Next Article in Journal
Molecular Composition of Humic Acids and Soil Organic Matter Stabilization Rate of the First Arctic Carbon Measurement Supersite “Seven Larches”
Previous Article in Journal
Blockchain and Smart Cities for Inclusive and Sustainable Communities: A Bibliometric and Systematic Literature Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 15
10.3390/su16156672
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Ecological Footprint of the National University of the Altiplano, Peru: A Tool for Sustainable Management

by
Alcides Huamaní Peralta
and
Julio Cesar Quispe Mamani
*
Faculty of Economic Engineering, National University of Altiplano, Puno 21001, Peru
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(15), 6672; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156672
Submission received: 18 June 2024 / Revised: 26 July 2024 / Accepted: 28 July 2024 / Published: 4 August 2024
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
One of the ways in which sustainable development can be understood is through the efficient management and systematization of indicators. For this reason, the study of ecological footprints is important, given that this concept integrates the different types of environmental indicators and, from the results and their interpretation, explains the total environmental impact generated through the development of daily human activities. The objective of this research was to quantify the total ecological footprint of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023. An application-type quantitative approach was considered, and the study utilized a descriptive, non-experimental design in which source data were used. The data were obtained from a primary sample through applying a survey to teachers, students, and administrative staff. The questionnaire included questions about the operations and functioning of the university, allowing us to calculate and analyze the components of its ecological footprint. It was determined that, in 2023, the university entity generated 4721.20 t CO2 in carbon dioxide emissions due to the use and operation of infrastructure, buildings, mobility, electricity consumption, paper consumption, and water consumption. The findings indicate that the university’s operations require approximately 915.67 hectares of forest annually to offset its carbon emissions and that it has an ecological footprint (in global hectares) of 1172.06 hag/year, suggesting important sustainability challenges. Finally, it was determined that the ecological footprint per capita at the National University of the Altiplano in 2023 was 0.04 ha/person/year and 0.06 hag/person/year, due to CO2 emissions, thus generating a greater ecological footprint of the university. These results underline the need to improve sustainable practices and review policies at the university level in order to better align with the objectives of sustainable development.

1. Introduction

To understand the sustainability problem, one must first consider the existence of the intrinsic relationship between humanity and nature. In this context, our dependence has become more evident in recent decades, as the excessive use of resources to satisfy humanity’s unlimited needs has strongly affected the constant flow of different resources on the planet. This is why it is important to study the ecological footprint (EF), which represents the amount of ecologically productive land required for the production of resources used and the assimilation of waste generated by human beings, measured in global hectares (hag). The EF is a tool that indicates, at a global level, the ecological deficit or surplus existing in a defined area, assuming that consumption is homogeneous. It can be calculated at a local, regional, or national level; moreover, it can be calculated at an institutional or personal level, indicating whether a population group is living within the limits of the planet or of the existing regional or local ecosystem [1,2,3,4,5].
In the 1950s and 1960s, many countries worldwide demonstrated that they had the capacity to meet the needs generated in their own territories; however, since the 1970s, the indicators of demand for goods and services in the world have exceeded the associated supply, generating a gap in needs. To cover this deficit, goods and services began to be produced in larger volumes, affecting the use of natural resources. Therefore, the ecological footprint began to vary, and the biocapacity of the earth was affected by increasing the consumption of renewable resources at rates greater than their natural regeneration cycle, releasing greater volumes of CO2 into the environment, and exceeding the capacities that ecosystems have for natural assimilation and absorption [5,6,7,8,9,10].
For these reasons, since the 1990s, the problem of climate change has been one of the most critical and worrying environmental problems for humanity and nations. This is why environmental pollution, the generation of solid waste, and CO2 emissions, among other important issues, were addressed at the meeting of the Kyoto Protocol on climate change and the conferences of the parties on climate change (COP), both promoted by the United Nations (UN). This same international organization proposed the paradigm of sustainable development in 1987, where sustainable development was established as development that satisfies the needs of the present without compromising those of future generations. Likewise, 17 sustainable development goals have been in force for UN member countries from 2015 to 2030. They all propose clean development mechanisms and tools for the public sector, private sector, and civil society of the countries [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21].
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) address aspects such as affordable and non-polluting energy (SDG 7), and the responsible production and consumption of resources (SDG 12). These have been incorporated into the state policies of Peru, where it has been established that, in order to reduce the ecological footprint, environmental policy guidelines must be implemented in state institutions and the private sector, including the Peruvian university system [22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29].
Greenhouse gases (GHGs)—mainly carbon dioxide (CO2)—are the main cause of the problem of climate change, which is considered the main environmental threat to our planet, as fossil fuels, which contribute to the generation of GHG emissions, continue to be the main source of energy for economic activities [20,21,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37]. In this sense, talking about the topic of the ecological footprint is important, as, being a measurement method, it allows for analysis of the demands of humanity on the biosphere with respect to the regenerative capacity of the planet. This is carried out by jointly considering the area required to provide the renewable resources that people use and the area occupied by infrastructure necessary to absorb waste [38,39].
To determine whether the human demand for renewable resources and CO2 absorption can be maintained, the ecological footprint is compared to the planet’s regenerative capacity (or biocapacity). In addition, both the ecological footprint (which represents the demand for resources) and biocapacity (which represents the availability of resources) are expressed in units called global hectares (hag), with 1 hag being equivalent to the productive capacity of one hectare of land with respect to the average production worldwide [40,41,42,43,44,45,46].
In recent years, the ecological footprint indicator has made it possible to identify the production and consumption of organizations with respect to environmental sustainability. As such, the methodology for calculating the ecological footprint of universities takes into consideration that ecological systems are necessary to obtain flows of materials and the energy required for the production of any type of product, for the absorption of waste from production processes and the final use of products, and for the creation of infrastructure. To estimate this indicator, the forest area necessary to assimilate the CO2 emissions produced in each consumption category identified and selected in the institution must be determined. This forest area is obtained by calculating the quotient of the total mass of estimated emissions (of all categories) and a factor that represents the carbon absorption or fixation capacity. The surface occupied by the buildings on the university campus is added to the final value obtained [47,48,49,50,51,52].
The worldwide ecological footprint in 2017 reached 2.70 hag/person, with a biocapacity of 1.78 hag/person, where Africa had an ecological footprint of 1.41 hag/person and a biocapacity of 1.48 hag/person, Asia had an ecological footprint of 1.78 hag/person and a biocapacity of 0.82 hag/person, Europe had an ecological footprint of 4.68 hag/person and a biocapacity of 2.89 hag/person, Latin America and the Caribbean had an ecological footprint of 2.58 hag/person and a biocapacity of 5.47 hag/person, North America had an ecological footprint of 7.90 hag/person and a biocapacity of 4.93 hag/person, and Oceania had an ecological footprint of 5.39 hag/person and a biocapacity of 11.15 hag/person [12,41,44,45,53,54,55,56,57,58,59].
In the case of Peru, it reached a value of 41,627,485 hag, representing a value of 1.46 hag/person—a value lower than that determined by the Global Ecological Footprint Network, which indicated that, for this period, the value was 43,408,349 hag (i.e., 1.54 hag/person). Considering the value of the global BC (1.80 hag per capita), by 2022, it was expected to increase to 1.47 hag/person. All of this is caused by the growing population and changes in the per capita demand for resources, resulting in Peru joining the ranks of countries that exceed the ecologically permissible parameters. Additionally, Peru’s CO2 emissions in 2020 reached 44,479 megatons, thus positioning Peru as number 128 of 184 countries within the ranking of countries by CO2 emissions from least to most polluting [48,50,60,61].
Given this problem, it is necessary for the public and private sectors to become aware of their levels of contribution to environmental deterioration and, at the same time, strategies for reducing the ecological footprint should be proposed. This is because, in recent years, the demand for organizations to evaluate the environmental impacts that they generate by applying sustainability indicators has increased; this is also the case for different public and private universities in particular, which are part of systems within their local environments. An institution can have inputs related to the consumption of different types of resources and outputs as part of the production of different types of waste. This analysis is in compliance with what was established at the Earth Summit (1992), which took place in Rio de Janeiro, and the functions that universities should perform for the benefit of guaranteeing sustainable development are included in Agenda 21 [61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68]. For this reason, the National University of the Altiplano (UNA-Puno), from its institutional framework and considering the perspective of the local reality, has been showing institutional growth not only in the aspect of infrastructure, due to its great pedagogical potential, but also with respect to the number of members who have progressively joined the university community (e.g., students, teachers, and administrative staff).
With its properties, UNA-Puno has an area of 38.93 hectares. As a public institution, its activities are to provide university-level higher education in its 35 professional courses in 19 faculties, with 23 master’s programs, 13 doctoral programs, pre- and post-graduate populations (18,508 and 6385 students, respectively), and 108 RENACYT-CONCYTEC researchers and teachers. It also has 1311 teachers, 813 administrative workers, and various infrastructure, vehicles, equipment, and laboratories [68,69].
In recent years (2018–2023), the numbers of students and teachers have increased at an annual growth rate of 0.037 and 0.0421, respectively (information from the UNA-Puno statistics office). This implies increases in demand for the consumption of water services, electricity, fossil fuels, and food, among other things, as well as an increase in the generation of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes, contributing strongly to its ecological footprint. It is necessary to mention that, at present, UNA-Puno does not have an instrument or document that systematizes the different types of resources that it demands, nor does it possess information related to the quantities of the different types of waste that are generated. Therefore, the real dimensions of the impacts that are generated in the development of the daily activities of the university are not known [68].
In this sense, this study is intended to demonstrate the degree of contribution to environmental deterioration by the UNA-Puno community. Therefore, this research proposes the calculation of the ecological footprint for 2023 using the methodology for calculating the ecological footprint of universities proposed by López et al. [51]. For this purpose, information was collected from direct sources (institutional information) and indirect sources (surveys), which allowed for the calculation of a sustainability indicator that provides information on resource consumption and relevant implications for sustainable development.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Approach, Type, and Design

