The issues and methodologies in sustainability assessment tools for higher education

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development http://jsd.sagepub.com/

The Issues and Methodologies in Sustainability Assessment Tools for Higher Education Institutions: A Review of Recent Trends and Future Challenges Masaru Yarime and Yuko Tanaka Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 2012 6: 63 DOI: 10.1177/097340821100600113 The online version of this article can be found at: http://jsd.sagepub.com/content/6/1/63

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of: Centre For Environment Education

Additional services and information for Journal of Education for Sustainable Development can be found at: Email Alerts: http://jsd.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://jsd.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://jsd.sagepub.com/content/6/1/63.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Apr 27, 2012 What is This?

Downloaded from jsd.sagepub.com at UNIVERSIDAD DEL ROSARIO on October 29, 2013

RESEARCH ESD in Higher Education, the Professions and at Home Copyright Š 2012 SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore and Washington DC) www.sagepublications.com Vol 6(1): 63–77 10.1177/097340821100600113

The Issues and Methodologies in Sustainability Assessment Tools for Higher Education Institutions A Review of Recent Trends and Future Challenges masaru yarime and yuko tanaka Abstract Assessment tools influence incentives to higher education institutions by encouraging them to move towards sustainability. A review of 16 sustainability assessment tools was conducted to examine the recent trends in the issues and methodologies addressed in assessment tools quantitatively and qualitatively. The characteristics of the current approaches as well as problems and obstacles are identified, and implications and suggestions offered for improvements. The sustainability assessment tools reviewed focus mainly on the environmental impacts of university operation and issues related to governance. Aspects of education, research and outreach activities are not well addressed by these tools. As activities for sustainability at higher education institutions increasingly involve inter-/trans-disciplinary cooperation and close collaboration with diverse stakeholders in society, it will be of critical importance to develop and implement concepts and methodologies for conducting comprehensive, long-term and integrated assessment of research, education and outreach on sustainability at higher education institutions.

Keywords: Sustainability assessment tool, higher education institutions, governance, operation, education, research, outreach Masaru Yarime and Yuko Tanaka are in the Graduate Program in Sustainability Science (GPSS) at the Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, University of Tokyo. Email: yarime@k.u-tokyo.ac.jp

64

Masaru Yarime and Yuko Tanaka

INTRODUCTION

T

he concept of sustainability was first introduced to education at an international level by the UNESCO-UNEP International Environmental Education Programme in 1975, jointly administered by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) (UNESCO 1984). Since then, a number of national and international declarations directly relating to sustainability in higher education institutions (HEIs) have been developed and gained broad acceptance in the higher education community.

The emerging themes in these declarations include sustainable physical operations, sustainable research, public outreach, interuniversity cooperation, partnership with government, nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) and industry, ecological literacy, developing interdisciplinary curriculum, and moral obligation (Wright 2002, 2004).

The importance of reorienting existing education programs to incorporate sustainability-related principles, knowledge, skills, perspectives and values has been emphasised further by the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005–2014) and UNESCO’s International Implementation Scheme (UNESCO Education Sector 2005). Here education for sustainable development is defined as a dynamic concept that utilises all aspects of public awareness, education and training, to create and enhance an understanding of the linkages among the issues of sustainable development and to develop the knowledge, skills, perspectives and values that will empower people of all ages to assume responsibility for creating and enjoying a sustainable future. It requires HEIs to rethink their missions, and to restructure their courses research priorities, community outreach and campus operations. Integrating sustainability into all of the major activities of HEIs presents a tremendous opportunity to prepare students, and the campus community, to become more adept decision makers in an increasingly complex, dynamic and uncertain future (Glasser et al. 2005).

Progress on campuses, however has been much slower than expected (Velazquez et al. 2005). The slow pace in HEIs’ movements towards sustainability is particularly influenced by the conventional university evaluation systems that do not seriously consider sustainability perspectives in their assessment frameworks. Currently, HEIs are under increasing pressure from the government’s requirements for quality assurance, and by market-based evaluations, which use quantitative data such as the number of academic papers published or cited and have become a powerful tool to provide simplified impressions of HEI performance. Because ranking and assessment systems are increasingly influential in guiding the activities of HEIs, they, if modified appropriately, could be a significant force for transformation towards a more sustainable direction (Fadeeva and Mochizuki 2010).

