Higher Education for Sustainable Development - Issues

TCCS - Higher education institutions are not only centers for imparting knowledge, but are also expected to play the role of a proactive social agent, both providing and creating knowledge and participating in solving urgent problems of the times. Nowadays, under the impact of integration and the formation of modern management thinking, higher education institutions are facing the challenge of increasing operational efficiency, including the requirements of autonomy, modernization and increasing social responsibility, for the goal of sustainable development.

Tạp chí Cộng Sản•02/09/2025

Politburo member, Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh with students attending the 7th National Student Startup Day_Photo: VNA

Higher Education for Sustainable Development

Many researchers believe that the sustainable development of higher education cannot be separated from the shaping of thinking about higher education. In the world , higher education operates according to a model that simply serves social needs and has moved towards a model that emphasizes human values. This adjustment is towards leadership serving the community, innovation and university ecosystems. In which, leadership serving with a focus on serving people, listening, empowering and developing individuals is considered the starting point of the process of organizational transformation. On that basis, innovation is promoted in an ethical, comprehensive and value-oriented direction. The university ecosystem model proposed by Ronald Barnett ⁽¹⁾ can be the direction for higher education for the connection between knowledge, society and the natural world. Research on the approach to leadership serving the community, innovation and university ecosystems provides a perspective on the philosophy of higher education for sustainable development.

From administrative leadership to community service leadership in education

The concept of servant leadership was first mentioned by author Robert K. Greenleaf ⁽²⁾ in the book “The Servant is the Leader” ⁽³⁾ in the 1970s as a critical perspective and proposed new adjustments to the traditional leadership model in education, which focuses on power, control and results rather than on human development. A true leader must be a “servant first”, that is, prioritize listening, empathy, care and development of others before exercising leadership. Servant leadership emphasizes the leader’s role of serving the community and the team they lead. In education, servant leadership focuses on supporting, empowering and meeting the development needs of teachers and learners, while creating a positive and sustainable educational environment.

Community service leadership brings many practical benefits to the education system such as:

First, servant leadership empowers and supports the personal growth of learners and teachers. By listening, understanding, and genuinely caring about the needs of faculty and students, servant leadership enables each individual to reach his or her full potential, while enhancing emotional intelligence and engagement in the academic community. In particular, this model directly affects the career satisfaction and quality of work of faculty.

Second, community-based leadership builds a positive, sustainable work environment, creating an organizational culture based on trust, flexibility, collaboration, and ownership. Under the leadership of effective community-based leaders, teachers often have higher levels of job satisfaction, contributing to increased organizational effectiveness and maintaining staff stability in educational institutions.

Third, servant leadership promotes engagement, which contributes to student success. By creating a safe, supportive, and collaborative learning environment, servant leadership increases student engagement, accountability, and intrinsic motivation. This model has also been shown to be effective in providing psychological support and mental health support to students.

Fourth, service leadership promotes professional development and enhances faculty teaching and research effectiveness. Professional development, increased self-efficacy, and increased collaboration are prominent outcomes of service leadership.

Currently, the implementation of the community service leadership model in education in some countries still faces many challenges. One of the major barriers is cultural and institutional factors when many educational institutions still operate in a traditional way, focusing on centralizing power and control, making the adjustment to the community service leadership model difficult. To overcome this barrier, educational institutions need to develop and implement appropriate strategies, and at the same time adjust the leadership model in a comprehensive and flexible way according to the context, grade level and organizational characteristics.

Innovation in education through rethinking models, structures and relationships in the education system

Innovation today is no longer simply understood as the application of new technology or methods, but as a continuous process of creating new values through rethinking models, structures and relationships in the education system ⁽⁴⁾ . Innovation in higher education includes: i- Teaching innovation - active learning, experiential learning, interdisciplinary integration; ii- Management innovation - smart management according to mission, autonomy, flexibility, data transparency; iii- Social innovation - universities linked to the community, solving social problems; iv- Start-up innovation - promoting entrepreneurship, developing business ideas from research results, supporting knowledge commercialization, connecting with businesses and building an innovation ecosystem in schools.

Educational innovation through rethinking the model, structure and relationships in the education system is an approach in which community-serving leadership acts as a catalyst, facilitating an environment for innovation: promoting trust, supporting experimentation with new ideas, paying attention to the ethical aspects of innovation, and orienting innovation from personal and organizational interests to promoting community interests.

Making the university ecosystem part of the social ecosystem

The university ecosystem model developed by Ronald Barnett ⁽⁵⁾ opens a new approach to 21st century higher education. No longer limited to the role of knowledge discovery or career training, the university ecosystem places itself at the center of the complex relationships between people, knowledge and the entire ecosystem. This is not only an expansion of the scope of school activities, but also a restructuring of the operating philosophy, to ensure that higher education institutions fully implement their social responsibilities and pay attention to the ethical aspects of the entire ecosystem with which they interact.

The core of the university ecosystem model lies in systems thinking and a multidimensional approach, where different ecosystems are always intertwined and impact each other. Ronald Barnett has pointed out eight main ecosystems that university ecosystems need to identify and participate in, including knowledge, education, people, social organization, culture, economy, politics and nature. Educational institutions not only receive influences from these ecosystems, but also have the responsibility to proactively restore, protect and develop them through three basic missions, such as education, research and community service.

