306
I. Hemmer and A.-K. Lindau
With these remarks, other universities can be given an idea of a sustainable university and are encouraged to start implementing Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), to continue their efforts and to make the entire university more sustainable. This example can also be used to help document the paths taken by universities
towards becoming more sustainable.
To a large extent, the explanations refer to the documentation of the annually
published sustainability reports (https://www.ku.de/unileben/nachhaltige-ku/nachha
ltigkeitsbericht).
2 Sustainable Development and Whole-Institution
Approach at Universities
Within the current sustainability debate, ESD is said to be of utmost importance
(UNESCO 2014). The Global Action Programme (GAP) on “Education for Sustainable Development” (2015–2019) has defined these top five priority action areas that
focus on the following aspects:
“Action Area 1: Advancing policy,
Action Area 2: Transforming learning and training environments,
Action Area 3: Building capacities of educators and trainers,
Action Area 4: Empowering and mobilizing youth, and
Action Area 5: Accelerating sustainable solutions at local level” (DUK 2014,
p. 15).
The National Action Plan (Nationale Plattform Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung 2017) for the implementation of the GAP in Germany underlines the outstanding
position of universities and their responsibility within the educational landscape when
it comes to implementing sustainable development measures. Emphasis is placed on
the formation of a whole-institution approach by carving out five interdependent
fields of action for the higher education sector:
“Action Area I: Aligning higher education funding and incentive systems with
substantive and structural sustainability and ESD” (p. 52),
“Action Area II: Systematically linking research and ESD using quality criteria”
(p. 54),
“Action Area III: Supporting a diversified higher education system with a range
of ESD paths, ESD pioneers and second followers” (p. 59),
“Action Area IV: Encouraging, supporting and enabling real participation of
students and graduates as key architects of sustainable development” (p. 62) and
“Action Area V: Developing transformative metaphors and narratives” (p. 66).
The aim is to integrate ESD in all educational areas (Michelsen and Fischer 2015;
Rieckmann 2016). The effectiveness of ESD is closely connected to the transformation of the entire educational institution. This holistic transformational concept
I. Hemmer and A.-K. Lindau
With these remarks, other universities can be given an idea of a sustainable university and are encouraged to start implementing Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), to continue their efforts and to make the entire university more sustainable. This example can also be used to help document the paths taken by universities
towards becoming more sustainable.
To a large extent, the explanations refer to the documentation of the annually
published sustainability reports (https://www.ku.de/unileben/nachhaltige-ku/nachha
ltigkeitsbericht).
2 Sustainable Development and Whole-Institution
Approach at Universities
Within the current sustainability debate, ESD is said to be of utmost importance
(UNESCO 2014). The Global Action Programme (GAP) on “Education for Sustainable Development” (2015–2019) has defined these top five priority action areas that
focus on the following aspects:
“Action Area 1: Advancing policy,
Action Area 2: Transforming learning and training environments,
Action Area 3: Building capacities of educators and trainers,
Action Area 4: Empowering and mobilizing youth, and
Action Area 5: Accelerating sustainable solutions at local level” (DUK 2014,
p. 15).
The National Action Plan (Nationale Plattform Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung 2017) for the implementation of the GAP in Germany underlines the outstanding
position of universities and their responsibility within the educational landscape when
it comes to implementing sustainable development measures. Emphasis is placed on
the formation of a whole-institution approach by carving out five interdependent
fields of action for the higher education sector:
“Action Area I: Aligning higher education funding and incentive systems with
substantive and structural sustainability and ESD” (p. 52),
“Action Area II: Systematically linking research and ESD using quality criteria”
(p. 54),
“Action Area III: Supporting a diversified higher education system with a range
of ESD paths, ESD pioneers and second followers” (p. 59),
“Action Area IV: Encouraging, supporting and enabling real participation of
students and graduates as key architects of sustainable development” (p. 62) and
“Action Area V: Developing transformative metaphors and narratives” (p. 66).
The aim is to integrate ESD in all educational areas (Michelsen and Fischer 2015;
Rieckmann 2016). The effectiveness of ESD is closely connected to the transformation of the entire educational institution. This holistic transformational concept