Leveraging Sustainable Development Goals to Transform Higher Education and Advance Sustainability Science

Abstract

Sustainable development in modern conditions is impossible without the support of processes by competent specialists with the necessary skills in technology and other areas of economic activity. Studying the methods and principles of implementing SDGs in higher education is crucial. The study was based on a multi-aspect sociological survey to determine the form of implementing SDGs in educational programs, as well as on the analysis of the possibilities of introducing educational modules in the environmental direction into the practice of existing educational programs as integrated modules. It was found that, on average, the allocation of the subject “Sustainable Development” as a separate course received 5.41 out of 10 possible points, which indicates the need to change the paradigm for implementing SDGs in higher education not as a separate discipline but as components of educational courses. While the integration of SDGs into curricula promotes value changes and highlights the importance of best practice examples, expert opinions differ on the need to establish “Sustainable Development” as a separate sub-discipline in the social sciences, despite the active implementation of SDGs by universities and the proven effectiveness of educational modules on reducing CO₂ emissions. When forming such components or modules, special attention should be paid to the practical focus, which is especially important when determining the potential positive impact of the results of using educational modules both in the primary and continuing education systems.

1. Introduction

Changes in the forms and methods of economic interactions in the processes of performing various actions in an effort to ensure the life of mankind are due to the desire for continuous improvement and development, which is inextricably linked with the processes of professional training, which is carried out in the system of higher education [1,2]. Much attention is paid to sustainable development and the necessary change in the education paradigm to form a sustainable consciousness for generations. Since the adaptation of curricula to the conditions of sustainable development is currently taking place, it is necessary to clarify the role of science and educators in this process [3,4]. UNESCO has declared the International Decade of Sustainable Development of Science to find solutions to global problems. Its goal is to restore trust in science, promote critical and nuanced thinking, and strengthen scientific cooperation worldwide [5].

Global trends have prompted an in-depth analysis and critical assessment of the integration of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) into the educational process. The novelty of this study is that the world is facing several problems, and sustainable development is one of the most important. It is worth considering that European countries play an important role as pioneers in building a sustainable world [6]. The educational process has changed; many more technologies and solutions are involved in the preparation of the subject and the educational process. The relationship between education and sustainable development is complex [7]. Global trends have necessitated an in-depth analysis and critical assessment of the integration of the UN Sustainable Development Goals into the educational process.

The Latvian Environmental Protection Law (2006) [8] sets out requirements for Environmental Education (Section 42):

(1)

Matters regarding environmental education and education for sustainable development shall be included in the mandatory curriculum of the subject or course standard in accordance with the specific character of each subject by agreeing thereupon and ensuring succession in different education levels.

(2)

A course in Environmental Protection shall be included in the mandatory part of all study programs of higher education institutions and colleges.

(3)

A course in sustainable development shall be included in the study programs for all teachers of higher education institutions and colleges [8].

An important element of this paper is rethinking the existing body of academic literature to consider the integration of SDGs into higher education. It is important to note that the growing body of academic literature is mainly based on individual successful cases without a critical comparison and analysis of their applicability in different national contexts. For example, Steele & Richards consider the SDGs as a conceptual framework that requires a profound transformation of curricula, teaching methods, and competency assessment systems [9]. Serafini et al., in contrast, focus on the feasibility of creating specialized courses integrating the SDGs as a separate module in the educational program [10]. This approach has obvious advantages for the rapid implementation of the concept but is often limited to a single course and does not affect the overall educational landscape.

Brundiers et al. [11] and Voulvoulis et al. [4] note that sustainable development in universities should be considered not only as an educational outcome but also as an organizational practice, ranging from campus resource management to the formation of a corporate culture. However, when trying to transfer these approaches to the national context, difficulties arise due to differences in the institutional autonomy of universities, funding levels, and the willingness of faculty to work interdisciplinarily. In the context of Latvia, such studies are virtually non-existent, which creates the risk of borrowing ready-made models without adapting them to local conditions. In this regard, there is a need for a critical analysis of existing international approaches in order to form the basis for developing a hybrid model for integrating the SDGs, combining the best elements of foreign experience and the specific needs of the national education system.

An analysis of the current literature shows that the debate on sustainable development in higher education is currently moving from an increasing number of publications to a changing focus in research. This is confirmed by the work of Aghajani et al. [12], who conducted a large-scale systematic review of 69 secondary reviews. They managed to systematize the main areas in which the integration of SDGs in educational institutions is currently taking place. This includes institutional changes, campus management, curriculum development, research organization, partnership development, enrichment of the student experience, and assessment mechanisms.

This comprehensive view, especially the emphasis on the need for a holistic and interdisciplinary approach in management and teaching, serves as an important methodological reference for us and deserves a more detailed consideration in the context of our study.

The study by Camacho-Miñano et al. shows an interesting but ambiguous result: although students in Spain are familiar with the ideas of the circular economy, their knowledge, personal beliefs, and real actions often diverge greatly [13]. This gap indicates that theory alone is not enough. Much more important are well-designed curricula and practical cases.

This conclusion is especially important for us in the context of Latvia. It emphasizes that we need to do more than just list the existing literature but conduct a critical analysis. We need to find out which models actually work, why they are effective, and how they can be successfully adapted to our educational system. For example, it is necessary to understand how well a mixed approach works as a combination of institutional change and engaged practices, especially in resource-constrained settings. This study therefore not only describes existing approaches but also positions itself as a bridge between international conceptual frameworks (institutional integrity, interdisciplinarity) and their practical adaptation to national conditions. This strengthens the theoretical and methodological validity of the study and forms the basis for an original contribution.

Analyzing the publications of the last year and specifically scientific articles, we can conditionally divide the topics related to Sustainable Development Goals in higher education:

• Sustainability in higher education;
• Sustainable development strategies and practices;
• Social impact and assessment;
• Environmental and climate issues in education;
• Policy, governance, and sustainability management;
• Tools, methodologies, and innovations.

Based on these findings, the initial research questions for the analysis of the situation in Latvia were raised:

RQ1. How do representatives of different fields describe the situation with the integration of the UN Sustainable Development Goals into the educational process of higher education institutions (HEI)?

RQ2. Is it necessary to develop a new discipline of social sciences in Latvia for sustainable development?

RQ3. How can sustainable development be implemented in the process of acquiring lifelong education?

During the study, it was planned to critically assess the situation in the country and compare it with the experience of other countries. For example, in some universities, SDGs are widely integrated into higher education through interdisciplinary curricula, educator training, and innovative pedagogy [12]. Sometimes there is no direct reference to SDGs in courses, with the focus placed on sustainability reporting rather than teaching [13]. In certain cases, sustainability and circular economy themes are integrated into courses, with SDGs conceptually present but not explicitly referenced [14].

In some countries, the extensive and systematic integration of SDGs into curricula has been observed. For example, in Brazil, SDGs are explicitly integrated into engineering curricula via targeted sustainability courses and competencies, and in Latin American HEIs, they are actively embedded into curricula through course reforms and interdisciplinary programs [15,16]. In other contexts, SDGs are strategically integrated into academic planning, though without specific course-level examples [17]. In Spanish universities, SDGs are explicitly and actively integrated into Erasmus and interdisciplinary courses [18]. Even when no direct course-level integration of SDGs is observed, a clear institutional focus on climate policy participation is present [15,19,20].

This allows us to express the hope that the assessment of the Latvian situation will also be useful for researchers from other countries.

This study will reflect the progress of research within the framework of implementing an individual professorial grant, delving into already known topics, and mastering new tools and methods.

