Archive for category: Project Blog

The digitalisation of education was accelerated by the recent COVID-19 pandemic (OECD, 2021). This increased the discussion on the design of quality online education and, for example, the use of pedagogical models instead of the of digital platforms (Adedoyin & Soykan, 2020). The need for integration of sustainable education into the design of digital education was identified already before the pandemic (see e.g. Wiek et al., 2016; Findler et al., 2019). In Finland, sustainable development should be integrated into all higher education degree programmes (Arene, 2021; Unifi, 2021).

The importance of collaboration in the integration of sustainable design (SD) in the design of digital education is highlighted in a recent study about the design of online degree programmes in higher education (Joshi, 2022). Online degree programmes refer to HE study programmes where education is interactive, guided and includes synchronous elements (Joshi et al., 2020).

The design of online degree programmes for national cross-studies

The design-based research (DBR) study examined the integration of SD into the holistic design of online degree programmes (ODP). The design context was national cross-studies offered on the national digital platform CampusOnline of universities of applied sciences (UAS) created in the ministry-funded eAMK project (eAMK, n.d.). The data subjects were the online degree working group who were involved in the development of ODPs for the national cross-studies as part of the project. The study comprised four phases: the first one prioritized the important features for national collaboration, the second one was a participatory design of ODP elements, and the third one was an interview that focused on the integration of SD in the design of ODPs. In the final phase, the results were compared to the combined sustainability competencies to make connections between ODP design and SD integration.

Results highlight the importance of collaboration

According to the results of Phase 1, the two most important factors for designing national ODPs are external collaboration and management support. In Phase 2, collaboration was added as an element to the feature tree. In Phase 3, most of the answers focused on cooperation and communication competencies, highlighting the importance of collaboration. The interview results revealed e.g., the importance of accessible online education, increased possibilities for SD learning opportunities through national collaboration, and future foresight in designing new ways to implement ODPs.

In Phase 4, the results highlighted the importance of collaboration, which supports earlier findings by Leal Filho et al. (2020), who suggest that partnerships are needed in successful SD initiatives. Strategic action and systemic approach were the second most common category in Phase 4, indicating the national-level strategic guidance of integrating SD into HE degrees and creating more accessible ODP and SD education through a systemic approach. The development of students’ SD competence and their well-being was seen as an important target for collaboration, and the development of curricula showed many opportunities for a systemic thinking approach. Aspects of digital environments or technologies, nor specific pedagogical approaches, related to SD integration were not revealed by the results.

Conclusion

National-level collaboration is important in the integration of SD into online higher education degrees. The key sustainability competency of cooperation and communication are central to the integration of SD in the holistic design of ODPs. Collaboration can enhance accessibility and multidisciplinary approach and support the national SD goals set in for the HE organizations. Also, national collaboration in the design of ODPs can develop students’ SD competencies through professional development. Students’ well-being can be supported by creating access to online communities and developing curricula in national collaboration. Following future foresight signals and developing new initiatives through national collaboration is important. Overall, a holistic approach to SD integration into ODPs seems suitable.

Educators and managers should consider the possibilities that national collaboration can bring in the integration of SD into the design of online education. It is important that online education can be seen as a platform for providing students access to communities and competencies that can further aid the national SD goals in higher education and the wider society.

Written by Marjo Joshi

Sources:

Adedoyin, O. & Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities, Interactive Learning Environments, https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180

The Rectors’ Conference of Finnish Universities of Applied Sciences Arene. (2020). Sustainable, responsible and carbon-neutral universities of applied sciences – Programme for the sustainable development and responsibility of universities of applied sciences. http://www.arene.fi/wp-content/uploads/Raportit/2020/Sustainable%2C%20responsible%20and%20carbon-neutral%20universities%20of%20applied%20sciences.pdf?_t=1606145574

eAMK. (n.d., a) eAMK Basic Facts. https://www.eamk.fi/en/project2/

Findler, F., Schönherr, N., Lozano, R., Reider, D., & Martinuzzi, A. (2019). The impacts of higher education institutions on sustainable development: A review and conceptualization. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 20(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-07-2017-0114

Joshi, M. (2022). Sustainable development in the design of online degree programmes for national cross-studies. Ammattikasvatuksen Aikakauskirja, 23(4), 12–33. https://doi.org/10.54329/akakk.113318

