Skip to main content

An Indicator-Based Approach to Sustainability Monitoring and Mainstreaming at Universiti Sains Malaysia

Abstract

This chapter presents the results of the research we have been doing to develop a new methodology to monitor and mainstream sustainability throughout Universiti Sains Malaysia, in keeping with our new vision of “Transforming Higher Education for a Sustainable Tomorrow.” We have focused both on global sustainability challenges and on campus sustainability. In the first part of our research we developed a new tool, a Sustainability Assessment Methodology (SAM), to assess the sustainability content of courses and projects. This method involves a screening step, consisting of three generic questions; an identification step, with 24 more specific questions; and a classification step, in which the results of steps 1 and 2 are used to classify courses and projects as either Green (High), Yellow (Medium), or Red (Low) in terms of sustainability. When we used SAM to do a USM Sustainability Audit, out of 2671 courses examined, 44 % were found to have elements of at least one pillar of the “Triple Bottom Line” sustainability model, 27 % had elements of two pillars, and 9 % had elements of all three pillars. In the second part of our research, we developed a Framework with Four Worksheets that presented targets, tasks, and timelines for sustainability infusion at all levels of USM’s activities. The outcomes of this part of our research provide feedback and guidance to all practitioners to build sustainability content in their mission activities. This may include reorienting existing courses or designing and managing new research and community-oriented projects. Together, the results may be used either for rating or ranking sustainability performance, though we have used them only for rating at this stage.

Keywords

  • Sustainability indicator (SI)
  • Sustainability assessment methodology (SAM)
  • Education for sustainable development (ESD)
  • Higher education
  • USM-APEX (Universiti Sains Malaysia accelerated program for excellence)

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-02375-5_14
  • Chapter length: 22 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-02375-5
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Notes

  1. 1.

    Indicator framework and worksheets are accessible at: http://cgss.usm.my/images/sustainability_indicators%20version%20for%20reprint%20250110.pdf (All the six (6) links in this paper can be viewed by ‘Ctrl + left-clicking’ the hyperlinks in the text or in the footnote and following prompts (click OK) on the screen.).

  2. 2.

    Indicator worksheets are available at: http://cgss.usm.my/images/sustainability_indicators%20version%20for%20reprint%20250110.pdf.

  3. 3.

    USM-APEX Sustainability Roadmap is accessible at: http://cgss.usm.my/images/sustainability_rm%20version%20for%20reprint%20120110.pdf.

  4. 4.

    WEHAB +3 is available for download at: http://cgss.usm.my/images/wehab%20plus.pdf.

  5. 5.

    USM-APEX Sustainability Fact Sheets are accessible at: http://cgss.usm.my/images/fact%20sheet%20latest%20version%20for%20reprint%20may%2020121LATEST.pdf.

  6. 6.

    The sustainability indicator checklist is available for download at: http://cgss.usm.my/images/si%20new%20check%20list%20sd.pdf.

References

  • Asif, M., Searcy, C., Zutshi, A., & Ahamd, N. (2011). An Integrated Management Systems Approach to Corporate Sustainability. European Business Review, 23(4), 360.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Alternative University Appraisal (AUA) for ESD in Higher Education Institutions (2010). Creating ESD learning community, a joint project of six ProSPER.Net members—Asian Institute of technology (Thailand), Hokkaido University (Japan), TERI University (India), Universiti Sains Malaysia (Malaysia), Yonsei University (Korea) and United Nations University-Institute of Advanced Studies (Japan). http:www.sustain.hokudai.ac.jp/aua;.

  • Community Engagement, Universiti Sains Malaysia (2009). Regional Centre Expertise (RCE), Healthy Campus (HC) and Bahagian Hal Ehwal Pembangunan Pelajar (BHEPP).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca, A., Macdonald, A., Dandy, E., & Valenti, P. (2010). The state of sustainability reporting at Canadian Universities. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 12(1), 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Getzner, M. (1999). Weak and strong sustainability indicators and regional environmental resources. Environmental Management and Health, 10(3), 174.

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hak, T., Moldan, B. & Dahl, L. A. (2007). Sustainability Indicators: A Scientific Assessment (Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) Series). Wasington DC: Island Press. ISBN 13: 978-1597261319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hezri, A. A. (2004). Sustainability indicator system and policy processes in Malaysia: A framework for utilisation and learning. Journal of Environmental Management, 73(4), 361.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • The World Bank (2002). Millennium Development Goals. World Development Indicators.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. T., Munoz-Erikson, T. & Redman, L, C. (2010). Transforming knowledge for sustainability: towards adaptive academic institutions. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 12(2), 177–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortengren. K. (2004). A Summary of the Theory Behind the LFA Method, the Logical Framework Approach. SIDA, ISBN 91-586-8402-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prabhu, R., Colfer, J. P. C., Venkateswarlu, P., Lay, C. T., Soekmadi, R. & Wollenberg, E. (1996) Testing Criteria and Indicators for the Sustainable Management of Forests. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Razak, A. D., Hamid, A. Z., Sanusi, A. Z., & Koshy, K. C. (2010). Transforming higher education for a sustainable tomorrow: A case of learning by doing at Universiti Sains Malaysia. Tomorrow Today, Learning to Build a Sustainable Future. UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Research, Universiti Sains Malaysia (2009). Based on Research Creativity and Management Office website (RCMO); www.usm.my/rcmoSchool Guidebook, Universiti Sains Malaysia (2009): School of Aerospace, School of Chemical Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, School of Materials and Materials Resources Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, School of Pharmacy, School of Housing, Building & Planning, School of Physics, School of Chemistry, School of Industrial Technology, School of Mathematics, School of Health Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, School of Computer Sciences, School of Social Sciences, School of Humanities, School of Language, Literacy and Translation, School of Communication, School of Educations, School of Accounting, School of Management.

