Anger and disappointment over delay and abandonment of sustainability projects

For Mariecke van der Glas, who worked as programme manager for sustainability for four years, the decision not to renew her contract came as an ‘unpleasant surprise’. Earlier this year, she had been given the green light to recruit an additional team member, and she had – partly during her holiday – finalised an analysis of the outcomes from last year’s sustainability dialogues. These were intended as input for the new strategy. Van der Glas and her colleague left their positions on 1 October. The new employee will take over part of the duties as interim coordinator.

Van der Glas was aware that the university faced financial challenges and that her temporary contract was due to expire after the summer. However, after EUR declared a climate emergency in 2023 and achieved third place in the ranking of the most sustainable higher education institutions, she had not expected EUR would not extend the sustainability programme.

The sustainability programme was struck off ‘with a single stroke of the pen’, alongside all other temporary programmes under the strategy office, during a June meeting, says Van der Glas. “Just like that, and we were barely thanked”, she says. “There was no substantive discussion. Since sustainability is to be a core theme in the new strategy, I hadn’t seen this coming. But the message was: no exceptions will be made.”

The decision also surprised members of the Sustainability Liaison Network, which includes representatives from each faculty and service department. Sven Hogervorst, strategic HR adviser and acting chair of the network, wrote a letter on their behalf to the Executive Board: “Furthermore, it is disheartening to see accolades given to the executive board for the Sustainability Award, with photos prominently displayed, while the individuals who have done the actual work with heart and soul for the past year(s) receive no recognition and just received the message that their contracts are not ensured. This lack of appreciation and neglect for the real contributors to our university’s success is unacceptable”, the letter stated. It was co-signed by professor Derk Loorbach (director of DRIFT) and two students from the Sustainability Hub.

Beyond their disappointment over the departure of the two staff members, the letter’s authors expressed concern about the overall lack of progress and clarity in the university’s sustainability policy.

In response, the Executive Board, via board member Ellen van Schoten, emphasised in a letter that sustainability remains a top priority. However, due to financial constraints, future responsibilities will have to be managed by permanent staff. The letter also confirmed that sustainability will remain a central pillar of the university’s next strategy.

Van der Glas says: “They did offer me the chance to apply for one of the new roles once the new strategy is in place, but I declined after four years in this position – it’s insulting. I didn’t seek further explanation; I was too affected. I prepared a handover document and called in sick because I could no longer function effectively. I haven’t heard anything further from the Executive Board.”

The impact of the dismissals extends beyond Van der Glas and her colleague’s personal situations. Ongoing projects have been stalled or delayed, and the departure has led to a loss of knowledge, expertise, and networks they build within the university. Van der Glas described the decision as ‘sending a completely wrong signal to everyone at EUR who is committed to sustainability’.

The idea now is to delegate responsibility for sustainability to faculties and departments. Van der Glas is sceptical: “I don’t understand how the university plans to achieve its sustainability goals without people to drive and coordinate these efforts. If sustainability ranks low on the agenda in meetings between faculties and the Executive Board, it rarely leads to tangible outcomes. That was my experience during my time here.”

As an example, Van der Glas cited the Sustainability Student Travel Grant, a collaboration with student organisations aimed at promoting sustainable travel within Europe by providing funding for non-air travel. “We put a lot of effort into it, and the students and colleagues involved were very enthusiastic. The project was cancelled due to a lack of funds and support. It was a major disappointment for us and those involved”, she said.

The Sustainability Liaison Network has not convened since the two staff members left after the summer. Hogervorst is concerned about the lack of central coordination for the university’s sustainability initiatives. “Who is now responsible for an integrated approach? In a fragmented organisation like EUR, that is crucial. Additionally, the university no longer has a representative in national discussions”, Hogervorst said.

Although a working group on sustainability has been established for the 2025–2030 strategy, Hogervorst questioned why the university has not created a dedicated centre for sustainability, as it has for diversity and inclusion. “Everything initiated after the sustainability dialogues is now delayed.”

Derk Loorbach fears that appointing an interim sustainability coordinator – someone Van der Glas and her colleague had themselves recruited – signals a step backwards for sustainability policy. “At the sustainability summit on 11 October, there was evident enthusiasm and ideas, but decisions about what truly needs to change at the university are being postponed.”

Loorbach acknowledged the university’s progress in operational areas such as travel policies, catering, and building energy use. “But I see a lack of connection to the university’s core business – education and research – because that’s where it gets challenging. This institution is still set up for economic growth, but we need an economic transition, which can only be achieved through education and research. That doesn’t seem to be happening here.”

Nonetheless, Loorbach remains hopeful about the position of sustainability in the university’s new strategy, expected next year. “The lack of vision and the reactive, bureaucratic approach in this case are disappointing. But perhaps, in that context, it’s better to take a more pragmatic approach rather than aiming for something overly grand.”