QS World University Rankings: Sustainability

In addition to being organised into Categories, Lenses, and Indicators, the QS World University Rankings: Sustainability groups indicators into six cross-cutting thematic areas. These themes provide an alternative way of understanding the methodology by highlighting the types of evidence used to assess sustainability performance.

While Research, Policy, and Infrastructure focus primarily on institutional activity and capability, Reputation, Students and Staff, and National Statistics offer perspectives on stakeholder experience, societal impact, and contextual factors.

Together, they ensure that the ranking captures not only institutional commitments and outcomes, but also the broader environment in which universities operate and the stakeholders they influence.

Research

The Research thematic area evaluates how universities contribute to sustainable development through the creation, dissemination, and influence of knowledge. It includes indicators that measure research performance aligned to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the impact of research outputs, knowledge exchange activities, policy citations, open-access publishing, and academic freedom.

Research indicators are a key component of both the Environmental Impact and Social Impact categories, recognising the critical role universities play in generating evidence and solutions to global challenges.

Policy

The Policy thematic area assesses the institutional frameworks, strategies, and commitments that support sustainability objectives. It includes indicators relating to climate action, sustainable procurement and investment, equality and inclusion, disability support, industry engagement, community outreach, governance processes, and sustainability leadership.

These indicators examine whether universities have embedded sustainability principles into their formal decision-making, strategic direction, and organisational culture.

Infrastructure

The Infrastructure thematic area focuses on the physical environment and facilities that support sustainability performance. It includes indicators relating to environmental research centres, carbon emissions efficiency, renewable energy generation, progress towards emissions-reduction targets, campus health provision, and accessibility.

These measures assess how effectively institutions manage and utilise their physical assets to support environmental sustainability, health, wellbeing, and research activity.

Reputation

The Reputation thematic area captures the perceptions of key stakeholder groups, including academics, employers, university staff, and other experts. It includes indicators measuring academic reputation in specific subject areas, employer reputation, staff perceptions of climate action, equality, ethics, institutional impact, and graduate skills.

These indicators provide an external and internal perspective on how effectively universities are delivering against their sustainability objectives and broader educational mission.

Students and Staff

The Students and Staff thematic area recognises the importance of people in driving sustainability outcomes. It includes indicators focused on alumni impact, student and faculty demographics, leadership representation, student societies, student unions, and graduate achievements.

These measures evaluate both the composition of university communities and the long-term impact of graduates, reflecting the role universities play in developing future leaders, innovators, educators, and change-makers.

National Statistics

The National Statistics thematic area incorporates country- and territory-level data to provide context for institutional performance. Indicators draw on external datasets relating to research and development investment, employment opportunities, equality measures, health and wellbeing, educational attainment, academic freedom, and international human rights commitments.

By considering national context, the methodology provides a more rounded understanding of the environment in which institutions operate and the opportunities and constraints they may face.

Students

The Project helps prospective and current students understand aspects of university performance that conventional rankings may not make visible. It provides comparable evidence on sustainability-related teaching and research, climate action, campus operations, equality and inclusion, health and wellbeing, employability, student engagement, and governance.

Students can use the ranking to identify institutions that align with their values, educational needs, and career ambitions. It also helps them assess whether a university’s public commitments are reflected in its policies, practices, stakeholder experience, and measurable outcomes.

Institutions

The Project provides universities with a structured framework for benchmarking their environmental, social, and governance performance against peers. Its nine Lenses and 52 Indicators help institutions identify strengths, gaps, and differences between stated commitments, implementation, stakeholder perceptions, operational performance, and wider impact.

Institutions can use the results to inform strategy, prioritise improvement, strengthen accountability, and communicate their contribution to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The combination of institutional and contextual evidence also supports a more nuanced understanding of performance across different national environments.

Employers

The Project helps employers identify universities that prepare graduates with the knowledge, skills, values, and sustainability awareness required by changing organisations and economies. Evidence on employer reputation, skills satisfaction, alumni impact, educational quality, equality, and wellbeing provides insight into graduate readiness and institutional culture.

Employers can also use the ranking to identify potential partners for research, innovation, knowledge exchange, and sustainable development. Industry collaboration, SDG-aligned research, policy influence, and alumni outcomes indicate where institutions possess relevant expertise, talent, and partnership capacity.

