Backcasting for sustainability in engineering education - CiteSeerX

Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 868e876 www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Backcasting for sustainability in engineering education: the case of Delft University of Technology Jaco Quist*, Crelis Rammelt, Mariette Overschie, Gertjan de Werk Technology Dynamics & Sustainable Development Group, Faculty of Technology, Policy & Management, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, NL-2628 BX Delft, The Netherlands Received 1 August 2005; accepted 1 November 2005 Available online 3 March 2006

Abstract This paper deals with teaching participatory backcasting to engineering students as part of the graduate specialisation in sustainability at TU Delft. A course is described using backcasting, sustainable future visions, a systems orientation, and interviews with stakeholders and multidisciplinary project work. The essentials of backcasting are presented before an outline and results from the backcasting course are described. It is concluded that it has been possible to develop a ‘light’ version of participatory backcasting that can be taught to engineering students in a useful way during a course of 3 study credits (4 ects; European credit transfer system (ects): 1 ects equals 28 h (3.5 days) of study; the previously used study credit equalled 40 h (5 days) of study). The paper also outlines some results of the Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) project at TU Delft. Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Engineering education; Sustainable system innovations; Backcasting; Future visions; Stakeholders; Project education

1. Introduction The United Nations has proclaimed January 2005 as the beginning of the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (EfSD). Without a doubt, it can be said that engineers and engineering education are essential for bringing about sustainability, including the development and implementation of sustainable technologies and sustainable system innovations. This requires integrating sustainability thoroughly in engineering education, which is an enormous task. At the start of the EfSD decade it is therefore important to look for outstanding examples and best practices with respect to integrating sustainability in engineering education. These should not only include methods of teaching sustainability to engineering students and novel educational practices evolving in specific courses and course programmes, but also examples of how sustainability has been successfully integrated into the present

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ31 15 2785584; fax: þ31 15 2783177. E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Quist). 0959-6526/$ - see front matter Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.032

engineering paradigm and in engineering educational institutions. However, the integration of sustainability in engineering education has only just begun, although specific university groups and course programmes have advanced a lot further. This does not mean that engineering education would not be capable of adjusting to new challenges. Continuous efforts have always been taken in most industrialised countries to keep curricula and courses updated and in line with societal demands, though there is often a focus on technical capabilities and the demands of business. Interestingly, a recent trend in engineering education in most industrialised countries is to go beyond technical capabilities and to extend curricula with teaching of non-technical (social and management) skills and incorporating of ethics and social aspects of technology into course programmes. De Graaff and Ravesteijn have called this ‘training complete engineers’ [1]. However, it can be argued that adding non-technical courses to engineering curricula has affected the traditional engineering paradigm too little so far, while sustainable development definitely requires huge changes not only in

J. Quist et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 868e876

engineering education, but also in its institutions and in the existing paradigm. Mulder [2], for instance, sees sustainability as a tool for opening the windows of engineering institutions to shift the engineering paradigm away from modernity. Such a shift might enable us to bridge or narrow the ‘gap’ between technology and society. This shift also concerns teachers and lecturers, as they were educated in the ‘old’ paradigm. So, a shift towards sustainability in engineering education should include substantial learning by lecturers, especially on the level of paradigms and mental frameworks, before they will really be fully capable of integrating sustainability in their teaching. However, the majority of lecturers have not made this shift yet, or are sometimes even opposing it. Furthermore, even if lecturers are willing to make this shift, they often lack knowledge and know-how. It is encouraging that, at the start of the decade for EfSD, there is an emerging development towards integrating sustainability into curricula of both technical and non-technical studies. However, there is often a preference in engineering education on incorporating environmental issues on the level of engineering tools and methods, while neglecting the holistic nature of sustainable development, its social component and the equity principle. Sustainability requires more than putting a social science course into an engineering curriculum [2], as it also requires changes in existing engineering paradigms, a broadening of mental frameworks and changes in values and basic assumptions [3]. Furthermore, sustainable development, in the long term resulting in considerable environmental improvement, requires an increase of eco-efficiency by a factor of 10e50 [4]. To achieve such improvements radical changes on a system1 level affecting present ways of production, consumption and innovation practices must be made. Such system changes towards sustainability require combinations of technological, social, institutional and organisational innovations. Backcasting has been proposed as a promising participatory approach for dealing with system innovations using desirable future visions and stakeholder involvement. It has, for instance, been applied in the Netherlands at the Sustainable Technology Development (STD) programme [4,5]. So, backcasting for sustainable system innovations seems very relevant to engineers and engineering education, but how can such an integral and complex approach like backcasting be taught to engineering students? This paper focuses on how this has been done at Delft University of Technology (TU Delft). It also describes the graduate specialisation in sustainability that has been developed as part of the Engineering in Sustainable Development (ESD) project and evaluates its main course in which backcasting is the key element. This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the background of the ESD project at TU Delft and the graduate specialisation on ‘Technology in Sustainable Development (TiSD)’, which was developed as part of the ESD project.