This research used a quantitative approach with statistical inference tools. According to the level of knowledge that was desired to be obtained, it was exploratory in nature [70].
The research design was descriptive, as it included descriptive elements that allowed for the collection and quantification of data on the variables under study. In addition, it was cross-sectional, as the components of the research were analyzed during the year 2023. Additionally, the research was applied specifically to the topic under investigation and the use of the knowledge acquired. Given that the development of a new project was sought, it was necessary for calculations to be carried out within the context of the proposed methodology [71].

2.2. Method for Calculating the Ecological Footprint

For the collection of information, the Google form was used; the same that was shared with the teaching, administrative staff and students of the National University of the Altiplano. For the processing of the information, the Excel 2019 program for Windows was used, which allowed obtaining the desired indicators.
To calculate the ecological footprint of the National University of the Altiplano, first, the CO2 emissions from the consumption of natural resources, such as electrical energy, transportation, buildings, water, and paper, were estimated. Then, the CO2 emission factors of the identified uses were calculated, considering the use of internationally accepted emission factors. These CO2 emissions were then multiplied by the consumption in each category and the relevant emission factor as follows:
E m i s s i o n s t   C O 2 = C o n s u m p t i o n ( u n ) ∗ E m i s s i o n   F a c t o r ( t   C O 2 / u n ) .
The final result of the ecological footprint is expressed in global hectares (hag). This unit represents one hectare with the average global capacity to provide the ecosystem services necessary for human development, such as the production of resources and absorption of waste. This unit of measurement is important, as it allows for the comparison of ecological footprint results obtained from different places or on different types of terrain. Another important part of the calculation of the ecological footprint is the equivalence factors published by the Global Footprint Network [72]. These factors were created to convert different types of land, such as forests, cropland, and fishing areas, into global hectare format (which, as described above, is a universal or average unit for productive surfaces). The equivalence factors were prepared by taking the productivity of the land, its use, and the time of use into account [51].
To estimate the ecological footprint, the forest area necessary to assimilate the CO2 emissions produced by each consumption category in the institution identified and selected for evaluation needed to be determined. The forest area was obtained by calculating the quotient of the total mass of estimated emissions (of all categories) and the factor that represented the carbon absorption or fixation capacity. The surface occupied by the buildings on the university campus was then added to the final value obtained [51], as represented in the following equation:
H E h a Y e a r = E m i s s i o n s t   C O 2 C F i x a t i o n ( t   C O 2 / ( h a / y e a r ) ) + O c c u p i e d   a r e a h a y e a r .
The average CO2 fixation accumulated in the biomass and soil considered in this research was 15.16 t C/ha/year [73]; 1 ton of carbon is equivalent to 3.37 t CO2 [74]. Converted into CO2 fixation, this is equivalent to 55.64 t CO2/ha/year. This value was used as the CO2 fixation capacity.
It was assumed that the forests would assimilate the CO2 emissions emitted by different consumption categories of the National University of the Altiplano; consequently, the equivalence factor corresponding to forests was used while considering the main ecosystem services offered by forests.

2.2.1. Estimation of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Direct Consumption

Information on consumption by entities, such as electricity consumption (monthly payment receipts), potable water consumption (monthly payment receipts), paper consumption (purchases made through the supply office), and the construction of buildings (built area in the different dependencies of the entity), was officially and directly obtained from the different departments of the university, providing information on the direct annual consumption of the National University of the Altiplano for 2023. This was used to estimate the CO2 emissions associated with each consumption category, which were multiplied by the emission factors established in Table 1.

