Ethical Imperialism Versus Ethical Relativism: The Case for Pluralism When Teaching SDGs to International Students

Abstract

Universities continue to offer international students opportunities to study abroad and gain an education in a highly ranked, world-recognised system, providing exposure to a broad cultural experience. While students cite that gaining exposure to a culturally different experience enhances study opportunities, there are also deeper considerations in globalised education. It is important to recognise that diverse classrooms may experience philosophical dichotomies. As business education across the world is increasingly using the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to underpin programmes that also address sustainability, these dichotomies cannot be ignored. This paper explores how educators must be aware of how complex culturally referenced norms are questioned when SDGs are incorporated into programmes. Using an action learning cycle of observation, action, and results, and drawing upon the example of teaching ethics and SDGs to large cohorts of international university students, we explain how transformative learning can occur without students feeling judged for past practices and experiences that are situated in culturally accepted norms that breach the SDGs. This paper thus provides practical ideas for teaching SDGs and includes the importance of understanding culturally referenced norms in light of the SDGs when teaching international students.

1. Introduction

Following the 2007 United Nations Global Compact, the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were introduced and formally adopted in 2015, articulating an ambitious agenda to eradicate poverty, protect the environment, and promote global peace and prosperity by 2030 [1]. In response, business schools who are signatories to the UN Principles for Responsible Management Education (UNPRME) embraced the challenge of advancing these goals, leading to the integration of SDGs into course curricula. This integration manifested both through dedicated SDG-focused courses and the broader incorporation of ethical considerations into tertiary business education. Ethical principles were embedded as foundational elements alongside traditional business concepts centred on shareholder value and financial returns. Recognising their role in shaping future business leaders, including managers, CEOs, and consultants, business schools sought to cultivate graduates who are attuned to sustainability imperatives, such as the triple bottom line and corporate social responsibility (CSR). Notably, CSR has recently been reframed as corporate responsibility (CR), reinforcing its centrality in contemporary business education. While some financially based courses continue to prioritise shareholder value, there is increasing evidence, as reported by academics, that the curricula are shifting towards stakeholder management and engagement as critical components of corporate strategy.

However, it would be an oversimplification to suggest that this transformation is without challenges. Of note are the present shifts towards decolonising the curriculum [2]. This process recognises that while businesses increasingly report on sustainability, they remain accountable to shareholders, and students may hold divergent perspectives on the relative importance of stakeholder interests versus shareholder returns. Furthermore, as these graduates enter the workforce, they may find themselves in organisations that continue to prioritise shareholder value above broader stakeholder considerations based on ‘white male’ norms. Today’s global village recognises this as an imperialistic view. Therefore, achieving systemic change requires a dynamic interplay among consumers, employees, shareholders, and management, with all contributing to a stakeholder-centric approach to value creation. This transition also necessitates shareholder buy-in, with an acceptance that short-term financial trade-offs may be required to achieve more sustainable, long-term outcomes that enhance the overall resilience and well-being of the broader economic and social system.

While education has a role to play in ensuring students and future managers have both the knowledge and agency to act, the UN’s lofty goal to reach this by 2030 appears to remain out of reach. Equipping future managers and shareholders to demand sustainable change is complex. The UN SDGs were largely determined through an industrialised and developed nation’s view of the world. The complexities of globalised businesses and a globalised student cohort must be both considered and examined. Accordingly, the tensions for students generally, and international students specifically, when studying business cannot be ignored. Complex cultural disparities must be considered and cannot be greenwashed by a cultural imperialistic view. At the same time, it is imperative for the health of these systems that culturally relativistic views are also challenged. This is supported by the calls for the curriculum to be decolonised and the recognition of a wider range of participatory voices.

