering note inviting responses.
A final total of 1,889 responses was received, an 8 per cent response rate. Although
the return rate was low, it is, nonetheless, significant that there were 1,889 voluntary
student responses in the face of so-called student survey fatigue and with no monetary
incentives in play. In addition, although the sample is not totally representative in
terms of age and faculty affiliation, it was relatively representative in terms of gender
balance across the total University of Plymouth student population[6].
The closed-category statements were analysed in terms of frequencies and
percentages. Associations between responses to questions, as well as between question
responses and key demographic features such as gender, age[7] and faculty affiliation
were explored using SPSS. A comprehensive set of x 2 tests were also applied to test for
statistical significance. Responses to open-ended questions were read a few times and
coded and categorized by emerging themes. A content analysis was undertaken,
comprising frequencies and percentages by categories.
Results
Students perceptions and understandings of sustainable development and sustainability
When asked about their familiarity with the terms sustainable development and
sustainability, a preponderance of respondents reported familiarity with both: about
one-third of respondents declared themselves very familiar with either term
(sustainable development 34.2 per cent; sustainability 40.7 per cent), one-third identified
themselves as quite familiar (sustainable development 36.5 per cent; sustainability
35.8 per cent) and approximately a third reported that they were either quite
unfamiliar or not at all familiar (sustainable development 29.3 per cent; sustainability
23.5 per cent) (Figure 1).
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 1.
Familiarity with the terms:
sustainable development
or sustainability
Very familiar
Quite familiar
sustainable development (n=1865)
Quite unfamiliar
Not at all
familiar
sustainability (n=1864)
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
323
100%
80%
60%
40%
Very familiar
Quite familiar
Quite unfamiliar
Not at all familiar
20%
Arts
Education
Health &
Social Work
Social Science &

Business
Science
Sustainability
Sustainable
development
Sustainability
Sustainable
Development
Sustainability
Sustainable
Development
Sustainability
Sustainable
Development
Sustainability
Sustainable
Development
Sustainability
0%
Sustainable
Development
As to gender, more male respondents claimed that they were more familiar with the
terms sustainable development and sustainability than female respondents. In terms of
familiarity with the term, sustainable development, 40.5 per cent of the male
respondents answered very familiar while 29.3 per cent of the female respondents
chose very familiar. Almost twice as many female students (23 per cent) chose not at
all familiar as against male respondents (12.1 per cent) ( p , 0.000). Similarly, female
respondents were less likely to declare themselves very or quite familiar with the
term sustainability (male 83.7 per cent; female 71 per cent) and more likely to say that
they were not at all familiar (male 9.6 per cent; female 19.1 per cent) ( p , 0.000).
A slightly higher percentage of respondents under 24-years old indicated they were
very familiar with the term sustainable development (over 35 per cent) and a
slightly higher percentage of respondents over 30 years old chose not very familiar
(22.3 per cent) compared with other age groups ( p , 0.013). In the same vein, a slightly
higher percentage of respondents under 24-years old described themselves as very
familiar with the term sustainability (42.9 per cent) while a slightly higher percentage
of the students under 20 (17 per cent) and over 30 (17.7 per cent) opted for not at all
familiar compared with other age groups ( p , 0.010).
Only a very small percentage (9.3 per cent) of respondents from the Health and
Social Work Faculty declared themselves very familiar with sustainable
development, while a high-percentage of students in the Faculty (39.8 per cent)
opted for not at all familiar. A lower proportion of respondents from the Arts and
Science Faculties declared themselves not at all familiar (arts 14.3 per cent; science 13
per cent) than respondents from other faculties ( p , 0.000). Similarly, respondents
from arts (53.5 per cent) and social science and business (48.3 per cent) identified
themselves as quite familiar with the term sustainability, compared with only 16.1
per cent of health and social work students (Figure 2).
Technology
Figure 2.
Familiarity with the terms:
sustainable development
or sustainability by
faculty
IJSHE
8,3
324
Of respondents, 48.9 per cent answered in the affirmative when asked if they had
participated in formal curriculum courses which addressed sustainability or
sustainable development.
More male than female respondents (male 45.3 per cent; female 38.7 per cent)
( p , 0.000), more respondents under 20-years of age as against other age groups
(under 20: 53.8 per cent; 20-24: 47.1 per cent; 25-29: 25.8 per cent; over 30:14 per cent)
( p , 0.000), and more respondents from the Social Science and Business Faculty as
against respondents from other faculties (social science and business 50.2 per cent;
science 46.9 per cent; education 44 per cent; arts 37 per cent; technology 36 per cent;
health and social work 17.9 per cent) ( p , 0.000) responded positively that they had
previously experienced formal education addressing sustainability and sustainable
development. Those who answered in the affirmative were further asked to give an
example of a previous formal curriculum area in which sustainable development or
sustainability was addressed.
Geography dominates, making up 62.8 per cent of responses. Returns for other
subjects all fall below 10 per cent of total responses (e.g. biology 8.7 per cent;
environmental science 7.6 per cent; economics 3.2 per cent; tourism 1.8 per cent; design
1.6 per cent; construction 1.4 per cent) (Table I).
Only 19.1 per cent of respondents reported involvement in out-of-school
sustainability-related activities (Figure 3). Those who answered in the affirmative
were asked to give an example of their involvement. Table II show categories of
students sustainability-related past experience outside of school and percentage of
students falling within each category. The five most frequently occurring categories are
Most frequently occurring curriculum area

Table I.
Previous formal
education where
participants have
addressed sustainability
or sustainable
development (n 760)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Frequency of the word (Percentages)
Geography
Biology
Environmental science
Economics
Tourism
Design
Construction
477
66
58
24
14
12
11
(62.8)
(8.7)
(7.6)
(3.2)
(1.8)
(1.6)
(1.4)
Yes
Formal curriculum
Figure 3.
Previous experience in
terms of sustainable
development and
sustainability
Out-of-school activities
No
20
40
60
80
100 (%)
nature conservation (39.6 per cent), education (12.7 per cent), recycling (11.4 per cent),
community/local work (9.4 per cent), political action (5.8 per cent).
There were 3,857 responses to the request to write up to four keywords conveying
personal understandings of sustainable development. A total of 1,018 keywords were
offered by those distinguishing between sustainability and sustainable development.
This discrepancy in numbers could imply that the majority of the respondents did not
distinguish these terms very strictly. This view is confirmed since the contents of
responses to the keywords for sustainable development and sustainability overlap as
Figure 4 shows (Table III).
What stands out is that the environmental dimension is strongly identified within
respondents conceptions of both terms. In contrast, the social and economic
dimensions of sustainable development and sustainability remain marginal although
Most frequently occurring categories
Examples
1. Nature conservation
2. Education
Conservation; cleaning beaches; plant trees

