Examination of Witness (Questions 480-499)
Thursday 22 May 2003
DR ANDY
JOHNSTON
Q480 Mr Challen: The HEPS initiative
will end this year. Are you going to produce an evaluation on
it?
Dr Johnston: Yes, the funding
comes with a whole series of outcomes, does it not?
Q481 Mr Challen: Have any lessons
already been learnt.
Dr Johnston: There have been substantial
lessons. Probably the biggest one—and again it refers to
a question that was asked earlier about willingness within the
sector—there is an enormous amount of willingness within
the higher education sector and also in further education and
schools to move forward on this debate; but that is not the problem.
The real issue is policy facilitation. At the moment, policy is
positively getting in the way of enthusiastic individuals within
universities and enthusiastic vice-chancellors getting any action
going. Policy can enable sustainable development—it does
not have to instruct institutions to consider it. That would be
where I have discovered the biggest problem, within the higher
education sector. If people want to do something for the future—and
others working in this field are working on practical ways that
that can happen—but in terms of internal debates within
the institution, they need a bit of help.
Q482 Chairman: Whose policy are you
referring to? Is it institutional policies or other organisations;
is it government policy?
Dr Johnston: There is a whole
vertical policy matrix that needs to be engaged with. I do not
know if this Committee is going to be looking at the situations
in Scotland and Wales, but if they are not I would urge them to
do so, in particular in Wales. The Welsh Assembly Government has
sustainable development written into its basic constitution. That
then means that the educational element of their work has sustainable
development written into it. We are beginning to see all sorts
of developments within Wales with the regulators. The inspectors
inspect for sustainable development. They are not forcing institutions
to be more sustainable; but institutions are recognising that
they can now move forward on this because that fits with the whole
social and economic environment of the agenda within Wales.
Q483 Chairman: It gives them a green
light.
Dr Johnston: Yes.
Q484 Mr Challen: How will you be
sharing the information that you have gleaned from this process,
to avoid duplication or getting other people re-inventing the
wheel?
Dr Johnston: We have a series
of guidance documents, which are the solid outputs, if you like,
from the HEPS process. It mirrors the journey that HEPS went through:
it started off in relatively applied environmental things like
transport, and now we are moving to more strategic matters in
terms of purchasing, finance, and currently most of our effort
is on a guide to help with curriculum greening within universities.
They will all be out by the end of this year as a result of the
last two years' work. Other outputs are a reporting tool so that
higher education institutions can measure their progress on sustainable
development. At the moment we are not thinking of it in terms
of a benchmarking tool; the idea is that we will encourage institutions
to measure progress under certain sustainable development headings,
and then that gives them the ability to tell everyone else what
it is they are doing on sustainable development.
Q485 Mr Ainsworth: In the absence
of the kind of drivers that exist in Wales that you have told
us about, what are the drivers and incentives for higher education
to get into this field? What is in it for them?
Dr Johnston: Different people
at different levels, is the message we are picking up. In terms
of what is in it for the vice-chancellor, it is his contacts with
the local community, the regional development agencies and things
like that, through local strategic partnerships. That is where
he is picking up on the sustainable development agenda, and through
boards of governors and things like that. It is at a local level,
quite interestingly. I was at Loughborough yesterday, and doors
were opening all over the place because one of the governors was
from Ford Motor Company and at the last board meeting had asked
what Loughborough was doing about sustainability—and the
answer was "don't know". People really got moving. At
vice-chancellor level, that is a driver. At a national level,
there is the Universities UK Sustainable Development Strategy
Group, which the HEPS project—and it was another of these
little things that we helped to progress within the HEPS project—was
set up last year. I have a little note here that it might be worth
talking to their Chairman, Michael Driscoll from Middlesex University,
because that is the national strategic higher education engagement
with sustainable development. As you work down to the levels within
the institution, it is probably more useful to next think about
what is driving the academics within the institution. What is
driving them is student demand and demand from employers in the
future. That is not a clear, coherent message as yet. We did some
research on business schools where that message was completely
absent from the academics they were talking to. Students are asking
employers and they say, "we do not know what it is, so we
are not going to do it." We have to look at that area. Forum's
experience of working with our corporate partners is that there
is a demand out there; so we have to try and connect those two
constituencies, get them talking to each other and get a clear
message about what that demand is.