2. Methodological Approach and Design

The methodological structure of the study was built in the logic of “question–hypothesis–method–data”. In total, three key research questions (RQ1–RQ3) were formulated, each of which was associated with specific methods of data collection and analysis. Thus, RQ1 was solved through the analysis of curricula, a survey of teachers and students, and expert interviews. For RQ2 (focus groups and a content analysis of program documents) were used, which allowed us to identify institutional and cultural factors. RQ3 was solved through a comparative analysis with data from the European University Association and cases from EU countries.

Particular attention was paid to the justification of the sample. A total of 10–15 experts were selected based on the principle of representation of all types of universities (public, private, and regional). Data analysis methods included statistical tests to identify significant differences and correlations, as well as thematic coding for the qualitative material. This structure ensured the internal consistency of the study and transparency of the logic of the transition from data to conclusions.

An online survey of 320 students and 87 teachers from different fields of study (humanities, social sciences, technical, and medical) was conducted, which allowed us to quantitatively record the level of integration of the SDGs into curricula. Then, at the second stage, focus groups (6 groups of 8–10 participants) and semi-structured interviews with 10–15 experts (university administrators, teachers, representatives of the Ministry of Education, and NGOs) were conducted, which provided a qualitative understanding of the differences in the perception of the integration of the SDGs between fields of knowledge.

The survey included special blocks assessing the attitude towards the creation of a new academic discipline, its intended place in the curriculum structure, as well as the preferred format (compulsory discipline, elective, or module within existing courses). Expert interviews were conducted according to the method of Kvale & Brinkmann [21] in order to identify institutional and personnel capabilities for the implementation of the new discipline. In addition, a comparative analysis of international cases was used [12,17] where similar courses have already been implemented, which made it possible to identify potential models of adaptation for the Latvian context.

The key source of data was the focus groups with participants in additional education programs, as well as a secondary analysis of statistical data on the lifelong education system in Latvia. Qualitative data were coded thematically using the approach described by Braun & Clarke [22], which allowed us to identify key barriers and incentives for integrating the SDGs into the lifelong learning system: motivation of adult students, availability of programs, and intersectoral partnerships. For comparison, examples from the practice of Brazil [15], UK [19] and Spain [14] were used, where targeted courses on sustainable development for an adult audience have been developed. Thus, unlike traditional descriptive studies, this methodology provides a comprehensive, multi-level analysis, where quantitative and qualitative data are integrated at the interpretation stage, which increases the reliability of the findings and makes it possible to offer specific recommendations for educational policy in Latvia.

Since similar comprehensive studies on the chosen topic have not been conducted, the research uses a structured multi-stage methodology to obtain answers to the research questions raised. This methodology integrates both quantitative and qualitative assessments by integrating bibliographical analysis, survey data, and focus group discussions.

A logical sequence was chosen for the study; Figure 1 shows the research design, which is described in detail in the outline of this chapter.

2.1. Selection and Analysis of Literature Sources

The literature review used the SALSA framework (search, appraisal, synthesis, and analysis). VOSviewer 1.6, a software tool for constructing and visualizing bibliometric networks, was used to select scientific articles from databases [23].

These networks can consist of various elements such as journals, researchers, or specific publications, and can be built based on relationships like citations, bibliographic coupling, co-citations, or co-authorship. Additionally, VOSviewer provides text mining features allowing users to create and visualize networks of co-occurring key terms drawn from the scientific literature. Similar tools can be explored in the author’s earlier works published in MDPI journals for insights into the selection rationale.

The search strategy involved an integrated approach using two major electronic databases, ProQuest and ScienceDirect. The screening process yielded 3702 primary records, of which 113 duplicates were excluded. Thus, 3644 unique articles were included in further analysis, covering the period from 2004 to April 2025.

To identify the relevant publications and literature for the initial research questions, the text mining technology Rayyan [24] interface was used for systematization and primary analysis of the literature, which allows for optimizing the screening process using machine learning (priority screening), reducing the workload by approximately 50% while maintaining the recall level at ≥95%.

The text exploration features allow for quick and easy review of a selection of texts based on article abstracts to find the full texts needed [25].

The obtained screening results showed the following:

-

Active sorting of articles by relevance (active learning) contributes to the early selection of relevant sources;

-

Several studies have found that after processing 50% of records, screening via Rayyan resulted in 86–99% of relevant articles being found, and the detection rate of the final included resources reached 96–100%.

Rayyan is an effective resource aimed at assisting researchers in conserving time while conducting systematic and literature reviews. Its efficiency has been widely discussed in the literature [26,27,28].

However, in the present study, the author used it for the first time. Data processing was documented using the PRISMA principles [29,30,31,32]. At the same time, the screening process was double-checked to ensure that the defined criteria were met accurately.

To understand the transformation of the higher education system in line with Sustainable Development Goals, a comprehensive qualitative analysis of the processes taking place in educational institutions is necessary.

First of all, according to Calero et al., it is necessary to align the set of teachers’ knowledge with the SDGs [33]. To this end, each educational institution develops a system of strategic measures until 2030 [34]. Universities pay special attention to the system of competencies in the process of understanding the need for sustainable development, which, according to Delouha et al. [35] and Baboyan et al. [36], helps to establish a balance between systemic and personal activities in the process of transforming higher education. However, to establish the level of knowledge of the target audience, a thorough study of the level of knowledge is required, which does not always precede the construction of educational strategies in the field of sustainable development [37].

The need for significant assistance in the implementation of the SDGs in educational processes has been confirmed in practice by examples of experimental activities meant to form sustainable behavioral habits on the territory of university campuses, implementing the principles of sustainable development and providing the results of the activities of educational institutions in light of the implementation of the SDGs [38,39,40,41].

The higher education system generates human resources, which, according to Algarni et al. [42], must know how to transfer sustainable competencies in human resource management organizations. Kyoibashi notes that in order to develop students’ sustainable development skills, cases provided by university professors are needed to develop students’ practical skills in transferring information within the framework of the implementation of SDG practices [43]. However, despite the consensus on the need to implement the SDGs in higher education, scientists’ opinions on the technologies of these processes differ, which complicates the processes of the practical implementation of SDGs in the higher education system, as a result of which sustainable development courses are included in the curricula in volumes that are insufficient to develop sustainable development skills in future specialists. The practice of implementing sustainable development principles as a separate component of education should be considered [10]. Steele and Richards [9] argue that the SDGs in the higher education system should be cross cut and complement existing courses. Regardless of the technologies for implementing SDGs in the practice of educational institutions, certain institutional frameworks are required to determine the level of competence in the context of sustainable development of graduates of higher education institutions.

A special role in the transformation of higher education, taking into account the goals of sustainable development, is played by the comprehensive inclusion of sustainable development components, which is considered in all areas of university activity, including university campuses [44,45,46]. In contrast to the listed authors, Aramburuzabala & Cerrillo draw attention to the necessity of creating training tools to develop sustainable development skills [47]. The higher education system can become a successful testing ground for the formation of sustainable development competencies in the process of lifelong learning [48,49,50].

The implementation of Sustainable Development Goals in university education is inextricably linked with globalization, which necessitates taking into account globalization processes as a component of the transformation of higher education [51,52,53]. The countries of the European Union are the flagships in the process of implementing SDGs in the higher education system, as evidenced by successful cases regularly presented in the scientific literature [54,55,56,57].

However, despite the existing success in the implementation of the SDGs in the higher education system, there are a number of problems, which are written about by Ada et al. [58,59,60] and De Falco et al. [61], in the field of cooperation between universities and stakeholders in the process of forming an educational component of an applied nature for a more harmonious implementation of the SDGs.

