Every year, a fresh wave of university rankings rolls out, pitting institutions against each other in traditional metrics like research output, teaching quality, and academic reputation. But there’s a new battleground quietly reshaping the global higher education landscape: the pursuit of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
On June 18, Times Higher Education (THE) released the seventh edition of its Impact Rankings. Unlike conventional rankings, this one is designed to showcase how universities are actively contributing to environmental, social, and economic sustainability. It’s a softer, more human measure of a university’s impact—but ironically, it's turning into one of the most fiercely contested and volatile rankings out there.
This year, 2,318 universities from 130 countries were included—up from just 462 in 2019. With such rapid growth in participation, competition is intense, and the rules are constantly evolving. In the past, institutions could submit two or three pieces of supporting evidence per SDG indicator; now it’s limited to just one. This means schools need to be sharper not just in what they do—but in how they tell their story.
Australian universities have been the unexpected champions of this new terrain. Western Sydney University topped the global list for the fourth year running, a staggering achievement considering the heavy documentation and coordination this ranking demands. Other Australian institutions like Griffith University, the University of Tasmania, and Macquarie University also placed in the top 50, alongside strong contenders from Canada, the UK, and South Korea.
Interestingly, many of the world’s most elite research universities are missing from the rankings altogether. Why? The reason, insiders suggest, is fear of reputational damage. “We’d rather not participate than show up lower than expected,” a researcher at a top UK university admitted privately. This hints at the deeper issue: reputational risk still outweighs the value of public accountability, even in the context of global sustainability.
And yet, some universities are embracing this new lens of evaluation as a way to demonstrate their real-world impact.
Arizona State University in the U.S., for example, has long been involved in outreach programs aimed at underserved Latino communities in Phoenix. Its online courses, many of which are free or low-cost, help thousands of first-generation students pursue degrees. This is not a flashy research breakthrough—it’s a steady, long-term commitment to community transformation.
The University of Manchester, a consistent top-ten performer, has embedded sustainability into every level of university policy. Meanwhile, institutions like the University of Auckland and Aalborg University in Denmark have prioritized social innovation alongside academic excellence, building bridges between academia and civic society.
But behind the scenes, a different kind of revolution is taking place. With hundreds of thousands of documents submitted each year—over 270,000 in 2024 alone—THE has begun using AI tools, including large language models, to process and validate the data. While this boosts efficiency, it also raises concerns. AI might streamline the review process, but it risks favoring universities with better documentation infrastructure—often the same institutions already rich in resources.
In Lyon, France, a small humanities-focused university has run local education programs in rural communities for over a decade. Yet they often struggle in the rankings. “It’s not that we don’t do the work,” said one program coordinator. “It’s that we don’t know how to present it in the language the system expects.”
Such gaps are becoming more visible as the ranking landscape shifts. Recently, THE announced it would phase out several niche rankings—like the Young University Rankings and Online Learning Rankings—to focus on core global and regional assessments. While this may simplify their portfolio, critics warn it could also accelerate the homogenization of higher education.
Not all universities aspire to global prestige. Many are deeply rooted in regional partnerships, responding to local challenges rather than international benchmarks. In the Netherlands, the University of Groningen has implemented a sustainability tracking system across all campus services—from energy usage to waste management. Their goal isn't just to be ranked well—it’s to live the values they teach.
Impact rankings, then, serve as both a mirror and a map. They reflect what universities are already doing—and point toward where they could go. For institutions that see education as a vehicle for social good, these rankings offer not just recognition, but a reason to keep going.
The question isn't simply “how well are we doing?” but “for whom—and to what end—are we doing it?”
Perhaps, in the long run, the most meaningful competition among universities will not be over who tops the list, but over who leaves the greatest mark on the world.