Developing an integrated participatory methodology framework for campus sustainability assessment tools (CSAT): A case study of a sino-foreign university in China

IF 5 1区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Progress in Planning Pub Date : 2023-11-10 DOI:10.1016/j.progress.2023.100827
Ayotunde Dawodu , Chenggang Guo , Tong Zou , Felix Osebor , Jiahui Tang , Chong Liu , Chengyang Wu , Jumoke Oladejo
{"title":"Developing an integrated participatory methodology framework for campus sustainability assessment tools (CSAT): A case study of a sino-foreign university in China","authors":"Ayotunde Dawodu ,&nbsp;Chenggang Guo ,&nbsp;Tong Zou ,&nbsp;Felix Osebor ,&nbsp;Jiahui Tang ,&nbsp;Chong Liu ,&nbsp;Chengyang Wu ,&nbsp;Jumoke Oladejo","doi":"10.1016/j.progress.2023.100827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The issue of sustainable development is a topic that needs to be studied, analysed, and addressed by higher education institutions. Campus sustainability assessment tools (CSATs) are commonly adopted internationally to evaluate and improve measures utilised for the development outcomes of universities. Whilst some Chinese universities have taken positive steps towards attaining sustainability in their operations, teaching and/or research, and China has come up with its own evaluation criteria for green universities, majority of their approach still have shortcomings, such as lack of multiple stakeholder involvement and a one size fits all approach to campus sustainability strategy. Thus, the aim of this paper is to investigate two core methodological issues (top-down and non-transparent approaches and the limited consideration of context-specific issues) that impact the efficacy of CSATs in order to optimize the selection process for indicators and enhance the development CSAT for Chinese campuses and other campuses globally. Based on the widely used assessment tools (both campus and neighbourhood) in foreign countries, 147 corresponding assessment indicators in 16 domains were collated through qualitative review of existing assessment tools and the questionnaire-based analysis through the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The case study campus selected was the University of Nottingham Ningbo China. The indicators to be investigated were selected based on frequency and distributed in the form of a questionnaire to the staff and students after a comprehensive stakeholder survey analysis. The staff and students were used to illustrate the high interest and high influence dynamic versus the high interest and low influence dynamic. This research was conducted to gain insight towards developing an integrated, inclusive, and context relevant CSAT. Furthermore, a new framework was developed for Chinese Campus sustainable assessment planning, using the University of Nottingham Ningbo as Case study. This framework provides step by step phases for CSAT development that includes the database phase, minimization phase, stakeholder phase and integration and implementation phase. Within these phases, factors that determined the success and failure were discussed such as issues of acceptability versus pragmatism, willingness of stakeholders to participate, weighing of indicators, stakeholder analysis and redistribution of power for the less influential. This led to the sample selection of indicators, which serve as validation of impact of this integrated methodological process. The final recommendation given is that all regions should create and provide avenues for tailored processes for the selection, weighting and criteria development of sustainability indicators and assessment tools. This needs to promote inclusivity, transparency and contextual relevance in decision making, which should be the main considerations for any truly sustainable framework. In addition, as a final measure to ensure methods such as CSATs are implemented in wider China and globally, this study identified the need for coordination, support, and participation of competent and sustainability driven leaders, government parastatals (National and provincial level), pilot demonstration, as well as data transparency throughout related campus departments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47399,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Planning","volume":"183 ","pages":"Article 100827"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305900623000880/pdfft?md5=691e681eeb495988bb7ab3cf1ba48c8e&pid=1-s2.0-S0305900623000880-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Planning","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305900623000880","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The issue of sustainable development is a topic that needs to be studied, analysed, and addressed by higher education institutions. Campus sustainability assessment tools (CSATs) are