2. HEFCE Review of Sustainable Development EAUC Conference 2007 Malcolm Rigg/Kate McGeevor Policy Studies Institute

3. Why a review?  To be able to assess where HE sector stands  To be able to measure sector over time  To support HEIs in progressing sustainable development

4. What kind of review?  ‘light-touch’  Minimise burden on HEIs  Use existing data/measures where possible  HEFCE ‘not seeking to introduce sector- wide reporting or funding by SD performance’

5. Review team  PSI co-ordination  PSI leads on Research Research Corporate Sustainable Development Corporate Sustainable Development  Centre for Research in Education and the Environment (CREE), University of Bath, leads on Curriculum  PA leads on managing change

6. Conceptual framework  Four capitals/resources Environmental/natural resources Environmental/natural resources Manufactured (e.g. buildings) Manufactured (e.g. buildings) Human Human Social Social

7. Research Strand  Develop and validate search terms  Search HEI web-sites to identify Number of researchers engaged in SD Number of researchers engaged in SD Number of students Number of students Levels of funding by type: RCs, Government, etc. Levels of funding by type: RCs, Government, etc. Supplement with info from HEIs Supplement with info from HEIs Search for 2001 RAE papers submitted Search for 2001 RAE papers submitted Search outputs from 2001-2005 Search outputs from 2001-2005

8. Teaching/curriculum strand  Develop and test search criteria  Search for incidence of SD teaching in HEI courses from websites  Supplement by HEI information

9. Focus today mainly on corporate SD  Estates  Procurement  Community

10. Key tasks of review  Propose a benchmark What are core impacts/actions that should be measured? What are core impacts/actions that should be measured? Based on existing data/practices where possible Based on existing data/practices where possible  Identify obstacles and problems  Identify examples of good practice

11. Candidates for inclusion  Resources used  Emissions  Construction & maintenance  Procurement & supply chain  Waste and recycling  Biodiversity  Travel management  Community engagement

12. Can performance be captured by numbers alone?  Circumstances differ  Don’t tell full story  Historical, not forward looking  Don’t identify priorities, rationale, commitment, ambition

13. What kind of qualitative measures?  Self-assessment of HEI’s distance travelled, targets, plans?  Key documents published Policy? Policy? Strategy? Strategy?  How reported in aggregate?

14. Issues  Demands to identify poor performers  FOI issues  Some HEIs are/will publish their performance

15. How you can help us?  Share experiences with us Value of benchmarks? Value of benchmarks? Soft measures? Soft measures? Experience/value of Environmental Management Systems Experience/value of Environmental Management Systems Other helpful tools? Other helpful tools? Problems and obstacles Problems and obstacles ‘good practice’/what you have learnt ‘good practice’/what you have learnt Knowledge of international examples Knowledge of international examples Links between corporate, teaching and research? Links between corporate, teaching and research?

16. What would you like from the review?  Now!  Email Malcolm Rigg m.rigg@psi.org.uk Malcolm Rigg m.rigg@psi.org.ukm.rigg@psi.org.uk Kate McGeevor k.mcgeevor@psi.org.uk Kate McGeevor k.mcgeevor@psi.org.ukk.mcgeevor@psi.org.uk