Introduction 

The field of sustainability has undergone considerable growth in the past twenty years, driven by the urgent need to lower carbon emissions and contamination before triggering irreparable damages to our planet. While the mainstream discourse has primarily emphasized on the necessity to develop new technologies to mitigate these processes, an emerging counter-narrative advocated for the critical involvement of academics to achieve meaningful results.. 

Drawing from this emerging discourse, this article aims to contribute to the argument that interdisciplinary and intersectional approach is critical for universities and academia in contributing positively to the fight against the climate crisis by providing a comprehensive analysis of the issue and the actors involved. To do this, we will first define the key concepts of sustainability and intersectionality, and then proceed to explore three key dimensions: universities as knowledge-production machines, acclimatizing academic curricula, and the effects of climate education. 

Sustainability: social movement and political agendas.

Human activities have been emerging as a main force shaping the biosphere from local to global scales (Rockström et al. 2013: 473). An increasing awareness of our impact as humans on the environment led to a self-defined sustainability movement crystallizing between the late 1970s and 1990s (Caradonna 2014: 136). Sustainability thus was no longer a mere concept or set of ideas, but there was now a set of organizations that promoted “sustainability” and a growing number of individuals who sought to “live sustainably” (ibid.)

Ultimately, sustainability entered the broader political agenda, resulting in a well-articulated ecological philosophy with numerous frameworks, systems, and models developed as a means of studying, measuring and advancing its principles (idem: 137). 

This development solidified sustainability’s place in political discourse and granted the topic the legitimacy and attention needed to investigate possible solutions, and culminated in the modern concept and language of sustainability in a global, 20th century sense (Purvis et al. 2018: 682). This emerging discourse asserted that the capitalist economic growth of the western world was fundamentally incompatible with ecological and social sustainability; it ultimately developed a compartmentalization of sustainability as a phenomena built on three dimensions: environmental, economic, and social (idem: 683-685).

Intersectionality offers a critical lens for understanding climate change. It highlights the intersection of climate change with other structural forces, such as capitalism and colonialism, and recognizes the need for an inclusive and deconstructed approach to address this pressing issue. Intersectionality evolved within feminist theory and is grounded in the feminist understanding of power and knowledge production; it serves to shed light on how structures of power emerge and interact (Kaijser and Kronsell 2013: 418). Intersectionality offers, for instance, nuanced analytical tools to produce novel insights of production chains and inequalities on a global scale, understanding extractivism as a modern practice rooted in capitalist and colonial principles.

Power relations are expressed in many ways: injustices from material conditions to normative expressions; the responsibility, vulnerability, a decision-making power of individuals and groups in relation to the climate crisis can be attributed to social structures based on categories such as gender, socio-economic status, ethnicity, nationality, health, sexual orientation, age, and place, etc. (Kaijser and Kronsell 2013: 420). 

From this framework, how individuals relate -or not- to climate change depends on their positions in these power structures based on their social categorizations, an intersectional analysis goes beyond the identification of power structures, but aims at scrutinizing the underlying social categorizations and see how they are reinforced or challenged in light of climate change (idem: 421-422). It is thus not only important, but necessary to not only analyze the adverse impacts of climate change on “vulnerable” groups, but also to highlight and problematize the norms and assumptions that one naturalizes and regards as common sense such as our economic model of production and our own construction of social categories. Norms reflect power and privilege, and the production of knowledge affects the norms society follows.

What do universities have to do with anything?

In a world where multitude of forces -economic, political, social, environmental- interact and contribute to the climate crisis, it is essential to recognize academia as a key player rather than a separate entity.  

In fact, the academic system produces knowledge and technology needed to tackle societal needs and challenges (ALLEA 2022: 14). Their dual role involves not only responding to societal demands with solutions but also critically assessing whether the status quo is addressing these needs effectively. No matter the relative share of emissions, all sectors of society are needed to achieve a climate-sustainable society and academia is particularly relevant given its role of research, dissemination, and education (idem: 14-15).

Especially when understanding the social world as produced through the acts each of us engages in every day, every action one does contributes to the production of new social orders (Mazey 1999: 201). Everything we do, every thought we have, contributes to the production of the social world.  

Given that universities are knowledge-producing institutions, their responsibility extends beyond the academic sphere: they shape the future through their education of students and production of research that informs public policy and societal forms.

Acclimatizing the curriculum, meaning introducing knowledge and discourses around the climate crisis in schools and other educational settings is crucial to increase awareness on the issue, spark interest and engage people with the topic. Participating students can engage in research and activities, which in turn facilitates connections to the natural world and fosters place belonging and attachment (Halliwell et al. 2020: 4). 

Adapting the curriculum across disciplines encourages students, staff, faculty, and administration to examine the connections between our goals and the communities’ needs (Breen 2010: 689). It establishes a chain-like system of knowledge-sharing and community building. Advocating for a holistic education around the climate crisis would entail the creation of a generation that understands environmental, social, and political framings as ultimately interconnected and thus as issues that call for a joint response (O’Riordan 2004: 235).

Conclusively, the peculiar position of universities as knowledge-making machines places them in a position of responsibility to educate. Not only do they produce the knowledge that the wide public uses on a daily basis, but they also train future professionals in all fields and have a direct impact on the future knowledge and technologies produced. Acclimatizing the academic curriculum and research focus not only has effects in the academic sphere, but can aid individuals and social movements in their advocacy for appropriate climate policies.

Conclusion

In conclusion, universities and academia are positioned at the forefront of addressing the climate crisis, not only through research but also through the education they provide. As knowledge production centers, they have a profound influence on societal behavior, contributing to both individual and collective actions that shape our response to the climate emergency. By acclimatizing curricula to include climate education, universities become a hub to foster a generation of professionals who are equipped to tackle the environmental, social, and political dimensions of sustainability in an interconnected manner. In doing so, academia becomes not just a participant but a driving force in the global effort to mitigate climate change. Ultimately, this is just the starting point for a broader discussion on the role of institutions in tackling the climate crisis and climate justice.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALLEA (2022) Towards Climate Sustainability of the Academic System in Europe and Beyond. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/clima-te-sust-acad

Breen, S. D. (2010). The Mixed Political Blessings of Campus Sustainability. American Political Science Association.

Caradonna, J. (2014). Sustainability: a History. Oxford University Press.

Halliwell, P., Whipple, S., Hassle, K. N., Bowser, G., Husic, D. W., and Brown, M. B. (2020). Twenty-First-Century Climate Education. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America

Kaijser, A. and Kronsell, A. (2014). Climate change through the lens of intersectionality. Environmental Politics Vol 23, Routledge Edition.

Maxey, I. (1999). Beyond Boundaries? Activism, Academia, Reflexivity and Research. The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)

O’Riordan, T. (2004). Environmental Science, Sustainability and Politics. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Jun., 2004, New Series, Vol. 29, No. 2, Geography: Making a Difference in a Globalizing World. The Royal Geographical Society.

Rockström, Johan & Steffen, W. & Noone, Kevin & Persson, Åsa & Chapin III, F Stuart & Lambin, E.F. & Lenton, T. & Scheffer, M. & Folke, Carl & Schellnhuber, Hans & Nykvist, Björn & de Wit, Cynthia & Hughes, Terence & Van der Leeuw, Sander & Rodhe, H. & Sörlin, Sverker & Snyder, P. & Costanza, Robert & Svedin, Uno & Foley, J.. (2013). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, v.461, 472-475 (2009). 46. 

Purvis, B., Mao, Y., & Robinson, D. (2018). Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Science, 14(3), 681–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5