While there are a large number of international students studying in Australia (up to ~750,000), these students predominantly come from mainland China and India, with Vietnam and Malaysia also among the top four nations represented [3]. This paper will explore the tensions for international students studying UN SDGs while abroad and the subsequent tensions if, and when, they return to their home countries, where the UN SDGs are still only a partial ideology. Specifically, we focus on the content taught as a point of tension, considering possible clashes in ideology or culturally accepted norms. Drawing from the experience of teaching large compulsory core classes studying SDGs and ethics, we consider the need for ethical pluralism to be foundational to embedding the SDGs into teaching so as to not forget or underplay the perils of ethical imperialism and the imposition of one’s own ethical standards as the only acceptable view. Additionally, the risk of ‘green washing’ or ‘wishing’ cannot be ignored. To support sustainable change, education must be inclusive and recognise the tensions that come with the competing and conflicting ideals of students and the academy.

Complexities such as religious beliefs that may be in conflict with equality, and economic reforms such as gender equity, do not consider the nature of wicked problems. Further, things that may have been culturally acceptable and prevalent in developing nations for decades may be ethically questionable. We acknowledge that while exposure to such considerations can be transformative, we also must recognise that this has the potential to unravel complex social systems and foundational norms, which may leave students unable to reconcile their past experience and cultural norms with their educational experience. As such, we suggest that, to teach the SDGs within management education, consideration must be given to our roles in supporting change for these student cohorts while creating safe learning environments that enable truly transformational change. In addition, we recognise that many students may repatriate upon conclusion of their studies, and this paradox between what is desired and what is occurring can be overwhelming and even alienating to their overall sense of belonging.

We argue, therefore, that it is important for educators to teach from an ethical pluralistic perspective, recognising while harming others is generally always considered ‘bad’, saying that our largely white industrialised norms are correct is too imperialistic and too far from some of the ethically relativistic practices these students have witnessed first-hand. Instead, by focusing on pluralistic methods of bringing about change that recognise fundamental human rights, the students’ broad development in educational settings can be supported, enabling change to occur in a manner that is both sustainable and ecological at a systems level. Doing so supports students’ overall well-being. It is, therefore, important to explore why the UN SDGs are being integrated into the curricula and how this has occurred more broadly. Importantly, teaching from an ethical pluralist perspective enables a move towards decolonising the curriculum in a manner that recognises the need for change while enabling safe learning spaces to explore what is possible without diluting the message of urgency.

2. Literature Review

In order to situate our stance, we studied the literature to synthesise recent findings on the integration of SDGs into business education within Australian universities. Key themes include the role of SDGs in shaping business curricula, pedagogical methodologies for SDG integration, student experiences (with attention to international cohorts), ethical considerations (ethical imperialism, relativism, and pluralism), and assessment strategies for sustainability competencies.

2.1. SDGs in Business Education Curricula

Business schools worldwide are increasingly aligning their curricula with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to prepare graduates to become responsible leaders equipped to tackle global challenges [4]. In Australia, universities have embraced the SDGs as a framework for guiding teaching and learning, seeing it as a ‘moral imperative’ to support these goals as part of their social mission [4]. Over the past five years, a growing body of the academic literature and government reports has examined how Australian business education is incorporating sustainability principles and the SDGs into its courses and programmes.

With the SDGs significantly influencing business education curricula in Australia, universities have been prompted to embed sustainability content into their programmes. Recent studies indicate that many Australian business schools now incorporate sustainability topics, which include SDGs, through dedicated courses, as well as by integrating SDG-related content into traditional business subjects [5]. In an exploratory study comparing Australian and Canadian institutions, it was found that both countries’ business schools include mandatory courses on sustainability and link sustainability concepts to other core business courses. This has led to a variety of degree offerings (e.g., majors, minors, or certificate programmes in sustainable business) and co-curricular programmes emphasising the relevance of SDGs [5].

Australian universities have also participated in global initiatives like the UN Principles for Responsible Management Education (UNPRME) to align their curricula with SDG values [4]. These efforts reflect an increasing commitment to positioning sustainability at the heart of business education, although implementation is sometimes uneven due to leadership support and resource variability [5]. Embedding the SDGs in curricula can occur at multiple levels. Some institutions concentrate on teaching the SDGs in flagship subjects, while others diffuse SDG content across numerous units. A case in point is Deakin University’s business school, which historically included corporate social responsibility (CSR) in core units and launched a project in 2016–2017 to make sustainability an “opt-out” rather than “opt-in” element in all core courses [6]. This systematic approach ensured that all business students, not only those electing sustainability electives, would engage with SDG issues through their coursework. Such integration across the core curriculum aligns with the recommendations in the literature that making SDG education mandatory will ensure that every student develops sustainability awareness and skills [5]. Other business schools, such as UNSW, have embedded SDGs at the undergraduate level but created a core compulsory unit for all post graduate students.