Since the development of the major declarations on sustainability in higher education in the 1990s, a variety of assessment tools have been published and implemented with a considerable diversity in scope and methodology, covering a broad range of aspects related to sustainability of HEIs. Three primary functions are addressed in the campus sustainability assessments; namely, to understand where an institution stands Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

Sustainability Assessment Tools for Higher Education Institutions

with regard to sustainability objectives; to identify areas and develop strategies for improving an institution’s sustainability performances; and to help build a culture committed to sustainability (Nixon 2002). To fully understand where an institution stands as well as what initiatives could improve sustainability, a comprehensive framework helps make critical linkages and connections among different areas of the institution, which might not be possible with a focused analysis. Furthermore, a culture committed to sustainability can be better fostered by comprehensive reporting, which can inspire interest in sustainability by presenting information in a form easily accessible and digestible to all stakeholders (Heilmayr 2005).

To achieve far-reaching impacts in the community of higher education, it is crucial that assessment tools are constructed and implemented across different institutions.

A study analysing 11 major cross-institutional sustainability assessment tools found that while the assessment tools vary greatly in purpose, scope, function and the state of development, they tend to emphasise the following attributes of sustainability in higher education—decreased usage of energy, water, and other materials and inputs, incremental and systemic progress, sustainability education as a core function, incorporation of teaching, research, operations and service, and cross-institutional action (Shriberg 2002). While these previous studies described the basic characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of existing sustainability assessment tools, they were mostly based on qualitative analysis; and the focused areas, specific issues, and methodologies were not examined quantitatively, which would make it difficult to trace chronological trends and to make more precise comparisons among universities. Recently, more sustainability assessment tools have been developed, and their issues and methodologies require close examination. This article reviews the major assessment tools used in dealing with sustainability in higher education over the past 20 years and to examine the basic trends and characteristics in the scope and methodology of these tools. In particular, it examines the issues addressed in these assessment tools with quantitative as well as qualitative measures. It compares the similarities and differences among the major assessment tools. Based on the analysis of the characteristics of the existing assessment tools, we draw implications and suggestions for improving sustainability assessment tools for HEIs.

METHODOLOGY AND DATA In a major study of assessment tools for sustainability in higher education, Shriberg argued that ideal sustainability assessments across institutions in general should identify important issues, be calculable and comparable, move beyond eco-efficiency, measure processes and motivations, and stress comprehensibility (Shriberg 2002).

This study follows this criteria for choosing the sustainability assessment tools.

Including the sustainability assessment tools analysed by Shriberg, as well as more recent ones, we selected 16 assessment tools for close examination. Basic information on the sustainability assessment tools is provided in Table 1.

The categories and indicators used in assessment and reporting tools are diverse, and indicators and questions asking the same content are categorised differently, depending on the assessment tool. In this study, indicators and questions were Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

65

66

Masaru Yarime and Yuko Tanaka

Table 1 List of the sustainability assessment tools analysed No. Sustainability Assessment Tool

Organisation/Individual for Development

Year

1

Campus Ecology

Student Environmental Action Coalition (SEAC)

1993

2

Higher Education Funding Council for England’s environmental report and workbook (Environmental Workbook)

Higher Education Funding Council for England

1998

3

University Leaders for a Sustainable Future’s Sustainability Assessment Questionnaire for Colleges and Universities (SAQ)

University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (ULSF)

1999

4

Environmental Management System Self-Assessment Checklist

Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence

2000

5

Penn State Indicator Report

Penn State Green Destiny Council

2000

6

Auditing Instrument for Sustainability in Higher Education (AISHE)

Dutch Committee on Sustainable Higher Education (CDHO)

2001

7

National Wildlife Federation’s State of the Campus Environment

National Wildlife Federation (NWF)

2001

8

Campus Sustainability Selected Indicators Snapshot

New Jersey Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability

2001

9

Campus Sustainability Assessment Review Project (CSARP)

Western Michigan University

2002

10

Campus Sustainability Assessment Framework (CSAF)

Lindsay Cole

2003

11

Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability (HEPS)

Forum for the Future

2003

12

Good Company’s Sustainable Pathways Toolkit

Good Company

2004

13

Global Reporting Initiative Modified for Universities

Global Reporting Initiative

2006

14

Sustainability Tracking, Assessment Association for the Advancement of and Rating System (STARS) for Colleges Sustainability in Higher Education and Universities Version 0.4 (AASHE)

2007

15

Campus Sustainability Assessment Framework Core (CSAF Core)

Sirra Youth Coalition

2009

16

College Sustainability Report Card

Sustainable Endowment Institute

2010

examined individually by the authors and recategorised into the five categories— governance, operations, education, research and outreach. These categories were mentioned as crucial elements of sustainability in HEIs in many of the previous studies of sustainability assessment tools.