Joshi, M., Könni, P., Mäenpää, K., Mäkinen, L., Pilli-Sihvola, M., Rautiainen, T., Timonen, P., & Valkki, O. (2020). Verkkotutkinnot. Turku University of Applied Sciences Reports 269. Turun ammattikorkeakoulu. http://julkaisut.turkuamk.fi/isbn9789522167682.pdf

Leal Filho, W., Eustachio, J. H. P. P., Caldana, A. C. F., Will, M., Lange Salvia, A., Rampasso, I. S., Anholon, R., & Kovaleva, M. (2020). Sustainability leadership in higher education institutions: An overview of challenges. Sustainability, 12(9), 3761. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12093761

OECD (2021), The state of higher education: One year in to the COVID-19 pandemic, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/83c41957-en

Universities Finland UNIFI. (2020). Theses on sustainable development and responsibility. https://www.unifi.fi/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Unifi-Theses-on-sustainable-development-and-responsibility.pdf

Wiek, A., Bernstein, M., Foley, R., Cohen, M., Forrest, N., Kuzdas, C., Kay, B., & Withycombe Keeler, L. (2016). Operationalising competencies in higher education for sustainable development. In M. Barth, G. Michelsen, M. Rieckmann, & I. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of higher education for sustainable development (pp. 241–260). Routledge.

Climate change is a global concern; hence it affects all countries and regions, however, with different magnitudes and rates [1]. The biggest driving force influencing climate change is fossil fuels, which include coal, oil and gas, contributing more than 75% of all greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions, including almost 90% of all carbon dioxide emissions [2]. The transport sector, especially road transport, accounts for around a quarter of global energy use and related GHGs. To keep the long-term increase in the global mean temperature below 2°C, it has been suggested that reductions in global GHGs emissions of 50% to 85% from levels noted in 2000 must be made by 2050 [3].

However, how to achieve this result since it is estimated that by 2050 the number of cars will double?

High potential in GHGs emission reduction is associated with electric vehicles (EVs). New gasoline and diesel vehicle sales were prohibited beginning in 2040, according to announcements made in the summer of 2017 by the UK and France. This restriction has already been advanced until 2030 by the UK. Therefore, it is already possible that internal combustion engines will no longer be used for personal transportation. This summer, Volvo, a Chinese-owned automaker, announced starting in 2019, all of its vehicles will be either electric or petrol hybrid driven. By 2025, Volvo’s Chinese owners, Geely, hope to sell one million EVs [4]. It would be a huge success, considering that in 2021 Volvo sold 698 700 cars, of which 56 883 were electric cars (both plug-in and fully electric) [5].

EV is not a new invention. The technology has been developing for a long time; the first attempt to create an EV was made in 1832 by Robert Anderson [6]. The biggest advantage of modern EVs is energy efficiency; 75-95% of the available energy is converted into motion. While internal combustion cars can only put up to 30% of the energy contained in its fuel into motion, the rest is lost in heat and friction [4].

EVs are considered cars that produce no pollutants and no hazardous gases. Is that fully true?

The manufacturing process of EVs releases a similar amount of CO₂ as the production of internal combustion cars, but only when battery manufacturing is excluded from the calculations. Production of batteries requires large quantities of rare metals lithium, cobalt and nickel [4]. Their mining is labour-intensive and necessitates chemical input and large quantities of water, frequently from water-scarce regions. What is more, it can produce toxic waste and impurities [7]. Additionally, the cost and the difficulty of recycling processes causes that lithium-ion battery recycling is still very low, at less than 5%, the rest ends in landfills [8]. Regulations are predicted to play a significant part in this process since recycling play a crucial role in the future of the industry because it helps to increase sustainability and lessen resource scarcity.

Engineers and scientists are trying to find different solutions for gathering energy, like sand batteries, which seem to be a promising technology. Sand, when heated to 600℃, can become a battery and, with the application of thick insulation, can keep the temperature inside even when it is freezing outside. Not only does sand have a much lower environmental impact than lithium, but it also does not involve any chemical reactions and does not degrade like lithium-ion batteries. The drawback of this technology is that sand batteries can store 5 to 10 times less energy than chemical batteries. However, the generation of 8 MWh of heat energy by sand battery costs $200 000 while the generation of the same amount of energy by lithium-ion battery costs $1 600 000. The main question is whether it is possible to scale up this technology to produce a considerable amount of electricity in addition to heat [9].    

