University Sustainability Index (USI)

Initiatives

University Sustainability Index (USI)

Overview

University Sustainability Index (USI) 

  • Led by the PPRC, CBS, and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, the University Sustainability Index (USI) project is a comprehensive, survey-based assessment that evaluates the sustainability performance of 161 universities worldwide.
  • The indices will provide a robust foundation for further research, events, and the development of an international university sustainability network.
  • The research team refined the Value–Process–Impact (VPI) framework to track institutions’ policy commitments, campus operations, community engagement, and research impacts.

Research Design and Methodology

Selection Criteria for Index Constituent

The Global USI

comprised 111 universities selected from the top 150 of the QS World University Rankings 2024 (with sustainability data available in English or Chinese).

The Asia-Pacific USI

comprised of 39 universities selected from the APRU (Association of Pacific Rim Universities) – 32 universities are included in the Global and Greater China indices and 7 universities are in Canada, Japan, Korea and Thailand.

The Greater China USI

comprised of 31 universities identified as the highest-ranked in their respective locations according to the QS rankings, including all 8 UG-funded institutions in Hong Kong, 11leading universities in Mainland China, 9 in Taiwan, and 3 in Macau.

The research team refined the Value–Process–Impact (VPI) framework to track institutions’ policy commitments, campus operations, community engagement, and research impacts.

The scoring is based on the 4 aspects under the VPI model, namely Value, Process (Management & Practice) and Impact, to assess University sustainability from all angles. The respective weight is as shown.

Value: 20% Process – Management: 20% Process – Practice: 40% Impact: 20%
Total Score
20%
Value Policy commitments & institutional values
20%
Process – Management Governance & management structures
40%
Process – Practice Campus operations & community engagement
20%
Impact Research outputs & societal impact


The USI assessment covers 109 indicators organised across 8 stakeholder categories. Each category draws on the Value–Process–Impact (VPI) framework: Governance indicators assess institutional values and management structures, while all other stakeholder categories are evaluated on both Practice (what universities do) and Impact (measurable outcomes). The table below summarises indicator distribution; expand any category to view the full indicator list.

Stakeholder Category VPI Dimensions Covered Indicators
Governance Value Process – Management 9
Students Process – Practice Impact 16
Employees Process – Practice Impact 19
Funding Bodies Process – Practice Impact 9
Peer Universities Process – Practice Impact 10
Community Process – Practice Impact 18
Environment Process – Practice Impact 16
Suppliers Process – Practice Impact 12
Total 109
Value Process – Management
Governance 9 indicators

USR / Sustainability Values

Indicator Description
Written USR/sustainability policy or statement Existence of a written policy, vision, mission, strategy, code of conduct, or charter
Extent of the USR/sustainability statement Level of detail: basic statement, descriptive, or including a conceptualisation
Stakeholders mentioned in USR/sustainability policy Which stakeholder groups are explicitly referenced in the university's sustainability statement

USR / Sustainability Management

Indicator Description
USR/sustainability goals Whether formal goals exist and which stakeholders they cover
USR/sustainability strategic plans Existence of strategic plans and their stakeholder scope
USR/sustainability programmes Active programmes directed at specific stakeholder groups
USR/sustainability budget Dedicated budget allocation for sustainability activities
Management structure for USR/sustainability Formal committee, dedicated office, or senior management responsibility
Regular USR/sustainability reporting Frequency and scope of published sustainability reports
Process – Practice Impact
Students 16 indicators

Practice — Students

Indicator Description
Quality of education actions Budget, student engagement, study support, career development, employment support, staffing quality
Equality and diversity advocacy Fair admission, fair teaching/assessment, information transparency
Student welfare and wellbeing Health, counselling, safe environment, study-life balance, family care, scholarships, disability access
Fostering students' social responsibility Curriculum, extra-curricular activities, USR research, scholarships, student clubs
Appeal and complaints channels for students Availability of ombudsperson or equivalent mechanisms for USR/sustainability issues
USR/sustainability communication with students Formal and informal channels; communication frequency
Codes of conduct for students Existence of student-facing USR/sustainability codes of conduct