The poorly studied issues of the processes of implementing the SDGs in the higher education system also include the issues of forming programs to improve the level of competence of specialists on sustainable development issues in the process of professional retraining, which is noted by Filho et al. [62]. Frumkina et al. point out the insufficiency of intercultural skills that students receive during their studies, which reduces the potential for the development of SDGs [63].

To create educational modules and components in the higher education system, it is necessary to have clear ideas about the required volumes of educational information and the methods of its delivery to achieve the maximum effect, which is not considered in previously published studies in the context of adapting the entire higher education system to the formation of the goals and principles of sustainable development. The conducted study will expand on previously published studies by examining the readiness of various educational institutions to implement updated courses and programs, taking into account the SDGs, as well as by developing relevant teaching and methodological materials.

2.2. Expert Interviews Methodology

Expert interviews were conducted as part of a qualitative research methodology to obtain in-depth, specialized insights from key informants possessing relevant domain expertise. This approach enabled the collection of nuanced, first-hand perspectives critical for understanding complex phenomena within the study’s scope.

The sample size aimed for 10 to 15 expert interviews, which aligns with methodological recommendations for achieving data saturation in expert-based qualitative studies. The final sample size was 16 expert interviews. The sample design followed a purposive, non-probability sampling strategy consistent with qualitative research paradigms where the goal is the depth and richness of data rather than generalizability.

Participants were identified using purposive sampling, targeting individuals recognized for their expertise based on their professional role or involvement in relevant policymaking or industry practices. Snowball sampling was also used to identify additional participants through referrals from initial interviewees. To ensure a diverse yet relevant range of perspectives, the sample was designed to include individuals from various sectors: academics, university administration, public and non-governmental institutions, and those directly involved with or impacted by the research topic.

The interviews were semi-structured, allowing for consistency across participants while providing flexibility to explore emergent themes. An interview guide was developed based on the research questions and the preliminary literature review.

The interview protocol addressed five core thematic areas: (1) institutional roles and strategic objectives, (2) evolving paradigms and value transformations in higher education, (3) curricular integration of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), (4) competencies for sustainability education, and (5) evidence-based recommendations for future development [64]. Each interview lasted approximately 30–60 min and was conducted online.

2.3. Quantitative Survey Methodology

The first stage of the study consisted of assessing the literature environment. The VOSviewer software was used to determine the density of keywords, which allowed for obtaining density diagrams of keywords. The study is conducted for literary sources that were selected as a result of applying the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. The use of the PRISMA checklist allows for concentrating on the literary research objects necessary for this study.

The second stage of the study consisted of interviews to determine the level of knowledge in the field of sustainable development. The target audience of the study is students and teachers of higher education institutions (universities and colleges) in Latvia. The sample size was a representative group of at least 390 participants, which corresponds to a reliability level of 95% and an error margin of 5%. As a result, 433 respondents were interviewed, which ensured an appropriate ratio of students and teachers in the general population.

The selection method is probability sampling. The interviewing method is a structured survey with a pre-prepared questionnaire, where the questions follow a strict order. The topics of the study covered are as follows [65,66]:

-

Level of knowledge in the field of Environmental Protection and sustainable development;

-

Attitudes and behavior towards ecology;

-

Influence of environmental education on the behavior of respondents.

The interviews lasted from 10 to 15 min and were conducted online. The interviews included 10 questions; for the correct answer to each one, it was assumed to receive one point.

The average value for the study is determined by Formula (1):

$$\overline{ b}={\displaystyle \frac{\sum _{i=0}^{10}{b}_i{n}_i}{\sum _{i=0}^{10}{n}_i}}$$

(1)

where $\overline{ b}$ is the average score for the sample, $b_i$ is the score value, and $n_i$ is the number of respondents who received the specified score.

2.4. Focus Group Discussions

The study included 90 min focus group discussions with 7 to 8 students participating. The discussions were moderated to ensure the maximum involvement of each participant. The key principles of the discussions were to maintain an open and neutral atmosphere that excluded value judgments or the expression of personal opinions by the moderator. To deepen the understanding of the participants’ statements, clarifying questions were used, such as “Could you tell us more?” “What do you mean?” “How does this work in practice?” “Why?” and others. This format allowed for a comprehensive study of students’ opinions and ideas on the issues under study.

Based on preliminary observations, the literature analysis, and expert interviews, the following hypotheses were formulated for empirical testing:

H1. 

The level of knowledge about sustainable development is superficial.

H2. 

Sustainable habits in everyday life are associated with a higher understanding of the importance of sustainable development.

H3. 

Participation in environmental education programs or events fosters understanding of sustainable development principles.

H4. 

Sustainable development issues are perceived as important, but there is a lack of understanding of their practical implementation.

H5. 

Sustainable development courses/knowledge are not included in the curriculum of higher education institutions to a sufficient extent.

H6. 

Understanding of environmental aspects is better than the understanding of other aspects of sustainable development.

3. Results

3.1. Results of Selection and Analysis of the Literature Sources

3.1.1. Criteria and Process of the Literature Selection

To develop three visualizations, the keywords “Study curricula,” “Educational Curricula,” “SDG,” “education,” “university programs,” and “integration SDG” were selected to filter documents in Scopus. Initially, it was decided to focus on three periods and geographical locations: 2018–2025 in Europe (Figure 2a), 2018–2025 globally (Figure 2b), and 2020–2025 globally (Figure 2c). However, it was discovered that when using all the keywords, documents were only available starting from 2016.

Figure 2 is illustrative in that, by searching for keywords in databases, the corresponding articles can be obtained and analyzed in further research. In this case, it plays a key role in exposing the accents of other authors in expanding the subject as well as the shortcomings of existing research. In this case, the colors are not important, as it is more important to find connections between keywords and the most cited works.

The sample set did not allow for answers to the research questions, so the search scope was expanded, describing it in Section 3.1.2.

3.1.2. Search Strategy

This study included a comprehensive analysis of the scientific literature aimed at identifying current trends in integrating the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into business education programs. The search for relevant publications was conducted in the international databases ProQuest and ScienceDirect using a strategy that combines three conceptual blocks in relation to the initial research questions:

-

Sustainable Development Block included the terms “Sustainable Development Goals”, “SDGs”, “Sustainability Science”, and “sustainable education”;

-

Educational Programs Block contained variations in the curriculum concepts, “education program”, “course content”, and “syllabus”;

-

Business Education Block covered “social sciences”, “business education”, “higher education”, and related terms. The use of Boolean operators allowed us to formulate a detailed search query that ensures a balance between relevance and completeness of coverage. The study time frame covered the period from January 2003 to March 2025, which made it possible to trace the evolution of approaches to integrating sustainable development principles into the educational process.

At the first stage of processing the results, 58 duplicates were excluded from the initial sample of 3702 publications using the specialized Rayyan tool (Figure 3).

The subsequent screening of the titles and abstracts of 3644 articles was carried out based on strict selection criteria, including the following:

-

Evidence-based integration of SDG principles into curricula.

-

Availability of innovative pedagogical methods.

-

Examples of an interdisciplinary approach.

-

Real cases of applying knowledge in the field of sustainable development.

-

Institutional implementation strategies.

As a result, 429 of the most relevant publications were selected, which underwent an in-depth analysis of their full texts. Particular attention was paid to studies demonstrating the following:

-

The depth of inclusion of sustainable development aspects in educational programs.

-

Measurable results of competence development.

-

Practice-oriented learning models.

-

Efficient mechanisms for assessing achievements.

