Archive for category: Project Blog

The consumption of wine has a great economic and cultural significance. According to The Food and Agriculture Organization statistics from 2016, the grape is the most widely cultivated fruit crop [1]. The biggest grape producers in 2018 were: China (11.7 million tons), Italy (8.6 million tons), the USA (6.9 million tons), Spain (6.9 million tons), and France (6.2 million tons) [2]. Among the others, grape crops are used for fresh fruit, dried fruit and juice production. However, the majority of production is focused on wine [3]. In 2019, the world wine production reached 292 million hectoliters from 77.8 million tons of grape crops. It is assumed that 30% of the total amount of vinified grapes are by-products during the wine production, including pomace – skin and seed as well as rachis and lees, as shown in Figure 1 [4].

In 2018 alone, vitiviniculture generated around 23 million tons of waste. Moreover, most of them were discarded without any treatment, causing an environmental and economic load. Biowaste generated during the winemaking process has one significant feature making them difficult to dispose of. They are rich in phenolic compounds, which decrease the pH and increase resistance to biological degradation [5].

Should they be considered waste?

Growing people’s interest in sustainability and circular economy is a driving force for the wine industry to look for innovation and an alternative way of winery biowaste utilisation. Winery by-products, especially grape pomace, present a rich source of essential compounds such as antioxidants, dietary fibres, polyphenols, flavonoids, essential minerals, showing health-promoting properties. It is documented that these bioactive compounds possess antibacterial, antitumor, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant effects preventing chronic diseases. Thus, they are highly interested in the food, cosmetics, and pharmaceutical industry [6]. More and more literature evidence shows an increasing number of possible reusing and recycling of winery biowaste. The extract of grape pomace can be used in various industries like:

• the food industry, where it can be added to prevent food products against oxidation and lipid peroxidation, to limit colour deterioration and prevent against the antimicrobial activity, thus food spoilage;
• the cosmetic and pharmaceutical industry, because of significant polyphenols content it could be a new, cost-effective source in the cosmetic sector due to their anti-ageing properties or dietary supplement rich in antioxidants;
• agroindustry as soil conditioner once the grape pomace is composted or it can be reused in animal feeding [5].

Instead of being disposed of away, winery by-products can be used as a fuel (biomass) to generate methane gas, which can then generate electricity [5]. Moreover, grape stalks can be used in wastewater treatment to remove heavy metals, including Cd, Cu, Cr, Ni, Hg, Pb [7].

The discussed number of wine pomace applications demonstrates the significant potential of winery by-product valorisation in various industries. The results of the research are very promising; however, still, there is a long way to go until all of these residues have proven recovery pathways. This is a huge challenge for the future, to make the wine production process more sustainable, to change the wine waste chain in order to recover as much as possible and turn it into valuable products.

“Who will be the first to benefit from exploring the opportunities?”

Written by Magdalena Fabjanowicz, Gdańsk University of Technology

References:

1.          FAO-OIV FOCUS 2016 Statistical Report on Table and Dried Grapes. Available Online: (Accessed 16.03.2022); s.n.], 2016;

2.          OIV, 2020 Statistical Report on World Vitiviniculture. Available Online: (Accessed 8.03.2022);

3.          Bouquet, A.; Torregrosa, L.; Iocco, P.; Thomas, M.R. Grapevine (Vitis Vinifera L.). In Agrobacterium Protocols Volume 2; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, 2006; pp. 273–285.

4.          Melo, P.S.; Massarioli, A.P.; Denny, C.; dos Santos, L.F.; Franchin, M.; Pereira, G.E.; Vieira, T.M.F. de S.; Rosalen, P.L.; Alencar, S.M. de Winery By-Products: Extraction Optimisation, Phenolic Composition and Cytotoxic Evaluation to Act as a New Source of Scavenging of Reactive Oxygen Species. Food Chemistry 2015, 181, 160–169, doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.02.087.

5.          Kalli, E.; Lappa, I.; Bouchagier, P.; Tarantilis, P.A.; Skotti, E. Novel Application and Industrial Exploitation of Winery By-Products. Bioresources and Bioprocessing 2018, 5, 46, doi:10.1186/s40643-018-0232-6.

6.          Gerardi, C.; D’amico, L.; Migoni, D.; Santino, A.; Salomone, A.; Carluccio, M.A.; Giovinazzo, G. Strategies for Reuse of Skins Separated From Grape Pomace as Ingredient of Functional Beverages. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2020, 8, doi:10.3389/fbioe.2020.00645.

7.          Tripathi, A.; Rawat Ranjan, M. Heavy Metal Removal from Wastewater Using Low Cost Adsorbents. Journal of Bioremediation & Biodegradation 2015, 06, doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000315.

Integration of IT technologies in universities’ education and research process is quite common for the last decades. The importance of IT infrastructure, digitalization, and virtual technologies sharply increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. The voluntary and innovative aspects of applying those technologies transferred to must have and survival of education process in time of lock-down. However, a huge outbreak of COVID cases raised a Hamlet dilemma for all lecturers “to be or not to be” with already a clear answer. A challenging period for students and a nerve-wracking period for some lecturers: when ZOOM embodied a whole classroom and “break-out rooms” function – team working space; questions “Can you hear me well?” or “Can you see the slides?” were used as a starting prayer of a lecture. “Frozen faces” became more common, and loss of the Internet connection was the most significant threat (and still is!) for the study process. Despite all these crazy moments, this experience brought a number of benefits with innovations and skills among lecturers and students in a time of digitalization – as new era of transformative education process. At the same time, it revealed the gaps on a national or organizational (university) level. So the questions arise, what are the benefits and what are the challenges of the changes towards the screen-based education?

Trends and guidelines towards technological development and increased digitalisation in higher education

The importance of this topic becomes also clear when considering that the EU institutions prepare documentation, initiatives and funding for better digital integration in the European Higher Education Area. 

The European Union set a policy initiative for 2021-2027, “The Digital Education Action Plan”, to better integrate IT technologies in universities. This plan aims to support the sustainable and effective adaptation of EU Member States’ education and training systems to the digital age. The plan has significant importance for including digital technologies into the teaching process, support for the digitalisation of teaching methods and pedagogies, and the provision of all necessary infrastructure for inclusive and resilient remote learning. There are three main priorities proposed in the document: 

1. Making better use of digital technology for teaching and learning.

2. Developing relevant digital skills and competencies for digital transformation.

3. Improving education systems through better data analysis and foresight.

The Action Plan sets out two following priority areas: developing a high-performing digital education ecosystem and enhancing digital skills and competencies for digital transformation to achieve these objectives. 

Moreover, during the Digital Education Action Plan preparation, stakeholders expressed the need for better cooperation and dialogue concerning digital education. Accordingly, at the beginning of January (2022) European Commission launched the Digital Education Hub. The Hub will provide visibility to the outputs of its community of practice, a dedicated space for its information-sharing needs and ensure synergies with the European Education Area initiative. 

Lessons learnt about digitalisation in higher education during the COVID-19 crisis

Scientists analyse the impact of the COVID-19 crisis in various scientific fields – environmental, educational, social, etc. Experts of Kaunas University of Technology provided insights on a few exciting research results about the usage of digital environments in the study process:

Positive environmental aspects of “work-study from home.”

Scientists of Frederick University (Cyprus) and Kaunas University of Technology (Lithuania) analysed “The role of Remote Working in smart cities: lessons learnt from COVID-19 pandemic”. This article analysed the case of university employees’ behaviour in different types of working (fig. 1). Therefore, it is highly related to the studies and its process. This work established impact indicators that demonstrate the contribution of remote working models in tackling energy and environmental challenges for the transition of European cities to smart energy regions. The study revealed that: “at least 4.0 litres of transportation fuel and 7.4 kg of carbon dioxide can be saved per hour of remote work per 100 employees for the case of Cyprus.” According to the study results, only one question could be raised – how much of transportation fuel and carbon dioxide emissions were saved by distance learning?

The impact of digital technology on Lithuanian education and the difficulties it faces.

Another useful interview was carried out with Gytis Cibulskis – the head of Kaunas University

Virtual learning environments have been used extensively in universities and colleges before the pandemic. According to Gytis Cibulskis, the Head of Kaunas University of Technology E-learning Technology Centre: “The Internet has become an endless source of learning resources that facilitate the transfer of learning materials in the technology classroom; communication, collaboration, and diverse learning platforms are essential in organising the learning process remotely and in a hybrid way.”

