Search

This research note illuminates the ascent of so-called “learning pods”, a concept and phenomenon with close connections to civil society that rose to prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic. We begin by characterizing and positioning learning pods in the diverse U.S. K-12 educational landscape. Next, participation in, and intent to form/join, learning pods are depicted by reporting on secondary data from a population poll among a national sample of U.S. adults since the start of the 2020 academic school year to December 2021. The second half of the research note discusses how learning pods can help garner useful insights to existing nonprofit research and theory.

The target of zero emissions sets a new standard for industry and industrial policy. Industrial policy in the twenty-first century must aim to achieve zero emissions in the energy and emissions intensive industries. Sectors such as steel, cement, and chemicals have so far largely been sheltered from the effects of climate policy. A major shift is needed, from contemporary industrial policy that mainly protects industry to policy strategies that transform the industry. For this purpose, we draw on a wide range of literatures including engineering, economics, policy, governance, and innovation studies to propose a comprehensive industrial policy framework. The policy framework relies on six pillars: directionality, knowledge creation and innovation, creating and reshaping markets, building capacity for governance and change, international coherence, and sensitivity to socio-economic implications of phase-outs. Complementary solutions relying on technological, organizational, and behavioural change must be pursued in parallel and throughout whole value chains. Current policy is limited to supporting mainly some options, e.g. energy efficiency and recycling, with some regions also adopting carbon pricing, although most often exempting the energy and emissions intensive industries. An extended range of options, such as demand management, materials efficiency, and electrification, must also be pursued to reach zero emissions. New policy research and evaluation approaches are needed to support and assess progress as these industries have hitherto largely been overlooked in domestic climate policy as well as international negotiations. Key policy insights Energy and emission intensive industries can no longer be complacent about the necessity of zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Zero emissions require profound technology and organizational changes across whole material value chains, from primary production to reduced demand, recycling and end-of-life of metals, cement, plastics, and other materials. New climate and industrial policies are necessary to transform basic materials industries, which are so far relatively sheltered from climate mitigation. It is important to complement technology R&D with the reshaping of markets and strengthened governance capacities in this emerging policy domain. Industrial transformation can be expected to take centre stage in future international climate policy and negotiations.

Many sport for development and peace organizations operate with limited resources and in low-resource environments. While resource constraints impede some organizations, others demonstrate an adaptive behavior, known as bricolage, to repurpose and flexibly engage existing resources to accomplish their goals. In this study, we ask what distinguishes organizations that engage in bricolage from others. We specifically test whether sport for development and peace nonprofits that engage in bricolage are more likely to engage in social innovation, and we test those findings against organizational size, age, and characteristics of organizations' operating environments. Using data from an international sample of 161 sport for development and peace nonprofits, we find that organizations employing greater levels of bricolage also demonstrate significantly higher levels of innovation, except for process-focused innovations, which are significantly associated with environmental turbulence. Organizational size itself does not appear to influence the use of bricolage or the relationship between bricolage and innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]