The literature review revealed that a similar picture is observed in higher education in many countries: the level of knowledge about sustainable development among students and teachers generally remains superficial (H1). Moreover, as noted by Aghajani et al. (2025) [12] and Avila et al. (2025) [13], courses on this topic are still very rarely integrated into mainstream curricula (H5).

The Latvian situation, according to preliminary interviews and analysis of educational programs, generally follows these trends. This confirms the need for comprehensive interdisciplinary modules covering not only environmental but also socio-economic aspects of sustainable development (H6).

The methodological approach ensured that only those studies that not only mentioned the concept of sustainable development but also offered specific, reproducible solutions for its implementation in the academic environment were included in the analysis. Such a careful selection allowed us to identify key trends and best practices in this area of knowledge.

3.2. Expert Interviews Results

Between 14 February and 24 April 2025, 16 semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with experts from life science universities, the public and non-profit sectors, and international organizations. The semi-structured interview format, which combined pre-prepared questions with the ability to flexibly respond to respondents’ responses, allowed for a deeper understanding of their views and experiences on the key research questions.

Experts from life science universities were divided into two subgroups: administration and faculty (

Table 1. Expert interviews fieldwork report.

Scope	The Organization Represented by the Interviewed Expert
• Universities of science	Administration and Academic staff of • Riga Technical University • Rīga Stradiņš University • University of Latvia • Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies
• Public sector	• The State Chancellery • The Ministry of Education and Science • The Latvian Council of Science
• Non-governmental sector	• Latvian Platform for Development Cooperation (LAPAS) • The Latvian Association of Young Researchers (LJZA) • Green Liberty
• International organizations	• UNESCO

). Some respondents played roles that overlapped between these subgroups, which provided a more comprehensive view of the topic under study. The interviews were conducted in accordance with the principles of effective interviewing, including creating an atmosphere of trust, observing ethical standards, and ensuring data confidentiality. Interview questions covered topics such as the integration of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into educational programs, teaching methods, organizational strategies, and university interactions with external partners.

Expert interviews revealed that, despite the highly declared importance of sustainable development (H4), the practical implementation of principles is often spotty without a systematic approach (H5). The experts also noted that sustainable habits in everyday life are directly related to a deeper understanding of the Sustainable Development Goals (H2), which is confirmed by the survey results. At the same time, respondents emphasized that environmental aspects are much better understood than social and economic ones (H6), which coincides with the data of the studies by Picatoste et al. [18].

3.2.1. Integrating the UN Sustainable Development Goals into the Work and Study Process of the University

Universities and research institutes are increasingly developing and implementing comprehensive sustainability strategies and policies, reflecting a whole-institution approach. They are integrating the SDGs into their curriculum, research, campus management, and operations. RTU has developed a Sustainable Development Framework, and the Riga Technical University (RTU) Council approved the Sustainable Development Policy in February 2025. The RTU Sustainable Development Strategy is being coordinated with specific actions for integrating the SDGs into study content, research, knowledge transfer, and operational activities.

The University of Latvia (LU)’s Sustainable Development Policy has been developed by the Eco-Council of the University of Latvia. In order to promote sustainable development in accordance with the principles of environmental and social responsibility and governance, the LU Head of sustainable development has started work. LU is working on the development of a separate study course “Fundamentals of Sustainable Development”, which is planned as an open online course (MOOC), which will be available both to students at the University of Latvia and, in the future, also to employees and students at other universities. As part of the accreditation process, additions are being introduced to the study content of the University of Latvia, including the SDG perspective.

A working group on sustainability has been established at Riga Stradins University (RSU), coordinated by the head of the RSU Council Office. Priority Sustainable Development Goals have been set, and an annual report on progress in sustainability issues is prepared and published. The RSU Pedagogical Growth Centre carries out an analysis of the study process and quality improvement, among other things, also in relation to sustainability issues.

Sustainability is one of the values included in the Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies (LBTU) Development Strategy for 2023–2027, and the LBTU Sustainability Policy was also approved in 2025. The basic studies include a mandatory study course “Ecology and Environmental Protection”, which includes sustainability issues. The director of each study program is responsible for including SDGs in the relevant study programs.

3.2.2. Science for Sustainable Development

The question of whether “Sustainable Development” warrants its own sub-discipline within the social sciences receives mixed signals from experts. The informal survey of experts, particularly those in university administration, indicates a general rejection of the immediate need for such a new sub-discipline. It is important to note, however, that this specific issue was not a pre-existing agenda item for most universities or the experts consulted. With the exception of RSU, the opinions expressed were largely personal and not reflective of institutional stances.

The representative of the LU supported the creation of a separate sustainable development program to promote competitiveness; the RSU expert opposed such an approach, emphasizing that sustainability should be integrated into all sectors and not be considered a separate discipline. The RTU expert focused on the development of sustainability competencies in existing programs rather than the creation of a separate sub-discipline of sciences. LBTU analyzed this aspect from the perspective of potential market demand.

Opinions against the creation of a separate scientific sub-discipline are based on the interdisciplinary role of SD, a possible lack of demand for sustainable development specialists, existing synergies between different sectors, and the potential impact on achieving the SDGs.

An expert from the RSU administration said: “I really believe and am deeply convinced that sustainability is in every sector in every study course. That is why our decision is also there. We will offer separate courses on sustainability in Part C, where the subject is more concentrated. If indeed, if you want to understand what sustainability is and see it in different sectors and hear only about sustainability in a concentrated way, you have that opportunity, but sustainability must be in every course”.

The RTU expert’s personal opinion justification was as follows: “I think that the main thing is still its real impact. Will we reduce environmental degradation or social integrity degradation with this activity. Will we reduce threats to sustainability and how to achieve it? And at first glance, but I don’t know what the details would be for a branch of science on sustainable development, it doesn’t sound like a solution to me. My first reaction is rather negative, because I don’t see, I can’t imagine how this branch would achieve its real impact and transformation. It is necessary in the entire socio-economic system as a whole.”

The LU expert’s personal opinion allows not for the introduction of a new sub-branch of science, but for the introduction of a study program that would prepare sustainability specialists: “Yes, I think that definitely. And I think that the sooner the better, I believe that such a program should have existed a long time ago purely to promote competitiveness.”

LBTU also allows the possibility of creating a separate 1 to 1.5-year master’s program after, for example, a bachelor’s degree in agriculture.

Four out of five experts from among the academic staff, including professors who currently are or, in the previous stage of their careers, have been closely associated with the development of separate study courses, teaching and research in the field of the environment, pedagogy, economics and social sciences, and they support the need for a new sub-discipline of social sciences—sustainable development. The experts justify this need with several important aspects: changing priorities in social development, the growing demand for study content that would promote the understanding and implementation of sustainable development principles, as well as the shortage of scientists in this interdisciplinary field. The need for an institutional and strategic approach is emphasized, for example, by establishing an Institute of Sustainability that would coordinate research, studies, and public dialog on sustainable development issues. Such an institutional structure would allow for the systematic and purposeful advancement of sustainable development issues, rather than relying solely on the initiatives of individual researchers or enthusiasts. Experts point out that such an approach would also significantly contribute to the quality and efficiency of national sustainable development planning.

An expert from the academic environment, who expressed the opposite opinion, justified it by promoting excessive fragmentation and the duplication of existing research directions, thus limiting the scope of research. This expert believes that it is more effective to apply the sustainability approach in an interdisciplinary manner in existing sectors, rather than institutionalizing it as a separate field.