2.2. Teaching Methodologies for SDG Integration

In tandem with curriculum design, Australian educators have experimented with diverse teaching methodologies to effectively integrate the SDGs into business learning. A common thread in the recent literature is an emphasis on experiential and problem-based learning approaches [7]. Most teaching aligned with the SDGs tends to utilise real-world case studies, team-based projects, and other active learning techniques that connect theory to practical sustainability challenges. For instance, authentic learning has gained prominence in business programmes addressing the SDGs. Authentic learning involves engaging students with complex, real-world problems through methods such as role-playing exercises, simulations, industry projects, and case analyses [7]. This approach helps students develop lasting understanding and skills as they apply classroom knowledge to tangible sustainability issues.

One illustrative example is a capstone unit design described at an Australian university, where multiple pedagogical strategies centre on SDGs. In this model, students participate in case-based learning by working in groups on real corporate case studies related to specific SDGs [5]. In these cases, students must identify relevant environmental, social, or economic issues, evaluate them using SDG frameworks, and propose solutions, with a peer-review component fostering accountability.

2.3. Student Experiences and Perspectives

Student perspectives in Australian business programmes suggest growing enthusiasm for sustainability content, alongside unique challenges for international students. In general, today’s business students demonstrate concern for social and environmental issues and want more sustainability content in their degrees [8]. Surveys at institutions abroad (e.g., a 2024 survey at a Norwegian business school) found that a majority of students value responsible business practices and expect to engage with SDGs during their studies [9]. However, at the same time, many students have limited prior knowledge of the specifics of the SDGs; for example, less than one-quarter of a sample of MSc students could describe even a single SDG in concrete terms. While that finding comes from Europe, Australian educators report similar trends anecdotally—for example, high student interest but varying levels of baseline SDG literacy. This gap in specific knowledge reinforces the importance of explicit SDG education in the curriculum, rather than assuming students will pick up these concepts on their own. As faculty integrate SDG topics, they are also paying attention to student feedback to ensure the content is engaging and comprehensible [9].

Of interest is the international student cohorts in business programmes. Australian business programmes, in particular, need to be aware of experiences with SDG-focused education, as they can be shaped by cultural background and language. International cohorts often provide diverse perspectives and face distinct hurdles. On the one hand, students from countries acutely affected by sustainability issues may place greater importance on environmental and social responsibility themes [10]. This suggests that many international students arrive highly motivated to engage with sustainability, seeing it as directly relevant to their lives and future careers. Educators are, therefore, encouraged to adopt inclusive strategies to support international cohorts in SDG learning. One approach is scaffolding or providing additional resources or preliminary tutorials to bring students ‘up to speed’ on contextual knowledge and terminology [8]. Peer learning can also be leveraged, with mixed teams of domestic and international students allowing for knowledge-sharing. These international students may enrich classroom discussions with first-hand insights into global challenges, thereby enhancing learning for all students. On the other hand, international students, particularly those from non-English-speaking backgrounds or from different educational systems, can encounter difficulties when studying sustainability in an Australian context. Challenges such as language barriers and unfamiliarity with local case studies or cultural references are commonly noted [8]. In this interdisciplinary sustainability course case study, students from linguistically diverse backgrounds reported struggling at times with jargon and assumed knowledge, even as they valued the course content overall [8]. If not addressed, such barriers can impede full participation and learning for international students.

Educators are, therefore, encouraged to adopt inclusive strategies to support international cohorts in SDG learning. One approach is scaffolding by providing additional resources or preliminary tutorials to bring students up to speed on contextual knowledge and terminology. Abbonizio et al. [8] observe that, without deliberate support, students with non-cognate academic backgrounds or those for whom English is a second language “may therefore be disadvantaged in interdisciplinary programs if educators do not account for these challenges” [8] (p. 18).

