Green Campus as a Part of Environmental Management of St. Petersburg State University

Abstract

The article is devoted to the study of summit and diversity of the environmental impact of St. Petersburg State University as a subject of environmental management and the characteristics of the formation of a “green” image in the digital environment. The goals of this study were to study the current condition of the application of the green campus concept at St. Petersburg State University and other Russian and foreign universities; to prepare proposals for further developmental concepts at St. Petersburg State University; to identify the theoretical aspects and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the “green” image of the University; to elaborate on practical recommendations for improving the “green” image of St. Petersburg State University. It was revealed that St. Petersburg State University is developing some elements of the green campus concept on its territory and could compete with other Russian and foreign universities in the level of implementation of environmental initiatives. At the same time, during the analysis of its strengths and weaknesses it was found that the “green” image of St. Petersburg State University is not highly developed. The results of the work indicate the most effective methods of forming a “green” image of the university and create a system of indicators based on the questionnaire of the rating “University of Indonesia (UI) Green Metric World University Ranking”.

1. Introduction

Sustainable development is a way of humanity’s development, which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs [1]. The concept has evolved through grooving societal recognition of environmental, economic and social issues affecting human habitats [2]. Sustainability refers to the harmonious development of three interdependent directions, known as the “People, Planet, Profit” model—economy, society and environment [3].

The term sustainable development is applied not only to state environmental safety programs, but also to the educational sphere. The Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) of the United Nations (UN) in 2005 adopted the UNECE Strategy for Education for Sustainable Development [4]. The main aim of this strategy is to encourage states to develop and integrate education for sustainable development in their educational systems within the relevant academic disciplines. The primary purpose is to provide people with knowledge and skills necessary for a healthy and productive lifestyle in accordance to nature and social values.

Higher education institutions play a significant role in the transition to a model of sustainable development of society, which are constantly looking for new more effective managerial and technological solutions and are introducing innovations in the educational process and administrative-technological management practice [5,6]. They are in charge of greening all educational pathways [7].

The concept of “Green Campus” is becoming more widespread in universities all around the world. This concept involves the introduction of environmental practices in the university’s campus, its improvement and raising the level of environmental awareness of students and employees. First of all, green campus is a well-developed environmental infrastructure of the university: bicycle parking; separate bins for different types of garbage; food and other waste management programs; use of energy-/heat-/water-saving technologies; reduction programs for the use of paper and plastic packaging. Also, it includes green building principles, which use the certified building materials, including recycled materials and application of engineering solutions that can reduce the cost and energy consumption of buildings such as external finishing materials contributing to optimal heat saving in the winter and modern means of management, control and optimization of all systems, reducing the cost of maintenance of the university infrastructure, monitoring of the soil cover [8,9].

Another comprehensive interpretation of the term green campus defines it as a university that conducts activities aimed at reducing environmental impact with reducing pollutant emissions, separating waste collecting, reducing water and electricity consumption. A university also introducing its activities to the principles of “green” economy and sustainable development [10].

According to the study of the factors of implementation of environmental initiatives [11], successful integration of sustainable development practices on the territory of the university does not require experience or timely start of the project. The most important factors are as follows:

• Involvement in the implementation of the project of a large number of participants representing different communities (students, teachers and technical staff, external partners and business representatives);
• Active interaction of teachers with the administration (significant inhibitory forces are a large workload and the absence of requirements to contribute to the project in their work duties);
• Support from the management of the institution, which should consider the use of financial or nonmonetary incentives for university staff;
• Clear and precise goal setting corresponding to the real problems of employees and students;
• Imperative use of a system of target values; successful solutions to this problem are the interuniversity associations which have been organized worldwide for the last 30 years.

A higher educational institution, as an object of economic activity, has its own image. One of the first studies of the image of an organization of higher education can be considered the works of Parameswaran R. and Glovaki A.E. [12] considering the impact of the use of strategic marketing tools on the image of an educational organization of higher education in the minds of applicants and students.

The corporate image of a university is a general idea consisting of a set of beliefs and feelings that consumers of educational goods and services have about an educational organization. This concept includes two components: descriptive, representing the totality of all known information about the university, and evaluative, arising under the influence of emotions. Stakeholders often evaluate educational institutions based on past experience, value orientations and moral principles [13].