1 Systems, as meant here, contain both technical and non-technical or social elements and must therefore, be seen as socio-technical systems.

869

The essentials of the backcasting approach are dealt with in Section 3, while Section 4 elaborates upon how this approach is adjusted for the educational setting at TU Delft. Results of teaching this course to engineering students are described in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 contains conclusions and a discussion. 2. Graduate specialisation in sustainability at TU Delft 2.1. The Education in Sustainable Development (ESD) project There are essentially two ways of integrating sustainability in (engineering) curricula. One is to add simply one or two courses on sustainability or environmental technologies without affecting the course programme any further and to treat these courses as an addition to the curriculum that does not affect the institutions or the paradigm. This is often the case, but does not necessarily lead to changes in the core of curricula and the present engineering paradigm. The second option is to integrate sustainability fully in the curriculum and to involve as many lecturers of the course programme as possible. The latter is preferred by the authors, but requires a strong cultural and institutional change and therefore, it requires support from leading scientists, lecturers and the university board. TU Delft has chosen the second option (for a more detailed account of this, see Mulder [2], Kamp, in another paper in this special issue [5] or www.odo.tudelft.nl. Interestingly, TU Delft has also incorporated ethics in all engineering course programmes through a similar approach [6]. The board of TU Delft decided in 1998 to integrate sustainability into all engineering curricula and, in addition, to create the possibility of a graduate specialisation in sustainability in all curricula, instead of developing separate sustainability course programmes.2 The rationale was that each student should have a basic knowledge of sustainability, sustainable technologies and how sustainability relates to his or her own engineering discipline. In order to realise the integration of sustainability in all curricula, the Education in Sustainable Development (ESD) project was initiated, which ran in the period 1998e2004 and was hosted by the Technology Assessment group. The ESD project consisted of three interconnected operations [3,5]. The first operation was the development of an elementary course ‘Technology in Sustainable Development’ (TiSD) for all students at TU Delft. The second was to intertwine sustainability in each regular course, if possible, and in a way corresponding to the nature of each specific course and in co-operation with the lecturer giving the course (for an elaboration of this, see Peet et al. [7]). The third was the development of a graduate specialisation in sustainable development within 2

Recently, several course programmes having sustainability as a central theme were started at TU Delft. They include SMST (a BSc-programme in Sustainable Molecular Sciences and Technology) and the MSc programme in Industrial Ecology (which is offered in co-operation with Erasmus University Rotterdam and the University of Leiden).

870


the framework of each department and engineering curriculum (see Section 2.2). In addition, dissemination and network shaping activities have been part of the ESD project at TU Delft, which includes discussions and lectures for interested lecturers and students from all faculties. Furthermore, the ESD project group has contributed strongly to disciplinary reviews in the Netherlands [8e10] looking for examples and opportunities for integrating sustainability in specific engineering disciplines. The group has also been involved in developing several textbooks [11,12]. For an overview of materials and courses, see http://www.odo.tudelft.nl.

2.2. Graduate specialisation in sustainability and the TiSD advanced course The graduate specialisation in sustainable development at TU Delft attracts annually around 45 students. The requirements are: Completing the mandatory 4 ects ‘Technology in Sustainable Development (TiSD)’ advanced course. Completing several sustainability oriented courses from the two clusters as shown in Table 1. Students must select 11 ects (310 study hours) from these clusters. Doing a graduate research project that is clearly sustainability oriented. It has to include a thorough sustainability analysis of the subject of the thesis and must be approved by the sustainability co-ordinator of the relevant course programme. So, a key element of the graduate specialisation is the mandatory 4 ects ‘Technology in Sustainable Development (TiSD)’ advanced course. This course is given twice a year, once in Dutch and once in English. The first half of the course, which takes place during a boat trip, offers an intensive programme in which lectures, site visits, excursions, workshops, creativity sessions, videos, discussions and role-playing games alternate. Guest lecturers, working as leading professionals, present state of the art cases on complicated sustainability problems and their social context. The second half of the course is devoted to project work using the backcasting approach, which is based on the approach at the STD programme [4] and takes place at the university during a 4e6 week period. It takes fulfilling future societal Table 1 Clusters and courses in the graduate specialisation in sustainability Clusters of course