Another suggestion is to leverage peer learning: mixed teams of domestic and international students allow for knowledge-sharing, with domestic students helping contextualise Australian business norms while international students contribute global perspectives. When well-facilitated, such collaboration can enhance intercultural competence for all participants. Crucially, faculty should avoid assuming homogeneity in the class; instead, acknowledging the diversity of experiences (urban vs. rural, Global North vs. Global South, etc.) among students can make SDG discussions more relatable. Global case studies [11] should be used, and examples purposely drawn from students’ home regions, so that international students see their own contexts represented and can speak as ‘semi-experts’ about familiar issues. This practice validates multiple viewpoints and avoids a purely Western-centric or imperialistic narrative in sustainability education.

2.4. Ethical Considerations: Imperialism, Relativism, and Pluralism

Integrating the SDGs into business curricula raises important ethical questions, especially given the diverse cultural norms of students in Australian universities. Educators must navigate between ethical imperialism—the imposition of one set of values as universally correct—and ethical relativism—the idea that moral standards are entirely culture-specific with no cross-cutting principles. Neither recognises the complexities. The UNSDGs themselves are a global framework, adopted by 193 countries, which suggests a universal set of development priorities. However, critics note that the SDGs largely reflect a Western or ‘Modernity’ worldview, emphasising scientific rationalism and liberal values [12]. If instructors present the SDGs uncritically as the sole blueprint for sustainable development, they risk perpetuating a form of ethical imperialism, implicitly conveying that local or Indigenous perspectives are less valid. This concern is especially salient for international students who might come from societies with different approaches to sustainability or development. They could perceive an unmodified SDG curriculum as dismissive of their cultural context.

On the flip side, an extreme ethical relativist stance, where educators avoid any judgement of practices (even those that undermine sustainability or human rights) because ‘every culture is different’, would undercut the normative power of the SDGs. The challenge is to find a balance that respects cultural diversity while upholding the global ethical principles embodied in sustainable development efforts. The concept of ethical pluralism is increasingly advocated in the literature as a way forward. Ethical pluralism encourages embracing multiple moral frameworks and fostering dialogue between them. Rather than treating the SDGs as a fixed doctrine, a pluralistic approach invites students to critically evaluate the goals through various cultural lenses and ethical theories. De Vries [12] argues that explicitly incorporating diverse worldviews and ethical systems enriches the interpretation and implementation of the SDGs. By engaging with the ‘real-world diversity’ of values and beliefs, students can develop greater respect, empathy, and willingness to cooperate across cultural differences. Classroom discussions under this paradigm might include, for example, examinations how concepts like equity or sustainability appear in Indigenous Australian knowledge systems alongside the UN’s definitions. This kind of dialogue helps reduce ethical imperialism because no single perspective is deemed absolute; at the same time, it avoids relativism by searching for common ground or ‘middle road’ solutions that are just and sustainable [12].

In practice, addressing ethical considerations may involve case studies that pose moral dilemmas in international business contexts, prompting students to confront where their own values come from. Educators often introduce frameworks from cross-cultural ethics or international business ethics, such as Donaldson and Dunfee’s [13] ethical algorithm or Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, to help students analyse scenarios without defaulting to knee-jerk relativism or imperialism. For instance, a class might debate a scenario involving a multinational operation imposing home-country environmental standards on overseas operations (raising questions of ethical imperialism) versus adopting the host country’s laxer standards (raising questions of relativism). Students are guided to critique both extremes and consider a principled yet culturally aware response (illustrating pluralism). The literature also highlights the importance of decolonising the curriculum: consciously including voices and case studies from the Global South and Indigenous communities to challenge the dominance of Western paradigms. In Australian business schools, this can mean integrating First Nations perspectives on ethical business and sustainability, which broadens students’ moral imagination and reduces the risk of one-size-fits-all solutions.

Clearly, the integration of SDGs into business education must be accompanied by reflexive teaching on ethics. Educators are encouraged to explicitly discuss concepts of ethical imperialism and relativism, making students aware of the biases and assumptions that can arise in global sustainability discourse. By cultivating an environment of ethical pluralism, where multiple viewpoints are examined and the merits of each are considered, Australian universities aim to produce graduates who can ethically lead in diverse, global contexts. Such graduates would be capable of advancing the SDGs in business in a way that is culturally sensitive and morally grounded.

