by ANGEL CALDERON

Times Higher Education (THE) has released the fifth edition of its Impact Rankings on June 1, which includes more than 1590 institutions from 115 countries.

Since its inception in 2019, when 462 institutions were ranked, this ranking has rapidly grown year-on-year. Although this year’s rate of growth is half of the rate seen last year (13 per cent in 2023 compared to 36 per cent in 2022), it is a positive development because it should lead to reduced volatility in results.

This lower annual growth also suggests that it is nearing its peak in overall participation unless more of the elite and research-intensive institutions elect to participate.

Back in 2019, I said THE Impact Rankings was a novel initiative that captured global attention. Indeed, it has lived up to the hype as we see it, by the number of institutions across the globe that elected to participate.

THE Impact Rankings has enabled institutions to highlight the extent to which they are addressing issues around environmental sustainability and how they are progressing the United Nations’ 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

From this perspective, THE efforts are clearly a resounding success in that institutions have a mechanism to articulate and demonstrate their progress with a wide range of stakeholders in addressing the critical issues we face right now. It is also a mechanism for institutions to benchmark against peers, gain international visibility, and enhance their reputation.

It’s worth noting there are many voices who are critical that global rankings are problematic because they have methodological issues and have too much influence on universities and who they purport to serve. Global rankings have exacerbated institutional inequalities within and across countries.

Global rankings have been in existence for the past 20 years and will continue to evolve as circumstances and opportunities arise. The 2015 adoption of the UN’s 17 SDGs was the turning point needed to bring sustainability and sustainable development into sharp focus. The adoption of the SDGs has forced HEIs to assess how they engage with these goals and how they address societal challenges head on.

Australia’s ongoing success

Australian universities continue to excel in this ranking. Of the 24 universities which received an overall score in 2023, 15 are ranked in the world’s top 100, two fewer compared to 2022 but three more compared to 2019.

This year, 11 moved up in overall standing, four moved down in position or band and eight remain unchanged in position or band, and there is a new entrant in Swinburne University. Overall, we see Australian universities performed much better compared to 2022 when I said that Australian universities faced a moment of reckoning (CMM, 28 April 2022).

Last year’s weakened performance of Australian universities was driven in part by two factors: methodological changes which adversely impacted on many universities, and new entrants. This year’s uplift in performance was driven by both our institutions addressing more specific criteria required by THE and by the weakened performance of overseas competitors.

This year we also see that the University of Sydney, which ranked overall 2^nd in 2020 and 2021, is not ranked. The University of Queensland is also an omission in 2023.

In case readers wonder why universities elect to participate in THE Impact Rankings some years and not others, there are a range of factors: an absence of available resources to prepare annual submissions, minimising reputational damage if overall performance is below peers or competitors, or if there is a perceived misalignment against strategic priorities.

Over the past five years, 28 Australian universities have elected to participate in one or multiple years. 12 Australian universities have participated every year.

Stand outs

For a second consecutive year, Western Sydney University ranks 1^st globally in the overall category. The University of Tasmania ranks 5^th – up by 20 places from 24^th last year. RMIT University ranks =7^th, up by 15 places from 22^nd in 2022.

Since 2019, Western Sydney, Tasmania, and RMIT have performed well both in overall score and on specific SDGs.

Australian universities are ranked first in individual SDGs more than any other country. Four institutions claim the top spot in seven SDGs:

* Western Sydney ranks globally first in three SDGs: Gender equality (SDG 5), Responsible consumption and production (SDG 12) and Partnership for the goals (SDG 17).

* Tasmania ranks first globally in Climate action (SDG 13).

* RMIT ranks first globally in Reduced inequalities (SDG 10) and is 1^st in Decent work and economic growth (SDG 8).

* Macquarie University ranks first globally in Life below water (SDG 14).

Additionally, Western Sydney ranks 2^nd in Clean water and sanitation (SDG 6) and Life on land (SDG 15) and RMIT is also joint 2^nd in Partnership for the goals (SDG 17).

We also see that UNSW Sydney, Monash University, and Macquarie University have made sustained improvement and rank among the world’s top 40.

Top 100

Australia is third in the number of institutions ranked in the top 100 globally, at 15 institutions, behind the United Kingdom (26) and Canada (16); however, Australia has six institutions in the top 25 compared to five for Canada and four for the United Kingdom.

Across the Tasman, the University of Auckland ranks 12^th overall and six other New Zealand institutions are ranked in the world’s top 100.

University of Technology Sydney, which made a debut last year, moved up one position and is now ranked 14^th globally and is 4^th in Australia.

University of Newcastle participated in the rank for the first time in 2020 ranked 45^th, moved up to 12^th in 2021, down to 30^th in 2022, and moved up to 28^th this year.

University of the Sunshine Coast ranks 20^th this year and has relatively maintained its overall performance over the past three years. In turn, La Trobe, which ranked 4^th overall globally in 2020 and 2021, now ranks 57^th. University of Wollongong and Griffith University, who started well when they first ranked, appear weakened in standing this year.

