THE Impact Rankings and SDG performance

University rankings typically revolve around academic reputation, research output, and student-to-staff ratios. But the Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Rankings take a different approach — they measure how much a university contributes to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). On this table, which ranks social impact rather than papers, HKUST's performance is particularly striking. This article focuses on HKUST's Impact Rankings results and the sustainability work behind them. It complements the comprehensive rankings overview^※, which covers academic rankings such as QS, THE World University Rankings, and ARWU, whereas this piece homes in on the SDG dimension.

# 1. 2025: 19th globally, first in Hong Kong and mainland China

According to a HKUST announcement picked up by multiple media outlets, HKUST ranked 19th globally in the THE Impact Rankings 2025, topping both Hong Kong and mainland China for the second consecutive year^※. The same report^※ notes that this year's ranking assessed roughly 2,500 universities worldwide^※ in recognition of institutions advancing the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

For a university known first and foremost for engineering, business, and its relative youth, a top-20 finish on a global table that measures "social impact" — and a consecutive Hong Kong–mainland China first — is telling: HKUST's reputation rests not only on papers and rankings, but also on tangible contributions to sustainable development.

A note on context: the Impact Rankings and the QS/THE World University Rankings are different tables, with different dimensions, samples, and methodologies. Positions on one cannot be converted into or compared across to the other. HKUST's 19th place in the Impact Rankings and its placing in the QS World University Rankings (see the comprehensive rankings^※ article) belong to separate ranking systems.

# How the scoring works: SDG 17 is compulsory, then the best three count

To gauge what "19th globally" really means, it helps to understand the Impact Rankings' distinctive scoring mechanism. According to the official THE methodology, SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) carries a fixed weight of 22% of the total score and is the only SDG that all participating universities must submit data for; the remaining SDGs each carry 26%, and a university's total score is computed from its SDG 17 score plus its three best-performing scores across the other 16 SDGs^※. In other words, a university does not have to — and realistically cannot — excel across all 17 SDGs. It just needs to concentrate on the areas where it is genuinely strong in order to post a competitive overall score.

This "one compulsory plus best three" formula explains why HKUST can anchor its campaign on SDGs such as 9, 11, and 15 — areas that align closely with its distinct strengths in engineering, technology, and business — without having to stretch itself thin on goals like Zero Hunger (SDG 2) or Gender Equality (SDG 5), where its disciplinary profile offers less natural purchase. Under the THE methodology, scores within each SDG are normalised so that the highest raw score in that goal is set to 100 and the lowest to 0, eliminating differences in scoring ranges across goals and ensuring fair comparison regardless of which SDGs an institution chooses to submit^※. Meanwhile, any institution that submits data for SDG 17 and at least three other SDGs is eligible for the overall ranking^※.

With this "play to your strengths" logic in mind, HKUST's standout showing on SDGs 9, 11, and 15 should be read as a strategic conversion of disciplinary advantage, rather than as the kind of across-the-board fulfilment of social responsibility that no single university can credibly claim. That points to a fundamental philosophical difference between the Impact Rankings and traditional academic league tables: the latter reward being strong everywhere; the former reward being genuinely excellent somewhere.

# 2. Areas of strength: SDG 9, SDG 11, SDG 15

The Impact Rankings assess universities goal by goal. According to the report^※, HKUST performed particularly well on the following three SDGs:

These three areas map neatly onto HKUST's disciplinary DNA and on-campus initiatives:

• SDG 9 (Industry and Innovation) — corresponds to HKUST's strengths in robotics, autonomous driving, and deep-tech entrepreneurship (see the Cheng Kar-Shun Robotics Institute^※ and research output and spin-offs^※);
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities) — corresponds to urban-resilience research, including work conducted under HKUST's State Key Laboratory of Coastal Urban Climate Resilience (see state key laboratories^※);
• SDG 15 (Life on Land) — corresponds to biodiversity conservation carried out on the Clear Water Bay campus, which is nestled within a natural woodland and coastal belt (see green campus, ecology, and expansion^※).

Put differently, HKUST's strong Impact Rankings performance is not the product of a fortuitous "exam-cram" effort, but a natural projection of its academic portfolio and campus practices onto the SDG framework.

# 3. The sustainability work behind the numbers

HKUST's Impact Rankings score is backed by a series of quantifiable on-campus sustainability initiatives. According to the report^※:

• In 2019, the University rolled out the HK$50 million Sustainable Smart Campus as a Living Lab (SSC) programme^※;
• In 2020, it installed one of the largest solar-energy systems in Hong Kong, projected to cut carbon emissions by roughly 1.5 million kg per year over a 25-year span^※;
• In 2024, HKUST committed HK$40 million to upgrading 30% of its parking spaces with electric-vehicle charging capacity^※;
• In April 2025, the University released Hong Kong's first university-wide Net-Zero Action Plan, with a target of achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2045^※ (for more, see green campus^※).

These efforts embody the "campus as a living lab" philosophy: HKUST treats its own campus as a testbed for sustainable technology, cutting emissions while simultaneously generating research and teaching value. According to the University's announcement, the Sustainable Smart Campus programme has so far spawned more than 40 sustainability-related projects and supported members of the campus community in trialling green innovations on campus before extending them beyond the campus, generating broader SDG impact^※. The figure "more than 40" grounds the Sustainable Smart Campus in a concrete, traceable list of initiatives — even if the announcement does not name every project individually, the volume alone shows that HKUST's investment in campus sustainability is not a scattering of isolated pilots but a portfolio that has reached meaningful scale.

Professor Tan Ka-hung, then HKUST Vice-President for Administration, put it this way: 「這一榮譽印證了科大致力於把可持續發展融入研究、教育與運營的決心。」^※ ("This recognition affirms HKUST's commitment to embedding sustainability into its research, education, and operations.") The statement places "ranking" alongside three dimensions — research, education, operations — echoing the Impact Rankings' own evaluative logic of looking beyond papers to what a university actually does.

# 4. Why the Impact Rankings deserve their own article

Among HKUST's many ranking results, the Impact Rankings merit a separate account for three reasons:

1. They add a complementary dimension. The Impact Rankings measure social impact rather than academic reputation. They supplement traditional rankings and offer a different lens through which to assess what a university brings to the table.
2. They are tied to practice. Impact Rankings scores map directly onto quantifiable campus and research practices. They are hard to coast on through reputational inertia, making them a better reflection of what a university actually does.
3. They speak to the defining issues of our time. With climate change and sustainable development commanding global consensus, a university's SDG performance is increasingly seen as an important yardstick of its social responsibility.

Note: The ranking position (19th globally), assessment scale (approx. 2,500 institutions), and all investment figures cited in this article are based on the source pages listed below and are time-sensitive. The Impact Rankings are published annually; positions and methodology may change. Please refer to the latest official releases from THE and HKUST before citing.