3. Materials and Methodology

We engaged in critical reflective practice considering a large compulsory core course (approximately 4500 students per annum), where the student cohort is over 90% international with the majority of these students coming from mainland China. This aligns with the international student data showing that Chinese students are 29% of the total international student population (2015–2021), outnumbering the next largest population of international students by 66% [3]. As a Group of Eight University, ranked the number one Business School in Australia, the entrance requirements may be higher than other institutions. These students are undertaking a Master’s degree in Commerce and are often studying quantitative majors in their second or third language. We consider the experiences of teaching these students over a period of 10 years. It should also be noted that many of these students would be considered privileged. Over the period of engaging with these students, it was noted that few considered their personal responsibility in the complex nature of SDGs in the business world when they commenced this course. We explore the cohort, their context, and their dreams.

Action learning is a methodology frequently applied in business education. Business schools often teach action learning as a methodology to both engage students in problem-based learning [14,15,16] and to apply course concepts in a sense-making exercise. Action learning asks the participant or student to situate their experience as an exploration of why something worked or failed to work. The process of action learning allows the exploration to move from micro to macro through the various steps of reflection, analysis, and action-planning. In this manner, systemic review and reflections on practice occur in deeply personal and reflective ways. For this paper, the action learning framework was used as a methodology to both explore the process of teaching and reflect upon the student behaviours and utterances during the teaching process regarding the topic at hand.

To undertake action learning, the researcher is required to consider their actions throughout a deeply personal reflection plan and then act [16]. Action learning is well-suited to pedagogical development because it enables quick inductive results to be tested and refined in a recursive manner resembling that of the leaning organisation [17]. Rather than limiting exploration to a predefined problem, the researcher commits to reflecting on their actions thorough a structured framework with a view to what might also be considered a continuous improvement loop (after Argyris and Schön’s [18] double loop learning). Of particular importance is encouraging structured reflective practice while also enabling others to learn through action. The action learning cycle can be conducted after a single class or after a full term has been completed. It may be prompted by a feeling of elation or disappointment in an ad hoc, ex post facto manner. This is not to suggest it is unsystematic; rather, it is a methodology that is fit for purpose for teaching- or education-focused academics to capture and disseminate their practice while focusing on codifying their experiences. Critically, action learning must be seen and utilised in a systematic manner, with dedicated time and practice. Of note, action learning is about how the data has been collected; rather than collecting data in a direct and purposeful manner, such as via a survey or focus group, all comments, sentiments, or even the class energy in discussions can form a rich narrative upon which to reflect. This can include comments by students before, during, or after class, or even ad hoc comments via student feedback or unsolicited emails. These comments then form the basis of the reflective narrative that informs actions based on qualitative considerations.

3.1. The Cohort

While university cohorts may differ, there are a noted number of international students in many institutions across Australia and abroad in the UK, US, and Canada. These international students are of particular interest. The benefits for both the home and host countries are well-noted, with education being many countries’ top export, and the returning students’ value from a globalised perspective, as well as the world-class education offered in developed nations, are also important to note [19]. International student cohorts are noted to bring diverse perspectives and diversity into the classroom. The growth in international students between 2013 and 2019, and then again in 2025 post pandemic [20], has meant that universities have funding to support research activities and also can further engage in society’s biggest and most complex problems. While the host country benefits through the money exported into the economy, it also prepares young people for the world of business more generally, both locally and internationally. The international students are noted to suffer culture shock when studying aboard [21]. They may also be studying in English as a second (or even third or fourth) language. They may enrol in business- or commerce-focused degrees to gain international experience, careers abroad, and/or immigration to the host country of study. Wardrop and Gribble [22] note the strategic focus of many universities on reducing inequalities to achieve overall sustainability. They also raise issues of potential green-washing or -wishing.