2.2.2. Estimation of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Indirect Consumption

In addition to direct consumption, there was consumption that was not registered by the university. Therefore, to obtain mobility or transportation consumption and paper consumption, surveys were distributed among teachers, students, and administrative staff to cover these two categories. To estimate the CO2 emissions of indirect consumption, these were multiplied by the emission factors established in Table 1.

2.3. Calculation of the Ecological Footprint

After having estimated the total consumption using the two previous items, we proceeded to estimate the ecological footprint; that is, according to the established methodology, the CO2 emissions generated were divided with respect to the fixation capacity obtained (55.64 t CO2/ha/year). Finally, to the previous result, we added the surface area occupied by the university. The result was the estimated ecological footprint for the National University of the Altiplano for 2023; that is, “the area of productive territory or aquatic ecosystem necessary to produce the resources for the development of a certain activity, and at the same time assimilate the waste generated by humans” [56]. Finally, for standardization and comparison purposes, the ecological footprint was calculated in global hectares; for this purpose, the estimated ecological footprint was multiplied by the equivalence factor relating hectares to global hectares (1.28) [72].

3. Results

3.1. General Characteristics of the National University of the Altiplano

The National University of the Altiplano has developed its educational training activities at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels since 1962. It is an institution whose activities include undergraduate- and graduate-level university education. It has teachers, administrative workers, infrastructure, vehicles, equipment, and laboratories for research and social purposes, the details of which are presented below (Table 2).

3.2. Estimation of the Ecological Footprint from Direct Consumption

3.2.1. Electrical Energy Consumption

The electricity consumption was obtained from the monthly electricity consumption receipts of all entities in the university during 2023, which were issued by the electric energy supply company Electro Puno S.A.A. When calculating the annual consumption of electric energy, the result was a total of 2,473,789.00 KWh during 2023 for all units of the National University of the Altiplano. The conversion factors in Table 1 and the described methodology were used to calculate the direct consumption. Therefore, the CO2 emissions due to the consumption of electrical energy in 2023 were 1353.16 t CO2 (2473.79 MWh × 0.547 t CO2/MWh).

3.2.2. Consumption of Potable Water

Information on the consumption of potable water by the different departments of the National University of the Altiplano was obtained from monthly consumption receipts during 2023, the source of which was the potable water supply company EMSA PUNO S.A.
Considering the annual consumption of potable water, a total of 15,924.00 m3 of potable water was consumed during 2023 by all departments of the National University of the Altiplano. Using the conversion factors in Table 1 and the methodology for calculating direct consumption, it was possible to calculate the CO2 emissions associated with potable water consumption in 2023, which amounted to 7.96 t CO2 (15.92 m3 × 0.0005 t CO2/m3).

3.2.3. Consumption of Paper

In 2023, the National University of the Altiplano made purchases of paper—mainly white A4-size 75 g bond paper—through the supply office. This was for use in tasks specific to the university’s departments. In lesser proportions, A4 white 80 g bond paper, colored A4 75 g bond paper, colored A4 80 gr bond paper, white legal-size 75 g bond paper, and white legal-size 75 g bond paper were also purchased. For this investigation, it was assumed that all paper consumption referred to white A4 75 g bond paper, and this information was officially obtained from the university. Therefore, the amount of paper acquired for 2023 amounted to 5,214,072 sheets. Considering that a 75 g sheet of paper weighs 4.674 g, 24,349.72 kg of paper was consumed. Using a conversion factor of 1.84 kg CO2/kg of paper (Table 1), the emissions due to paper consumption amounted to 44,803.48 kg CO2 or 44.8 t CO2.

3.2.4. Quantification of Buildings

The academic and administrative activities of the National University of the Altiplano mainly occur on the university campus, the total area of which amounts to 36.82 ha. Additionally, it has several offices in the city of Puno and inside and outside the department of Puno where, in total, the university owns 12,147.08 ha.
During the last 15 years, the construction of infrastructure on the university campus and in other areas has significantly increased. According to the investment office, the construction of educational, administrative, and other infrastructure amounts to 151,401.08 m2 of constructed area, as detailed below in Figure 1.
According to the relevant methodology and the conversion factors in Table 1, the built area was equivalent to the emission of 1,574,571.25 k CO2 or 1574.57 t CO2 from the construction carried out on the entity’s premises.

3.3. Estimation of the HE from Indirect Consumption

3.3.1. Consumption of Paper

In the previous section, the direct paper consumption at the National University of the Altiplano was estimated by considering the university’s purchases through the supply office during 2023. However, paper consumption was also carried out by students and teachers in their activities related to the university. For this reason, in accordance with the methodology established in this research, surveys were carried out via Google Forms and disseminated through the information technology office (OTI) of the university to the emails of students and teachers.
The questionnaires were sent to 1311 teacher emails, and 224 responses were obtained. Likewise, the questionnaire was sent to 18,508 student emails, and 1428 responses were obtained.
The consumption amount of virgin paper by both teachers (virgin paper) and students (virgin paper and notebook sheets) was calculated according to the following extrapolation procedure:
  • The total number of sheets used per semester was calculated, which was 91,000 sheets and 782,760 sheets for teachers and students, respectively.
  • This total was divided by the number of respondents (224 teachers and 1428 students) to estimate the per capita consumption per semester.
  • Next, the per capita consumption was multiplied by two semesters.
  • To calculate the consumption of virgin white A4 bond paper, the previous result was multiplied by the total number of teachers and students (1311 teachers and 18,508 students). The consumption of sheets of paper by teachers and students was estimated at 1,065,188 sheets and 20,290,367 sheets, respectively. Therefore, the total indirect consumption of virgin paper by teachers and students of the National University of the Altiplano was 21,355,555 sheets of white A4 bond paper in 2023.
  • Next, considering that a sheet of white A4 size bond paper weighs 4.67 g, the total consumption of paper by teachers and students at the National University of the Altiplano in 2023 was estimated to amount to 99,730,439.79 gr of paper or 99,730.44 kg of paper.
Regarding the consumption of white A4 recycled paper by teachers, the following extrapolation procedure was carried out:
  • The total number of recycled sheets used by teachers per semester was calculated, which was 45,400 sheets.
  • Then, this total was divided by the number of respondents (224 teachers) to estimate the per capita consumption per semester.
  • Next, the per capita consumption was multiplied by two semesters.
  • Finally, the previous result was multiplied by the total number of teachers (1311), resulting in the consumption of 531,423 white A4 sheets of recycled paper by teachers of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023.
Next, considering that a sheet of 75 g A4 white bond paper weighs 4.67 g, the total consumption of paper by teachers at the National University of the Altiplano in 2023 was estimated to amount to 2,481,746.41 g of recycled paper or 2481.75 kg of recycled paper.
Finally, to estimate the CO2 emissions due to the indirect consumption of virgin paper and recycled paper by teachers and students, in accordance with the methodology established in the study by López et al. [51] and shown in Table 1, the CO2 emissions were estimated at 185,017.87 kg CO2/kg paper (99,730.44 kg virgin paper × 1.84 kg CO2/kg virgin paper + 2481.75 kg recycled paper × 0.61 kg CO2/kg recycled paper).

