The Transformation of Higher Education Institutions …
641
2.3 Modern Worldview: Sustainability 2.0 as Eco-Efficiency
Being dismayed by the strict rules of the traditional worldview, some individuals
developed a new, questioning mindset. What if we changed the rules set generations
before us? What if we could make it better? Questioning assumptions and focusing
on optimization marked mighty breakthroughs for society (Laloux 2014). Indeed,
modern democracy, technology, empirical science, academic medicine, free market
systems were invented from modern worldview and led to the expansion of wealth,
citizen rights, knowledge and drastically improved health care. The modern worldview is currently the most powerful worldview in industrialized countries.
However, radically questioning assumptions and striving for evermore optimization did not only create ever-increasing “progress” but also powerful side effects
(Scharmer and Kaufer 2013). Breaking with traditions and focusing on efficiency
as an end in itself, the modern worldview made the massive exploitation of natural resources possible (Hedlund-de Witt 2014a). Furthermore, the believe in pure
meritocracy as well as in the powers of the free market often works against social
welfare and the active inclusion of traditionally disadvantaged groups such as people of color and women. In line with this kind of thinking, the modern worldview
frames all sustainability issues to be either solvable by eco-efficiency or technological
innovation—or to be non-important in the face of economic growth.
2.4 Post-modern Worldview: Sustainability 3.0 as Respect
for Nature and People
The post-modern worldview developed as a counter movement to the modern worldview’s negative characteristics, namely exploitation of nature and people, cold individualism and an autistic focus on efficiency, achievement and improved numbers.
It is described as the green worldview (Beck and Cowan 1996) and focuses on feelgood themes such as respect for nature and people, mutual care-taking, community
and wellbeing. The pure post-modern worldview reacts allergically to hierarchy, to
society’s focus on economy and to the disregard of minorities.
The concept of sustainable development arose from a post-modern worldview, in
light of the world’s ills and aches. It strengthened the humanitarian role of the United
Nations and led to the development of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
Therefore, this worldview is the dominant one of those engaged in the promotion of
SD.
However, trying to include all relevant stakeholders in decision making processes
free of hierarchy can often be tedious and ineffective. Focused on being positive
and empowering, the post-modern way of thinking is often blind to the challenges
and trade-offs of implementing sustainability in economic processes—both in industrial and pre-industrial countries (Müller-Christ 2017). Furthermore, the post-modern
worldview’s language of community and respect is often regarded as “hippie hog-
641
2.3 Modern Worldview: Sustainability 2.0 as Eco-Efficiency
Being dismayed by the strict rules of the traditional worldview, some individuals
developed a new, questioning mindset. What if we changed the rules set generations
before us? What if we could make it better? Questioning assumptions and focusing
on optimization marked mighty breakthroughs for society (Laloux 2014). Indeed,
modern democracy, technology, empirical science, academic medicine, free market
systems were invented from modern worldview and led to the expansion of wealth,
citizen rights, knowledge and drastically improved health care. The modern worldview is currently the most powerful worldview in industrialized countries.
However, radically questioning assumptions and striving for evermore optimization did not only create ever-increasing “progress” but also powerful side effects
(Scharmer and Kaufer 2013). Breaking with traditions and focusing on efficiency
as an end in itself, the modern worldview made the massive exploitation of natural resources possible (Hedlund-de Witt 2014a). Furthermore, the believe in pure
meritocracy as well as in the powers of the free market often works against social
welfare and the active inclusion of traditionally disadvantaged groups such as people of color and women. In line with this kind of thinking, the modern worldview
frames all sustainability issues to be either solvable by eco-efficiency or technological
innovation—or to be non-important in the face of economic growth.
2.4 Post-modern Worldview: Sustainability 3.0 as Respect
for Nature and People
The post-modern worldview developed as a counter movement to the modern worldview’s negative characteristics, namely exploitation of nature and people, cold individualism and an autistic focus on efficiency, achievement and improved numbers.
It is described as the green worldview (Beck and Cowan 1996) and focuses on feelgood themes such as respect for nature and people, mutual care-taking, community
and wellbeing. The pure post-modern worldview reacts allergically to hierarchy, to
society’s focus on economy and to the disregard of minorities.
The concept of sustainable development arose from a post-modern worldview, in
light of the world’s ills and aches. It strengthened the humanitarian role of the United
Nations and led to the development of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
Therefore, this worldview is the dominant one of those engaged in the promotion of
SD.
However, trying to include all relevant stakeholders in decision making processes
free of hierarchy can often be tedious and ineffective. Focused on being positive
and empowering, the post-modern way of thinking is often blind to the challenges
and trade-offs of implementing sustainability in economic processes—both in industrial and pre-industrial countries (Müller-Christ 2017). Furthermore, the post-modern
worldview’s language of community and respect is often regarded as “hippie hog-