The 2016 ProSPER.Net Leadership Programme was held in Labuan Island and Beaufort, Sabah, Malaysia. The Programme included workshops, plenary sessions, and fieldwork around the topics of local sustainable development challenges in the region. The main goals of the Programme were to identify local leadership opportunities for sustainable development and to link local and national sustainable development projects to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Paris Climate Treaty, and the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction.

1. Leadership For Sustainable Development:
A Humble Reflection While in “London Sojourn”

2. Few question to start with…
1. Why SD? (Simon Sinek)
2. Is there a specific content/course/program to develop a leader/leadership for
SD?
3. If yes – is it process or the outcome?
4. What kind of program may produce/create/nurture leaders for SD?
5. Leading vs. managing for SD
6. Are leaders born or made?
Reflection 1

3. The journeys that shaped and moulded…
• A Kampong Boy grown up in poverty settlement area (FELDA) – A Showcase of
Sustainable Village
• Head of School, Secondary Science School, Raub, Pahang
• President of Human Science and Revealed Knowledge Students Society, International
Islamic University
• Deputy President of ASEAN Student Society during graduate studies at IUJ – with 200
students from 40 different countries at Urasa – a remote area in Japan
• Ph.D in Political Economy from Waseda University, Tokyo – thesis - Japanese
Technology Transfer to Malaysia - and lived in Tokyo hi-tech Japan city but indulged in
sakura viewing
Reflection 2

4. • Post-doc at UN University - a year of close interaction with of 10 fellows – physicist,
biologist, economist, geographer, educationist, chemist with regular seminar, conference
and meeting on SD at national and international level
• Regional Centre of Expertise on ESD – 7 pioneering Centres for DESD
• Centre for Global Sustainability Studies – championing USM sustainability agenda
• The MAD conferences in between – Knowledge Dialogue with 5 Noble Laureates
• Centre for Leadership Training, AKEPT, Ministry of Higher Education – pushing and
mainstreaming SD as part of Ministry’s agenda
• Currently at Education Malaysia, London – con”fusion” of the above – pushing towards
nation building while abroad and questioning the Oxbridge Leadership Model?
“The journey of ….learning and unlearning and relearning”
Reflection 2..cont

5. Fundamental answers found
1. The missing link between formal education and real life – “distorted/misleading”
education
2. The continuous detachment between sciences and social sciences (and humanities) -
leading to sustainability science
3. The diverse culture – developed vs developing vs less developing “superficial division”
(created by global organisation adopting “universal values” as standard of
references/benchmark)
4. The choice of BAU (business as usual) vs Transformational Leadership (vs.
Transactional Leadership) – just be MAD
5. The need to contextualise and build from local values
“PASSION, CONVICTION, FULL SUBMISSION TO THE MISSION OF SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT, SUSTAINABILITY AND SUSTAINABILTY SCIENCE”
Reflection 3

6. If there are fundamental criteria for leadership for SD…
• Shifting KAVS (knowledge, attitude, values and skills) - from niche to default
KAVS
• System thinking (inter, multi and transdisciplinary) * Notes 5 and 6
• Multitasking (Jack of all trade Master of SD)
• T-shaped personality (against hyper specialisation)
• SD as heartware (the SOUL – S-ustainability O-f U-niverse and L-ife)
Reflection 4

7. What should be the approach of nurturing sustainability leaders?
“teaching disciplinary knowledge with interdisciplinary competencies
and transdisciplinary perspective”

8. Hardware
(technologies etc.)
Software (KAVS)
HEARTware (soul)
Reflection 4…cont

9. SYSTEM THINKING
Reflection 5
ACADEMIC
POLICY MAKERNGO
INDUSTRIES
The challenges of
COORDINATION and
CONNECTIVISM

10. COLLABORATORS OF RCE PENANG
•Penang Environmental Working Group (PEWOG)
•Friends of the Earth (Penang)
•Don & Mylene Theseira (Individual)
•World Wide Fund For Nature Malaysia (WWF)
•Taiping Peace Initiative (TPI)
•Socio-Economic & Environmental Research
Institute (SERI)
•Water Watch Penang (WWP)
•Malaysian Nature Society, Penang Branch (MNS)
•Association For Science And Mathematics
Education Penang (ASMEP)
•Regional Centre For Education in Science And
Mathematic (SEAMEO RECSAM

