Many universities across the world now speak fluently about sustainability. Websites reference it, leaders endorse it and commitments abound. Yet progress remains uneven.
In some institutions, sustainability appears in strategic documents; in others it is reshaping research and-or operations. Despite the rhetoric in too many, it continues to sit at the margins: articulated but weakly embedded. The difference is not a lack of intent; it is a lack of capability.
Newly published research, drawing on in-depth case studies of university leadership development initiatives across Europe, the United Kingdom, Latin America and beyond, sheds light on why sustainability succeeds in some institutions and stalls in others. The findings offer rare, practice-based insight into what enables sustainability to move from aspiration to institutional reality.
The message is both encouraging and sobering: transformation is possible; but it does not happen through strategy documents, targets or declarations alone. It requires understanding and unpacking current practice rather than simply adding another layer of commitments.
No isolated champions
One of the clearest findings from the case studies is that sustainability leadership cannot be treated as an individual attribute. Where impact was strongest, leadership development focused on senior teams, not isolated champions.
Initiatives such as the UK Green Academy, UNESCO IESALC’s rector-level leadership programmes and the EAUC Sustainability Leadership Laboratory deliberately worked with cross-functional groups that combined academic authority, professional expertise and student perspectives. This created something universities seldom prioritise: protected space for strategic sense-making.
Participants consistently reported that stepping outside day-to-day operational pressures enabled them to confront the systemic barriers embedded within their own institutions and to design responses that were both ambitious and feasible. Importantly, this did not depend on large new budgets, but on legitimising time, dialogue and collaboration.
Reshaping the rules
A second, more structural lesson is that sustainability stalls when it is not anchored in governance. Many institutions entered leadership programmes with strong commitment but limited authority to act.
Those that progressed most effectively translated learning into formal governance mechanisms: revised committee remits, explicit rector or vice-rector portfolios, integration into strategic plans and clearer lines of accountability. Once sustainability became part of how decisions were made, rather than something reported on, it ceased to be optional.
The case studies demonstrate that leadership development becomes transformative only when it reshapes the rules of the system, not just the motivation of individuals.
Collective ownership
The evidence also challenges a persistent assumption: that sustainability change must be either top-down or bottom-up. In practice, the most resilient change processes deliberately worked across both levels.
Senior leaders provided mandate, legitimacy and protection for experimentation. At the same time, academic staff, professional teams and students were engaged as co-creators rather than implementers.
Peer learning, within institutions and across networks, emerged as a particularly powerful mechanism for building confidence and sustaining momentum.
This combination helped avoid compliance-driven approaches and fostered a shared sense of responsibility. As several participants noted, sustainability shifted from ‘something we comply with’ to ‘something we collectively own’.
Coherent pathways
Perhaps the most important insight from the case studies is that transformation occurs when universities stop accumulating sustainability projects and start designing institutional pathways.
Successful programmes supported leaders to develop roadmaps that connected education, research, operations, engagement and governance into a coherent change narrative.
Tools such as institutional self-assessment, impact mapping and structured road-mapping helped leaders prioritise action, sequence change and monitor progress over time.
This mattered because sustainability leadership is not about doing everything at once. It is about making strategic choices that align mission, resources and long-term societal responsibility.
Despite these advances, the case studies also expose a significant structural weakness: the absence of systematic sustainability training for governing bodies and senior decision-makers. While leadership programmes for executive teams are growing, provision remains fragmented and uneven.
Yet governing bodies play a decisive role in setting institutional priorities, risk appetites and investment decisions.
Without targeted capacity building at this level, sustainability leadership will remain fragile. If sustainability is to move from the margins to the mainstream of higher education leadership, it must be recognised as a core leadership capability, not an optional specialism.
What lighthouse leadership looks like
In an article in University World News last year, I argued that universities must move from being mirrors of society to lighthouses for change. The case studies now show what that metaphor looks like in practice.
Lighthouse leadership is reflective rather than reactive, relational rather than heroic and willing to question inherited assumptions about success, growth and value. It is built through sustained learning, redesigned governance and collective ownership, not through slogans.
The question facing university leaders is therefore no longer whether sustainability belongs at the heart of leadership. The evidence is clear. The question is whether institutions are willing to invest in the capabilities, structures and cultures required to lead it with integrity.
Professor Daniella Tilbury is an international thought leader in higher education policy, leadership and sustainability.
She has held leadership roles such as vice-chancellor, dean, director of research, and chair at prominent universities across the UK, Australia, Hong Kong and Gibraltar.
She has developed evidence-informed frameworks and programme offerings to support leadership and governance for sustainability.
This article draws on case studies published in the European Commission-commissioned research Higher Education for Sustainability: Leadership, learning and the development of senior teams (2025).