Unlike the university model that focuses on the output standards of training programs or research results, the university ecosystem operates on a responsible ethical foundation, emphasizing integrity, honesty, and critical dialogue in academic and administrative activities. Along with that, it encourages schools to foster empathy and long-term responsibility towards future generations and the entire biosphere, considering education as a process of co-creating life in interaction with nature and society ⁽⁶⁾ .

The university ecosystem also places a strong emphasis on community and cultural engagement, encouraging students and faculty to proactively engage in solving local social, cultural and environmental issues. This reshapes university culture not only as “acting in the world,” but also as “acting for the world.”

Recent studies show the diversity in the implementation of the university ecosystem model in different countries. In Türkiye, a model of building an organic connection between universities and the local natural, cultural and economic environment has been formed in some places. In China, some non-public higher education institutions have chosen ecological philosophy as the basis for their comprehensive development and innovation strategies. In countries in the South American region, language students can use multimedia-based art to recreate the concept of university ecosystem, while emphasizing human values, human rights and social responsibility.

The university ecosystem is characterized by the following three main pillars: i- Systems thinking - recognizing the university as an organically linked part of the larger social-environmental systems; ii- Multidimensional responsibility - not only to students, but also to the community, nature and future generations; iii- Nurturing symbiosis - creating the university into a caring environment, promoting learning, creativity and symbiosis between people and people, between people and the natural world. More importantly, the formation and operation of the university ecosystem cannot be achieved through mere administrative regulations, but requires an endogenous adjustment process from the leadership philosophy, organizational culture and academic value system. In particular, the community-serving leadership model can play the role of an initial catalyst, while innovation becomes a key tool to realize the philosophy of university education.

Issues in the process of adjusting leadership: from community-serving leadership to innovation and university ecosystems

This is a journey in which higher education is adjusted from “management for performance” to “education for life”. The three-phase model approach below represents a systemic approach, connecting people, knowledge and the socio-environmental ecosystem.

Phase 1: Servant Leadership

In any fundamental transformation of an educational institution, people are always the central element. The community-serving leadership model sets out the core principle: Leaders take people as the subject of the learning and development process as the center of all activities. This is especially important in the context of higher education when there are higher education institutions that only care about administrative requirements or simple assessment and ranking, which can easily lead to distance from the real needs of learners and the community. Community-serving leadership helps establish internal trust, creates a psychologically safe space and encourages bottom-up participation in innovation activities. This is the stage of building an organizational philosophy - where learners are respected, teachers are listened to and the spirit of service becomes the leadership philosophy.

Phase 2: Innovation

Once the humanistic foundation is established, the organization can enter the next stage: promoting comprehensive innovation. Here, innovation is not only about improving the application of scientific and technological achievements or teaching methods, but also about repositioning learning goals, expanding interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary learning spaces, and redesigning the relationship between lecturers, students, the community and the school.

The innovative model inspired by the community leadership model is often more autonomous, flexible and ethical. This model allows individuals to dare to experiment and dare to act for common values, such as social justice, environmental sustainability, and community building. This is the stage where schools begin to transform towards innovation, through diversifying educational initiatives, while still maintaining a clear value orientation.

Phase 3: University Ecosystem

Once a university has developed a responsible innovation ecosystem, the next step is to become a university ecosystem. At this stage, the university operates not only as a training or research institution, but also as an integral part of a larger socio-natural ecosystem.

The university ecosystem is concerned with the quality of life rather than just academic performance; participating in solving the big problems of the time, such as social inequality, climate change... At this time, the university ecosystem plays the role of an entity responsible not only to learners, but also to society and the planet. This is the destination of the journey to adjust the philosophy of higher education - where education is not only about how to live, but also part of the activity of living.

In these three stages, each stage reflects a gradual adjustment from the focus of management to humanistic values, responsible innovation and ecological integration. In the initial stage, the central philosophy is “serving people”, meaning that the leader focuses on the needs, development and happiness of the members of the organization. The main adjustment process lies in building an organizational culture based on trust, consensus and cooperation with the goal of forming common trust and co-creation between individuals, promoting collective spirit.

As the higher education system enters a period of more vigorous reform, the central philosophy is “responsible innovation” – that is, promoting innovation in parallel with social responsibility and professional ethics. The adjustment now focuses on restructuring the organization to create space for experimentation, adapting to the complexity and rapid change of the higher education context in the knowledge economy era.

The next stage is when the university becomes an ecological entity – operating on the basis of the philosophy of “ethical ecology”, balancing knowledge development and sustainable development. The vision and mission of the organization are reshaped towards deeper integration with global issues. The goal at this time is not only internal efficiency, but also towards sustainable connection with the community, the environment and the world.

In general, the development of higher education is from the centripetal model (serving learners and lecturers) to the adaptive model (innovation and social responsibility) and finally to the sustainable ecological model (deep integration with the community and the world). This is the development path that helps higher education institutions not only improve the quality of training and research, but also contribute to the sustainable development of society.

