Abstract
Organisations of all types are significant contributors to global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Currently, the carbon emissions of organisations are typically assessed through hybrid environmentally extended input-output—life cycle analysis. The design of these models means that double counting is inherent and, were all institutions to report their carbon footprint, the cumulative figure would be grossly inflated. Knowing the full extent of environmental impact is important in the decision making process to implement sustainability initiatives. However, on the basis of comparing with peers and contributing to national carbon accounts, the model falls short of requirements. For universities, where activity is dominated by the consumption of resources, producing and reporting the carbon footprint is plagued by potential double counting, as well as vast data collections which are too cumbersome for institutions to manage. To find the most suitable approach for higher education, this paper explores the attributes of the organisational carbon footprinting methodologies available to simultaneously avoid double counting and lessen data management issues. The former can be eradicated if activities are allocated on either a consumption or production basis; however footprinting is streamlined for universities if a production based footprint is chosen. Universities should not defer from their responsibility to sustainable consumption and so for internal purposes, efforts to understand the full breadth of emissions in which they indirectly influence are deemed important.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Climate Change Act 2008 introduced into law a national target of carbon emission reduction of 80 % below a 1990 baseline by 2050. Limited to Scope 1 and 2 emissions, it was the first piece of legislation of its kind in the world.
- 2.
‘Environmentally extended’ refers to the assigning of GHGs to the financial transactions normally modelled in economic input-output analysis (IOA) (first introduced by Wassily Leontief in the 1930s).
- 3.
The Blue Book is a key annual publication of UK National Accounts statistics and an essential data source for anyone concerned with macro-economic policies and studies.
References
Amani, P., & Schiefer, G. (2011). Data availability for carbon calculators in measuring GHG emissions produced by the food sector. International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2(4), 392–407.
Atherton, A., & Giurco, D. (2011). Campus sustainability: Climate change, transport and paper reduction. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 12(3), 269–279.
Baboulet, O., & Lenzen, M. (2010). Evaluating the environmental performance of a university. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(12), 1134–1141.
Von Bahr, B., Hanssen, O. J., Vold, M., Pott, G., Stoltenberg-Hansson, E., & Steen, B. (2003). Experiences of environmental performance evaluation in the cement industry. Data quality of environmental performance indicators as a limiting factor for benchmarking and rating. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11(7), 713–725.
Bastianoni, S., Pulselli, F. M., & Tiezzi, E. (2004). The problem of assigning responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. Ecological Economics, 49(3), 253–257.
Bhatia, P., Cummis, C., Brown, A., Rich, D., Draucker, L., & Lahd, H. (2011). Greenhouse gas protocol. Corporate value chain (scope 3) accounting and reporting standard. World Resources Institute and World Business Counci for Sustainable Development: Geneva, Switzerland.
Birnik, A. (2013). An evidence-based assessment of online carbon calculators. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 280–293.
Cummis, C., Draucker, L., Khan, S., Ranganathan, J., & Sotos, M. (2013). Technical guidance for calculating scope 3 emissions. World Resources Institute and World Business Counci for Sustainable Development: Geneva, Switzerland.
Davis, S. J., & Caldeira, K. (2010). Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(12), 5687–5692.
Davis, S. J., Peters, G. P., & Caldeira, K. (2011). The supply chain of CO2 emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(45), 18554–18559.
Disterheft, A., da Silva, Ferreira, Caeiro, S. S., Ramos, M. R., & de Miranda Azeiteiro, U. M. (2012). Environmental management systems (EMS) implementation processes and practices in European higher education institutions—Top-down versus participatory approaches. Journal of Cleaner Production, 31, 80–90.
Dragomir, V. D. (2012). The disclosure of industrial greenhouse gas emissions: A critical assessment of corporate sustainability reports. Journal of Cleaner Production, 29–30, 222–237.
Flint, K. (2001). Institutional ecological footprint analysis—A case study of the University of Newcastle, Australia. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 2(1), 48–62.
Gao, T., Liu, Q., & Wang, J. (2013). A comparative study of carbon footprint and assessment standards. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 9(3), 237–243.
Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2010a). Carbon management strategies and plans: A guide to good practice. HEFCE: Bristol.
Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2010b). Carbon reduction target and strategy for higher education in England. HEFCE: Bristol.
Hoornweg, D., Sugar, L., & Trejos Gomez, C. L. (2011). Cities and greenhouse gas emissions: moving forward. Environment and Urbanization, 23(1), 207–227.
Huang, Y. A., Lenzen, M., Weber, C. L., Murray, J., & Matthews, H. S. (2009). The Role of input–output analysis for the screening of corporate carbon footprints. Economic Systems Research, 21(3), 217–242.
