Sustainability Tracking, Assessment And Rating System Research Articles

Campus sustainability, organizational learning and sustainability reporting: an empirical analysis

Purpose Studies have shown that higher education institutions (HEIs) need to achieve deep organizational learning to develop and implement long-term strategies for responding to the climate crisis. This study aims to analyze the sustainability efforts of HEIs, in particular those who use the sustainability tracking, assessment and rating system (STARS), to ascertain what type of organizational learning is being achieved. Design/methodology/approach This paper does this by analyzing perceptions of learning amongst this group of HEIs. More specifically, it analyzes survey data regarding perceptions of types and system levels of organizational learning achieved by 116 HEIs in the USA that currently use or have used STARS in the past. The approach also aims to develop a macro view of the relationships between practicing campus sustainability, using sustainability reporting tools and learning as an organization. Findings An examination of the practice of campus sustainability and its relationship to organizational learning reveals that the use of sustainability reporting promotes broad learning, but deep learning at the level of the organization is seldom achieved. Practical implications Given the success of using sustainability reporting tools to diffuse knowledge and foster broad learning, this paper argues that such tools should incorporate more metrics relative to soft organizational characteristics of HEIs to shift organizational cultures and foster deeper organizational learning. Originality/value This work constitutes one of the few studies analyzing empirical data on campus sustainability, sustainability reporting and organizational learning for a large number of HEIs.

Defining Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions

People interact with each other based on shared meaning. In the absence of shared meaning, organizations fail to identify and achieve goals. Focus is generally placed on how to engage, fund, and achieve sustainability across HEIs, and the conceptual problem of what sustainability means is often overlooked. This exploratory analysis examines how Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the United States define sustainability. Definitions of sustainability were collected from 131 Sustainability Tracking, Assessment, and Rating System (STARS) reports submitted between March 2017 and March 2020. Through thematic coding, four definition themes emerged: 3-dimensional, intergenerational, environmental, and ethical. The 3-dimensional and intergenerational themes were the most common, with 11 different combinations of themes identified among the definitions. The majority of definitions described sustainability as an anthropocentric concept rather than an ecocentric concept. How sustainability is defined and communicated is important for the coordinated progress toward global sustainability goals. Further, the implications of various definitions should be acknowledged when identifying strategies to advance sustainable practices in higher education.

Measuring the impact of organizational characteristics on the sustainability performance of US institutions of higher education

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to determine how organizational characteristics at higher education institutions (HEI) influence their sustainability performance as measured by the advancement of sustainability in higher education’s sustainability tracking, assessment and rating system (STARS).Design/methodology/approachThis analysis identified 11 independent variables to measure the impact of four general organizational characteristics – structure, commitment, culture and planning – on sustainability performance. Through an examination of relevant literature, especially that specific to HEI, 13 hypotheses were formulated to test the impact of these organizational characteristics on sustainability performance and to explore the relationships between these characteristics. Using self-reported STARS data from US HEI, a variety of statistical methods, including ordinary least squares regression, ANOVA, Chi-square test and bi-variate correlation, were used.FindingsThe analysis suggests that HEI with both a sustainability office and a sustainability committee, more staff in a sustainability office, a more comprehensive sustainability plan and earlier and more frequent STARS submissions had higher STARS scores. Furthermore, doctoral-granting HEI had higher STARS scores and were more likely to have the organizational characteristics of higher-performing HEI.Originality/valueAlthough other studies have used STARS data to examine organizational characteristics, this study includes more organizational characteristics, and it explores both their relationship to sustainability performance and their relationship with each other.

Signaling sustainability: impact that learning how to report has on enrollment, endowment and emissions of North American higher education institutions

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to develop an integrated model assessing the frequency and timing between reports on the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) reporting the framework by higher education institutions (HEIs) and the relationship between the STARS score and reputation (enrollment), finances (endowment) and performance (emissions).Design/methodology/approachThe development of the theoretical model is based on learning, signaling and legitimacy theories. This study collects data from the AASHE STARS to indicate the rating level of 202 HEIs, control variables, enrollment, endowments and emissions. The hypotheses were tested using generalized linear models.FindingsFindings suggest that as HEIs report on their sustainability activity, they learn to report better but that there is also an “un-learning” aspect if the HEI skips reporting in a period. The results support the main hypothesis that there is a relationship between reporting and engagement with the HEIs in the form of enrollment and endowments. Finally, the findings provide evidence that the HEIs’ reporting is associated with a reduction in emissions.Practical implicationsThe findings suggest that HEIs should develop a reporting strategy on a standardized framework such as AASHE STARs and they ought to codify the approach to learn from prior reporting. Students and alumni are increasingly seeking to engage the HEI in the sustainability process and the report is a mechanism for signaling activities.Social implicationsThe findings suggest that AASHE STARS scores may be used by HEIs as a signaling mechanism to stakeholders of their commitment to sustainability. The signal is a mechanism to reduce information asymmetry between the HEI and stakeholders who may want more information on the institution’s attempts toward sustainability but lack access to information. Further, HEI partners have a mechanism to assess the overall level of commitment of the HEI toward sustainability and can, therefore, engage accordingly.Originality/valueThere has been significant work on signaling theory and sustainability. However, the relationship between STARs reporting as a signal that legitimates the HEI, learning how to report well and HEI performance has received less attention. The current study demonstrates that the STARS framework as a reporting mechanism signals the HEIs’ level of commitment to sustainability thereby legitimating it resulting in improved performance.