3.3.2. Mobility Use

Fuel consumption at the National University of the Altiplano was mainly due to the use of mobility or transportation services by teachers, students, and administrative staff. In accordance with the methodology established in this research, surveys were carried out in the month of August (2023) via Google Forms, disseminated through the university’s information technology office (OTI) to the emails of teachers, students, and administrative staff.
The questionnaires were sent to 1311 teacher emails, and 224 responses were obtained. It was also sent to 18,508 student emails, and 1428 responses were obtained. Finally, it was sent to 813 administrative staff emails, and 65 responses were obtained.
To estimate the total fuel consumption by teachers, students, and administrative staff, the same procedure was carried out for each of them, as described in the following:
  • The distances traveled (less than 1 km, 1 km, 2 km, 3 km, 4 km, 5 km, and more than 5 km) by teachers, students, and administrative staff were calculated for each type of mobility (their own mobility, taxi, “combi,” on foot, or by bicycle), and round trips were considered.
  • These distances were then multiplied by the conversion factors reported by López et al. [51].
  • The result for each type of mobility was multiplied by the percentage of the number of times traveled to the university per week (3 times, 5 times, 7 times, 10 times, or 12 times).
  • The results were added for each type of transport, and this total was divided by the number of respondents (224 teachers, 1428 students, and 65 administrative staff; in total, 1717 respondents) to estimate the per capita consumption per week.
  • Next, the per capita consumption was multiplied by two semesters for the result for the whole year.
  • Finally, to obtain the total emissions due to mobility, extrapolation was carried out; that is, the per capita consumption was multiplied by the total number of teachers, students, and administrative staff. In this way, the total annual emissions due to transportation amounted to 1,555,686.46 kg CO2/km.
In this sense, the majority of the members of the university community (62.7%) traveled to the university via public transport (in the city of Puno, this is called a “combi,” which carries 15 passengers), and the minority (1.8%) traveled by taxi. Regarding the distance traveled, the majority (30.9%) traveled a distance greater than 5 km. Likewise, during the week, teachers mostly went to the university 12 times (38.97%), and a minority went to the university 10 times per week (1.91%); see Table 3.
The emissions generated by the use of transportation by the university community (teachers, students, and administrative staff) in 2023 were mostly due to the use of public transportation (combis; 75%), as shown in Figure 2.

3.4. Estimation of the HE of the University Based on Direct and Indirect Consumption

The impact associated with the consumption of natural resources through different types of consumption—such as electrical energy, potable water, buildings, paper, and mobility—was estimated according to the CO2 emissions by consumption category. As shown in Table 4, the emissions are expressed as the extent of forests necessary to absorb them.
It can be deduced that the construction of infrastructure, use of transportation, and consumption of electrical energy generated the most CO2 emissions, while the consumption of potable water and paper generated lower emissions. This has implications for the estimation of the ecological footprint. The total emissions from consumption at the National University of the Altiplano in 2023 amounted to 4721.20 t CO2 (Table 4).
To calculate the ecological footprint according to the area of ecologically usable territory necessary to produce the resources used and assimilate the waste produced by the National University of the Altiplano in 2023, it was necessary to convert the types of consumption (energy, water, construction, paper, and mobility) into productive territory (forests, agriculture, and built land). Therefore, consumption was converted into hectares using equivalence factors, and then into global hectares using the equivalences proposed by the Global Footprint Network [25,54,55,75,76]. This resulted in a fixation capacity of 55.6372 ha/year, as explained in the methodology of the present research. The final results are detailed below (Table 5).
In order to standardize and compare the values, the ecological footprint in hectares was converted into global hectares; for this purpose, a conversion factor of 1.28 was used [72]. It can be seen that the ecological footprint of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023 was 915.67 ha/year or 1172.06 hag/year, which allowed us to calculate a per capita ecological footprint of 0.06 hag/year (Table 5).

4. Discussion

Most studies focused on calculating the ecological footprints of universities have considered the methodology for this purpose proposed by López et al. [51] in the Spanish context. In this research, this methodology was used with some adjustments, in order to reflect the local reality, thus allowing for comparison with results obtained using similar methodologies for the estimation of the ecological footprints of universities.
The ecological footprint generated through the different institutional activities of the National University of the Altiplano was demonstrated. With the use and consumption of goods, it can be seen that the results are very similar to those of other investigations conducted in the last 15 years. Ecological footprint estimates have been calculated for Latin American universities, as presented below, and most of them have made use of the estimation methodology proposed by López et al. [51]. In this research, this methodology was also used with some minor modifications, which is why comparisons of the results with those obtained in other studies carried out at other universities in Latin America are pertinent [54,56,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84]. It can be clearly observed that the ecological footprint per capita in universities is generally less than 0.5 ha/year, as observed in this study (0.04 ha/person/year). Although this value was well below that of foreign universities, the CO2 emissions from consumption at the National University of the Altiplano were the highest at the national level (4721.20 t CO2); the corresponding ecological footprint at the national level of universities in Peru is also relatively high (915.67 ha/year). This result is mainly due to the fact that, at this university, the population of teachers, students, and administrative staff comprises 20,632 people, and because the university owns land for experimental centers inside and outside the department of Puno, reaching a total of 12,147.08 hectares (Table 6).
From the estimates of the ecological footprint, the consumption categories, and the methodology, we can infer that this university had a high level of CO2 emissions and a significant ecological footprint. This is due to the large amount of infrastructure and number of buildings constructed over the last 15 years, the use of transportation to the university, and energy consumption. This greater level of carbon dioxide emissions must be addressed through the implementation of a series of policies and/or actions by the university authorities for their adequate reduction. If the objective of the university management is to improve academic quality and improve research, the priority should not be only iron, cement, and stone. Budget, efforts, and resources should be oriented toward these priorities, and it should be understood that the most important resource of a university is human resources. Therefore, the construction of infrastructure should not be the priority of resource allocation—as happens in the best universities in the world [74,84,85,86], given that the average ecological footprint of European universities is 0.55 ha/person/year. There, the means of transportation has a 55% share in the generation of CO2. Thus, to reduce the ecological footprint, environmental education policies must be developed for university communities, and more sustainable management must be carried out. In addition, policies and/or actions must be implemented for the rational and efficient use of electrical energy at the National University of the Altiplano. Both recommendations are supported, in light of the findings of this ecological footprint investigation.