Examples of courses and course topics

A. Design, Analysis and Tools Life cycle assessment, recycling, sustainable energy, environment and chemistry, photovoltaic energy, eco-toxicology, sustainable building B. Management, Policy and Environmental management, environmental Society law, chain management, risk analysis, technology assessment, sustainability in global perspective, environmental philosophy, environmental economy

needs in a sustainable way as a starting point. The definition of sustainable used here includes achieving a factor 20 environmental improvement in fulfilling societal needs over the next 50 years. The factor 20 is derived from the so-called IPAT equation (for an elaboration see Weaver et al. [4]). 3. Essentials of backcasting 3.1. Background of backcasting Backcasting can be defined as first creating a desirable (sustainable) future vision or a normative scenario, followed by looking back at how this desirable future could be achieved, before defining and planning follow-up activities and developing strategies leading towards that desirable future. A future vision is seen as a desirable sketch, image or vision of the future. The backcasting approach originates from the 1970s and was originally developed as an alternative to traditional energy forecasting and planning. It was used at that time as a novel analytical tool for energy planning using normative scenarios and analysing them [13]. Around the 1990s, the emphasis shifted towards identifying and exploring sustainability solutions [14], for instance in Sweden [15], Canada [16] and the Netherlands [4]. Backcasting for sustainability has been applied to a wide range of different topics like river basins [16], transportation and mobility [17], transforming companies into sustainable ones [18], sustainable technologies and sustainable system innovations [4] and sustainable households [19,20]. Interestingly, it has also been applied to integrating sustainability in the engineering curricula at TU Delft [3]. The development towards participatory backcasting utilising inputs from a broad range of stakeholders and discussions among stakeholders aiming to social learning among stakeholders took place in the early 1990s, especially in the Netherlands [4,5] and Canada [16], while in the former there was also a shift towards achieving implementation and follow-up. A more detailed overview of past and present applications of backcasting was reviewed by Quist and Vergragt [25]. Backcasting is particularly useful if it concerns highly complex problems, if there is a need for a major change, if dominant problems are part of the problem, and if the scope and time-horizon are wide enough to leave room for very different choices and directions of development [15]. Key elements of participatory backcasting include [21,25]: (1) the construction and use of desirable normative scenarios and goals; (2) broad stakeholder participation and stakeholder learning (on the level of paradigms and values); and (3) combining process, participation, analysis and design using a wide range of methods within the overall backcasting approach. It has been argued that the distinctive features of backcasting make it more appropriate for sustainability applications than regular foresighting and scenario approaches [15]. This mainly has to do with the idea of taking desirable (sustainable)


futures or a range of sustainable futures as a starting point for analysing their potential, their feasibility and possible ways of achieving them.

3.2. A methodological framework for backcasting: steps and methods Though several varieties of backcasting can be distinguished, it is possible to put them into a methodological framework for participatory backcasting consisting of five steps. These are [21,25]: Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4

Strategic problem orientation; Construction of sustainable future visions or scenarios; Backcasting: backwards-looking analyses; Elaboration and defining follow-up and an action agenda; Step 5 Embedding of results and generating follow-up. It must be noted that the strategic problem orientation of step 1 includes defining normative assumptions and setting goals. The elaboration in step 4 includes both design and analysis. It is stressed that although the approach is depicted stepwise and seems to be linear, it definitely is not. Iteration cycles are likely, while there is also a mutual influence between steps following one another. Furthermore, four groups of tools and methods can be distinguished within this framework, while in each step in participatory backcasting, methods and tools can be applied from all groups [25]. The first group consists of participatory tools and methods. This group concerns all tools and methods that are useful for involving stakeholders and for generating and guiding interactivity among stakeholders. It includes specific workshop tools, tools for creativity and tools supporting (interactive) backcasting with stakeholders. The second group consists of design tools and methods. This includes tools and methods for scenario construction, but also for designing and elaborating systems or stakeholder interaction processes. The third group consists of analytical tools and methods. This group relates not only to different assessments of scenarios and designs like consumer acceptance studies, environmental assessments and economic analysis, but also includes methods for evaluation of (social) processes in the backcasting project and stakeholder analysis. The fourth group concerns overall management, co-ordination and communication tools and methods. These are methods and tools that are relevant to managing the overall process. It includes not only methods that can be applied to shaping and maintaining stakeholder networks, but also methods for communication and co-ordination. It is also possible to distinguish different goals that are not necessarily all present in a particular backcasting project. Possible goals for backcasting studies include: Generation of normative options for the future and analysing their environmental improvement, opportunities and other consequences;