The green image of the organization of higher education consists in positioning itself and creating in the minds of all interested parties the image of an environmentally responsible business entity following modern trends in environmental protection and introducing innovative methods of resource conservation.

The aims of this work are devoted to the study of (i) the summit and diversity of the environmental impact of St. Petersburg State University as a subject of nature management and (ii) the peculiarities of the formation of a “green” image in the digital environment. The third (iii) aim was to compare the St. Petersburg State University with other Russian universities.

For a comprehensive study of the goal, the following cases were identified:

• To study the current condition of the application of the green campus concept at St. Petersburg State University and at other Russian and foreign universities;
• To prepare proposals for further development of the concept at St. Petersburg State University;
• To identify theoretical aspects and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the “green” image of the university;
• To develop practical recommendations for improving the “green” image of St. Petersburg State University.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Methodology of “UI Green Metric World University Ranking”

In 2010, the University of Indonesia established the UI Green Metric World University Ranking, which aims to assess the current state and prospective policies of universities around the world related to the implementation of the concept of sustainable development.

The UI Green Metric World University Ranking aims to assess the current state of the environmental culture and policies related to the green campus concept and sustainability of universities around the world and reflects the efforts made by institutions to implement sustainable strategies and programs. In 2021, 956 universities from 79 countries were ranked, including 54 represented by Russian universities [14]. Every year, the number of universities participating in this rating increases, which shows the interest of the administration in public dissemination of information about the consistency of their activities with the principles of sustainable development.

The number of universities included in the UI rating and the diversity of evaluation criteria were the main factors in choosing this methodology.

The UI Green Metric World University Ranking considers the sustainability of universities, which includes environmental, economic and social aspects. The environmental aspect refers to the use of natural resources, environmental management and pollution prevention, while the economic aspect refers to cost-savings and profitability. The social aspect includes education, as well as the local community and its involvement in sustainable development [15].

The UI Green Metric World University Rankings evaluates six areas: environment and infrastructure, energy and climate change, waste management, water supply, transport, and education. The methodology for assessing the rating of the latest edition of the criteria from 2021 will be considered below.

In the “Environment & Infrastructure” category, much attention was paid to information about the surroundings and infrastructure of the campus, allowing you to achieve a basic understanding of the university’s relationship to the environment: the area of the campus occupied by various types of vegetation; health infrastructure facilities for the well-being of students and employees; and protected plant, animal and genetic resources. These total 11 indicators represent 15% of the overall rating and show whether a university campus deserves the status of a green campus or not.

The university’s focus on energy use and climate change is the category with the highest weight in the ranking (“Energy and Climate Change”, 21% of the overall rating). Total 10 indicators are the use of energy-efficient appliances; introduction of “smart buildings”; the amount of renewable energy sources used on campus; the total electricity consumption; programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and climate change; the carbon footprint; and the number of innovative programs managed by the university during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The waste management and recycling program (“Waste”, total 6 indicators represent 18% of the overall rating) is an important component of the green campus of any university. During the life of university employees and students on campus generate a large amount of waste. That is why programs for waste management and a targeted reduction in the use of paper and plastic should be in the field of interest of the university.

Campus water use is an integral category in the UI Green Metric World University Rankings (“Water”, 10% of the overall rating). Total 5 indicators include implementation of programs for the conservation of water resources and recycling water supply; use of water-saving equipment, as well as the percentage of additional handwashing facilities during the pandemic. The importance of assessing these criteria lies in the audit of the water consumption system in order to minimize both consumption and water losses.

A set of 8 indicators in the category “Transport” (18% of the overall rating) allows you to evaluate the effectiveness of the policy of using vehicles on campus through the analysis of shuttle bus services, transport initiatives to reduce private vehicles, including the promotion of walking and cycling.

The last category on the list is “Education & Research” (18% of the overall rating). This group of 11 criteria evaluates the number of training courses in the field of sustainable development in relation to the total number of subjects taught, the number of scientific publications in the field of sustainable development, the holding of events and the activity of student organizations related to sustainability, as well as the presence of an updated section on the official website of the educational organization and a report on sustainable development. The described category demonstrates to stakeholders the desire of the university to improve the academic image.