5. Conclusions

In 2023, the National University of the Altiplano had 1311 teachers, 18,505 undergraduate students, and 813 administrative staff. Through academic, research, and social activities, carbon dioxide emissions amounting to 4721.20 t CO2 were generated as a result of consumption through infrastructure construction, mobility, electrical energy consumption, paper consumption, and potable water consumption.
The methodology proposed by López et al. [51] for the estimation of the ecological footprint of universities was adapted to the local reality, and an ecological footprint of 915.67 ha/year or 1172.06 hag/year was estimated, in addition to a per capita ecological footprint of 0.04 ha/person/year or 0.06 hag/person/year.
From the obtained results, it can be inferred that building- and electrical energy-related consumption generates the most carbon dioxide emissions. Therefore, they contribute to greater CO2 emissions and a greater ecological footprint. Therefore, university authorities should implement relevant policies and practices that re-orient investments toward the rational and eco-efficient use of electrical energy. They should also not excessively increase the construction of buildings, and they should encourage the frequent use of bicycles and other means of transportation. Another use of the results obtained is that they improve knowledge and inform better environmental behaviors and culture on the part of the university community.
It is necessary to indicate that the methodology used in this research was an adaptation of procedures that were developed in the Spanish context, in which the possible environmental impacts of solid waste management were not considered. We consider this to be one of the limitations of the present study; in future research, it is recommended to establish a methodology according to the local reality, which will allow for more precise and reliable results to be obtained.
Finally, the results of this research contribute to supporting sustainable development by providing a tool for sustainable management and an integral metric of the impact of the activities of the National University of the Altiplano on the environment according to its ecological footprint generated in 2023. Specifically, this contributes to Sustainable Development Goal No. 7 on affordable and clean energy and Sustainable Development Goal No. 12 on responsible production and consumption. The Peruvian university system has incorporated actions within the framework of sustainable development into its institutional environmental policies through strategic planning, in order to reduce its ecological footprint, as have the countries leading in sustainable production, such as Germany, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, and others that have quality water, soil, air, and ecosystems. It is recommended to propose methodologies appropriate to our environment and carry out further ecological footprint studies on universities, non-university institutions, and economic activities with greater environmental impacts. This will allow for measurement of the impacts of anthropogenic activities on the environment, enabling consequent environmental policies and actions in accordance with sustainable development.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, methodology, software, and validation, A.H.P.; formal analysis, investigation, writing—original draft preparation, and writing—review and editing, J.C.Q.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This scientific research was financed by funds from the National University of the Altiplano.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data used for this research can be found in the National Household Survey Database of the National Institute of Statistics and Informatics of Peru, available at: https://proyectos.inei.gob.pe/microdatos/, accessed on 28 May 2024.