Policymakers

The Project provides policymakers with internationally comparable evidence on how higher education contributes to climate action, equality, public health, employment, education, innovation, knowledge exchange, and good governance. Its alignment with the SDGs creates a common framework for assessing institutional and sector contributions to national and international priorities.

Policymakers can use the ranking to inform policy discussions, funding priorities, sector strategies, and sustainability initiatives. National statistics help distinguish institutional performance from wider contextual conditions, supporting more balanced interpretation and better-targeted interventions.

Global higher education landscape

The Project provides a shared framework for understanding the collective contribution of higher education to a more sustainable, equitable, healthy, and well-governed society. By combining evidence across education, research, operations, governance, stakeholder perceptions, alumni outcomes, and national context, it recognises the diverse ways universities create impact within and beyond their campuses.

The global higher education community can use the ranking to identify leading practice, compare performance across countries and territories, encourage transparency, and support collaboration. Mapping every indicator to one or more SDGs also provides a common language for monitoring progress and strengthening the sector’s contribution to shared global challenges.
 

Research for the World University Rankings: Sustainability begins in September and the Rankings are published in November.

Data Collection

	Date Starts	Date Ends
Survey Contacts Submission	September 2025	31 January 2026
Academic Survey	November 2025	early March
Employer Survey	November 2025	early March
Institution Data	January 2026	15 April 2026

 

In each of our rankings we use a range of measurements as part of our methodology. These can be split into four broad groups. Each ranking is made up of a different group of measurements, with some being used across several rankings and others unique to one project.

• Category - Used in Sustainability, we use three Categories to group lenses together: Environmental Impact, Social Impact, and Governance

• Lens - A group of Indicators which are related to the same theme.

• Indicator - A measurement of one aspect of an institution’s performance. Institutions are scored and ranked within indicators and those indicator scores contribute to its overall rank and score​.

• Metric - A more specific calculation that forms part of an Indicator.

Below you can find the Categories, Lenses, and Indicators used in this ranking. Click on any Category or Lens for more information.

Weightings are reviewed on an annual basis.

Environmental Impact

The Environmental Impact Category accounts for 45% of the QS World University Rankings: Sustainability and evaluates how effectively universities contribute to environmental sustainability through their education, research, operational practices, climate commitments, and alumni impact.

It recognises that universities influence environmental outcomes not only through knowledge creation and teaching, but also through their institutional operations and the long-term contributions of their graduates.

The category is structured around three complementary lenses comprising 17 indicators:

Environmental Education

Environmental Education (17%) assesses how institutions develop environmental knowledge and climate literacy through the quality of their teaching, environmental curricula, and the impact of graduates working in environmental policy, government, NGOs and the third sector.

Indicators: EE1 - Academic Reputation in Earth and Environment; EE2 - Alumni Impact for Environmental Sustainability - Public and Third Sector; EE3 - Climate Science and/or Sustainability Courses

Environmental Research

Environmental Research (13%) evaluates the scale, quality and influence of sustainability-focused research, including research impact across key environmental SDGs, research infrastructure, policy influence, and the broader national research environment.

Indicators: ER1 - Research Impact on SDGs for Sustainable Research; ER2 - Sustainable Research National Statistics; ER3 - Research Centre with an Environmental Sustainability Focus; ER4 - Policy Citations (Environmental)

Environmental Sustainability

Environmental Sustainability (15%) examines how universities embed sustainability within their own operations and strategy, including climate commitments, emissions performance, renewable energy generation, sustainability policies, stakeholder engagement, and evidence of progress towards environmental targets.

Indicators: ES1 - Alumni Impact for Innovation; ES2 - Member of an officially recognised sustainable group; ES3 - Climate change commitment (staff perception); ES4 - Publicly available strategy or policy on sustainable procurement and investment; ES5 - Student Society focused on Environmental Sustainability; ES6 - Net Zero Commitment; ES7 - Emissions Efficiency; ES8 - Renewables Generated Onsite; ES9 - Progress Towards Target; ES10 - Policy on Climate Strategy

Social Impact

The Social Impact Category accounts for 45% of the QS World University Rankings: Sustainability and evaluates how effectively universities create positive outcomes for individuals, communities, and society.

It recognises the role of higher education institutions in improving employability, promoting equality and inclusion, advancing health and wellbeing, enhancing educational outcomes, and sharing knowledge beyond the university sector.

The category is structured around five complementary lenses comprising 25 indicators:

Employability and Opportunities

Employability and Opportunities (11%) assesses how successfully institutions prepare graduates for employment, support career outcomes, collaborate with industry, and conduct research that contributes to economic development and opportunity.

