Only a small minority of?universities are adopting climate change policies common in?the private sector such as?carbon budgets or?internal carbon pricing, according to a?report that urges more institutions to?adopt such measures.
by 中国A片 consultancy SUMS Consulting for the 中国A片 Strategic Planners Association (Hespa) looks at the state of?the sector’s practice around integrating climate change and carbon emissions into university strategy and planning.
The report is based on “a sector survey of around 50 participants and discussions with experts and practitioners inside and outside the sector”.
“The main impetus for putting climate on the agenda at universities is the views of their leadership and stakeholders,” says the report, written by Thomas Owen-Smith, service lead for sustainability at SUMS Consulting.
“Measures for integrating climate into institution strategy and planning are at variable stages of adoption across the sector,” it adds. “While some are now widely adopted and can be considered standard practice, others are diffusing or emergent, used at only a small number of institutions at present.”
The survey, shared through Hespa’s network, found 98?per cent of respondents agreeing with the statement “My institution has a commitment around climate action in its strategy or prominent public documents”, and 90?per cent agreeing with the statement “My institution has a target year for achieving net zero in scopes?1 and?2” – measures thus billed as “standard” in the sector by the report.
Then there were measures billed as “diffusing” in the sector, such as “My institution has an institution-level budget envelope to fund climate initiatives” (which 52?per cent agreed with).
Finally, there were measures billed as “emergent” – taken up by only a small minority of institutions thus far. There, 19?per cent of respondents agreed with the statement “My institution has annual carbon budgets”; 8?per cent agreed that “My institution has experimented with or is using internal carbon pricing”; and 4?per cent agreed that “My institution models the impacts of different climate-related scenarios on its strategy and finances”.
“Many of the measures which are currently diffusing and emergent in the HE sector are more prevalent in the private sector,” says the report, noting that in some cases this is due to additional regulation for industry.
Internal carbon pricing is prevalent not just in energy, heavy industry and aviation, but is “widely used” in sectors such as financial services, it adds.
“Although the differing strategic drivers for private sector organisations and universities may encourage the adoption of different approaches, integration measures are generally applicable across both,” the report says. “This report recommends that universities set in place or reinforce an agenda to adopt these measures.”
Dr Owen-Smith said: “Getting to net zero and building resilience for climate change are not just estates problems. Technical interventions will certainly play an important role, but universities, like all organisations, will need to make quite fundamental changes to the ways they run core activities and make decisions. There’s also risk in the operating environment around this, which over time will likely affect supply chains, costs and even demand; and there are opportunities that universities can seize to develop their activities and support the transition to a sustainable economy. Many are already doing this, of course.
“For all these reasons, climate is a truly cross-institution issue – it needs to be considered among the other important strategic drivers for universities, and in the context of their wider footprint on resources and the natural environment.”
The report offers recommendations on how universities can integrate action against climate change in their strategies – on enhancing “upskilling and collaboration across institutions”, Hespa and SUMS Consulting are establishing a special interest group focusing on sustainability in strategy and planning, aimed at “supporting external collaboration to share knowledge and practice, enabling the development of sector- and function-appropriate reference materials, and identifying needs for technical training around the most complex topics”.
Jen Summerton, the Hespa executive director, writes in a foreword that the report “helps us to understand the state of play regarding institutional maturity, and how we can learn from each other and other sectors to move this agenda forward”.