Indirect pollution is related to the type of electricity grid used to charge batteries. A gas-fired power plant emits 350–400 grams of CO₂ per kWh, but a coal-fired power station releases ~650 grams of CO₂ per kWh. When considering the emissions produced during the manufacturing process of renewable energy sources like solar panels or wind turbines, the emissions produced per kWh are approximately 36g CO₂ [7]. Research demonstrates that even after accounting for these electricity-related emissions, an EV often emits fewer GHGs than the typical new gasoline vehicle. However, the overall GHGs associated with EVs might be significantly lower if more renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, are employed to produce electricity [10].

Another important aspect is related to the pollution emitted from tires. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, tires are one of the main sources of microplastic pollution in oceans [11]. Because of the use of battery power, electric cars are much heavier than combustion engine cars and, together with the instant acceleration and, therefore, instant torque, because more stress is put on the tyres. Engineers are trying to capture the pollution from tires into the boxes placed above the tire, which on the way of electrostatic forces, could collect shed tire particles. However, until now, it is at the prototype stage [11]. Moreover, manufacturers of tires are trying to improve tire quality to increase their longevity and reduce the amount of noise and pollution emissions.

Personal transport is one thing, but a reliable freight transportation infrastructure that can move goods effectively, safely, and sustainably is an essential component of a sustainable society. Diesel trucks have only a 4% share of the total road transport. However, they are responsible for almost half of the transportation sector’s smog-forming pollution and a quarter of all climate emissions [12]. There are some attempts made to change internal combustion heavy trucks into electrical ones. Volvo started series production of electrified truck Volvo FM, FMX, and FH series, that could operate at a combined weight of 44 metric tons [13]. Nevertheless, it should be noticed that the kilometres range of an electric truck is equal to 380 km, then it needs to be charged, while an internal combustion truck can be driven over 2000 km using only one tank of 630 L. Although EVs seem to be the right step towards sustainability and GHGs reduction, challenges still remain.

Written by Magdalena Fabjanowicz, Gdańsk University of Technology

References:

1.  EPA. International Climate Impacts. Accessed November 26, 2022. https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-impacts/international-climate-impacts_.html
2. United Nations Climate Action. Causes and Effects of Climate Change. Accessed November 26, 2022. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/causes-effects-climate-change
3. H. Ma, F. Balthasar, N. Tait, X. Riera-Palou, A. Harrison, Energy Policy, 44 (2012), 160-173, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.01.034.
4. YPTE. Electric cars. Accessed December 5, 2022. https://ypte.org.uk/factsheets/electric-cars/what-are-the-downsides-to-electric-cars#section
5. Volvo cars. Press Releases: Volvo Cars reports sales of 44,664 cars in July. Accessed December 29, 2022, https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/en-gb/media/pressreleases/303268/volvo-cars-reports-sales-of-44664-cars-in-july
6. Energy.gov. Timeline: History of the electric car. Accessed November 28, 2022. https://www.energy.gov/timeline/timeline-history-electric-car
7. Climate Portal. How much CO₂ is emitted by manufacturing batteries? Published July 15, 2022. https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-much-co2-emitted-manufacturing-batteries
8. AZO Materials. Worldwide Regulations on lithium-ion battery recycling. Published January 24, 2022. https://www.azom.com/news.aspx?newsID=57992
9. BBC. How a sand battery could transform clean energy. Accessed December 29, 2022. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20221102-how-a-sand-battery-could-transform-clean-energy
10. EPA. Electric Vehicles Myths. Published October 18, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth1
11. The Japan Times. When driving, tires emit pollution. And EVs make the problem worse. Published September 4, 2022. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/09/04/business/tech/electric-vehicles-tires-climate/
12. GreenBiz. A new way o track truck pollution. Published October 5, 2022. https://www.greenbiz.com/article/new-way-track-truck-pollution
13. CNBC. Volvo starts series production of heavy-duty electric trucks, targets 50% of sales by 2030. Published September 14, 2022. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/14/volvo-starts-series-production-of-heavy-duty-electric-trucks.html

The textile and apparel sector is of high importance and complexity. The transition to more sustainable and circular textile systems affects various stakeholders through the whole value chain and life cycle of the product. The EU is concerned about those challenges, and therefore the corresponding strategies and regulations are developed in order to guide the stakeholders. This paper is oriented to light upon the reuse as an option of the extension of the life cycle of the products. What kind of transformations are needed in order to make it effective and scalable as a promising tool for the circularity of the sector?