The purpose of the ratings is to raise awareness among stakeholders and to assess the situation. “UI Green Metric World University Rankings” is relatively simple in terms of the number of indicators studied, as well as similar to other sustainability ratings such as GREENSHIP, STARS and College Sustainability Report card. Overall, Green Metric can be assessed as a «practical entry-level tool for assessing sustainability efforts on university campuses». A comparison with other well-known academic rankings shows that high scores on environmental indicators are associated with higher scores in such rating systems as Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), QS World University Ranking (QS) and World University Rankings Times Higher Education (THE). Thus, it can be concluded that the development of “green” initiatives on campus strengthens the image [16] and affects the satisfaction of students and academic performance [17].

2.2. Expert Interview Method

To assess both the state of development of the green-campus concept and to determine the level of development of the green image of St. Petersburg State University, a semistructured, face-to-face, individual expert interview was conducted with candidate of biological sciences Popova N.F., who is the head of the environmental department of the Occupational Safety and Health Department of St. Petersburg University. To fulfil the third task for the first subtopic and the fourth for the second, questions were formulated. These 7 questions are presented below:

• Is it necessary to carry out work within the development of the green campus concept on the territory of St. Petersburg University?
• What projects have been implemented on the campus of the University? Does the University administration support them? If so, how? If not, why?
• Should the initiators of environmental initiatives be students or administration of the university?
• Is it important for St. Petersburg University to form and maintain a green image in the digital environment?
• How do you assess the green image development level at St. Petersburg University: developed, underdeveloped, not developed? What difficulties can be encountered in its formation?
• What are the most effective methods of building a green image of a university?
• How do you assess the representation of St. Petersburg University in the world and Russian rankings in terms of environmental friendliness?

2.3. Student Survey Method

A survey was conducted among students of the faculty of biology of St. Petersburg State University to assess the involvement of students in the implementation of the university’s environmental policy. The survey consisted of nine thematic questions that were divided into two clusters. The first cluster consisted of one question, which was sent to assess awareness of the existence of environmental policy in St. Petersburg State University as a whole. The second set consisted of eight questions, aimed at determining the influence of the factors of student involvement in the implementation of environmental initiatives at the University. The survey was conducted online in May 2022 using the Google Forms service. A total of 98 students of the faculty of biology of St. Petersburg State University from different courses of undergraduate and graduate programs were surveyed.

2.4. SWOT Analysis Method

The SWOT analysis method was developed in the 1960s by researchers from the Harvard Business School and today is widely used as a method of marketing research for an organization’s activities in the market [18].

The methodology for conducting a SWOT analysis implies the division of all factors into 2 categories: internal and external. The internal category includes factors that the object in question can influence on its own; these include strengths and weaknesses. The external category includes environmental factors, that is, what can affect the object from the outside and cannot be controlled by it; these include opportunities and threats. Next, an analysis is made as to whether the identified strengths can prevent possible threats and whether the opportunities contribute to level the weaknesses. SWOT analysis can be carried out for an economic entity, for individual business areas, for individual markets and for individual commodity-market combinations.

3. Results

3.1. UI Green Metric World University Ranking

The analysis (Figure 1) of the external category of indicators (“Environment and Infrastructure”) showed that the strengths of the University are the ratio of the area of open space to the total area, which entails a high ratio of open space to the number of employees and students; large campus areas covered with green spaces and water-absorbing surface areas. Also, more than half of the possible points the University received were for such indicators as the availability and quality of security, security, health infrastructure and infrastructure for people with special needs. Decent points were awarded for the distribution of the University’s budget for sustainable development throughout the year and maintenance of buildings during the COVID-19 pandemic. At this stage of development, St. Petersburg University received zero points for the ratio of the campus area covered by forest to the total area of the campus and the lack of a program for the conservation of plants, animals and genetic resources. The total score for this category was 1000 points out of a possible 1500 (67%).

The lowest percentage score (500 out of 2100 possible, 24%) was scored in the “Energy and Climate Change” category. The strengths of the University are its high rate of use of energy-efficient appliances, low rates of total electricity consumption per total number of employees and students, and specific indicators of the carbon footprint. Weaknesses of St. Petersburg University include the lack of renewable-energy sources on campus, reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions programs and the introduction of smart-building technology.

