at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113

Contents lists available

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ jc lepro

Monitoring networking between higher education institutionsand regional actors

Marlene Mader a,*, Clemens Mader b, Friedrich M. Zimmermann c,Elisabeth Görsdorf-Lechevin d, Mario Diethart a

aRegional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development (RCE) Graz-Sytria, University of Graz, Heinrichstrasse 36, 8010 Graz, AustriabGraduate School, Leuphana University Luneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, 21335 Luneburg, GermanycDepartment of Geography and Regional Science, University of Graz, Heinrichstrasse 36, 8010 Graz, Austriad Treffpunkt sprachen e Centre for Language, Plurilingualism and Didactics, University of Graz, Johann-Fux-Gasse 30, 8010 Graz, Austria

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 22 August 2011Received in revised form4 July 2012Accepted 24 July 2012Available online 23 August 2012

Keywords:NetworkingCapacity buildingHigher educationGraz Model for Integrative Development

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ43 316 380 8824; faE-mail address: marlene.mader@uni-graz.at (M. M

0959-6526/$ e see front matter � 2012 Elsevier Ltd.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.046

a b s t r a c t

As major contributors to research, higher education institutions have to tackle scientific questions thatarise in connection with the transition of societies around the world towards more sustainable devel-opment. But universities are also significant societal actors e they shape their local, regional and nationalenvironments and are therefore important drivers for a sustainable future. A new way of cooperation andnetworking between higher education and regional actors is required in order to take up society-drivenchallenges for a cooperative solution-finding process. This paper aims at reflecting and analysing thediverse roles of higher education institutions in networking with regional actors. Three cases ofnetworking and capacity building between higher education and regional actors, which were developedin the framework of the European Union project 3-LENSUS (Lifelong Learning Network for SustainableDevelopment), will be assessed in this paper: the COPERNICUS Alliance, the Database on Learning forSustainable Development and the Seminar Series for Sustainable Development. The examples aremethodologically reflected on the basis of the Graz Model for Integrative Development, as this model notonly reflects the actions but in particular the processes behind the cases.

� 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Facing today’s challenges in social, natural or economic fields,the disciplines inherent in sustainable development do not co-exist, bordering each other, but rather overlap, thus crossingthese borders and influencing each other. This fact constitutesa huge challenge for research, education, and society. The UNDecade of Education for Sustainable Development (UNESCO, 2005)confronts universities throughout the world with these challengesas well as with resulting opportunities. Universities in particularbear a distinct responsibility for building a sustainable future intheir role as educators for future leaders in society and economy.Being major contributors to research, universities have to tacklescientific questions that arise in connection with the transition ofsocieties around the world towards more sustainable developmentpaths. But universities are also significant societal actors e theyshape their local, regional and national environments and aretherefore important drivers for a sustainable future. A scientific

x: þ43 316 380 9886.ader).

All rights reserved.

discourse about the role of universities in the quest to interact withregional actors and to transform societies towards sustainabledevelopment is therefore required.

Academic research needs to become more open minded andcooperative with other disciplines, but to really understand globaland local challenges research needs to learn from those who areinvolved and have an impact on the challenge itself. At the sametime, society is facing complex challenges, which is reflected inwider impacts than ever. To understand these influencing systems,networking between society and research becomes more and moreimportant. What we are currently experiencing is a new way ofcooperation between regional and higher education actors, whichnot only consists in cooperation across disciplines but also increating a scienceesociety interaction with a mutual learningprocess, taking up society-driven challenges for a cooperativesolution-finding process.

In this paper, the authors concentrate on networking andcapacity building between higher education institutions andregional actors in the field of sustainable development. The aim isto analyse and reflect the different roles of higher education insti-tutions in co-operations with regional actors. This is done on thebasis of monitoring three network cases. Experiences and findings

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113106

of this monitoring can be used for the development and analysis ofnetworks as well as to identify the roles and motives of highereducation institutions to engage in regional developments.

The paper is structured as followed:

- Networking and capacity building. This chapter highlights theimportance of networking and capacity building for sustain-able development by higher education institutions and defines“networking” within this context. Furthermore the roles andmotives of higher education institutions in regional develop-ments are addressed.

- Monitoring of cases on networking and capacity building inhigher education. In the framework of the European Unionproject 3-LENSUS,1 different cases have been developed. Threeexamples of networking and capacity building between highereducation and regional actors are reflected within this paper:namely a university network, a project database as well asa seminar series.

- Methodological approach. To monitor the three cases the GrazModel for Integrative Development by C. Mader (2009, 2012) ischosen as the main methodological approach. Not only does itreflect the actions, but in particular the processes behind thecases and shows further the roles of higher education institu-tions within networks as well as points to possible develop-ment potentials.- Networking universities e The COPERNICUS Alliance. The firstcase deals with COPERNICUS Alliance, the European Networkon Higher Education for Sustainable Development. Itdemonstrates how a European higher education network cancontribute to more transdisciplinary research.

- Networking and knowledge transfer e 3-LENSUS Database onLearning for Sustainable Development. The second case focuseson the Database on Learning for Sustainable Development,which is analysed regarding the impact its contributors andusers have. Projects that have been entered in the databaseare analysed and discussed.

- Capacity building e a Seminar Series for Sustainable Develop-ment. The third case presents a seminar series, whichconcentrates on the interactive exchange between regionaland higher education actors. The experience of these semi-nars relates not only to aspects of communication but alsohighlights the importance of participation in research andcommunity development.

2. Networking and capacity building between highereducation institutions and regional actors

Both networking and capacity building are two main aspectsrepresenting an integral part of university life; andhappenonvariouslevels of universities’ activities. Universities for instance act withintheir local environment, but at the same time show a strong nationaland international orientation e also depending on the researchdiscipline. For sustainability research, interactions and networkingwith regional stakeholders are essentiale following themotto ‘thinkglobal, act local’. While acting on the local and regional level, theglobal dimension and possible impacts of local activities on a globalscale are taken into account and hence refer to a systemic approach.