3.2. Their Contexts

The context of the international student cannot be ignored. These students may have chosen their degree based on their previous studies, job opportunities, immigration possibilities, or the experience/safety offered by the university location. While culture shock from studying overseas is noted among these cohorts, they also note feeling isolated and often lack a sense of belonging as they settle into the reality of studying away from home [23]. They also are often placed in significantly different cultural environs. The complexity of differing cultural norms and mores may lead to them questioning previously long-held beliefs and widely accepted practices from their home countries. Concepts such as sustainable business practices, where a fair price and fair trade are seen as norms, may, in practice, be in opposition to what has been their lived experience to date. Care must be taken when making judgements on what is deemed inappropriate and/or unacceptable.

When embedding the UNSDGs into business teaching, long-held cultural or even religious beliefs are suddenly questioned and challenged. This may leave students adrift and questioning long-held values with links to familial behaviours. Examples of this include, but are not limited to, gender equality and reduced inequalities and include fundamentals such as the idea of quality education for all, not just the select few. Therefore, the inclusion of the UN SDGs into business teaching must consider the need to challenge embedded societal norms, along with cultural beliefs regarding gender, in safe ways as both necessary and required.

This is more complicated and complex for students who have the financial means to live and study internationally, as they may have themselves have embedded norms that see children providing household help as a good practice (providing work and some financial assistance) and therefore hold diverging beliefs regarding child labour. Other students may originate from locations where women’s rights are restricted, and, as a result, can feel caught between the ideals of the host country and their experiences in their home countries. This paradox is uncomfortable (as paradoxes are), and simple discussions in socialised classrooms can mean that certain utterances buried for fear of giving ‘air’ to ideas counter to the philosophical position of the content. These tensions cannot be ignored.

The placing of an intellectual ideal over experience or long-held beliefs is also complex. The systematic processes that embed disadvantages are often difficult to unpack. Even in organisations that value gender equality, there can be a struggle to change meetings to ensure inclusive timing or locations. Enabling access requires non-hostile architecture, and means every action and concept need to be explored. Simple tasks like using inclusive pronouns can challenge the very core of one’s beliefs and long-held values; however, failure to do so embeds practices that continue to impoverish other’s experiences.

Add to this the complexities of studying abroad. The differences in how studies are assessed and the study methods utilised can see students grappling to transition at levels that prevent them from engaging with more complex and philosophical debates such as ending world hunger.

3.3. Dreams

As educational offerings evolve, business schools need to be careful they are not green-washing or even instilling green-wishing into their students. While the students and the literature tell us that Gen Z care [24,25,26], they are also known to seek convenience and fear economic collapse [27]. They spend a lot of their time online and choose sustainable brands and eco-friendly products, while also showing a strong enthusiasm for cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, which is notoriously environmentally damaging [23]. Hussan [27] suggests they feel deflated and overwhelmed by climate change. Therefore, a disconnect between the desire to purchase ethically and prioritising price and convenience [27,28,29] is seen. It is these contradictions that cannot be ignored when teaching such a cohort.

Transition pedagogy considers how the first year of study is also about inspiring change [30]. Add to this the aspirational aspects of study, such as better opportunities for graduates in their working lives, with university graduates being known to earn more than those who do not attend [31]. At the same time, a growing consciousness among young people, stemming from increases in general education, means that students generally care about the planet and have concerns about equity. The real question pertains to the gap between people’s (general) intentions and actions. After all, action counts where it really matters. Students may feel disenfranchised as to what difference they can make. Hence, business education has a responsibility to inspire action, noting the difference one person can make. Whether through daily actions or how students interact with organisations, social change can be obtained.

To consider this cohort, we now turn to exploring, in situ, what is possible in an ethically pluralistic teaching environment.

4. Results

4.1. The Results: The Offering, the Tensions, and the Nature of Wicked Problems in Education

Teaching students the Principles of Responsible Management Education (PRME) is not without risks. Specifically, in this course, the underpinning of transformational pedagogy drives the desire to see students change in ways yet to be determined [32]. Transformation has been linked to feelings of uncertainty. However, transformative education has the power to create great change [32]. As noted, case studies highlighting wrongdoings often form the basis of SDG education, as the ethical failings of business in the past and the subsequent collapses of the early 2000s and the late 1980s could all provide a forewarning of problems. History has a way of repeating, and in doing so tells us that systems collapse is imminent. Thus, business education must prepare the leaders of the future, with societal considerations at the forefront of their ideologies. Hence, transformational pedagogy sets the scene well, enabling students to seek their own answers while being gently guided to reconsider what was a previously accepted norm.