Other Australian universities which rank in the world’s top 100 are Central Queensland, Charles Sturt, and Canberra. These institutions have clear areas of strength well aligned to the SDGs and are primed to make considerable gains in overall position in the coming years.

Roadmap for development

When THE’s Impact Ranking was first published, I viewed it as providing institutions with a roadmap for development and continuous improvement. This is because sustainability reporting is still in the early stages of development in institutions across the globe, due to a lack of clear understanding of what HEIs are doing in this space, competing priorities due to insufficient resources, barriers across disciplines, and resistance to change.

THE’s Impact Ranking has provided institutions with an opportunity to act. I have also noticed that institutions which participate in this ranking want to see how they are tracking over time by SDG and overall performance.

However, THE’s chief data officer, Duncan Ross, recently advised against direct year-on-year comparison. I would have thought that doing so was essential against the SDGs institutions elect to be assessed. For example, in 2022 many institutions experienced a decline in performance in Partnership for the goals (SDG 17) because of methodological adjustments made by THE. One of the first things I have done this week was to check if institutions improved performance on this SDG. It is also a way to map out institutions progress made on an annual basis.

Context matters

I have often argued that global rankings, including specialised rankings, need to be seen in context and regionally or country-specific, rather than on a global scale. In the case of the impact or the various sustainability rankings, I often look at other indices such as the Sach’s SDG Index, which brings into perspective how the SDGs are viewed by country and provide a point of reference to explain how institutions perform in specific SDGs or what policy drivers influence such performance (or a lack thereof).

There are also national or regional SDG indices which may help to explain how institutions with similar characteristics perform significantly differently. There are also dimensions such as climate conditions that may influence energy demand and consumption and therefore performance in chosen SDGs.

Top of mind

Over the past two decades, Australian universities have been proactive in reporting how they are becoming sustainable institutions, embedding environmental sustainability principles in every facet of institutional activity. Therefore, it is not surprising that our universities are top performers in the Impact Rankings, including Climate action (SDG 13) even though as a country we have been atrocious in addressing climate change.

Also, our universities have progressively become mature in terms of sustainability reporting and developed improvement roadmaps on how to tackle the SDGs head on. Thes way our universities are reporting their sustainability efforts and overall societal impact are being mirrored elsewhere.

Mini-ERA

Gathering evidence and preparing submissions for the Impact Ranking is like undertaking a mini-ERA (Excellence in Research in Australia) exercise on an annual basis. The Impact Ranking assesses institutions commitments to sustainability across research, stewardship, outreach, and teaching.

It requires the involvement of many people across the entire university. After institutional submissions are made there comes a long wait. One lives for months with the hope of getting a phone call days before the release with embargoed results.

Looking ahead

Over the next five years, we are likely to see a greater representation of universities from middle-income and lower-income economies among the world’s top 100 in THE Impact Rankings. At present, 13 universities are drawn from eight of these countries and the remaining are drawn from 14 from high-income economies.

As universities around the world continue to progress and improve their reporting mechanisms regarding sustainability, the SDGs, and overall societal and economic impact, we are likely to see a shake up in the geographic distribution of which countries and universities stand tall in the impact and sustainability rankings. Chances are that Australia’s top leading sustainability institutions will remain strong.

 

Overall standing of Australia universities in THE Impact Rankings, 2019-2023
Institution	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023
Western Sydney University	11	3	17	1	1
University of Tasmania	96	47	76	25	5
RMIT University	82	10	3	22	7
University of Technology Sydney				15	14
UNSW Sydney	101-200	66	96	55	18
Monash University	45	17	18	42	21
University of Newcastle		45	12	30	28
University of the Sunshine Coast			26	31	29
Macquarie University	63	101-200	82	79	39
La Trobe University		4	4	19	57
University of Wollongong	13	31	6	70	61
Griffith University			38	92	72
Central Queensland University	101-200	101-200	101-200	83	74
Charles Sturt University		61	101-200	67	79
University of Canberra		101	57	57	92
Australian Catholic University	101-200	101-200	54	101-200	101-200
Charles Darwin University	101-200	99	101-200	101-200	101-200
James Cook University	39		91	101-200	101-200
Queensland University of Technology	46	70	43	101-200	101-200
Victoria University		101-200	101-200	79	101-200
Federation University Australia			101-200	201-300	201-300
University of South Australia	22	87	101-200	201-300	201-300
Swinburne University of Technology					401+
The University of Western Australia				401+	401+
Ranked in previous years
University of Sydney	25	2	2	52
The University of Queensland	46	101-200		101-200
Deakin University		55	79
Edith Cowan University	42	83	101-200
Table compiled by A Calderon, using THE Impact Ranking annual tables

Angel Calderon is Principal Adviser, Policy and Research at RMIT