Enhancing sustainable development goals or promoting universities? An analysis of the times higher education impact rankings

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to analyse and evaluate the methodology followed by the Times Higher Education Impact Rankings (THE-IR), as well as the coverage obtained and the data offered by this ranking, to determine if its methodology reflects the degree of sustainability of universities, and whether their results are accurate enough to be used as a data source for research and strategic decision-making. Design/methodology/approach A summative content analysis of the THE-IR methodology was conducted, paying special attention to the macro-structure (university score) and micro-structure (sustainable development goals [SDG] score) levels of the research-related metrics. Then, the data published by THE-IR in the 2019, 2020 and 2021 edition was collected via web scraping. After that, all the data was statistically analysed to find out performance rates, SDGs’ success rates and geographic distributions. Finally, a pairwise comparison of the THE-IR against the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE-WUR) was conducted to calculate overlap measures. Findings Severe inconsistencies in the THE-IR methodology have been found, offering a distorted view of sustainability in higher education institutions, allowing different strategic actions to participate in the ranking (interested, strategic, committed and outperformer universities). The observed growing number of universities from developing countries and the absence of world-class universities reflect an opportunity for less-esteemed institutions, which might have a chance to gain reputation based on their efforts towards sustainability, but from a flawed ranking which should be avoided for decision-making. Practical implications University managers can be aware of the THE-IR validity when demanding informed decisions. University ranking researchers and practitioners can access a detailed analysis of the THE-IR to determine its properties as a ranking and use raw data from THE-IR in other studies or reports. Policy makers can use the main findings of this work to avoid misinterpretations when developing public policies related to the evaluation of the contribution of universities to the SDGs. Otherwise, these results can help the ranking publisher to improve some of the inconsistencies found in this study. Social implications Given the global audience of the THE-IR, this work contributes to minimising the distorted vision that the THE-IR projects about sustainability in higher education institutions, and alerts governments, higher education bodies and policy makers to take precautions when making decisions based on this ranking. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this contribution is the first providing an analysis of the THE-IR’s methodology. The faults in the methodology, the coverage at the country-level and the overlap between THE-IR and THE-WUR have unveiled the existence of specific strategies in the participation of universities, of interest both for experts in university rankings and SDGs.

Developing a Sustainable Development Goals Research Hub among MERCOSUR’s Universities: A Case Study

“…This motivation could be considered as one of the many reasons that allowed South Korea to integrate the universities' ranking the Impact Ranking of Times Higher Education (THE). Even though there are some discordances between the showed results of the ranking and the SDG's development, THE continues to be the only ranking capable of evaluating the development of the universities through an SDG framework (Bautista-Puig et al, 2022). South Korea was able to place five universities into the 100 Top: Kyungpook National University (13°), Yonsei University (27°), Kyung Hee University (74°), Hanyang University (92°), Jeonbuk National University (95°).…”

“…The academic article supporting our research results are deposited in Emerald Insight at https://doi.org/10.1108/ijshe-07-2021-0309, (Bautista-Puig et al, 2022) The academic article supporting our research results are deposited in Scholar Works at https://doi.org/10.7275/9043848.0, (Cho, 2016) The academic article supporting our research results are deposited in Research Gate at https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.22276.35207, (Galdós et al, 2020) The academic article supporting our research results are deposited in Revista Mercosur at https://doi.org/10.28917/ism.2018-v2-5, (García et al, 2018) The academic article supporting our research results are deposited in MDPI at https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093295, (Körfgen et al, 2018) The academic article supporting our research results are deposited in Springer Link at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67828-3, (Noh, 2020) The academic article supporting our research results are deposited in Profesional de la información at https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.jul.04, (Noh, 2021) The book supporting our research results are deposited in CEPAL Repositorio at https://repositorio.cepal.org/handle/11362/1449, (SaKong & Koh, 2010) The book supporting our research results are deposited in UNSDSN at https://www.unsdsn.org/australia-nzpacific, (Kestin et al, 2017) The book supporting our research results are deposited in Oxford Academic at https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct044, (Trencher et al, 2013) The book supporting our research results are deposited in UNESCO Biblioteca Digital at https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000257931, (UNESCO, 2017)…”

University Autonomy for Sustainable Development: Results of the Times Higher Education Impact Rankings 2022

“…Тобто один і той самий університет може отримати оцінки за декілька років поспіль, але оцінити його динаміку складно, бо оцінки будуються на показниках, які можуть повністю відрізнятися з року в рік. Так, за підрахунками N. Bautista-Puig et al (2022), лише 23% університетів, які потрапили в рейтинг у 2020 і 2021 рр., оцінювались за тими самими 4 Цілями.…”

A hybrid assessment framework for human‐centred sustainable smart campus: A case study on COVID‐19 impact

“…As compared to the existing metric systems concerning a single dimension or domain, such as Refs. [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 ], the proposed assessment framework serves as a platform to provide a broader vision of the different essential aspects and their co‐effects, which could generate information in a wider scope to facilitate smart campus planning and development.…”

“…Assessing Responsibility in Sustainable Education based on ISO 2600 [30] was further established to extend the sustainability assessment to faculty or a service department. GreenMetric [31] and Times Higher Education Impact Rankings [32] are two important metrics for the global ranking of universities' sustainable behaviour. GreenMetric aims to assess the policies and activities within the green campus to promote sustainable cultures in universities, whereas the Impact Rankings assesses universities' impacts on the UN's SDGs.…”