Almost half of the possible number of points (825 out of 1800, 46%) the University received were for the category “Waste”. The developed waste-management program, as well as the presence of the regulations explain this result on the procedure for handling production and consumption waste. An increase in indicators within this category is possible due to the further development of the waste recycling program (including organic composting), as well as the treatment and monitoring of the state of wastewater.

In the “Water” category, less than half of the possible number of points (400 out of 1000, 40%) were scored due to the lack of water conservation and water-recycling programs. On the other hand, the University is equipped with modern faucets and drains in the toilet rooms. To achieve maximum performance, it is necessary to implement a rainwater-utilization program and a water-reuse program.

A similar result is observed in the “Transport” category (750 out of 1800, 42%). The result is attributed to the lack of an on-campus shuttle-bus program and initiatives to reduce the use of private vehicles. At the same time, most of the University campus is located in the city and the nearest suburbs, which are well accessible by public transport. It is also possible to note the presence of pedestrian and cycling paths, the number of which has increased from year to year.

In the “Research and Education” category, St. Petersburg University scored just over half of the possible points (975 out of 1800, 54%). On the positive side, many scientific publications, start-ups (small innovative enterprises), events and student associations on sustainable-development issues can be noted. The negative points include the low information content of the section on sustainable development on the university website and the absence of a report on sustainable development of St. Petersburg University.

The specific calculation process is presented in Supplementary Materials S1.

3.2. Expert Interview Method

In the first part of the interview, the specifics of the development of the green campus concept at the University were considered. Based on the results of the discussion, the following positive points can be noted below:

• Creation and active work of the environmental committee as part of the student council (the official representative body of St. Petersburg State University), which has a clear structure and close interaction with the Department of Youth Affairs and the administration of the university as a whole.
• Separation of waste collection on campus, which can reduce the cost of waste disposal and reduces the negative impact of the University on the environment since hazardous waste and recyclable materials are collected separately and taken out for disposal/neutralization and not for disposal in landfills as part of household waste.
• Partially implemented programs for water saving (installation of meters and sensor taps) and energy saving (switching to LED lamps instead of mercury lamps).
• Restoration of the botanical garden of St. Petersburg State University, which provides both educational and research work and popularizes knowledge about botany among the population. It is also an object of recreation for employees and students of the university. The botanical garden of St. Petersburg State University is a clear example of the formation of a biodiversity cluster in the center of one of the oldest urbanized ecosystems in Russia. The campus greening improves academic performances of students [19].

The negative points that hinder the development of the concept on campus include the following:

• The outdated environmental policy of St. Petersburg State University, which does not have indicators of the implementation of strategic directions of development.
• The absence of a program for the collection and use of rainwater, which is due mainly to the intracity location of the main educational buildings and climatic features.
• The initial stage of formation and coordination of many ecological associations of students.

In general, the application of elements of the green campus concept on the territory of St. Petersburg University is noted, which are random in implementation and focused on obtaining economic benefits and student initiatives. Also, the application of international construction standards, such as LEED and BREEAM, is limited by the fact that some of the buildings have a long service life and are objects of the cultural heritage of the Russian Federation.

The second part of the interview was devoted to assessing the state of the green image of St. Petersburg University. According to Popova N.F., who is the head of the environmental department of the Occupational Safety and Health Department of St. Petersburg University, the expert, it is important for the university to maintain a green image in the digital environment as part of the openness policy.

3.3. Student Survey Method

In general, a little less than half of the students surveyed (42.9%) were aware of the existence of an environmental policy at the university, while the majority noted that they were not aware of it (55.1%). The rest (2%) stated that there was no environmental policy at the university. The high percentage of students who were not aware of the existence of such policy at the university probably highlights the reason for the low motivation of students to participate in environmental initiatives.

About 57.2% of the respondents noted that they were likely to be involved in the implementation of environmental policy if there were associations for environmental protection at the university. About 62.7% of respondents indicated that they were ready to participate in environmental initiatives if they did not require large labor costs from them. Students demonstrated a similar position (59.2%) to the issue of the impact of the participation with friends.

The participation of the management and employees of the university in activities to ensure sustainable development based on the university had a significant impact on the involvement of students, as the high percentage of those who agreed with these statements (77.5% and 65.3%, respectively) shows.