Q486 Mr Ainsworth: Is there a degree
of consensus within higher education about what is not being done
and what needs to be done, or is the response to those issues
rather patchy and dependent on individuals?
Dr Johnston: I would say it is
patchy, depending on individuals at this stage. The hearts and
minds element of sustainable development has got some people and
not others.
Q487 Mr Ainsworth: Who or what should
be involved in forging that consensus, because it seems to me
that that may not create critical mass, to drive the issue along?
Dr Johnston: If I was to try and
identify in process terms—say, for example HEPS were starting
all over again for another three years, then what would be the
strategy? The strategy would be to engage at the peer level. Higher
education, more than most sectors I have worked in—people
have paid more attention to other academics, for example, in different
institutions, or other managers in different institutions than
they do to their own colleagues and where they work. Therefore,
it is professional associations, trade bodies, employer organisations,
that are the key to getting consistency across the sector.
Q488 Mr Ainsworth: Why do you think
the sector has historically been so unreceptive to the whole idea?
We had the Toyne Report and nothing happened. Why?
Dr Johnston: There are probably
two answers there. In terms of imposing any idea on the higher
education sector or encouraging the higher education sector to
take up any idea is always difficult because of academic independence
and freedom, and there is that basic tenet there. If I can go
back a little bit, that is why I am not wildly enthusiastic about
what I would call a policy driver or a policy facilitator, or
saying "this looks like you must do something about sustainable
development"—and the more resistance we are going to
get within higher education; so it is a process of encouragement
rather than anything else. The other element is that I think there
is still a significant detachment between what is taught within
universities and what is happening in the world outside and those
connections.
Q489 Mr Ainsworth: There seems to
be a tendency for the agenda to get started in universities with
estates management, rather than what is actually being taught
and learned. Do you think starting with estate management is a
useful way in, or would you prefer to take it from scratch?
Dr Johnston: I think it is a useful
way in. If I was to characterise the biggest thing that HEPS has
achieved over the last three years, it is that we have manage
to build up a bit of trust within the sector that sustainable
development is not something that is going to bankrupt the institutions
if they take it on board. The way in for us was to approve the
estates management process. There are relatively straightforward
synergies that you can make between how a university is run and
managed and actually operates itself, and how the curriculum is
taught. If, for example, you are teaching engineering and exhorting
an engineer who is really making a contribution to sustainable
development and is very enthused about carbon emissions and energy
efficiency and the rest of it, but that lecture is in a room where
it is all single glazed and it is obviously a completely inefficient
way of running it, students are not stupid and they can pick up
on that.
Q490 Mr Ainsworth: You have done
some work with a Chilean university. Was that at the request of
the Chilean Government?
Dr Johnston: Yes. The Chilean
Government asked the university to try and find people who could
help them with their curriculum.
Q491 Mr Ainsworth: Why do you think
the Chileans see an importance, evidently, in integrating sustainable
development through the curriculum, whereas the British Government
does not seem to? What is it about Chile?
Dr Johnston: The sustainable development
debate is actually far more open and progressive generally in
South America, and in particular in Chile. It is something which
is talked about at a political level, more than it was talked
about here up until about two or three years ago. Secondly, the
area we are working in—the whole economy is based around
primary resource extraction, and dominated by large multinationals
which themselves have recognised the importance of a sustainable
development agenda and were the key employers of most of the students
in the university. There was a sort of virtuous circle, if you
like, and a policy willingness. Employers were really plugged
in to sustainable development, realising that they need employees
who could talk this language.
Q492 Mr Ainsworth: How close are
we in this country to achieving that kind of thing?
Dr Johnston: We have the willingness
within the sector—not 100% by any stretch of the imagination,
but there is enough there within key areas. I do not think we
yet have a coherent message from industry and employers, and we
do not have the facilitation at policy level. When you ask how
close we are, you are probably guessing how close we are on that.
My feeling is that these are not insurmountable problems, and
these things can be achieved relatively short-term.
Q493 Mr Ainsworth: Closer than we
were five years ago.
Dr Johnston: Definitely.