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

Sustainability Assessment Tools for Higher Education Institutions

Governance—Questions and indicators concerning the administrative structure and policy directions of a HEI. This category indicates a basic framework to promote sustainability in the institution, thus it includes visions and policies imposed on the whole institution with regard to working conditions, such as employment and payment.

Operation—Indicators and questions directly related to campus operations and environmental performance, such as energy and water consumption, and waste and hazardous materials management. It also includes policies and funding guidelines implemented on a specific part of environmentally conscious performance, such as environmental purchasing policies and investment in renewable energy.

Education—Indicators and questions related to the curriculum, teaching and capacity development offered for students at the institution. Other learning opportunities for faculty members and staff are categorised in the governance section and learning opportunities for communities are categorised in the outreach section.

Research—Indicators and questions asking the institution’s efforts and commitments to promote research activities in relation to sustainability and to establish the surrounding conditions that enables them.

Outreach—Indicators and questions representing the extent of transformation that the institution has undergone towards reaching sustainability goals, such as networking with stakeholders outside the institution as well as regional, national and international engagement.

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS Table 2 shows that the questions and indicators on governance and operation have received much attention, accounting for 39 and 44 per cent of questions and indicators, respectively. Education, research and outreach account only for 8 per cent, 5 per cent and 4 per cent, respectively, which suggests that there is a relative lack of attention to these areas in the existing assessment tools.

To understand trends in the areas addressed in sustainability assessment tools, we examined the questions and indicators in different tools by recategorising the questions and indicators into the five areas of governance, operation, education, research and outreach. The share of the number of indicators and questions on governance, Table 2 Areas addressed in sustainability assessment tools for HEIs Area

Share (%)

Governance

39

Operation

44

Education

8

Research

5

Outreach Total

4 100 Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

67

68

Masaru Yarime and Yuko Tanaka

operation, education, research and outreach to the total number of indicators and questions in each assessment tool is given in Table 3. The 16 assessment tools are listed in a chronological order depending on the year of development as shown in Table 1.

Table 3 Share of indicators on governance, operation, education, research and outreach in sustainability assessment tools for HEIs Assessment Tool No.

Governance

Operation

Education

Research

Outreach

1

26

54

8

8

4

2

35

64

0

0

1

3

46

18

20

8

8

4

97

3

0

0

0

5

12

61

0

12

15

6

50

0

40

5

5

7

16

66

4

10

4

8

0

90

7

3

0

9

44

45

6

4

1

10

43

44

5

3

5

11

52

31

9

4

4

12

10

83

7

0

0

13

53

23

11

13

0

14

46

31

10

6

7

15

51

41

2

2

4

16

45

45

2

0

8

Governance and operation received attention in assessment tools developed in early periods, and have also been emphasised in more recent assessment tools.

Conversely, the areas of education, research, and outreach do not exhibit a clear tendency over the years. Nonetheless, the attention given these three areas has been consistently smaller than that given to governance and operation.

Qualitative Analysis Qualitative analysis was conducted on the content of individual indicators. The issues addressed in the fields of governance, operation, education, research and outreach in the 16 assessment tools are shown in Tables 4–7 respectively. Elements and aspects mentioned more than two times in the assessment tools were included. Indicators and questions interpreted as addressing the same content are combined into one indicator. For example, in the category of governance, indicators asking if the institution has either a policy, vision or mission for sustainability are regarded as a single indicator.

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

x

x

5

x

x

x

x

6

x

x

7

8

x

x

x

x

9

x

x

x

x

10

x x

x

x

Note:  X indicates the content is addressed in the assessment tool.

Emergency Plan

Health and Well-being (Mental and Physical Health, Housing)

Volunteer

Student Retention, Graduation Rates x

x

Public Relations (Reporting, Website, etc.)

Student Organisation

x

Orientation for Staff and Faculty, Written Guideline and Training

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Stakeholder Involvement in Decision-Making Process x

x

x

x

4

Investment, Budget and Funding

x

x

x

x

3

x

x

x

2

Salary, Payment

Faculty Development in Sustainability (Hiring, Promotion and Other Incentives)

Employment (Diversity, Disabled, Ethnic Minority)

Sustainability-Related Coordinator and Office

Monitoring, Investigation, Audit, Assessment and Survey

x

x

Creation of Policies, Strategies, Planning, Initiatives and Visions

Implementation of Policies, Management Programs

1

Issue

x

x

x

11

x

x

x

x

x

x

12

x

x

x

x

x

x

13

Table 4  Issues addressed in the field of governance in sustainability assessment tools

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

14

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

15

x

x

x

x

x

x

16

3

6

3

4

3

6

7

3

8

4

2

4

6

8

3

12

Total

x

Solid Waste Management (Recycle, Reduction)

x x

Note:  X indicates the content is addressed in the assessment tool.