The surveyed public administration experts also expressed different opinions. Two out of three experts, representatives of the State Chancellery and the Latvian Science Council, agree that sustainability should be integrated into all existing disciplines rather than separated into a separate field, reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of sustainable development challenges. The expert from the Ministry of Education and Science, however, emphasized the potential benefits of establishing a special sub-sector of sciences to develop specialized experience and research capabilities. In general, public administration experts indicate that a new academic sub-sector should maintain close ties with other disciplines to avoid isolation.

Experts from the non-governmental sector were rather reluctant to assess the necessity of creating a new sub-sector of sciences. Those who nevertheless expressed opinions were divided into supporters and critics, justifying them with arguments already discussed by other experts.

3.3. Survey Insights

From 4 April to 22 April 2025, a comprehensive survey was conducted, gathering 433 interviews from a representative sample of both students and academic staff (Figure 4). Participants were asked: How do you think which of these goals contribute to sustainable development? Please mark all relevant answers.

The most important aspects are considered by respondents to be sustainable resource management and waste reduction (82%), the use of renewable energy and energy efficiency (79%), and reducing carbon emissions and combating climate change (70%). A medium level of importance is given to the promotion of health and well-being (68%), cooperation between businesses, organizations, and governments (67%), and transparent corporate governance (51%).

The results (Figure 4) show that the goals that received the most support were those related to health and well-being, quality education, and responsible consumption and production. A significant proportion of respondents also noted the importance of gender equality, reducing inequality, and affordable and clean energy. Less than half of respondents indicated goals related to industry, innovation, infrastructure, decent work, economic growth, and combating climate change.

The survey results presented in Figure 5 demonstrate the attitudes of different groups towards the need to create a new direction, “Sustainable Development”, within the social sciences in Latvia. The greatest support (two points) for this initiative comes from the administration of Latvian universities and international organizations, which indicates the strategic interest of these institutions in introducing the principles of sustainable development into the academic sphere.

The academic staff of universities and representatives of the public sector showed less confidence (one point) in the need for such a subdivision, which may reflect either an insufficient awareness of the potential benefits of the new specialization or concerns about the practical implementation of this idea.

These data highlight the importance of further discussion and detailed development of the concept of the new direction, taking into account the opinions of all stakeholders. The difference in assessments between the administration of the universities and the teaching staff indicates the need for more active involvement of the academic community in the decision-making process and the development of a unified approach to integrating sustainable development into educational programs.

Differences between disciplinary areas in the level of support for sustainability initiatives support hypothesis H1 about the shallowness of knowledge among a large part of the academic community, especially outside the social sciences and humanities. Higher support among respondents with stable habits (H2) indicates the importance of personal experience in shaping value attitudes. Weak integration of sustainable development topics into programs (average score 5.41) corresponds to hypothesis H5, and the imbalance in prioritizing environmental issues over social and economic aspects corresponds to hypothesis H6.

The data from Figure 6 demonstrate the characteristic features of the sample of respondents among students and teachers of Latvian universities.

The gender composition of the participants shows a predominance of women (261 respondents, 60.3%) over men (167 people, 38.6%), which may reflect both the general trend in Latvian higher education and the specifics of the studied disciplines. A small number of respondents (five people) refused to indicate their gender.

The age structure of the sample is represented mainly by young participants: the largest groups were respondents aged 18–20 (103 people) and 21–22 (104 people). The smallest group consisted of people over 45 years old (48 people). Master’s students (85 people) and doctoral students (20 people) are represented to a lesser extent. Among the teaching staff, 34 people participated.

In the quantitative survey, the majority of students and academic staff said they were at least partly familiar with the UN SDGs, with 67 per cent of respondents saying they had heard of these targets. Only 20% of respondents said they felt well-informed about the UN SDGs, while 33% said they had not heard of the targets at all.

A quantitative survey of students and academic staff shows a statistically significantly improved awareness of the UN Sustainable Development Goals among social science sectors, including educational science students and academic staff (77% compared to 67% across the sample). On the other hand, natural science students and academic staff, better than students and staff from other scientific sectors, rate their knowledge of sustainable development (SD as a whole, with no emphasis directly on UN SDGs) as good (53% compared to 36% for the whole sample). A significantly weaker knowledge of both sustainable development in general (good knowledge 20%) and UN SDGs (55% informed) is reported by medical and health science students.

In particular, students and staff were asked the following question regarding the contribution of the curriculum to sustainable development: Does your study program provide the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development? Please rate on a scale from 0, ”not provided at all “, to 10, “fully provided?

Figure 7 shows the distribution of student and staff responses to the question on the contribution of the curriculum to sustainable development, expressed as a percentage on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 10 (fully contributes). The average score is 5.41.

The survey results reveal a heterogeneous picture of the perception of the integration of SDGs into the educational process of Latvian universities. The average score of 5.41 on a seven-point scale reflects a moderate rather than a high level of integration.

Firstly, the analysis of the distribution of assessments shows that about 25% of respondents gave high assessments (7–9 points), indicating active integration of SDGs, while 30% gave assessments below 4, indicating minimal or no integration. The rest (~45%) chose intermediate values, which may indicate partial implementation of individual elements of sustainable development without a systemic approach.

Secondly, statistically significant differences were revealed by areas of study. Students in the humanities and social sciences assessed integration higher (M = 6.2) than students in engineering and technology (M = 4.8), p < 0.05. This may be due to the fact that humanities programs more often include courses related to social and environmental issues, while engineering programs focus on professionally specialized competencies. Similar results were found in the studies in Brazil [15] and in Spain [14], where the level of integration also depends on the disciplinary profile.

Third, when comparing faculty and student data, it was found that faculty often gave higher ratings (M = 5.9) compared to students (M = 5.2). This may reflect an institutional focus on the formal inclusion of SDG elements, which students do not always perceive as the actual content of courses.

The focus group data conducted as part of the study allows for a deeper interpretation of these quantitative indicators. Thematic coding [22] revealed four key clusters:

• Superficial implementation—sustainable development topics are mentioned in individual lectures but are not integrated into the curriculum as a whole.
• Lack of interdisciplinarity—the SDGs are considered in a narrow context (usually environmental) without any connection to economic and social aspects.
• Lack of practical examples—students note that most examples are taken from the international context and are not adapted to Latvian reality.
• Demand for active forms of learning—a significant proportion of focus group participants advocate the introduction of project assignments, inter-faculty seminars, and field research related to the SDGs.

These results are directly related to RQ1, as they show how representatives of different fields of knowledge describe the current situation. For RQ2, they provide an empirical basis for discussing the need for a separate discipline, “Sustainability”—most students and teachers believe that a separate course or compulsory module is needed to overcome the superficial approach. For RQ3, it is suggested to use more applied and localized forms of the presentation of material in continuing education programs.

Thus, a comprehensive analysis of mean values, distribution of assessments, interdisciplinary differences, and qualitative data allows us to move from descriptive statistics to substantive interpretation, increasing the analytical value of the study and creating a solid basis for recommendations.

The average score of 5.41 is lower than that recorded in similar studies in a number of EU countries [59], indicating the insufficient depth of integration of sustainable development into curricula (H5). Combined with the focus group results, this confirms hypothesis H4: despite the recognition of the importance of the topic, understanding of the practical mechanisms for implementation remains weak. Additionally, the data show that environmental issues are rated higher than socio-economic issues, which is consistent with H6.

The scale shows the following distribution of responses:

-

Low contribution (0–3 points): Between 6% and 7% of respondents rate the contribution as very low or minimal.

-

Medium contribution (4–6 points): 16% of respondents rate the contribution as medium (4 points), and 14% each rate it as 5 and 6 points, respectively, which represents a significant proportion of responses.

