Search results

Collaborative organizing for grand challenges 

The Collaborative Innovation and Entrepreneurship professorship focuses on the collaborative paradigm in economic transformation - the ways diverse organizations in globalvalue chains innovate and act in partnerships to address ecological and social grand challenges. Collaboration with multiple and diverse stakeholders is complex and challenging. Stakeholders have different interests, may compete with each other, or are just not ready to move as fast or as radically as others. Yet, we know that grand challenges are too complex and systemic for any one organization to address alone. Business leaders have an important role to play in transforming economic ecosystems and catalysing change among stakeholders and industry actors. They must move from linear thinking, where sustainability is a market for green or social products, to circular and inclusive thinking, where regeneration of natural ecosystems occurs and economic profits are equally distributed.The Collaborative Innovation and Entrepreneurship professorship aims to contribute knowledge, support organizations, and facilitate learning about collaborative organizational forms and practices - what we call collaborative organizing - for a more sustainable, regenerative and thriving 21st century economic system.

Sustainable travel in an era of disruption : Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on travellers’ sustainable tourism attitudes and projected travel behaviour.

The power to change

With the effects of climate change linked to the use of fossil fuels, as well as the prospect of their eventual depletion, becoming more noticeable, political establishment and society appear ready to switch towards using renewable energy. Solar power and wind power are considered to be the most significant source of global low-carbon energy supply. Wind energy continues to expand as it becomes cheaper and more technologically advanced. Yet, despite these expectations and developments, fossil fuels still comprise nine-tenths of the global commercial energy supply. In this article, the history, technology, and politics involved in the production and barriers to acceptance of wind energy will be explored. The central question is why, despite the problems associated with the use of fossil fuels, carbon dependency has not yet given way to the more ecologically benign forms of energy. Having briefly surveyed some literature on the role of political and corporate stakeholders, as well as theories relating to sociological and psychological factors responsible for the grassroots’ resistance (“not in my backyard” or NIMBYs) to renewable energy, the findings indicate that motivation for opposition to wind power varies. While the grassroots resistance is often fueled by the mistrust of the government, the governments’ reason for resisting renewable energy can be explained by their history of a close relationship with the industrial partners. This article develops an argument that understanding of various motivations for resistance at different stakeholder levels opens up space for better strategies for a successful energy transition. https://doi.org/10.30560/sdr.v1n1p11 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/

The social media life of climate change

Social media is a transformative digital technology, collapsing the “six degrees ofseparation” which have previously characterized many social networks, and breaking down many of the barriers to individuals communicating with each other. Some commentators suggest that this is having profound effects across society, that social media have opened up new channels for public debates and have revolutionized the communication of prominent public issues such as climate change. In this article we provide the first systematic and critical review of the literature on social media and climate change. We highlight three key findings from the literature: a substantial bias toward Twitter studies, the prevalent approaches to researching climate change on social media (publics, themes, and professional communication), and important empirical findings (the use of mainstream information sources, discussions of “settled science,” polarization, and responses to temperature anomalies).Following this, we identify gaps in the existing literature that should beaddressed by future research: namely, researchers should consider qualitativestudies, visual communication and alternative social media platforms to Twitter.We conclude by arguing for further research that goes beyond a focus on sciencecommunication to a deeper examination of how publics imagine climate changeand its future role in social life.