Building, Renovation

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Transportation

x

Landscape

x

x

x

x

x

x

Purchasing Products and Services

x

x

x

x

Biodiversity

x

Food (Organic, Vegetarian)

x

x

x

Treatment of Hazardous/Toxic Materials, Pollution Control

Materials (Paper, etc.)

x

Noise Pollution

x

x

7

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

8 x

9

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

6

x

x

5

x

4

Air Quality

x

3

Water/Sewage

x

2 x

x

Energy Consumption, Renewable Energy Use

GHG Emissions

1

Issue

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

10

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

11

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

12

x

x

x

x

x

13

Table 5  Issues addressed in the field of operation in sustainability assessment tools

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

14

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

15

x

x

x

x

16

7

14

5

9

9

9

6

12

7

2

7

13

4

12

Total

x

x

Student Literacy including Graduates

2

x

x

3

x

4

5 x

6

7 x

8

x

x

9

x

x

x

10

x

x

11 x

x

12

x

x

13

x x x

Research Project

Faculty Participation

Fund, Budget

2 x

x

3

4

x

x

5

Note: X indicates the content is addressed in the assessment tool.

Ethical Treatment of Research Related to Sustainability

1

Issue

6

7 x

8

x

x

9

x

x

x

10

11

x

x

x

12

x

x

13

Table 7 Issues addressed in the field of research in sustainability assessment tools

Note: X indicates the content is addressed in the assessment tool.

x

Fund, Budget

Faculty Participation

Course and Program

1

Issue

Curriculum, Credits Requirement

Table 6 Issues addressed in the field of education in sustainability assessment tools

x

x

14

x

x

x

x

14

x

15

x

15

16

x

16

2

6

4

9

Total

7

2

3

6

7

Total

x

1

2

x

x

3

x

4

Note:   X indicates the content is addressed in the assessment tool.

Partnership at Regional, National and International Level

Locally Produced Product

Involvement and Communication with Local Community

Student Internship, Volunteer and Service to Community

Graduating Students Career Support

Alumni Network

Issue

5 x

6

x

7

8 x

9

x

x

x

10

11

x

12

x

x

13

Table 8:  Issues addressed in the field of outreach in sustainability assessment tools

x

x

14

x

15

x

x

16

2

2

5

3

4

2

Total

Sustainability Assessment Tools for Higher Education Institutions

In the field of governance, due to a wide variety of issues and aspects, ranging from the management of the whole university to human rights, some differences can be identified among assessment tools. Nevertheless, most of the assessment tools address the importance of creating policies, strategies, planning, initiatives and visions. The issue of monitoring, investigation, audit, assessment and survey as well as financial aspects including investment, budget and funding are also frequently addressed in many assessment tools. Conversely, faculty development in sustainability areas, implementation of policies, stakeholder involvement in decision making and emergency plans have not received much attention.

The field of operations showed similarities with regard to the attention received in different assessment tools, compared with other fields. Assessing HEIs’ physical operations incorporating environmental impacts has been addressed well. That is probably because relevant quantitative data can be collected relatively easily, which makes it possible to compare performance with that of other institutions. Accordingly, several of the assessment tools are specifically focused on this area. In particular, the issues of energy consumption, water/sewage, solid waste management and transportation received attention most frequently.

Attention to the fields of education, research and outreach has been small in most existing assessment tools. One exception is research projects for sustainability, as this aspect can be relatively easily evaluated based on the increasingly sophisticated database on scientific articles in academic journals (Yarime et al. 2010). As these three areas are increasingly emphasised in the activities of HEIs for sustainability, more attention needs to be given to them in sustainability assessment tools even though the outcomes of educational, research and outreach activities are not easily evaluated, because it will take some time to see if they have actually made any impact.

The types of indicators and questions used in the 16 assessment tools were also examined to give useful information on their frequency of use and effectiveness.

