Sustainability Concept (Whole-Institution Approach) …
317
which is expected to be published in 2020. Main objectives of the new concept are,
amongst others, strengthening sustainability research and applying a more extensive
implementation of sustainability in the teaching practice in as many subject areas
as possible. In 2020, the KU will set up a Green Office that will support student
initiatives and commitment. Last but not least, the KU has the objective of becoming
a climate-neutral university within the next couple of years.
3.4 The University’s Contribution to Transformation
at Higher Education Institutions
3.4.1 Promoting and Inhibiting Factors for Transformation at Higher
Education Institutions
The developments at the KU offer a lot of potential for being transferred to other
universities. Drawing on the example of the KU, advantages and disadvantages can
be identified that can be said to promote or inhibit the transformation of universities in general. For example, a very favorable factor is the KU’s size. Being a small
university with approx. 5000 students and 120 professors, the KU has relatively lean
administrative structures and regular exchange between University Management and
KU members is the norm. Another beneficial factor is that the KU has decided to
involve the Chancellor in the coordination of sustainability matters, providing for a
direct connection to the University Management. The commitment of the University
Management also plays a decisive role in connection with how fast, intensively and
comprehensively the sustainability process is being advanced at the KU. This also
becomes evident in the results of the project KriNaHoBay (2017). Furthermore, the
KU is a successful example of efficient implementation of a university-wide overall
sustainability concept, which had the aim of continuously promoting sustainable
development by defining objectives and measures for the relevant action areas for
ten years already. Particularly noteworthy in this context is the consistent creation of
participatory structures (see Sect. 3.2.1) and an increasing degree of professionalization. The fact that the KU is a Catholic university is also beneficial, especially in view
of the Encyclical Laudato Si, although it should be pointed out that the sustainability
activities were not initiated by the subject of Theology, but primarily by the subject
of Geography.
Inhibiting factors in the sustainability development process at the KU were the
changes within the University Management over the last ten years and other staff
turnover in important and responsible positions. As regards the fields of research
and teaching, it can be stated that processes of change in these areas are subject
to a certain inertia and thus require great commitment, initiative and persistence of
responsible players in these fields.
Without a doubt, the KU also serves as an illustrative example of how well a
jointly implemented top-down bottom-up process supports targeted implementation
317
which is expected to be published in 2020. Main objectives of the new concept are,
amongst others, strengthening sustainability research and applying a more extensive
implementation of sustainability in the teaching practice in as many subject areas
as possible. In 2020, the KU will set up a Green Office that will support student
initiatives and commitment. Last but not least, the KU has the objective of becoming
a climate-neutral university within the next couple of years.
3.4 The University’s Contribution to Transformation
at Higher Education Institutions
3.4.1 Promoting and Inhibiting Factors for Transformation at Higher
Education Institutions
The developments at the KU offer a lot of potential for being transferred to other
universities. Drawing on the example of the KU, advantages and disadvantages can
be identified that can be said to promote or inhibit the transformation of universities in general. For example, a very favorable factor is the KU’s size. Being a small
university with approx. 5000 students and 120 professors, the KU has relatively lean
administrative structures and regular exchange between University Management and
KU members is the norm. Another beneficial factor is that the KU has decided to
involve the Chancellor in the coordination of sustainability matters, providing for a
direct connection to the University Management. The commitment of the University
Management also plays a decisive role in connection with how fast, intensively and
comprehensively the sustainability process is being advanced at the KU. This also
becomes evident in the results of the project KriNaHoBay (2017). Furthermore, the
KU is a successful example of efficient implementation of a university-wide overall
sustainability concept, which had the aim of continuously promoting sustainable
development by defining objectives and measures for the relevant action areas for
ten years already. Particularly noteworthy in this context is the consistent creation of
participatory structures (see Sect. 3.2.1) and an increasing degree of professionalization. The fact that the KU is a Catholic university is also beneficial, especially in view
of the Encyclical Laudato Si, although it should be pointed out that the sustainability
activities were not initiated by the subject of Theology, but primarily by the subject
of Geography.
Inhibiting factors in the sustainability development process at the KU were the
changes within the University Management over the last ten years and other staff
turnover in important and responsible positions. As regards the fields of research
and teaching, it can be stated that processes of change in these areas are subject
to a certain inertia and thus require great commitment, initiative and persistence of
responsible players in these fields.
Without a doubt, the KU also serves as an illustrative example of how well a
jointly implemented top-down bottom-up process supports targeted implementation