The need to publish information on the impact of the application of environmental practices and the economic benefits of ongoing actions is supported by the majority of respondents (71.4% and 79.6%, respectively).

The survey showed an extremely high need for waste-management-system development within the university. The majority (83.4%) of respondents noted that they would separate waste if the separate collection containers were closer to their dormitory. This result confirms the relevance of the work carried out by the environmental department on the implementation of waste management on the territory of the university.

The results are presented graphically in Figure 2.

3.4. SWOT Analysis of the Green Image of St. Petersburg University

During the analysis, the following strengths of the green image of St. Petersburg University were identified:

• Availability of a separate section on the website called “Green University”, which presents the main principles of the university’s environmental policy;
• The presence of hashtags in news materials posted on the official website and related to sustainable development (e.g., “#sustainable development goals” and “#ecology”);
• A large number (249) of indexed scientific publications on the topic of sustainable development;
• Systematic events on the territory of the university related to sustainable development, including the territory of the botanical garden;
• Presence in the ranking of “Green Universities of Russia–2019”.

The following disadvantages were also highlighted:

• Scarcity and untimely presentation of information in the “Green University” section;
• Until recently, the lack of a reporting system for ongoing activities on the territory of the university;
• Low level of motivation of employees and students in the medium and long term in the implementation of environmental initiatives due to the lack of commitment and incentive system;
• Lack of representation of St. Petersburg University in international specialized environmental ratings.

The following is a list of threats that may negatively affect the green image of St. Petersburg University:

• The university has a noticeable shortage of funding sources, because of which the amount of cash payments for student events decreases, which negatively affects the quality of their conduct;
• The tightening of environmental legislation in Russia, which has resulted in an increased burden on the environmental department, as well as costs for compliance with legal requirements. Together, these reduce the ability and motivation to implement nonmandatory environmental initiatives and update information on the Internet in a timely manner.

In the last paragraph of the analysis, we consider the opportunities available to the University, which can positively affect the green image:

• Development of the Association of Green Universities in Russia, which leads to the exchange of experience in the implementation of successful environmental projects and public events;
• Increasing competition among leading universities, which encourages a comprehensive representation of the educational institution in all areas of activity, including the negative impact on the environment and methods for reducing it.

4. Discussion

4.1. UI Green Metric World University Ranking

In general, as a result of the assessment, the university’s activities were evaluated with 4450 points out of a possible 10,000, which, according to the results of the UI Green Metric World University Rankings 2021, allows us to claim 686–688 places in the world and 36 in Russia (total participating universities are 957 and 55, respectively, taking into account St. Petersburg State University).

The conducted assessment allows us to visually and systematically consider the strengths and weaknesses of St. Petersburg State University in terms of environmental management, taking into account all the limitations of the methodology under consideration. This result is not satisfactory for this university and requires work to improve the indicators.

4.2. Expert Interview Method

It was noted that the administration of the university has a desire to present a variety of areas of activity of the university, including on the official website. At the same time, the extent of development of the green image of St. Petersburg University is assessed as “poorly developed”. From now on, this contradiction is in the official documents of the university and states the “... promotion of classical universities among the world elite in order to spread a positive image of Russian science, culture, education, socio-humanitarian values in a globalized world”. At the same time, a lexical error was made in the use of the term “ecology” while the priority areas for the development of the university was formulated, because of which the only mention of the need to protect the environment and comply with environmental legislation was recorded in the wording “protection of the environment”.

Based on the above, one can single out the main factor behind the weak development of the green image of St. Petersburg University, which consists of the weak motivation of both administration and students. This problem has two solutions. First is to fix the need to update information on the website in the job descriptions of university employees. The second is that students could obtain different grant support from public organizations.

4.3. Student Survey Method

A similar study in Russia was conducted among students of higher educational institutions of five other Russian universities (PFUR, PNRPU, SFU, SSAU and VSU) participating in the UI Green Metric World University Ranking in 2019 with the sample size of 105 respondents [20].