Indicators: EO1 - Employer Reputation; EO2 - Research Impact on SDGs for Employment and Opportunities; EO4 - Employment and Opportunities National Statistics; EO5 - Partnerships with Industry; EO6 - Skills Satisfaction

Equality

Equality (12%) evaluates institutional performance in promoting gender equality and reducing inequalities through research, representation, policies, support services, staff perceptions, and national context.

Indicators: EQ1 - Research Impact on SDGs for Equality; EQ2 - Student Gender Ratio; EQ3 - Faculty Gender Ratio; EQ4 - Leadership Gender Ratio; EQ5 - Equality, Diversity and Inclusion policy; EQ6 - Academic Equality (Staff View); EQ7 - Disability Support; EQ8 - Equality National Statistics

Health and Wellbeing

Health and Wellbeing (5%) measures contributions to health through both research and the provision of services that support the physical and mental wellbeing of students and staff.

Indicators: HW1 - Research Impact of SDGs for Health and Wellbeing ; HW2 - Health Provision on Campus; HW3 - Health and Wellbeing National Statistics

Impact of Education

Impact of Education (7%) examines educational quality and influence through research, academic reputation, alumni achievements, academic freedom, and wider national educational performance.

Indicators: IE1 - Research Impact on SDGs for Education; IE2 - Academic Reputation for Impact of Education; IE3 - Alumni Impact for Education; IE4 - Academic Freedom Index; IE5 - Impact of Education National Statistics

Knowledge Exchange

Knowledge Exchange (10%) assesses how universities collaborate, share expertise, engage with communities, and contribute to global knowledge transfer and capacity building.

Indicators: KE1 - Knowledge Exchange: Progress / Dissemination; KE2 - Outreach and Community Engagement; KE3 - Staff perception; KE4 - Policy Citations (Social)

Governance

The Governance Category accounts for 10% of the QS World University Rankings: Sustainability and evaluates the extent to which universities demonstrate effective, ethical, transparent, and accountable leadership.

It recognises that strong governance is a fundamental enabler of sustainable development, ensuring that institutions have the structures, processes, and culture necessary to make responsible decisions, engage stakeholders, and deliver on their sustainability commitments.

The category consists of a single lens, Good Governance (10%), which comprises 10 indicators that collectively assess institutional leadership, transparency, participation, ethical conduct, and accountability.

Good Governance

Good Governance (10%) is designed to assess both the formal structures that support good governance and the extent to which those structures are embedded within institutional culture and practice. 

Indicators: GG1 - Ethics Culture; GG2 - Open-Access Publishing; GG3 - Dedicated staff / team for Sustainable Development; GG4 - Transparent financial reporting; GG5 - Student's Union; GG6 - Student Representation in Governance; GG7 - Published governance minutes; GG8 - National Signatory to UN charter against torture; GG9 - Staff perception; GG10 - Policy Citations (Governance)
 

Unit of Measurement

• Institution

The Project evaluates higher education institutions as the primary unit of measurement. Programme-, subject-, country-, and region-level information may contribute to eligibility or provide contextual evidence, but the final assessment and ranking are produced at institutional level.

Scope

The Project includes higher education institutions eligible for one or more of the following: QS World University Rankings; QS Rankings by Region; or QS Rankings by Subject.

Eligible institutions must also satisfy the Sustainability ranking’s minimum research-performance requirements. The methodology evaluates institutional performance across Environmental Impact, Social Impact, and Governance, covering education, research, operations, policies, stakeholder experience, alumni impact, knowledge exchange, and national context.

Geographic Scope

• Global

The Project is open to eligible higher education institutions worldwide. It enables comparison across countries and territories while incorporating national statistics to contextualise differences in research investment, employment, equality, health and wellbeing, educational attainment, academic freedom, and human-rights commitments.

Inclusion Rules

An institution must be eligible for one or more of the QS World University Rankings, QS Rankings by Region, or QS Rankings by Subject.

For eligibility through the QS World University Rankings or QS Rankings by Region, an institution must:

• Offer full-degree programmes at both undergraduate and postgraduate level;
• Offer full-degree programmes in at least two faculty areas;
• Offer full-degree programmes in at least two subjects within each faculty area;
• Have at least three graduated classes in each subject; and
• Deliver all or part of each programme on campus.

