Universities can be considered a key element in promoting sustainable development through education, research, innovation and social leadership. In this educational-focused article, we discuss the need to provide students with the knowledge and skills needed to understand and address sustainability challenges. To do this, it will be very important to introduce sustainability – and also other related concepts – in university curriculums and, in particular, in Economic and Business courses, where future business leaders are currently being formed. For this reason, the article presented has a double objective, on the one hand, to answer this question: what are we teaching about this topic in universities and, in particular, in Economics and Business courses; and on the other hand: how are we integrating it into curriculum. The article reviews over time the main subjects that have covered this topic – from business ethics to ESG criteria, to CSR – and proposes different strategies to integrate this content into the curriculum.

The social responsibility of companies and organizations towards their stakeholders and towards the planet has been evolving and changing, as has geopolitics and the global economy based on the globalization of markets and capital. This article takes a prospective approach and presents the main challenges that companies and society currently face and the trends that companies and international think tanks are developing to face these challenges. Similarly, the European Union, with its taxonomy, requires companies a greater comply with the premises of the Green Deal. Civil society is also a key element when it comes to demanding more committed companies that can generate sustainable responses to global and local challenges. This involves having an education system that produces more aware and empowered citizens, capable of demanding companies to align their activities with sustainable development.

The confluence of different factors is creating a closer approach of enterprises to society. On the one hand, the business’s need to establish permanent channels with consumers requires companies to become open systems and, with that, the assumption of civic obligations towards society. On the other hand, the Earth’s crazy situation is generating a general danger alarm that urgently appeals to social agents’ collaboration and commitment, especially productive organizations.

To achieve this, powerful approaches such as social responsibility and sustainability are being implemented, created to generate a productive transition that is beneficial for everyone, society, companies and the environment. The action plan is already in place, with a pact approved by the UN General Assembly (2030 Agenda), with a consistent business governance pattern (ESG) and with realistic objectives (SDGs). This orderly and firm tour allows us to match the conservation of the planet, with the quality of life and social well-being of its people.

As States point out in the resolution of the 2030 Agenda, “we are determined to end poverty and hunger around the world by 2030, to combat inequalities within and among countries, to build peaceful, fair and inclusive societies, to protect human rights and promote gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls, and to ensure a lasting protection of the planet and its natural resources”.

The main objective is to implement a new sustainable society that solves the serious problems that industrial society has brought us to. A fair and supportive community society that considers the health and concordance of humanity and its living environment. Ultimately, a society that uses freedom for people’s growth, equality to recognize each other as peers, and fraternity to care for each other.

The acceleration of climate change we are seeing is triggering one of the deepest and most threatening global crises to ensure a fair and livable planet for the more than 8 billion inhabitants and for the biosphere. The climate crisis is so significant and severe that climate emergency is already being discussed. We are in a global context in which the trespassing of planetary boundaries, particularly those related to climate emergency, has clear effects on our daily lives, especially in an uneven and unfair manner. Organizations, across their diversity, cannot circumvent the necessary debate on how they must adapt to the new climate emergency context and how they can contribute effectively to mitigation and adaptation, without falling into greenwashing. New metrics, beyond current green certifications, that can capture and incentivize the decarbonization and ecological transition of organizations will need to be found. Obviously, this requires a profound change in the continuous economic growth logic that transcends the individual wills of organizations and requires profound social, cultural and political-economic change in the priorities we have as a society.

We start with the Brundtland Report’s (1988) definition of the concept of sustainability to analyze key aspects and look at the essence of human nature. We realize that the way to meet people’s needs is key to optimizing their quality of life, integrating us back into nature and achieving the seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The strategy that must be followed is the cooperation between the interested parties by bringing the places of residence, work and consumption closer to being able to have meeting spaces in the proximity of neighborhoods, but also within companies, public administrations and non-profit entities. Given that the purpose is to meet basic human needs in the consumer society we have built, we identify the quality of life indicators that allow us to analyze the sustainability of organizations and products throughout their lifecycle. The application of the quality of life indicators can be essential in our individual and collective decisions of everyday purchasing, both public and private, to raise awareness and to build a strong path towards sustainability. It will also help us design sustainable public policies, including public procurement.

In a socioeconomic situation like our current one, it is difficult to understand the future of organizations without considering social responsibility. Looking at this future with a certain guarantee of success requires looking back to learn and gather drive. This article presents the evolution of social responsibility over the last twenty-five years, analyzing international and national initiatives, legislative instruments and self-regulatory framework, progress in commitment and level of involvement of organizations, as well as the consequences of Covid-19. Important progress is noted, with organizations that are increasingly conscious of the impact of their activities, making socially responsible decisions beyond their legal obligations. However, there is still much to do in the management of a social responsibility that guarantees sustainability and sustainable development in the medium and long term.

Coinciding with the twenty-fifth anniversary celebration of the UOC, the following article aims to review the main transformations that the basic areas of business have undergone over the past two and a half decades. For this, we have enjoyed the participation of five female and five male professors in the studies of economy and business, who have given us some broad strokes on some of the main changes during this period and the challenges still to come. These topics are: leadership, decision-making, internationalization, digitalization, strategy, adaptation to change, ethics, corporate social responsibility, diversity, inclusion, business modal innovation, and finance.

The objective of this article is to analyze the evolution of logistics in three different contexts: past, present and future. By looking at where the concept of logistics began and the point it has now reached, we can understand and better anticipate the trends and logistical challenges of the future. We live in an era where digitalization is increasing rapidly, which enables us to obtain more data, more transparency, a greater capacity for anticipating change and a greater automatization of processes. In addition, the health crisis of COVID-19 has only accelerated the use of electronic devices and online tools, as shown by the increasing figures in e-commerce over the last two years. However, the pandemic has also shone a spotlight on the need to rethink the current logistical model. Aspects such as globalization, sustainability, resilience or security throughout the supply chain are in question. In this changing context, the skills and competencies of logistics professionals will undoubtedly decide future success.

In 2015, the UN General Assembly approved the 2030 Agenda. There was an agreement on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the purpose of which was to reverse development patterns around the planet. Cities, as population agglomerations and production centres, are directly challenged actors. The growth patterns followed in recent years show a clear explosion of the urban fabric, and an unprecedented land occupancy. So much so that certain degraded urban sectors are being abandoned to the detriment of new construction sectors located in the urban periphery. The connotations of this phenomenon are multiple, but it is important to focus on the unsustainability of an urban growth model based on urban development, land occupancy and transport infrastructures that have not been planned in coordination with these urban projects. Based on the foregoing, this article reflects on the externalities of this phenomenon, and raises some reflections to help transition towards a more sustainable city model.

Circular economy is an alternative to the linear “extract-use-dispose” economic model, based on the ideas of recycling, repair and reuse. The circular economy promises to turn the trade-offs of unsustainable economic growth in a limited planet into synergies that make sustainability a growth strategy. The knowledge base of the circular economy, however, is highly divided and characterised by controversy over the very possibility of circularity itself. This paper asks why such a controversial idea has gained so much traction in public policies, at the EU level and at lower scales, such as the urban level. Although the focus on win-win solutions was understandable in the context in which the first circular economy policies were formulated in the EU, in the current context this policy framing may obfuscate more than it enlightens by rendering debates about complex sustainability issues technical and apolitical.