Comparing the results (Figure 3) carried out at St. Petersburg State University and presented in the study by Ali E.B. and Anufrieva V.P., it was revealed that a greater number of SPbU students would be inclined to follow the example of the top management and employees of the University (77.5% and 65.3% versus 59.2% and 62%, respectively). Also, students of the university report a reluctance to make a large amount of effort in participating in environmental policy as compared to other universities examined (63.3% and 51%, respectively). The reverse trend is noticeable in the need to openly publish information on the degree of influence and economic effect of ongoing environmental initiatives, in particular, outside the university, this problem is more acute (71.4% and 79.6% versus 92% and 90%, respectively). At the same time, the need to increase the availability of points for separate collection is approximately at the same level in all the universities under consideration (83.7% in St. Petersburg State University and 76% in other universities).

In general, it can be noted that the problems of implementing environmental policy at St. Petersburg State University have their own specific features. This policy is different from other higher-education institutions, which poses the challenge for the administration and students to find nontrivial solutions and take into account the specific features of the alma mater.

4.4. SWOT Analysis

In general, we can conclude that St. Petersburg University operates in a favorable environment, and the available opportunities can help reduce the adverse impact soon. Possible threats cannot be eliminated due to the influence of the strengths of the university, which require increased attention from the administration and a search for alternative solutions in order to minimize the risk of a decrease in competitiveness in the educational-services market and strengthen positions in international specialized ratings.

5. Conclusions

During the analysis of the activities of St. Petersburg University, it was revealed that the university has a complex and fragmented organizational structure, which determines the variety of forms and its impact on the natural environment.

As a result of the expert interview, it was established that there is an environmental policy, a separate waste-collection system and environmental volunteering and environmental education programs that are at a high level.

Despite the outdated environmental policy and the low level of motivation of employees and students, there is a gradual implementation of environmental initiatives on the territory of the university, which requires closer attention and participation from the management of St. Petersburg University (the request for which is also confirmed by a survey of students) to strengthen positions in international rankings and obtaining an economic effect from embodied ideas. Thus, the hypothesis that St. Petersburg University can compete with other universities in terms of the level of implementation of environmental initiatives has been confirmed.

The level of the green image of St. Petersburg University was assessed as insufficiently developed due to the general level of students’ awareness of the existence of environmental policy at the university level, which is confirmed by a survey of students, and to the untimely updating of the thematic sections of the website.

In view of the foregoing, a system of indicators was developed based on the UI Green Metric World University Ranking questionnaire (Supplementary Materials S2), which is required for annual completion and posting on the official website of the University in the “Green University” section. These indicators informatively and concisely demonstrate the dynamics and effectiveness of the environmental initiatives’ implementation on the territory of St. Petersburg University, and are also easily calculated, which practically does not increase the burden on the administrative staff of the University.

The most effective methods of forming the “green” image of the university were the following:

• The publication of news about ongoing events, goals and indicators of sustainable development of the University on the website of St. Petersburg State University;
• The Creation of informational occasions and publication of news about them in third-party media of the city and country;
• Inviting people from outside the University to events, publishing information about the possibility of representatives of local communities attending some events.
• Providing information about environmental projects at the open day for applicants.

6. Implications and Future Research

6.1. Theoretical Implications

The results of this study have theoretical contributions. Our research touched upon the topic of the university’s green image in the digital environment. We believe that in the modern world it is important to convey information about your achievements to local communities, especially in such a competitive environment as universities.

Studies of this nature are welcome, as there is a need to develop the concept of a green campus in Russia and CIS countries.

6.2. Practical Implications

Our results are of great practical importance for the formation of a green image of a higher educational institution. The analysis carried out using the UI Green Metric methodology was the first for this university.

The developed system of indicators will be included in the environmental management policy of St. Petersburg State University.

6.3. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research

Despite the contributions made by this paper, it does come with some shortfalls that must be acknowledged. Data analysis is presented by qualitative comparison, without the use of statistical criteria. Also, the comparison was carried out only among Russian universities, on the other hand, the use of an international assessment system allows using the data obtained in other studies.

However, the findings are the first study among universities of this scale in Russia. Additionally, this study has limitations as the small sample size of students and only one expert interview, which is due to the fact that there are few officials involved in environmental management in Russian universities.

Finally, in further research, we suggest comparing universities in countries similar in geographical location and history, such as the CIS countries, which will allow us to find differences in the formation of a green image in educational institutions of these countries.