Sustainability Leadership Scorecard Andy Sheppard Arup Overview Scoring

Sustainability Leadership Scorecard Andy Sheppard Arup

Overview Scoring GSC Broader: What? Why? SLS Structure Mapping Outputs Scope 3 Web Portal Summary Case Studies Questions Gap Analysis

Green Scorecard Background - Launched 2016, updated 2017 - High take-up - Responded to sector needs: 1 2 3 Provide a framework for progress Drive innovation within the sector Motivate the wider university community Non-competitive Collaborative Communicative

The need for a wider context Sustainability in HE Estates & FM (indirect) e. g. Travel Procurement e. g. Curriculum Community Estates & FM (direct) e. g. Energy Water

- Aimed at communicating with Senior Leadership Team - Relates to wider issues: - Reputation Student engagement & satisfaction REF, TEF Graduate attributes & outcomes Internationalisation Leadership Directors Management Practitioners Results, feedback and issues - Framework for progress Strategy and importance Why do it?

Priority Areas Framework Areas Activity Areas Leadership & Governance Partnership & Engagement Learning, Teaching & Research Estates & Operations

Priority Areas Framework Areas Activity Areas Leadership & Governance Leadership Staff Engagement & HR Health & wellbeing Risk Learning, Teaching & Research Learning & Teaching Student Engagement Research Partnership & Engagement Community & Business & industry public engagement interface Procurement & supplier engagement Food & drink Estates & Operations Waste Water Biodiversity Construction Travel Energy Adaptation

Priority Areas Framework Areas Activity Areas Estates & Operations Waste Water Biodiversity Construction Travel Adaptation Energy Policy & strategy Stakeholder engagement Action planning Measurement Communication - Score 0 -4 based on descriptions - Similar to Green Scorecard Training & support Implementation & performance Link to curriculum

Scoring Background - Simple percentage achieved - No weighting - Empty answers counted as zeros 100% 90% 80% Gold 70% 60% - At overall & Priority Area level - Visible only to you Platinum 50% Silver Bronze 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% No rating

Tool mapping – Green Scorecard Frameworks Resource Efficiency & Waste Sustainable Biodiversity Construction, Renovation Policy and Strategy Water Ws 7, M 1, M 2 Travel & Transport Climate Change Adaptation Energy T 2 A 6 E 10 A 1, A 2, A 4 E 7 Stakeholder Engagement Activities Action Planning Ws 8 B 5 Measurement M 3 Wt 1 T 1 E 7 Communication E 9 Training and Support E 9 Implementation and performance Link to the Curriculum Ws 1, Ws 2, Ws 3, Ws 4, Ws 5, Ws 6 B 2, B 3, B 4, B 6 Wt 1, Wt 2, Wt 3, T 4, T 5, T 6, Wt 4, Wt 5 T 7 A 3, A 5, B 1 E 1, E 2, E 3, E 4, E 5, E 6, E 7, E 8

Tool mapping – others - NUS Green Impact Eco. Campus Flexible Framework NUS Responsible Futures BREEAM ISO 14001 ISO 50001 ISO 26001 Food for Life Learning Teaching and Research Policy and Strategy Stakeholder Engagement Action Planning Measurement Communication 1 Link to the Curriculum Estates and Operation 1 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 1 Partnerships and Engagement 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 Training and Support Implementation, performance Leadership and Governance 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

Output mapping – UN SDGs - Seminal framework of the time - Frameworks aligned with 3 Goals - Potential impact – alignment of issues - Actual impact – alignment of effort

Website: Dashboard

Website: Tools

Website: Scoring

Website: Groups

Website: Progress

Website: Map

Website: Compare

Website: SDGs

Report export

Case Study – Canterbury Christ Church University - Consistency across Priority Areas - Variability in frameworks - High aspirations Policy and Strategy Stakeholder Engagement Action Planning Measurement Communication Training and Support Implementation and Performance Link to the Curriculum 0 Score 1 Target 2 3 4

Case Study – Nottingham Trent University - Few areas of weakness - Exceeding target in some areas Policy and Strategy Stakeholder Engagement Action Planning Measurement Communication Training and Support Implementation and Performance Link to the Curriculum 0 Score 1 Target 2 3 4

Gap analysis Self Assessment Purely optional - Institution to check progress External progress map Galvanises action External communication 3 rd Party Review • Documents & Interviews • Recommendations Consistency check • Outcome agreed Verification

Most accurate Scope 3 Slightly off-topic… - Guidance note created commuting • Construction • Business services • ICT • Manufactured products • Food and catering Travel Procurement • Water supply • Wastewater treatment • Re-use • Recycling • Composting • Combustion • Landfill Water Waste Least accurate • Business travel • Staff & student

In summary Structure of indicators in categories Non-competitive - Many characteristics of GSC continue Collaborative - Optional broader scope - Optional gap analysis Communicative - Aimed at wider university issues - Launch early-mid May No need for evidence Easy to use Flexible – no need to do everything Framework for progress ü ü ü ü

Thank you – questions? Andy Sheppard andy. sheppard@arup. com 07825 198 132