EU consumption of textiles is mostly based on imports. It has a significant negative environmental impact: the 4^th on climate change and the 3^rd on water and land use from a life-cycle perspective (EEA, 2022). 5.8 million tons of textiles are discarded in the EU each year, approximately 11 kg per person per year (EEA, 2019). Landfilled or incinerated textile results in huge losses of textile primary resources. It also leads to losses related to production processes because of the usage of millions of tons of water and kilowatts of energy, and work hours (Aus et al., 2021). In solving the problems of the waste sector, the EU has determined that every member state must introduce a separate collection system for textiles from January 1, 2025 (2008/98/EC, 2018), in order to reduce the amount of textiles to be landfilled as waste and promote their recycling and reuse rates. 

Up to 2.1 million tons of second-hand clothing and textiles are collected separately for recycling or reuse in the EU each year, representing around 38% of all textiles placed on the EU market (JRC 2021). It varies considerably in the EU member states, e. g. 5% of used textiles are collected in Latvia, respectively 11% in Lithuania and Italy, 30% in Estonia, 40% in Norway, 42% in Denmark and 70% in Germany. The rest of the textile products are discarded as mixed municipal waste for landfilling and/or incinerated (Nordic, 2020; Sandin & Peters, 2018).

However, the collection of used textiles (as waste) separately does not ensure higher recoverability or lower environmental impact. Organizations operating in the used textile collection sector report that there is a small share of textile products suitable for the reuse market. Meanwhile, there is a huge lack of recycling technologies and a market for low-quality textiles (Nordic, 2020). The development of recycling technologies and the implementation of national or international systems is a long-lasting process. Therefore the life cycle extension strategies are getting more and more relevant in the EU market in order to foster the transition towards circular textile systems.

According to the (WRAP, 2017) report, the reuse of textile is the most popular in Denmark, where 17% of the population try out second-hand market options before buying new clothes. However, the EU Waste Prevention Report (EEA, 2018) shows that the average reuse rate is below 9% in Denmark and below 5% in other EU countries.

The European Commission adopted the EU strategy for sustainable and circular textiles (Strategy) in March 2022, addressing environmental, waste and social challenges in this sector and opportunities for more sustainable development. The Strategy recognizes that extension of the textile lifetime is the most effective way to significantly reduce its negative impact (EC, 2022). The strategy seeks to solve the current situation of consumption patterns: consumerism and decreased quality of apparel. The main reasons why consumers discard textiles are the low quality of clothes and short usability. The fast fashion trend includes mass production of garments, quickly responding to the latest fashion trends and enticing consumers to keep buying at low prices.

As indicated in the strategy and proved by the researchers, the most important instrument for the extension of textile products’ lifetime (fig. 1) is prevention based on the Eco-design Regulation for Sustainable Products (Regulation). The design of product determines up to 80% of its life-cycle environmental impact (Commission et al., 2014) and based on the following regulation requirements products will be more sustainable, reliable, reusable, upgradeable, repairable, maintainable, refurbishable, recyclable and energy, resource and socially efficient (European Commission, 2022b).

The production, consumption and extension of the life cycle of sustainable textiles will gain meaningful benefits through the whole value chain of textile products by the introduction of a digital product passport. The main aim of it is to collect and provide valuable data on a product’s environmental performance and its suitability for reuse, repair, recycling and other circular options. Application of the extended producer responsibility (EPR) principle expected in the Strategy would oblige producers and suppliers to the EU market to take responsibility for the textile waste they generate, resulting in an additional need on the part of the producer to find solutions for sustainable product design, new recycling technologies and wider reuse activities, thus ensuring the prevention of textile waste and the longest possible use of textiles as products. EPR systems for textiles are active in two EU Member States: France (since 2008) and Sweden (since the beginning of 2022). EPR for textiles will start in the Netherlands in 2023. However, the EU is supposed to provide consolidated guidelines for all of the EU.