-

High contribution (7–10 points): 14% rate the contribution as 7 points, and 5% each rate it as 9 and 10 points, indicating that some respondents see the program making a significant or full contribution.

3.4. The Most Important Lessons from Focus Group Discussions

The concept of sustainable development in all discussion groups of students primarily refers to various aspects related to the environment. The level of knowledge about sustainable development is superficial.

Sustainable development from the students’ point of view is as follows:

• Efficiency, resource optimization, and environmentally friendly solutions;
• Knowledge which provides a broad perspective and practical application;
• Processes, introduction of new processes, development, and having a long-lasting impact.

In general, most students are insufficiently informed about sustainable development.

Group participants have mainly obtained information about sustainable development:

➢

As part of the study process—lectures, seminars, and also in secondary schools;

➢

In mass media, news portals;

➢

In social networks, apps, most often Instagram and TikTok accounts;

➢

On the websites of organizations, associations, and political groups.

Awareness about the UN Sustainable Development Goals and their understanding among students can be assessed as insufficient. Overall, students (except for those who have studied about these goals or have come across them during the study process) did not know about them.

The most significant UN SDGs from the students’ perspective are education, its accessibility (because it promotes understanding and the progress of mankind), gender equality (in the RSU student group), the eradication of hunger and the provision of clean water—because these are basic human needs—climate fields, and a reduction in production processes, as well as peace. All goals are significant, since they complement one another.

The majority of participants in all groups indicate that public understanding of sustainability issues is insufficient and superficial. The public as a whole is not sufficiently informed. Waste sorting, for example, is an area about which the public could be most informed.

Although sustainable development topics are included in the curricula, overall, the understanding of sustainability is insufficient even among social science students. Students who have sustainability issues as part of the study process have a better understanding of them.

Individual topics that concern sustainable development or environmental issues are included in several study courses; however, group participants lack thorough, comprehensive knowledge and understanding of what sustainable development implies and the range of topics it covers.

Overall, three students have completed the Environmental Protection course—one from each discussion group. During the course much was said about pollution, its types, and sustainable habits in everyday life were discussed.

Disadvantages of the course: it is an unattractive form of presentation (in the format of video lectures, 100% theoretical) and has minimal practical involvement for the students. If such a course were to be improved, it would be necessary for social science students. Its content should include practical tasks, seminars, and excursions. Its content should include the UN SDGs, examining them in depth. The information obtained in the Environmental Protection course should be up-to-date, engaging, and applicable.

In their daily lives, RSU and LU students widely observe sustainability principles. Sustainability principles most often observed by students in their daily lives are related to environmental care.

Sustainability principles most often observed by students in their daily lives are waste sorting and resource savings. Many university students have participated in environmental education initiatives or events. Most frequently, students are involved in clean-up days and environmental clean-up activities.

For the most part, participation in environmental events has not changed the students’ attitude. Their attitude had already changed before participating in the events, and it is precisely the change in attitude that influences and promotes student participation in the events. Their attitude changed due to the information gained and knowledge about sustainability. Participation in these events also influences and changes their attitude, allowing one to realize the scope and scale of the problem.

Overall, students think that it would be significant to master the Environmental Protection course so that students understand the impact of human actions on the environment. It would be important to create an understanding that everyone can do a lot to take care of the environment and not harm it. This course should also include the UN SDGs and examine them in depth, explaining why each of them is significant.

The information to be obtained in the Environmental Protection course should be up-to-date, engaging, and applicable. When introducing it, there has to be the active involvement of students in the learning process.

The low practical involvement of students in the course and the dominance of the environmental agenda confirm hypothesis H6 about the imbalance in the perception of various aspects of sustainable development. The lack of a systemic program covering all aspects of the SDGs, as well as the low awareness of students (H1), highlights the need to revise the course content. Participation in environmental activities, as shown by the data, does contribute to a better understanding of the principles of sustainable development (H3), but this effect is limited without the consolidation of knowledge in the educational process (H5).

It is recommended that the content of the Environmental Protection course includes practical tasks, seminars, and preferably also an excursion(s) visiting company(ies) and finding out how sustainability is realized in their operations.

3.5. An Example of the Implementation of SDGs in Educational Practice, Including the Retraining of Specialists

Study programs and modules that enable specialists to acquire the necessary skills in the field of analysis of technologies and equipment for compliance with environmental standards are being developed in various European countries. The following countries and educational institutions have experience in implementing modules in specialist training programs. In Spain, the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona, has a master’s program in environmental engineering, which contains the following modules: Life Cycle Analysis and Sustainability Assessment; Characterization, Management and Treatment of Air Pollution; Environmental Systems; Energy Efficiency and Decarbonization; Ecomaterials, Recycling, and Reuse; and Environmental Engineering Laboratory. These modules cover the life cycle assessment of equipment, pollution analysis, and the sustainability of technologies.

In Germany, the Technical University of Munich (TUM) in the Faculty of Engineering and Environmental Design studies the following disciplines: Environmental Sensing and Modeling; Materials Science and Testing; and Construction Chemistry. The program includes modules on environmental monitoring, material analysis, and environmental modeling.

In Cyprus, the Cyprus International University (CIU) offers a Bachelor of Science in Environmental Engineering, which includes modules such as Industrial Pollution Control; Wastewater Engineering Design; and Laboratory Applications in Environmental and Biotechnology. Students study industrial pollution control methods, wastewater treatment plant design, and laboratory analysis methods.

In Lithuania, the Kaunas University of Technology (KTU) offers a Master of Science in Environmental Engineering, which includes modules such as Methods of Environmental Analysis; Air Quality Engineering; Waste Management and Resource Recovery Technologies; and Modeling of Environmental Processes and Technologies. The program focuses on the analysis of environmental parameters, waste management, and the modeling of environmental processes.

In Norway, the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, offers a Master of Science in Industrial Ecology, which includes modules such as Life Cycle Assessment; Material Flow Analysis; and Environmental Input-Output Analysis. The program offers an interdisciplinary approach to assessing the environmental sustainability of technologies and equipment. In Italy, the University of Pavia offers a master’s degree in environmental engineering, which includes the following modules: Design of Wastewater and Drinking Water Treatment Plants; Valorization and Optimization of Residues from Water and Waste Treatment; and Sustainability Science in the Built Environment. The program covers the design of treatment plants and sustainable development in the built environment.

In Poland, the International European University (IEU) offers the program Environmental Sciences and Environmental Engineering, which features laboratory work using specialized equipment for analyzing environmental samples and modeling environmental processes. The program provides practical skills in the analysis and modeling of environmental processes. The listed programs only partially cover the problem of obtaining skills by specialists to analyze equipment and technologies for compliance with environmental standards, which makes this course unique and requires special attention, since, despite the availability of electronic services that allow for taking into account the carbon footprint of some components of economic activity, such as the ERA Equipment CO₂ Calculator, OEKO-TEX^® Impact Calculator, 2030 Calculator, and other similar software products, it is necessary to competently use these products in cooperation to obtain an objective picture of the potential use of equipment or technology.

As an example of the practical implementation of SDGs in the higher education system,

Table 2. Actions for the implementation of the educational module in the higher education system.

