The Role of UI GreenMetric as a Global Sustainable Rankings for Higher Education Institutions

This note is presented as continuance discussion in previous edition more focus on how Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) contribute to create sustainable universities, sustainable future.

As we know that university is an institution of higher education and research which awards academic degrees in various academic disciplines. Generally, it provides undergraduate education and postgraduate education involved large numbers of students, academic and non-academic staffs also wide areas of buildings. Hence, universities can be considered as “small cities” (Alshuwaikhat & Abubakar, 2008) whereas their massive daily activities in term of teaching, research, and community engagement, also movement of goods and persons inside and outside campuses have contributed greenhouse gases emission. We can see that universities have different type, function, size and buildings complexity, energy and electricity consumption, waste generation, water and materials consumption, public transportation, education activities and so forth so that obviously, they brought significant impacts on the environment within their boundaries. In regards to these facts, since the last two decades’ discussion on campuses’ externalities on environmental quality and integrity is profound and rise the need to consider sustainability in academic institutions.

Many universities in developed countries have aware on this environmental issue, and take a lead in initiating and implementing policies on green and sustainability campus. For example, in US and UK where the greatest number of universities had actively involved in all aspects of sustainability (Puertas & Marti, 2019). Several Irish Universities set their policies on sustainability by referring to Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), a document produced by the Irish government that explicitly targets as National Strategy on Education for Sustainable Development in Ireland 2014-2020 (Shawe et al., 2019). Numbers of local and global association that strongly commit and put serious concern in sustainability issue such as Global Universities Partnership on Environment for Sustainability (GUPES), Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN), International Sustainable Campus Network (ISCN), Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), Sustainability University Network (SUN) Thailand, Campus Sustainability Network in Japan (CAS-Net Japan) etc. have been established and significantly growth in number of participating university. Furthermore, as the UNDP 17 SDGs became widely global concern including the role of HEIs in achieving SDG targets by 2030, many more universities become aware regarding the implementation of sustainability efforts and their annual report on sustainability which related to SDGs.   

To appreciate and acknowledge universities who have strong commitment and works hard on campus sustainable efforts, UI GreenMetric World University Rankings was developed in 2010 as a tool to support green universities development (Suwartha & Riri, 2013). The ranking has 6 categories to be evaluated: firstly, the university landscape (setting and infrastructure), secondly the electricity consumption (energy and climate change), the third is waste management, the forth is water preservation, the fifth is green transportation for public, and the last is education and research that related to sustainability. From these 6 categories, some goals of the 17 SDGs are relevant such as goals 9 and 11 for category setting and infrastructure, goals 7, 12, and 13 for category energy and climate change, goals 3, 12, and 14 for category waste management, goal 6 for category water preservation, goals 13 and 15 for category green transportation, and goal 4 for category education and research.

In 2018, 719 universities from 81 countries have participated in the rankings and have significantly changed their attitudes towards sustainability challenges in their own contexts. Having this large numbers of participants in global scale, UI GreenMetric World University Rankings Network (UIGWURN) was established in 2017 to be a platform for sharing best practices and encourage more universities to put sustainability agenda as one of their priorities. Currently, there are 29 country-based coordinators for the UIGWURN. The network has three main thematic priority activities: (1) Shaping Global Higher Education and Research in Sustainability; (2) Creating Global Sustainability Leaders; and (3) Partnering on Solutions to Sustainability Challenges.

Significant impact of the UI GreenMetric ranking shown by the increasing number of participants, covered in dynamic regions of North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia and Oceania. Many participating universities through their website express sincere gratitude and proud that their continuous sustainability efforts have been acknowledged by listed in the ranking. Appreciation to UI GreenMetric ranking also given by the International Ranking Expert Group (IREG) as a global sustainable ranking for university. Though several authors gave critical analysis and positive feedback for a green ranking including UI GreenMetric (i.e. Ragazzi & Ghidini, 2017), some authors on contrary proposed a composite indicator developed using data envelopment analysis (DEA) and combined with UI GreenMetric that later known as the DEA-GreenMetric ranking (Puertas & Marti, 2019).

Based on the above findings, it can be concluded that UI GreenMetric has been acknowledged globally as the only one sustainability ranking which relevancy simple, accessible, and has significant role as benchmark or guidance tools particularly for universities in developing countries towards creating sustainable universities, sustainable future. Nurturing Research and Technology Development

In order to hasten developments in all research areas, various improvement of technologies through alternative designs, methods, modeling, experiments, and observation is urgently required. In this context, this edition presents twenty papers dedicated to promote research in engineering and environmental that direct and indirectly contributes to sustainable development goals.

The first paper, written by M.M. Julian, A. Brenning, S. Kralisch, and M. Fink, presents the hydrological implications of the spatial plan 2029 and climate change. The authors argue that the hydrological model able to explore the impacts of land-use change and climate change, providing useful information for urban planning, environmental decision making, and water resources management.

The next paper, written by A.T. Juniati, D. Sutjiningsih, H. Soeryantono, and E. Kusratmoko, analyses water availability estimation using the modified Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS-CN) model. The authors argue that from the estimation of water availability, the water availability can still meet the water demand for current needs, but there will be shortage for the next 20 or 30 years.

The third paper, written by S.G.P. Suvvari and V.V.S. Pasalapudi, examines the performance of encased silica-manganese slag stone columns in soft marine clay. The authors argue that the engineering behaviour of the soil was improved by introducing the Silica-Manganese slag than conventional stone columns and also with encasement length.