In the following part, a literature review on networking andcapacity building for sustainable development in higher education

1 3-LENSUS stands for “Lifelong Learning Network for Sustainable Development”.The project is funded with support from the European Commission as a projectwithin the framework of the Lifelong Learning Programme.

is presented. Furthermore the roles and motives of higher educa-tion institutions to engage with regional stakeholders areexplained.

2.1. Networking and capacity building for sustainability

Networks are essential to stay competitive as they help to sharepractical knowledge and experiences as well as enable access tocurrent developments. Within networks, synergies are being used,knowledge is effectively applied, innovations and new develop-ments are commonly created, and the exchange of knowledge,experiences and support are provided. Sustainable developmentrequires collaboration and the ability to integrate various disci-plines and people from various backgrounds in order to solvecomplex societal challenges. The importance of higher educationinstitutions in fostering innovation processes in regional develop-ments is pointed out by Nijkamp et al., who state that ‘innovation ishighly dependent on information and knowledge; these elements arebecoming the critical success factors in new models of regionaldevelopment’ (Nijkamp et al., 1994). Information and knowledge isbeing produced by universities but it requires networks and peoplewithin these networks who share this knowledge and experiencesand get in contact with regional actors. Furthermore, regionalactors contribute their knowledge and practical expertise. A highlevel of trust and collaboration are prerequisites for networks thatpursue sustainability targets.

What are the characteristics of such kinds of networks?According to Wasserman and Faust (1994), a social networkconsists ‘of a finite set or sets of actors and the relation or relationsdefined on them’. Hence, networks are defined by the people whoare part of the network as well as by the kind of collaboration. Thethree cases within this paper show how different such networksmay look, depending on their purpose, intensity of communicationand collaboration as well as the level of trust among the networkpartners. Three network models can be defined: (1) informationnetworks, (2) knowledge networks and (3) innovation networks(Huggins, 2004, p. 103). This classification can also be found in theGraz Model for Integrative Development (Mader, C. 2009), which isused as a methodological approach tomonitor the network cases inthis paper. Huggins argues that ‘networking capacity at its mostsimplistic level can be seen as the disposition to collaborate to achievemutually beneficial ends’ (2004, p. 102). This is in accordance withthe network models mentioned above; for example, informationnetworks present a simple form of networks that do not requirea high level of collaboration and trust between the network part-ners, where on the other hand innovation networks requireidentification-based trust between the actors as well as a high levelof collaboration in order to develop new innovations. In both casesthe results should be mutually beneficial, though they pursuedifferent objectives. But sustainability networks are characterisedby more than the provision of information and the level of coop-eration. It is also a question of knowledge and know-how of thenetwork partners how particular information is being used andhence how the network develops further (cf. Huggins, 2004). This isagain related to capacity building, which ‘...refers to the skills andattitudes in individuals and groups of people’ (Groot and van derMolen, 2000). Capacity building describes the process ofacquiring knowledge e and the know-how to apply the newlygained knowledge, which is in turn highly depended on thepersonal skills of people involved. The UNDP (2009, p. 5) describescapacity development as ‘the process through which individuals,organizations and societies obtain, strengthen and maintain thecapabilities to set and achieve their own development objectives overtime’. Hence it is about empowering people and fostering sustain-ability actions. Networking and capacity building are closely linked

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113 107

to education and learning. Tilbury (2007, p. 117) argues that ‘in thecontext of sustainability learning is understood as a reflective process’.Network partners learn by acquiring knowledge as well as bycontinually reflecting their knowledge, experiences and develop-ment processes and hence build capacity to take actions fora sustainable development.

2.2. Roles of higher education institutions in networking andregional sustainable development

Activities towards sustainable development require a holisticapproach. It is important to integrate the global perspective whenplanning activities and projects on the local level e as recom-mended for Local Agenda 21 processes (Lukman et al., 2009; Zilahyand Huisingh, 2009). Implementing sustainability projects on thelocal and regional scale makes sense insofar as the local levelconcerns the personal living environments of people and hence ismore tangible than abstract global problems in other parts of theworld. On the basis of local actions, an understanding for globalchallenges and impacts should be developed. Higher educationinstitutions are valuable partners within regional activities forsustainable development as they act on a global as well as local andregional level and thus provide a broad field of experiences andknow how. Academic disciplines that are involved in suchnetworking activities work on applied research, i.e. amongst otherssustainability, social or economic sciences. Networking betweenhigher education institutions and regional and societal actorshappens at all levels that higher education is dealing with:education, research, outreach and management.

Education and research present the core tasks of universitiesand contain great potential to foster collaboration with regionalactors. On the basis of education and teaching, universities canmakeimportant contributions to sustainable development, as they highlyinfluence the range and offer of study programs and courses.Besides the imparting of fundamental basic knowledge, universitiesalso have to perform the task to promote an understanding forsustainability, which is based on ethical values and a holisticperception of society, environment and economy (Zimmermann,2006).

Universities shape the identity of regions in which they arelocated and operate in. Many universities have already establishedco-operations with businesses, however, for sustainable regionaldevelopment, a multi-stakeholder cooperation is more desirable.Beside businesses, public organisations and authorities, non-governmental and non-profit organisations, educational institu-tions as well as the general public would be included. A variety ofhigher education institutions that put sustainability on theiragenda have also started to enhance their teaching and learningsystems towards more interactive, participatory as well as inter-disciplinary course settings. The linkage with regional challengesand conditions present a good opportunity to foster interactive andapplied teaching, which is furthermore an important basis ofknowledge acquisition as it includes reflexive learning as well asapplication-oriented learning (‘learning by doing’) (cf. Lukmanet al., 2009; Hansen and Lehmann, 2006; Zimmermann, 2006;Zimmermann and Risopoulos, 2009; Adomßent and Michelsen,2011).