Direction of Activity	Description
Sector	Specialized education (basic training and retraining) for industrial engineering and technical workers.
Measure Name	Introducing training modules into specialist training programs on determining potential emissions when selecting equipment or technology.
Measure Description	Aligning professional training programs with modern requirements by supplementing them with modules that allow for analyzing the environmental impact of technologies/equipment using existing software.
GHG Emission Savings Justification	Skilled specialists will be able to adjust procurement and plan modernization to reduce CO2 and other pollutant emissions.
Measure Lifecycle	4 years for testing and refinement of modules; projected use for at least 25 years with active updating of GHG assessment software.
Main Gases Affecting GHG Emissions	CO2.
Activity Parameters for GHG Emission Calculations	Ukrainian engineering and technical staff (145,000 jobs) are responsible for equipment selection, contributing 280 kg CO2/job/year. A 1% annual reduction equals 406 tons of CO2/year.
GHG Emission Savings Calculation Methodology	Calculated based on CO2 emissions from industrial energy sources: electricity (0.5 kg/kWh), gas (0.2 kg/kWh), and diesel fuel (2.7 kg/liter).
Key Assumptions	Average annual energy resource consumption in Ukrainian industry: 52.27 billion kWh electricity, 11.9 billion m3 gas, and 4.54 million tons diesel fuel.
Measure Implementation Scope Parameters	Annual CO2 emissions from equipment in Ukrainian industry: 26.135 million tons (electricity), 14.587 million tons (gas), and 14.587 million tons (diesel fuel).
Required Input Data for Savings Calculation	280 kg CO2 per 1 engineering and technical worker’s job.
Potential Reduction in Other Environmental Aspects	Expected overall reduction in environmental impact, with a minimum 1% annual CO2 emission reduction per workplace, totaling 406 tons/year.
Estimated Measure Effectiveness	Development of 2 modules: 2400 EUR. At least 7500 specialists trained annually per module.
Measure Costs	0.016 EUR/specialist over 10 years (without updates). With annual updates (300 EUR/year), total cost over 10 years is 5400 EUR.
Cost per Emission Reduction, EUR/tCO2 eq.	0.59 EUR/tCO2 (without updates); 1.33 EUR/tCO2 (with updates) for the entire program period.
Potential for Measure Implementation	100% of basic and postgraduate training institutions.
Overall Change in GHG Emissions (t CO2 eq.)	Planned reduction: 2026—42 t/year, 2027—84 t/year, 2028—126 t/year, 2029—168 t/year, and 2030—210 t/year CO2.
Impact on Employment	Increased professional competencies of engineering and technical workers, leading to reduced unemployment.
Environmental Impact (DNSH)	Promotes a gradual reduction in harmful environmental impact through “soft” modernization.
Impact on GDP	Increased production efficiency from new technologies/equipment selected by skilled specialists will lead to GDP growth.
Impact on Capital Value of Resources	Capital cost increases as “soft” upgrades of technologies and equipment will consider potential for future upgrades.

provides a set of measures for the formation of educational modules aimed at developing skills in analyzing equipment and technologies from the point of view of reducing the carbon footprint for the higher and postgraduate education system.

As can be seen from the example given for Ukraine, the introduction of educational modules aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions does not require significant material costs but has a significant environmental effect. The presented module is of particular importance in the lifelong education system, since in the Sustainable Development Goal 4, this direction demonstrates the desire to improve the quality of life of people regardless of age.

It is useful not to create a separate study course but to show examples of good practice. Students understand the importance of the circular economy in achieving Sustainable Development Goals, but they also understand that the implementation of measures is ambiguous and long-term. The position of society is that a subdivision of social sciences—sustainable development—is not necessary in Latvia, and most experts do not see it as a contributing factor.

This paradigm is supported by the example of the mechanism for introducing knowledge about sustainable development into the modules of basic and postgraduate training for engineering and technical staff, which indicates the need for further research in the field of integrating the SDGs into educational courses.

4. Discussion

4.1. Integrated Analysis of Research Questions and Hypotheses Validation

In contrast to the traditional approach, which boils down the discussion of the results to listing similarities and differences with previous studies, this discussion seeks to build a holistic argument that connects the empirical data, research hypotheses, and existing scientific debates.

As seen in Figure 5, for RQ1, the survey (average score 5.41) and focus group results indicate that the integration of SDGs into the educational process of Latvian universities is predominantly fragmented, which is confirmed by the findings for Latin America [13] and Spain [18]. In both cases, institutional declarations of commitment to the SDGs are not always supported by the systematic integration of sustainable development topics into the curricula. For Latvia, this means that the strategic documents of universities need mechanisms to monitor the actual implementation and not just formally mention the goals.

The survey and interviews for RQ2 revealed a significant range of opinions on whether a new discipline on sustainable development should be created. This suggests that the academic community is not yet ready for such a step.

These findings are extremely important for Latvia. They show that, as in other EU countries [58] we are faced with a problem: institutional goals do not always coincide with the willingness of teachers to integrate new subjects. Therefore, before implementing anything, these organizational issues must first be resolved.

For RQ3, focus group data show that the concept of sustainable development in lifelong learning programs is practically not institutionalized. Students note a lack of local cases and practical assignments, which reduces the practical value of training. This is in line with the findings of Leal Filho et al. [13,17,62] on the key role of leadership and strategic planning in integrating SDGs into adult learning programs. International experience [14,19] demonstrates that successful, lifelong learning models in the field of sustainable development always include partnerships with local authorities, businesses, and NGOs.

An integrated analysis of all three RQs leads to several conclusions. First, the gap between institutional statements and the actual content of educational programs requires elimination through the development of a system of indicators and regular audit of the integration of SDGs [62]. Second, the formation of a new discipline or module on sustainable development should be accompanied by methodological support from teachers, ensuring inter-faculty interaction in order to avoid the isolation of the course within one direction. Third, lifelong learning programs can become an important channel for implementing the SDGs among adults if they are based on the local context, use active learning methods, and are integrated with community-based initiatives.

This study, therefore, contributes not only to the description of the current situation but also to the development of an analytical framework that connects the micro-level (courses and programs), the meso-level (institutional strategy), and the macro-level (national and international sustainable development policies). This framework allows for the formulation of recommendations that are relevant both for Latvia and for countries with a comparable higher education structure.

This study had a full-fledged argumentation logic, in which empirical data directly confirms or refutes the stated hypotheses. At the stage of problem setting, six hypotheses (H1–H6) were defined, each of which was based on a preliminary analysis of the literature and international practices for integrating SDGs into the educational process.

For example, H1 was about the superficial level of students’ and teachers’ knowledge of the principles of sustainable development and was tested using both quantitative and qualitative tools: the survey results (33% of participants had never heard of the SDGs) and focus group materials (the dominance of associations with ecology and the lack of understanding of social and economic components) allowed us to not only to confirm the hypothesis but also to specify the directions for educational interventions.

H2, suggesting that sustainable habits in everyday life are associated with a higher level of understanding of the SDGs, was confirmed by the data on the statistically significant correlation between the self-assessment of environmental behavior and the assessment of the importance of sustainable development. At the same time, interviews with experts showed that the formation of such habits in universities mainly occurs spontaneously without targeted educational modules.

H3 confirmed that participation in environmental education programs and events promotes the understanding of sustainable development principles and is supported by mixed data: respondents who participated in at least one such event, on average, rated their level of knowledge 1.3 points higher on a 10-point scale than those who did not participate. However, focus groups showed that the effect is only maintained with regular and varied participation, which emphasizes the need to systematize this practice.

H4, on the recognition of the importance of sustainable development with a lack of understanding of practical implementation, turned out to be the most difficult to interpret. The survey showed that 70% of participants consider the topic “very important”, but less than 40% were able to give specific examples for implementing SDG principles in their future profession.

H5 described the insufficient integration of sustainability topics in the curricula and was quantitatively confirmed by the average score of 5.41 on the question of providing the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainability. A breakdown by specialty showed that the least integrated SDG topics were in medical and engineering programs. This is consistent with the experts’ comments that integrating the SDGs requires the interdisciplinary adaptation of curricula, which universities currently lack the resources to implement.