commonly adopted internationally to evaluate and improve measures utilised for the development outcomes of universities. Whilst some Chinese universities have taken positive steps towards attaining sustainability in their operations, teaching and/or research, and China has come up with its own evaluation criteria for green universities, majority of their approach still have shortcomings, such as lack of multiple stakeholder involvement and a one size fits all approach to campus sustainability strategy. Thus, the aim of this paper is to investigate two core methodological issues (top-down and non-transparent approaches and the limited consideration of context-specific issues) that impact the efficacy of CSATs in order to optimize the selection process for indicators and enhance the development CSAT for Chinese campuses and other campuses globally. Based on the widely used assessment tools (both campus and neighbourhood) in foreign countries, 147 corresponding assessment indicators in 16 domains were collated through qualitative review of existing assessment tools and the questionnaire-based analysis through the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The case study campus selected was the University of Nottingham Ningbo China. The indicators to be investigated were selected based on frequency and distributed in the form of a questionnaire to the staff and students after a comprehensive stakeholder survey analysis. The staff and students were used to illustrate the high interest and high influence dynamic versus the high interest and low influence dynamic. This research was conducted to gain insight towards developing an integrated, inclusive, and context relevant CSAT. Furthermore, a new framework was developed for Chinese Campus sustainable assessment planning, using the University of Nottingham Ningbo as Case study. This framework provides step by step phases for CSAT development that includes the database phase, minimization phase, stakeholder phase and integration and implementation phase. Within these phases, factors that determined the success and failure were discussed such as issues of acceptability versus pragmatism, willingness of stakeholders to participate, weighing of indicators, stakeholder analysis and redistribution of power for the less influential. This led to the sample selection of indicators, which serve as validation of impact of this integrated methodological process. The final recommendation given is that all regions should create and provide avenues for tailored processes for the selection, weighting and criteria development of sustainability indicators and assessment tools. This needs to promote inclusivity, transparency and contextual relevance in decision making, which should be the main considerations for any truly sustainable framework. In addition, as a final measure to ensure methods such as CSATs are implemented in wider China and globally, this study identified the need for coordination, support, and participation of competent and sustainability driven leaders, government parastatals (National and provincial level), pilot demonstration, as well as data transparency throughout related campus departments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为校园可持续性评估工具(CSAT)开发综合参与式方法框架:中国一所中外合作大学的案例研究
可持续发展问题是高等教育机构需要研究、分析和解决的一个课题。国际上普遍采用校园可持续发展评估工具(CSAT)来评估和改进大学发展成果的措施。虽然一些中国大学在其运营、教学和/或研究中为实现可持续发展采取了积极措施,中国也制定了自己的绿色大学评估标准,但它们的大多数方法仍然存在缺陷,如缺乏多方利益相关者的参与,以及校园可持续发展战略的 "一刀切 "方法。因此,本文旨在研究影响 CSAT 效能的两个核心方法问题(自上而下、不透明的方法和对特定环境问题的有限考虑),以优化指标选择过程,促进中国校园和全球其他校园 CSAT 的发展。基于国外广泛使用的评估工具(包括校园和社区),通过对现有评估工具的定性审查和基于问卷的层次分析法(AHP)分析,整理出16个领域147个相应的评估指标。所选的案例研究校园是宁波诺丁汉大学。在对利益相关者进行全面调查分析后,根据频率选择了调查指标,并以调查问卷的形式分发给教职员工和学生。教职员工和学生被用来说明高兴趣和高影响力动态与高兴趣和低影响力动态的对比。开展这项研究的目的是为了深入了解如何制定一个综合、包容和与具体情况相关的 CSAT。此外,还以宁波诺丁汉大学为例,为中国校园可持续评估规划制定了一个新的框架。该框架为 CSAT 的开发提供了循序渐进的阶段,包括数据库阶段、最小化阶段、利益相关者阶段以及整合与实施阶段。在这些阶段中,讨论了决定成败的因素,如可接受性与实用主义、利益相关者的参与意愿、指标权衡、利益相关者分析以及对影响力较小的人进行权力再分配等问题。这导致了指标的抽样选择,这些指标是对这一综合方法过程影响的验证。最后提出的建议是,所有地区都应为可持续性指标和评估工具的选择、权重和标准制定的量身定制过程创建和提供途径。这需要促进决策的包容性、透明度和背景相关性,这应该是任何真正可持续框架的 主要考虑因素。此外,作为确保 CSAT 等方法在更广泛的中国和全球范围内实施的最终措施,本研究认为需要有能力和以可持续发展为导向的领导人、政府半官方机构(国家级和省级)的协调、支持和参与,试点示范,以及校园相关部门的数据透明度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
1.60%
发文量
26
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: Progress in Planning is a multidisciplinary journal of research monographs offering a convenient and rapid outlet for extended papers in the field of spatial and environmental planning. Each issue comprises a single monograph of between 25,000 and 35,000 words. The journal is fully peer reviewed, has a global readership, and has been in publication since 1972.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Editorial Board Editorial Board Immigrants, slums, and housing policy: The spatial dispersal of the Ethiopian population in Israel Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1