  • Sustainability Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) for Colleges and Universities (2009). Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (ULSF), 2009, ULSF serves as the Secretariat for signatories of the Talloires Declaration, a ten-point action plan committing institutions to sustainability and environmental literacy in teaching and practice. Over 350 university presidents and chancellors in more than 50 countries have signed the Declaration. http://www.ulsf.org/.

  • Swanepoel, H., & De Beer, F. (2006). Community Development: Breaking the Cycle of Poverty. Landsdowne: Juta and Co Ltd. ISBN 9 780702-171581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sustainability Studies Committee, Centre for Global Sustainability Studies (CGSS@USM) (2009). USM-APEX Sustainability Roadmap.

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Brighton (2010). Using values-based indicators: Guiding notes for Civil society, research and academic institutions. a Smart toolkit for evaluating sustainability projects, Developed by University of Brighton, Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Charles University in Prague. http://www.smarttoolkit.net/?q=node/602.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are deeply indebted to the research assistants of the indicator research team (Nordiana binti Mohd Yusoff, Nur Afiqah binti Ismail, Masratul Hawa), to Ratisya Radzi and Nurhazliyana Hanafi of CGSS@USM, Christopher Smith for editing the draft, and to all others who helped to make this project a success.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kanayathu C. Koshy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix 1

Permutation Combination

 
  1. The (+, ~ , –) responses when applied to the three pillars of SD, Economy (Eco), Environment (Env) and Society (Soc), generate the following permutations.
  2. (Note This table itself need not be understood in any depth to apply SAM, but this explains the basis for it. It is true that those who use SAM need to have a working knowledge of SD and ESD. There are no other easy approaches to assessing sustainability content as we have attempted here. It is similar to a clinical approach; while instrument based test results are useful in diagnosis, qualified and experienced medical personnel are needed to treat patients).
  3. Any combination of two or more positives (+) with other sign was considered to indicate a distinct situation for sustainability—a smiling face. The other two faces have less and less + signs and hence relatively less sustainability content.

Appendix 2

Brief check list for SAM–KIPs* and KPIs* (Based on USM-APEX Sustainability Priorities—WEHAB +3)

No. Indicator type: Impact indicators (8 KIPs); scope—general (check compatibility of statements here to audit items) + (H) ~ (M) – (L) Remarks (sector/cross-sec)
1 Depletion of natural capital; institutional arrangements
Development footprints; globalization, culture
    Environment
2 Pollution; institutional arrangements
Integrated waste management - 3R approach
    Environment
3 Knowledge economy, skills generation; poverty eradication (social uplift)     Economy
4 Emphasis on “the economy and society are wholly owned subsidiaries of the environment” or “the economic goods and services come from the ecological goods and services”     Economy
5 Green business for income generation and societal well being     Society
6 Health, conflict resolution, social capital, democracy, equity, good governance     Society
7 In human history, there have been ‘waves’ of major innovations. The next wave of innovation will be in Sustainability. EE/ESD as the educational approach for this innovation     EE/ESD
8 The intent of the ESD decade (2005-14, UNDESD)     EE/ESD
No. Indicator type: performance indicators (10 KPIs); scope—‘WEHAB + 3’ (WEHAB = water, energy, health, agriculture and biodiversity) + ~ Remarks
9 Quality and quantity     Water
10 Distribution and accessibility     Water
11 Efficiency/accessibility:     Energy
12 Diversification/renewable energy     Energy
13 Communicable diseases     Health
14 Non-communicable diseases     Health
15 Land use and land cover changes     Agriculture
16 Food security     Agriculture
17 Biological goods and services     Biodiversity
18 Habitat integrity, conservation     Biodiversity
No. Indicator type: performance indicators (6 KPIs); scope—WEHAB + 3’ (3 = (i): climate change/disaster risk management, (ii): population/poverty, (iii): production/consumption) + ~ Remarks
19 Science, sectoral impacts and capacity building     Climate change/disaster risk management
20 Mitigation, adaptation, Networking and Policy     Climate change/disaster risk management
21 Demography, settlement, natural resources, income generation, and Poverty     Population/poverty
22 Human capital, education, health, globalization, culture, and governance     Population/poverty
23 Natural resource use, pollution, policies     Production/consumption
24 Industry, trade, transportation, business, market, policies     Production/consumption
  1. (+) If the answer is positive/yes
  2. (~) If the answer is neutral (neither positive or negative)
  3. (–) If the answer is negative/no (if in doubt here, use precautionary principle)
  4. *KIP Key intangible performance; KPI, Key performance indicators

Appendix 3

Appendix 4

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Koshy, K.C., Nor, N.M., Sibly, S., Rahim, A.A., Jegatesen, G., Muhamad, M. (2013). An Indicator-Based Approach to Sustainability Monitoring and Mainstreaming at Universiti Sains Malaysia. In: Caeiro, S., Filho, W., Jabbour, C., Azeiteiro, U. (eds) Sustainability Assessment Tools in Higher Education Institutions. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02375-5_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02375-5_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-02374-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-02375-5

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)