For this compulsory course, including and embedding SDGs was supported by the Aristotelian ethics notion of “what is good for the hive is good for the bee” (attributed to Marcus Aurelius). However, caution must be heeded when presenting certain ideals as good vs. bad or better vs. worse. The view that ethical business is important commenced with those at the CAUX roundtable in 1986 and was tabled, leading to the development of ethical hyper-norms lead by US-centric views in 1994 [13]. Hence, the view of what an ethical business ‘should’ look like is not new; however, these ideas are relatively unspoken outside of academia.

4.1.1. Action Learning Cycle: Observation

When the nature of the UNSDGs’ lofty goals, which are largely underpinned by wicked problems, is considered, it is of little wonder that progress has been so slow. For example, gender equity has long left the world’s best minds puzzled. In a world that is currently questioning Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, there is no time to spare regarding this important agenda item. Women’s voices, rights, education, and more are under the microscope. International Women’s Day can be divisive, yet we must persist in seeking ways to ensure women’s rights are discussed at a global level, from fundamental human rights to equality in the boardroom and more. As educators, we can champion this. When considering responsible management education, we must do so. With this as our foundation, we then focused on implementation.

4.1.2. Action Learning Cycle: Action

In teaching this cohort, the teaching process aimed to achieve more than providing case studies as a form of exposure. Providing students with time to unpack the values of their past practices encouraged and enabled them to make small local changes for a global impact. Based on the premise that consumers can drive ground-up change [28], we asked every student to take one action aligned with a specific SDG (and, where possible, to more than one) each week. This simple request and public commitment, as suggested by Cialdini [33], led to a change in behaviour or reduced waste (for example, students would keep cups and water bottles). We then asked each person to consider their consumer habits, such as buying less food and more frequently reusing and recycling clothes, furniture, and more to reduce landfill and fast fashion. Over the course of 10 weeks, we saw up to a 97% reduction in disposable cups and bottles. Students self-reported, through discussions and in class polling, changes including less food waste and purchasing fewer fast fashion items. We encouraged the use of pronouns, regardless of how the student identified, noting that when everyone does something it both changes the discourse and normalises the behaviour. Every action was linked to a pluralistic notion of ethics. We watched students start to explore what was possible from the ground-up, not just the top-down. SDGs were everyone’s business.

While there may be more direct ways to teach SDGs, we wanted to provide time across the term for each student to deeply explore their own values and actions. It was also important to support them in traversing the complexities of these and look at how cultural differences can set foundations without imposing judgement. The job at hand was to open each student to the pluralistic possibility of how complex problems can live side-by-side when asking what humanity needs and what a good human would do (virtue ethics).

4.1.3. Action Learning Cycle: Results

Students also started to discuss how their own cultures, including religious beliefs and long-standing practices, were often at odds with the SDGs. This led to a level of discomfort, but while this was palpable, students appeared to talk and work their way through this. Importantly, students voluntarily reported changes in behaviours and attitudes in class, both to each other and to the teachers. They also spoke about these changes in their reflective practice assessments. Additionally, there was visible evidence of change. There were fewer cups, increased use of pronouns, and richer discussions. Consideration for the need for all to be educated was paramount, and this often extended into discussions surrounding gendered roles, or previously accepted ways of behaving being no longer acceptable. Transformation was evident in students’ self-reported ‘impact statements’ as we asked them to go beyond the changes, they had made to consider why they were important in their world. These statements comprised more than anecdotal comments in class, although these were frequently noted. In addition to the visual changes observed in the classroom and via platforms where pronouns are presented, students stopped to discuss their ‘awakenings’. Classes were not characterised by students leaving but more by students staying, often long after class was finished, sharing their own insights in deeply personal ways. It was this as a process, not the content, that indicated pluralism had been impactful.