Acknowledgments

Gratitude is extended to the authorities of the National University of the Altiplano and to the teaching staff, students, and administrators for all the support provided—whether financially or logistically—and for providing us with facilities for the collection of information.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Khan, S.; Yahong, W. Income Inequality, Ecological Footprint, and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Asian Developing Economies: What Effects What and How? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 24660–24671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ansari, M.A. Re-Visiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve for ASEAN: A Comparison between Ecological Footprint and Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 168, 112867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Li, X.; Xiao, L.; Tian, C.; Zhu, B.; Chevallier, J. Impacts of the Ecological Footprint on Sustainable Development: Evidence from China. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 352, 131472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Shut’ko, L.; Samorodova, L.; Ivanov, A. Ecological Footprint and Decoupling in the Sustainable Development of a Region. E3S Web Conf. 2020, 174, 04058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Valencia, A.; Suárez Castaño, R.; Sánchez, A.; Cardozo, E.; Bonilla, M.; Buitrago, C. Gestión de La Contaminación Ambiental: Cuestión de Corresponsabilidad Management of Environmental Pollution: A Matter of Co-Responsibility. Rev. Ing. 2016, 30, 90–99. [Google Scholar]
  6. Figueroa, A. Crecimiento Económico y Medio Ambiente. CEPAL 2013, 109, 29–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gonzales, G.F.; Zevallos, A.; Gonzales-Castañeda, C.; Nuñez, D.; Gastañaga, C.; Cabezas, C.; Steenland, K. Contaminación Ambiental, Variabilidad Climática y Cambio Climático: Una Revisión Del Impacto En La Salud de La Población Peruana. Rev. Peru. Med. Exp. Salud Pública 2014, 31, 547–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Quispe, S. Los Recursos Naturales y Su Relación Con La Contabilidad Ambiental En El Perú. Investig. Soc. 2010, 25, 339–354. [Google Scholar]
  9. Torres Eristáin, B.; González López, G.; Rustrián Ortilla, E.; Houbron, E. Enfoque de Cuenca Para La Identificación de Fuentes de Contaminación y Evaluación de La Calidad de Un Río, Veracruz, México. Rev. Int. Contam. Ambient. 2013, 29, 135–146. [Google Scholar]
  10. Telatar, O.M.; Birinci, N. The Effects of Environmental Tax on Ecological Footprint and Carbon Dioxide Emissions: A Nonlinear Cointegration Analysis on Turkey. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 44335–44347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Dong, Q.; Zhong, C.; Geng, Y.; Dong, F.; Chen, W.; Zhang, Y. A Bibliometric Review of Carbon Footprint Research. Carbon Footprints 2024, 3, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sahoo, M.; Kaushik, S.; Gupta, M.; Islam, M.K.; Nayak, P. Powering a Sustainable Future: Does Economic Structure Influence the Ecological Footprint? Sustain. Dev. 2024. early view. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ritu, R.K.; Kaur, A. Towards Environmental Sustainability: Nexus of Ecological Footprint, Human Capital, Economic Growth and Energy Consumption in India. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2024, 35, 179–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zahid, K.; Ali, Q.; Iqbal, Z.; Saghir, S.; Khan, M.T.I. Dynamics between Economic Activities, Eco-Friendly Energy and Ecological Footprints: A Fresh Evidence from BRICS Countries. Kybernetes 2023. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Villanthenkodath, M.A.; Pal, S. How Economic Globalization Affects the Ecological Footprint in India? A Novel Dynamic ARDL Simulations. J. Econ. Adm. Sci. 2023. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Abba Yadou, B.; Ntang, P.B.; Baida, L.A. Remittances-Ecological Footprint Nexus in Africa: Do ICTs Matter? J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 434, 139866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Xia, A.; Liu, Q. Modelling the Asymmetric Impact of Fintech, Natural Resources, and Environmental Regulations on Ecological Footprint in G7 Countries. Resour. Policy 2024, 89, 104552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mendiara Co, S. Efecto de los Usos del Suelo en la Emisión CO2; University of Vic: Barcelona, Spain, 2012; 82p. [Google Scholar]
  19. Bendezú Pajuelo, C.N. ¿Impuesto al Carbono en Perú? Análisis Crítico del Impuesto a la Emisión del Carbono en Modelos Tributarios Extranjeros y Su Aplicación en el Perú; PUCP—Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú: San Miguel, Peru, 2020; 44p. [Google Scholar]
  20. Samaniego, J.; De Miguel, C.J.; Galindo, L.M.; Gómez, J.J.; Martínez, K.; Cetrángolo, O. La Economía del Cambio Climático en Chile: Síntesis; Publicación de las Naciones Unidas: Santiago, Chile, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  21. Samaniego, J.L.; Galindo, L.M.; Mostacedo, S.J.; Ferrer Carbonell, J.; Alatorre, J.E.; Reyes, O. El Cambio Climático y el Sector de Energía en América Latina; Publicación de las Naciones Unidas: Santiago, Chile, 2017; pp. 3–13. [Google Scholar]
  22. CIES. La Minería Peruana y Los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible; Consorcio de Investigación Económica y Social-CIES: Lima, Perú, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  23. Cuenca-López, A.D.; Torres, D.E. Impact of Infrastructure Investment on Poverty in Latin America in 1996-2016. Población Desarro. 2020, 26, 5–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bishop, R.C.; Heberlein, T.A. Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased? Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1979, 61, 926–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Chu, L.K. Determinants of Ecological Footprint in OCED Countries: Do Environmental-Related Technologies Reduce Environmental Degradation? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 23779–23793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Elliff, C.I.; Kikuchi, R.K.P. The Ecosystem Service Approach and Its Application as a Tool for Integrated Coastal Management. Nat. Conserv. 2015, 13, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gilman, E. Guidelines for Coastal and Marine Site-Planning and Examples of Planning and Management Intervention Tools. Ocean. Coast. Manag. 2002, 45, 377–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lee, C.K.; Mjelde, J.W. Valuation of Ecotourism Resources Using a Contingent Valuation Method: The Case of the Korean DMZ. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63, 511–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Perez-Lopez, J.-B.; Orro, A.; Novales, M. Environmental Impact of Mobility in Higher-Education Institutions: The Case of the Ecological Footprint at the University of A Coruña (Spain). Sustainability 2021, 13, 6190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zilio, M. Emisiones de Dióxido de Carbono En América Latina. Un Aporte al Estudio Del Cambio Climático. Econ. Soc. 2008, 13, 133–161. [Google Scholar]
  31. Zegarra Tello, I.J.; Cabrera Carranza, C.F.; Moore Torres, R. Tendencias y Escenarios de La Contaminación Del Aire Por Origen Automotriz En Lima Metropolitana. Rev. Inst. Investig. Fac. Minas Metal. Cienc. Geográficas 2021, 24, 211–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. MINAM. Reporte Anual de Gases de Efecto Invernadero del Sector MTC-Móvil del Año 2014; Ministerio de Transportes y Comunicaciones: Lima, Perú, 2009; pp. 50–52.
