Investigating the Relationship Between the Scientific Outputs of the World’s Universities in the Field of Sustainable Development Goals and their Rankings in the Times Higher Education and Shanghai World University Ranking Systems

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Master in Scientometrics, Department of Information Science and Knowledge Studies, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Scienc-es, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Information Science and Knowledge Studies, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Scienc-es, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran,

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Information Science and Knowledge Studies, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Persian Gulf University, Bushehr, Iran.

4 Associate Professor, Department of Information Science and Knowledge Studies, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Scienc-es, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

Abstract

pment Goals (SDGs), presented by the United Nations, address social, economic, and environmental challenges. It is essential for all sectors of society to focus on the goals that are defined for them. As a vital part of society, universities have the potential to play a significant role in this effort and should dedicate some of their educational and research activities to these issues. The purpose of this research is to examine the correlation between the responsiveness and contributions of the world’s universities in addressing the challenges facing humanity, based on their scientific output in the field of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and their rankings in reputable global ranking systems. To achieve this goal, universities identified as high-ranking in terms of scientific productivity—based on data extracted from the Web of Science database—were selected and compared according to their positions in global ranking systems.
Methodology: This study employs a quantitative research design utilizing a scientometric approach. The research population comprises all universities that have published scientific documents related to the 16 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), totaling 3,907 institutions. After a screening process aligned with the research objectives, 1,798 universities were selected for analysis. Data preparation was conducted using Microsoft Excel and Access software, with a substantial portion of the process, including data standardization, performed manually by the researcher. The IBM SPSS software package was used to analyze the data. The degree of correlation was assessed using Kendall's tau-b test.
Findings: The research findings indicate that Harvard University was recognized as the most productive university in terms of scientific output related to Goals 1 (No Poverty), 3 (Good Health and Well-being), 5 (Gender Equality), 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions). The University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences achieved first place in scientific output related to Goals 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), 13 (Climate Action), and 15 (Life on Land). After that, Tsinghua University was recognized as the most productive institution in Sustainable Development Goals 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). Additionally, the Universities of Florida, Toronto, and Sorbonne ranked first in scientific output for Goals 2 (Zero Hunger), 4 (Quality Education), and 14 (Life Below Water), respectively. Furthermore, this research indicates that the highest number of scientific outputs related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has been produced by American and Chinese universities. Specifically, Chinese universities demonstrate the highest level of participation in SDGs 6, 7, 11, and 12. In contrast, for Goal 9, the participation rates of universities from both the United States and China are equal. Additionally, for the remaining goals, universities in the United States have published the largest volume of scientific publications. Examining the ranking results of universities in two global ranking systems reveals commonalities among the top institutions in the THE and Shanghai rankings. For example, both THE and Shanghai consistently rank the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in third place, while Stanford University holds the second position. Additionally, Princeton University is ranked sixth in both of these prestigious global university rankings. Furthermore, eight universities appear jointly among the top 10 in the THE and Shanghai rankings. Finally, the results of the correlation analysis, conducted at a 99% confidence interval, indicate a significant and positive correlation between the research variables. Considering that the correlation coefficients between the ranks in all SDGs and the ranks in the ranking systems range from 0.35 to 0.65, this indicates an acceptable level of correlation between them.
Conclusion: Overall, the results indicate that developed countries, which allocate a higher percentage of their GDP to research and publish scientific outputs related to the Sustainable Development Goals, pave the way for a more sustainable world. Moreover, the results reveal that despite methodological differences between the two ranking systems, they exhibit a moderate correlation across all goals. However, some universities, such as the University of Florida, despite strong performance in specific goals (SDG 2 and 15), have achieved lower positions in global ranking systems. This suggests that ranking systems prioritize the overall volume of scientific output rather than the social impact and problem-oriented focus of research.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

