Implementing a Sustainability Plan on a Small …
459
areas are under pressure from being suppressed to make room for new buildings. The
consideration of green areas as having sustainability value, including carbon sequestration, implies an increase in its visibility and appreciation. The formalization of
institutional commitments to sustainability through its internal documents and adherence to international agreements has been considered as an important sustainability
action by universities (Lozano et al. 2014) and may help to overcome the reduced
commitment of Brazilian universities to the issue (Brandli et al. 2015).
The last three indicators show the greatest differential role of promoting sustainability at a university in relation to other institutions, which is the formative function,
the university’s primary mission. That is why it is essential that sustainability must be
present in the learning processes while, at the same time, include formative actions
of research and extension, which also have an impact on society. It is known that
not only the students are educated in these processes but also staff, faculty and the
community who interact with the university. This reinforces the fact that participatory
processes are much more efficient in promoting sustainability in higher education,
as already observed in others studies (Disterheft et al. 2014).
5 Discussion: Sustainability on a Small, Young Campus
In a study on the process of institutionalization of sustainability in a Portuguese
university, Bizerril et al. (2018) indicated that the way sustainability is institutionalized in universities, including the dimensions and aspects that are most highlighted,
would probably be related to the perception of the theme and the concept of sustainability adopted by the process coordinators. Thus, the process could be facilitated
or hindered according to the structural and cultural circumstances of the university itself, as well as the institutionalization strategies assumed. In this scenario, the
sustainability at the university will be more likely to be successful if it is encouraged,
planned and carried out from the conditions and characteristics of each institution,
rather than merely measured or quantified for purposes of evaluation and comparison.
In the case of FUP, size and age appear to be key elements facilitating the process,
since it avoids the danger of “crystallization” of campus culture and dynamics. The
small size, combined with the absence of departments, reduce the decision-making
bodies providing greater monitoring and community control over the actions of the
campus directors. It is also a facilitator of change and adjustment in management, as
is the case of an implementation of a sustainability policy. In the case of the sustainability policy, the size reduces the distance between the community and the coordinating group of sustainability actions. Additionally, a young campus is more likely
to deal positively with new management proposals than more traditional institutions.
Disterheft et al. (2012) analyzed European universities that had some kind of
environmental management system and concluded that the participatory approach
appears to be more comprehensive than a top-down process. This is because participatory approaches not only improve the environmental performance of the institution,
but also more effectively incorporate sustainability in all the university’s performance
459
areas are under pressure from being suppressed to make room for new buildings. The
consideration of green areas as having sustainability value, including carbon sequestration, implies an increase in its visibility and appreciation. The formalization of
institutional commitments to sustainability through its internal documents and adherence to international agreements has been considered as an important sustainability
action by universities (Lozano et al. 2014) and may help to overcome the reduced
commitment of Brazilian universities to the issue (Brandli et al. 2015).
The last three indicators show the greatest differential role of promoting sustainability at a university in relation to other institutions, which is the formative function,
the university’s primary mission. That is why it is essential that sustainability must be
present in the learning processes while, at the same time, include formative actions
of research and extension, which also have an impact on society. It is known that
not only the students are educated in these processes but also staff, faculty and the
community who interact with the university. This reinforces the fact that participatory
processes are much more efficient in promoting sustainability in higher education,
as already observed in others studies (Disterheft et al. 2014).
5 Discussion: Sustainability on a Small, Young Campus
In a study on the process of institutionalization of sustainability in a Portuguese
university, Bizerril et al. (2018) indicated that the way sustainability is institutionalized in universities, including the dimensions and aspects that are most highlighted,
would probably be related to the perception of the theme and the concept of sustainability adopted by the process coordinators. Thus, the process could be facilitated
or hindered according to the structural and cultural circumstances of the university itself, as well as the institutionalization strategies assumed. In this scenario, the
sustainability at the university will be more likely to be successful if it is encouraged,
planned and carried out from the conditions and characteristics of each institution,
rather than merely measured or quantified for purposes of evaluation and comparison.
In the case of FUP, size and age appear to be key elements facilitating the process,
since it avoids the danger of “crystallization” of campus culture and dynamics. The
small size, combined with the absence of departments, reduce the decision-making
bodies providing greater monitoring and community control over the actions of the
campus directors. It is also a facilitator of change and adjustment in management, as
is the case of an implementation of a sustainability policy. In the case of the sustainability policy, the size reduces the distance between the community and the coordinating group of sustainability actions. Additionally, a young campus is more likely
to deal positively with new management proposals than more traditional institutions.
Disterheft et al. (2012) analyzed European universities that had some kind of
environmental management system and concluded that the participatory approach
appears to be more comprehensive than a top-down process. This is because participatory approaches not only improve the environmental performance of the institution,
but also more effectively incorporate sustainability in all the university’s performance