Indexing: Web of Science (ESCI), Scopus (CiteScore: 1.2)
Article 23 Dec 2025
Waleed Mugahed Al-Rahmi
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 329–352
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 329–352
12 Views6 Downloads
Article 23 Dec 2025
Ga-won Song, Eunhwa Yang and Cheol-Jae Yoon
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 299–328
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 299–328
12 Views6 Downloads
Article 4 Dec 2025
Aivars Spilbergs, Biruta Dzērve, Sandra Ozoliņa, Gunta Innuse-Breidaka, Tatjana Mavrenko, Laima Čable, Agnese Vincēviča, Biruta Sloka, Ginta Tora and Kristīne Liepiņa
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
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
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 285–298
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 285–298
339 Views50 Downloads
Article 26 Nov 2025
Kurt Orkun Aktaş, Ajda Zaim, Özlem Nur Aslantamer, Gözen Güner Aktaş and Hüseyin Emre Ilgın
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 256–284
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 256–284
337 Views63 Downloads
Article 29 Oct 2025
Barbara Marchetti, Guido Castelli and Francesco Corvaro
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 240–255
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 240–255
488 Views146 Downloads
Article 23 Oct 2025
Mehdi Hesam, Alfonso A. Vargas-Sánchez, Nima Moshiri Langroudi, Younes Saeedi Saraee and Zeynab Dargahi
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 216–239
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 216–239
964 Views177 Downloads
Review 17 Oct 2025
Jesús Huerta de Soto, Antonio Sánchez-Bayón and Philipp Bagus
This paper reviews the efficiency and sustainability of the management model during the COVID-19 crisis and beyond. There is a comparison between the centralized bureaucratic management versus the agile market alternative or spontaneous and flexible social
This paper reviews the efficiency and sustainability of the management model during the COVID-19 crisis and beyond. There is a comparison between the centralized bureaucratic management versus the agile market alternative or spontaneous and flexible social coordination. This is a study of Political Economy, Management, and Health Economics from the perspective of Austrian economics, with special attention to the Spanish case. The analysis is based on Mises theorem about the impossibility of economic calculation under centralized coactive systems, and other economic principles. In this context, we also pay attention to collateral problems of the centralized and coactive management. Finally, we propose a solution based on dynamic efficiency and the constitutions of wellbeing economics based on digitalization.
or
Access Full Article
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 205–215
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 4, pp. 205–215
909 Views215 Downloads
Article 8 Sep 2025
Larry Dwyer
Across the social sciences, wellbeing measures are being developed to cover a more comprehensive picture of factors contributing to quality of life. However, ongoing neglect of the wellbeing outcomes of tourism activity has restricted the relevance
Across the social sciences, wellbeing measures are being developed to cover a more comprehensive picture of factors contributing to quality of life. However, ongoing neglect of the wellbeing outcomes of tourism activity has restricted the relevance of much tourism research, practice and policymaking globally. These include failure to recognise human wellbeing as the primary aim of any industrial development, including tourism; adherence to a superficial conception of the nature of wellbeing and its measures; a failure to acknowledge that human wellbeing, beyond “needs”, is an essential component of sustainable development; tourism stakeholder adherence to a primarily static, rather than dynamic conception of sustainability; failure to distinguish between “weak” and “strong” sustainability; uncritical adoption of a pro-growth mindset that is steadily depleting and degrading the resources and the wellbeing of life on the planet; failure to incorporate wellbeing outcomes into tourism business mission statements; and failure to treat seriously the need for tourism degrowth at least for some sectors of the industry. To address such failures, tourism decisionmakers must incorporate stakeholder wellbeing outcomes into conceptual analysis, empirical research and policy assessment.
or
Access Full Article
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 3, pp. 192–204
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 3, pp. 192–204
1085 Views383 Downloads
Article 4 Sep 2025
Noha Emara, I-Ming Chiu and Sheila Warrick
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 3, pp. 174–191
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 3, pp. 174–191
1293 Views171 Downloads
Systematic Review 3 Jul 2025
Samson Toye Abiodun and Mehmet Recai Uygur
This research investigates the role of line managers in encouraging prosocial behavior that improves sustainability at the individual level in organizations. Based on a meta-analysis of the last ten years of research literature consisting of 15
This research investigates the role of line managers in encouraging prosocial behavior that improves sustainability at the individual level in organizations. Based on a meta-analysis of the last ten years of research literature consisting of 15 studies, it underlines the impact of transformational, servant, and inclusive leadership on the level of trust, emotional commitment, and shared purpose within the organization. Its emergent culture and internal climates strengthened leadership’s impact on fostering prosocial behavior. Benefits include enhanced employee well-being, improved productivity, and heightened engagement. This study highlights the emotionally responsive leadership and the appreciation of organizational culture needed to perpetuate prosocial behavior, offering actionable insights for leadership and organizational transformation. This study approaches sustainability from a social perspective, framing “individual sustainability” as the employee’s ongoing capacity for well-being and interpersonal engagement within the organization.
or
Access Full Article
Highlights of Sustainability
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 3, pp. 158–173
Volume 4 (2025), Issue 3, pp. 158–173
1807 Views310 Downloads
Journal Menu
Journal Contact
Highlights of Sustainability
Editorial Office
Highlights of Science
Avenida Madrid, 189-195, 3-3
08014 Barcelona, Spain
08014 Barcelona, Spain
Cathy Wang
Managing Editor