871

Putting attractive future visions or normative scenarios on the agenda of relevant societal and political arenas; A follow-up agenda containing activities for different groups of stakeholders contributing to bringing about the desirable future and implementation of them; Stakeholder learning with respect to the options, the consequences and the opinions of other stakeholders; Stakeholder support and commitment with respect to vision, designs, analysis and commitment to the follow-up agenda. 4. Backcasting in the TiSD advanced course 4.1. Educational backcasting versus real-life backcasting The questions that emerged in the course were related to how the complex trans-disciplinary and participatory backcasting approach as described above should be adjusted so that it can be taught to graduate students in engineering and what the differences and similarities are with backcasting in ‘real-life’? For instance, it does not seem likely that all possible goals that can be pursued in ‘real-life’ backcasting experiments involving a wide range of stakeholders, can be incorporated in the goals and aims of a course based on a few weeks of student project work. Furthermore, the educational setting is likely to require additional educational goals. Besides, major goals are likely to be relevant in both settings. Therefore, we discuss some major differences and similarities between ‘real-life’ backcasting and backcasting in an educational setting. First, the educational backcasting project is not a real-life experiment with real stakeholders, but a (social) simulation within our case students from different engineering and design faculties at TU Delft. So, the diversity in interests, mental frameworks, values, resources and the presence of dependencies between stakeholders and power issues that can be found among the stakeholders in a regular backcasting project are not present here. Instead, the group of students is rather homogenous when compared to backcasting involving stakeholders from different societal groups. However since the students are from different engineering and design faculties, they are quite multi-disciplinary. Second, when considering the backcasting goals as discussed in Section 3.2, it is clear that the goals of stakeholder support, stakeholder learning and commitment or initiatives for implementation cannot be realised in the educational setting. This is the major focus of the fifth step in the backcasting approach, which could be dealt with by leaving out the fifth step. However, in an educational project, it is still possible and for students very worthwhile to do so, to make strategic action plans and to consider the potential stakeholder support, ways to stimulate follow-up by stakeholders and the instruments that could support such activities. Third, educational backcasting projects are rather short compared to backcasting projects with stakeholders in a real-life setting, so a major goal of educational backcasting projects should be getting the students acquainted with and

872


practising the full backcasting approach. So, it should include the do’s and don’ts of participatory backcasting in real-life involving stakeholders, its key feature of working from desirable sustainable future visions to activities and action agendas and the kinds of methods and tools that can be applied within a backcasting framework. In backcasting in a real-life setting involving professional facilitators, these aspects are of less concern to participating stakeholders. Stakeholders are involved because of their position or influence in the field, because they are interested or because they have relevant knowledge about the problem or possible solutions, while they are not responsible for applying the overall approach or specific methods. So, organisation, methods, approach and process are, in general, the responsibility of the organisers and the facilitators. In education, this is different, since students do not have thorough expertise or stakes in the problem, while students must not only learn the application of the backcasting approach and specific methods, but they must also collect information and data, all under the supervision of the lecturers. So, roles and responsibilities are quite different in the educational project. A major similarity is the importance of learning on several levels both in education and real-life. This includes learningby-doing (through participation), acquiring new knowledge and so-called higher-order or conceptual learning with respect to paradigms, opinions, values, for instance regarding sustainability. Regular ways of gaining new cognitive knowledge in higher education and learning-by-doing in the projects by the students can contribute, if properly taught, to higherorder learning. This can contribute to changing problem definitions and novel solution strategies for solving these redefined problems. However, achieving higher-order learning among students is likely to require more than regular educational approaches. It might be stimulated more when students learn from each other through interaction and discussion. It is also important that students learn from stakeholders including the issue of social acceptance, interests and values, preferably through face-to-face contacts or interviews. These ways of learning are especially important as students are mainly educated in the existing regular engineering paradigm. Furthermore, an important goal of backcasting in both a real-life setting and in an educational setting is raising awareness of the necessity of long-term thinking, in combination with an integral multi-disciplinary approach, a system orientation, a focus on societal needs and the necessity of system innovations for achieving sustainable development [21,22]. It also includes awareness of the potential contribution that innovation and technology development can make to moving towards sustainability. Furthermore, also how technology has been used and developed so far and how this has contributed strongly to present sustainability problems and can contribute to rebound effects, also when working on sustainable alternatives. It also includes raising awareness of the co-evolutionary nature and mutual influence of production and consumption systems and of technology and society in general.

