Going beyond the rhetoric: system-wide changes in universities for sustainable societies

In October 2008, the 5th Environmental Management for Sustainable Universities (EMSU) international conference was held in Barcelona, Spain. It dealt with the need to rethink how our higher educational institutions are facing sustainability. This special issue has been primarily derived from contributions to that conference. This issue builds upon related academic international publications, which have analysed how to use the critical position of universities to accelerate their pace of working to help to make the transition to truly SUSTAINABLE SOCIETIES! This issue focus is on the ‘softer’ issues, such as changes in values, attitudes, motivations, as well as in curricula, societal interactions and assessments of the impacts of research. Insights derived from the interplay of the ‘softer’ issues with the ‘harder’ issues are empowering academic leaders to effectively use leverage points to make changes in operations, courses, curricula, and research. Those changes are being designed to help their students and faculty build resilient and sustainable societies within the context of climate change, the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD), and the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The overall systems approach presented by Stephens and Graham provides a structured framework to systematize change for sustainability in higher education, by stressing on the one hand the need for “learning to learn” and on the other hand by integrating leadership and cultural aspects. The “niche” level they propose for innovative interactions between practitioners such as EMSU is exemplary developed by all of the other documents in this special issue. To highlight some of the key elements of the articles in this issue, there are proposals for new educational methods based in sustainability science, a set of inspirational criteria for SD research activities, new course ranking and assessment methods and results of psychological studies that provide evidence that participatory approaches are the most effective way to change values within university members in order to facilitate the development and sharing of new sustainability norms.

Hungarian International Development Cooperation: Context, Stakeholders and Performance

This paper explores the domestic and international context of Hungary's emerging international development policy. Specifically, it looks at three factors that may influence how this policy operates: membership in the European Union (EU) and potential ‘Europeanization’, Hungary's wider foreign policy strategy, and the influence of domestic stakeholders. In order to uncover how these factors affect the country's international development policy, semi-structured interviews were carried out with the main stakeholders. The main conclusions are: (1) While accession to the EU did play a crucial role in restarting Hungary's international development policy, the integration has had little effect since then; (2) international development policy seems to serve mainly Hungary's regional strategic foreign policy and economic interests, and not its global development goals; and (3) although all the domestic development stakeholders are rather weak, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) still seems to play a dominating role. Convergence with European requirements and best practices is, therefore, clearly hindered by foreign policy interests and also by the weakness of non- governmental stakeholders.

Az Európai Unió nemzetközi fejlesztéspolitikája előtt álló kihívások és válaszok (EU’s international development policy – challenges and answers)

A tanulmány röviden áttekinti, hogy milyen kihívások érték az elmúlt években az EU nemzetközi fejlesztéspolitikáját, és milyen válaszokat adott ezekre a Közösség. A Bizottság által 2011-ben kiadott Agenda for Change című zöld könyv a közös fejlesztéspolitikát erőteljesebb normatív alapokra igyekszik helyezni és a demokrácia és jó kormányzás támogatását teszi az EU egyik fő célkitűzéséve a fejlődő országokban. Mindez a gyakorlatban erőteljesebb kondicionalitást és szelektivitást fog jelenteni az európai segélyezésben. _____ The paper briefly reviews the challenges that the EU’s international development policy faced in recent years and the answers the Community has provided to these. A green paper published by the Commission in 2011, the Agenda for Change attempts to place development policy on a stronger normative basis by making the support of good governance and democracy one of the main goals of the EU in developing countries. In practice, this will mean stronger conditionality and greater selectivity in EC aid.

A fenntartható fejlődéssel foglalkozó nemzetközi együttműködés négy évtizede (Four Decades of International Cooperation on Sustainable Development)

Along with the recognition of the increasing environmental and social problems stemming from globalization, the need to address these problems and to develop the relevant international framework has strengthened since the 1970s. The scope of this cooperation gradually broadened and eventually it embraced all issues, which were considered to be critical for sustainable development. The summits on sustainability, namely, the UN Conference on Environment and Development in 1992, the “Rio+5” in 1997 and the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, wished to respond to all unsustainable processes by adopting, reinforcing and expanding a global program. This program is based on a series of important principles and includes various goals and instruments adopted by consensus; however, it also reflects delicate compromises between development related aspirations and environmental barriers, and also between the developed and the developing countries. Actually, there is a serious implementation gap and there are also new challenges. Referring to these problems, the idea of convening an extraordinary summit in 2012 was raised and it was eventually adopted but with a rather narrow mandate and agenda. It turned out that besides the “usual” conflicts between the developed and developing countries e.g. upon the common but differentiated responsibilities or international development financing, there were also diverting views on the green economy and on the ways of institutional strengthening of the international sustainable development and environmental governance. As a consequence, the 2012 Conference concluded with rather modest results.