Table 9 shows the percentage of four types of indicators and questions; namely, yes/ no questions, ratings or multiple options, quantitative questions and free descriptions. If an indicator/question has both a yes or no question and free descriptions, each of them is counted once. Although there is variety in the composition of the different types of indicators and questions, many of the early assessment tools rely on asking questions with multiple options, whereas more recent assessment tools often ask for quantitative information. That difference suggests that assessment tools are increasingly aimed at obtaining more subtle, detailed information, reflecting the diversity and complexity of sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION HEIs are expected to play a significant role in contributing to creating a more sustainable world through their major functions of education, research and outreach (Fadeeva and Mochizuki 2010). Assessment systems and frameworks are increasingly influential in guiding the activities of HEIs. The results of our analysis show, however, that the existing sustainability assessment tools are not sufficiently addressing the

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

73

74

Masaru Yarime and Yuko Tanaka

Table 9 Share of different types of indicators and questions used in sustainability assessment tools for HEIs Yes/No

Multiple Options

Quantitative

Free Description

33

1

25

41

2

–

100

–

–

3

23

28

2

47

4

–

50

–

50

5

–

–

64

36

6

–

50

–

50

7

–

100

–

–

8

–

100

–

–

1

9

–

–

24

76

10

–

–

100

–

11

–

–

63

37

12

–

–

40

60

13

–

–

50

50

14

92

8

–

–

15

–

–

100

–

16

38

25

21

17

importance of education, research and outreach activities in HEIs. A close look at the indicators and questions included in the assessment tools reveals that they mostly deal with the environmental impacts of university operation and issues related to governance. These aspects are relatively easily observable and manageable, often with quantitative goals and objectives.

In the field of governance, some of the assessment tools have started to consider as important indicators informal meetings of faculty members, student groups and community activities, which are not necessarily recognised officially. The practice of assessment itself has been increasingly recognised as a driving force to promote efforts in transforming HEIs into sustainable directions. However, while it is often emphasised that we need to consider problem-oriented nature, long-term perspectives, multi-stakeholders involvement and inter-/trans-disciplinary approaches, many of the existing assessment tools fail to address these aspects sufficiently.

In the area of education, indicators and questions mainly address curricula, the availability of sustainability-related courses, and students’ environmental literacy. While many assessment tools ask for the numbers of courses offered and the number of faculty and students participating in these courses, there are few indicators concerning course content; for example, what skills and knowledge students learn through sustainability education. Analysis of course content would require more careful work, as sustainability-related programs are quite diverse at HEIs across the world.

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

Sustainability Assessment Tools for Higher Education Institutions

It will also be necessary to examine the various kinds of measurement used to evaluate student learning. While immediate results of education are usually measured by tests and exams, a key challenge ahead will be in developing yardsticks that can measure long-term impacts of education for sustainability, the ultimate objective of which is to contribute to promoting sustainability in the future (Trencher and Tanaka 2010). Multiple approaches to sustainability assessment will contribute to a comprehensive understanding of how well and under what pedagogies and educational experiences students learn those outcomes that an institution values (Hernon 2010).

The amount of research funding and number of participating faculty and research projects are the measures commonly addressed in the field of research. Most of the questions in this area ask whether HEIs are making efforts to support research activities related to sustainability and how actively. Thus indicators on research are mainly dealing with the inputs and processes of sustainability-related research activities. Evaluating the outputs of those research activities is especially difficult compared with traditional types of research, because of the inter-/trans-disciplinary nature and the long time period necessary for having any effects on society. While conventional approaches to quantitative evaluation of research performance of HEIs are often based on bibliometric data, such as the numbers of academic papers published and cited, there is no established methodology to assess whether a research project has made any positive impact with regard to sustainability. Even with their limitations, conventional methods of research performance evaluation, including academic articles and patents, could be used to focus on specific subjects considered to contribute to sustainability such as renewable energy.

Only rarely do universities and their surrounding communities collaborate closely with each other to initiate integrated approaches to sustainability, despite huge opportunities for mutual benefits (Elder 2008). There remains a barrier between town and gown even though universities should be able to create research and education opportunities based on real-world problems rather than making unidirectional contributions to society. Community colleges can work on local issues through their strong connections with local communities, whereas large research universities can promote efforts for linking research findings to global challenges such as climate change. It will be necessary to develop assessment tools which take into account such functional differentiations, since indicators are not necessarily applicable to all types of HEIs. Sustainability is not just another issue to be added to an already overcrowded curriculum, but rather can be a gateway to a different view of curriculum, pedagogy, organizational change, policy, and, in particular, ethos (Sterling 2004). While interest in sustainability is growing rapidly at HEIs across the globe, it will be of vital importance to develop methodologies to assess and evaluate appropriately new activities, which transcend mere efficient environmental management of university infrastructure (Wals and Blewitt 2010). Among the novel initiatives recently emerging at some HEIs is the integration of education, research and outreach—three major functions of contemporary universities—through social experimentation based on collaboration with various types of stakeholders (Yarime et al. 2012). Integrated assessment tools will be required to make appropriate evaluation of this kind of ambitious attempts, Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

75

76

Masaru Yarime and Yuko Tanaka

which will go beyond the existing disciplinary boundaries and organisational barriers so that HEIs are encouraged to lead efforts for making steady progress towards sustainability (Yarime 2010).