4.1.4. Action Learning Cycle: Plan

With positive and tangible results, the focus on pluralism as an underpinning threshold concept became emmeshed with teaching the SDGs, highlighting to students why transformational learning (pedagogy) would often lead to more questions than answers, and why the premise of this is uncomfortable. Our focus is on exploring what is possible in a pluralistic view. This sets clear boundaries of what is acceptable and what is possible when enacting change. We also noted a change in how our students acted towards each other. While the students remained competitive, they also became more inclusive of each other, helping each other to succeed and supporting each other in the classroom (and this appeared to translate beyond the classroom upon observation).

5. Discussion

Discussion and a Way Forward: Pluralism as a Foundational Underpinning for a More Considered World

Teaching ethics and SDGs [1,4] requires recognition of the diversity of lived experiences that enter the classroom. Many of the fundamental ethical frameworks have their origins in normative moral obligation or greater-good ideals [12]. For students with various international lived experiences who are also far away from their home countries, learning ethics, there is an opportunity to encourage exploration of oneself and one’s actions [2,7,10,19]. To bring about change, students must feel empowered to be part of the solution in their own way [11,19]. By teaching and enabling students to take small daily actions that matter, they are empowered to explore previously taken-for-granted attitudes [5,9]. This pluralistic exploration enables them to honour their past and heritage while exploring cultural norms to support the initial process to achieve a more just and inclusive world [19]. While the tensions for international students are many [21], we must recognise that education plays a significant role in supporting changes to societal norms and mores [6]. The call to undertake small daily actions made change possible for these students without asking them to oppose their cultural norms [19]. Moving beyond case studies to action-based learning and planning embedded ways of making the SDGs possible at a micro-level [14,15,16]. It also enabled students to explore the complexities of ethical pluralism in a safe and supported way that became transformational [32].

Micro-level actions enabled students to see what organisations both could and should do to make the world more sustainable [22,23,24,25]. The students became a mobilising force for the changes they had determined and were driving as consumers and future employees [29]. It was not a case of ‘you must do this’, or ‘this is right’ but a case of exploring past and future actions towards a more responsible, sustainable, and just future for humanity [11]. It is not a case of ‘shaming’ people into action. If education about past wrongdoings was enough to create change, we would already live in a very different world [2]. To achieve change, educators need to move beyond looking at cases as a form of inoculation against wrongdoing to mobilise students both while they are studying and for their futures in their careers [19], encouraging micro-actions on a daily basis that prepare students to engage in the perhaps bigger and even more impactful actions they may take as employees and managers [5].

However, it is also important within reflective practice to note that change occurs for both students and teachers [14,15,16]. Reflection is impactful when it leads to insights and change [14]. As such, being a teacher using ethical pluralism requires consideration of our own perspectives and how they inform our teaching [15]. At the same time, business schools will continue to include and lead changes to ensure the SDGs’ lofty goals are at least progressed [5,22]. To do so will require educators to empower and encourage action, as knowledge alone is insufficient [6]. In addition, we must recognise that involving international students in the actions taken requires a pathway which is pluralistic and enables individual action to be a catalyst for change [22].

6. Conclusions

Pluralistic views recognise that some things are inherently ‘bad’ as they harm others’ human rights and liberties but also acknowledge where no harm is done then there is less cause to make change. The real challenge is experienced by educators continuing the debate about fundamental human rights and how cultural norms may erode these. These norms need to be challenged and changed. As educators, our role is to do so while recognising the paradoxes; culturally embedded norms must be challenged in ways that make change possible without destabilising students’ internal compasses. Doing so will lead to a world where people, at a minimum, are not hungry and live without fear, with the aim of ultimately creating and maintaining a world perfect harmony sees all people recognised as valuable, regardless of gender, and where the cost of progress is balanced against the cost to the environment.

Teaching the SDGs, particularly in management education, requires supporting change and creating safe learning environments. Many students may repatriate upon conclusion of their studies, and the paradox between what is desired and what is occurring can be overwhelming and even alienating to their overall sense of belonging; teaching from a pluralistic view can present the SDGs as a universally good idea that can be explored regardless of your cultural upbringing or beliefs.