For eligibility through the QS Rankings by Subject, an institution must:

• Offer full-degree programmes at undergraduate and/or postgraduate level in the relevant subject area;
• Have at least three graduated cohorts in the relevant subject;
• Meet the minimum publication threshold established for the subject; and
• Meet the minimum reputation threshold, with a combined Academic Reputation and Employer Reputation score of 5 or higher.

Sustainability ranking inclusion requirements

To be included in the QS World University Rankings: Sustainability, an eligible institution must:

• Possess a non-zero score in ER1 – Research Impact on SDGs for Sustainable Research; and
• Possess a non-zero score in at least two of the following four Social Impact research indicators:
• EO2 – Research Impact on SDGs for Employment and Opportunities;
• EQ1 – Research Impact on SDGs for Equality;
• HW1 – Research Impact of SDGs for Health and Wellbeing; and
• IE1 – Research Impact on SDGs for Education.

All institutions can submit data for the rankings. This data is important in ensuring our rankings are as accurate as possible.

You should submit data for your institution through our QS HUB platform. Please contact our Institution Support Team via our helpdesk if you do not have login details, or need further support.

Our rankings are not opt-in/opt-out, so it is in an institution's best interest to ensure that we reflect them accurately by submitting their data.

Where we don’t have data submitted by an institution, we feature them on the strength of proprietary and publicly available or previously supplied data. Our rankings are designed with this in mind.

If you would like your institution to be considered for inclusion in the Rankings and your institution has not received a submission email, please contact: rankings@qs.com.

Data Reporting Period

For the majority of the data we request, the reporting period should cover the academic year previous to our rankings cycle.

This will be approximately January to December for the Southern Hemisphere, and August to July for the Northern Hemisphere.

There are exceptions to this, so please refer to our data dictionary if you are unsure.

Additional Data

Some data that we ask for is not immediately used in the weighted indicators, but it is important for QS to collect so that we may assess whether it can be included in the methodology in the future.

It also allows us to create a useable volume of data covering several years that can be introduced into the process when required.

We encourage all institutions to submit all the data they are able to so that the rankings can continue to evolve.

In Sustainability the following additional data is asked for:

Assessment tool

• The presence of an assessment tool - such as TASK™ by Sulitest - in assessing the knowledge of staff and students
• TASK™ enables organizations to measure the sustainability knowledge of their community through a psychometric, multiple-choice question assessment covering a comprehensive scope of sustainability-related subjects

Energy consumption

• The institution's annual energy consumption in kilowatt hours (kWh)

Scope 3 emissions

• The total Scope 3 carbon emissions in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e)
• Scope 3 emissions are those created by activities from assets not owned or controlled by the institution, but that the institution indirectly affects in its value chain
• This can include emissions from staff commuting or from suppliers

Student scholarship numbers

• The numbers of students with scholarships covering 50% or 100% of their fees

Sustainability training

• The existence of mandatory annual training on environmental and social aspects of sustainability

Water consumption

• The institution's annual water consumption in cubic metres (m3)

• What is the QS World University Rankings: Sustainability?

The QS World University Rankings: Sustainability is a global ranking that evaluates how effectively higher education institutions contribute to a more sustainable future through their education, research, operations, governance, and engagement with society. It considers both institutional commitments and observable evidence of performance and impact.

• What does the ranking measure?

The ranking measures university performance across Environmental Impact, Social Impact, and Governance. These Categories cover areas including environmental education and research, climate action, employability, equality, health and wellbeing, educational impact, knowledge exchange, ethics, transparency, and stakeholder participation.

• Why does the ranking assess more than environmental performance?

Sustainability includes environmental, social, and governance dimensions. Universities contribute to sustainable development not only through climate action and environmental research, but also through the graduates they prepare, the communities they support, the way they treat students and staff, and the transparency and accountability of their decision-making.

• How is the ranking structured?

The methodology comprises three Categories, nine Lenses, and 52 Indicators. Environmental Impact accounts for 45% of the overall ranking, Social Impact accounts for 45%, and Governance accounts for 10%. The Lenses and Indicators provide more detailed views of the areas contributing to each Category.

• What are the three Categories and their weights?

Environmental Impact accounts for 45% and assesses environmental education, research, operations, climate commitments, and alumni impact. Social Impact accounts for 45% and assesses employability, equality, health and wellbeing, educational impact, and knowledge exchange. Governance accounts for 10% and assesses ethical leadership, transparency, accountability, participation, and institutional governance.

