Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine higher education institutions’ participation in association for the advancement of sustainability in higher education’s (AASHE’s) Green Athletics category in the sustainability tracking, assessment and rating system (STARS) sustainability report while assessing how well collegiate athletic departments engage with their respective aspects.

This general review used quantitative content analysis to determine the number of NCAA Divisions I–III institutions that actively report Green Athletics categories in their AASHE STARS reports. The data collection process compiled current reports from the STARS website and the National Collegiate Athletic Association database. Green Athletics categorical and accumulated point attempts and outcomes were analyzed.

Of the 335 institutions that actively use the STARS reporting tool, the NCAA accounted for 247 rated institutions of which only 50 attempted points in Green Athletics while only 21 institutions succeeded. This paper discusses the lack of participation from institutions in Green Athletics and propose an alternate to better engage collegiate athletics in STARS reporting.

This study is one of the first known examinations of the tangible results of collaborations on college campuses to integrate the athletic department’s sustainability efforts into the overall sustainability reporting of the institution. This study can better inform STARS on how to more fully engage college athletic departments and boost the sustainability efforts in all corners of campus.

The purpose of this paper is to test the hypothesis that there are correlations between campus sustainability initiatives and environmental performance, as measured by resource consumption and waste generation performance metrics. Institutions of higher education would like to imply that their campus sustainability initiatives are good proxies for their environmental performance.

Using data reported through the Association for the Advancement in Higher Education’s Sustainability Tracking and Rating System (AASHE STARS) framework, a series of univariate multiple linear regression models were constructed to test for correlations between energy, greenhouse gas (GHG), water and waste performance metrics, and credit points awarded to institutions for various campus sustainability initiatives.

There are very limited correlations between institutional environmental performance and adoption of campus sustainability initiatives, be they targeted operational or coordination and planning best practices, or curricular, co-curricular or research activities. Conversely, there are strong correlations between environmental performance and campus characteristics, namely, institution type and climate zone.

Institutional decision makers should not assume that implementing best practices given credit by AASHE STARS will lead to improved environmental performance. Those assessing institutional sustainability should be wary of institutions who cite initiatives to imply a certain level of environmental performance or performance improvement.

This is the first paper to use data reported through the AASHE STARS framework to assess correlations between campus initiatives and environmental performance. It extends beyond previous research by considering energy, water and waste performance metrics in addition to GHG emissions, and it considers campus sustainability initiatives in addition to campus characteristics.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the way to achieve the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Through the introduction and learning of a specific case, this paper summarizes the specific process of green campus’s development and construction and directly discusses how to achieve the goal of sustainable development. By analyzing the achievements and measures of its construction, on the one hand, the experience and shortcomings of its green campus construction are summarized; on the other hand, the impact of Stanford’s own green campus construction on the local community is discussed.

This paper takes Stanford, one of the best green campuses assessed by sustainability tracking, assessment and rating system (STARS), as a case study in three steps. First, it introduces the academics, energy supply and demand, water and land, waste, management, food and living, buildings and transportation of its campus construction in detail; second, it uses the STARS to make a comprehensive sustainable evaluation of Stanford; finally, it discusses the development relationship between Stanford and local community.

The four characteristics of its green campus development model are summarized, namely, based on its own scientific research; from the aspect of environmental friendliness; to achieve joint participation; and forming complementary development with the community. The construction of green campus has changed from a single triangle framework composed of SDGs, STARS and universities to a compound triangle framework composed of SDGs, universities and communities on the existing basis, greatly expanding the way to realize SDGs.

This development mode will have direct guiding significance for the sustainable construction of other campuses.

This paper also discusses the development concept from green campus to sustainable community to provide positive reference to achieve the global SDGs from the perspective of colleges and universities.

According to the historical track of its development, this paper combines the two (SDGs and green campus) to discuss by using campus construction as an effective way to achieve the SDGs. On the basis of literature research and case study, STARS sustainable assessment is introduced. This will lead to quantitative analysis of sustainable construction in the discussion of the specific case, judging the specific sustainable degree of all aspects of campus construction, to provide a scientific basis for summarizing its characteristics of development mode.

This paper aims to make a comparative study on the latest version of green campus evaluation standard between China and America: Green Campus Evaluation Standard (GB/T51356-2019) and the sustainability tracking, assessment and rating system (STARS 2.2). The differences of evaluation methods and contents are analyzed and their respective characteristics and advantages are sorted out, so as to promote the development of sustainable campus evaluation standards.

The research mainly adopts the method of comparative study, which is carried out from three dimensions, namely, the related policies development of campus construction and world university sustainable rankings; the content of evaluation standards (including evaluation methods and evaluation categories and scores); the characteristics and current application of standards.