Dissertations/researches; educational work in
Africa
Recycle; reduce waste; reuse
Community volunteer; community
development work; charity work
Boycott; campaign; members of organizations
(e.g. Friends of the Earth; Greenpeace)
3. Recycling
4. Community/local work
5. Political action
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
325
Percentages
39.6
12.7
11.4
9.4
5.8
Table II.
Most frequently
occurring categories of
students
sustainability-related
past experience outside of
school and percentage of
students falling within
each category (n 308)
(%)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1E
nv
nt
nt
gy tasis tude ocal obal ions
on
ial mic ture term
ity ent
oc
cti
m
me olo
me
l
o
u
bil
s
L
ti
pt
2 S Econ he f ong rove 7 Sta vern and a nage echn meo n at
14 15 G erce
a
a
o
P
T
3
4 T 5 L Imp
m
Go ing
H
M
6
u
1
8
1
1
6
n
12 3 H
10
ear
1
9L
nta
me
n
iro
sustainable development ( n=3857)
sustainability (n=1018)
Figure 4.
Keywords for sustainable
development and
sustainability
IJSHE
8,3
Categories
Examples
Aspects
1. Environmental
326
Table III.
Categories used to code
keywords for sustainable
development and
sustainability
Alternative/clean energy; biodiversity; conservation;

environment/environmental; environmental/ecofriendly; earth; green; organic food; permaculture;
recycle
2. Social
Diversity; equality; equity; public transport; people;
quality of life society; social; social justice
3. Economic
Economy; fair trade; poverty; production;
Temporal (including time projection and rhythm)
4. The future
Future; future generations; future needs; our
children; tomorrow
5. Long-term
Constant; continuation; long-term; overtime;
on-going
6. Improvement
Advancement; betterment; growth; improvement;
progress
7. Stability
Consistent; stable; stay the same
Approaches towards sustainable development/sustainability
8. Governance, policy, politics
Agenda 21; Brundtland report; government; UN; EU
9. Learning and action
Action; awareness; consideration; education;
empowerment; research
10. Management
Control; maintain; manage; plan; prevent; support
11. Technology, building, and design
Alternative technology; eco-design technology
12. Homeostasis
Balance; cycle; harmony; self-sufficiency
13. Human attitude
Accountability; altruism; commitment ethical;
health; moral; responsibility; well-being
Scale/level
14. Local
Community; local
15. Global/international
Global; worldwide
Perceptions of sustainable development/sustainability
16. Perceptions/feelings
Beneficial; challenging; controversial; essential;
good; needed; necessary; positive
they are commonly identified as key factors alongside the environment by a range of
authorities including UNESCO (2004) and McKeown (2002). Returns for other
keywords all fall under 10 per cent of responses. Interestingly, 5.5 per cent of keyword
responses for sustainable development and 9.3 per cent of the responses for
sustainability earmarked specific characteristics of respondents answers, which were
comments on rather than explanations of the terms (e.g. good beneficial
challenging necessary positive essential controversial needed). Such
descriptions could be construed as confirming that respondents understandings of
sustainable development and sustainability are vague or wooly (Darnton, 2004).
Students attitudes towards and concerns about sustainability-oriented challenges
In a question asking respondents to identify with one of a range of positive through
negative attitudes towards sustainability, a majority of the respondents veered
strongly towards the positive: 71.5 per cent of respondents thought sustainability a
good thing and 20.3 per cent of respondents considered themselves as a passionate
advocate. Only a small percentage of respondents chose to identify with a neutral,
non-committal, or negative statement of sustainability: It is OK if others want to do it

(4.6 per cent); I am not really bothered (2.9 per cent); I think it is a waste of time and
effort (0.7 per cent) (Figure 5).
The percentages of responses elicited by 12 attitudinal questions are presented
below as sets of stacked bar graphs according to environmental, social and economic
aspects of sustainability.
More than 80 per cent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement
concerning the need for collective and radical social change given the threat of climate
change, with a similar large percentage asserting the rights of non-human animals.
About 70 per cent of respondents supported not buying from an environmentally
unconcerned company. A relatively high-percentage of respondents (respectively 17.5
and 22.9 per cent) did not know whether to avoid buying from an ecologically
unconcerned company and whether the ecological crisis had been greatly exaggerated
(Figure 6).
More than 80 per cent of respondents opposed retention of a dominant
growth-oriented economic policies. In the two statements directly referring to the
University of Plymouth, 60.8 per cent of respondents supported the exclusive use of
locally produced food in the university cafeteria and 68 per cent supported the
exclusive use of Fair Trade products on campus (Figure 7).
Almost 90 per cent of respondents acknowledged the importance of learning from
cultures living harmoniously with nature. About 80 per cent also supported socially
inclusive local public transportation and more than 90 per cent favoured supporting
and celebrating cultural diversity among the University of Plymouth populations.
Respondents opinions were divided when it came to their views on whether they
preferred a society based on competition. In sum, the above results of 12 attitudinal
questions show that respondents generally support pro-sustainability positions under
each identified key aspect of sustainability (Figure 8).
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
327
Students personal views of the future of society

Table IV shows students personal views of the future of society. Respondents
opinions were divided over six presented scenarios of the future of society. There were
some tendencies discernible in the choice of scenario associated with the demographic
characteristics of respondents. For instance, in terms of gender, a much higher
percentage of male respondents favoured technological solutions as a means of
I think it is a waste of time and effort

I am not really bothered
It is OK if others want to do it
I think it is a good thing
I am a passionate advocate
0
10
20
30
40
%
50
60
70
80
Figure 5.
How would you describe
your attitude towards
sustainability? (n 1535)
IJSHE
8,3
328
We, as a society, should radically

change our way of living to offset
the danger of climate change.
(n=1833)
The earth has plenty of natural

resources for future generations.
(n=1840)
The so-called 'ecological crisis' facing

human beings has been greatly
exaggerated. (n=1842)
Non-human animals have rights.

(n=1844)
I avoid buying from a company which

shows no concern for the
environment. (n=1844)
0%
Figure 6.
Environmental aspect
10%
20%
Strongly agree
30%
Agree
40%
I do not care
50%
60%
I do not know
70%
80%
Disagree
90%
100%
Strongly disagree
The University of Plymouth should

only purchase fair trade products
where such products exist. (n=1844)
The UK should maintain high and

stable levels of economic growth,
even if it disregards the environment.
(n=1843)
The cafeterias of the University of

Plymouth should only use locally
produced foods. (n=1827)
0%
Figure 7.
Economic aspect
10%
20%
Strongly agree
30%
Agree
40%
I do not care
50%
60%
I do not know
70%
80%
Disagree
90%
100%
Strongly disagree
achieving a better future society (male 13.2 per cent; female 1.2 per cent). A slightly
higher percentage of female than male students opted for the formation of local
economies as the way forward (female17.9 per cent; male 10.9 per cent). This result
interestingly somewhat synchronizes with Robertsons (1983, p. 23) observation
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
The University of Plymouth should

strongly support and celebrate
cultural. religious and linguistic
diversity among students and staff
members. (n=1840)
A dynamic society based on
competition is most preferable.
(n=1829)
329
It is imperative to learn from

cultures where people live more
harmoniously with nature. (n=1839)
The City of Plymouth should

ensure socially inclusive public
transportation. (n=1827)
0%
10%
20%
Strongly agree
30%
Agree
40%
I do not care
50%
60%
I do not know
70%
Disagree
80%
90%
100%
Strongly disagree
Statements
Technological progress will overcome all ecological problems we face and eliminate
extreme poverty
We are headed straight for ecological catastrophe and in my lifetime I will see the
consequent collapse of our social and economic systems
The best way forward is the formation of local economies of exchange centred around
the values of smallness, justice, eco-concern and living in voluntary simplicity
Recent government policies about the environment, trade and social services combined
with a better educated youth will ensure a safe, healthy, sustainable society living within
ecological limits
Only through strong authoritarian government will we be able to establish justice and
equality which will ensure a safe, healthy and sustainable society living within
ecological limits
I do not have a personal view of the future of society
Figure 8.
Social aspect
Percentages
8.0
19.1
18.4
28.4
13.9
12.1
that a significant number of proponents of the development and efficient use of

technology are male and that a decentralized and ecological future is preferred by
females. Regarding age, a slightly higher percentage of respondents under 20 years of
age supported strong governmental leadership (government policies 30.4 per cent;
authoritarian government 16.4 per cent) and a slightly higher percentage
of respondents over 30 years old favoured the formation of local economies
(30.6 per cent) as against other age groups ( p , 0.000). In terms of faculty affiliation,
not a single student from Education or Health and Social Work Faculty embraced the
technological progress option, while a much higher percentage of respondents from the
Technology Faculty (18.5 per cent) and a slightly higher percentage from Social
Table IV.
Which one of the
following most nearly
represents your personal
view of the future of
society? (n 1,524)
IJSHE
8,3
330
Science and Business Faculty (10.8 per cent) opted for technological responses
( p , 0.000).
There were 437 written responses giving a wide spread of individual views on the
future of society. Interestingly, a sizeable number of comments (134 responses) touched
upon the importance of government initiatives. Ideas such as enforcing regulations
compulsory strong political incentives take control radical policies/steps and
high taxes were repeatedly used by these respondents in describing envisioned
government initiatives. For instance, one student wrote Governments need to play a
strong role in regulating industry even more than the private consumer. According to
another student:
Future governments will need to implement strong political incentives and regulations
quickly, face[d] with global warming and the ongoing environmental devastation. It is only a
strong and clear political will that will drive society towards sustainability. Without this, we
are headed to potential catastrophe.
Another interesting point is that 96 respondents wrote about crises and disasters. The
characteristics of crises which student respondents described were more global than
local, more environmental or ecological than socio-political. Their opinions were
divided when it came to when such disasters would take place. Some thought they
could happen during their lifetime, while others thought they could happen during
their childrens or grandchildrens lifetimes. The US Government, western counties,
globalization and lack of economic justice, consumerism, capitalism, human greed, and
underlying worldviews were variously identified as causes of current and potential
disasters.
Deep concern, even some pessimism, about the future of the society was expressed
by 67 respondents. For instance, one student wrote:
I do feel that with nations such as the USA declaring war on every nation they feel they have
to interfere with, the world is going to become a war zone and will be on the verge of collapse.
Another student stated that Ecological catastrophe is inevitable. We cant reverse

the damage done, its just too late. We will have to learn to live another way. In the
same token, some students pessimistically felt that necessary changes would only
be instigated after serious disasters happened. In the words of one respondent:
Our culture is going to hell in a hand basket, our governments attempts at curbing the
pending disaster seem to centre around waiting for the disaster to occur before actually
getting on with doing anything.
In the words of another, When a catastrophe happens then we will take notice as we
will have no other choice.
In contrast, there were respondents who considered that potential disasters could be
pre-empted fully or to some extent. For some, technological solutions (e.g. developing
alternative energies) were the key (60 responses) while, for others, education and
awareness raising were considered as crucial for positive change (79 responses). One
student for instance, wrote: Education of all generations, but particularly younger
ones, is necessary in overcoming environmental and social problems, prejudice and
injustice.
However, it is critical to note that students overall feelings could not be simply cast
as either optimistic or pessimistic. It seems that a small number of students were in a
process of internal struggle, balancing their feelings towards conflicting future

scenarios with, on the one hand, despair and, on the other, hope (14 responses). For
instance, one student wrote:
Its too late for many species to escape extinction. I think wars will become more frequent,
resulting from competition for resources and space. But its not completely hopeless, at least I
hope not!
Another stated:
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
331
I dont hold out much hope. Maybe this is all part of evolution. The animals seemed to be
doing fine before we came along. Frankly the world would be better off without a single
human being existing on this planet. Its too late . . . we have [disrupted] everything. All I can
do is deal with the day-to-day challenge and bring it down to a smaller picture and do what I
can to salvage what is left. Contribution for my life time is what I can do. Thats why Ive
chosen to study . . . to do what I can in my life time.
Actions towards a more sustainable living

There were in total 5,729 responses to a request to list up to six of the most important
things individuals were prepared to do in their personal life so as to live a sustainable
lifestyle (Table V).
The most frequently mentioned theme is consumer change with 1,399 responses
(24.4 per cent). Such actions included, predominantly, changing purchasing habits by
consciously choosing products which are organic, fair-trade, locally produced and/or
healthy. Changing eating habits (e.g. becoming vegetarian/vegan) and growing ones
own food were also frequent answers under this theme. Answers also signalled
intentions to purchase from companies which are environmentally and/or socially
ethical and to boycott products if the company exploited the environment and/or
people. In contrast, addressing consumerism by reducing the amount of things they
will buy in the first place, or not being a consumer were mentioned a mere 46 times
(1 per cent).
Recycling constituted the second most frequent cluster of actions chosen by
respondents (1,250 responses, 21.8 per cent). The third most frequent cluster was to
change forms of transport (818 responses, 14.3 per cent): avoiding or reducing car use;
more use of public transportation; more cycling and walking. In contrast, reducing air
Most frequently occurring
categories
Examples
Buy/eat/support fair trade, local, organic

and/or healthy products
2. Recycling
Recycle; reduce waste; compost
3. Change forms of
Car share; less use of car; walk/cycle more;
transportation
use more public transportation
4. Energy and/or water saving Energy and/or water saving/conservation;
be energy efficient
5. Education
Educate; learn; be aware
6. Alternative energy use
Use solar/wind power; use bio-fuel; use
clean/alternative energy
7. Political actions
Advocate; campaign; vote; protest;
8. Nature conservation
Clean beach/river; do not litter; plant trees
Frequencies
(percentages)
1. Consumer change
1,399 (24.4)
1,250 (21.8)
818 (14.3)
646 (11.3)
394 (6.9)
177 (3.1)
128 (2.2)
110 (1.3)
Table V.
Categories used to code
what students are
prepared to do in their
personal for a sustainable
lifestyle and the
frequencies and
percentage of students
falling within each
category (n 5,729)
IJSHE
8,3
332
flights was mentioned only 15 times (0.2 per cent). Energy and/or water conservation
(646 responses, 11.3 per cent) and alternative energy use (177 responses, 3.1 per cent)
constituted, in combination, the fourth most frequent areas of action. Answers here
ranged from general answers such as save energy/water and be energy/water
efficient to a very specific and practical behaviours such as turning off lights less
use of shower/bath. Fifth in frequency was education (394 responses, 6.9 per cent)
not only self-education, but also educating peers and children as well as the general
public as playing an important role in moving towards a sustainable lifestyle.
In terms of lifestyle change toward sustainability, some respondents honestly
expressed their dilemmas. Personal preference, convenience and/or comfort seem to get
in the way of being sustainable. For instance, one student wrote about his difficulty in
giving up what he likes:
I love cars and motorbikes well anything that runs on petrol or other highly flammable
fuels and would NEVER give up the privilege of owning and enjoying one, two or maybe
more if I can afford too. So maybe Im not so good for the environment after all . . . But its a
worthwhile sacrifice.
In a similar vein, another student wrote:

I guess I am not willing to give up travel by flying or give up having my food shipped round
the world so I can have some diversity in my diet, but I am willing to make small alterations
to my everyday life style to keep the Britain/the world more sustainable.
Others wrote about financial constraints for lifestyle change. One student who is a
single parent on a bursary with two special needs children reluctantly stated I am
often too stressed and financially inadequate to do as much as I want. Similarly,
another student expressed that [c]ost is an important factor in determining what
changes can be made to a persons life-style.
Discussion: dissonance in students perceptions of sustainable
development and sustainability
This survey found that more than 90 per cent of respondents held a positive attitude
towards sustainability, identifying sustainability as a good thing or declaring
themselves as passionate advocates for sustainability. As might have been anticipated,
those who were very familiar with the term sustainable development or sustainability
were more likely to be a passionate advocate. Both those who are familiar and not so
familiar with the terms sustainable development and sustainability by and large
thought sustainability a good thing. However, this finding raises the important
question of whether acceptance of sustainability is in any way useful unless
accompanied by understanding of its contested meanings? Does this general acceptance
of the controversial indicate a lack of critical reflection?
It is important to note that the above-mentioned general support of sustainability
does not mean respondents understand either the contested and multi-faceted nature of
sustainability nor the holistic nature of the concept as proposed by proponents. In fact,
it has become apparent through this survey that there exist knowledge gaps in terms of
student respondents understandings of sustainability. The concept is predominantly
associated with environmental aspects and actions. Social, economic, political and
cultural dimensions of sustainability were less represented and remain marginal to the
understandings of most. Keywords which are held by some writers (Sterling, 2004) to
characterize education for sustainability, such as democracy, diversity, participation,

inclusion, appear only occasionally or not at all in both keywords sections. Such
knowledge or concept deficits are in line with previous university students perception
research for sustainability such as Azapagic et al. (2005) and Summers et al. (2004).
Acknowledging the social and cultural construction of the term as well as its multiple
interpretations among different cultures and interest groups within a culture, Fien and
Tilbury (2002, p. 2) raise the following important questions to be considered in any
discussion of ESD:
Over what time period are we talking sustainability? The human life span? This generation
and the next? Or are we concerned with sustainability on ecological lifetime-scales? And what
kind of development do we want to sustain: social, cultural, political, spiritual and/or
economic? (And are these separable?) What changes are required to achieve sustainability
and how are they to be achieved? What are the implications for economic growth? Are there
limits to economic growth in a sustainable society and, if so, what are they?
Those critical questions need to be raised in order to deepen and expand students
current understanding of sustainable development and sustainability.
There also exist dissonances in terms of student respondents perceptions of
sustainability and their reported behaviour determinations. It seems that respondents
tend to agree with critical or even radical statements on behalf of environmental and
social justice. For instance, more than 80 per cent of respondents strongly agreed or
agreed with the statement, We, as a society, should radically change our way of living
to offset the danger of climate change and more than 80 per cent of respondents
strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement, The UK should maintain high
and stable levels of economic growth, even if it disregards the environment. However,
when it comes to personal behaviour changes, their proposed individual lifestyle
changes do not necessarily align with their critical or radical in principle stances.
Most frequently mentioned actions actions addressing responsibilities as consumers,
recycling, energy and/or water saving, changing forms of transport fall under the
umbrella of reformist responses, in other words, light green on a light to
dark green spectrum (Porritt and Winner, 1988; Selby, 2000a, b). Dark green
responses offering a radical, visionary and fundamentalist challenge to the prevailing
economic and political world order (Porritt and Winner, 1988, p. 11) were less
frequently articulated by respondents. Those dark green responses tended to
embrace radical proposals for institutional and political change, critiquing
taken-for-granted assumptions, but only a small percentage of respondents (0.8 per
cent) critically addressed the fundamental issue of consumerism by articulating a not
being a consumer stance. The above-mentioned light green actions are indeed
meaningful steps, and accumulations of such changes could make a significant
difference. However, are they feel good actions[8] emanating from feel good
sustainability (Wals and Heymann, 2004) and only delaying solutions which are
urgently required, and even buttressing the status quo?
It is beyond the scope of this paper to deal with the huge area of behavioural change
toward pro-sustainability behaviours. In fact, the process which facilitates any
behaviour change is very complex, as Folke (2003, p. 227) states:
. . . directing human behaviour towards improved environmental performance and
sustainability is not just a simple matter of providing information and policy prescriptions
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
333
IJSHE
8,3
334
but a complex socio-cultural process. It will require understanding of the contexts that form,
shape and reshape habits of thought and action.
Increasing knowledge by itself will not automatically facilitate individual behavioural

change as Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) and Darnton (2004), among others, have
already pointed out. There are multiple factors which influence the process of
behavioural change and further investigation of dissonance between students
perception of sustainability and their individual actions needs to be explored.
As described above, student respondents expressed a mixture of optimism and
pessimism towards the future of society in relation to sustainability-oriented
challenges. Some expressed a probable future, the future which is likely to happen,
while some expressed a preferred future, the future they would like to see happen (Pike
and Selby, 1988). In their descriptions of the probable future, a sense of frustration,
anxiety, sadness, even cynicism, were commonly intermingled. On the other hand,
descriptions of preferred futures were infused with optimism and notions of active
participation and engagement.
According to Hicks (2002) and Macy (1983), it is not unusual for young people to
express their sadness, anxiety, personal insecurity, cynicism and sometimes denial, in
learning about the state of the planet. Hicks (2002, p. 70) notes that the emotional
impact of global issues on students leaning is still a neglected area of research and
points out that there is an urgent need to develop and implement pedagogies which
provide a sense of hope, liberation and empowerment among students. Based on his
research and his own teaching experiences, Hicks (2002) emphasizes that it is
important for educators to support young learners who articulate pessimistic probable
futures by envisioning preferable futures. In that process, educators need to
acknowledge that learning about global issues can never be solely a cognitive matter
(p. 99) and an affective aspect plays an important role. However, this could be a
challenging task for higher education institutions where learning is still largely
treated as a cognitive affair, with some attention possibly being paid to attitudes and
values where this seems appropriate and, in turn, the learners resist the affective
(p. 108).
Taking into consideration the research findings of students mixed feelings towards
the future of society, there is an urgent need to develop empowering pedagogies so that
each student can act as a change agent in their own life and community as well as in
their future professional life. It is important to increase knowledge of multi-faceted
sustainability but simply accumulating knowledge about sustainability by itself is not
enough. Problem solving skills, creative and critical thinking, and self-reflection are
vital as HEA (2006) and Wals (2005), among others, point out. Pedagogies also need to
help students envision their preferred futures. Not only encouraging visioning of, but
also supporting actions towards desired futures, as well as pre-empting undesired
futures, will be key in this regard. Furthermore, students should be encouraged to
examine critically multiple perspectives in sustainability debates within a no single
right answer culture.
Conclusions
So what are the principal findings in the light of the three research questions set out?
First, this study has found that student respondents strongly associate the concepts of
sustainable development and sustainability with their environmental as against their
economic and social aspects. Put another way, they associate the concepts
uni-dimensionally with the environment rather than embracing a holistic
(multi-dimensional) interpretation. Such results suggest that curriculum
development work to embed sustainability needs to address more explicitly the
interconnectedness of different aspects of sustainability, by linking the environmental
(natural environment, in particular) aspect of sustainability with economic, social,
cultural, inter/intra generational aspects of sustainability in order to help students
understand the complexity of sustainability-oriented concepts, understandings and
challenges.
Second, this study has also found that respondents possess general
pro-sustainability attitudes, and they harbour mixed feelings regarding the future of
society in the face of sustainability-oriented challenges. Feelings are still a largely
neglected area in higher education learning. Hence, facilitating not only cognitive but
also affective learning in terms of ESD remains a challenge. Pedagogies which help
students envision and take actions towards their preferred futures need to be
developed. In such development, bridging theory and practice, examining the role and
style of lectures, and creating a positive learning environment will be important
elements to be examined.
Third, in terms of personal change for a sustainable lifestyle, students respondents
most frequently articulate actions addressing responsibility as consumers such as
changing purchasing habits, recycling, saving energy and/or water, and changing
forms of transport. In order for students to actually take those pro-sustainability
actions, the university campus should provide infrastructures to facilitate those
actions, and more importantly create opportunities where students could participate in
greening of campus initiatives by themselves. There are obviously different ideological
and political stances regarding how to deal with sustainability-related issues among
different stakeholders. For instance, some would think the above-described personal
actions would indeed make a significant difference; some would advocate more radical
structural changes; others would suggest a combination of both. When different ways
of promoting sustainable development are openly shared and discussed, there will be
rich learning opportunities. As a future study, various means of facilitating students
pro-sustainability behaviours should be explored.
Obviously, there is no universal formula for ESD. In order to make student learning
more relevant to a specific contest, it is indeed vital to create a curriculum change
process within which students needs, aspirations, and concerns for sustainability are
addressed. In a rapidly changing and uncertain world faced by sustainability-oriented
challenges, higher education needs to play an increasingly significant role in helping
students become active responsible citizens.
Notes
1. The HEA is an independent organization mainly funded by the four UK higher education
funding bodies and higher education institutions. It aims at helping higher education
institutions to provide best learning experience for their students.
2. Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETLs) were created in England. Each one
of them addresses a particular educational issue or theme. The Centre for Excellence in
Teaching and Learning in Education for Sustainable Development (CETL ESD) is called the
Centre for Sustainable Futures (Dyer et al., 2006).
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
335
IJSHE
8,3
336
3. CSFs staff members include a Professor for Education for Sustainability/ Director, an
Associate Director, a Business Manager, a Schumacher Reader in Education for
Sustainability, four researchers, an Administrative Assistant, and Centre Fellows from a
range of Schools within the University.
4. Modern Universities or New Universities were created in or after 1992 from polytechnics
and colleges of higher education in the UK.
5. The author would like to express special thanks to an anonymous ten colleagues from
Australia, Canada, the UK and the US who provided useful information and suggestions
through e-mail communications between February-May 2006.
6. Additional data collection was undertaken on campus in April 2006 to investigate the
generalisability of the on-line questionnaire survey with a wider University of Plymouth
student population, since it is plausible that the student respondents in the on-line survey
tend to be those who are more familiar with or positive towards sustainable development
and sustainability. A number of 150 students were randomly asked to complete a slightly
simplified and paper- based version of questionnaire on campus. In a nutshell, a high
correspondence between the results of the online and paper-based surveys was observed. So
the on-line questionnaire survey results and analysis can be taken as indicative of a wider
Plymouth student population.
7. The four age groups used in the survey are under 20; 20-24; 25-29; over 30 years of age.
8. The idea was expressed by Jo Matthews of the Somerset College of Arts and Technology in
her video message at an HEA Regional Seminar, The Sustainability and the Higher
Education Response at the Centre for Sustainable Futures, 3 May 2006.
References
Azapagic, A., Perdan, S. and Shallcross, D. (2005), How much do engineering students know
about sustainable development? The findings of an international survey and possible
implications for the engineering curriculum, European Journal of Engineering Education,
Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Carew, A. and Mitchell, C. (2002), Characterizing undergraduate engineering students
understanding of sustainability, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 27
No. 4, pp. 349-61.
Darnton, A. (2004), The impact of sustainable development on public behaviour: report 1 of desk
research commissioned by COI on behalf of DEFRA, available at: www.sustainabledevelopment.gov.uk/publications/pdf/desk-research1.pdf (accessed 15 May 2005).
Dawe, G., Grand, R. and Taylor, R. (2003), Kingston University: sustainability in the
curriculum, available at: www.kingston.ac.uk/environment/final%20report.pdf (accessed
20 July 2006).
Dyer, A. and Selby, D. (2004a), Centre for Excellence in Teaching & Learning: Education for
Sustainable Development Stage One, University of Plymouth, Plymouth.
Dyer, A. and Selby, D. (2004b), Centre for Excellence in Teaching & Learning: Education for
Sustainable Development Stage Two, University of Plymouth, Plymouth.
Dyer, A., Selby, D. and Chalkley, B. (2006), A centre for excellence in education for sustainable
development, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 309-14.
Environmental Audit Committee (2005), Environmental Education: Follow-up to Learning the
Sustainability Lesson, House of Commons, London.
Fien, J. and Tilbury, D. (2002), The global challenge of sustainability, in Tilbury, D., Stevenson,
R., Fien, J. and Schreuder, D. (Eds), Education and Sustainability: Responding to the Global
Challenge, IUCN, Gland, pp. 1-11.
Folke, C. (2003), Social-ecological resilience and behavioural responses, in Biel, A., Hansoon, B.
and Martenensson, M. (Eds), Individual and Structural Determinants of Environmental
Practice, Ashgate, Aldershot, pp. 226-42.
Haigh, M. (2005), Greening the university curriculum: appraising an international movement,
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 31-48.
HEA (2006) Sustainable Development in Higher Education Current Practice and Future
Development: Progress Report for Senior Managers in Higher Education, Higher
Education Academy, Heslington.
HEFCE (2005), Sustainable development in higher education: consultation on a support strategy
and action plan, Higher Education Funding Council for England, available at: www.hefce.
ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_01/05_01.pdf (accessed 22 June 2006).
Hicks, D. (2002), Lessons for the Future: The Missing Dimension in Education, RoutledgeFalmer,
London.
HM Government (2005), Securing the future: delivering UK sustainable development strategy,
available
at:
www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/publications/pdf/strategy/
SecFut_complete.pdf (accessed 23 June 2006).
Hopkins, C. and Mckeown, R. (2002), Education for sustainable development: an international
perspective, in Tilbury, D., Stevenson, R., Fien, J. and Schreuder, D. (Eds), Education and
Sustainability: Responding to the Global Challenge, IUCN, Gland, pp. 13-24.
Huckle, J. (1999), Locating environmental education between modern capitalism and
postmodern socialism: a reply to Lucue Sauve, Canadian Journal of Environmental
Education, Vol. 4, pp. 36-45.
Kagawa, F. (2005), Emergency education: a critical review of the field, Comparative Education,
Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 487-503.
Kollmuss, A. and Agyeman, J. (2002), Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and
what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour?, Environmental Education
Research, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 239-60.
McKeown, R. (2002), Education for sustainable development toolkit: version 2, available at:
www.esdtoolkit.org/esd_toolkit_v2.pdf (accessed 24 July 2006).
Macy, J. (1983), Despair and Personal Power in the Nuclear Age, Now Society Publishes,
Philadelphia, PA.
Pike, G. and Selby, D. (1988), Global Teacher Global Learner, Hodder & Stoughton, London.
Porritt, J. and Winner, D. (1988), The Coming of the Greens, Fontana, London.
Robertson, J. (1983), The Sane Alternative, Spring Cottage, Ironbridge.
Sauve, L. (1996), Environmental education and sustainable development: a future appraisal,
Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 1, pp. 7-34.
Selby, D. (2000a), A darker shade of green: the importance of ecological thinking in global
education and school reform, Theory into Practice, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 88-96.
Selby, D. (2000b), Global education as transformative education, Zeitschrift fur internationale
Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspadagogik (Journal for International Educational
Research and Development Education), Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 2-10.
Selby, D. (2005), Curriculum, campus and community: transformative change towards
sustainability in a university and its region, available at: www.otic.jp/englishdocument/
images/Dr.Selbyspresentation.doc (accessed 15 May 2006).
Selby, D. (2006), The firm and shaky ground of education for sustainable development, Journal
of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 353-67.
Dissonance in
students
perceptions
337
IJSHE
8,3
338
SQW Ltd (2006), Specialist review and evaluation of the higher education partnership for
sustainability (HEPS) programme: final report to the UK higher education funding bodies
(HEFCE, SFC,HEFCW and DEL) from SQW Ltd, available at www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/
rdreports/2006/rd08_06/rd08_06.pdf (accessed 15 May 2006).
Sterling, S. (2004), Whole system thinking as a basis for paradigm change in education:
exploration in the context of sustainability, available at: www.bath.ac.uk/cree/sterling.
html (accessed 1 February 2006).
Stir, J. (2006), Restructuring teacher education for sustainability: student involvement through a
strength model, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14, pp. 830-6.
Summers, M., Corney, G. and Ghilds, A. (2004), Student teachers conceptions of sustainable
development: the starting-points of geographers and scientists, Educational Research,
Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 163-82.
UNESCO (2004), United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005-2014:
Draft International Implementation Scheme, UNESCO, Paris.
Wals, A. (2005), Introduction, in Wals, A. (Ed.), Curriculum Innovations in Higher Agricultural
Education, Elsevier Overheid, Hague, pp. 11-17.
Wals, A. and Heymann, F. (2004), Learning on the edge: exploring the change potential of
conflict in social learning for sustainable living, in Wenden, A. (Ed.), Education for a
Culture of Social and Ecological Peace, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY,
pp. 123-44.
WCED (1987), Our Common Future, World Commission on Environment and
Development/Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Further reading
Mertig, A. (2001), MSU Environmental Survey of Freshmen Fall 2000 and Spring 2003,
unpublished.
Raid, A. and Petocz, P. (2006), University lecturers understanding of sustainability, Higher
Education, Vol. 51, pp. 105-23.
Wals, A. and Jickling, B. (2002), Sustainability in higher education: from doublethink and
newspeak to critical thinking and meaningful learning, International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 221-32.
About the author
Fumiyo Kagawa is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Sustainable Futures, University of
Plymouth, UK. Her research area lies along the interface between emergency education and
education for sustainability. Her latest academic article is in Comparative Education (Kagawa,
2005). Fumiyo Kagawa can be contacted at: fumiyo.kagawa@plymouth.ac.uk
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
This article has been cited by:

1. Pasi Pohjolainen, Petri Tapio, Markus Vinnari, Pekka Jokinen, Pekka Rsnen. 2016. Consumer
consciousness on meat and the environment Exploring differences. Appetite 101, 37-45. [CrossRef]
2. Johnnie Stark University of North Texas Denton United States Jin Gyu "Phillip" Park University of
North Texas Denton United States Walter Leal Filho Hamburg University of Applied Sciences Hamburg
Germany Mihaela Sima Romanian Academy, Institute of Geography Bucharest Romania . 2016. Interior
design students perceptions of sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education
17:3. . [Abstract] [PDF]
3. Luiza de Sousa Daniel Etse Department of Purchasing and Supply, Kumasi Polytechnic, Kumasi, Ghana
Coral Ingley Department of Management, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand .
2016. Higher education curriculum for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher
Education 17:2, 269-280. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Cludia V. Viegas, Alan J. Bond, Caroline R. Vaz, Miriam Borchardt, Giancarlo Medeiros Pereira, Paulo M.
Selig, Gregrio Varvakis. 2016. Critical attributes of Sustainability in Higher Education: a categorisation
from literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production . [CrossRef]
5. Gregor Kovai, Valentina Breko Grubar. 2016. Knowledge of sustainable development among geography
students in Slovenia. Acta geographica Slovenica 56. . [CrossRef]
6. Eugenio Pellicer, Leonardo A. Sierra, Vctor Yepes. 2016. Appraisal of infrastructure sustainability
by graduate students using an active-learning method. Journal of Cleaner Production 113, 884-896.
[CrossRef]
7. Janet Richardson, Thomas Heidenreich, Carmen lvarez-Nieto, Fabienne Fasseur, Jane Grose, Norma
Huss, Maud Huynen, Isabel M. Lpez-Medina, Anglick Schweizer. 2016. Including sustainability issues
in nurse education: A comparative study of first year student nurses' attitudes in four European countries.
Nurse Education Today 37, 15-20. [CrossRef]
8. Fikret Korhan Turan, Saadet Cetinkaya, Ceyda Ustun. 2016. A methodological framework to analyze
stakeholder preferences and propose strategic pathways for a sustainable university. Higher Education .
[CrossRef]
9. Chamila Roshani Perera Faculty of Business and Law, Swinburne Business School, Swinburne University
of Technology, Melbourne, Australia Chandana Rathnasiri Hewege Faculty of Business and Law,
Swinburne Business School, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia . 2016.
Integrating sustainability education into international marketing curricula. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education 17:1, 123-148. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Ismaila Abubakar, Faez Al-Shihri, Sayed Ahmed. 2016. Students Assessment of Campus Sustainability
at the University of Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 8, 59. [CrossRef]
11. Mary Panko, Rashika Sharma. 2016. Integrating Waste Management and Pollution Control in Tertiary
Vocational Education Programmes: Case Studies. International Journal of Information and Education
Technology 6, 228-231. [CrossRef]
12. Tripp Shealy, Rodolfo Valdes-Vasquez, Leidy Klotz, Geoff Potvin, Allison Godwin, Jennifer Cribbs, Zahra
Hazari. 2016. Career Outcome Expectations Related to Sustainability among Students Intending to Major
in Civil Engineering. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 142, 04015008.
[CrossRef]
13. Brooklynn J. Wynveen. 2015. Perceptions of Sustainability and Sustainable Living Among NonEnvironmentally Motivated Individuals. Society & Natural Resources 28, 1278-1289. [CrossRef]
14. Yin Sin Lim, Bo Xia, Martin Skitmore, Jason Gray, Adrian Bridge. 2015. Education for sustainability
in construction management curricula. International Journal of Construction Management 15, 321-331.
[CrossRef]
15. Lynne Eagle, David Low, Peter Case, Lisa Vandommele. 2015. Attitudes of undergraduate business
students toward sustainability issues. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 16:5,
650-668. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Leigh Wilks, Neil Harris. 2015. Examining the conflict and interconnectedness of young peoples ideas
about environmental issues, responsibility and action. Environmental Education Research 1-14. [CrossRef]
17. Debby R E Cotton Pedagogic Research Institute and Observatory (PedRIO), Plymouth University,
Plymouth, UK. Wendy Miller Pedagogic Research Institute and Observatory (PedRIO), Plymouth
University, Plymouth, UK. Jennie Winter Pedagogic Research Institute and Observatory (PedRIO),
Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK. Ian Bailey School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences,
Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK. Stephen Sterling Centre for Sustainable Futures, Plymouth
University, Plymouth, UK. . 2015. Developing students energy literacy in higher education. International
Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 16:4, 456-473. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. P. Brian Fisher Office of Sustainability and Department of Political Science, College of Charleston,
Charleston, South Carolina, USA. Erin McAdams Department of Political Science, Presbyterian College,
Clinton, South Carolina, USA. . 2015. Gaps in sustainability education. International Journal of
19. Soyoung Kim, Jihyun Yoon, Joongwon Shin. 2015. Sustainable business-and-industry foodservice.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 27:4, 648-669. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
20. Sharmin Attaran, Bilge Gokhan Celik. 2015. Students environmental responsibility and their willingness
to pay for green buildings. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 16:3, 327-340.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
21. Ian F. Clark, Yvonne Zeegers. 2015. Challenging students' perceptions of sustainability using an Earth
Systems Science approach. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 39, 260-274. [CrossRef]
22. Gaurav Chawla, Parikshat Singh Manhas. 2015. Sustainability in Higher Education: An Exploratory
Investigation of Hospitality Management Courses. Asia-Pacific Journal of Innovation in Hospitality and
Tourism (APJIHT) 4. . [CrossRef]
23. Gisela Cebrin, Merc Junyent. 2015. Competencies in Education for Sustainable Development: Exploring
the Student Teachers Views. Sustainability 7, 2768-2786. [CrossRef]
24. Dolors Set-Pamies, Eleni Papaoikonomou. 2015. A Multi-level Perspective for the Integration of Ethics,
Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability (ECSRS) in Management Education. Journal of Business
Ethics . [CrossRef]
25. C. Hesselbarth, M. Buhr, S. SchalteggerManagement education for sustainability 21-49. [CrossRef]
26. Eric Pappas, Jesse Pappas, Devon Sweeney. 2015. Walking the walk: conceptual foundations of the
Sustainable Personality. Journal of Cleaner Production 86, 323-334. [CrossRef]
27. Umesh Sharma, Martin Kelly. 2014. Students perceptions of education for sustainable development in the
accounting and business curriculum at a business school in New Zealand. Meditari Accountancy Research
22:2, 130-148. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
28. Ethan D. Schoolman, Mike Shriberg, Sarah Schwimmer, Marie Tysman. 2014. Green cities and ivory
towers: how do higher education sustainability initiatives shape millennials consumption practices?.
Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences . [CrossRef]
29. Gareth Chaplin Unite Group PLC, Sheffield, UK, and Paul Wyton Centre for Facilities Management
Development, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK . 2014. Student engagement with sustainability:
understanding the valueaction gap. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 15:4,
30. Katja Mikhailovich Faculty of Education, Institute for Sustainable Communities, University of Canberra,
Canberra, Australia Robert Fitzgerald Faculty of Education, Institute for Sustainable Communities,
University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia . 2014. Community responses to the removal of bottled
water on a university campus. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 15:3, 330-342.
31. Alisha Ali, Hilary Catherine Murphy, Sanjay Nadkarni. 2014. Hospitality students perceptions of digital
tools for learning and sustainable development. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education
15, 1-10. [CrossRef]
32. Keren Mintz, Tali Tal. 2014. Sustainability in higher education courses: Multiple learning outcomes.
Studies in Educational Evaluation 41, 113-123. [CrossRef]
33. Bela Yavetz, Daphne Goldman, Sara Peer. 2014. How do preservice teachers perceive environment and
its relevance to their area of teaching?. Environmental Education Research 20, 354-371. [CrossRef]
34. Jonathan P. Doh, Peter Tashman. 2014. Half a World Away: The Integration and Assimilation
of Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability, and Sustainable Development in Business School
Curricula. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 21, 131-142. [CrossRef]
35. Mahmood Bahaee, Luis A. Perez-Batres, Michael J. Pisani, Van V. Miller, Mahmoud Saremi. 2014.
Sustainable Development in Iran: An Exploratory Study of University Students' Attitudes and Knowledge
about Sustainable Development a. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 21,
175-187. [CrossRef]