پورآتشی، م.، و زمانی، الف. (1399). سنخ‌شناسی دانشگاه‌های برتر جهان از منظر توسعه پایدار. فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی در آموزش عالی، 26(1)، 123-148. https://journal.irphe.ac.ir/article_702996.html
حبیب­پور گتابی، ک.، و صفری شالی، ر. (1388). راهنمای جامع کاربرد SPSS در تحقیقات پیمایشی. لویه؛ متفکران. http://lib.uok.ac.ir:8080/sitehttps://ketab.ir/book/da7fde66-5592-4983-8cad-2f9ca6892106
حسابی، س.، ستوده، ه.، و یوسفی، ز. (1401). همبستگی بین رتبه­بندی دانشگاه­ها به دو روش کتاب­سنجی محض و داوری غنی‌شده با کتاب­سنجی: نمونه موردمطالعه نظام تعالی پژوهش انگلیس و نظام­های رتبه­بندی معتبر جهانی. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، 8(2)، 75-98. https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2020.5836.1437
خداوردیان، م. (1400). مروری بر توسعه و ترویج کشاورزی ارگانیک و چالش‌های پیش روی آن. تهران: سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، نشر آموزش کشاورزی. https://agrilib.areeo.ac.ir/book_9743.pdf
خورسندی طاسکوه، ع.، و پناهی، م. (1395). تحلیل انتقادی نظام­های رتبه­بندی بین­المللی دانشگاه­ها؛ پیشنهادات سیاستی برای آموزش عالی ایران. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی آموزش عالی ایران، 8(3)، 111-136.
    https://ihej.ir/article-1-913-fa.html
مشتاق، م.، ستوده، ه.، یقطین، م.، و جوکار، ط. (1400). همبستگی نتایج سامانه‌های رتبه‌بندی نمایه نیچر و لایدن با تایمز و کیو-اس. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، 7(2)، 157-172.
    https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2020.5488.1384
مصطفوی، الف.، و خاکی صدیق، ع. (1399). درآمدی بر نظام­های رتبه­بندی دانشگاه­ها. انتشارات دانشگاه یزد.
https://yazd.ac.ir/Page.aspx?mId=1766&ID=1108&Page=Magazines/SquareshowMagazine&t=Archive
منصوریان، ی. (1393). روش تحقیق در علم اطلاعات و دانش­شناسی. سمت.
    https://samta.samt.ac.ir/product/9104
 
