Author
Rodrigo Lozano
Other affiliations: Autonomous University of Madrid, University of Leeds, Utrecht University
Bio: Rodrigo Lozano is an academic researcher from Cardiff University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Sustainability & Higher education. The author has an hindex of 44, co-authored 107 publications receiving 9596 citations. Previous affiliations of Rodrigo Lozano include Autonomous University of Madrid & University of Leeds.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the factors that give rise to food waste throughout the food supply chain, and propose a framework to identify and prioritize the most appropriate options for prevention and management of food waste.
1,016 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyzed the texts of eleven declarations, charters, and partnerships developed for higher education institutions to represent university leaders' intentions to help improve the effectiveness of education for sustainable development (ESD).
801 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present the types of conflicts that might arise and the role of the campus sustainable development champion in preventing or solving them, and also present several approaches and strategies to overcome this resistance.
686 citations
TL;DR: This paper presented an innovative attempt to represent sustainability in three dimensions which show the complex and dynamic equilibria among economic, environmental and social aspects, and the short-, long- and longer-term perspectives.
649 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors conducted a survey with 84 respondents from 70 higher education institutions and found that academic leadership's commitment was a leading cause for signing a declaration, charter, or initiative, and implementing sustainable development.
614 citations
Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them, and describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative.
Abstract: What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.
2,134 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: F fuzzy sets allow a far richer dialogue between ideas and evidence in social research than previously possible, and can be carefully tailored to fit evolving theoretical concepts, sharpening quantitative tools with in-depth knowledge gained through qualitative, case-oriented inquiry.
Abstract: In this innovative approach to the practice of social science, Charles Ragin explores the use of fuzzy sets to bridge the divide between quantitative and qualitative methods. Paradoxically, the fuzzy set is a powerful tool because it replaces an unwieldy, "fuzzy" instrument—the variable, which establishes only the positions of cases relative to each other, with a precise one—degree of membership in a well-defined set. Ragin argues that fuzzy sets allow a far richer dialogue between ideas and evidence in social research than previously possible. They let quantitative researchers abandon "homogenizing assumptions" about cases and causes, they extend diversity-oriented research strategies, and they provide a powerful connection between theory and data analysis. Most important, fuzzy sets can be carefully tailored to fit evolving theoretical concepts, sharpening quantitative tools with in-depth knowledge gained through qualitative, case-oriented inquiry. This book will revolutionize research methods not only in sociology, political science, and anthropology but in any field of inquiry dealing with complex patterns of causation.
1,828 citations
TL;DR: The three-pillar conception of sustainability, commonly represented by three intersecting circles with overall sustainability at the centre, has become ubiquitous as discussed by the authors, however, there is no single point of origin of this threepillar conception, but rather a gradual emergence from various critiques in the early academic literature of the economic status quo from both social and ecological perspectives on the one hand, and the quest to reconcile economic growth as a solution to social problems on the part of the United Nations on the other.
Abstract: The three-pillar conception of (social, economic and environmental) sustainability, commonly represented by three intersecting circles with overall sustainability at the centre, has become ubiquitous. With a view of identifying the genesis and theoretical foundations of this conception, this paper reviews and discusses relevant historical sustainability literature. From this we find that there is no single point of origin of this three-pillar conception, but rather a gradual emergence from various critiques in the early academic literature of the economic status quo from both social and ecological perspectives on the one hand, and the quest to reconcile economic growth as a solution to social and ecological problems on the part of the United Nations on the other. The popular three circles diagram appears to have been first presented by Barbier (Environ Conserv 14:101, doi: 10.1017/s0376892900011449, 1987), albeit purposed towards developing nations with foci which differ from modern interpretations. The conceptualisation of three pillars seems to predate this, however. Nowhere have we found a theoretically rigorous description of the three pillars. This is thought to be in part due to the nature of the sustainability discourse arising from broadly different schools of thought historically. The absence of such a theoretically solid conception frustrates approaches towards a theoretically rigorous operationalisation of ‘sustainability’.
1,155 citations