  33. Friedrich, E.; Trois, C. Quantification of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Waste Management Processes for Municipalities—A Comparative Review Focusing on Africa. Waste Manag. 2011, 31, 1585–1596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Rawat, M.; Ramanathan, A. Assessment of Methane Flux from Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfill Areas of Delhi, India. J. Environ. Prot. 2011, 2, 399–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Haverkort, A.J.; Verhagen, A. Climate Change and Its Repercussions for the Potato Supply Chain. Potato Res. 2008, 51, 223–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Jackson, R.B.; Vengosh, A.; Carey, J.W.; Davies, R.J.; Darrah, T.H.; O’Sullivan, F.; Pétron, G. The Environmental Costs and Benefits of Fracking. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2014, 39, 327–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Battistini, R.; Passarini, F.; Marrollo, R.; Lantieri, C.; Simone, A.; Vignali, V. How to Assess the Carbon Footprint of a Large University? The Case Study of University of Bologna’s Multicampus Organization. Energies 2023, 16, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Rahman, M.M.; Bindu, K.J.; Islam, M.K. Linking Per Capita GDP to Energy Consumption, Ecological Footprint, and Carbon Dioxide Emission in a Developing Economy in the World: The Case of Bangladesh. J. Bank. Financ. Dyn. 2018, 2, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zaman, K.; Moemen, M.A. Energy Consumption, Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Development: Evaluating Alternative and Plausible Environmental Hypothesis for Sustainable Growth. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 74, 1119–1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Salman, M.; Wang, G. The Impact of National Environmental Policy on Pakistan’s Green Economic Development: Evidence from Regression Discontinuity Design. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2024, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Badii, M.H. La Huella Ecológica y Sustentabilidad. Int. J. Good Concience 2008, 3, 672–678. [Google Scholar]
  42. Carpintero Redondo, O. La Huella Ecológica de La Agricultura y La Alimentación En España, 1955-2000. Areas. Rev. Int. Cienc. Soc. 2006, 25, 31–45. [Google Scholar]
  43. Scherr, S.J.; McNeely, J.A. Biodiversity Conservation and Agricultural Sustainability: Towards a New Paradigm of “ecoagriculture” Landscapes. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2008, 363, 477–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Muñiz, I.; Rojas, C.; Busuldu, C.; García, A.; Filipe, M.; Quintana, M. Forma Urbana y Huella Ecológica En El Área Metropolitana de Concepción (Chile). Eure 2016, 42, 209–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Vargas-Morales, M.; Rueda, M.; Maldonado, J. Evolución y Factores Determinantes de La Huella Ecológica de La Pesca de Camarón Blanco (Litopenaeus Occidentalis) En El Pacífico Colombiano. Bol. Investig. Mar. Costeras 2013, 42, 153–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Muñiz, I.; Galindo, A. Urban Form and the Ecological Footprint of Commuting. The Case of Barcelona. Ecol. Econ. 2005, 55, 499–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Vega Marcote, P.; Álvarez Suárez, P. La Agenda 21 y La Huella Ecológica Como Instrumentos Para Lograr Una Universidad Sostenible. Enseñanza Ciencias. Rev. Investig. Exp. Didácticas 2011, 29, 207–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Norabuena, D.; Shiguay, S. Estimación de la Huella Ecológica en el Campus de la Universidad Peruana Unión, Aplicando el Método Componente Modificado; Universidad Peruana Unión: Lima, Peru, 2020; pp. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  49. Fañanás Viñuales, P.J. Análisis Del Impacto de Factores Técnicos, Socioeconómicos y Ambientales En La Huella Ecológica Local de Zaragoza; Universidad de Cantabria: Santander, Spain, 2021; pp. 1–132. [Google Scholar]
  50. Aliaga, M. Determinación de La Huella Ecológica Personal Como Estrategia Para La Adquisición de Patrones de Consumo Sostenibles UNCP 2014. Rev. Ing. USIL 2014, 3, 49–69. [Google Scholar]
  51. López Álvarez, N.; Autores, O.; Blanco Heras, D. Metodología Para El Cálculo de La Huella Ecológica En Universidades. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  52. Wrana, J.; Struzik, W.; Kwiatkowski, B.; Gleń, P. Release of Energy from Groundwater/with Reduction in CO2 Emissions of More Than 50% from HVAC in the Extension and Revitalization of the Former Palace of the Sobieski Family in Lublin. Energies 2022, 15, 6627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ahmad, M.; Dai, J.; Mehmood, U.; Abou Houran, M. Renewable Energy Transition, Resource Richness, Economic Growth, and Environmental Quality: Assessing the Role of Financial Globalization. Renew. Energy 2023, 216, 119000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Danish; Ulucak, R.; Khan, S.U.D. Determinants of the Ecological Footprint: Role of Renewable Energy, Natural Resources, and Urbanization. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 54, 101996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Rudolph, A.; Figge, L. Determinants of Ecological Footprints: What Is the Role of Globalization? Ecol. Indic. 2017, 81, 348–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Guerra, J.; Rincón, I. Calculation of Carbon Footprint in the Universidad Central de Venezuela Campus. Rev. Luna Azul 2018, 46, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Vaisi, S.; Alizadeh, H.; Lotfi, W.; Mohammadi, S. Developing the Ecological Footprint Assessment for a University Campus, the Component-Based Method. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Jaglan, A.K.; Cheela, V.R.S.; Vinaik, M.; Dubey, B. Environmental Impact Evaluation of University Integrated Waste Management System in India Using Life Cycle Analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bulege Gutiérrez, W. Determinación de La Huella Ecológica Personal de Estudiantes de Educación Superior. Apunt. Cienc. Soc. 2022, 10, 70–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Jaimes Gutierrez, L.L. Estimación de la Huella Ecológica de la Universidad Peruana Unión; Pontificia Universidad Católica Del Perú: San Miguel, Peru, 2019; pp. 1–115. [Google Scholar]
  61. Martínez, C.R. Educación y Huella Ecológica. Actual. Investig. Educ. 2008, 8, 1–28. [Google Scholar]
  62. Carballo Penela, A. Utilidad de La Huella Ecológica y Del Carbono En El Ámbito de La Responsabilidad Social Corporativa (RSC) y El Ecoetiquetado de Bienes y Servicios. DELOS Desarro. Local Sosten. 2010, 3, 7. [Google Scholar]
  63. Martínez Castillo, R. Algunos Aspectos de La Huella Ecológica. InterSedes Rev. Sedes Reg. 2007, VIII, 11–25. [Google Scholar]
  64. Quesada, J.L.D.; Certificación, A.E.D.N. Huella Ecológica y Desarrollo Sostenible; Asociación Española de Normalización y Certificación: Madrid, Spain, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  65. Gómez, D. La Huella Ecológica y Los Países Andinos, Una Reflexión Sobre La Sustentabilidad y La Biocapacidad. Let. Verdes Rev. Latinoam. Estud. Socioambientales 2009, 5, 21–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Pengue, W. Fundamentos de Economía Ecológica; Kaicron: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  67. Palmero, F.; González, F.; Miguélez, F.; Menéndez, E.; Castro, J. Desarrollo Sostenible y Huella Ecológica, Una Aplicación a la Economía Gallega; Netbiblo: Coruña, Spain, 2004; ISBN 8497450809. [Google Scholar]
  68. Universidad Nacional del Altiplano. Plan Estratégico Institucional UNA Puno; Universidad Nacional del Altiplano: Puno, Peru, 2022; p. 43. [Google Scholar]
  69. Universidad Nacional del Altiplano. Plan Estratégico Institucional Ampliado 2020–2023; Universidad Nacional del Altiplano: Puno, Peru, 2020; pp. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  70. Mendoza, W. Cómo Investigan los Economistas: Guía para Elaborar y Desarrollar un Proyecto de Investigación; Fondo Editorial de la PUCP: San Miguel, Peru, 2014; ISBN 978-612-317-028-8. [Google Scholar]
  71. Hernández, F.; Fernández, C.; Baptista, L. Metodología de La Investigación. Metodol. Investig. 2010, 5, 264. [Google Scholar]
  72. Network, G.F. Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010. Retrieved May 2010, 25, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  73. Velázquez, L.M.C.; Pérez, L.G.; Mieres, A.F. La Huella Ecológica, Indicador de La Responsabilidad Social y Ambiental de Cara al 2030. Rev. Iberoam. Ambiente Sustentabilidad 2019, 2, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hernández, J.J.A.; Herrera, N.M.R.; Becerra, A.M.R.; Camacho, W.A.; Suarez, H.J.P.; Andrade, J.V.; Cano, M.A.V.; Cortes, Y.P.M.; Chavez, J.F.C. Determinación de La Huella de Carbono En El Sistema de Producción de Café Pergamino Seco de Cuatro Municipios Del Sur Del Departamento Del Huila (Colombia). Rev. Investig. Agrar. Ambient. 2018, 9, 109. [Google Scholar]