In the field of research, a variety of networking activitiesbetween higher education institutions and regional actors arise,promising mutual benefits. Strong partnerships are essential foruniversities to identify research demands within society and theregion. On the basis of such transdisciplinary research settings,more valuable results are expected. Especially research activities byPhD and master students offer a great potential to engage withregional stakeholders e may it be businesses, NGOs or public

organizations (cf. Hansen and Lehmann, 2006). However, it shouldbementioned that it is of importance for universities to do researchin various scientific fields and also without the involvement ofsociety as somebody cannot anticipate what would be of relevancein the future (cf. Hansen and Lehmann, 2006). A combination ofboth regional as well as international research networks thus isthe key.

Outreach and hence the involvement of civil society and regionalactors present another task of universities. This might happen onthe basis of transdisciplinary research activities and applied studycourses. Additionally, a variety of universities offer specificprograms and events that aim at involving the public, makingresearch attractive and addressing societal needs as well as regionaldevelopment. An example for a platform that successfullycombines research, education and outreach is the Regional Centreof Expertise (RCE) Graz-Styria. RCEs, in general, act both withina regional network of different stakeholders as well as within theglobal network of about 100 RCEs all around the world (as ofJanuary 2012). According to Mochizuki and Fadeeva (2008) an RCE‘is a network of existing localeregional institutions mobilised to jointlypromote all types of learning for a sustainable future’ (p. 370). Theidea to initiate RCEs first evolved at the Johannesburg WorldSummit on Sustainable Development in 2002 and was furtherdeveloped by the United Nations University’s Institute of AdvancedStudies, who presented the idea of RCEs at various conferences andmeetings since 2004 (Mochizuki and Fadeeva, 2008). RCEs serve asinterfaces between education, research, business and society(Mader et al., 2008). A further example, which is also based at theUniversity of Graz, is the establishment of the Centre for Society,Knowledge and Communication with the main aim to fosterscienceesociety communication and open the university toa broader public (University of Graz, 2011).

In the field of management, higher education institutions againhave the possibilities of networking with regional actors. Univer-sities should try to cooperate with these partners and companiesfor procurement activities in order to strengthen the regionaleconomy as well as to reduce the ecological footprint of theuniversity. Policy actions can also be added to this category.

Besides the division into academic fields where higher educa-tion institutions are cooperating with regional actors, the univer-sities’ role of networking can also be seen from the perspective towhich degree higher education institutions are involved withinthese networks. Devine-Wright et al. (2001) divide the role ofuniversities in regional networks into the level of their involvementinto five categories: hence the universities might (1) be leaderswho guide and actively shape the development processes in suchnetworks; (2) be gatekeepers who manage access to the networkand have more a role as facilitators; (3) be spokespersons whorepresent the university and speak with one academic voice withinthe network; (4) be bridging institutions who have the role toconnect to other stakeholders or networks; and (5) be independentactors whomonitor and evaluate the networking developments (cf.Devine-Wright et al., 2001). A further approach how the role ofhigher education institutions can be classified is with regards to thetype of network in which they collaborate with regional actors, asmentioned in chapter 2.1 (cf. Huggins, 2004). The differences ofthese network types are addressed in chapter 3, especially in theanalysis of the cases. It goes without saying that these threeapproaches overlap.

2.3. Motives of higher education institutions in networking withregional actors

The aims and motives of academic institutions in cooperatingwith regional actors are manifold; some have been mentioned

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113108

above, such as the demand for transdisciplinary research. Zilahyand Huisingh (2009) found out that universities engage inregional sustainability initiatives and networks because of commonvisions and the better communication between stakeholders.Scientists can link their research to societal, problem-drivenresearch questions that aim at serving society’s needs. The linkbetween research and practice can bring about new solutions thatare holistic and commonly reflected, and hence widely acceptedamong the various stakeholders. Due to the fact that universitiesinvolve a broad range of disciplines, they can provide exactly theexpertise needed to address specific regional challenges. But thisalso leads to the challenge for universities to open their researchand engage with non-academic stakeholders at an equal level. Forcollaborations it is essential that universities acknowledge theknow-how and experiences of regional stakeholders and treat eachother with respect in order to be able to learn from and with eachother. Furthermore an external academic perspective on the regionmight also help the regional actors to understand regionalprocesses. Critical and systemic thinking can thus be fostered; theengagement of universities in a variety of regional as well asinternational networks can support these developments. Further-more, research outcomes can be disseminated more effectivelyacross the stakeholders (cf. Brown, 2008; Zilahy and Huisingh,2009; Tandon, 2008; Adomßent and Michelsen, 2011).

In a study carried out by Lukman et al., the main reasons foruniversities to cooperate with regional stakeholders were identi-fied; these consistedof generating andacquiringknowledge,mutualproblem solving as well as the possibility for graduates to findemployment in the region (2009, p. 1151). Hence, universities seethemselves as drivers for the regional labourmarket. Due to the factthat students are involved in regional research activities during theirstudies, it is more likely that they will not move away after gradu-ating and hence brain drain might be reduced. This is especiallyimportant for universities that are located in rural areas. Theinvolvement of regional actors in university courses furthermorestrengthens the awareness of students for regional challenges andthe importance for sustainable development (Zilahy and Huisingh,2009).

The following elaborations exemplify three different cases ofnetworking between higher education institutions and regionalactors.