 
Anowar, F., Helal, M. A., Afroj, S., Sultana, S., Sarker, F., & Mamun, K. A. (2015). A critical review on world university ranking in terms of top four ranking systems. In K. Elleithy, & T. Sobh (Eds.), New Trends in Networking, Computing, E-learning, Systems Sciences, and Engineering. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering (Vol. 312). Springer.
      https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06764-3_72
Baty, P. (2009, October 30). New Data Partner for World University Ranking. Times Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/new-data-partner-for-world-university-rankings/408881.article?storycode=408881
Brock, C., & Zhong, Z. (2021). The Many contexts of the social responsibilities of universities. Journal of International and Comparative Education, 10(2), 133–141.
      https://doi.org/10.14425%2Fjice.2021.10.2.0612
Buela-Casal, G., Gutiérrez-Martínez, O., Bermúdez-Sánchez, M. P., & Vadillo-Muñoz, O. (2007). Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities. Scientometrics, 71, 349-365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1653-8
Campbell, D. A. (2017). An update on the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 46(3), e48-e55.
      https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogn.2016.11.010
Costanza, R., Daly, L., Fioramonti, L., Giovannini, E., Kubiszewski, I., Mortensen, L. F., Pickett, K. E., Ragnarsdóttir, K. V., Vogli, R. D., & Wilkinson, R. (2016). Modelling and measuring sustainable wellbeing in connection with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Ecological Economics, 130, 350-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.07.009
De la Poza, E., Merello, P., Barberá, A., & Celani, A. (2021). Universities’ Reporting on SDGs: Using THE Impact Rankings to Model and Measure Their Contribution to Sustainability. Sustainability, 13(4), 2038. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042038
Dobrota, M., & Dobrota, M. (2016). ARWU ranking uncertainty and sensitivity: What if the award factor was Excluded? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(2), 480-482. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23527
Fauzi, M., Tan, C., Daud, M., & Noor Awalludin, M. (2020). University rankings: A review of methodological flaws. Issues in Educational Research, 30(1), 79-96.
      https://www.iier.org.au/iier30/fauzi-abs.html
Forward Pathway, US College Database. (2024). Harvard University’s Commitment to Sustainable Development. https://www.forwardpathway.us/harvard-universitys-commitment-to-sustainable-development?utm_
Habibpour Gatabi, K. & Safari Shali, R. (2009). Comperehensive Manual for Using SPSS in Survey Researches. Loye, Motefakeran. http://lib.uok.ac.ir:8080/site/catalogue/95801
      [In Persian].
Harvard Office for Sustainability. (2025, January 4). Harvard’s Sustainability Action Plans. Retrieved January 4, 2025, from https://sustainable.harvard.edu/our-plan/?utm_
Harvard Office for Sustainability. (n. d.). Accelerating Action for a Sustainable Future. Retrieved December 25, 2023, from https://sustainable.harvard.edu/?utm_
Hesabi, S., Sotudeh, H., & Yousefi, Z. (2022). A Correlation study of bibliometric-based and informed-peer-review university rankings: The case of UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) and the World's Prestigious University Ranking Systems. Scientometrics Research Journal, 8(2), 75-98. https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2020.5836.1437 [In Persian].
Holmes, R. (2006). The THES university rankings: Are they really world class? Asian Journal of University Education (AJUE), 2(1), 1-14.
      https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/296/1/AJ_RICHARD%20HOLMES%20AJUE%2006.pdf
Katila, P., Colfer, C. J. P., De Jong, W., Galloway, G., Pacheco, P., & Winkel, G. (Eds.). (2019). Sustainable Development Goals: Their Impacts on Forests and People. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108765015
Khodaverdian, M. R. (2021). An Overview of the Development and Promotion of Organic Agriculture and the Challenges it Faces. Tehran: Agricultural Research, Education and Promotion Organization, Agricultural Education Publication.
      https://agrilib.areeo.ac.ir/book_9743.pdf [In Persian].
Khorsandi Taskouh, A., & Panahi, M. (2016). A critical analysis of international university ranking systems; policy suggestions for Iranian higher education. Iranian Higher Education Quarterly Scientific Research Journal, 8(3), 111-136. https://ihej.ir/article-1-913-fa.html
      [In Persian].
Mansourian, Y. (2014). Research Methods in Information Science and Knowledge Studies. SAMT. https://samt.ac.ir/en/book/3039/research-methods-in-information-science-and-knowledge-studies [In Persian].
Meschede, C. (2020). The Sustainable Development Goals in scientific literature: A bibliometric overview at the Meta-level. Sustainability, 12(11), 4461.
      https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114461
Mishra, M., Desul, S., Santos, C. A. G., Mishra, S. K., Kamal, A. H. M., Goswami, S., Kalumba, A. M., Biswal, R., da Silva, R. M., dos Santos, C. A. C. & Baral, K. (2024). A bibliometric analysis of sustainable development goals (SDGs): A review of progress, challenges, and opportunities. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(5), 11101-11143.
      https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03225-w
Moshtagh, M., Sotudeh, H., Yaghtin, M., & Jowkar, T. (2021). The Correlation of Nature and Leiden Index Ranking Systems with Times and QS. Scientometrics Research Journal, 7(2), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2020.5488.1384 [In Persian].
Mostafavi, I. (2020). An Introduction to University Ranking Systems. Yazd University Publication.  https://www.ketabiran.ir/book/69511 [In Persian].
Pavel, A. P. (2015). Global University Rankings - A Comparative Analysis. Procedia Economics and Finance, 26, 54-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00838-2
Pouratashi, M. & Zamani, A. (2020). Typology of the world's top universities from the perspective of sustainable development. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 26(2), 123-148. https://journal.irphe.ac.ir/article_702996.html
      [In Persian].
Quinlan, M. (2020). Five challenges to humanity: learning from pattern/repeat failures in past disasters? The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 31(3), 444–466.
      https://doi.org/10.1177/1035304620944301
Rendtorff, J. D. (2019). Sustainable Development Goals and progressive business models for economic transformation. Local Economy: The Journal of the Local Economy Policy Unit, 34(6), 510–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269094219882270
Rousseau, R., Egghe, L., & Guns, R. (2018). Chapter 8 – Research Evaluation. In R. Rousseau, L., Egghe, & R. Guns (Eds.), Becoming Metric-wise: A Bibliometric Guide for Researchers. (pp. 247-292). Chandos Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102474-4.00008-X
Sadeghi Moghadam, M. R., Govindan, K., Dahooie, J. H., Mahvelati, S., & Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I. (2021). Designing a model to estimate the level of university social responsibility based on rough sets. Journal of Cleaner Production, 324, 129178.
      https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jclepro.2021.129178
Scheyvens, R., Banks, G., & Hughes, E. (2016). The private sector and the SDGs: The need to move beyond Business as Usual. Sustainable Development, 24(6), 371-382.
      https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1623
Shehatta, I., & Mahmood, K. (2016). Correlation among top 100 universities in the major six global rankings: Policy implications. Scientometrics, 109, 1231-1254.
      https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2065-4
Smolennikov, D., Makarenko, I., Bacho, R., Makarovych, V., Oleksich, Z., Gorodysky, M. & Polishchuk, I. (2024). Do higher education institutions contribute to countries’ SDG progress: Evidence from university rankings. Knowledge and Performance Management, 8(1), 133-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/kpm.08(1).2024.10
The Guardian (2009, March 19). World faces 'perfect storm' of problems by 2030, chief scientist to warn. The Guardian. Retrieved November 14, 2023, from
      https://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/mar/18/perfect-storm-john-beddington-energy-food-climate
Vernon, M. M., Balas, E. A., & Momani, S. (2018). Are university rankings useful to improve research? A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 13(3), e0193762.
      https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193762
World Bank, Science & Technology Indicators. (2021, January 6). Research and Development Expenditure (% of GDP) [Map].
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS?end=2022&most_recent_year_desc=true&start=2022&type=shaded&view=bar&year=2021
Yeh, S. C., Hsieh, Y. L., Yu, H. C., & Tseng, Y. H. (2022). The trends and content of research related to the Sustainable Development Goals: A systemic review. Applied Sciences, 12(13), 6820. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136820

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics