IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i3p1521-1543d34233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Tale of Two (or More) Sustainabilities: A Q Methodology Study of University Professors’ Perspectives on Sustainable Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Sylvestre

    (School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, 6100 University Avenue, Suite 5010, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H4R2, Canada)

  • Tarah Wright

    (Environmental Science Programs, Dalhousie University, Life Sciences Center, Rm 822, 1355 Oxford Street B3H4R2, Canada)

  • Kate Sherren

    (School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, 6100 University Avenue, Suite 5010, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H4R2, Canada)

Abstract

If change for sustainability in higher education is to be effective, change efforts must be sensitive to the institutional culture in which they will be applied. Therefore, gaining insight into how institutional stakeholders engage with the concept of sustainable universities is an important first step in understanding how to frame and communicate change. This study employed Q methodology to explore how a group of professors conceptualize sustainable universities. We developed a Q sample of 46 statements comprising common conceptions of sustainable universities and had 26 professors from Dalhousie University rank-order them over a quasi-normal distribution. Our analysis uncovered four statistically significant viewpoints amongst the participants: ranging from technocentric optimists who stress the importance of imbuing students with skills and values to more liberal arts minded faculty suspicious of the potential of sustainability to instrumentalize the university. An examination of how these viewpoints interact on a subjective level revealed a rotating series of alignments and antagonisms in relation to themes traditionally associated with sustainable universities and broader themes associated with the identity of the university in contemporary society. Finally, we conclude by discussing the potential implications that the nature of these alignments and antagonisms may hold for developing a culturally sensitive vision of a sustainable university.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Sylvestre & Tarah Wright & Kate Sherren, 2014. "A Tale of Two (or More) Sustainabilities: A Q Methodology Study of University Professors’ Perspectives on Sustainable Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:3:p:1521-1543:d:34233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/3/1521/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/3/1521/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    2. Dryzek, John S. & Berejikian, Jeffrey, 1993. "Reconstructive Democratic Theory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(1), pages 48-60, March.
    3. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    4. Adrianna Kezar & Peter D. Eckel, 2002. "The Effect of Institutional Culture on Change Strategies in Higher Education," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(4), pages 435-460, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lauri Lidstone & Tarah Wright & Kate Sherren, 2015. "Canadian STARS-Rated Campus Sustainability Plans: Priorities, Plan Creation and Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Clair Bullock & Gregory Hitzhusen, 2015. "Participatory Development of Key Sustainability Concepts for Dialogue and Curricula at The Ohio State University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-29, October.
    3. Maria Bonaventura Forleo & Nadia Palmieri, 2017. "University value for sustainability: What do stakeholders perceive? An Italian case study," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(2), pages 103-118.
    4. Lauri Lidstone & Tarah Wright & Kate Sherren, 2015. "An analysis of Canadian STARS-rated higher education sustainability policies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 259-278, April.
    5. Andrew Bieler & Marcia McKenzie, 2017. "Strategic Planning for Sustainability in Canadian Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305231, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Serena Mandolesi & Emilia Cubero Dudinskaya & Simona Naspetti & Francesco Solfanelli & Raffaele Zanoli, 2022. "Freedom of Choice—Organic Consumers’ Discourses on New Plant Breeding Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-17, July.
    3. Priya Kurian & Debashish Munshi & Lyn Kathlene & Jeanette Wright, 2016. "Sustainable citizenship as a methodology for engagement: navigating environmental, economic, and technological rationalities," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(3), pages 617-630, September.
    4. Swedeen, Paula, 2006. "Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 190-208, May.
    5. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    6. Rizwana Alam & Jon C. Lovett, 2019. "Prospects of Public Participation in the Planning and Management of Urban Green Spaces in Lahore: A Discourse Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-28, June.
    7. Elvis Modikela Nkoana & Aviel Verbruggen & Jean Hugé, 2018. "Climate Change Adaptation Tools at the Community Level: An Integrated Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, March.
    8. Astari, Annisa Joviani & Lovett, Jon C., 2019. "Does the rise of transnational governance ‘hollow-out’ the state? Discourse analysis of the mandatory Indonesian sustainable palm oil policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 1-12.
    9. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    10. Katarzyna Gruszka & Annika Scharbert & Michael Soder, 2016. "Changing the world one student at a time? Uncovering subjective understandings of economics instructors' roles," Ecological Economics Papers ieep7, Institute of Ecological Economics.
    11. Marina Masso & Christos Zografos, 2015. "Constructing food sovereignty in Catalonia: different narratives for transformative action," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(2), pages 183-198, June.
    12. Tahereh Zobeidi & Masoud Yazdanpanah & Masoumeh Forouzani & Bahman Khosravipour, 2016. "Climate change discourse among Iranian farmers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 521-535, October.
    13. Eden, Sally & Bear, Christopher & Walker, Gordon, 2008. "The sceptical consumer? Exploring views about food assurance," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 624-630, December.
    14. Jiayuan Li, 2018. "Translating Idea into Reality? A Q-Methodological Investigation of Chinese Local Officials’ Response to the Initiative of a Happiness Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 433-452, September.
    15. Gruszka, Katarzyna & Scharbert, Annika Regine & Soder, Michael, 2017. "Leaving the mainstream behind? Uncovering subjective understandings of economics instructors' roles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 485-498.
    16. Mandolesi, Serena & Nicholas, Philippa & Naspetti, Simona & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2015. "Identifying viewpoints on innovation in low-input and organic dairy supply chains: A Q-methodological study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 25-34.
    17. David Ockwell, 2008. "‘Opening up’ policy to reflexive appraisal: a role for Q Methodology? A case study of fire management in Cape York, Australia," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(4), pages 263-292, December.
    18. Elvis Modikela Nkoana & Aviel Verbruggen & Jean Huge, 2018. "Climate change adaptation tools at the community level: An integrated literature review," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/269477, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    19. E. M. Nkoana & T. Waas & A. Verbruggen & C. J. Burman & J. Hugé, 2017. "Analytic framework for assessing participation processes and outcomes of climate change adaptation tools," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 1731-1760, October.
    20. Simona Naspetti & Serena Mandolesi & Raffaele Zanoli, 2014. "L?accettabilit? delle innovazioni nella filiera lattiero casearia: un?analisi tramite la metodologia Q sort," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 16(2), pages 79-95.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:3:p:1521-1543:d:34233. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.