Today, Times Higher Education announced the results of the 2020 THE University Impact Rankings, the second edition of the classification, which assess the impact of the activities of universities in relation to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The ranking is based on the analysis of universities’ activities in seventeen SDG, six more than in the first edition.

In total, more than 760 participating universities from XX countries have participated, that is 50% more than the previous year, and UPF is ranked 53^rd in the world, consolidating the good results obtained in the first edition. In addition, it ranks XXst/nd/rd/th university in the Spanish State and XXst/nd/rd/th in Europe. The results of UPF for the SDG stand out in sectoral rankings related to the Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions (5^th in the world); Climate Action (12^th in the world), and Gender Equality (26^th in the world).

Mònica Figueras, vice-rector for social commitment and equality projects, said “our good position in this ranking, both in the first and in the current edition, is proof of the commitment and the work by UPF to progress towards the goals of the United Nations. Universities are also responsible for achieving the SDG because our actions have a clear impact on society, both in the training of people and in transferring research to society, and the actual governance of the institution and the actions we implement”.

“Our good position in this ranking, both in the first and in the current edition, is proof of the commitment and the work by UPF to progress towards the goals of the United Nations. Universities are also responsible for achieving the SDG because our actions have a clear impact on society"

This year’s ranking analyses activities by universities in the seventeen SDG, unlike last year when it took only eleven as a reference. To participate, each university had to submit its candidacy with at least three SDG in addition to SDG number 17, which is compulsory for all institutions. With these data, Times Higher Education has developed two types of classification: a global one (constructed from the results of the university in the three SDG for which it obtained the best results) and the specific rankings for each SDG.

As the vice-rector explains, “UPF has been promoting the institution’s social dimension for years now. The appearance of the SDG fitted perfectly into commitments already acquired and has meant another way to organize and systematize the work done in various areas of the university (research, teaching, management, environment, community...)”.

UPF presents its candidature in eight of the seventeen SDG evaluated

The two SDG with the highest participation were number 4, Quality Education (over 670 universities), and number 3, Good Health and Well-being (620 universities). The following table offers a breakdown of the results in each field.

In brackets, the total number of universities that have submitted their candidacy for the SDG

A ranking to showcase the commitment of universities to achieving the SDG

According to THE, this ranking reflects the need to “show how the higher education sector is working to build and make possible the objectives set by the United Nations”, as well as being an opportunity to highlight the activity of an institution in areas not covered by other classifications. Thus, according to THE, “the inclusion of an institution in this ranking is, in itself, a great success and showcases the university as a global pioneer player, demonstrating the commitment of the institution with the SDG, not only through teaching, research and knowledge transfer; but also through the institution’s internal practices, policies and procedures”.

The evaluation of each SDG has included a wide range of qualitative and quantitative indicators, provided by the University itself and other external sources, such as Elsevier, a partner of THE for the supply of bibliometric and scientific output data. A key element of the evaluation consisted of each university having to certify the accuracy of the information provided via links to documents, websites or other public information; cases where the reliability of the information provided could not be verified were subject to penalization.