• What are the nine Lenses?

The Lenses are Environmental Education, Environmental Research, Environmental Sustainability, Employability and Opportunities, Equality, Health and Wellbeing, Impact of Education, Knowledge Exchange, and Good Governance. Each Lens combines related Indicators to provide a focused assessment of one aspect of sustainability performance.

• Why are the Category weights divided equally between Environmental Impact and Social Impact?

The equal weighting recognises that universities contribute to sustainable development through both environmental and social outcomes. Governance is weighted at 10% because it provides the institutional structures and culture needed to support credible and lasting environmental and social performance.

• How do the Indicator weights contribute to the overall score?

Each Indicator has a specified weight within its Lens and Category. The Indicator weights sum to the relevant Lens weight, the Lens weights sum to the Category weight, and the Category weights sum to 100% of the overall ranking. This allows the ranking to combine detailed evidence while retaining a clear overall structure.

• How does the ranking align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals?

Every Indicator is mapped to one or more of the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The mapping provides a common international framework for understanding university contributions to priorities such as climate action, quality education, equality, decent work, health, responsible consumption, and effective institutions.

• Does a high ranking mean that a university has achieved sustainability?

No. A high ranking indicates comparatively strong relative performance across the evidence included in the methodology. It does not mean that an institution has resolved all of its environmental, social, or governance challenges. The ranking should be interpreted as a benchmarking tool rather than as a complete certification of sustainability.

• Does the ranking measure commitments or actual outcomes?

It measures both. Policies, strategies, targets, and memberships provide evidence of institutional commitment, while research impact, emissions performance, renewable-energy generation, stakeholder perceptions, alumni impact, policy citations, and other measures provide evidence of implementation and wider outcomes. The methodology recognises that the existence of a commitment does not by itself demonstrate effective delivery.

• Why does the ranking include policies and public commitments?

Public policies and commitments indicate whether sustainability principles have been formally incorporated into institutional decision-making. They also support transparency and accountability by enabling stakeholders to assess an institution’s stated objectives. However, policy evidence is considered alongside operational, stakeholder, research, and outcome measures.

• Why are national statistics included in an institutional ranking?

Universities operate within national environments that influence research investment, employment opportunities, equality, health and wellbeing, educational attainment, academic freedom, and human-rights conditions. National statistics provide context for institutional performance and help explain differences in the opportunities and constraints faced by universities in different countries and territories.

• Can a university be rewarded or penalised for conditions outside its control?

National-context Indicators are intended to provide a more rounded assessment, not to attribute all national outcomes directly to individual institutions. Users should distinguish between institution-level evidence and contextual evidence when interpreting results.

• Are universities compared fairly across different countries and territories?

The ranking uses internationally comparable data wherever possible and incorporates national context to support interpretation. However, differences in data availability, legal systems, funding models, institutional missions, and social conditions mean that rankings should be considered alongside regional, national, mission-based, and peer-group comparisons.

• Are universities with different missions directly comparable?

The ranking provides a global institutional comparison, but universities differ in size, subject mix, research intensity, funding model, estate profile, student population, and mission. While the methodology accounts for this using normalisation and balancing measures where appropriate, users should bear this in mind when reviewing an institution’s profile and performance across individual Categories and Lenses.

• Why are research indicators prominent in the methodology?

Universities play a major role in generating and disseminating knowledge that supports sustainable development. Research Indicators measure SDG-aligned research, research capacity, international collaboration, policy influence, open access, and knowledge exchange. They are balanced with measures of education, operations, stakeholder experience, alumni impact, and governance.

• Could the research measures favour large or research-intensive universities?

Research volume, reputation, citations, and international collaboration can be influenced by institutional size, age, language, subject mix, and research intensity but normalisation and balancing measures are used where appropriate to create fair comparisons. The methodology includes additional measures relating to education, operations, social outcomes, governance, and national context, but users should still consider the detailed results and the institutional context when making comparisons.

• Why are reputation measures included?

Academic, employer, and staff perceptions provide stakeholder-informed evidence that cannot be obtained from institutional reporting alone. Reputation measures capture recognition of teaching, research, graduate preparation, climate action, equality, ethics, and societal contribution. They are used alongside objective, policy, operational, and outcome data rather than as a standalone measure of performance.

• What does the ranking tell students?