  75. Urtiaga, C.P.; Gracia, A.A.; Ramos, E.M.; Santamaría, R.G. La vulnerabilidad del desarrollo sostenible medida a través de la huella ecológica. Available online: https://openurl.ebsco.com/contentitem/gcd:53431857?sid=ebsco:plink:crawler&id=ebsco:gcd:53431857 (accessed on 8 February 2024).
  76. Danish; Wang, Z. Investigation of the Ecological Footprint’s Driving Factors: What We Learn from the Experience of Emerging Economies. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 49, 101626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Guzmán, J.C.N.; Morales, J.L.S.; Alemán, M.G.A. Responsabilidad Social y Huella Ecológica: El caso de la Universidad Politécnica de San Luis Potosí. Cult. Económica 2020, 38, 66–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Leiva, J.; Rodríguez, I.; Quintana, C. Cálculo de La Huella Ecológica de La Universidad Central “Marta Abreu” de Las Villas. Tecnol. Química 2011, 31, 60–67. [Google Scholar]
  79. Restrepo, J.M.; Rodríguez, M.M.O. Cálculo de la Huella Ecológica en el Campus de la Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira; Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira: Pereira, Colombia, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  80. Ávila Ruíz, L.J.; González Velandia, K.D. Tutora Cálculo de la huella ecológica generada por la Corporación Universitaria Minuto de Dios, Sede Principal, a través de la metodología utilizada para el cálculo de la huella ecológica en universidades por López y Blanco. Doctoral Thesis, Corporación Universitaria Minuto de Dios, Bogotá, Colombia, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  81. Huerta Esquivel, J.V. Determinación de la Huella Ecológica en la Comunidad Universitaria “Santigo Antunéz de Mayolo”, Campus Universitario de Shancayán—Período Anual 2014; Universidad Nacional Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo: Huaraz, Peru, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  82. Rozo, Y.Y.P.; Adaime, M.C.A.; Martínez, S.A.C. Estimación de La Huella Ecológica En Estudiantes Del Programa de Administración de Empresas de La Universidad de La Amazonia. Sotavento M.B.A. 2008, 29, 18–28. [Google Scholar]
  83. Echegaray Rozas, R. Evaluación de la Huella Ecológica Corporativa de la Universidad Católica San Pablo—Campus San Lázaro. Available online: https://alicia.concytec.gob.pe/vufind/Record/UCSP_2ff64cc6ddb21181bbc6e8f493798626 (accessed on 15 March 2024).
  84. Parra, G.; Checa, M.; Mesa-Barrionuevo, C.R.; Ruiz-Reyes, N.; Guerrero, F. Evaluación de La Huella Ecológica En La Universidad de Jaén, Una Herramienta Para La Gestión Sostenible. Obs. Medioambient. 1970, 21, 233–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Cipriano Bautista, J.; Ramírez Mundaca, F.E.; Claros Guerrero, M.; Paredes Aguirre, F. Huella Ecológica de La Universidad Nacional José Faustino Sánchez Carrión En El Año 2012. Big Bang Faustiniano 2014, 3, 24–27. [Google Scholar]
  86. Hernández, E.; Cano, C.; Correa, A. La Huella Ecológica de la Universidad de Valladolid; Universidad de Valladolid: Valladolid, Spain, 2014; p. 26. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 16 06672 g001
Figure 1. Built area at UNA-Puno in 2023 (m2).
Figure 1. Built area at UNA-Puno in 2023 (m2).
Sustainability 16 06672 g001
Sustainability 16 06672 g002
Figure 2. Emissions (in kg CO2) by the type of transport.
Figure 2. Emissions (in kg CO2) by the type of transport.
Sustainability 16 06672 g002
Table 1. CO2 conversion factors for each consumption category.
Table 1. CO2 conversion factors for each consumption category.
Type of ConsumptionEmission FactorUnit of MeasureSource
Electric power0.547t CO2/MWhGlobal Footprint Network [72]
Water0.0005t CO2/m3Global Footprint Network [72]
Virgin paper1.84kg CO2/kg paperLópez et al. [51]
Recycled paper0.61kg CO2/kg paperLópez et al. [51]
Buildings10.4kg CO2/m2Bendezú [19]
Table 2. Main characteristics of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023.
Table 2. Main characteristics of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023.
N°CharacteristicsQuantityUnit of Measure
1Extension of territory (C.U.)12,147.08ha
2Properties31Land area
3Built area151,401.08M2
4Professional schools35Professional schools
5Faculties19Faculties
6Appointed teachers978Teachers
7Hired teachers535Teachers
8Research teachers108Teachers
9Bachelor students18,508Students
10Graduate students6385Students
11Administrative staff813People
Table 3. Means of transport used vs. average distance per trip.
Table 3. Means of transport used vs. average distance per trip.
Distance Own MobilityTaxiCombiOn Foot-BicycleBus UNATotal
Less 1 km0.4%0.2%7.6%4.8%0.7%13.6%
1 km0.5%0.2%8.4%4.3%0.7%14.2%
2 km0.6%0.2%11.8%1.0%1.0%14.7%
3 km0.3%0.2%7.0%5.8%0.5%13.9%
4 km0.3%0.2%5.4%1.0%0.3%7.2%
5 km0.1%0.1%4.7%0.5%0.2%5.5%
More than 5 km0.6%0.3%17.9%12.1%0.0%30.9%
Total2.8%1.4%62.7%29.6%3.5%100.0%
Table 4. Consumption and CO2 emissions of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023.
Table 4. Consumption and CO2 emissions of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023.
Type of ConsumptionConsumptionEmissions
Unit of MeasureQuantityt CO2Percentage
Electric powerMWh2,473,789.001353.1628.7%
Potable waterm315,924.007.960.2%
Buildingsm2151,401.081574.5733.4%
Direct paperkg24,349.7244.800.9%
Indirect paperkg99,730.44185.023.9%
Mobilitykm1177.941555.6933.0%
Total 4721.20100%
Table 5. Ecological footprint of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023.
Table 5. Ecological footprint of the National University of the Altiplano in 2023.
Consumption Categoryt CO2HE ha/yearHE hag/year
Electric power1353.1624.3231.13
Potable water7.960.140.18
Buildings1574.5728.3036.22
Paper229.824.135.29
Mobility1555.6927.9635.79
Occupied area-830.821063.44
Total4721.20915.671172.06
Table 6. Estimated ecological footprints of universities in Peru and Latin America.
Table 6. Estimated ecological footprints of universities in Peru and Latin America.
University NameLocationYeart CO2HE ha/yearHE ha/per/yearHE hag/yearPopulation
U. Central of VenezuelaVenezuela2017 1743.810.31 76,156
U. Politécnica San Luis of PotosíMéxico20202675.36466.77
U. Central Marta Abreu of the VillasCuba20086375.771811.450.15
U. of the AmazoníaColombia2017718.68
U. of AndesColombia20116183.007827.350.40 18,227
U. Tecnológica of PereiraColombia20167479.001822.950.102111.1619,467
U. Minuto of DiosColombia201562,167.879917.320.4813,289.2120,490
U. of ValleColombia2009 8743.70
U. Católica of PerúLima2012 3999.02
U. Peruana UniónLima20193742.90358.300.06462.205819
U. Nac. Santiago Antúnez of MayoloHuaraz20141441.60 604.5012,350
U. Católica San PabloArequipa2018 245.80
U. Nacional of AltiplanoPuno20234721.20915.670.041172.0620,632
Source: Authors’ own elaboration based on provided information.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Huamaní Peralta, A.; Quispe Mamani, J.C. The Ecological Footprint of the National University of the Altiplano, Peru: A Tool for Sustainable Management. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6672. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156672

AMA Style

Huamaní Peralta A, Quispe Mamani JC. The Ecological Footprint of the National University of the Altiplano, Peru: A Tool for Sustainable Management. Sustainability. 2024; 16(15):6672. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156672

Chicago/Turabian Style

Huamaní Peralta, Alcides, and Julio Cesar Quispe Mamani. 2024. "The Ecological Footprint of the National University of the Altiplano, Peru: A Tool for Sustainable Management" Sustainability 16, no. 15: 6672. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156672

APA Style

Huamaní Peralta, A., & Quispe Mamani, J. C. (2024). The Ecological Footprint of the National University of the Altiplano, Peru: A Tool for Sustainable Management. Sustainability, 16(15), 6672. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156672

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop