372
K. Sung
Upcycling is both a form of alternative consumption in which consumers can
engage (Albinsson and Yasanthi Perera 2012), and a form of alternative production that environmentally conscious entrepreneurs can utilise (e.g. Sung and
Cooper 2015). Within the context of increased product longevity (Cooper 2010),
it enables a reduction in the use of raw materials by extending the lifetime of used
materials, components and products, thereby increasing material efficiency and
reducing industrial energy consumption (Allwood et al. 2011). The reduction in
energy consumption contributes ultimately to lowering greenhouse gas emissions
(Hamit-Haggar 2012). It also reduces solid waste or, at least, delays new addition
of waste to landfill (Bramston and Maycroft 2013). The benefit of upcycling is
not limited to lessening negative impact on the environment. Businesses based on
upcycling can create employment opportunities especially for the disadvantaged
people (Campbell 2017; Gelbmann and Hammerl 2015; Guerrini 2014). Upcycling
as a hobby could contribute to individuals’ psychological wellbeing by providing
experience benefits (i.e. upcycling process as a meaningful journey and learning
experience), empowerment benefits (i.e. becoming more capable and self-reliant),
a sense of a community through upcycling networks if any, and reducing stress and
relaxing (Frank 2013; Gauntlett 2011; Lang 2013; Sung 2015). When scaled up
(Van den Bosch 2010) to a meaningful level, it could, in theory, contribute significantly to achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): e.g. promote
well-being, promote lifelong learning opportunities, promote sustained, inclusive
and sustainable economic growth, ensure sustainable consumption and production
patterns, take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts (United
Nations General Assembly 2015). For such potential benefits, upcycling has been
practiced in households and businesses, and existing studies have reported on these
cases (e.g. Janigo et al. 2017; Sung et al. 2017a, b; Sung and Cooper 2015; Wilson
and Wilson 2016). Relatively little attention has been paid to how universities have
utilised upcycling for teaching and learning activities. This paper therefore aims to
provide a literature review on the use of upcycling for and in higher education.
2 Methods
A systematic literature review (Fink 2013) was conducted between November 2017
and January 2018. Research questions were generated. Bibliographic databases were
selected. Practical screening criteria were applied. Selected pieces of literature were
reviewed and results were synthesised.
2.1 Research Questions
Research questions were: (a) who have been publishing papers on upcycling for and
in higher education? (e.g. occupation, affiliation); (b) when was the paper published?;
K. Sung
Upcycling is both a form of alternative consumption in which consumers can
engage (Albinsson and Yasanthi Perera 2012), and a form of alternative production that environmentally conscious entrepreneurs can utilise (e.g. Sung and
Cooper 2015). Within the context of increased product longevity (Cooper 2010),
it enables a reduction in the use of raw materials by extending the lifetime of used
materials, components and products, thereby increasing material efficiency and
reducing industrial energy consumption (Allwood et al. 2011). The reduction in
energy consumption contributes ultimately to lowering greenhouse gas emissions
(Hamit-Haggar 2012). It also reduces solid waste or, at least, delays new addition
of waste to landfill (Bramston and Maycroft 2013). The benefit of upcycling is
not limited to lessening negative impact on the environment. Businesses based on
upcycling can create employment opportunities especially for the disadvantaged
people (Campbell 2017; Gelbmann and Hammerl 2015; Guerrini 2014). Upcycling
as a hobby could contribute to individuals’ psychological wellbeing by providing
experience benefits (i.e. upcycling process as a meaningful journey and learning
experience), empowerment benefits (i.e. becoming more capable and self-reliant),
a sense of a community through upcycling networks if any, and reducing stress and
relaxing (Frank 2013; Gauntlett 2011; Lang 2013; Sung 2015). When scaled up
(Van den Bosch 2010) to a meaningful level, it could, in theory, contribute significantly to achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): e.g. promote
well-being, promote lifelong learning opportunities, promote sustained, inclusive
and sustainable economic growth, ensure sustainable consumption and production
patterns, take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts (United
Nations General Assembly 2015). For such potential benefits, upcycling has been
practiced in households and businesses, and existing studies have reported on these
cases (e.g. Janigo et al. 2017; Sung et al. 2017a, b; Sung and Cooper 2015; Wilson
and Wilson 2016). Relatively little attention has been paid to how universities have
utilised upcycling for teaching and learning activities. This paper therefore aims to
provide a literature review on the use of upcycling for and in higher education.
2 Methods
A systematic literature review (Fink 2013) was conducted between November 2017
and January 2018. Research questions were generated. Bibliographic databases were
selected. Practical screening criteria were applied. Selected pieces of literature were
reviewed and results were synthesised.
2.1 Research Questions
Research questions were: (a) who have been publishing papers on upcycling for and
in higher education? (e.g. occupation, affiliation); (b) when was the paper published?;