Indicators differentiating the sustainability profiles of leading universities in the QS Sustainability Rankings

  • 102 Views
  • 19 Downloads

Creative Commons License DMCA.com Protection Status
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Type of the article: Research Article

Higher education plays an important role in advancing the sustainable development paradigm. The corresponding contribution of universities is measured, in particular, by the QS Sustainability Rankings, which summarizes nine comprehensive indicators for assessing various aspects of sustainability. The study aims to analyze the structure of the QS Sustainability Rankings for leading global universities and identify the indicators that most significantly distinguish the ranked profiles of these institutions. The study covered the top 30 universities in the QS World University Rankings: Sustainability 2026 (31 universities due to tied ranking scores). The Pearson coefficient showed a fairly strong pairwise relationship with the ranking score for indicators such as “Equality”, “Environmental Research”, “Impact of Education”, and “Employability & Opportunities”; however, the typology of university profiles is more complex. Therefore, based on the principal component analysis method, the indicators most strongly associated with the variation of universities in the Ranking were identified: “Health and Wellbeing”, “Knowledge Exchange”, and “Environmental Sustainability”. A cluster analysis showed that university profiles in the QS Sustainability Rankings vary across clusters: cluster I (17 institutions) is predominantly oriented toward strengthening social impact, cluster II (7 institutions) toward strengthening environmental impact, and cluster III (7 institutions) has a mixed orientation. Therefore, based on classification analysis, a combination of indicators (“Environmental Sustainability”, “Impact of Education”, “Health and Wellbeing”) was identified as most strongly distinguishing the obtained clusters, that is, differentiating the ranked profiles of leading universities. Other institutions can use this to substantiate the priorities of their sustainable transformation strategy.

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Table 1. Assessment results of the contribution of QS Sustainability Rankings indicators to the principal components
    • Table 2. Medians of QS Sustainability Rankings indicators within the obtained university clusters by ranking category
    • Table А1. Components of QS World University Rankings: Sustainability 2026
    • Conceptualization
      Vladimir Bilozubenko, Fedir Zhuravka, Andriy Zhydyk
    • Funding acquisition
      Vladimir Bilozubenko, Andriy Zhydyk
    • Investigation
      Vladimir Bilozubenko, Olha Hryhorash, Оleksandr Mosin, Maxim Korneyev
    • Methodology
      Vladimir Bilozubenko, Fedir Zhuravka, Olha Hryhorash, Yuri Tovt
    • Validation
      Vladimir Bilozubenko, Olha Hryhorash
    • Visualization
      Vladimir Bilozubenko, Yuri Tovt, Оleksandr Mosin, Maxim Korneyev
    • Writing – original draft
      Vladimir Bilozubenko, Olha Hryhorash, Yuri Tovt, Оleksandr Mosin
    • Formal Analysis
      Fedir Zhuravka, Olha Hryhorash, Yuri Tovt, Оleksandr Mosin, Maxim Korneyev
    • Project administration
      Fedir Zhuravka, Andriy Zhydyk
    • Supervision
      Fedir Zhuravka, Olha Hryhorash, Andriy Zhydyk, Maxim Korneyev
    • Writing – review & editing
      Fedir Zhuravka, Andriy Zhydyk, Maxim Korneyev
    • Data curation
      Olha Hryhorash, Оleksandr Mosin, Maxim Korneyev
    • Software
      Olha Hryhorash, Yuri Tovt, Оleksandr Mosin
    • Resources
      Оleksandr Mosin, Maxim Korneyev