Campuses as living labs for sustainability problem-solving: trends, triumphs, and traps

Colleges and universities around the world are increasingly using their campuses as living laboratories for sustainability problem-solving and engagement. “Campus-as-lab” (CAL) projects emphasize experiential learning and campus sustainability through the integration of research and campus operations. By engaging students in CAL work, campuses make themselves more sustainable while contributing to knowledge and research needed to make an impact beyond their borders. The Sustainability Tracking, Assessment, and Rating System (STARS) is an important tool to track work in this rapidly evolving CAL arena. Here, we use data from STARS 2.0 to assess the self-reporting and concentration of CAL efforts in 14 operational and administrative areas across institutions of higher education in North America. We analyzed self-reported STARS reports in 2016 and 2018 and found that there was a 203% increase in institutions self-reporting CAL efforts (2016: n = 171; 2018: n = 347). Most efforts tend to be concentrated in the operational categories linked to the built environment. Socially explicit categories such as Diversity and Affordability, however, show increases in self-reporting. We identify nascent CAL priority areas, including the arts and biodiversity and conservation, as well as significant mis- or over-reporting of CAL efforts. To optimize the utility of STARS as a metric for capturing sustainability problem-solving efforts through CAL activities, process revisions are needed to ensure that institutions of higher education are accurately interpreting and self-reporting CAL work and that the STARS tool adequately captures the changing role that sustainability plays on university campuses in North America and beyond.

Assessment of sustainable development in technical higher education institutes of India

This paper assesses the sustainability related performance of Indian Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) based on the parameters and indicators listed under the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS), and the University of Indonesia GreenMetric World University Ranking (UI GreenMetric WUR). Qualitative assessment of Indian HEIs based on the two selected frameworks is provided. Data were collected for parameters pertaining to sustainable development (SD) at nine Indian HEIs through surveys, documentation, direct observations, and interviews with professors, research scholars, students, and employees. The study shows that although Indian campuses are implementing SD strategies, the approach is not comprehensive and systematic, as almost 50% of the STARS and UI GreenMetric framework parameters are not currently being complied with. Out of the two selected assessment frameworks, Indian HEIs showed greater compliance with the UI GreenMetric, which can be attributed to its Asian origin. A lack of policies, monitoring and reporting mechanisms were common across all the HEIs. This study highlights the need to report specific rating parameters that are widely present on Indian campuses and those which are not currently being emphasised. The findings contribute to developing a contextualised rating system for assessing Indian HEIs that can help boost SD. This study can further help other developing countries aiming to progress along similar lines.

Analysis of Sustainability Assessment Tools (SATs) for Higher Education Institutions (HEIs)

During the last few years, there are many sustainability assessment tools (SATs) were developed and introduced to higher education institutions (HEIs) that functions to guide and assess the commitment of HEIs to implement sustainability. The aim of this study is to review and analysis four existing SATs namely as Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS), Campus Sustainability Assessment Framework (CSAF), UI GreenMetric Ranking and Sustainable Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) which have been embedded and used as their sustainability guidance by many institutions in the world. The analysis is conducted by reviewing the indicators contained within the SATs and then the indicators will be gathered according 1) to the aspect of sustainability; environment, social and economics and 2) between the key elements of each SAT. Result found that there were a significant imbalanced proportion of indicators between the aspect of sustainability and between the key elements of sustainability among the sustainability assessment tools.

An aggregated and dynamic analysis of innovations in campus sustainability

PurposeThis paper aims to compose a systematic understanding of campus sustainability innovations and unpack the complex drivers behind the elaboration of specific innovations. More precisely, the authors ask two fundamental questions: What are the topics and modes of implementation of campus sustainability innovations? What are the external and internal factors that drive the development of specific innovations?Design/methodology/approachThe authors code and analyze 454 innovations reported within the Sustainability Tracking Assessment and Rating System (STARS), the campus sustainability assessment tool of the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education. Using descriptive statistics and illustrations, the paper assesses the state of environmental innovations (EIs) within STARS. Then, to evaluate the role of internal and external drivers in shaping EIs, the authors have produced classification and regression tree models.FindingsThe authors’ analysis shows that external and internal factors provide incentives and a favorable context for the implementation of given EIs. External drivers such as climatic zones, local income and poverty rate drive the development of several EIs. Internal drivers beyond the role of the agent of change, often primarily emphasized by past literature, significantly impact the implementation of given EIs. The authors’ work also reveals that EIs often move beyond traditional mitigation approaches and the boundaries of campus. EIs create new dynamics of innovation that echo and reinforce the culture of a higher education institution.Originality/valueThis work provides the first aggregated picture of EIs in the USA and Canada. It produces a new and integrated understanding of the dynamics of campus sustainability that complexifies narratives and contextualizes the role of change agents.

