Purpose This study aims to investigate how youth in Vietnam’s climate-vulnerable Mekong Delta perceive and respond to everyday climate-related challenges, situating the analysis within global environmental education debates. It examines the potential of Photovoice, as both method and pedagogy, to support transformative, place-based learning and equity-oriented sustainability education. Design/methodology/approach Seven university students participated in a one-month Photovoice process, each capturing 10–15 photographs and developing Vietnamese narratives for selected images concerning heat stress, energy insecurity, recurrent flooding and agricultural loss. Photographs, captions, SHOWeD group-dialogue transcripts and field notes were analysed through reflexive thematic analysis and subsequently mapped to four pedagogical mechanisms: affective noticing, dialogic reflexivity, situated systems thinking and civic orientation. Findings Participants reframed climate-related experiences from individual discomfort towards systemic and justice-oriented concerns and proposed possible micro- and community-level responses. Photovoice made everyday infrastructures and inequities visible, supported critical reflection and fostered tentative civic orientation rather than verified long-term action. The findings indicate its potential to integrate cognitive, emotional and action-oriented learning in place-sensitive climate education. Originality/value This research contributes a mechanism-level account of how Photovoice may operate pedagogically in a Global South context, addressing a gap in environmental education literature that often overlooks youth-led, place-based approaches. It refines discussions of transformative learning by showing how visual storytelling can support epistemic recognition and equity-focused climate education in a Global South delta context.
Purpose-This study aims to examine how artificial intelligence (AI) competence is associated with university students' academic productivity, cognitive engagement and academic outcomes within the context of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 (Quality Education). It investigates whether AI functions primarily as a learning enhancer that supports student effort or as a substitute that may reshape engagement patterns in higher education. Design/methodology/approach-This study surveyed 412 Indian university students to examine how AI impacts overall academic outcomes. A multi-stage purposive and convenience sampling strategy was adopted. Structural equation modelling with bootstrapping was employed to test direct and indirect associations, while confirmatory factor analysis assessed measurement reliability and validity. Findings-AI competence is positively associated with academic productivity (beta = 0.52, p <0.001) and cognitive engagement (beta = 0.47, p < 0.001). Both productivity (beta = 0.45, p <0.001) and engagement (beta = 0.39, p < 0.001) are significantly related to academic outcomes. The model explains 48% of the variance in academic outcomes (R-2 = 0.48). Bootstrapped mediation analysis shows significant indirect effects through productivity and engagement. These findings suggest that AI competence influences academic outcomes primarily through productivity and engagement pathways. Practical implications-The results highlight the importance of developing AI competence as part of sustainable digital literacy initiatives aligned with SDG 4. Institutions should combine AI literacy training, equitable access policies, and pedagogical strategies that encourage reflective and effortful learning to promote inclusive and quality-focused educational outcomes. Originality/value-This study contributes to the emerging discourse on sustainable digital transformation in higher education by empirically modelling how AI competence relates to academic outcomes through productivity and engagement mechanisms. It offers a structured framework for integrating AI into higher education in ways that align with equitable, quality-focused and sustainable learning systems.
