IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i9p5306-d551405.html

Nature Ideas Exchange: Education of Sustainable Business Principles Based on Parallels with Forest Ecosystem

Author

Listed:
  • Karolina Macháčková

    (Department of Forestry and Wood Economics, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká129, Praha 6 - Suchdol, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Jiří Zelený

    (Department of Hospitality Management, Institute of Hospitality Management in Prague, Svídnická 506, 182 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Dana Kolářová

    (Department of Languages, Institute of Hospitality Management, Svídnická 506, 506, 182 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Zbyněk Vinš

    (Department of Hospitality Management, Institute of Hospitality Management in Prague, Svídnická 506, 182 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Arne Næss considered nature the best source of knowledge and regarded the economists as morally responsible for the ecological crisis. Therefore, this research focused on students of economic fields at the university level. The experimental group ( n = 236) led by a teacher-as-researcher completed a Business Economic course by forest workshops for one semester because the sustainability principles can be very well explained and observed on examples of forest fauna and flora and then applied in managerial practice. Many similarities were found between forest and business principles (optimal growth rate, teamwork, cooperation models, parasitism). This paper aimed to identify if students’ proficiency in applying sustainable mindset from a forest ecosystem to practice increased. The achievement test compared outcomes of the experimental and control group ( n = 190) of students. Based on statistical testing, it can be stated that the experimental intervention led to better results compared to the control group. For issues in which no suitable parallel with the forest ecosystem was found and were therefore explained according to the textbook, group (E) did not perform better than group (C). The methodology is based on qualitative and quantitative research, a mixed-methods approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Karolina Macháčková & Jiří Zelený & Dana Kolářová & Zbyněk Vinš, 2021. "Nature Ideas Exchange: Education of Sustainable Business Principles Based on Parallels with Forest Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5306-:d:551405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5306/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5306/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leire Agirreazkuenaga, 2019. "Embedding Sustainable Development Goals in Education. Teachers’ Perspective about Education for Sustainability in the Basque Autonomous Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, March.
    2. William E. Becker & Carol Johnston, 1999. "The Relationship between Multiple Choice and Essay Response Questions in Assessing Economics Understanding," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 75(4), pages 348-357, December.
    3. Ashley Finlayson & Karine Markewitz & Jean-Marc Frayret, 2014. "Postsecondary Education in Industrial Ecology Across the World," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(6), pages 931-941, December.
    4. Sue L. T. McGregor, 2013. "Alternative Communications about Sustainability Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-19, August.
    5. Masami Nakagawa, 2019. "Trust in sustainable natural resource development," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(6), pages 542-542, June.
    6. William B. Walstad & Denise Robson, 1997. "Differential Item Functioning and Male-Female Differences on Multiple-Choice Tests in Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 155-171, June.
    7. repec:bla:ecorec:v:75:y:1999:i:231:p:348-57 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Chung-Ting Pan & Shih-Jang Hsu, 2020. "Effects of a One-day Environmental Education Program on Sixth-Graders’ Environmental Literacy at a Nature Center in Eastern Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, June.
    9. Per Sund & Jonas Greve Lysgaard, 2013. "Reclaim “Education” in Environmental and Sustainability Education Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-19, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. W. Robert Reed & Stephen Hickson, 2011. "More Evidence on the Use of Constructed-Response Questions in Principles of Economics Classes," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 10(2), pages 28-49.
    2. Edward M. Scahill, 2006. "Evaluation of the Training the Trainers Programme. What Did Trainers Know? What Did They Learn?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 5(2), pages 9-28.
    3. Roger B. Butters & Carlos J. Asarta & Tammie J. Fischer, 2011. "Human Capital in The Classroom: The Role of Teacher Knowledge in Economic Literacy," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(2), pages 47-57, November.
    4. Delfín Ortega-Sánchez & Almudena Alonso-Centeno & Miguel Corbí, 2020. "Socio-Environmental Problematic, End-Purposes, and Strategies Relating to Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) through the Perspectives of Spanish Secondary Education Trainee Teachers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-10, July.
    5. Marianne Johnson & Denise Robson, 2008. "Clickers, Student Engagement and Performance in an Introductory Economics Course: a Cautionary Tale," Computers in Higher Education Economics Review, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 20(1), pages 4-12.
    6. Noor Hamwy & Jennifer Bruder & Abdellatif Sellami & Michael H. Romanowski, 2023. "Challenges to Teachers Implementing Sustainable Development Goals Frameworks in Qatar," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-19, July.
    7. María Paz Espinosa & Javier Gardeazabal, 2013. "Do Students Behave Rationally in Multiple Choice Tests? Evidence from a Field Experiment," Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 9(2), pages 107-135, July.
    8. Ana Nikezić & Dragan Marković, 2015. "Place-Based Education in the Architectural Design Studio: Agrarian Landscape as a Resource for Sustainable Urban Lifestyle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-23, July.
    9. Luisa María Torres-Barzabal & Almudena Martínez-Gimeno & José Manuel Hermosilla-Rodríguez, 2020. "Twitter Social Network in University Teaching. Digital Innovation Strategy for Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Guia Bianchi, 2020. "Sustainability competences: A systematic literature review," JRC Research Reports JRC123624, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Ross Guest, 2013. "Towards Learning Standards in Economics in Australia," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(1), pages 51-66, March.
    12. Fátima Lanhoso & Denis Alves Coelho, 2021. "Emergence fostered by systemic analysis—Seeding innovation for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 768-779, July.
    13. Birol Bulut & Irem Elci Oksuzoglu, 2025. "Teachers’ Beliefs About Education for Sustainable Development: Challenges and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-31, August.
    14. Oberrauch, Luis & Kaiser, Tim, 2020. "Economic competence in early secondary school: Evidence from a large-scale assessment in Germany," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    15. Kengo IGEI & Hirofumi KUROKAWA & Masato ISEKI & Akinori KITSUKI & Kenichi KURITA & Shunsuke MANAGI & Makiko NAKAMURO & Akira SAKANO, 2022. "Nudges to Increase the Effectiveness of Environmental Education: New evidence from a field experiment," Discussion papers 22111, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    16. Nixon Chan & Peter E. Kennedy, 2002. "Are Multiple‐Choice Exams Easier for Economics Students? A Comparison of Multiple‐Choice and “Equivalent” Constructed‐Response Exam Questions," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 68(4), pages 957-971, April.
    17. Thompson, Alexi S. & Jager, Abigail L. & Burton, Robert O., Jr., 2012. "Do Men and Women Perform Differently on Different Types of Test Questions?," 2012 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2012, Birmingham, Alabama 119771, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    18. Ken Rebeck & Carlos Asarta, 2011. "Methods of Assessment in the College Economics Course," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Huikku, Jari & Myllymäki, Emma-Riikka & Ojala, Hannu, 2022. "Gender differences in the first course in accounting: An achievement goal approach," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(3).
    20. Svatava Janoušková & Pavel Teplý & David Fatka & Milada Teplá & Tomáš Cajthaml & Tomáš Hák, 2020. "Microplastics—How and What Do University Students Know about the Emerging Environmental Sustainability Issue?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-16, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5306-:d:551405. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.