Analytics, Impact and Strategy By SIMON PRATT

On November 18th 2025, QS released the fourth edition of its Sustainability Rankings. The results signal a maturing of the ranking as more universities actively participate.

The top ten:

Lund University (Sweden) secured the #1 position, displacing the University of Toronto, which moved to #2. University College London (UCL) rounded out the top three. While the top ten remained relatively stable, the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) ascended 35 places to rank 4th globally.

Results Volatility Lower down:

Further down the table, a significant trend emerged: several institutions experienced significant upward mobility. For example, the University of Oxford climbed 187 places to 14th; Boston University rose 227 places to 40th; and the University of Zurich ascended 246 places to joint 74th. 24 of the top 200 universities rose by more then 50 places this year.

Because global rankings are a zero-sum game, these significant leaps necessitate a downward shift for all other institutions and most universities saw their rank decline simply to accommodate these rapid ascents. The further down the table you go, the larger the fall.

The Data Submission Gap:

From a strategic perspective, it is improbable that these institutions fundamentally transformed their sustainability within a twelve-month cycle. Rather, these shifts are the result of enhanced data reporting.

While QS evaluates universities regardless of their active participation, the methodology favors institutions that submit comprehensive, verified, and optimised data. The disparity is best illustrated by the gap between the Oxbridge rivals: while the University of Oxford climbed 187 places and now sits at 14th, the University of Cambridge fell 74 places to 267th, despite the fact that both universities held similar positions last year (201st and 195th respectively).

With so many institutions jumping on board the QS Sustainability Ranking, failing to react will lead to a significant drop in the rank position next year.

Methodological Complexity

The QS Sustainability ranking is built upon 52 unique indicators, grouped into nine lenses and further grouped into the three categories: Environmental Impact, Social Impact, and Governance. These indicators are scored from 0 to 100 and combined using a weighting schema:

• Quantitative Performance (9%): Metrics such as Emissions Efficiency (for example the ratio of Scope 1 & 2 emissions to gross internal area) are scored using Z-score normalization. This assesses an institution’s performance relative to the cumulative probability within the global dataset.
• Policy or Activity (17%): These evaluate institutional commitments, such as Net Zero targets and EDI (Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) policies. While some indicators are scored using a binary 0 / 100 point score, other indicators, like net-zero commitment, are scored on a graduated scale.
• Reputation Survey (22%): the universities reputation in various research categories related to the environment or social impact. Additionally faculty perceptions of their own institution’s progress towards sustainability.
• Alumni lists (10%): university alumni who achieve global recognition, such as recipients of prestigious awards, or those in leadership positions in various sectors.
• Research outputs (35%): research papers indexed in Scopus are used for a variety of indicators including research volume and citations, policy citations, knowledge mobility and open access publications.
• National data (7%): data on the nation in which the university is based are used in a variety of ways, such as the Academic Freedom Index and statistics from UNESCO and the World Bank.

Full details of the methodology are at: https://support.qs.com/hc/en-gb/articles/8551503200668-QS-World-University-Rankings-Sustainability

Strategic Implications for Leadership

The QS data collection cycle closes in April. The questionnaire is extensive, requiring precise interpretation of criteria and the collation of cross-departmental evidence. For senior leadership, the risk of non-participation, or suboptimal submission, is now a matter of reputational risk.

PRAXIMA Analytics, Impact and Strategy specializes in bridging this gap. I provide the analytical expertise needed to interpret complex criteria and optimize data submissions. This ensures they accurately reflect an institution’s sustainability impact. While working at the University of Toronto, I completed the entire data submission process for the QS Sustainability Ranking. As a result, the University was ranked #1 in the world for sustainability 2023-2024. It has consistently been in the top 2.

As global competition for sustainability leadership intensifies, ensuring your institution’s data is accurate, optimized, and comprehensive is no longer optional. It is a strategic necessity. Please get in touch to find out more.