Purpose Universities often face trade-offs between campus development and preservation of natural areas. This study aims to estimate how university employees value protecting campus green space and examines how institutional trust and payment acceptance affect observed support for sustainability initiatives. Design/methodology/approach A contingent valuation (CV) survey was administered to faculty, staff and administrators at a public Canadian university. Respondents evaluated a realistic development scenario in which preservation required higher service fees or reduced employment benefits. Willingness-to-pay (WTP) was estimated using models that account for protest participation and zero bids, including a selection-corrected Tobit specification. Findings Observed contributions imply an expected WTP of approximately CAD 149 per employee per year under existing institutional conditions. However, the latent valuation recovered from the selection-corrected Tobit model is approximately CAD 399 per employee per year. The gap between these estimates reflects participation and payment-acceptance frictions rather than weak environmental preferences. Protest responses reflected concerns about fairness and institutional trust. Interpreting the probability-weighted WTP as an annual flow from a long-lived institutional natural asset implies an employee-based asset value of approximately CAD 14.9 million under a 1.4% discount rate and CAD 208.6 million under a near-zero 0.1% discount-rate sensitivity scenario. Research limitations/implications The study examines one university and only employees, limiting generalizability. As a stated-preference survey, responses describe hypothetical rather than actual payments. The payment vehicle (higher parking fees combined with potential benefit reductions) may also have elevated protest responses by emphasizing fairness concerns. Nonetheless, identifying protest behavior shows that acceptance of conservation policies depends strongly on institutional credibility and perceived fairness. Practical implications Campus conservation policies require credible commitments. Support declines when costs are concentrated on employees or viewed as inequitable. Universities should therefore pair preservation plans with transparent governance, and formal protection mechanisms rather than informal sustainability pledges. Engagement of staff and faculty in land-use planning can increase acceptance of preservation initiatives. Social implications University campuses are the role models for local biodiversity and public perceptions of sustainability. The study shows that people support conservation but resist policies viewed as unfair, highlighting the importance of institutional legitimacy. Transparent governance and protection of campus natural areas can strengthen trust and demonstrate how local decisions contribute to broader environmental stewardship. Originality/value The contribution is primarily empirical and institutional rather than a claim of methodological novelty. The study shows that CV within universities measures both environmental preferences and institutional legitimacy. Sustainability outcomes in higher education depend not only on environmental attitudes, but also on governance credibility and perceived fairness of financing mechanisms. Because the survey covers only employees, aggregate values should be interpreted as lower-bound estimates for employee stakeholders rather than as measures of total campus social welfare.
This study aims to examine how Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13 (Climate Action) is integrated into business education in higher education (HE) by exploring student perceptions to comprehend whether climate education is substantively implemented or symbolically presented. Using Q-methodology, 137 business students ranked 29 statements covering curriculum content, skills development, and attitudes toward climate action. Principal component analysis identified shared viewpoints, while qualitative feedback provided depth and context. Tensions between sustainability objectives and disciplinary silos are highlighted by the emergence of two student archetypes: Engaged Advocates, who demand experiential pedagogies, and Pragmatic Observers, who prioritize economic outcomes. Results highlight a legitimacy gap between institutional rhetoric and meaningful curriculum integration. Findings are drawn from a single HE institution and focus solely on students, limiting generalizability. Future research should examine faculty perspectives, policy implementation and multi-institutional comparisons. HE must integrate sustainability into research, curricula and community engagement, following 1) Systemic curriculum integration; 2) Scaling experiential/place-based learning and systemic/anticipatory skills; 3) Faculty training for climate-aligned pedagogies to prepare students to be actionable leaders. Empowering students as climate leaders can drive institutional reform, support regional sustainability agendas, and advance the welfare of society. This research introduces a comprehensive framework that links educational theory, SDG competencies and transformative pedagogy to examine climate education through the lens of legitimacy theory. It also demonstrates the unique value of Q-methodology in capturing nuanced stakeholder perspectives in the context of HE.
Purpose Sustainability education (SE) is shaped not only by research and theory but by persistent beliefs about its purpose, scope and pedagogies that lack empirical or theoretical grounding. This study aims to examine the emerging phenomenon of myths in and about sustainability education (MYTHSE): their characteristics, origins, consequences and strategies for addressing them. Design/methodology/approach A pre-registered qualitative study with seven international experts spanning SE, cognitive psychology and misinformation research. Semi-structured, podcast-based interviews were analysed through qualitative content analysis combining inductive and deductive coding. Findings Experts characterised MYTHSE as plausible, socially reinforced claims that narrow SE’s transformative ambitions and described as widespread rather than marginal in SE discourse. Examples include equating SE with environmental education and assuming factual knowledge alone changes behaviour. Causes span cognitive heuristics, cultural narratives and institutional path dependencies; consequences include reductive pedagogies, curricular fragmentation and disengagement from complex socio-ecological issues. Experts agreed that fact correction is insufficient and emphasised prebunking, mental immunity and critical thinking. Research limitations/implications The small purposive sample and cross-sectional design limit generalisation, but this study provides conceptual and methodological foundations for future research, SE practice and policy. Originality/value To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is among the first expert-based studies on MYTHSE. It introduces a myth/contested classification, positions MYTHSE as a distinct research agenda and identifies evidence-informed strategies for addressing these beliefs.