Jerneck, A., Olsson, L., Ness, B., Anderberg, S., Baier, M., Clark, E., et al. (2011). Structuring sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 6(1), 69–82.
Klein-Banai, C., & Theis, T. L. (2013). Quantitative analysis of factors affecting greenhouse gas emissions at institutions of higher education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 29–38.
Larsen, H. N., & Hertwich, E. G. (2009). The case for consumption-based accounting of greenhouse gas emissions to promote local climate action. Environmental Science & Policy, 12(7), 791–798.
Larsen, H. N., Pettersen, J., Solli, C., & Hertwich, E. G. (2013). Investigating the carbon footprint of a university—The case of NTNU. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 39–47.
Letete, T. C. M., & Marquard, A. (2011). Carbon footprint of the University of Cape Town. Journal of Energy in Southern Africa, 22(2), 2–12.
Matthews, H. S., Hendrickson, C. T., & Weber, C. L. (2008). The importance of carbon footprint estimation boundaries. Environmental Science and Technology, 42(16), 5839–5842.
Minx, J. C., Wiedmann, T., Wood, R., Peters, G. P., Lenzen, M., Owen, A., Scott, K., et al. (2009). Input–Output analysis and carbon footprinting: An overview of applications. Economic Systems Research, 21(3), 187–216.
Munksgaard, J., Wier, M., Lenzen, M., & Dey, C. (2008). Using input-output analysis to measure the environmental pressure of consumption at different spatial levels. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(1–2), 169–185.
Ozawa-Meida, L., Brockway, P., Letten, K., Davies, J., & Fleming, P. (2011). Measuring carbon performance in a UK University through a consumption-based carbon footprint: De Montfort University case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 56, 185–198.
Pelletier, N., Allacker, K., Pant, R., & Manfredi, S. (2013). The European commission organisation environmental footprint method: Comparison with other methods, and rationales for key requirements. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19(2), 387–404.
Peters, G. P. (2010). Carbon footprints and embodied carbon at multiple scales. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2(4), 245–250.
Pike, G. (2012). From internationalism to internationalisation: The illusion of a global community in higher education 1 global education and international education: Responses to globalisation. Journal of Social Science Education, 11(3), 133–149.
Recker, J., Rosemann, M., & Gohar, E. (2011). Measuring the carbon footprint of business processes. Business Process Management Workshops, 511–520.
Riddell, W., Bhatia, K. K., Parisi, M., Foote, J., & Iii, J. I. (2009). Assessing carbon dioxide emissions from energy use at a university. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 10(3), 266–278.
Robinson, O., Kemp, S., & Williams, I. (2015). Carbon management at universities: A reality check. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 109–118.
Rypdal, K., & Winiwarter, W. (2001). Uncertainties in greenhouse gas emission inventories–evaluation, comparability and implications. Environmental Science & Policy, 4(2–3), 107–116.
Schofer, E., & Meyer, J. W. (2005). The worldwide expansion of higher education in the twentieth century. American Sociological Review, 70(6), 898–920.
Sharrard, A. L., Matthews, H. S., Asce, A. M., & Ries, R. J. (2008). Estimating construction project environmental effects using an input-output-based hybrid life-cycle assessment model. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 14, 327–336.
Song, J.-S., & Lee, K.-M. (2010). Development of a low-carbon product design system based on embedded GHG emissions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(9), 547–556.
Stephens, J. C., Hernandez, M. E., Román, M., Graham, A. C., Scholz, R. W., Stephens, J. C., et al. (2008). Higher education as a change agent for sustainability in different cultures and contexts. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9(3), 317–338.
Suh, S., Lenzen, M., Treloar, G. J., Huppes, G., Jolliet, O., Klann, U., et al. (2004). Critical review system boundary selection in life-cycle inventories using hybrid approaches. Environmental Science and Technology, 38(3), 657–664.
Wiedmann, T., & Minx, J. C. (2008). A definition of a “carbon footprint.” In Ecological Economics Research Trends (pp. 1–11). Hauppage, New York: USA: Nova Science Publishers.
Williams, I., Kemp, S., Coello, J., Turner, D. A., & Wright, L. A. (2012). A beginner’s guide to carbon footprinting. Carbon Management, 3(1), 55–67.
Zhang, N., Williams, I. D., Kemp, S., & Smith, N. F. (2011). Greening academia: Developing sustainable waste management at higher education institutions. Waste Management, 31(7), 1606–1616.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Robinson, O.J., Kemp, S., Williams, I.D. (2017). Consumption, Production… or Perfection? Exploring Approaches to Carbon Footprinting in Higher Education Institutions. In: Leal Filho, W., Skanavis, C., do Paço, A., Rogers, J., Kuznetsova, O., Castro, P. (eds) Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in Higher Education. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47889-0_31
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47889-0_31
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-47888-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-47889-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)