4.2. The backcasting project in the TiSD advanced course What could be the consequences of these differences and similarities and how have we dealt with them in our backcasting project at TU Delft? First, the educational project had to be focused on the essentials of the backcasting approach and had to provide training in problem exploration, the development of sustainable visions, backcasting analysis, interaction with stakeholders and stakeholder opinions and elaborating a follow-up proposal and development trajectory. Second, the nature of stakeholder involvement must be changed. Within the several weeks available, it is not possible to realise strong stakeholder participation in developing and analysing the sustainable future visions. Instead, project groups are stimulated to identify relevant stakeholders and experts on their topic and to interview them for further information and to ask them about the future vision they have developed in their group work. In addition to gathering additional facts, it includes a range of stakeholder opinions and preferences regarding the developed future vision, its attractiveness and its feasibility. Third, due to limited time and changes in stakeholder involvement, step 4, ‘‘Elaboration and defining action-agenda and follow-up’’, and step 5, ‘‘Embedding and initiating or stimulating follow-up activities’’, are combined in the educational project. Implementation and embedding is changed into making a follow-up proposal, sketching a rough development and implementation trajectory and analysing what could or should be the contribution of different stakeholder groups. In addition, it is asked to sketch the contours of a specific (follow-up) plan containing suggestions for relevant stakeholders including government, public interest groups, companies and research bodies. Fourth, methods in the educational backcasting project were simplified, while process management methods, important when dealing with stakeholder involvement and differing mental frameworks and problem perceptions were omitted. The project is considered to be multi-disciplinary due to the fact that students participate from all engineering and design engineering course programmes, while occasionally students from other universities participate having a totally different background. Furthermore, there is interaction with stakeholders, so the course moves towards working trans-disciplinary. All this led to the following practical outline of the course that is both problem and project oriented. First, the general orientation on the nature and complexity of sustainability problems, the aspect of fulfilling societal needs and the necessity for long-term and stakeholder oriented integral and system oriented approaches takes place especially during the boat trip. So, this orientation is broader than the strategic problem orientation (step 1) in real-life backcasting. The project work includes two workshop sessions facilitated by the lecturers involved. The first is meant for elaborating the problem orientation and constructing a


future vision that depicts sustainable future fulfilment of needs, while the second is meant for backcasting focusing on the changes necessary to realise the sustainable future vision. There are two lectures in the second part of the course, one dealing with the backcasting approach at the beginning and another dealing with the issue of implementation and societal dynamics in a plural democracy, which is scheduled after the backcasting session. Project work of the groups is organised by the groups themselves, while they are strongly stimulated to identify and interview relevant stakeholders and experts. The simplified backcasting approach uses a set of questions for each step and is given in Table 2. Projects are completed through final presentations to which experts and stakeholders are invited, and a final report must be prepared. Briefly, the course proceeds as follows. From the broad themes like mobility, clothing, energy, use of space, etc., presented and discussed during the first week during the

873

boat trip, students can select one they would like to deal with during the project work in the second week, fitting their own interest and discipline. Of course, not every individual preference can be met, but students are capable of making groups around different (broad) topics and narrowing them down. Next the backcasting assignment starts using the questions of Table 2. Due to limited time, the steps are mainly structured through guiding questions, which function as a ‘working’ checklist. It can be adjusted by the student groups, if sufficiently motivated. Most of the methods mentioned in Table 2 are considered to be too time-consuming and their application has been limited. Each project group starts with a strategic problem orientation during the second part of the course, which is partly based on the first week of discussions. Next, each group develops and elaborates a future vision for sustainable need fulfilment in which identified sustainability problems have been solved. This is followed by a backcasting analysis in which groups identify technological, cultural-behavioural and structural-economic changes that are necessary for achieving the sustainable future vision. Then further

Table 2 Guiding questions for each step in the educational backcasting project Methods and tools Step 1: Strategic problem orientation What is the (socio-technical) system to be studied? Which societal needs/functions are addressed by this system? What are important trends and development related to this system/needs? What are major sustainability problems and what are the causes? How is the problem defined and what are possible problem perceptions? Who are stakeholders and what are their opinions concerning sustainability problems and possible solutions? Step 2: Generating sustainable future visions What are the demands (terms of reference) for the future vision? How does the future sustainable socio-technical system and need fulfilment look like? Which sustainability problems have been solved? Which technologies have been used in the future vision? How are culture and the social and economic structure different? How do people live in the future vision? How can it be made more sustainable and more attractive? Step 3: Backcasting analysis What technological changes are necessary for achieving the future vision? What cultural and behavioural changes are necessary? What structural, institutional and regulatory changes are necessary? How have necessary changes been realised and what stakeholder (groups) are necessary? Is it possible to define milestones for the identified technological, cultural and structural changes when looking back from the vision? Step 4: Elaboration, design, analysis and defining follow-up agenda What is a more detailed design of the socio-technical system in the future vision? What are the results of different analyses (social, consumer, environmental, economic, etc.)? What are drivers, barriers and conditions for the achieving the future vision? What could different stakeholder groups (research, government, companies, public interest) do and what should be on the action agenda? Which activities can be started now and who should do them? Elaborate a specific follow-up proposal that contributes to the system change and define who should contribute and what should be contributed? What do stakeholders and experts think about the attractiveness and feasibility of vision, analyses and the proposed follow-up agenda

Problem analysis; actor/stakeholder analysis; system analysis; modelling methods; interactive methods

Creativity methods; design methods; interactive methods; modelling methods; visualisation methods

Backcasting analysis

Design methods; analytical methods like impact assessment, technology assessment, etc.; planning methods