3. Monitoring cases on networking and capacity building inhigher education

The three examples in this chapter represent results of theEuropean Union Lifelong Learning project 3-LENSUS. The ideabehind the cases has emerged from a network of partner univer-sities, which has gradually developed by common project experi-ences, such as the Virtual Campus for a Sustainable Europe, an e-learning platform for sustainable development courses, as well asformer engagements in Copernicus activities (Görsdorf et al., 2009).On the basis of their collaboration and experiences, the followingthree cases appeared to be of importance: (a) a European networkon higher education for sustainable development and hence re-launching COPERNICUS, (b) an online database on learning forsustainable development to enable networking and knowledgetransfer betweenmulti-stakeholder groups, as well as (c) a seminarseries that concentrates on capacity building and the interactionbetween higher education institutions and regional actors.

The description and reflection of the cases below are uniformlystructured: in the first place the background of the case is shortlyexplained before describing how the development process of thecase is monitored and analysed on the basis of the Graz Model forIntegrative Development.

3.1. Methodological approach e the Graz Model for IntegrativeDevelopment

In order to monitor the roles of higher education institutions inthe cases of the COPERNICUS Alliance, the Database on Learning forSustainable Development and the seminar series, the Graz Modelfor Integrative Development (in short: Graz Model) has beenapplied. The Graz Model is designed as a tool for describing,monitoring and assessing development processes of regional,entrepreneurial or institutional projects and initiatives. ClemensMader developed the model in the course of a research project atthe University of Graz between 2008 and 2009. It is based oninvestigations of three case studies in Egypt, Sweden and theUnited States; and was further tested in a variety of other regionalas well as entrepreneurial and institutional development processes(Mader, 2012).

In this paper the Graz Model was chosen as methodologicalapproach as it reflects the processes behind the cases and not onlythe actions. Furthermore, this assessment method allows a struc-tured approach for the benchmarking of activities. In contrast tousual project evaluation systems, the Graz Model is not based onquantitative indicators to measure the actual state of impact ofa project e no matter if it is a project of regional development orwithin an enterprise. It focuses on the qualitative process of howthe project is being implemented and therefore how the effects ofthe project come into place and are being carried out by a sharedleadership of actions (Mader, 2009, 2012). Nevertheless the ques-tion remains how the results of networking activities can beobjectively analysed. In particular networks that pursue complexgoals, such as partnerships between universities and regionalactors that aim to solve societal relevant challenges, are difficult toassess. Fadeeva (2004) therefore suggests that the process as wellas the network’s goals present essential elements that need to beconsidered in the analysis. The Graz Model for Integrative Devel-opment includes these aspects. The monitoring on the basis of theGraz Model presents a self-analysis, as demonstrated in followingcases.

The Graz Model is essentially based on the following five prin-ciples (Mader, 2009): (1) Leadership & Vision, (2) Social Network,(3) Participation, (4) Education & Learning, and (5) Research Inte-gration. During the research of case studies in Egypt, Sweden andthe United States these five principles were identified to beessential for development processes towards sustainability. Each ofthose five principles is again divided into three hierarchical levels.Lower levels are placed in the outer circle of the model. Whengetting closer to the middle of the model, the process is becomingmore integrative. Principles overlap in their characteristics witheach other and the process strives towards transformative devel-opment. Complex processes, such as sustainability processes,require a holistic and integrative approach, whereas more simpleprocesses do not necessarily need to be highly integrative to besuccessful. The five principles are shortly described in the following(cf. Mader, 2009, 2012):

a. Leadership & Vision: Leadership is leveraged into thestages of:- Administration where one is only following tasks but notbeing proactive.

- Transactional leadership where one is taking proactive stepstowards a vision and communicates this to the network.

- Transformational leadershipwhere one is building up a sharedvision within the network and advancing towards innovativesolutions via the active involvement of affected people.

b. Social network is related to people who are affected by theprocess, as well as all relevant stakeholders. The social network

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113 109

supports the process by means of knowledge, experiences,human resources or financial means. The following three levelsof intensities of networks exist:- An information network simply aims to exchange informationwithout following a common aim to combine thisinformation.

- A knowledge network not only exchanges information, butaims at cooperation and development and follows a commonaim. More trust towards each other in the use of one’sknowledge is required.

- An innovation network follows a common vision, requireshigh trust towards each other and aims to pose new inno-vative solutions for coming challenges.

c. Participation focuses on how all the people as well as insti-tutions of the social network are involved in the process.- Information is just a one-way communication withoutreflection. People are informedwithout having the possibilityof active involvement.

- Consultation involves relevant people by seeking interestsand opinions but calls for a decision from the leader on howto react to the feedback.

- Decision influencing participation involves people in theleadership of the process and transforms a shared leadershipwith highly trusted people.

d. Education & Learning: Education focuses on knowledgebuilding activities that contribute to building a shared vision.Learning implies an ability to learn from one’s experiences andreflect the process.- Single loop learning only implies a reaction to one’s activity,but does not affect learning to adopt the vision.

- Double loop learning also affects the adaptation of the vision.- Generative learning requires the ability of systemic thinking tobe able to adopt the vision and to have an impact on thewhole system according to the learning.

e. Research integration provides the opportunity to find newsolutions for existing and upcoming challenges.- Disciplinary research only focuses on a single discipline.- Interdisciplinary research creates connections between disci-plines and demonstrates systemic interrelations in-between.

- Transdisciplinary research takes up challenges posed by thepeople involved and creates a mutual learning environmentwith interdisciplinary systemic understanding.

During an assessment, the vision of the development process ofa project or initiative is taken as the basis for investigating howeach of the principles is represented by various types of actions.Those actions can be reported and thus characterize the integrativeapproach of the process. A picture of the process is drawn by themodel, the user consequently may investigate opportunities forimprovement and further development. Over individual periods oftime, a re-assessment makes sense to monitor the progress ofdevelopment and to react according to the different experiences.