Strategic Planning for Sustainability in Canadian Higher Education

This paper reviews representations of sustainability in the strategic plans of Canadian higher education institutions (HEIs). A content analysis of the strategic plans of 50 HEIs was undertaken to determine the extent to which sustainability is included as a significant policy priority in the plans, including across the five domains of governance, education, campus operations, research, and community outreach. We found 41 strategic plans with some discussion of sustainability, and identified three characteristic types of response: (i) accommodative responses that include sustainability as one of many policy priorities and address only one or two sustainability domains; (ii) reformative responses that involve some alignment of policy priorities with sustainability values in at least a few domains; and (iii) progressive responses that make connections across four or five domains and offer a more detailed discussion of sustainability and sustainability-specific policies. Accommodative responses were dominant. More progressive responses were typically from institutions participating in the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) of the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education. The paper concludes with consideration of the political and economic contexts contributing to this relative prevalence of accommodative responses to sustainability.

Recapturing the learning opportunities of university sustainability indicators

Reconfiguring student involvement in university sustainability assessments and reporting can create important learning opportunities. In the 1990s, students conducted campus environmental audits and assessments, which were often the first step towards improving university environmental practices and creating sustainability programs. These audits, often conducted as class projects, capstone projects, or theses, gave students agency in a significant environmental issue, and they provided integrative, compelling, and collaborative environmental learning experiences. Today, university sustainability ratings and rankings are largely developed by organizations outside universities, with data provided by university sustainability staff and administrators. Hundreds of colleges and universities participate in the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) administered by the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), posting information in 70 categories in public reports. Environmental Studies and Sciences (ESS) faculty and students can participate in the process of assessing university sustainability by producing their own sustainability indicator reports from the STARS data. A literature of sustainability indicators, particularly the work of Donella Meadows, describes indicators from a systems thinking perspective and explores how the selection of indicators can change system behavior by providing missing feedback or influencing a system’s goals. It describes an inclusive process for developing indicators to ensure they will be meaningful to the larger community. Students can use these theories and processes to critically evaluate sustainability data, to develop their own sense of the components of a sustainable institution or society, and to advance understanding of sustainability within their university community. Creating and communicating sustainability indicator reports for their particular university can provide an ongoing topic for ESS capstone courses.

Canadian STARS-Rated Campus Sustainability Plans: Priorities, Plan Creation and Design

The use of integrated sustainability plans is an emerging trend in higher education institutions (HEIs) to set sustainability priorities and to create a work plan for action. This paper analyses the sustainability plans of 21 Canadian HEIs that have used the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) from the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE). The plans were coded thematically with a focus on the sustainability goals, process of plan creation, and aspects of plan design outlined in the texts. This paper finds that sustainability goals focused on the environmental aspects of sustainability, while social and economic aspects were less emphasized. Further, most plans were described as being created through a broad stakeholder-consultation process, while fewer plans assigned timelines and parties responsible to sustainability goals. This paper contributes to our understanding of the priorities of Canadian HEI institutions at the end of the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development and is useful for practitioners interested in developing their own sustainability plans.

Measuring sustainability at universities by means of the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS): early findings from STARS data

This paper focuses on findings from an analysis of data submitted through the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS). STARS has addressed the demand for standard metrics to measure sustainability progress at US and Canadian colleges and universities, with expanding access to institutions in other countries gained through the launch of an International Pilot and release of STARS 2.0. Since its release in 2009, STARS has emerged as a reputable source of data that can provide a broad overview of the state of campus sustainability. The release of STARS Version 2.0 in 2013 improved upon the original reporting framework and also expanded accessibility of STARS to all higher education institutions worldwide. The findings in this paper tell the story of a campus sustainability movement that is quite young. As STARS matures along with this movement, STARS data will hopefully show a trend of continuous improvement at participating institutions. By participating in STARS and learning from examples set by other institutions, colleges and universities from across the world can be on the leading edge of moving toward a more just and sustainable world.

A mathematical decision-making procedure to assist in the development of sustainability plans based on the STARS framework

Purpose – The purpose of this study was to establish an objective mathematical decision-making procedure to help universities prioritize credits, while using the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) framework developed by the Association for Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), when pursuing their sustainability goals in the short-, medium- and long-term. The authors used the assessment data from Dominican University of California (DUofC), as our case study. Design/methodology/approach – Two criteria, the number of possible points available and overall priority, were developed to classify credits in the STARS version 1.2 framework into six groups from lowest to highest level of difficulty. Two mathematical credit-selecting models based on how many points were available per credit, partial or full amount, were also established to produce short-, medium- and long-term plans. Findings – Our results show that DUofC can reach the Silver level in three years by wor...