{"title":"可持续发展的竞赛:通过比较分析解码绿色大学排名(2018-2022年)","authors":"Seda Abacıoğlu, Büşra Ayan, Dragan Pamucar","doi":"10.1007/s10755-024-09734-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study investigates the evolving landscape of green universities by analyzing and comparing rankings from 2018 to 2022. It expands beyond the single score offered by the UI GreenMetric, employing Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques to evaluate universities from diverse perspectives. Focusing on the top 50 universities from 2022, the study assesses their performance across six key criteria: setting and infrastructure, energy and climate change, waste, water, transportation, and education and research. Various MCDM methods (LOPCOW MEREC, CoCoSo, CRADIS, EDAS, MABAC, MAIRCA, and MARCOS) are implemented, revealing how they prioritize different aspects of sustainability. Furthermore, the study examines the correlation between rankings and employs the COPELAND aggregation approach to derive a unified ranking. This investigation not only contrasts MCDM outcomes with the UI GreenMetric’s total score-based rankings but also illuminates the relative significance of each criterion and its variation across weighting techniques. Additionally, the study delves into the temporal dynamics of university rankings, offering insights into institutional performance across different years. </p>","PeriodicalId":47065,"journal":{"name":"Innovative Higher Education","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Race to Sustainability: Decoding Green University Rankings Through a Comparative Analysis (2018–2022)\",\"authors\":\"Seda Abacıoğlu, Büşra Ayan, Dragan Pamucar\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10755-024-09734-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study investigates the evolving landscape of green universities by analyzing and comparing rankings from 2018 to 2022. It expands beyond the single score offered by the UI GreenMetric, employing Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques to evaluate universities from diverse perspectives. Focusing on the top 50 universities from 2022, the study assesses their performance across six key criteria: setting and infrastructure, energy and climate change, waste, water, transportation, and education and research. Various MCDM methods (LOPCOW MEREC, CoCoSo, CRADIS, EDAS, MABAC, MAIRCA, and MARCOS) are implemented, revealing how they prioritize different aspects of sustainability. Furthermore, the study examines the correlation between rankings and employs the COPELAND aggregation approach to derive a unified ranking. This investigation not only contrasts MCDM outcomes with the UI GreenMetric’s total score-based rankings but also illuminates the relative significance of each criterion and its variation across weighting techniques. Additionally, the study delves into the temporal dynamics of university rankings, offering insights into institutional performance across different years. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovative Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovative Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09734-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovative Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09734-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Race to Sustainability: Decoding Green University Rankings Through a Comparative Analysis (2018–2022)
This study investigates the evolving landscape of green universities by analyzing and comparing rankings from 2018 to 2022. It expands beyond the single score offered by the UI GreenMetric, employing Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques to evaluate universities from diverse perspectives. Focusing on the top 50 universities from 2022, the study assesses their performance across six key criteria: setting and infrastructure, energy and climate change, waste, water, transportation, and education and research. Various MCDM methods (LOPCOW MEREC, CoCoSo, CRADIS, EDAS, MABAC, MAIRCA, and MARCOS) are implemented, revealing how they prioritize different aspects of sustainability. Furthermore, the study examines the correlation between rankings and employs the COPELAND aggregation approach to derive a unified ranking. This investigation not only contrasts MCDM outcomes with the UI GreenMetric’s total score-based rankings but also illuminates the relative significance of each criterion and its variation across weighting techniques. Additionally, the study delves into the temporal dynamics of university rankings, offering insights into institutional performance across different years.
期刊介绍:
Innovative Higher Education is a refereed scholarly journal that strives to package fresh ideas in higher education in a straightforward and readable fashion. The four main purposes of Innovative Higher Education are: (1) to present descriptions and evaluations of current innovations and provocative new ideas with relevance for action beyond the immediate context in higher education; (2) to focus on the effect of such innovations on teaching and students; (3) to be open to diverse forms of scholarship and research methods by maintaining flexibility in the selection of topics deemed appropriate for the journal; and (4) to strike a balance between practice and theory by presenting manuscripts in a readable and scholarly manner to both faculty and administrators in the academic community.