In the following, the COPERNICUS Alliance (the EuropeanNetwork on Higher Education for Sustainable Development), theDatabase on Learning for Sustainable Development, as well as theSeminar Series for Sustainable Development are presented asexamples of networking and capacity building as well as are moni-tored on the basis of the Graz Model for Integrative Development.

3.2. Networking universities e the COPERNICUS Alliance

The COPERNICUS Alliance was established with the vision toconnect European higher education institutions in the field ofsustainable development. This university network aims to promotethe role of sustainable development in European higher education

and to improve education and research for sustainable develop-ment in partnership with society and policy. The platform enablesthe exchange of knowledge and experiences as well as the commondevelopment and implementation of sustainability actions andpolicy. The re-establishment of the network was initiated bya consortium of universities and RCEs that had also been activelyinvolved in former COPERNICUS initiatives. The COPERNICUS Alli-ance is connected to and based upon the COPERNICUS Charta thatwas already developed in 1993 and signed by more than 300universities until 2005. A new draft of the Charta, which includesthe goals of the network, was developed by the consortiummembers at the COPERNICUS Alliance kick-off meeting at Graz,Austria (July 2e3, 2010), and further developed in a working group(cf. COPERNICUS Charta version 2.0/2011, in Zimmermann et al.,2012). Both the University of Graz, Austria, and Leuphana Univer-sity Luneburg, Germany, took over the co-leadership andcommonly represented the president board as well as the foundingmanagement team. When looking at the principle of ‘Leadershipand Vision’ within the Graz Model for Integrative Development itcan be stated that the process of re-establishing COPERNICUSAlliance started as a form of transactional leadership. First, proac-tive steps were taken by the universities in Graz and Luneburg bycommunicating their aim to revive the COPERNICUS network toother European universities and RCEs. An NGO was established,goals and a management structurewere defined and the presidentswere elected for the first two years by a small consortium ofuniversities. After the first administrative and strategic steps hadbeen taken, the founding team started to comprehensively spreadthe idea among all European universities that had formerly signedthe COPERNICUS Charta, and invited them to a kick-off meeting,which took place in Graz in July 2010. The idea of establishing theCOPERNICUS Alliance as well as its further development wasopenly discussed. All participants were invited to bring in theirideas and knowledge, and build working groups. A common visionwas developed on how the COPERNICUS Alliance should perform infuture. Therefore a new COPERNICUS Charta including aims andmissions was discussed and developed. This shared form of lead-ership also affects the social network. The network consists ofEuropean higher education institutions, such as universities,universities of applied science or open universities, as well asaffiliated organizations, such as NGOs, public organizations andstudent organizations in the field of higher education. The activitieswithin the network address all activity levels universities operatein, but focus on common research activities, management issuesand outreach to foster sustainability issues in European highereducation. The Alliance aims to build up an innovation networkamong its participants in order to develop innovative ideas andinitiatives. Innovation networks present the most integrative formof networks. They are based on a shared vision as well asidentification-based trust among its members. Actors withininnovation networks closely collaborate, commonly reflect andwork hard on creative and innovative development processes(Mader, 2011; Zimmermann et al., 2012).

The COPERNICUS Alliance would be defined as a knowledgenetwork; knowledge networks are not as integrative and strong asinnovation networks. They also focus on a common aim and vision,further develop their knowledge by research and develop strategiesfor implementing their gained knowledge and insights. Althoughknowledge networks also target collaboration and further devel-opment, their aims not necessarily focus on innovation. Further-more the trust between the members does not have to beidentification-based, but relies on common previous experience.The degree to which the network is knowledge-based orinnovation-based verymuch depends on themembers involved. Byinviting various institutions affiliated to European higher education

Fig. 1. The impacts of projects within the 3-LENSUS Database on Learning forSustainable Development (Trummler et al., 2011).

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113110

for sustainable development, the COPERNICUS Alliance tries tobuild a framework for developing an innovation network. Thisopenness towards different institutions aims at creating a basis notonly for disciplinary research among the members, but for trans-disciplinary research. By means of inviting important stakeholdersof higher education institutions, such as student organizations andNGOs, but also public institutions, COPERNICUS Alliance likes toconsciously involve regional actors. In order to promote sustainabledevelopment, it is helpful when universities are aware of their localand regional anchoring as well as responsibility.

The importance of the active involvement of the networkmembers has already been mentioned. The COPERNICUS Alliancehomepage and intranet serve as an information and exchangeplatform for members as well as interested people. Within thenetwork, participation primarily takes place in the form ofconsultation and decision influencing. Consultation means thatmembers are asked about their positions, and respectively, theyhave the possibility to bring in their opinions, knowledge andexperiences. This approach allows decision makers to respond toopinions of other network members. Within COPERNICUS, ‘deci-sion-makers’ refer to the president board as well as other memberswho are actively involved in the further development of the alli-ance. Consultation primarily took place in the phase until the kick-off meeting in Graz, Austria and to some extent afterwards. Duringthe meeting, the network was characterized by decision influ-encing, which marks the highest level of participation. Within thislevel all members and stakeholders concerned are able to activelycontribute and commonly decide about further developments. Ahigh level of trust, respect as well as the ability to reflect and learnare essential elements.

This in turn means that education and learning come into play.Within the Alliance, learning takes place on the basis of double looplearning, which means that decision makers as well as networkingmembers not only reflect their actions, but also their aims andvision. This presents an added value as processes can be recon-sidered and adapted according to new situations. The COPERNICUSAlliance kick-off meeting in 2010 presented an important learningphase for the network as a shared vision was discussed withina larger group of participants. The aims were constantly criticallyreflected and updated.

