In September 2015, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly passed a resolution identifying 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 associated targets, and countries around the world agreed to achieve these by 2030. By conducting a thematic analysis of four key UN policy documents related to sustainable development, this paper argues that alongside financial and other resources, access to, and use of, appropriate information are essential for achieving SDGs. The paper also reviews research on information and sustainability undertaken at the iSchools and the computer and human–computer interaction HCI communities. Given that the mission of iSchools is to connect people and society with the required information through the use of appropriate technologies and tools, this paper argues that iSchools can play a key role in helping people, institutions, and businesses, and thus countries around the world achieve SDGs. The paper identifies 4 broad areas of teaching and research that can help iSchools around the world prepare a trained workforce who can manage, and facilitate access to, information in specific domains and contexts. It is also argued that cooperation and collaborations among iSchools can promote a culture of sustainable information practices among university graduates and researchers in different disciplines that will pave the way for achieving SDGs in every sector.

Impactful academic research plays a stellar role in society, pressing to ask the question of how one measures the impact created by different areas of academic research. Measuring the societal, cultural, economic and scientific impact of research is currently the priority of the National Science Foundation, European Commission and several research funding agencies. The recently concluded United Kingdom’s national research quality exercise, the Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2014, which piloted impact assessment as part of the overall evaluation offers a lens to view how impact of research in different disciplines can be measured. Overall research quality was assessed through quality of outputs, ‘impact’ and research environment. We performed two studies using the REF 2014 as a case study. The first study on 363 Impact Case Studies (ICSs) submitted in 5 research areas (UoAs) reveals that, in general, the impact scores were constructed upon a combination of factors i.e. quantity of quartile-one (Q1) publications, quantity and value of grants/income, number of researchers stated in the ICSs, spin-offs created, discoveries/patents and presentation of esteem data, informing researchers/ academics of the factors to consider in order to achieve a better impact score in research impact assessments. However, there were differences among disciplines in terms of the role played by the factors in achieving their overall scores for the ICSs. The outcome of this study is thus a set of impact indicators, and their relationship with the overall score of impact of research in different disciplines as determined in REF2014, which would in the first instance provide some answers to impact measures that would be useful for researchers in different disciplines. The second study extracts the general themes of impact reported by universities by performing a word frequency analysis in all the ICSs submitted in the five chosen research areas, which were substantially varied owing to their fields.

Since 2015, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) began the process of inculcating culture as part of the United Nations' (UN) post-2015 Sustainable (former Millennium) Development Goals, which member countries agreed to achieve by 2030. By conducting a thematic analysis of the 25 UN commissioned reports and policy documents, this research identifies 14 broad cultural heritage information themes that need to be practiced in order to achieve cultural sustainability, of which information platforms, information sharing, information broadcast, information quality, information usage training, information access, information collection, and contribution appear to be the significant themes. An investigation of education on cultural heritage informatics and digital humanities at iSchools (www.ischools.org) using a gap analysis framework demonstrates the core information science skills required for cultural heritage education. The research demonstrates that: (i) a thematic analysis of cultural heritage policy documents can be used to explore the key themes for cultural informatics education and research that can lead to sustainable development; and (ii) cultural heritage information education should cover a series of skills that can be categorized in five key areas, viz., information, technology, leadership, application, and people and user skills. Role of Culture and Cultural Heritage Information in Sustainable DevelopmentThe role of culture in sustainable development has been recognized by academics in different areas including local government's planning strategies

There is a large body of literature by the Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela, referred to as Autopoietic Theory. This theory describes the dynamics of living systems; dealing with cognition as a biological phenomenon. The theory, however, has found far wider application than may be suggested from its biological roots, to generate implications for epistemology, i.e. enactive view of cognition, communication and social systems theory. This paper presents key insights and explores their implication to understanding leadership capability from the perspective of an enactive view of cognition. Autopoiesis suggests that the quality of human experience, is determined by the interplay between the internal dynamics (biological processes) and the environment (social and other) of an active situated human agent, and thus offers an alternative perspective to interpreting and developing leadership capability. What is required is to foster an environment where awareness is actively developed, fragmentation of experience is avoided and language is used to promote creativity. A mini case study of the hearing aid manufacturer, Oticon A/S, is used for illustration.

PurposeThere is a general inquisition regarding the monetary value of a research output, as a substantial amount of funding in modern academia is essentially awarded to good research presented in the form of journal articles, conferences papers, performances, compositions, exhibitions, books and book chapters etc., which, eventually leads to another question if the value varies across different disciplines. Answers to these questions will not only assist academics and researchers, but will also help higher education institutions (HEIs) make informed decisions in their administrative and research policies.Design and methodologyTo examine both the questions, we applied the United Kingdom’s recently concluded national research assessment exercise known as the Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2014 as a case study. All the data for this study is sourced from the openly available publications which arose from the digital repositories of REF’s results and HEFCE’s funding allocations.FindingsA world leading output earns between £7504 and £14,639 per year within the REF cycle, whereas an internationally excellent output earns between £1876 and £3659, varying according to their area of research. Secondly, an investigation into the impact rating of 25315 journal articles submitted in five areas of research by UK HEIs and their awarded funding revealed a linear relationship between the percentage of quartile-one journal publications and percentage of 4* outputs in Clinical Medicine, Physics and Psychology/Psychiatry/Neuroscience UoAs, and no relationship was found in the Classics and Anthropology/Development Studies UoAs, due to the fact that most publications in the latter two disciplines are not journal articles.Practical implicationsThe findings provide an indication of the monetary value of a research output, from the perspectives of government funding for research, and also what makes a good output, i.e. whether a relationship exists between good quality output and the source of its publication. The findings may also influence future REF submission strategies in HEIs and ascertain that the impact rating of the journals is not necessarily a reflection of the quality of research in every discipline, and this may have a significant influence on the future of scholarly communications in general.OriginalityAccording to the author’s knowledge, this is the first time an investigation has estimated the monetary value of a good research output.