According to G.Cibulskis:

• More attention should also be paid to the development and accessibility of digital learning tools.
• Higher education institutions should be encouraged to become actively involved in developing and implementing EdTech innovations.
• Virtual labs, learning data analytics, artificial intelligence applications, and other innovations could be tested by universities in higher education.

The solutions tested could be replicated in the general education sector as well, involving teachers in the development of teachers’ digital competencies.” Despite some drawbacks the Lithuanian education sector faces, there are some good initiatives to be mentioned:

• Teacher training packages the EdTech digital education transformation project has been initiated.
• Hybrid teaching equipment is being procured centrally.
• Other projects are being initiated.

¨It is to be hoped that the impetus given by the pandemic will have long-term positive consequences for the overall digitalisation of the educational sector”. 

Further ideas for virtual teaching and learning process

Digital education has become an integral part and background of every study process. Therefore, the current challenge is to look for digital innovations, but not the digitalisation of the study process itself. The students and lecturers are getting more and more used to the virtual environment and online lectures. Therefore the development of the higher education will integrate digitalization, virtual and blended learning as one of the core resources, infrastructure and direction for the innovative and up-to-date competences providing institutions for the specialist of the future and nowadays. Transformative changes will be oriented not from the blackboard to the “black-screens” of the students (as it used to be in virtual lectures), but to the integration of innovative tools providing flexibility, individualization and all other benefits, the digitalization provides to the society. The question is HOW, but not WHY to be more digital in the education process. Therefore, the lessons learned at each institution and interinstitutional collaboration as well as orientation to the EU strategic guidelines will lead to positive changes and development of the quality of higher education.

p.s. Useful information for the lecturers and students, who are curious or still feel the need to improve the teaching/learning process, The United Nations prepared a list of programmes and websites called “Distance learning solutions”. The information and solutions include resources to provide psychosocial support, digital learning management systems, massive open online course (MOOC) platforms, self-directed learning content, collaboration platforms that support live-video communication, tools for teachers to create digital learning content, etc. The results of the TOO4TO project also could be seen as a set of useful virtual and digital tools for lecturers and students oriented to the development of sustainable management competences.

Written by Inga Gurauskienė, Kaunas University of Technology

References

Digital Education Action Plan (2021-2027). https://education.ec.europa.eu/focus-topics/digital/education-action-plan

Digital Education Hub. https://education.ec.europa.eu/focus-topics/digital-education/digital-education-action-plan/digital-education-hub

Gytis Cibulskis: learning process without technologies is unimaginable. https://en.ktu.edu/news/gytis-cibulskis-learning-process-without-technologies-is-unimaginable/

Kylili, A., Afxentiou, N., Georgiou, L., Panteli, C., Morsink-Georgalli, P.-Z., Panayidou, A., Papouis, C., & Fokaides, P. A. (2020). The role of Remote Working in smart cities: lessons learnt from COVID-19 pandemic. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 0(0), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2020.1831108

Remote working can help solve environmental problems and develop smart cities. https://en.ktu.edu/news/remote-working-can-help-solve-environmental-problems-and-develop-smart-cities/

Researcher of KTU: online learning – will we be able to learn everything? (publication in Lithuianian: KTU mokslininkė: nuotolinis mokymasis – ar viską išmoksime?) https://ktu.edu/news/ktu-mokslininke-nuotolinis-mokymasis-ar-viska-ismoksime/

UNESCO. Distance learning solutions. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/solutions

Sustainability. We know it is important – something everyone should pursue and favour, but what are its origins, and how should we understand it?

Sustainability may be as old as human existence, even though its concept as a word with various meanings is much younger. It may also be impossible to pinpoint who first used the term ‘sustainability’. However, the concerns about natural environmental preservation in the economic circles were purportedly brought up first by a German accountant Carl von Corlowitz in the early 18^th century, who was one of the first to use the term ‘nachhaltiger Ertrag’ – ‘Sustained yield’ – in the context of forest management¹. Already back then, environmental preservation meant that nature needed the time to regrow if we wanted to use it sustainably.

Around the same time, an English economist Thomas Robert Malthus postulated that the environment has limits ². He suggested that as the population grows, there would be diminishing food supply per capita, leading to lower living standards, eventually ending the growth (Figure 1).

However, the shortcoming of the Malthusian theory was that the total production curve was kept fixed. Malthus was unable to predict that the Industrial Revolution would enable a significant shift upwards in the production curve, which is why the human population has grown from about 800 million in 1750 to nearly 8 billion at the present day.

After the first half of the 20^th century, various United Nations administrators, governments and scientists started sounding the alarm bells again about the limits³. However, it was not until 1987 when the Brundtland Commission Report mainstreamed the term ‘sustainable development’ and defined it as:

 “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”

Arguably, this is still one of the most accepted definitions for sustainable development. But what does it mean if we really try to understand it? Some could argue that the definition is elusive, which may also be one of the reasons for its wide acceptance. After all, the definition leaves much room for us to interpret and adjust it in ways that best suit different purposes.

Be that as it may, ten years after the Brundtland Commission Report, academia alone had produced over 300 different definitions of sustainability and sustainable development ⁴. Probably, due to a plethora of definitions, most of us have little understanding of what these terms mean.

Perhaps, from the practical point of view, it makes more sense to view sustainability as a framework rather than debating its definition. In this regard, there appears to be a consensus that sustainability comprises economic, social and environmental dimensions, which the English author John Elkington coined as the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) in the 1990s. Since its introduction, many businesses have adopted TBL at least as an accounting framework to communicate their non-financial impacts. Yet, many interpretations exist on how these dimensions should be understood and promote sustainability. In this regard, some general perspectives on sustainability are coined into specific models (Figure 2).

Many of us from management disciplines have seen representation A, where the three sustainability dimensions are presented as pillars. The fundamental message of this view is that the dimensions need to be in balance to prevent sustainability from collapsing. This conceptualisation may also make it clear to understand that sustainability issues can be discussed and addressed separately.

The so-called Mickey Mouse model (B) also sees the sustainability dimensions as separate entities. This perspective focuses on the economic dimension, where economic activities influence the other two. It is arguably not the most dominant model in terms of how we want to view sustainability. However, it has been argued that this view underpins much of the current global economic and political decision making ⁵.

Then there is the TBL model (C), introduced by John Elkington, according to which sustainability is achieved when a balance exists in the intersect of the dimensions. Twenty-five years after its introduction, Elkington himself ⁶ has, however, started to doubt whether his model has been understood appropriately by businesses. Indeed, it seems many companies have interpreted the model as a “balancing act” where trade-offs between the sustainability dimensions are possible.

Finally, the strong sustainability model (D) views the human world as an integral environmental dimension. It recognises that social and economic systems exist as subsystems of the wider ecosystem, ultimately setting limits to growth. Therefore, strong sustainability can only work if the natural environment is sustained and human impact within it is manageable. ⁷

However, economic growth has dominated our current ways of living. This growth has enabled better infrastructure and higher life expectancy, positively contributing to our wellbeing. Hence, economic growth should not be seen as bad as such. However, the excessive economic growth stemming from our current lifestyles promotes increased material consumption, which has led to the depletion of the natural world and issues like climate change. The world has become a human-centric place, where strong sustainability seems impossible. ⁵

Should we, however, feel doom and gloom about our planet when we have governments and businesses committing more and more to sustainable development? After all, we read more news every day about innovations that will make life more sustainable in the future. Such innovations include lab-grown meat that grows in Petri dishes currently but will become available in grocery stores in the future. Sustainable development is also taking place in the fashion industry, where many fashion houses have started to add recycled materials into their textiles. These are only some examples that demonstrate that we are heading in the right direction. Therefore, we should stay optimistic. Right?

However, we should also realise that, in a way, the future is now and not tomorrow. After all, the actions and decisions we make today have consequences on our tomorrow. And unfortunately, due to human-induced climate change, the future will be unequal for us – especially for those living on ice or in coastal regions – let them be polar bears or humans. Let us also ask ourselves: Do we have that lab-grown meat in our local grocery stores now? The answer is no, and while we are waiting for it to become available, the world is consuming meat and dairy more than ever, which produce about 14.5% of global CO2 emissions⁸. And while the fashion industry is blending more recycled materials into their clothes, the average consumer also buys 60% of more pieces of clothing today than 15 years ago, and each item is kept for half as long, of which the majority ends up in landfills⁹.