11. Primary Schools
Secondary Schools
Penang Heritage Trust, Consumer
Association of Penang, Third World
Networks, Malaysian Nature Society,
Social Economic Research Institute,
Community based NGOs. Media and
Local Business Community
Ministry of Higher Education,
Ministry of Education, Ministry
of Natural Resource and
Environment
USM’s Research Centres,
Fisheries Research, Penang
Botanical Garden, Penang
National Park, Taiping Peace
Initiative, Matang Mangrove
Reserve
Polytechnic Seberang Perai,
Community College Kepala
Batas, Community College
Bayan Lepas, UiTM , Teachers
Training Colleges, RECSAM
Private Colleges, Other
Universities
State Government of Penang and Its
Agencies, Penang Municipal Council,
Seberang Perai Municipal Council,
Penang Development Corporation,
Penang Regional Development Authority
Formal Education Non-formal Education

12. The journey begins …..August 2005
With other 6 RCE pioneers

13. RCE Penang Council Consultative Meeting

14. Sustainable Penang Initiatives II Roundtable Workshop
“Penang as Sustainable Living Space”

15. 60 participants from 10 NGOs
Prioritizations of
Environmental Issues

16. ESD Training and Planning Workshop –
Faculty and Community Leaders

17. Training workshop with Penang High School Teacher (UNESCO grant)

18. EfSD for the kids – carried out by USM EfSD
messengers

19. UNIVERSITY-COMMUNITY PROJECT

20. Transition of knowledge development towards
Transdisciplinary knowledge
History Policy sciences
Complexity
researchSociology
Ecology
Action
Grounded
theory
consultancy
Applied
Participatory
MODE 3
Stronger
emphasis on
community as
critical helix
Notes 6

21. • Mode 1 of knowledge production refers primarily to basic university research (basic research performed by the
higher education sector) that is being organized in a disciplinary structure.
• Mode 2 focuses on knowledge application and a knowledge-based problem-solving that involves the following
principles: “knowledge produced in the context of application”; “transdisciplinarity”; “heterogeneity and
organizational diversity”; “social accountability and reflexivity”; and “quality control” (Gibbons et al. 1994 ; see
also Nowotny et al. 2001, 2003, 2006 (triple helix)
• Mode 3 Knowledge Production System architecture focuses on and leverages higher order learning processes and
dynamics that allow for both top-down government, university, and industry policies and practices and bottom-
up civil society and grassroots movements initiatives and priorities to interact and engage with each other toward
a more intelligent, effective, and efficient synthesis. (quadruple helix)

22. “Mode 3 advocates for higher-order learning
processes and dynamics that allow for both “top-
down” government, university, and industry policies
and practices, and “bottom-up” civil society and
grassroots movements initiatives and priorities to
interact and engage with each other toward a more
intelligent, effective, and efficient synthesis.”
“Mode 3 ensures a tighter and more robust coupling
of a vision with reality and helps reify the socio-
economic and socio-political being. (Carayannis and
Campbell, 2011)
Reflection 6…cont

23. Mathematics of Un/Sustainable Development
and Leadership Style
Math formula Types of Interaction
among 3 SD pillar
(environment,
economic, social)
Leadership Style State of SD
1 + 1 + 1 = 3 Silo Business as Usual Status quo =
Unsustainable
1 + 1 + 1 = 2.5 Compromise Transaction Unsustainable
1 + 1 + 1 = less than 3 Defensive Contention Unsustainable
1 + 1 + 1 = -1, -3, -10 Hostility Contention Very unsustainable
1 + 1 + 1 = 3, 10, 100 Synergistic Transformational Sustainable
Reflection 7

24. Mathematics of Un/Sustainable Development
and Stakeholders’ Participation
Math formula Types of Interaction
among Stakeholders
Dominancy of
stakeholder
Outcome on
Development
1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4 Silo Industry, Government
Academic, Community
Status quo
1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 3.5 Compromise - - community
+ + industry
Industrial driven dev
1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = less than 4 Defensive + + academic Unrealistic solution
1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = -1, -4, - 10 Hostility + + government
bureaucracy
Slow development
1 + 1 + 1 = 3, 10, 100 Synergistic Fusion One common interest
Reflection 7…cont

25. The bigger picture challenges:
 The antagonism between West and ROW (rest of the world) (POLEMIC)
 ‘Global’ (west?) knowledge vs. local knowledge and wisdom (POLEMIC)
 International pledge and declaration vs. small local practical real saving the planet
action (POLEMIC AND SOLUTION)
 University paradox in redefining the knowledge paradigm, teaching and learning,
research and development and community engagement (SOLUTION)
 Science vs. Social science vs. sustainability science (approach) (SOLUTION)
Reflection 8

26. Final thoughts
• Institutionalisation of:
• capacity building program
• incentives structure
• Collective approach in addressing the resistance to change
• Conversational approach instead of confrontational
• Appreciating diversities in approach, contents and understanding

27. LEADERS ARE BORN
AND MADE
Are leaders BORN or MADE?

28. Leaders are made more by the unexpected than by the usual routine……

29. Died 1978