Impact — Students

Indicator Description
Awards and recognitions for student programmes Local, national, and international recognition received
Student feedback rate Percentage of positive student feedback (<40% / 40–80% / >80%)
Employment rate in USR/sustainability-related jobs Share of graduates working in sustainability-related roles
Enrolment in USR/sustainability subjects Percentage of students taking sustainability-related courses
Participation in USR/sustainability activities Percentage of students involved in sustainability activities
Admission diversity statistics Percentage of racial/ethnic minority groups in admissions
Student complaints trend Trend in unsettled student complaints (increase / decrease / no change)
Students in sustainability exchange programmes Number/percentage involved in sustainability-focused exchange or field trips
Graduation rate (normalised) Percentage of students completing their degree (<80% / 80–95% / >95%)
Process – Practice Impact
Employees 19 indicators

Practice — Employees

Indicator Description
Employee health and safety Healthcare, counselling, safe workplace, work-life balance programmes
Workplace equity Gender/racial equity in recruitment, job opportunities for disadvantaged groups, disability accommodation
Employee development and education Training budget, career development, USR/sustainability promotion, research fund
Employee welfare Healthcare benefits, pension, awards, family care, maximum working hours
Transparency in employment practices Open information on recruitment, performance, salary, and management policies
USR/sustainability communication with employees Formal and informal engagement mechanisms and frequency
Codes of conduct for employees Existence of employee-facing USR/sustainability codes of conduct

Impact — Employees

Indicator Description
Employee satisfaction level Percentage reporting high or moderate satisfaction
Employee participation in voluntary sustainability activities Share of employees involved in USR/sustainability volunteering
Staff turnover rate (normalised) Annual turnover: <5% / 5–10% / >10%
Women in management/senior positions Percentage of female employees in leadership roles
Ethnic minority representation in senior positions Percentage of racial/ethnic minority groups in management
Training hours per employee per year Average annual hours spent on development and education
Sustainability conference attendance per staff Average number of sustainability-related conferences attended per staff member
Meetings with employee associations on sustainability Number of formal engagement meetings with employee associations
Employees with disabilities Number/percentage of staff members with disabilities
Workplace injuries Occurrence of workplace injuries in the reporting year
Employees in sustainability-focused training Share of employees engaged in sustainability training and development
Research projects/papers on sustainability Percentage of research output with a sustainability focus
Process – Practice Impact
Funding Bodies 9 indicators

Practice — Funding Bodies

Indicator Description
Regular communication with government/funding bodies Frequency of meetings, information dissemination, and financial transparency
Regular financial audits Frequency of external financial audits
Participation in government-sponsored programmes Social, philanthropy, environmental, education, and research programmes
Provision of government-sponsored programmes University-delivered programmes sponsored by government/funding bodies
Advocacy of USR/sustainability to policy makers Initiatives influencing business, social, environmental, and education policy

Impact — Funding Bodies

Indicator Description
Meetings with government/funding bodies on sustainability Number of formal sustainability meetings with funders
Management reports to government/funding bodies Number of sustainability reports submitted to funders
Sustainability initiatives supported by funders Number of initiatives co-supported with government/funding bodies
Sustainability policy proposals to funders Number of policy initiatives proposed to government or funding bodies
Process – Practice Impact
Peer Universities 10 indicators

Practice — Peer Universities

Indicator Description
Fair competition practices Fair conduct in student admission, staff recruitment, research, and education
Joint USR/sustainability initiatives Collaborative social, environmental, research, and education programmes
Communication and engagement with peer universities Formal and informal channels and frequency of engagement

Impact — Peer Universities

Indicator Description
Experience sharing on sustainability Whether experience-sharing on USR/sustainability takes place with peers
Attendance at joint sustainability conferences Number of joint conferences or seminars attended with peer institutions
Joint sustainability classes Existence of co-taught sustainability courses with peer universities
Sustainability-focused exchange programmes Exchange programmes with an explicit sustainability focus
Joint education programmes on sustainability Enrolment in shared sustainability education programmes
Joint sustainability initiatives Number of collaborative sustainability projects with peers
Joint social projects with peers Number of joint social responsibility projects
Process – Practice Impact
Community 18 indicators

