We Can Only Do It Together: Addressing Global Sustainability …
245
labour—including the various interrelationships between professions—consequently
loses its functionality. Theorists have thus stressed the need for transdisciplinarity
(Florin et al. 2015; Mochizuki and Yarime 2015; Vogt and Weber 2020) and epistemological pluralism (Miller et al. 2011) in knowledge construction for the future.
Interprofessional collaboration is equally necessary, as well as the capacity to reconfigure organisations and structures. Several approaches additionally suggest more
interactive processes, as well as involving concerned populations actively in research
(see, for instance, Lynch 2006; Lindhult 2016; Marquard et al. 2016).
6 Particular Challenges for Universities
The main challenge that HEIs face today is likely that of funding, regardless of
whether they are private- or state-funded. In most contexts, education is oriented
towards immediate employability, rather than societal, global or future needs (see
Lynch 2006). Similarly, research is dependent on industry funding (Beynaghi et al.
2016) and is largely oriented towards immediate applicability and commercial
interests.
The second challenge is the pervasive structure based on competition among
students, staff, departments or disciplines, researchers or research environments.
Competition systematically prevents available resources from being used effectively
and tends to reduce the necessary diversity.
A third major challenge for addressing global challenges is how knowledge is
shared and developed. The language of instruction and modes of publication systematically put the Global South at a disadvantage, marginalising Southern perspectives
and knowledge production on topics relevant for low-income countries. Hallinger and
Chatpinyakoop (2019) have found that in the area of higher education for sustainable
development, only a small fraction of publications come from developing countries,
and among these, only the larger economies are represented. The issue is aggravated by the fact that scientific methodologies discourage future-oriented explorative
approaches and systematically prioritise the aggregation of data rather than contextsensitive descriptions and observations. Not only does this render us collectively
blind to emerging trends, but it precludes the development of responses that are
relevant and possible to implement in local low-income contexts.
In the short term, HEIs cannot change such underlying structures. But by refusing
the competitive paradigm (Chan 2004) and prioritising collaboration—within each
HEI as well as with other HEIs nationally and globally—existing resources can be
used much more effectively, benefitting from scale, synergies and complementarities.
Risks inherent in explorative and innovative research can be shared among partners,
while the costs caused by lack of continuity can be reduced, such as those incurred
in building and demolishing capacity for disconnected, externally-funded research
projects. Importantly, creating a culture of trust and integrity enhances knowledge
245
labour—including the various interrelationships between professions—consequently
loses its functionality. Theorists have thus stressed the need for transdisciplinarity
(Florin et al. 2015; Mochizuki and Yarime 2015; Vogt and Weber 2020) and epistemological pluralism (Miller et al. 2011) in knowledge construction for the future.
Interprofessional collaboration is equally necessary, as well as the capacity to reconfigure organisations and structures. Several approaches additionally suggest more
interactive processes, as well as involving concerned populations actively in research
(see, for instance, Lynch 2006; Lindhult 2016; Marquard et al. 2016).
6 Particular Challenges for Universities
The main challenge that HEIs face today is likely that of funding, regardless of
whether they are private- or state-funded. In most contexts, education is oriented
towards immediate employability, rather than societal, global or future needs (see
Lynch 2006). Similarly, research is dependent on industry funding (Beynaghi et al.
2016) and is largely oriented towards immediate applicability and commercial
interests.
The second challenge is the pervasive structure based on competition among
students, staff, departments or disciplines, researchers or research environments.
Competition systematically prevents available resources from being used effectively
and tends to reduce the necessary diversity.
A third major challenge for addressing global challenges is how knowledge is
shared and developed. The language of instruction and modes of publication systematically put the Global South at a disadvantage, marginalising Southern perspectives
and knowledge production on topics relevant for low-income countries. Hallinger and
Chatpinyakoop (2019) have found that in the area of higher education for sustainable
development, only a small fraction of publications come from developing countries,
and among these, only the larger economies are represented. The issue is aggravated by the fact that scientific methodologies discourage future-oriented explorative
approaches and systematically prioritise the aggregation of data rather than contextsensitive descriptions and observations. Not only does this render us collectively
blind to emerging trends, but it precludes the development of responses that are
relevant and possible to implement in local low-income contexts.
In the short term, HEIs cannot change such underlying structures. But by refusing
the competitive paradigm (Chan 2004) and prioritising collaboration—within each
HEI as well as with other HEIs nationally and globally—existing resources can be
used much more effectively, benefitting from scale, synergies and complementarities.
Risks inherent in explorative and innovative research can be shared among partners,
while the costs caused by lack of continuity can be reduced, such as those incurred
in building and demolishing capacity for disconnected, externally-funded research
projects. Importantly, creating a culture of trust and integrity enhances knowledge