The ranking helps students compare universities on sustainability-related education, research, climate action, campus practices, equality and inclusion, health and wellbeing, employability, student engagement, and governance. Students should use the ranking alongside course information, tuition and living costs, location, admissions requirements, student reviews, and other factors relevant to their individual decisions.

• Can students use the ranking to identify the best university for a particular course?

The Sustainability ranking is an institutional-level ranking and does not provide a complete assessment of individual programmes. Students interested in a particular subject should also consult subject rankings, programme accreditation, curriculum information, teaching and learning evidence, graduate outcomes, and direct information from the institution.

• What does the ranking tell universities?

The ranking provides a framework for benchmarking performance across environmental, social, and governance areas. Institutions can use the results to identify strengths and gaps, improve data and public disclosure, review policies and implementation, set priorities, and communicate their contribution to the SDGs. It should support institutional improvement rather than replace an institution’s own mission or strategy.

• Should universities focus on improving their ranking position?

Universities should prioritise meaningful sustainability outcomes rather than ranking performance alone. The ranking can help identify areas for improvement, but institutions should avoid directing resources only towards highly visible or highly weighted Indicators. Activities that are important to students, staff, communities, and the environment may not always be fully captured by the methodology.

• What does the ranking tell policymakers?

The ranking provides internationally comparable evidence on how higher education contributes to climate action, employment, equality, health, education, innovation, knowledge exchange, and good governance. Policymakers can use it to identify leading practice, inform sector strategies, and understand how institutional performance interacts with national conditions. It should be used alongside national data, evaluations, and sector-specific evidence.

• Which institutions are eligible for inclusion?

Institutions must be eligible for one or more of the QS World University Rankings, QS Rankings by Region, or QS Rankings by Subject. They must also meet the Sustainability ranking’s minimum research-performance requirements, including a non-zero score for ER1 and a non-zero score in at least two of the specified Social Impact research Indicators.

• Why does the ranking have minimum research requirements?

The research requirements ensure that included institutions have a minimum level of evidence relating to sustainability and social-impact research. They also support the ranking’s focus on universities as contributors to knowledge creation and dissemination. However, the eligibility rules are reviewed periodically to ensure they do not unintentionally exclude institutions that make strong educational, operational, or community contributions through less research-intensive models.

• How are emissions measured?

ES7 measures Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions relative to Gross Internal Area, providing a scale-adjusted measure of operational carbon performance. This supports comparison between institutions of different sizes, but results may still be affected by climate, building type, research intensity, energy systems, estate ownership, and reporting boundaries. Future methodology development may consider Scope 3 emissions, absolute emissions, emissions per student or staff member, and embodied carbon.

• Does the ranking reward institutions for having onsite renewable-energy generation?

ES8 measures renewable energy generated onsite as evidence of clean-energy infrastructure and operational action. This Indicator is only one part of the Environmental Sustainability Lens and should not be interpreted as a complete measure of renewable-energy performance. Institutions with limited estate control or access to low-carbon electricity may face different circumstances, which should be considered when interpreting results.

• Does having a net-zero target demonstrate strong climate performance?

ES6 measures the existence and ambition of a public net-zero target, while ES9 assesses progress towards the required emissions pathway. A target demonstrates strategic commitment but does not by itself demonstrate delivery. The strongest interpretation considers the target, the supporting climate strategy, emissions data, renewable energy, progress, and staff perceptions together.

• How are missing data treated?

Missing data is handled consistently and transparently. Non-disclosure is not rewarded in the methodology but equally institutions with limited reporting capacity are not unfairly disadvantaged. Where data is not provided by an institution every effort is made to obtain it from public sources.

• Can institutions submit their own data or evidence?

The methodology combines institutional submissions with public sources, surveys, research databases, national statistics, and external reference datasets. Institutional evidence can provide important information that may not otherwise be fully publicly available.

• How does QS verify institutional submissions and public data?

Submitted data is subject to defined validation and quality-control procedures, including checks for consistency, duplicate evidence, reporting periods, organisational boundaries, and unusual changes.

• Can universities improve their results by publishing more information?

Better public disclosure can improve transparency and enable evidence-based assessment, particularly for policies, governance, financial reporting, emissions, climate strategies, and sustainability activities. However, disclosure alone should not be treated as equivalent to performance. Published information should be supported by evidence of implementation, stakeholder experience, and measurable outcomes wherever possible.

• How should users interpret scores based on stakeholder perceptions?