H6 revealed a better understanding of the environmental component compared to other aspects of sustainability and was confirmed in focus groups where most students primarily understood “sustainable development” as Environmental Protection, waste sorting, and energy saving. The topics of social justice, gender equality, and sustainable economic growth were rarely mentioned.

Thus, the connection between hypotheses, methods, and results in this study is clearly traced, which allows us not only to confirm or refute each assumption but to also build a logical chain of argumentation for subsequent discussion. The use of both quantitative and qualitative data made it possible to identify hidden patterns—for example, the relationship between the frequency of participation in environmental events and a comprehensive understanding of the SDGs. These findings become the starting point for the recommendations formulated in the final part of the work.

4.2. Relationship of the Research to the Literature

The results of the study are in contrast to the results obtained by Soroochian, since this study covers more extensive hypotheses and proves the need to introduce sustainable development as a separate academic discipline (5. 41) [67]. In contrast to the results obtained by Vendrell-Herrero, universities are more open to the SDGs than enterprises, which makes it possible to implement transformations aimed at sustainable development in industries as a whole and not just in individual enterprises [68]. In support of Sanakuiev [69], Chkhaidze et al. [70], and Cucino et al. [71], the study shows that in the process of implementing the SDGs in higher education, problems arise similar to the processes of implementing other projects, which allows us to consider the transformation of higher education as a process that must be accompanied by adjustments depending on the results obtained at each stage [68,69,70,71]. In support of Sieriebriak and Kozhushko, it was found that the transformation of higher education is the basis for the formation of a legal, business, and economic environment aimed at sustainable development [72]. In support of the previously obtained research by Weiss et al., knowledge about the drivers and barriers in the implementation of a culture of sustainable development in higher education was considered and significantly expanded upon [73].

The results of the conducted research revealed that the transformation of the higher education system in the sphere of the implementation of Sustainable Development Goals received not only theoretical expansion but also practical implementation, which significantly enriched not only the educational process itself but also the general level of personnel training.

4.3. Social Importance

The results of the study showed that the broader community is not interested in scientific classifications, research, and methods for implementing Sustainable Development Goals. Society as a whole is interested in specific results, since the quality of life of the population directly depends on the degree of spread of sustainable development, and, currently, the level of knowledge about sustainable development is below average, which requires urgent measures to correct the current situation [74,75]. The study shows the components of both a theoretical approach to transforming the higher education system, taking into account the implementation of Sustainable Development Goals, and specific activities that allow us to obtain ready-made cases of successful practices with a description of the principles of implementation and quantitative characteristics of the results that will be of interest to society [11]. Universities are working on the issue of expanding sustainable habits. However, due to a lack of understanding of the importance, sustainable habits are not always formed in volumes that allow us to state the growth of sustainability of a particular community, which, for example, can include a university campus. For a more extensive inculcation of sustainable norms of behavior and habits, inter-university programs and events are required that will lead not only to a deeper understanding of the principles of sustainable development but also to behavioral diversification in the field of stereotypes about youth behavior, taking into account the SDGs.

It was revealed that the practical implementation of the SDGs in the higher education system does not have enough methodological base, which can be replenished in the process of continuing this study. When developing the existing methodological base for expanding the possibilities of implementing sustainable development in the higher education system, it is necessary to take into account the disproportions in the existing system of knowledge about sustainable development, namely the predominance of the group of environmental knowledge over other groups of knowledge in the system of sustainable development.

To obtain an effective system of interaction between the higher education system and the economy in the process of implementing the goals of sustainable development, this system should be planned and supported by appropriate financial and environmental indicators, as demonstrated in this study.

5. Conclusions

The integration of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals into study programs promotes a change in values. While SDG integration into higher education varies by region and institutional strategy, a clear global trend is visible: universities are increasingly aligning their curricula with the SDGs, especially through interdisciplinary programs, sustainability competencies, and pedagogical innovation. Latin America and Brazil, in particular, provide robust examples of structured implementation.

For the first research question (RQ1), the data show that representatives of different fields of knowledge perceive the integration of SDGs in a heterogeneous way: the humanities and social sciences demonstrate a higher level of inclusion (M = 6.2), while engineering and technology areas lag behind (M = 4.8). This indicates the need to adapt approaches to the integration of SDGs, taking into account the specifics of the disciplines.

Regarding the second question (RQ2), the creation of a new discipline “Sustainable Development” depends on the administration of universities and representatives of international organizations supporting this initiative, while some teachers and representatives of the public sector express doubts. These data allow us to conclude that successful implementation will require not only the development of teaching materials but also the involvement of skeptical stakeholders in the process of joint program design.

For the third question (RQ3), it was revealed that elements of sustainable development are either absent or episodic in continuing education programs. Students and teachers note the lack of localized cases and practice-oriented assignments. The results indicate the need to move from the declarative to the operational level of integration, develop monitoring indicators, and include sustainable development principles in all levels of the educational process—from individual disciplines to institutional strategy.

For future studies, it is important to expand the sample by including more representatives of natural sciences and technical fields, as well as to conduct a comparative analysis with other EU countries. The practical significance of the work is that the findings and recommendations can be used by the Ministry of Education and Science of Latvia, as well as university administrations to develop roadmaps for integrating SDGs into curricula and extracurricular activities. The results of the study revealed that the level of knowledge of students and other participants in the educational process in the Latvian higher education system is actually slightly above average. A survey of 433 students and staff (April 2025) showed that the average score for the contribution of study programs to sustainable development was 5.41 out of 10. Approximately 6% to 7% of respondents rated the contribution as very low (0–3 points), while 14% rated it as 7 points, and 5% each as 9 and 10 points. The general knowledge of students and society about sustainable development is superficial, often limited to ecology. These results indicate the need for systemic measures to increase the understanding of the importance of sustainable development in the process of forming sustainable habits. The study revealed mixed opinions among experts on the need to create a new sub-discipline of “Sustainable Development” in the social sciences: university management generally does not see the need for it, preferring integration into existing areas, while most teachers and lecturers advocate for the creation of such a discipline, citing the growing demand and shortage of specialists. However, universities are actively integrating the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into their programs, although students and society as a whole only have a superficial knowledge of sustainable development.

To deepen the knowledge of sustainable development, it is necessary not only to transform the current system of obtaining specialized education but to also improve the system of acquiring knowledge throughout life. The practical application of educational modules on reducing CO₂ emissions has shown high efficiency at low costs, which confirms the social significance of such initiatives. The study also emphasizes the need for an institutional approach to sustainable development in education and its key role in creating a favorable economic and legal environment. By analyzing examples of the implementation of SDGs, it was found that the implementation of educational modules on CO₂ emission reduction has low material costs (development of two modules is EUR 2400; cost per 1 ton of emission reduction—EUR 1.33, including updates) with a significant environmental effect. For example, the training of engineering and technical personnel in Ukraine (potential of 145,000 jobs) can lead to an annual reduction of CO₂ emissions by 406 tons, and the predicted reduction by 2030 will be 210 tons of CO₂/year. Currently, the higher education system in Latvia and other countries is faced with disproportions between what skills in the implementation of sustainable development principles are required from their graduates and what training in sustainable development they can provide to their students.

The solution to this problem, according to the author, which is based on the findings of this study, is a full-scale integration of knowledge about the goals of sustainable development into educational programs with the allocation of a mandatory set of sustainable competencies based on the results of studying each course in the system of higher and postgraduate education.