To conclude, even though we see evidence of sustainable development, can we call this development sustainable in the big picture, within the limits of growth? The answer to this depends mainly on how we understand sustainability. Arguably, as a word, ‘sustainability’ holds different meanings to different people in different contexts. These meanings are not static either and are subject to alterations when various actors such as governments, scientists and business representatives communicate about it. Having said this, we should take the responsibility seriously for how we teach and communicate sustainability to others – even as an abstract concept. Although we may all have somewhat differing views on sustainability, we can still find ourselves sharing perspectives with some of the models presented in this blog post. The question is, which of the models do you wish yourself and the others to be advocating – the strong sustainability or the Mickey Mouse?

Written by Eljas Johansson, Gdańsk University of Technology

References:

1. Grober U. Deep Roots: A Conceptual History of “sustainable Development” (Nachhaltigkeit). Vol No. P 2007.; 2007. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/50254/1/535039824.pdf
2. Zeder R. The Malthusian Theory of Population. Published 2020. https://quickonomics.com/the-malthusian-theory-of-population/
3. Bansal P, Song HC. Similar but not the same: Differentiating corporate sustainability from corporate responsibility. Acad Manag Ann. 2017
4. Johnston P, Everard M, Santillo D, Robèrt KH. Reclaiming the definition of sustainability. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2007;14(1)
5. Mulia P, Kumar Behura A, Kar S. Categorical Imperative in Defense of Strong Sustainability. Probl Ekorozwoju. 2016;11(January):29-36. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2858188
6. Elkington. 25 Years Ago I Coined the Phrase “Triple Bottom Line.” Here’s Why It’s Time to Rethink It. Harv Bus Rev. 2018;June 25. https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it
7. Peet J. Strong Sustainability for New Zealand: Principles and Scenarios.; 2009. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Strong+sustainability+for+New+Zealand#4
8. Kevany S. 20 meat and dairy firms emit more greenhouse gas than Germanu, Britain or France. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/07/20-meat-and-dairy-firms-emit-more-greenhouse-gas-than-germany-britain-or-france  Published September 7, 2021.
9. UNEP. UN Alliance For Sustainable Fashion addresses damage of ‘fast fashion.’ Accessed January 17, 2022. https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/un-alliance-sustainable-fashion-addresses-damage-fast-fashion

The world is currently facing environmental degradation and consequently negative repercussions on human well-being. This situation can be mitigated if modern economies and societies are willing to take the finite resources of the planet into consideration and start moving towards an alternative model that can lessen the risk of resource scarcity and respond to climate change challenges, as assured by the Circular Economy (CE) model.

The circular economy “is a model of production and consumption, which involves sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing and recycling existing materials and products as long as possible. In this way, the life cycle of products is extended.” (European Parliament, 2015). The EU currently places the transition towards the CE model on top of its agenda in order to reduce the 2.5 billion tons of waste it generates annually. (European Parliament, 2015).

The CE measures, such as waste prevention, eco-design and re-use, are expected not only to reduce the total annual greenhouse gas emissions, decrease pressure on the environment, improve the security of the supply of raw materials, increase competitiveness, stimulate innovation; but also, it is expected to save money for the EU companies, boost economic growth as well as add  0.5%  growth rate to gross domestic product (GDP) and create more than 700,000 jobs in the EU alone by 2030 (EU Parliament, 2020).

That being said, the European Commission adopted the new circular economy action plan (CEAP) in March 2020. This action plan is one of the foundational elements of the European Green Deal, which aims to attain the EU’s 2050 climate neutrality target and halt biodiversity loss (European Commission, 2021).

Recognizing this, several industries and organizations embarked on more sustainable practices within the new CE framework. However, the businesses and technological innovations alone are not sufficient to achieve a complete transformation to CE. Citizens awareness is crucial in that regard, given that some of the obstacles facing this transformation are associated with attitudes such as perception of sustainability and risk aversion (Ritzén and Sandström, 2017) and cultures, for example, the lack of consumer interest and awareness. Citizens perceive themselves unaccountable for that transition and believe it is only governments and businesses responsibility (Kirchher et al., 2018). Therefore, a paradigm shift cross-cutting the individual behaviors reaching to the collective societal adaption of the CE principles through a bottom-up approach is the viable option to internalize CE principles. This can only be accomplished by education, to equip the people to become themselves the agents of the evolution towards CE (EU Commission, 2020).