36. Yvonne Zeegers, Ian Francis Clark. 2014. Students' perceptions of education for sustainable development.
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 15:2, 242-253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
37. Mary Katherine Watson, Rodrigo Lozano, Caroline Noyes, Michael Rodgers. 2013. Assessing curricula
contribution to sustainability more holistically: Experiences from the integration of curricula assessment
and students' perceptions at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Journal of Cleaner Production 61,
106-116. [CrossRef]
38. Debby R.E. Cotton, Ian Alcock. 2013. Commitment to environmental sustainability in the UK student
population. Studies in Higher Education 38, 1457-1471. [CrossRef]
39. Scott Weaven, Deborah Griffin, Ruth McPhail, Calvin Smith. 2013. Who is listening? An examination
of gender effects and employment choice in sustainability education in an undergraduate business school.
The Australian Educational Researcher 40, 567-582. [CrossRef]
40. Clemens Mader, Geoffrey Scott and Dzulkifli Abdul Razak Dalia Khalil Students Life and Development,
Heliopolis University for Sustainable Development, Cairo, Egypt Omar Ramzy Faculty of Business and
Economics, Heliopolis University for Sustainable Development, Cairo, Egypt Rasha Mostafa Faculty of
Commerce, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt . 2013. Perception towards sustainable development
concept: Egyptian students' perspective. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal 4:3,
41. Maria Tighe, Andrew Whiteford, Janet Richardson. 2013. Stepping Out: Enabling Community Access
to Green Space through Inter-disciplinary Practice Learning in Plymouth, UK. International Journal of
Practice-based Learning in Health and Social Care 1, 8-22. [CrossRef]
42. Eric C. PappasIndividual sustainability: Preliminary research 1631-1636. [CrossRef]
43. Tammy Erlene Parece, Tamim Younos, Lawrence S. Grossman, E. Scott Geller. 2013. A study of
environmentally relevant behavior in university residence halls. International Journal of Sustainability in
Higher Education 14:4, 466-481. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
44. Aurali Dade, David M. Hassenzahl. 2013. Communicating sustainability. International Journal of
45. Nikoleta Jones, Spiridon Roumeliotis, Theodoros Iosifides, Maria Hatziantoniou, Eleni Sfakianaki,
Eleni Tsigianni, Kalliopi Thivaiou, Athina Biliraki, Kostas Evaggelinos. 2013. Students' perceptions on
environmental management of HEIs and the role of social capital. International Journal of Sustainability
in Higher Education 14:3, 278-290. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
46. Felita R. Figueredo, Yelena Tsarenko. 2013. Is being green a determinant of participation in university
sustainability initiatives?. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 14:3, 242-253.
47. Mary Katherine Watson, Caroline Noyes, Michael O. Rodgers. 2013. Student Perceptions of Sustainability
Education in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Journal of
Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 139, 235-243. [CrossRef]
48. Benjamin Karatzoglou. 2013. An in-depth literature review of the evolving roles and contributions
of universities to Education for Sustainable Development. Journal of Cleaner Production 49, 44-53.
[CrossRef]
49. gnes Zska, Zsuzsanna Marjain Szernyi, Anna Szchy, Tams Kocsis. 2013. Greening due to
environmental education? Environmental knowledge, attitudes, consumer behavior and everyday proenvironmental activities of Hungarian high school and university students. Journal of Cleaner Production
48, 126-138. [CrossRef]
50. Mostafa Nejati, Mehran Nejati. 2013. Assessment of sustainable university factors from the perspective
of university students. Journal of Cleaner Production 48, 101-107. [CrossRef]
51. E. Pappas, O. Pierrakos, R. Nagel. 2013. Using Blooms Taxonomy to teach sustainability in multiple
contexts. Journal of Cleaner Production 48, 54-64. [CrossRef]
52. Matthias BarthSchool of Global Studies, Social Science and Planning, RMIT University, Melbourne,
Australia. 2013. Many roads lead to sustainability: a processoriented analysis of change in higher
education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 14:2, 160-175. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
53. Tarah Wright, Gary Markle, Peter Wuench. 2013. The Goggles Project: Using Street Theatre to Engage
University Stakeholders in Discussions about Sustainability. Creative Education 04, 105-109. [CrossRef]
54. Mareike Burmeister, Sabine Schmidt-Jacob, Ingo Eilks. 2013. German chemistry teachers understanding
of sustainability and education for sustainable developmentAn interview case study. Chem. Educ. Res.
Pract. 14, 169-176. [CrossRef]
55. Marc Rosen. 2013. Engineering and Sustainability: Attitudes and Actions. Sustainability 5, 372-386.
[CrossRef]
56. Jennie Winter, Debby Cotton. 2012. Making the hidden curriculum visible: sustainability literacy in
higher education. Environmental Education Research 18, 783-796. [CrossRef]
57. Korina Katsaliaki, Navonil MustafeeA survey of serious games on sustainable development 1-13.
[CrossRef]
58. Robert L. Nagel, Eric C. Pappas, Olga Pierrakos. 2012. On a Vision to Educating Students in Sustainability
and DesignThe James Madison University School of Engineering Approach. Sustainability 4, 72-91.
[CrossRef]
59. Jessica HillDivision of Textiles and Apparel, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA
HyunHwa LeeDepartment of Fashion Design and Textiles, College of Human Ecology, Inha University,
Incheon, Republic of Korea. 2012. Young Generation Y consumers perceptions of sustainability in the
apparel industry. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 16:4, 477-491.
60. I. Nicolaou, E. Conlon. 2012. What do final year engineering students know about sustainable
development?. European Journal of Engineering Education 37, 267-277. [CrossRef]
61. Funda Varnaci Uzun, Ozgul Keles. 2012. The Effects of Nature Education Project on the Environmental
Awareness and Behavior. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46, 2912-2916. [CrossRef]
62. Patricia Brackin, Richard House, Jennifer Mueller-Price, Michael DeVasher, Richard Layton, Corey
Taylor, Rebecca DeVasher, Mark Minster, Kathleen TooheyInstitutionalized: Organizational obstacles to
communicating sustainability 1-5. [CrossRef]
63. Angela R. Bielefeldt. 2011. Incorporating a Sustainability Module into First-Year Courses for Civil and
Environmental Engineering Students. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
137, 78-85. [CrossRef]
64. Richard EmanuelDepartment of Communication, Alabama State University, Montgomery, Alabama,
USA J.N. AdamsDepartment of English, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, Alabama, USA. 2011. College
students' perceptions of campus sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education
12:1, 79-92. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
65. Willy Legrand, Philip Sloan, Rosemarie Delgado-Krebs, Heli Tooman Sustainable Tourism &
Hospitality Management Education: An Empirical Study on Educational Experiences in Preparation for
Professional Life 195-208. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
66. Cathy A. Rusinko. 2010. Integrating sustainability in higher education: a generic matrix. International
Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 11:3, 250-259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
67. Maurie J. Cohen. 2010. Destination unknown: Pursuing sustainable mobility in the face of rival societal
aspirations. Research Policy 39, 459-470. [CrossRef]
68. Cynthia Deale, Jane Nichols, Paul Jacques. 2009. A Descriptive Study of Sustainability Education in the
Hospitality Curriculum. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education 21, 34-42. [CrossRef]
69. Mageswary KarpudewanSchool of Educational Studies, University Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
Zurida Hj IsmailSchool of Educational Studies, University Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia Norita
MohamedSchool of Chemical Sciences, University Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia. 2009. The
integration of green chemistry experiments with sustainable development concepts in preservice teachers'
curriculum. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 10:2, 118-135. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
70. Anthony Middlebrooks, Lauren Miltenberger, James Tweedy, Grant Newman, Joanna Follman. 2009.
Developing a sustainability ethic in leaders. Journal of Leadership Studies 3:10.1002/jls.v3:2, 31-43.
[CrossRef]
71. Daniel J. Sherman. 2008. Research and Solutions: Sustainability: What's the Big Idea? A Strategy
for Transforming the Higher Education Curriculum. Sustainability: The Journal of Record 1, 188-195.
[CrossRef]
72. Paula Jones, Colin J. Trier, Jonathan P. Richards. 2008. Embedding Education for Sustainable
Development in higher education: A case study examining common challenges and opportunities for
undergraduate programmes. International Journal of Educational Research 47, 341-350. [CrossRef]
73. Mona Betour El ZoghbiConferences as Learning Spaces on Climate Change and Sustainability: 37-59.
[CrossRef]
74. Robert L. Nagel, Kyle G. Gipson, Adebayo OgundipeIntegrating Sustainable Design and Systems
Thinking throughout an Engineering Curriculum 136-153. [CrossRef]

