Aivars Spilbergs, Biruta Dzērve, Sandra Ozoliņa, Gunta Innuse-Breidaka, Tatjana Mavrenko, Laima Čable, Agnese Vincēviča, Biruta Sloka, Ginta Tora and Kristīne Liepiņa

https://doi.org/10.54175/hsustain4040017

This study examines the primary risks associated with using generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in social science research and proposes a framework for higher education institutions to effectively manage these risks. As universities increasingly integrate GAI into ... Read More ... Read More This study examines the primary risks associated with using generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in social science research and proposes a framework for higher education institutions to effectively manage these risks. As universities increasingly integrate GAI into teaching, research, and administration, concerns around intellectual property, academic integrity, data privacy, and ethical use have intensified. This paper explores the adequacy of current legal frameworks in addressing these challenges, drawing on recent legal analyses and institutional practices. Survey data reveal statistically significant differences in perceptions of the need for GAI guidelines based on respondents’ age, education level, field of study, research experience, and geographic region. The findings underscore the urgency of developing adaptive, risk-based policies that support responsible integration of GAI while safeguarding academic standards. The study concludes by proposing guiding principles for a dynamic legal framework that balances innovation with accountability. These recommendations aim to support sustainable and ethical GAI adoption in higher education institutions and contribute to the broader discourse on responsible AI governance in academia. ... « or Access Full Article

Andreas Plesner, Allan P. Engsig-Karup and Hans True

https://doi.org/10.54175/hveh3010001

Manuel Rodeiro

https://doi.org/10.54175/hsustain3010003

Environmentalists have long claimed it is unjust for the state to prioritize economic interests over environmental ones by sacrificing ecosystem integrity and functioning to unsustainably expand the economy. Recently, mainstream environmentalists have moved to a more ... Read More ... Read More Environmentalists have long claimed it is unjust for the state to prioritize economic interests over environmental ones by sacrificing ecosystem integrity and functioning to unsustainably expand the economy. Recently, mainstream environmentalists have moved to a more conciliatory approach highlighting the common ground between environmental and economic goals. They today claim processes of economic growth and development can be made just if they become green. This paper explores the question: should states pursue “green growth”? Although some critics claim green growth is impossible, I maintain it is. I theorize three conditions that must be met for an instance of growth to be truly considered green. That a development project is green, however, does not automatically ensure it is just. Justice considerations remain in adjudicating the competing interests of different groups of stakeholders. I then examine four reasonable approaches to resolving controversies over the pursuit of green growth: cost-benefit analysis, sufficientarianism, democracy, and pluralism. I conclude a liberal pluralist form of decision-making is best for ensuring fairness. ... « or Access Full Article

Mouna Samaali, El-Hassane Aglzim, Xavier Dessertenne and Patrick Dubreuille

https://doi.org/10.54175/hveh1020005

Michele Sisto and Angela Cresta

https://doi.org/10.54175/hsustain2010003