The EU-funded TOO4TO project, hence, contributes to this goal by embedding the desired knowledge about circularity and sustainable economy in its modules. The course entails the necessary information about the circular economy, economics, sustainable production concepts and the concept of planetary boundaries. Students will get familiar also with the influence of public policy on the transition process to CE and the techniques of evaluating the business actions in terms of sustainability.

Practically as observed by Rodriguez and Marcote (2020), including circular economy and sustainability into the educational modules of the students altered their perception about their role and contribution to the CE transition and raised awareness with regards to the change in daily habits. As stated by Rodriguez and Marcote (2020: 1361)

“Students have sought out, developed, and provided solutions that have improved their impact on campus (water and energy saving, longer use of devices, less waste and more recycling). This critical view of their consumption is necessary to make the transition to the CE. Students can understand how their purchasing decisions have direct and serious consequences on the planet. They also recognized their inconsistency when shopping without need, just for fashion. The transition to more sustainable consumption patterns and levels will require reinforcing new habits through education”.

Written by Ashrakat Fouda, Global Impact Grid

References:

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_en

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/europarl/circular_economy/circular_economy_en.svg

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-PR-652387_EN.html?redirect

https://epale.ec.europa.eu/en/blog/transition-circular-economy-role-education-youth-higher-education

Ritzén, S. and Sandström, G.Ö. (2017), “Barriers to the circular economy – integration of perspectives and domains”, Procedia Cirp, Vol. 64, pp. 7-12.

Kirchher, J., Piscicelli, L., Bour, R., Kostense-Smit, E., Muller, J., Hublbrechtse-Trujens, A. and Hekkert, M. (2018), “Barriers to the circular economy: evidence from the European union (EU)”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 150, pp. 264-227.

Rodrigues, A., Marcote, P. (2020), “Circular economy, sustainability and teacher training in a higher education institution”. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 1351-1366. Retrieved from: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2020-0049/full/pdf?casa_token=0DPVaO9GfywAAAAA:RNd9KN4b72-BJMC_Z1wkZx1oFyGT__8hwsK_-uLnIt_tHqU1zdPydrJuBk76kQI6IKevjgsKyZ89Yg8mYUe3mYjvh0Je_MONPM-R8KxL6MgfSSHtng

Engage your stakeholders in dialogue

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is not all about charitable activities and events. CSR is not only that businesses take into account the economic, social and environmental impacts of their operations, but also about taking the responsibility. Also, about taking the responsibility in developing the society. This happens by envisioning future plans for socio-economic justice and being conscious about companies’ responsibility for the welfare of society around them. 

CSR manifests in communication with stakeholders. CSR activities that are effectively communicated to stakeholders are likely to have good returns on investments and increase companies’ social legitimacy and reputation.

Social media has become a standard communication tool for companies to inform about their socially responsible activities. Social media has allowed organizations to communicate in entirely new ways through dialogue type of communication utilizing value- and performance-driven motives. However, it is stated that social networking platforms are most utilized in traditional one-way company-to-consumer communication. Unfortunately, this pattern still predominates in the social and digital era where interactivity and engagement are key. It is true that with a monologue type of communication one can campaign participation and spread e-WOM, electronic Word of Mouth. However, participating in dialogues in social media can reduce stakeholders’ scepticism towards the company’s CSR activities and lead to active stakeholder engagement. Moreover, through discussions and listening, companies can hold active dialogues and identify the sentiment of the discussions. This is relevant because emotional messages tend to be diffused more widely than neutral ones. Sharing emotional content is an intrinsic part of social media behaviour. In addition, emotions are used for promoting dialogue and engagement. Therefore, emotions are crucial elements for achieving stakeholder acceptance, commitment, and participation regarding CSR issues.

#CSR and #corporatesocialresponsibility in social media

We used hashtag and sentiment analysis to identify the main topics and their sentiment in social media discussions (i.e., Twitter or Instagram) related to corporate social responsibility. We chose hashtags #CSR and #corporatesocialresponsibility. We used a free version of social searcher and the data was limited to timeline 1.9 – 14.9.2021. Only social media mentions in English were included and inadequate data was removed.

Table 1 shows an overview of the social media posts related to corporate social responsibility during the two first weeks in September.

Table 1 shows that #CSR is used more often than # corporatesocialresponsibility and it has also more users. Analysis of both hashtags showed that Twitter and Reddit are popular channels. Differences in the chosen channels are found, for example, daily motion is actively used for #CSR but not at all for #corporatesocialresponsibility. Surprisingly, channels like YouTube and Facebook had under 25 posts during the given timeframe.