14676370710817174

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

14676370710817174

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education

Dissonance in students' perceptions of sustainable development and sustainability:

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

To cite this document:

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

International Journal of Sustainability

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

The Higher Education Academy (HEA)[1] is also working to include components of

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

an appreciation of the importance of environmental, social, political and

CSF takes a holistic concept of sustainability which embraces the complementary

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

principles; providing continuing professional development programmes for

CSF is providing students across the university with increasing opportunities to

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

sustainable development (n=1865)

Social Science &

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Most frequently occurring curriculum area

Frequency of the word (Percentages)

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Conservation; cleaning beaches; plant trees

sustainable development ( n=3857)

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Alternative/clean energy; biodiversity; conservation;

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

non-committal, or negative statement of sustainability: It is OK if others want to do it

Students personal views of the future of society

I think it is a waste of time and effort

We, as a society, should radically

The earth has plenty of natural

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

The so-called 'ecological crisis' facing

Non-human animals have rights.

I avoid buying from a company which

The University of Plymouth should

The UK should maintain high and

The cafeterias of the University of

The University of Plymouth should

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

It is imperative to learn from

The City of Plymouth should

that a significant number of proponents of the development and efficient use of

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Another student stated that Ecological catastrophe is inevitable. We cant reverse

process of internal struggle, balancing their feelings towards conflicting future

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Actions towards a more sustainable living

Buy/eat/support fair trade, local, organic

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

In a similar vein, another student wrote:

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

characterize education for sustainability, such as democracy, diversity, participation,

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Increasing knowledge by itself will not automatically facilitate individual behavioural

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

Downloaded by Universiti Sains Malaysia At 21:32 16 April 2016 (PT)

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com