874

elaboration and analysis is done, while the students also have to elaborate on a follow-up proposal and a possible development and implementation trajectory. Course materials are partly provided by the guest lecturers during the boat trip, while it is also supplemented with some state-of-the art material (recent papers and slides) for the backcasting project. The book on Sustainable Technology Development by Weaver et al. [4] on the results and outline of the STD programme serves as background material providing students with extensive materials about results of backcasting projects in the STD programme. Additional materials are supplied that are focused upon the practical and methodological aspects of applying backcasting as a professional or a student. Methods and skills for project work, working in teams and communication are important, but not explicitly taught in the course. Regarding grading and appreciation of the student’s work, there are two aspects to take into account. First, the students have to show sufficient quality and knowledge of the outcomes of their analysis and backcasting project. Second, the students have to show they have understood the approach, and are able to use it properly and have to show understanding of the roles played by stakeholders.

are regularly chosen, there are also topics that are less frequently chosen, such as the future of European agriculture, balancing recreation and nature in the Mediterranean sea, unmanned wave-energy powered ships, bio-piracy, etc. Second, developing countries are dealt with in each edition of the course. Students have worked on topics like sustainability in production, trade and use of clothes, sustainable food supply in Tanzania, a sustainable future for the Yangtze River basin in China, sustainability on the level of specific villages and regions in developing countries. Third, the scale of the topics varies from local to global. Students have done projects investigating topics like energy in a Dutch residential area, private transportation in the Netherlands, water security in the Netherlands, as well as on topics like the European energy supply, global energy systems, or the development of a specific renewable energy technology. Another aspect that shows considerable variation over the projects is how integral or integrated it has been done. While project groups are strongly stimulated to use an integral approach and take both the supply system and the consumption system into account, groups sometimes decide to limit themselves to the technology or the supply system. 5.2. Student learning and evaluations results

5. Results and course evaluation 5.1. Course results The TiSD advanced course was started in 2001. By the end of 2004 more than 170 students had completed it, while more than 30 backcasting projects have been done. In the early editions, groups had to do a project on water, energy or spatial development, but since groups can decide themselves, a wide variety of topics have subsequently been addressed. Regarding the selected topics some observations can be made, while a few examples are given in Table 3. First, while themes such as water, energy, mobility and spatial development

It is important to consider how participating students evaluate the course and the way the backcasting approach has been taught, and what they have learned. In fact, students are very positive about the course, the backcasting approach and the project education structure. Students are enthusiastic about the format of intensive working weeks, but are critical that it does not fit into their regular schedule. They are also very positive about making sustainable future visions, the backcasting analyses and the possibilities of long-term approaches. Though students like the broad multi-aspect and integral approach, they also consider it difficult, since it is, in general, not part of their study.

Table 3 Results of educational backcasting projects at TU Delft Sustainable clothing and fair trade

This group chose consumption and production of clothing and developed a vision of fair trade, sustainable production of clothing and consumption with a focus on quality instead of price. Using backcasting analysis they found that it not only required huge cultural changes in developed countries and in international trade, but also transparency and sustainable production chains delivering a fair share of the profit to those involved in early stages of the supply system. They also found, due to the international nature of the production system, that international organisation should play an important role. This included that the World Trade Organization (WTO) should take a broader view and that the International Labour Organization (ILO) should become more powerful.

A compact city surrounded by strong nature

One group chose the theme of spatial planning and developed a vision for a highly compact city surrounded by nature with minimised human development. They used a rather intuitive approach for creating their desirable future and decided to stay close to their initial dreams and thoughts. The backcasting analysis to identify changes that are necessary for realising this future led to options like underground transportation to and from this city, a focus on self-supply including local closed systems for energy, water and the development of urban agriculture and hobby gardens on roofs. Clearly, this vision requires considerable cultural and structural changes as well. What is very interesting about this vision is that feasibility and realising it were not the key drivers. One could say that this is a shortcoming, but it was found that the students involved definitely learned a lot and were very capable of thinking and working outside existing mental frameworks and structures. Using a rather intuitive approach to creating visions of the future enhanced this, but it also led to a rather limited strategic problem orientation. However, surprising ideas and opinions were generated here through a non-conventional alternative method. It also makes clear that application of the backcasting approach can vary and thereby lead to varying outcomes.