The Textile Strategy also focuses on strengthening responsible consumption and awareness among consumers so that the demand for sustainable textiles would increase not only from the political strategies and regulations but also from the consumers’ “bottom-up” intentions. The Strategy facilitates the development of responsible consumption behaviour by implementing the following measures: manufacturers publicly disclose information on how they dispose the unsold or returned textiles; using only credible eco-claims and correct eco-labelling and considering the introduction of a digital label; the provision of information to the consumer at the point of sale on the products’ commercial durability guarantee, reparability level, etc. 

Although the Strategy was adopted on March 30, 2022, the transition towards a sustainable textile economy has already begun quite efficiently. 12.5% of the fashion industry is committed to circular fashion, and many leading retailers have set bold targets and increased consumers’ awareness about fashion’s environmental impact (Global Fashion Agenda, 2018). Thus, the decoupling is on the process in different stages of the value chains: starting from the resources’ use when the textile industry is looking for solutions for new-garment designs, sustainable materials, and advanced recycling technologies, but also implementing new circular business models that are reuse-oriented (Fashion for Good & Accenture., 2019) (figure 2). The circular business models (renting, end-of-life collection services, second-hand clothing collections, resale, repair, remaking, etc.) aim to optimize the life cycle stage of usage and provide more opportunities for textile products to be reused after the primary use phase (UNEP, 2020).

A study by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2021) found that the global value of reuse businesses in 2019 was 73 billion USD (figure 3), and it represented 3.5% of the global fashion market revenues. It was estimated that the share of the reuse market could increase up to 23% of the fashion market (USD 700 billion) by 2030. It would lead to a 16% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The study estimates that these business models will grow faster in Europe and North America and could account for around 43% of total fashion market revenue in Europe by 2030.

After a brief overview of textile waste prevention in the context of reuse, the Textile Strategy will be one of the key documents guiding the direction and means of building a sustainable and circular textile economy. Inspired by eco-design requirements and the application of producer responsibility, the textile industry will stimulate and influence the search for innovative alternatives to prolong the product life cycle, which will allow the expansion of existing textile reuse models and the creation of new ones. Reuse is a much more promising strategy, which will be supported by the EU and national institutions. Therefore, investing in the textile service and reverse logistics activities is an opportunity for the various stakeholders within the value chain and their cooperation. The consumers and environment will gain many positive effects out of this transformation from fast fashion towards the extension of the usage of higher quality textile products and services.

Written by Agnė Jučienė, Inga Gurauskienė, Institute of Environmental Engineering, KTU, Lithuania

References:

2008/98/EC. (2018). Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of November 19, 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (Text with EEA relevance). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32008L0098

Aus, R., Moora, H., Vihma, M., Hunt, R., Kiisa, M., & Kapur, S. (2021). Designing for circular fashion: integrating upcycling into conventional garment manufacturing processes. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-021-00262-9

Commission, E., Energy, D.-G. for, & Industry, D.-G. for E. and. (2014). Ecodesign your future: how ecodesign can help the environment by making products smarter. European Commission. https://doi.org/doi/10.2769/38512

EEA. (2018). Waste prevention in Europe — policies, status and trends in reuse in 2017. https://doi.org/doi:10.2800/15583

EEA. (2019). Textiles and the environment in a circular economy.

EEA. (2022). Textiles and the environment: the role of design in Europe’s circular economy. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/textiles-and-the-environment-the

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2021). Circular business models: Rethinking business models for a thriving fashion industry. https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/fashion-business-models/overview

European Commission. (2022a). EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles. COM (2022) 141 Final. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52022DC0141

European Commission. (2022b). On making sustainable products the norm COM (2022) 140 final. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52022DC0140

Fashion for Good & Accenture. (2019). Driving circular business models in fashion. https://fashionforgood.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/The-Future-of-Circular-Fashion-Report.pdf

Global Fashion Agenda. (2018). 2020 Commitments. https://www2.globalfashionagenda.com/commitment/#

Nordic. (2020). Post-consumer textile circularity in the Baltic countries: current status and recommendations for the future.

Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M. (2018). Environmental impact of textile reuse and recycling – A review [Article]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 184, 353–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.266

UNEP. (2020). Sustainability and Circularity in the Textile Value Chain: Global Stocktaking. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/34184

WRAP. (2017). Mapping clothing impacts on Europe: the environmental cost. http://www.ecap.eu.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Mapping-clothing-impacts-in-Europe.pdf

www.circularstories.org. (2022). circularstories.org. https://circularstories.org/009-circular-fashion-berlin-startup/

When we discuss sustainability, our focus is usually on corporations and governments; how they can decrease their negative impact on the environment / society and boost sustainable development and transformation. As single individuals, our environmental footprint may be quite low compared to those of institutions (such as companies); however, we can still make contributions in change towards a more sustainable future by making adaptations in our lifestyles and leading a (more) sustainable living.

