Cargando…

Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research

Higher Education Institutions (HEI) or universities, as organisations engaged in education, research and community services, play an important role in promoting sustainable development. Therefore, they are increasingly linked to the initiative of calculating their carbon footprint (CF), which is a t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Valls-Val, Karen, Bovea, María D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8382111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34456663
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10098-021-02180-2
_version_ 1783741489091706880
author Valls-Val, Karen
Bovea, María D.
author_facet Valls-Val, Karen
Bovea, María D.
author_sort Valls-Val, Karen
collection PubMed
description Higher Education Institutions (HEI) or universities, as organisations engaged in education, research and community services, play an important role in promoting sustainable development. Therefore, they are increasingly linked to the initiative of calculating their carbon footprint (CF), which is a tool to assess sustainability from the perspective of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The aim of this study is to carry out a systematic review of the current situation of CF assessment in academic institutions by analysing different key elements, such as the time period, methodologies and practises, calculation tools, emission sources, emission factors and reduction plans. The review protocol considered articles published until March 2021. Of the articles reviewed, 35 are aimed specifically at calculating the CF of HEI, while the remaining articles consist of review, activity-specific CF assessment or GHG emission reduction articles. Clear differences have been identified when results are compared for the normalised CF (average of 2.67 t CO(2)e/student, ranging from 0.06 to 10.94) or the percentage of carbon offsetting, only considered in 14% of the studies and ranging from 0.09 to 18%. The main reason for this is the lack of standardisation as regards the time metric (year, semester), functional unit (student, employee, area) and data collection boundary (scope 1, 2, 3), the emissions sources and emission factors, mainly for scope 3 (water consumption and treatment, waste treatment, office, ICT and laboratory consumables, commuting and travel, construction materials, canteens, etc.), and the inclusion or not of the effect of carbon offset projects to offset the CF (aim of the project and absorption sources and factors). However, despite the differences, a reduction over time is clearly observed. Therefore, CF in HEI requires further improvements and solutions to a number of challenges, including the definition of representative emission sources, the creation of a robust emission factor database and the development of tools/methodologies that cover all the needs of this type of organisation. GRAPHIC ABSTRACT: [Image: see text]
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8382111
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83821112021-08-23 Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research Valls-Val, Karen Bovea, María D. Clean Technol Environ Policy Review Higher Education Institutions (HEI) or universities, as organisations engaged in education, research and community services, play an important role in promoting sustainable development. Therefore, they are increasingly linked to the initiative of calculating their carbon footprint (CF), which is a tool to assess sustainability from the perspective of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The aim of this study is to carry out a systematic review of the current situation of CF assessment in academic institutions by analysing different key elements, such as the time period, methodologies and practises, calculation tools, emission sources, emission factors and reduction plans. The review protocol considered articles published until March 2021. Of the articles reviewed, 35 are aimed specifically at calculating the CF of HEI, while the remaining articles consist of review, activity-specific CF assessment or GHG emission reduction articles. Clear differences have been identified when results are compared for the normalised CF (average of 2.67 t CO(2)e/student, ranging from 0.06 to 10.94) or the percentage of carbon offsetting, only considered in 14% of the studies and ranging from 0.09 to 18%. The main reason for this is the lack of standardisation as regards the time metric (year, semester), functional unit (student, employee, area) and data collection boundary (scope 1, 2, 3), the emissions sources and emission factors, mainly for scope 3 (water consumption and treatment, waste treatment, office, ICT and laboratory consumables, commuting and travel, construction materials, canteens, etc.), and the inclusion or not of the effect of carbon offset projects to offset the CF (aim of the project and absorption sources and factors). However, despite the differences, a reduction over time is clearly observed. Therefore, CF in HEI requires further improvements and solutions to a number of challenges, including the definition of representative emission sources, the creation of a robust emission factor database and the development of tools/methodologies that cover all the needs of this type of organisation. GRAPHIC ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-08-23 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8382111/ /pubmed/34456663 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10098-021-02180-2 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Review
Valls-Val, Karen
Bovea, María D.
Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research
title Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research
title_full Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research
title_fullStr Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research
title_full_unstemmed Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research
title_short Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research
title_sort carbon footprint in higher education institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8382111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34456663
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10098-021-02180-2
work_keys_str_mv AT vallsvalkaren carbonfootprintinhighereducationinstitutionsaliteraturereviewandprospectsforfutureresearch
AT boveamariad carbonfootprintinhighereducationinstitutionsaliteraturereviewandprospectsforfutureresearch