Physics students visit the Clean Room, Nano and Energy Center, Faculty of Physics, University of Science, Vietnam National University, Hanoi_Source: vnexpress.net

Some issues to be raised in the future

The three-phase model from community service leadership to innovation and university ecosystem is not only a model associated with organizational development, but also the formation of a new philosophy of community-oriented higher education, for the sustainable development of higher education. In the context of higher education institutions under increasing pressure from globalization, marketization, and digitalization, reshaping the philosophical foundation is urgent to ensure that education promotes humanism and a liberal mission. By starting with community service leadership, this model helps promote the humanistic values of higher education, promote innovation from within the organization, thereby moving towards a comprehensive, humane and sustainable vision, making the school a link in the global ecosystem.

The process of university autonomy is opening up a new space for higher education institutions to restructure their organizational models. However, besides the initial achievements, university autonomy is still biased towards the aspect of pure administrative and financial management, while the philosophy of sustainable development and community-oriented innovation is not prominent. This proposed model of adjusting the philosophy of higher education can be a guiding framework for the process of university autonomy in depth, not only financial or human resource autonomy. To gradually adjust the philosophy of higher education towards leadership serving the community, some countries are moving towards a model of support, companionship and development of autonomy capacity of learners and educational institutions. Many higher education institutions are building their identity and sustainable development model. According to this approach, the thinking of generations of leaders in the education sector is increasingly oriented towards the community, towards the values of service, sharing and connection...

However, the adjustment of the philosophy of higher education also faces some challenges, such as many educational institutions have not really operated in the direction of innovation; the policy framework for promotion is unclear, the ethical aspects, community service or ecological responsibility have not been fully assessed and appear frequently in the criteria for accreditation and ranking. Leadership capacity reflects the philosophy of higher education is still inadequate, most educational leaders are trained in the direction of administrative management, not equipped with leadership thinking to serve the community.

Higher education in the 21st century is facing complex and multidimensional challenges. In this context, adjusting the philosophy of higher education towards innovation and community orientation is the way to be concerned.

This model is important in the context of the country promoting university autonomy, because it opens up an approach to the philosophy of higher education - autonomy in vision, values, organization and social mission - in addition to governance factors, such as finance, human resources or training programs. However, to realize this model, higher education cannot rely solely on the role of the leadership and management team, but requires a synchronous movement in organizational culture, mechanisms, policies and implementation capacity at many levels.

To effectively implement the journey of adjusting the philosophy of higher education for sustainable development, the following solutions should be considered:

First, develop leadership capacity to serve and transform: It is necessary to design training and development programs for leaders and managers of higher education in the direction of service - transformation - with ecological vision. Encourage research on the application of humane, creative and sustainable leadership models suitable to national conditions.

Second, establishing an environment to support responsible innovation: To realize this model, it is necessary to retrain the team of leaders and educational managers in the direction of service and ecosystem thinking, build a controlled testing - evaluation - improvement mechanism to form innovative ideas and incorporate ecological - social values into the educational quality assessment framework. Build a controlled testing space (sandbox) in higher education institutions to allow the implementation of interdisciplinary educational, teaching and research initiatives towards the benefit of the community and the environment. Apply a feedback - evaluation - continuous improvement mechanism to foster a culture of responsible innovation.

Third, integrate ecological thinking into university development strategy: Design school development strategy, curriculum and research based on ecological thinking, including academic ecology (knowledge), social ecology (community), environmental ecology (sustainability).

Fourth, reforming policies and assessment systems: integrating social, environmental, and academic ecological criteria into the university accreditation, ranking, and quality assessment system. Researching the formation of a policy framework for university autonomy goes into depth, not just stopping at the administrative and financial management aspect.

Fifth, encourage ecosystem cooperation: Promote cooperative relationships between higher education institutions and localities, businesses, social organizations, environmental organizations and research institutes to form an ecological action network./.

-------------------

(1) Higher education analyst, emeritus professor of higher education at the Institute of Education, University College London
(2) (1904 - 1990), researcher on management, development and education, founder of the modern servant leadership movement and the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership in the US
(3) See: Robert K. Greenleaf: What is Servant Leadership ?, https://greenleaf.org/what-is-servant-leadership/
(4) See: Nguyen Huu Duc, Nguyen Huu Thanh Chung, Nghiem Xuan Huy, Mai Thi Quynh Lan, Tran Thi Bich Lieu, Ha Quang Thuy, Nguyen Loc: "Approaching higher education 4.0 - Characteristics and evaluation criteria", Journal of Science : Policy and Management Research, Hanoi National University , vol. 34, no. 4 (2018), pp. 1 - 28
(5) See: Ronald Barnett: The Ecological University - A Feasible Utopia , Routledge, London and New York. 2018, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315194899
(6) See: Nguyen Huu Thanh Chung, Tran Van Hai, Luu Quoc Dat, Nancy W Gleason, Nguyen Huu Duc: “Measuring 4IR Responsiveness in Vietnam's Higher Education”, Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia, 20 (2), September/October,2022; http://www.seairweb.info/journal/articles/JIRSEA_v20_n02/JIRSEA_v20_n02_Article01.pdf