Sustainable living can be defined as “understanding how our lifestyle choices impact the world around us and finding ways for everyone to live better and lighter.” [1]. It is an approach to decrease one’s demand on natural resources by, for example, stopping to use a certain product or service that is produced and delivered through unsustainable ways and have a huge negative impact on our planet; or by making behavioral changes in one’s everyday life to decrease one’s ecological footprint.

Sustainable living is closely related to the concept of sustainable consumption, which means “the use of goods and services that respond to basic needs and bring a better quality of life, while minimizing the use of natural resources, toxic materials and emissions of waste and pollutants over the life cycle, so as not to jeopardize the needs of future generations.” [2]

The importance of sustainable consumption in achieving sustainable development is so important that it also appears in one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) of the United Nations (UN). SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production pursues “ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns” and “doing more and better with less”. [3]

According to a few facts presented by the UN;

• “Each year, an estimated one-third of all food produced – equivalent to 1.3 billion tonnes worth around $1 trillion – ends up rotting in the bins of consumers and retailers, or spoiling due to poor transportation and harvesting practices.
• If people worldwide switched to energy-efficient light bulbs the world would save US$120 billion annually.
• Should the global population reach 9.6 billion by 2050, the equivalent of almost three planets could be required to provide the natural resources needed to sustain current lifestyles.” [3]

A simple online research on ‘how to lead a more sustainable life’ gives various ideas for small lifestyle changes that can change one’s impact on the planet for the better.

One example would be to decrease the consumption of animal-based products in one’s diet, which would not only boost one’s own health, but also that of the planet.

According to Dr. Michael Greger’s videos on Which Foods Have the Lowest Carbon Footprint? and Diet and Climate Change: Cooking Up a Storm “In California, including more animal products in your diet requires an additional 10,000 quarts of water a week. That’s like taking 150 more showers each week. Instead of eating meat every day, if you skip meat on weekdays, you could conserve thousands of gallons of water a week and cut your daily carbon footprint and total ecological footprint by about 40 percent.” [4] “The foods that create the most greenhouse gasses appear to be the same ones that contribute to many of our chronic diseases, such as heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and hypertension.” [5]

Another example would be to stop contributing to the growth of the fast-fashion industry and shopping for what is really needed and going for sustainable brands or second-hand clothes. The fashion industry is indeed known as one of the main pollutants of our planet. According to the Deutsche Welle Documentary on Fast fashion – The shady world of cheap clothing, “Our planet is being swamped in clothes with some 56 million tons sold every year. The number sold in Europe has doubled since the turn of the millennium”. [6]

According to Prof. Nikolay Anguelov, who presents interesting facts in the documentary, it is estimated that “by 2030 the industry will expand by an additional 60 percent”, which is very worrying considering, among many other issues, the amount of dumped clothes every year. Indeed, as Prof. Anguelov puts it, “Fast fashion is the commerce of very inexpensive clothing that you are expected, or you are ready to replace very rapidly. It’s very typical for the fashion forward buyer to never wear an outfit that they purchased. You will wear something once or twice or maybe never.” [6]

It is important that each individual is aware that one’s actions and choices do have an impact on climate change -among many other social and environmental challenges we experience today- and gets informed about the small changes he/she can make for a more sustainable lifestyle. To start with, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) presents a footprint-calculator, a questionnaire through which one can calculate his/her individual ecological impact and makes the first step towards a more sustainable living.

Written by Ela Kurtcu, Global Impact Grid

References:

[1] https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/resource-efficiency/what-we-do/sustainable-lifestyles

[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/economics-econometrics-and-finance/sustainable-consumption

[3] https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-consumption-production/

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWKCvP1XCjA

[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu5NKLxqTak

[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhPPP_w3kNo

One part of Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is employee wellbeing that can be supported by leadership focusing on creating a motivated and open work culture at today´s workplaces. However, during the last two three years leadership has been challenged by the Covid 19 and its accompanying transformation of the work environment. Today, almost every organization operates in a virtual and in even more complex environments. The TOO4TO project has addressed this challenge and contributes to the goal of better and more sustainable virtual leadership by integrating the development of virtual team leadership and sustainable leadership skills in the e-learning course it will produce.