There are great differences between the evaluation standards of China and America in organization and participation mode, evaluation method and content. Public engagement, energy and campus engagement are the hot spots. Buildings, energy, food and dining and investment and finance will become the focus of sustainable campus in the future. Specific optimization strategies of key points, evaluation method and content and organization and participation mode of Chinese standard are put forward.

This paper clarifies the advantages and disadvantages of the current global sustainable campus, and provides the basis for the next stage of construction policy. At the same time, it is helpful for all countries, especially China, to formulate construction guidelines that not only meet their own actual needs but also conform to the trend of global sustainable campus development.

The connotation of sustainable campus is enriched, and the evaluation standards of sustainable campus are improved. The development of sustainable campus is promoted, so as to realize the sustainable development goals.

This research expands the scope of the study to the whole campus, rather than just one aspect of campus buildings. It compares the evaluation standard of green campus in China with STARS in the USA, and no longer compares leadership in energy and environmental design for schools. It discusses the campus building’s energy conservation while paying attention to the campus green consciousness, green management and green planning. Based on the relevant data currently used by STARS in the global evaluation, this paper analyzes the hot spots and shortcomings of the current global sustainable campus construction and puts forward some optimization suggestions for China’s green campus evaluation system.

The 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).

This 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.

The 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.

Although 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.

Administrators in higher-education settings routinely create planning documents that help steer the organization in mission-centric ways. In the area of sustainability planning, strategic plans, sustainability plans and climate action plans are the most common methods used. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if specific forms of planning predict sustainability outcomes.

This question was evaluated via an empirical archival study of the AASHE STARS database in relation to planning, administration and governance credits and criteria to determine if specific forms of planning were predictive of sustainability implementation outcomes in the categories of Education and Research, Operations, Diversity and Affordability, Human Resources, Investment, Public Engagement and Innovation.

Findings support the notion that climate action plans were most predictive of achieving sustainability outcomes, and strategic plans were best able to predict educational outcomes.

These findings have important implications for the design and execution of sustainability planning processes in higher-education institutions.

The academic literature contains relatively few empirical studies that demonstrate the capacity of planning on the realization of sustainability outcomes.

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.

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.

Our results show that DUofC can reach the Silver level in three years by working on 25 credits; Gold level in nine years by focusing its efforts in 28 additional credits; and Platinum level in 15 years by improving another 10 credits.

The procedure developed in this study can be applied to other universities and other versions of the STARS framework.

As the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been widely adopted since 2015, higher education institutions (HEIs) are experimenting with ways they can be measured, reported and incorporated into all realms of the university. In this process, the challenges of SDG integration into HEIs have become more evident, from lack of resources and sustainability literacy to having multiple disconnected programs that feature the SDGs.

A mixed methods approach using archival materials, literature reviews, interviews and participant observation has been adopted for a case study at a university in the process of adopting the SDGs in multiple areas.

The University of South Florida began with efforts to incorporate SDGs at the undergraduate level, such as the Global Citizens Project that brands both events and courses with SDGs. Institutional changes coupled with the launch of the Times Higher Education University Impact Rankings provided more opportunities to have broader conversations about SDGs in all areas of campus.

Universities are continually transforming its structure and governance in response to the new social, environmental and economic challenges. Particularly, there has recently been a growing academic interest for measuring sustainable practices of higher education institutions (HEI) aiming to monitor and reduce their carbon emissions, as well as transform them into more sustainable organizations. More recent studies began to focus also on the sustainable performance of distance education Universities. So it became crucial to evaluate their sustainability practices through sustainability assessment tools with the aim of improving their sustainability performance and boosting their role as agents of academic, social and economic change. The purpose of this study is to assess and compare holistically sustainability implementation in two similar distance learning universities and to evaluate their advantages and disadvantages.

One of the most rigorous and internationally used sustainability assessment tools was used – the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System, to evaluate and compare sustainability implementation in two distance universities, one from Spain and another from Portugal: the Madrid Open University and Universidade Aberta. Indicators of both universities were compared and ways of improvement in both universities were widely discussed.

The results of this research show that there is a similar pattern in both universities. Both have low performance in campus operations and low levels of community participation but good performance in sustainability courses and programmes offer. The results of both institutions were compared and allowed a learning process for improvement.

This research hopes to contribute to the continuous research about the usefulness of sustainability assessment tools in particular when applied to distance universities at the time that offers new paths to carry out improved sustainable practices in crucial areas of interest such as research, administration, education and resource-saving. This research also highlights the value of distance learning universities and their ability to be more sustainable after the advent of COVID-19.