3.3. Networking and knowledge transfer e 3-LENSUS database onlearning for sustainable development

The online project database, which was developed by theproject partners of the 3-LENSUS project, mainly by the Depart-ment of Geography and Regional Science at University of Graz,Austria, and by the Environment Centre at Charles University Pra-gue, Czech Republic, presents a source for networking, support andinspiration, aiming at broadening, strengthening and promotinglearning for sustainable development (cf. Dlouhá et al., 2012). Itprovides information on ESD research and practice for sharing andexchanging information among academic and non-academicstakeholders working in the field of sustainability. The databasecontains a range of projects that deliver sustainability activitiesdealing with regional development, multi-oriented learningapproaches, multi-stakeholder involvement, transdisciplinarity aswell as empowerment. Within the 3-LENSUS network, the partneruniversities were involved in the development of the database, butafter implementation their role shifted to facilitating and main-taining the database.

Initially, 27 European projects were contributed to the Databaseon Learning for Sustainable Development in the first ten monthsafter its launch (3-LENSUS Moodle, 2010). These 27 projects wereanalysed and a conclusion is presented here. When contributing

a project to the database, an online form has to be completed. Thisform includes 30 questions related to general information aboutthe project, a project description, information about the stake-holders involved, learning activities as well as possible impacts onsustainable development. The form includes a mix of open andclosed questions. The Database makes a contribution to learningprocesses and gathers information on howprojects progress, whichchallenges they face and how actors react on these challenges.Furthermore it shows how actors recognise impacts on sustainabledevelopment as well as the benefits of their research. The expla-nation of project challenges provides a valuable opportunity forlearning and reflection. According to the project contributors, thecommunication between stakeholders is seen as a main challenge.Especially language barriers present a challenge in transnationalprojects. Another challenge relates to learning systems, the way thestakeholders learn and reflect their developments and howlearning takes place within the project. Management issues havealso been mentioned as challenging parts of projects, especially forthose focusing on regional development.

The field of projects’ impacts on sustainable development (seeFig. 1) implies that the relation between the three sustainabilitydimensions is well balanced. On average, each project mentionsfive effects it has on sustainable development. In order to receivemore general statements the answers of these open questions havebeen clustered. The allocation of statements to the three sustain-ability dimensions reflects the perspectives of the persons whocontributed their projects. As illustrated below, social aspectsmainly deal with informing people and raising awarenessregarding specific social issues (15 cases). Generating new andmutual knowledge, as well as educating people represents anotherfocus (13 cases). The projects, especially those that operate ona regional level, aim at empowering people by involving differentstakeholders and raising interest to sustainability issues. Thishappens via workshops, lectures or information folders. Activeparticipation of the public however is seldom supported. Withregards to the environmental impact, the reduction of ecologicaldestruction is mainly stated (13 cases). When discussing sustain-able development the needs of future generations become evidente and hence the maintenance and preservation of our ecologicalresources. In many cases this aspect is closely connected toeducational activities, where people are being informed about theimportance of our environment. Topics that are highlighted includeclimate change, energy efficiency, sustainable production andwater resources. Raising awareness for environmental issues as

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113 111

well as the development of sustainable technologies is alsomentioned. Eleven projects indicate a contribution to regionaleconomic development as an objective related to economic impactson sustainability. Initiatives include Local Agenda 21 processes,entrepreneurial activities to create new jobs, increasing theregional value added by fostering regional products, i.e. food,handcrafts, tourism activities as well as the use of local energysources. Furthermore, some projects aim at developing competitiveadvantages based on sustainability activities, acquiring sustainableeconomic thinking as well as fostering economic vitality.

Within the framework of the Graz Model for IntegrativeDevelopment, the Database on Learning for Sustainable Develop-ment assumes two main functions: firstly it serves as an informa-tion network, and secondly it provides education and learningfacilities. As an information network the database presents a simpleand basic form of networks. The main motivation is to offer, shareand exchange information on specific projects in the field ofsustainable development. On the contrary, the database is not tar-geted on cooperation, and hence does not necessarily require a highlevel of trust between the users. People view projects and/orcontribute their own projects. They trust each other that the pre-sented information reflects the truth, but at the same time they donot have to know each other. The database presents a platform forboth higher education actors as well as regional actors to presenttheir project activities, to share their good practices, but alsochallenges and experiences with other people interested insustainable development. Consequently the database also serves asa source for learning.

3.4. Capacity building e a Seminar Series for SustainableDevelopment

The third case highlights a Seminar Series for SustainableDevelopment focusing on the interactive exchange betweenregional and higher education actors. Four seminars were heldbetween January 2009 andNovember 2010: (1) European and GlobalNetworking for a Sustainable Development, focusing on partnershipbuilding and networking for sustainable development at theUniversity of Graz, Austria (January 2009), (2) Establishment of RCEs& Communication of Sustainable Development, focusing on regionalactors’ collaboration and learning for sustainable development atthe Leuphana University Luneburg, Germany (May 2009), (3)Regional Innovation for Sustainable Development, focusing on RCEs asincubators for regional innovation at the Charles University Prague,Czech Republic (May 2010), and (4) Virtual Learning for SustainableDevelopment at the University of Macedonia, Greece (November2010). Within the seminar series, input statements were given andduring interactive parts, topics were discussed and further devel-oped. The group of participants were composed of 3-LENSUSproject partners as well as invited regional partners fromacademic institutions as well as NGOs and enterprises.

The seminar series presents an example of knowledge transferas well as capacity building and moreover demonstrates theimportance of participation and learning in research processes andcommunity development. Furthermore the Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development (see chapter2.2) were promoted as platforms to deliver ESD activities to localcommunities and regions within the framework of a globalnetwork.