Virtual team leadership

Employees often work in small teams and the success of virtual teams depends among other things on the size and structure of the virtual team, as well as team composition meaning individual differences and team leadership. Virtual team leadership is not so different from the face-to-face leadership; however, certain practices are emphasized:

• solving conflicts,
• supporting open and regular communication,
• leading diversity,
• being present to avoid social isolation,
• giving feedback to maintain intrinsic motivation and
• allowing autonomy to enable self-managing teams.
• building trust to ensure knowledge sharing and creation

Working in virtual settings increases also the importance of sustainable leadership. Especially, in diverse virtual teams where the team members speak different languages, are of different ages and have different experiences, the team leader must ensure the wellbeing of the team members by leading in a sustainable way in the pursuit of trust.

How do we lead in a sustainable way in virtual settings?

The Sustainable Leadership Pyramid created by Avery and Bergsteiner (2011) (SLP) proposes a bundle of 23 integrated and mutually supportive leadership practices combined to enhancing performance outcomes by multiple measures (see fig.1). Key performance drivers refer to organizational behaviors, in other words – staff engagement, quality and innovation.

On the higher-level practices the focus is on the employees, and we can find corresponding practices that were mentioned being the most important in leading virtual teams. One of the most crucial practices is building trust. To be more precise, building both cognitive and affective trust, that correlates positively with the success of a virtual team.

It is said that trust is more difficult to establish and maintain in virtual teams (I.e., Sarker & al. 2011; Morrison-Smith & Ruiz 2020) and lack of trust is most pronounced during the initial stages of the virtual teamwork. Facilitating social exchanges early in the life of a project and creating opportunities also for informal interactions between the team members, can improve trust. In other words, the leader’s first responsibility is to build an employment relationship where team members are allowed to work freely and share their own expertise and knowledge with others. In this way, they feel a sense of belonging and make their best contribution to the success of the team. All these practices lead to increased trust between the team members and psychologically safe working environment.

In addition, to build trust in an international virtual team in the best possible way, the virtual team leader should strive to create an open discussion by choosing the right kind of technological tools and taking cultural differences into account. Also, the members of the virtual team must be aware of the communication rules and etiquette and of the norms and values of different cultures. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, the various stages of team development should be considered, most effort is needed at the initial stages of team development. Not only open communication and technology but also demonstrating appreciation and respect for the team members is beneficial. Unfortunately, trust is often seen as a sensitive resource because it is demanding and time-consuming to build, but it can be broken down easily and quickly.

Ways to develop sustainability and sustainable leadership skills virtually

The TOO4TO project online course offers an opportunity to conduct group assignments in virtual teams across national borders. The intention is to elevate the learners’ sustainable leadership skills, such as building trust, as well as adaptability to new situations in conjunction with studying sustainability, which as an approach, is unique to all project partners.

The project has also published a “How to lead virtual teams” guide to increase competence and skills in the area of sustainable leadership and multicultural virtual teamwork. The guide is available on the https://too4to.eu/ website.

While changes in the work environment are seen as challenges, they are also great opportunities to re-think ways of working and to develop as a sustainable virtual team leader. Despite the work environment, it is still about the welfare of the team members.

Written by Mervi Varhelahti, Marjatta Rännäli and Milka Leppäkoski, Turku University of Applied Sciences

References:

Avery, G.C. & Bergsteiner, H. (2011), “Sustainable leadership practices for enhancing business resilience and performance”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878571111128766

Bergsteiner, H. (2022) Institute for Sustainable Leadership. The Sustainable Leadership Pyramid (SLP). Accessed 16.2.2022 https://instituteforsustainableleadership.com/research/tools/sl-pyramid/#

Leppäkoski, M. (2021) The role of leadership in building trust in multilingual virtual teams. Turku University of applied sciences. Accessed 16.2.2022 https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2021090917629

Morrison-Smith, S. & Ruiz, J. (2020). Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review. SN Applied Sciences, 2(6), 1-33.

Suriyankietkaew, S. & Avery, G. (2016). Sustainable leadership practices driving financial performance: Empirical evidence from Thai SMEs. Sustainability, 8(4), 327.