The form of communication is mainly photographs. Based on the popularity of the posts (e.g. likes, shares) of both hashtags, the posts mainly include videos and photos. Video content is mainly webinars or recorded discussions with experts and company managers. Photos instead are related to campaigns and events and posted as announcements (Figure 1). However, the popularity of the posts reveals that engagement is not at a high level as a whole, because the amount of likes and shares is quite low. This may be due to the short two-week timeframe used. Some of the posts have been published while the analyses were being made, and so the followers have not had the time to react to the posts.  

According to the sentiment analysis, the tone in social media posts is mainly neutral or positive. Related to #CSR Twitter and Instagram posts were most positive and Flickr and Reddit most negative. The same results concern #corporatesocialresponsibility.

It was found out that Reddit, Flickr, and Dailymotion are the most active channels based on the popularity count of #CSR when focusing on the social side of communication, dialogue, and interaction. However, Flickr and Instagram are the most active channels for #corporatesocialresponsibility. It should be mentioned that behind most engaging posts we found one organization, Trinity Care Foundation.

In addition, we found out that the most active days for communicating #CSR was Wednesday (38%) and for #corporatesocialresponsibility Tuesday (26%). Sundays were also active days for social media communication concerning both hashtags.

Themes were analysed using word clouds and analysis of words related to the posts. The themes related to discussions can be seen in Fig. 2. The first cloud represents the analysis of #CSR and the second cloud #corporatesocialresponsibility.

Word clouds are confusingly different. When #CSR discussions focus on business and workplace, #corporatesocialresponsibility discussions strongly indicate Covid -19 related themes.

This study is not enough to give us significant results. Only discussions in English were analysed and in a short timeframe. Moreover, channels like LinkedIn were not included in this study. We also must keep in mind that organisations discuss their responsible actions also without using the hashtag #CSR and #corporatesocialresponsibility. However, strategic use of hashtags is part of communication in social media. Hashtags are used to reach the target audience and encourage stakeholders in thematic discussions.  These indicative results give us many reasons to focus on communication strategies in the future.

What can we learn from these results?

Firstly, each social media platform is different, and what works on Instagram may not work on Twitter and vice versa. Secondly, the main issue in social media is that it works best for communication that is social in nature and manifests itself in interaction and dialogue. According to the results, communication on corporate social responsibility is mostly monologue style in a neutral tone and this will not engage stakeholders in dialogue. Finally, the good news is that there is a lot of space for strategic communication leading to openness in CSR activities and building a good reputation of organizations.  In addition, if it is in your interest, there is a good opportunity to profile yourself as an expert on CSR. You only need to know where your stakeholders are in social media and especially, what do they value.

Key takeaways!

• choose appropriate channels
• engage your audience in emotionally tagged dialogue. Both positive and negatively labelled discussions may lead to positive results.
• use photos and videos
• use both hashtags #CSR and #corporatesocialresponsibility, so people can find you. Add more relevant hashtags into your post to inform the theme you are discussing about.
• be in active dialogue and listen to your audience! Especially on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Sundays.

To be able to emphasize active stakeholder engagement and hear the bad and good bell will finally lead to an increase of trust in company CSR activities.

Written by Mervi Varhelahti, Rauni Jaskari and Susanna Saari, Turku University of Applied Sciences

References

Bialkova, S. & Te Paske, S. (2020). Campaign participation, spreading electronic word of mouth, purchase: how to optimise corporate social responsibility, CSR, effectiveness via social media? European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 30(1).

@Biryanibykilo (2021) in Instagram. Accessed 20.9.2021 at https://www.instagram.com/p/CTyjPm8PgsW/

Gómez, L. M. (2017). Social media concepts for effective CSR online communication. In Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility in the Digital Era (pp. 193-215). Routledge.

Jalonen, H. (2017). “A good bell is heard from far, a bad one still further”: A socio-demography of disclosing negative emotions in social media. The Journal of Social Media in Society, 6(1).

Kvasničková Stanislavská, L., Pilař, L., Margarisová, K. & Kvasnička, R. (2020). Corporate Social Responsibility and social media: Comparison between developing and developed countries. Sustainability, 12(13).

Keywords: social media, CSR, corporate social responsibility, dialogue, emotions