The fourth paper, written by K.S. Vali and B. Murugan, investigates the impact of nano SiO₂ particles on the physical and mechanical properties of cold-bonded artificial lightweight aggregates by the pelletization process. The authors argue that the results could be very useful in the enhancement of both the physical and mechanical properties of lightweight aggregates.

The fifth paper, written by P. Sukapto, J.R. Octavia, P.A.D. Pundarikasutra, P. K. Ariningsih, and S. Susanto, evaluates occupational health and safety and in the home-based footwear industry. As a result, the authors recommend that the workshops need to improve their working environment, work facilities, safety climate and participatory ergonomics of the employees.

The next paper, written by I.Z. Sutalaksana, S.Z.Z. Zakiyah, and A. Widyanti, examines the link risk behavior and accident rates in military tools manufacturer. The authors argue that occupational safety can be achieved through individual approaches based on basic human values and risk perception.

The seventh paper, written by O. L. Driouach, K. Zarbane, and Z. Beidouri, reviews the use of lean manufacturing in small and medium-sized enterprises. The authors argue that the proposed alternative model can be used to implement lean manufacturing for the specific context of very small businesses (VSBs).

The eighth paper, written by M. Iman, E.M. Yuniarno, and A.G. Sooai, proposes a low-cost system for capturing motion using stereo webcam and some daily house grade tools that has been specifically designed for theatre. The authors argue that the proposed system creates high accuracy and cost efficient.

The next paper, written by T.M. Amine and A. Djebbari, proposes a method for building low-density-parity-check (LDPC) codes. The authors argue that the proposed codes ensure a very low encoding complexity and reduce the stored memory of the matrix H in which this matrix can be easily built comparing to others codes used in channel coding.

The tenth paper, written by A. Khumaeni, H. Sutanto, and W.S. Budi, examines the use of an Nd:YAG laser operated at a low-energy of 30 mJ to produce gold nanoparticles. The authors argue that the gold nanoparticles with narrow size distribution and high purity can be successfully produced using the PLA technique.

The eleventh paper, written by N.R Yanti, H. Heryani, M.D. Putra, and A. Nugroho, examines the triacetin production from glycerol using heterogeneous catalysts prepared from peat clay. The authors argue that the the conversion of glycerol for triacetin production using such alumina and silica catalysts yielded levels of 82.7% and 87.4% respectively.

The next paper, written by M. Muslim, M.I. Alhamid, Nasruddin, M. Yulianto, and E. Marzuki, examines the variations in heat source temperatures for an organic rankine cycle power plant to produce electricity. The authors argue that optimum power estimation was measured several electrical power outputs between 1.76 and 2.74 kilowatts.

The thirteenth paper, written by M. Dani, A. Dimyati, Parikin, D.R. Adhika, A.K. Jahja, A. Insani, Syahbuddin and C.A. Huang, examines the microstructure and deformation of austenitic super alloy after arc plasma sintering. The authors argue that the arc plasma sintering leads to a decrease in the area of the eutectic structure at the inter-dendrites and forms micro straine.

The fourteenth paper, written by J.F. Fatriansyah, M. Joshua, R. Lailani and M. Chalid, presents crystallization kinetics study of impact polypropylene copolymer with kenaf as nucleating agent and reinforcement. The authors argue that that better crystal growth dynamics yields better mechanical strength in the IPC+kenaf system.

The next paper, written by B. Priyono, A.Z. Syahrial, M.R. Nugraha, D. Sepala, Faizah and A. Subhan, examines the performance optimization of micro composites for lithium-ion batteries. The authors argue that the compounds of micro composites were successfully synthesized and obtained a reasonably high surface area and minimum aggregation.

The sixteenth paper, written by A.S. Baskoro, R.P Kurniawan and Haikal, evaluates the 2-axis movement of a 5-axis gantry robot for welding applications. The authors argue that the best level of robot accuracy is 0.83% at a velocity of 2.5 mm/s, while the repeatability rate produces 96 ?m and 108 ?m on the X and Y axis.

The next paper, written by D. Suwandi, R. Aziz, A. Sifa, E. Haris, J. Istiyanto and Y. Whulanza, examines the application of dry film photoresist on printed circuit board (PCB). The authors argue that the maskless photolithography process successfully conducted using DLP Projector Infocus IN114A applied to dry films photoresist. 

The eighteenth paper, written by H. Iridiastadi, B. Anggawisnu, F.S. Didin, and P.A.R. Yamin, presents the prediction of dynamic axial crushing on a square tube with eight holes used as a crush initiator. The author argues that the proposed formulas can be used to predict average force, peak force and energy absorption of the dynamic axial crushing.

The nineteenth paper, written by I. Abar and I.K.A.P. Utama, examines the effect of incline angle of propeller boss cap fins (PBCF) on ship propeller performance. The authors argue that the PBCF convergent hub results in increased efficiency of around 0.8%, whereas the divergent type decreases efficiency by about 1.0%.

The last paper, written by M.Z.M.A. Zubair and S.I. Latumahina, investigates progressive collapse of the local elements and ultimate strength of a ro-ro ship. As a result,  the authors argue that the deformation of the local elements on the deck and bottom parts indicate that stress concentration appearead.

We hope that this edition of IJTech conveys some new insights in the way we conduct our research. We are pleased to accept and respond to any comment or enquiry you may have on the direction and content of IJTech, and we invite you to join us in this venture by sending your work for consideration.