As this example shows, the seminars concentrate on the inter-action and exchange between science-based expertise at highereducation institutions and experience-based expertise of localactors. This interaction and collaboration form the basis forknowledge networks and especially for transdisciplinary exchangewithin the Graz Model for Integrative Development Processes. The

social networks of each seminar e especially regional co-operations such as the RCE networks in Austria, Germany and theCzech Republic are hereby addressed e are characterized asknowledge networks. Compared to information networks, such aswithin the Database on Learning for Sustainable Development,knowledge networks not only focus on the exchange and allocationof information but additionally aim at cooperation between theactors involved (Mader, 2009). Actors in knowledge networkspursue shared goals and visions concerning the further develop-ments of the network. Their exchange of knowledge is target-oriented. Experience has shown that especially in regional co-operations for sustainable development, participation and trustplay a crucial role for the success or failure of the network.

Another principle of the Graz Model that is integrated in theseminar series for sustainable development is education andlearning. It is self-explanatory that the seminars aim at knowledgeexchange and capacity building. During the seminars, mutuallearning takes place, on the one hand on the basis of input state-ments by both academic as well as non-academic experts, and onthe other hand by interactive workshop sessions. Participantsexchange their knowledge and experiences, learn from and witheach other and create new ideas. People coming from differentdisciplines and backgrounds jointly work on current challenges ofsocietal and regional relevance. Open, transparent and respectfuldiscussions are possible e requirements for mutual learningprocesses. Besides acquiring new ideas, information and knowl-edge, participants also reflect their ownprojects, aims, perspectivesand learning. This circumstance characterizes the added value oftransdisciplinary research and learning.

4. Conclusion

The aim of this paper was to analyse the roles of highereducation institutions in networking with regional stakeholders.This was done on the basis of a literature review as well as themonitoring of three cases that were analysed with the Graz Modelfor Integrative Development. The roles and motives of highereducation institutions to engage in regional co-operations can beanalysed from different angles. The authors of this paper describedthree perspectives how the universities’ role can be classified:

(1) in the way higher education institutions collaborate withregional actors in the framework of the universities’ fields ofactivities:- education- research- outreach- management;

(2) with regards to the level of higher education institutions’involvement within the regional networks (cf. Devine-Wrightet al., 2001):- as leaders- as gatekeepers- as spokespersons- as bridging institutions- as independent actors;

(3) according to the type of networks that higher educationinstitutions and regional stakeholders collaborate with eachother (cf. Huggins, 2004):- as an information network- as a knowledge network- as an innovation network.

When monitoring the role of higher education institutions inregional development, it is obvious that the three perspectives can

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113112

be applied together, and categories (i.e. of an activity or project)could overlap even within the same approach. To give an example,a university can have a partnership with regional actors in theframework of a knowledge network, where educational as well asresearch activities are undertaken and where the university leadsand coordinates the network as well as acts as bridging institutionbetween regional stakeholders. The perspective chosen in order tomonitor or identify the role of higher education institutions inregional networking activities depends on the purpose of investi-gation. The first perspective addresses the fields of activity and isrecommended if the type and level of thematic orientation ofhigher education institutions within the regional partnerships shallbe identified. It provides a valuable overview on the different fieldsof activities (i.e. research and education) that university represen-tatives have in specific regional networks. The second perspectiveaims at identifying the concrete role of higher education institu-tions within these networks. This might help departments orindividual researchers to get a structured overview about theirrange of involvement in various networks. The third perspectiveaims at identifying in which kind of network the higher educationinstitutions are operating. This should be seen in a broaderperspective as it also reflects the level of leadership and especiallythe level of participation of the different stakeholders.

The cases within present paper have been analysed on the basisof the Graz Model for Integrative Development, hence the role andmotives of the universities to engage with regional actors havepredominantly been reflected in regard to the type of network(third approach). Regarding the COPERNICUS Alliance, the scope of‘region’ needs to be looked at from a broader perspective, namelythe perspective of European higher education. Although the alli-ancemembers act within their regions, the focus is on the exchangeand networking between the European member universities. TheCOPERNICUS Alliance combines both virtual networking (by anonline social platform) as well as physical networking (by annualphysical meetings). COPERNICUS is analysed as a knowledgenetwork, although the aim is to develop into an innovationnetwork. The network is active at all universities’ fields of activities,but focuses on collaborations in policy issues (management andoutreach) as well as research partnerships. Additionally, anexchange between experiences in teaching and education isprovided. Within the alliance, universities undertake all possiblemanagement roles e they act as leaders, facilitators, spokespersonsas well as bridging institutions.

The Database on Learning for Sustainable Development on theother hand serves as an information network. Higher educationinstitutions as well as regional actors are involved on the basis ofgathering information from the database or contributing their ownproject experience to the database. The thematic field includesresearch and to some extent education. At the beginning of thedevelopment process of the database, universities led the process,but after implementation the role changed into maintaining thedatabase; hence, universities can be identified as gatekeepers.

The Seminar Series on Sustainable Development are defined asknowledge networks as they focus on the intensive physicalexchange and involve both actors from science and society intoparticipative discussions and outcome oriented workshops. Theseminars deal with research as well as outreach activities wherehigher education institutions and regional actors collaborate witheach other. Depending on the different seminars, where differentnetwork actors participated, the role of universities can be seen aspartly leaders, gatekeepers as well as bridging institutions.

The described three initiatives provide platforms and thecapacity to react on sustainability challenges which require theinteraction between global and local as well as regional and highereducation actors.

On the basis of this analysis it can be concluded that the roles ofhigher education institutions in regional networks are manifoldand overlap in terms of fields of activities, levels of involvement aswell as types of networks. Higher education institutions’ activitiesand initiatives in regional development are diverse and multifac-eted; so are their roles within these networks.

References

Adomßent, M., Michelsen, G., 2011. Transdisziplinäre Nachhaltigkeitswissenschaf-ten, p. 98e116. In: Heinrichs, H., et al. (Eds.), Nachhaltige Gesellschaft. WelcheRolle für Partizipation und Kooperation?, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, p. 222.

