Sustainability beyond boundaries

In recent years, sustainability has taken center stage in higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide. With the emergence of international green/sustainability rankings like the UI GreenMetric World University Ranking, Times Higher Education Sustainability Impact Rankings, and the QS Sustainability Ranking, universities are being assessed and compared based on their commitment to sustainable growth and development.

While these rankings aim to promote environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and economic viability, concerns have arisen regarding their ability to accurately capture the diverse contexts of HEIs, particularly the disparities between institutions in the Global North and the Global South, including Arab nations. This article examines these international sustainability rankings, shedding light on the contextual differences often overlooked and proposing a pathway towards a more inclusive framework.

The UI GreenMetric World University Ranking evaluates universities based on various sustainability parameters, while THE Sustainability Impact Rankings assess universities against the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Similarly, the QS Sustainability Ranking focuses on environmental and social sustainability, as well as governance indicators. These rankings incentivise HEIs to improve sustainability practices and guide prospective students in their university selection.

In the Global North, wealthier countries often have an advantage in sustainability rankings due to their investments in green technologies and research programs. In contrast, universities in the Global South, particularly Arab countries, face challenges such as economic constraints, political instability and limited access to green technologies. These challenges are not adequately accounted for in current ranking methodologies.

With respect to resource allocation, HEIs in the Global South prioritise basic educational needs over sustainability initiatives due to financial constraints. As for cultural and social norms, sustainability practices are influenced by local cultural and social norms, which are not fully accommodated in current rankings.

With regard to technological access, HEI access to green technologies varies across the globe, giving some institutions an inherent advantage. As for economic stability, HEI faces economic instability that affects sustainability initiatives in many Arab countries, a factor often overlooked in rankings. Finally, political instability poses challenges not encountered by universities in more stable regions.

Towards a more inclusive framework

To address these disparities, a more nuanced and inclusive ranking framework is needed. This could involve introducing region-specific indicators, implementing a weighting system that accounts for contextual challenges, encouraging collaboration between universities, and expanding assessment criteria to include qualitative measures of sustainability efforts.

While international sustainability rankings have promoted sustainable development within HEIs, they must evolve to reflect the diverse contexts of institutions worldwide accurately. Moreover, higher education institutions are driven by corporate, professional, and market logic, emphasising the integration of the Agenda 2030/17 SDGs into their operations and practices.