Students indicate that they have learned a considerable amount about stakeholders, their interests, their behaviour and strategic motives and have started realising that they are part of the barriers to sustainable development. Students consider it difficult to take into account social acceptance, democratic legitimisation, the influence of existing parties and existing interests and the social dynamics around development and implementation of sustainable system innovations. Furthermore, students mention regularly that the course has stimulated a different outlook on sustainability issues and the relationship between technology and society. Students often realise that tools and methods learned at their own faculty for the design and development of technology and for dealing with engineering problems can also be useful when dealing with sustainability problems. They also realise that other (engineering) disciplines look at (sustainability) problems with a different view and assumptions. Students learn about the potential added value of different views and about the necessity for clear and conscious communication, although they consider it difficult. They are positive about working with students from other faculties and exchanging methods and ideas. It is also an eye-opener for them to realise that while they are a minority within their course programme and their faculty, students in other faculties are also interested in sustainability and sustainable technology development. Interestingly, the boat trip contributes significantly to reaching the educational goals of the backcasting project. For instance, participating students realise halfway how immense, complex and difficult the sustainability issues are. This is always the moment that the necessity of long-term thinking and approaches like backcasting are introduced as promising approaches for working on sustainable development in the long-term. So, the boat week, the first half of the course, contributes significantly to goals like awareness of applying a system orientation, the complexity of sustainability problems, the relevance of stakeholders and their involvement and the need for long-term-change processes in dealing with complex sustainability problems. The boat week also stimulates interaction and network shaping among students interested in sustainability and increases knowledge (both broader and deeper) concerning sustainability. Furthermore, the intensive and non-conventional character of the boat week, bringing students out of their daily life, contributes considerably to momentum and enthusiasm among the participating students, which is also beneficial for the project work. An interesting spin-off of the course has been the establishment of Osiris, which was initiated in 2002 by students doing the graduate specialisation. It is a knowledge and communication platform for sustainability designed to increase and spread awareness both inside and outside TU Delft. 6. Conclusion In this paper we have described how we teach participatory backcasting for sustainable system innovations to engineering students in a course of limited time (4 ects, which is 112 study hours). This course is a key element of the graduate

875

specialisation on Technology in Sustainable Development that has been running at TU Delft since 2001, while the specialisation is an option in all graduate programmes. Up till now the course has resulted in numerous backcasting projects covering a wide range of topics. The results and evaluations by students indicate that we, the lecturers, have succeeded in developing a light version keeping the essentials of backcasting as an approach for identifying and exploring future sustainable options for present production and consumption systems fulfilling societal needs. We have found that students working in projects are, if properly facilitated, very capable of generating sustainable future visions, performing backcasting analyses and identifying what cultural, structural, technological and other changes are necessary to bring about these visions. Student groups are also very capable of selecting and elaborating their own topics, finding consensus within their project group and of approaching relevant stakeholders and experts for their topic. This has been an improvement compared to earlier editions of the course, when only a limited number of topics were offered and stakeholder interaction was structured and organised by the lecturers. Furthermore, students are confronted with the issue of public acceptance and the process of generating stakeholder support and contributions. We have found that engineering students, in general, see the government as the central regulating actor that should stimulate and force sustainable development and sustainable innovations, while they tend to overlook the restrictions that governments face on this issue. The students also find it difficult to realise that the government is fragmented and that democratically elected governments can slow down change processes, due to existing interests of powerful stakeholders. This might be due to the present paradigms and structures in engineering and engineering education that includes a focus on problem solving and on technical solutions. It can also be concluded that the course leads to learning among students in several ways and on different levels. First, they gain new cognitive knowledge. Second, students learn to apply the backcasting approach and associated tools and methods. New elements for most students are the integral approach, taking into account the social aspects of systems and technologies, the focus on fulfilling societal needs and functions (in a sustainable way), the long-term orientation necessary for sustainable development and the complexity of sustainability issues. Third, learning takes place on the conceptual or higher-order level. This includes the insight that different disciplines have different viewpoints, that different stakeholders can have strongly different viewpoints and that stakes and values of stakeholders are at play. This also includes that long term orientations and social change processes are necessary for sustainable development, that promising sustainable alternatives have cultural and structural barriers and that they might be more difficult to deal with than technical barriers, especially in a democratic and plural society. Of course, as lecturers we have learned a lot as well, and we are still working on improving the course. For instance, we have found that, in spite of the good results achieved, the

876


course is very ambitious in terms of combining numerous elements that are new to students. Taking into account all these aspects in an integral approach like backcasting in a rather limited timeframe results in quite some tension between, on the one hand, applying all the steps of the backcasting approach by soundly using the set of guiding questions, as well as understanding the full approach and its range of aspects, and on the other hand obtaining results on the selected topic that make sufficient sense. In general, we see that most groups, despite their enthusiasm and motivation, do not meet the full range of criteria and we see that one of the aspects or elements is less well elaborated than the others. However, we do not see this as a major issue, as the emphasis is on applying the overall backcasting approach and regarding this, the results are satisfactory. Furthermore, the purpose of the course is not to develop backcasting experts, but to get acquainted with backcasting for sustainable system innovations. We expect that when engineers get involved in sustainable system innovations, they are capable of participating in them as engineers or on behalf of a specific stakeholder. When it comes to educating experts for applying backcasting or related long-term approaches, an additional educational programme is necessary. One might think of a full graduate course programme. Then it would be possible to teach more approaches and methods. It must be realised that backcasting is a powerful approach when working on sustainability issues, but not the only one. For an interesting overview and framework, see Robert et al. [23]. Finally, we think that the approach could easily be adjusted for application in other course programmes in higher education in the Netherlands and abroad and also in postdoctoral education. Interestingly, slightly different approaches, also using stakeholder involvement, future visions and transdisciplinary or multi-disciplinary student work are emerging in higher education in the Netherlands, indicating a growing educational demand for these types of courses [24].

