Jamming sustainable futures: Assessing the potential of design thinking with the case study of a sustainability jam

Kagan, Sacha; Hauerwaas, Antoniya; Helldorff, Sünje; Weisenfeld, Ursula

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119595

Cited by 21 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Students' creativity and innovation are still unemployed resources in HESD [1,9]. Few studies have investigated the status quo of students' creativity within the field of SD [2,3] or their creativity skill development through HESD [4][5][6] or evaluated educational settings regarding their potential to enhance creativity in HESD [7][8][9]. However, students' innovation has so far been neglected.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Students’ Innovation in Education for Sustainable Development—A Longitudinal Study on Interdisciplinary vs. Monodisciplinary Learning

Braßler

Schultze

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Innovative ideas are essential to sustainable development. Students’ innovative potential in higher education for sustainable development (HESD) has so far been neglected. Innovation is often associated with an interdisciplinary approach. However, the results of research on diversity and its role in innovation are inconsistent. The present study takes a longitudinal approach to investigating student teams in project-based learning courses in HESD in Germany. This study examines how innovation develops in interdisciplinary student teams in contrast to monodisciplinary student teams. The results of the latent change approach from a sample of 69 student teams indicate significant changes in students’ innovation over time. Monodisciplinary student teams outperform interdisciplinary student teams in idea promotion (convincing potential allies) at the beginning, whereas interdisciplinary student teams outperform monodisciplinary student teams in idea generation (production of novel and useful ideas) in the midterm. There is no difference in the long term. The results indicate that interdisciplinary student teams have an advantage in the generation of novel ideas but need time to leverage their access to different discipline-based knowledge. We discuss practical implications for the design of interdisciplinary learning with strategies to support students in the formation phase in project-based learning in HESD.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Students’ Innovation in Education for Sustainable Development—A Longitudinal Study on Interdisciplinary vs. Monodisciplinary Learning

Braßler

Schultze

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this systematic literature review indicates that research regarding DT for innovation in SBE is challenged by the matter of how to identify new contexts (unknown) and new solutions (unknown) for future-oriented sustainability. The only thing we have is a " desirable future," but we are unsure of precisely "what" to build or which "working principle" to apply when creating the aspired value [83]. Exploring alternative futures is a leap into the unknown that benefits from a participatory creative process [83].…”

Section: Design Thinking For Future-oriented Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The only thing we have is a " desirable future," but we are unsure of precisely "what" to build or which "working principle" to apply when creating the aspired value [83]. Exploring alternative futures is a leap into the unknown that benefits from a participatory creative process [83]. The fact that so few DT methods are used for innovation in sustainability, taken along with the fact that sustainability is now the key driver for innovation, indicates that there may be a huge opportunity available to explore DT for future-oriented sustainability.…”

Section: Design Thinking For Future-oriented Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Design Thinking for Innovation in Sustainable Built Environments and the Integration of an Inclusive Foresight and Design Thinking Framework

Tantiyaswasdikul¹

2023

IJSDP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The search for new methods and tools to successfully address sustainability challenges is gaining momentum, due to the growing awareness of sustainability issues. Over the past two decades, design thinking (DT) has become a phenomenon in a wide range of contexts, and has recently drawn research attention as an innovative approach for handling complex socioecological problems. This review paper analyzes DT processes covered in sustainable built environment (SBE) articles that focus specifically on DT and innovation, with a view to suggesting/developing an affective new model for sustainability research. The research design was developed following Denyer and Tranfield's method. The author reviewed documents using the evidence from all open access English language articles related to this issue between 2000 and 2022 identified using a Scopus database search in order to clearly identify and analyze the challenges and opportunities for innovation growth in SBE using a DT and innovation framework, 50 articles were selected based on the PRISMA statement and plotted on a modified Ansoff Matrix. This systematic literature review indicates that research regarding DT for innovation in SBE is challenged by the matter of how to identify new contexts and new solutions for future-oriented sustainability. It is also proposed that a wider range of stakeholders are required to help optimize the solutions being generated. The results reveal research gaps in integrating foresight and DT into sustainability research. A model of inclusive foresight design thinking (FDT) is proposed to guide future research to support the practical application and enhance the viability of DT in sustainability.

show abstract

“…Design thinking's five phasesempathizing, defining, ideating, prototyping and testingcan stimulate creativity and quick prototyping, facilitating different perspectives on "changes" (Massari et al, 2021;Friis, 2019). Given their shared emphasis on creativity and problem-solving, design thinking and SD can contribute to SDGs and ESD (Kagan et al, 2020). Despite these insights, few studies have compared different instructional approaches' learning outcomes.…”

Section: Higher Education For Sustainable Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

To know, feel and do: an instructional practice of higher education for sustainable development

Huang,

Ho,

Zheng

et al. 2023

IJSHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The importance of multidimensional and engaging instruction for sustainable development goals (SDGs) in higher education cannot be overstated. Such instructions should motivate students not only to memorize and contemplate these goals but also to actively participate in addressing SDG-related challenges. Consequently, this study aims to develop practical and appropriate instructional approaches to education for sustainable development (ESD) in higher education to enhance students’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviors concerning sustainability. Design/methodology/approach By using a quasi-experimental design, this ESD study was conducted at a university in central Taiwan. A total of 121 students from diverse academic backgrounds participated in the 16-week experiment, which was divided into three groups. Lecturing, thematic teaching and design-thinking strategies were applied to these respective groups. Findings The thematic-teaching and design-thinking groups displaying improved cognitive performance. However, the quantity results revealed that the design-thinking group surpassed the other two groups in sustainability knowledge, attitudes, behaviors and mind map tasks. The qualitative findings further indicated that design thinking – through multiple practical problem-solving activities – guided college students to think independently and sustainably, as well as enabled them to internalize the value of sustainable development. By implementing these effective approaches, the core goals of ESD-related personal and societal transformations may be realized. Practical implications This study proposed a goal-oriented ESD instructional model for educators, demonstrating the efficacy of design thinking in cultivating higher-order thinking and affection for ESD in students. Additionally, this study introduced an innovative evaluation approach – mind mapping – to the ESD domain, which may compensate for the limitations of the survey method. Originality/value This study provides empirical evidence for the effectiveness of design thinking and thematic-based pedagogies in sustainable development higher education. Additionally, it also offers a practical ESD instructional model with reference value for scholars and multi-domain instructors. Moreover, the study highlights that by examining organizational governance from the perspectives of design thinking and higher-order affection, sustainable and economic development need not be mutually exclusive concepts. Instead, pursuing SDGs can be viewed as investment opportunities for organizations rather than mere costs.

show abstract

Jamming sustainable futures: Assessing the potential of design thinking with the case study of a sustainability jam

Cited by 21 publications

References 42 publications

Students’ Innovation in Education for Sustainable Development—A Longitudinal Study on Interdisciplinary vs. Monodisciplinary Learning

Students’ Innovation in Education for Sustainable Development—A Longitudinal Study on Interdisciplinary vs. Monodisciplinary Learning

Design Thinking for Innovation in Sustainable Built Environments and the Integration of an Inclusive Foresight and Design Thinking Framework

To know, feel and do: an instructional practice of higher education for sustainable development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About