Practice — Communities

Indicator Description
University philanthropy to communities Frequency and nature of philanthropic activities
Support for local employment Preference for local hires, people with disabilities, immigrants, veterans, ethnic minorities
Voluntary USR/sustainability service Volunteering, environmental protection, and care for disadvantaged groups
Sponsorship of USR/sustainability activities Sponsorship of social responsibility and environmental protection activities
Communication and engagement with communities Formal and informal mechanisms and their frequency
Joint initiatives with communities Social, environmental, research, and education collaborative projects

Impact — Community

Indicator Description
Number of donations to communities Monetary and in-kind donations made in the reporting year
Community projects supported Total number of community projects the university supported
Long-term community projects (3+ years) Number of ongoing projects sustained for three or more years
Community projects with NGOs Jointly organised projects with non-governmental organisations
Community projects with businesses Jointly organised projects with the business community
Staff participation in community services Percentage of staff engaged in community sustainability services
Staff hours in community sustainability services Average hours per employee per year in community service
Media coverage of community activities Number of media reports about the university's community sustainability work
Community complaints on sustainability Presence of complaints from the community regarding sustainability
Business information sessions on sustainability Sessions sharing and promoting sustainability with the business community
Knowledge transfer projects to business community Projects involving sustainability knowledge transfer to businesses
Business endowments for sustainability Number of endowments from the business community for sustainability programmes
Process – Practice Impact
Environment 16 indicators

Practice — Environment

Indicator Description
Environmental management policies Existence of formal environmental management policies
Environmental management system Establishment of a formal environmental management system
Environmental monitoring systems Systems for ongoing environmental performance monitoring
Environmental performance indicators tracked Energy, water, waste, emissions, biodiversity, and other metrics actively measured
Communication on environmental practices Mechanisms for sharing environmental performance with stakeholders

Impact — Environment

Indicator Description
Energy consumption reduction Percentage change in energy use compared to previous year
Water consumption reduction Percentage change in water use compared to previous year
Indoor air quality Whether indoor air quality has improved
Recycling rate Current recycling rate (0% / 0–20% / 20–40% / >40%)
Reduction of solid waste to landfills Percentage decrease in landfill-bound solid waste
Reduction of hazardous waste disposal Percentage decrease in hazardous waste disposal
Environmental programmes organised/sponsored Number of environmental programmes run or supported
ENGO collaborations Number of collaborations with environmental NGOs
GHG emissions reduction Percentage reduction in greenhouse gas emissions year-on-year
Increase in greenery areas Whether campus green space as a share of total area has grown
Complaints related to environment and pollution Presence of environmental or pollution-related complaints
Process – Practice Impact
Suppliers 12 indicators

Practice — Suppliers

Indicator Description
USR/sustainability criteria in procurement Application of sustainability standards in supplier selection and contracts
Supplier USR/sustainability policy Formal written policy governing supplier sustainability conduct
Monitoring supplier sustainability performance Audits, inspections, and submission of CSR/sustainability information by suppliers
Communication mechanisms with suppliers Frequency of calls, site visits, meetings, online communication, and feedback
Materiality of supplier engagement Nature and significance of sustainability engagement with suppliers

Impact — Suppliers

Indicator Description
Local supplier share Percentage of suppliers that are local (<50% / 50–80% / >80%)
Long-term supplier share (3+ years) Percentage of suppliers with relationships of 3 or more years
Meetings and inspections with suppliers Number of monitoring interactions with suppliers in the year
Suppliers with SER collaboration Percentage of suppliers engaged in social/environmental responsibility work
Complaints about suppliers Number of complaints about suppliers lodged by students or employees
Complaints from suppliers Number of complaints received from suppliers
Supplier violations of regulations/contracts Number of documented supplier violations

The index universities are categorized into 6 tiers based on the scores attained, with each tier representing the level of achievement in their sustainability journey.

 

USI Score Tier
90 – 100 Global Icon
80 – 89 Impact Leader
70 – 79 Model Achiever
60 – 69 Proactive Advocate
50 – 59 Committed Partner
Below 50 Emerging Follower

Access the full University Sustainability Index report for detailed findings, rankings, and analysis.

View Full Report

Supporting Organizations