The aim of this article is to analyse the “Third Mission” (TM) of universities within Nordic countries and universitieś approach to implementing the mission into their strategy. The main activities that Nordic universities relate to the Third Mission are examined and policy implications drawn. Furthermore, gaps in literature are outlined that imply possible future research. The systematic literature review outlines 35 articles in the period from 2000 to 2018. Qualitative case studies have been the main research method so far, and about half of the research at Nordic universities has been conducted in Sweden. Most research has focused on commercial aspects of the Third Mission, but neglected social components and indirect, less visible activities such as popular-science publications or participation in policymaking. Little research regarding TM has been conducted in humanities or social sciences. For future research, more cross-national studies are needed, as well as research with a mixed-method research design.

This article presents findings on factors hindering academic employees from becoming involved in collaboration activities. Based on survey data, we map out perceived barriers to collaboration whereby five categories emerge: teaching obligations, partner (dis)interest, partners’ resources, academic freedom, and university resources. By means of multiple regression analysis, we examine the extent to which individual, intra-, and inter-organisational factors explain these perceived barriers to collaboration. The study was carried out in Iceland, where university objectives are still heavily based on teaching activities, and few entrepreneurial activities take place in academia. Our results reveal that age and academic disciplines play a main role in the perceptions of academics regarding barriers to collaboration, especially when it comes to barriers grounded in teaching obligations or university resources. Most perceived barriers are based on the internal level that is lack of resources on behalf of universities. The study, therefore, provides a new perspective relative to earlier findings that have indicated that barriers to collaboration exist mostly at the individual level. We conclude that academic institutions can play a more prominent role in the activation of third mission activities than they have been doing so far.

In recent years, the coming of the entrepreneurial university has brought about a third role in academia, which involves greater visible exchange of academics with society and industry. In this paper, the authors investigate to what extent individual and organisational factors influence the propensity of academics to engage in different types of Third Mission (TM) activities. This study is based on a large-scale survey of academics in Iceland regarding engagement in socio-economic activities. The results indicate that “soft” activities such as community activities and external teaching and training can be better predicted by individual factors, while hard activities such as applied contract research and commercialisation can be better predicted by organisational factors. Overall, academics are most likely to participate in community-related activities. Hereby, academics from the STEM and health disciplines, with work experience outside of academia and who are open to new experiences are more likely to be engaged in applied contract research and commercialisation. Academics belonging to disciplines other than STEM and health sciences and those that on an average publish more peer-reviewed articles are more likely to disseminate their knowledge to a wider audience outside of academia through public science communication. Gender, rank, and teaching do not affect TM participation, but openness, performance, or discipline do.

Tourism and hospitality organisations in remote, highly seasonal Arctic and sub-Arctic destinations face persistent workforce instability, multicultural team dynamics, and well-being risks that threaten service reliability and organisational continuity. Previous research has focused mainly on destination- and community-level resilience, while giving less attention to how resilience is built within tourism organisations through everyday workforce-related practices. This study examines people-centred organisational resilience through a qualitative comparative design in two northern contexts: Iceland and Finnish Lapland. The empirical material comprised semi-structured interviews in Iceland and interviews, organisational documents, and field observations in Finnish Lapland, collected in autumn 2025. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. The findings identify four recurring resilience mechanisms: leadership under seasonal and environmental pressure; employee experience across employment phases; living conditions and belonging; and ethical governance. Here, “mechanisms” refers not simply to broad topics but to organisational processes through which recurring practices support resilience in remote, highly seasonal tourism settings. Together, these mechanisms show that resilience in remote tourism is built not only through operational flexibility or crisis response, but through people-centred organisational practices that support continuity, coordination, safety, and trust across seasons. The study contributes a workforce-centred extension of resilience theory in tourism and offers a comparative account of how these mechanisms operate across two northern tourism settings.

Distance education has gained magnitude post-COVID-19, requiring an understanding of learners’ motivations. This study at the University of Akureyri used a mixed- methods approach to identify three key factors: flexibility, educational growth, efficiency. While gender, age, residence, and education level showed no significant impact, having children and employment influenced perceptions. Thematic analysis revealed insights into student prefe- rences, challenges, and recommendations for improving distance learning.

In early 2021, a quantitative survey was conducted among academics in Icelandic universities to gather information about their involvement in Third Mission (TM) activities and barriers to collaboration [1]. The target group consisted of all academics working at any of the seven Icelandic universities. The majority of participants (n = 674) were affiliated with the University of Iceland, while the remaining (n = 360) were associated with other universities. The survey was designed based on previous studies on barriers to university-industry collaboration [2]. Before it was administered, it underwent a pre-test phase involving various academics and university staff members. Email addresses of potential participants were obtained from the universities’ public websites. The survey was conducted using QuestionPro over a period of 21 days, with two reminders being sent following the initial invitation to participate. A total of 183 responses were collected, although not all participants completed the entire questionnaire. Consequently, the response rate amounted to 17.7%. It is worth noting that the study is a census, i.e., it targeted all academics in Iceland that satisfied the participation criteria rather than targeting only a sample of the population. Furthermore, the data extends its focus to academic disciplines that have previously received limited attention in third mission research.