Brown, L.D., 2008. Practice-research engagement for human and social develop-ment in a globalizing world, p. 152e155. In: López, Y.C., et al. (Eds.), HigherEducation in the World 3 e Higher Education: New Challenges and EmergingRoles for Human and Social Development. GUNI Series on the Social Commit-ment of Universities, vol. 3. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, p. 374.

Devine-Wright, P., Fleming, P.D., Chadwick, H., 2001. Role of social capital inadvancing regional sustainable development. Impact Assessment and ProjectAppraisal 19 (2), 161e167.

Dlouhá,, J., Barton, A., Janou�sková,, S., Dlouhý,, J., 2012. Social learning indicators insustainability-oriented regional learning networks. Journal of CleanerProduction.

Fadeeva, Z., 2004. Development of the assessment framework for sustainabilitynetworking. Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2), 191e205.

Görsdorf, E., Mader, C., Pizzera, J., Zimmermann, F., 2009. Creating regional (e-)learning networks, p. 67e90. In: VCSE (Ed.), Virtual Campus for a SustainableEurope e Best Practice Guidebook, p. 123.

Groot, R., van der Molen, P. (Eds.), 2000. Workshop on Capacity Building on LandAdministration for Developing Countries, Final Report, The ITC, Enchede, theNetherlands, 12e15 November, 2000.

Hansen, J.A., Lehmann, M., 2006. Agents of change: universities as developmenthubs. Elsevier Ltd. Journal of Cleaner Production 14, 820e829.

Huggins, R., 2004. Competitiveness and the global region. The role of networking, p.101e123. In: Simmie, J. (Ed.), Innovation, Networks and Learning Regions,Regional Policy and Development Series, vol. 18. Spon Press, London, p. 250.

Lukman, R., Krajnc, D., Glavic, P., 2009. Fostering collaboration between universitiesregarding regional sustainability initiatives e the University of Maribor. Journalof Cleaner Production 17, 1143e1153.

Mader, C., Zimmermann, F.M., Steiner, G., Risopoulos, F., 2008. Regional Centre ofExpertise (RCE) Graz-Styria: a process of mobilization facing regional challenges.International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 9 (4), 402e415.

Mader, C., 2009. Principles for integrative development processes towardssustainability in regions, dissertation, University of Graz, 141 pp.

Mader, C., 2011. Launching the COPERNICUS alliance: European network on highereducation for sustainable development. Journal of Education for SustainableDevelopment 5 (1), 7e8.

Mader, C., 2012. How to assess transformative performance towards sustainabledevelopment in higher education institutions. Journal of Education forSustainable Development 6 (1), 81e91. Sage Publications.

Mochizuki, Y., Fadeeva, Z., 2008. Regional centres of expertise on education forsustainable development (RCEs): an overview. International Journal of Sustain-ability in Higher Education 9 (4), 369e381. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Nijkamp, P., van Oirscoht, G., Oosterman, A., 1994. Knowledge networks, scienceparks and regional development: an international comparative analysis ofcritical success factors. In: Cuadrado-Roura, J.R., Nijkamp, P., Salva, P. (Eds.),Moving Frontiers: Economic Restructuring, Regional Development andEmerging Networks. Avebury, Aldershot.

Tandon, R., et al., 2008. Civil engagement in higher education and its role in humanand social development, p. 142e152. In: López, Y.C. (Ed.), Higher Education inthe World 3 e Higher Education: New Challenges and Emerging Roles forHuman and Social Development. GUNI Series on the Social Commitment ofUniversities, vol. 3. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, p. 374.

Tilbury, D., 2007. Learning based change for sustainability: perspectives and path-ways, p. 117e131. In: Wals, A.E.J. (Ed.), Social Learning for a Sustainable World.Wageningen Academic Publishers, the Netherlands, p. 537.

Trummler, M., Mader, C., Zimmermann, F., Görsdorf-Lechevin, E., Diethart, M., 2011.Networking and interaction between regions and higher education institutions,p. 106e123. In: Barton, A., Dlouha, J. (Eds.), Multi-actor Learning for SustainableRegional Development in Europe: a Handbook of Best Practice. GrosvenorHouse Publishing Limited, UK, p. 352.

UNDP (United Nations Development Program), 2009. Capacity Development e

a UNDP Primer, New York, USA, 62 pp. Available at: www.capacity.undp.org.UNESCO, 2005. International Implementation Scheme for the UN Decade of

Education for Sustainable Development. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001403/140372e.pdf.

University of Graz, Centre for Society, Knowledge and Communication. Available at:www.uni-graz.at/en/weiwww, (accessed July 2011).

Wasserman, S., Faust, K., 1994. Social Network Analysis e Methods and Applica-tions. Cambridge University Press, United States of America, 825 pp.

M. Mader et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 49 (2013) 105e113 113

Zilahy, G., Huisingh, D., 2009. The roles of academia in regional sustainabilityinitiatives. Elsevier Ltd. Journal of Cleaner Production 17, 1057e1066.

Zimmermann, F.M., Risopoulos, F. (Eds.), 2009. Nachhaltigkeitsbericht UniversitätGraz 2008. Grazer Universitätsverlag e Leykam e Karl-Franzens-UniversitätGraz, Austria, 86 pp.

Zimmermann, F.M., Mader, C., Michelsen, G., Adomßent, M., 2012. The Europeanhigher education for sustainable development network e COPERNICUS Alliance

e back on stage with Charta 2.0, p. 134e136. In: GUNI (Global UniversityNetwork for Innovation) (Ed.), Higher Education in the World 4 e HigherEducation’s Commitment to Sustainability: From Understanding to Action.Palgrave Macmillan, p. 341.

Zimmermann, F.M. (Ed.), 2006. Nachhaltigkeitsbericht Universität Graz 2005. Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Austria, 64 pp.

3-LENSUSMoodle, Available at:www.3-lensus.eu/moodle, (accessedDecember2010).