References [1] De Graaff E, Ravesteijn W. Training complete engineers: global enterprise and engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education 2001;26:419e27. [2] Mulder K. Engineering education in sustainable development: sustainability as a tool to open up the windows of engineering institutions. Business Strategy and the Environment 2004;13:275e85. [3] Van Heel HP, Jansen JLA. Duurzaam: zo gezegd, zo gedaan, professoral farewell speech. Delft (The Netherlands): TU Delft; 1999 [in Dutch]. [4] Weaver P, Jansen L, van Grootveld G, van Spiegel E, Vergragt P. Sustainable technology development. Sheffield (UK): Greenleaf Publishers; 2000. [5] Kamp LM. Engineering education in sustainable development at Delft University of Technology. Journal of Cleaner Production 2006;14: 928e31.

[6] Van de Poel IR, Zandvoort H, Brumsen M. Ethics and engineering courses at Delft University of Technology: contents, educational set-up and experiences. Science and Engineering Ethics 2001;7:267e82. [7] Peet DJ, Mulder KF, Bijma A. Integrating SD into engineering courses at Delft University of Technology: the individual interaction method. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 2004;5: 278e88. [8] Bras-Klapwijk R. Vakreview natuurkunde en duurzame ontwikkeling [Physics and sustainable development, a disciplinary review]. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): DHO Network; 2001 [in Dutch]. [9] Bras-Klapwijk R. Vakreview civiele techniek en duurzame ontwikkeling [Civil engineering and sustainable development, a disciplinary review]. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): DHO Network; 2002 [in Dutch]. [10] Egyedi TM, Peet DJ. Vakreview informatica en duurzame ontwikkeling [ICT and sustainable development, a disciplinary review]. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): DHO Network; 2003 [in Dutch]. [11] Bras-Klapwijk R, Heijungs R, Van Mourik P. Levenscyclusanalyse voor onderzoekers, ontwerpers en beleidsmakers [Life cycle analysis for researchers, designers and policymakers]. The Netherlands: Delft; 2003. VSSD [in Dutch]. [12] Mulder KF. Sustainable development for engineers. Sheffield (UK): Greenleaf Publishers, in press. [13] Robinson JB. Energy backcasting: a proposed method of policy analysis. Energy Policy 1982;10:337e44. [14] Robinson JB. Futures under glass: a recipe for people who hate to predict. Futures 1990;22(9):820e43. [15] Dreborg KH. Essence of backcasting. Futures 1996;28:813e28. [16] Robinson J. Future subjunctive: backcasting as social learning. Futures 2003;35:839e56. ˚ kerman J, Nijkamp P, et al. [17] Banister D, Stead D, Steen P, Dreborg KH, A European Transport Policy and Sustainable Mobility. London UK: Spon Press; 2000. [18] Holmberg J. Backcasting: a natural step in operationalising sustainable development. Greener Management International 1989;23:30e51. [19] Green K, Vergragt Ph. Towards sustainable households: a methodology for developing sustainable technological and social innovations. Futures 2002;34:381e400. [20] Quist J, Knot M, Young W, Green K, Vergragt P. Strategies towards sustainable households using stakeholder workshops and scenarios. International Journal of Sustainable Development 2001;4:75e89. [21] Quist J. A strategic approach to radical sustainable innovations: stakeholder involvement, visioning, backcasting, learning and engineering education. In: Mulder KF, editor. Proceedings of the first Engineering Education in Sustainable Development (EESD) conference. Delft (The Netherlands); 2002. p. 626e37. [22] Jansen L. The challenge of sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production 2003;11:231e45. [23] Robert KH, Schmidt-Bleek B, Aloisi de Larderel J, Basile G, Jansen JLA, Kuehr R, et al. Strategic sustainable development e selection, design and synergies of applied tools. Journal of Cleaner Production 2002;10: 197e214. [24] Vlasman A, Quist J, Van Mansvelt JD. Future visions and visioning for sustainability in higher education: results and examples from The Netherlands. In: Ferrer-Balas D, Mulder KF, Bruno J, Sans R, editors. Proceedings of the second Engineering Education in Sustainable Development (EESD) conference. Barcelona (Spain); 2004. p. 1e14. [25] Quist J, Vergragt PJ. Backcasting for industrial transformations and system innovations towards sustainability: relevance for governance? In: Jacob K, Binder M, Wieczorek A, editors. Governance for industrial transformation, proceedings of the 2003 Berlin Conference on the Human Dimension of Global Environmental Change. Berlin (Germany); 2004. p. 409e37.