References Elder, L. James. 2008. ‘Think Systemically, Act Cooperatively: The Key to Reaching a Tipping Point for the Sustainability Movement in Higher Education’, Sustainability: The Journal of Record, 1 (5): 319–28.

Fadeeva, Zinaida and Yoko Mochizuki. 2010. ‘Higher Education for Today and Tomorrow: University Appraisal for Diversity, Inovation and Change towards Sustainable Development’, Sustainability Science, 5: 249–56.

Glasser, H., W. Calder and Z. Fadeeva. 2005. Definition: Research in Higher Education for Sustainability. Document prepared for the Halifax Consultation. Halifax Nova Scotia.

Heilmayr, Robert. 2005. Sustainability Reporting at Higher Education Institutions. Senior Thesis, Claremont McKenna College.

Hernon, Peter. 2010. Selecting from the Assessment Tool Chest. In Peter Hernon and E. Robert Dugan, (eds) Outcomes Assessment in Higher Education: Views and Perspectives. United States: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc, 149–73.

Nixon, Andrew. 2002. Improving the Campus Sustainability Assessment Process. Undergraduate Honors Thesis, Western Michigan University.

Shriberg, Michael. 2002. ‘Institutional Assessment Tools for Sustainability in Higher Education: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Implications for Practice and Theory’, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3 (3): 254–70.

Sterling, Stephen. 2004. Higher Education, Sustainability, and the Role of Systemic Learning.

In Peter Blaze Corcoran and Arjen E.J. Wals, (eds) Higher Education and the Challenge of Sustainability: Problematics, Promise, and Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press, 47–70.

Trencher, Greg and Aurea Christine Tanaka. 2010. ‘UNU-IAS Meeting Notes, Symposium “Perspectives on University Performance Evaluation”, 15–16 March 2010, Elizabeth Rose Hall, United Nations University Headquarters, Tokyo, Japan’. United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS).

UNESCO. 1984. ‘Activities of the UNESCO-UNEP International Environmental Education Programm (1975–1983)’. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Paris.

UNESCO Education Sector. 2005. ‘United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005–2014): International Implementation Scheme’. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), Paris, France.

Velazquez, Luis, Nora Munguia, & Margarita Sanchez. 2005. ‘Deterring Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions: An Appraisal of the Factors Which Influence Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions’, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6 (5), 383–91.

Wals, Arjen E.J. and John Blewitt. 2010. ‘Third-wave Sustainability in Higher Education: Some (Inter)national Trends and Development’, Jones, Paula, David Selby, and Stephen Sterling, (eds) Sustainability Education: Perspectives and Practice across Higher Education.

London: Earthscan, 55–74.

Wright, Tarah S.A. 2002. ‘Definitions and Frameworks for Environmental Sustainability in Higher Education’, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3 (3): 203–220.

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

Sustainability Assessment Tools for Higher Education Institutions Wright, Tarah. 2004. ‘The Evolution of Sustainability Declaration in Higher Education’, Corcoran, Peter Blaze and Arjen E. J. Wals (eds) Higher Education and the Challenge of Sustainability: Problematics, Promise, and Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Yarime, Masaru. 2010. ‘Sustainability Innovation as a Social Process of Knowledge Transformation’, Nanotechnology Perceptions, 6 (3): 143–53.

Yarime, Masaru, Yoshiyuki Takeda and Yuya Kajikawa. 2010. ‘Towards Institutional Analysis of Sustainability Science: A Quantitative Examination of the Patterns of Research Collaboration’, Sustainability Science, 5 (1): 115–25.

Yarime, Masaru, Gregory Trencher, Takashi Mino, Roland W. Scholz, Lennart Olsson, Barry Ness, Niki Frantzeskaki, and Jan Rotmans. 2012. ‘Establishing sustainability science in higher education institutions: towards an integration of academic development, institutionalization, and collaborations with stakeholders’, Sustainability Science, 7 (Supplement 1): 101–113.

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:1 (2012): 63–77

77