Survey-based Indicators capture the views of relevant stakeholder groups, including academics, employers, and university staff. They provide valuable insight into institutional reputation and lived experience, but may be affected by response rates, sample composition, awareness, and response bias. Perception results should therefore be interpreted alongside objective evidence and data-quality information.

• Does the ranking measure student satisfaction directly?

The ranking includes several measures relevant to students, including student societies, student unions, student representation, disability support, health provision, sustainability education, equality, employability, and campus operations. It does not constitute a complete student-experience survey and does not directly measure every aspect of teaching quality, satisfaction, retention, affordability, or attainment.

• How does the methodology assess equality and inclusion?

The Equality Lens combines equality-related research, student, faculty, and leadership gender ratios, EDI policies, staff perceptions, disability support, and national equality context. These measures provide a broad assessment of formal commitment, representation, accessibility, and institutional culture, but do not fully capture intersectionality, pay equity, progression, retention, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic background, or the experiences of all protected groups.

• Does the ranking assess the quality of health and wellbeing services?

HW2 assesses the availability of campus physical healthcare, mental-health support, health education, sexual and reproductive health information, and healthy food. This provides evidence of institutional provision but does not fully measure service quality, accessibility, uptake, waiting times, safeguarding, or outcomes. Users should not interpret the Indicator as a complete assessment of student or staff wellbeing.

• Does the ranking measure sustainability across the whole curriculum?

EE3 measures the availability and recognition of climate science and sustainability-focused courses. This provides evidence of formal sustainability provision but does not directly measure how sustainability is integrated across all disciplines, student climate literacy, learning gains, teaching quality, or experiential learning. The availability of a course should therefore not be interpreted as evidence that all students receive sustainability education.

• How are alumni and graduate outcomes used?

Alumni Indicators assess the longer-term contribution of graduates in areas such as environmental sustainability, innovation, education, public service, and wider societal impact. They provide an outcome-based perspective on university influence beyond graduation.

• Does the ranking measure community impact?

Community impact is reflected through outreach and community engagement, policy citations, knowledge exchange, staff perceptions of societal contribution, research impact, alumni outcomes, and partnerships. These measures recognise that universities contribute beyond their campuses, although the methodology does not capture every form or quality of community partnership.

• How does the ranking assess governance?

The Good Governance Lens includes ethics culture, open-access publishing, dedicated sustainability staff, financial reporting, student unions, student representation, published governance minutes, national human-rights context, staff perceptions, and governance-related policy citations. Together, these Indicators assess transparency, accountability, participation, ethical culture, sustainability leadership, and external governance impact.

• Does the existence of a student union or student representative prove that students influence decisions?

The presence of a student union or formal student representation provides evidence of institutional structures for participation, but does not by itself demonstrate meaningful influence. Users should consider the wider governance evidence, including the powers and responsibilities of representatives, published minutes, consultation practices, and evidence that student views affect decisions.

• How does the ranking prevent institutions from gaming the methodology?

The use of multiple data sources and evidence types reduces reliance on any single submission or public claim. Validation, consistent definitions, reporting-period requirements, checks on organisational boundaries, and comparison with external data further reduce gaming risks.

• How often is the methodology reviewed?

Indicator definitions, data sources, SDG mappings, weights, eligibility rules, and normalisation methods are reviewed annually to ensure that the methodology remains relevant, robust, and internationally comparable. Changes are subject to consultation, impact assessment, advance notice, and appropriate transition arrangements so that year-on-year comparisons remain meaningful.

• Can a university’s position change even if its own performance has not changed?

Yes, rankings are relative measures. An institution’s position may change because other institutions improve, data sources or survey results change, national context changes, reporting improves, or the methodology is revised. Users should examine scores, Indicator-level results, data-quality information, and year-on-year trends rather than relying on rank movement alone.

• Should users rely on the overall ranking position?

No. The overall position provides a high-level comparison, but users should examine Category, Lens, and Indicator results to understand the reasons for an institution’s performance. Students, institutions, and policymakers may reach different conclusions depending on whether they are most interested in education, climate action, employability, equality, wellbeing, research, or governance.

• How should the ranking be used responsibly?

The ranking should be used as one source of comparative evidence, not as a substitute for institutional due diligence, student research, public policy evaluation, or an institution’s own sustainability strategy. Users should consider the detailed methodology, institutional context, data limitations, and the distinction between commitments, activities, perceptions, outcomes, and national conditions.