Sustainability Behavior at the University of Sharjah: A Gender Comparison

  • Anwar HamdanEmail author
  • Nada Murad
  • Marah Abdelrazeq
  • Sadeque Hamdan
  • Imad Alsyouf
  • Maamar Bettayeb
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation book series (ASTI)


Universities around the world have an important role in sustainability which encourage them to conduct campus sustainability studies to measure their sustainability performance. This study aims to assess sustainability performance and compare the level of behavior between males and females at the University of Sharjah. We developed and distributed a questionnaire to all the university populations to measure sustainability behavior. We used a Likert scale and hypothesis testing to analyze the questionnaire. By the end of the questionnaire duration, we received 646 responses, where 238 were males, and 408 were females. To analyze the questionnaire, the sign test was applied to determine the level of sustainable behavior of the males’ and females’ respondents. The results of this test showed that both males’ and females’ behavior levels are high. This is a good sign that both males and females are practicing their daily activities in a sustainable manner. Furthermore, the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test was applied to compare the males’ and females’ behavior levels. As a result, it was found that males have better sustainability behavior. It is recommended that the University of Sharjah organizes more events and activities to boost the behavior level of female respondents. Also, the university may define some rules and regulations to monitor the sustainability behavior at the campus by providing rewards, incentives, and penalties in case of violation.


Sustainability Higher education Behavior Gender 



The authors thank the participants of the survey and the Sustainability Office at the University of Sharjah for the support in conducting this study. The authors thank Emirates Islamic Bank for financial support.


  1. Abubakar, I.R., Al-Shihri, F.S., Ahmed, S.M.: Students’ assessment of campus sustainability at the University of Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 8, 1–14 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alsyouf, I., Alsuwaidi, M., Hamdan, S., Shamsuzzaman, M.: Impact of ISO 55000 on organisational performance: evidence from certified UAE firms. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 1–19 (2018)Google Scholar
  3. Dagiliūtė, R., Liobikienė, G., Minelgaitė, A.: Sustainability at universities: students’ perceptions from green and non-green universities. J. Clean. Prod. 181, 473–482 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fagerland, M.W., Sandvik, L.: TheWilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test under scrutiny. Stat. Med. 28, 1487–1497 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hacker, A., Rando, A., Shafritz, A.: Student Sustainability Assessment at Colgate University (2015)Google Scholar
  6. Hamdan, S., Hamdan, A., Bingamil, A., Al-Zarooni, H., Bashir, H., Alsyouf, I.: Investigating delay factors in electrical installation projects using fuzzy TOPSIS. In: The 8th International Conference on Modeling, Simulation and Applied Optimization (ICMSAO’2019). IEEE, Bahrain (2019)Google Scholar
  7. Hansmann, R., Mieg, H.A., Frischknecht, P.: Principal sustainability components: empirical analysis of synergies between the three pillars of sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 19, 451–459 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Isa, N.K.M.: Sustainable campus and academic staffs awareness and behaviour in Malaysia’ s institutions of higher learning: a case study of UPSI. Malaysia J. Soc. Sp. 6, 89–99 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., Pal, D. K.: Likert scale: explored and explained. Br. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 7, 396–403 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Katiliūtė, E., Stankevičiūtė, Ž., Daunorienė, A.: The role of non-academic staff in designing the green university campus. In: Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in Higher Education, pp. 49–61 (2017)Google Scholar
  11. Koh, H.C.: Testing hypotheses of entrepreneurial characteristics: a study of Hong Kong MBA students. J. Manag. Psychol. 11, 12–25 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Manning, C.: The Psychology of Sustainable Behavior (2009)Google Scholar
  13. Marans, R.W., Callewaert, J.: Evaluating sustainability initiatives on university campuses: a case study from the University of Michigan’s sustainability cultural indicators program. In: Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in Higher Education, pp. 189–199 (2017)Google Scholar
  14. Mir, A.A., Khan, S.J.: Students’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviours towards sustainability : a study of select universities. Int. J. Res. Eng. IT Soc. Sci. 8, 134–141 (2018)Google Scholar
  15. Montgomery, D.C., Runger, G.C.: Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers. Wiley & Sons (2007)Google Scholar
  16. Pope, J., Annandale, D., Morrison-Saunders, A.: Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 24, 595–616 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ribeiro, J.F., Embiruçu, M., Freires, F.G.M.: Sustainable university : methods of implementation and assessment tools. In: POMS 27th Annual Conference, pp. 1–8 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. Ruqaishi, M., Bashir, H.A.: Causes of delay in construction projects in the oil and gas industry in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries: a case study. J. Manag. Eng. 31, (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K., Dikshit, A.K.: An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol. Indic. 15, 281–299 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sustainable Engineering Asset Management (SEAM) Research GroupUniversity of SharjahSharjahUAE
  2. 2.Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management DepartmentUniversity of SharjahSharjahUAE
  3. 3.Electrical and Computer Engineering DepartmentUniversity of SharjahSharjahUAE

Personalised recommendations