Q494 Mr Ainsworth: Can I just pick
you up on what you were saying about peer pressure. How much do
we reward people for taking on board this agenda? Is that something
which might help encourage peer pressure?
Dr Johnston: I think so. It is
one of these essential points we make about the "Are you
Doing your Bit?" campaign. Our response here was that people
did not actually get rewarded for doing their bit.
Q495 Chairman: Do you think that
is one of the reasons why that campaign failed?
Dr Johnston: I think so, yes.
People's motivations are strange things, and sometimes people
change their behaviour and then they will rationalise why they
did that afterwards. Part of that whole rationalisation process
is recognising others around are doing the same thing and getting
some sort of benefit from it, but it just did not happen. Does
that answer your question?
Q496 Chairman: You have partly answered
it, yes. One of the issues we wanted to explore was what was the
"Are you Doing your Bit?" campaign about; has it been
monitored; did it have success; was it wrongly formulated; was
it broad—or how would we do it now with all the extra monitoring
we have; and how would that assist your agenda of learning, as
opposed to education?
Dr Johnston: There are two things
there. Policy consistency across all tiers of government—and
we use the example drink-driving or smoking campaigns where there
is continual reinforcement of those campaigns by behaviour within
every government department; but in terms of the "Are you
Doing your Bit?" campaign, it was very clear that it was
one department doing this thing about environmental resources
and other parts of government and parts of the way people understand
their lives were not engaged at all. You need to have constant
reinforcement of messages before you can get a behaviour change.
There is a second bit to that, which is just as important. It
was just about environmental resources on the whole and not about
sustainable development. Any future campaign needs to make a connection
between economic and social and environment as well.
Q497 Mr Chaytor: Can you tell us
a bit about your relationships with the DfES, and what you think
their contribution has been to giving a lead?
Dr Johnston: The HEPS project
came out of the Funding Councils in Scotland, and then the Funding
Councils of England, Wales and Northern Ireland came on board.
That was done largely without any engagement with DfES. As time
has gone on through the HEPS project, the engagement has gradually
increased. You have had evidence from the Sustainable Development
Education Panel. They appear to be the chief mechanism by which
the DfES is engaging in this debate. I know you have had evidence
about how successful that relationship happens to be. We have
spoken to DfES throughout the HEPS project. We have had Michael
Hipkins, Head of Finance, a civil servant, come to a finance talk.
There is the beginning of engagement. Over the last month or so,
that level of engagement has gone on, and I am hoping it is down
to the work of his committee, in particular in the light of the
evidence of Charles Clarke. There does seem to be real movement
there.
Q498 Mr Chaytor: How important is
that? Do you think there ought to be a clear, well-publicised
strategy from the DfES? How important would that be, given the
importance of the sense of academic freedom? Would it be counterproductive
if the DfES tried to give too strong a lead?
Dr Johnston: I think potentially
it would be counterproductive if the DfES became prescriptive
in this area. I just do not see that as being part of the culture
of DfES. It deals with higher education and they are generally
quite hands-off, with a light hand on the tiller, and as long
as it is mentioned as encouragement, that will be enough to unlock
the willingness.
Q499 Mr Chaytor: Would you like to
see a formal strategy as a published document? What would the
ingredients of that be? What are the key things you think the
DfES ought to be highlighting?
Dr Johnston: There are two answers
to that, I suppose. I probably had an ideal in my mind, and I
also have a "what I think will work with Charles Clarke"
version. The ideal in my mind is outcome led and relatively grand
vision because that is something that the sustainable development
debate requires. You have to be very ambitious, think the unthinkable,
see what is out there somewhere. This is long-term and is about
changing the way people understand the world they are living in.
Grand visions have a role, but my feeling is that with the current
Minister in place, that is not necessarily the best way forward.
The best way forward might be three key points that we could provide
real encouragement upon. If I was to pick up on three key points,
they would be these: in the managerial element within higher education,
we would be looking at the way that procurement and finance is
run within institutions. In terms of agreeing the curriculum,
it would be addressing capacity-building amongst staff at universities.
In terms of the wider community role for universities, it would
be encouraging them to engage far more with their local communities.
I know it is in the strategy that they should do so, and I am
scared that that might become a reactive policy by institutions
rather than a proactive one.
| 
