Search results

While sustainability experts point to interrelated social, economic and environmental goals, students may think about sustainability primarily as natural resources. To prepare students to tackle global challenges to well-being, this paper aims to show that educators need to assess and address students’ shortcomings in considering socioeconomic dimensions.

This study coded essays on the meaning and components of sustainability written by 93 undergraduate and graduate students in environmental policy, business and engineering courses at US and Austrian universities. Then, the study reviewed a teaching strategy using diverse experts, case studies and assignments. Finally, the analysis evaluated students’ final projects proposing sustainability legislation with social, economic and environmental dimensions.

Students usually connect sustainability with limited natural resources affecting current and future generations, but seldom think that sustainability means acting on prominent socioeconomic challenges like poverty, food insecurity, pandemics and violence. Teaching in diverse courses through multidimensional case studies and legislation broadened and deepened students’ understanding and preparedness to act.

Despite experts’ attention to the interconnected Sustainable Development Goals, educators and policymakers need information on whether students associate sustainability with socioeconomic challenges. Open-response questions can reveal gaps in the respondents’ sustainability beliefs. In a wide range of courses, teaching can use diverse experts and multidimensional case studies and legislative assignments.

Climate change is the greatest threat to global health today and it challenges professionals in many disciplines. Most American university programs lack courses covering the rising deaths and illnesses from climate change. Consequently, graduates in health and other disciplines are underprepared for providing services in a world affected by climate change. They also lack the training to communicate this transformative development effectively. Universities should fill this gap and this paper aims to provide guidance on approaches to teaching climate-related health effects (CRHE).

Three analyses guide university coursework on CRHE. First, consider what current practitioners observe about the challenges they face and capability of trainees. Second, identify gaps in accreditation standards for university programs regarding these competencies. Third, draw lessons from innovative courses at a major American university.

Leading associations of practitioners in healthcare services, public health, social work, urban planning, civil engineering, law and other professions call for training students on CRHE. In contrast, accreditation bodies for most university programs fail to specify such curricula and competencies. Four offerings at a major American public university in 2016-2017 developed knowledge of CRHE, skills to improve professional services, appreciation of professional responsibilities and communication competencies.

Building on recommendations for climate change and sustainability in higher education, this study focuses on health effects, finds gaps in many programs and accreditation standards within and outside health sciences and draws lessons from innovative offerings.