SDG2

ZERO HUNGER

1. Research on hunger

1.1 Zero hunger : CiteScore

This indicator measures the proportion of a university’s publications appear in the top 10% of journals according to the Citescore metric. It is intended to reflect on excellence of academic output.

This indicator is normalised and a maximum score is worth 10% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 2.6% of the overall score).

1.2 Zero hunger: FWCI

This indicator explores the quality of a university’s output in the area of hunger research using the number of citations received as a metric.

This number is normalised by publication type (paper, review, conference proceeding, book, or book chapter), by year of publication, and by subject. Subjects are defined using Elsevier’s ASJC classification.

This indicator is normalised and a maximum score is worth 10% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 2.6% of the overall score).

1.3 Zero hunger: publications

The number of publications looks at the scale of research output from a university around hunger. It is not scaled by the size of the institution – rather it looks at the overall impact.

This indicator is normalised and a maximum score is worth 7% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 1.82% of the overall score).

2. Campus food waste

Food waste can occur at each level of the food production process: production, handling and storage, processing, distribution and consumption. Causes can also vary, but usually they are related to inadequate market systems, in-proper transportation of fresh products, production of excess food, too large quantities purchased/displayed, large portion meals, attitude that disposing is cheaper than re-using.

This indicator measures the proportion of food (metric ton) wasted/discarded per person on campus. A maximum score for this metric is worth 15.4% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 4% of the overall score). 

Although campus food waste data was collected for the Impact Rankings 2020, in the judgement of THE the data was not consistent enough to be used. We have reframed the question to support data submission, and hope to include it in this year’s rankings.

2.1 Campus food waste tracking - 7.7% in SDG (2% Overall)

Measure the amount of food waste generated from food served within the university. Up to three points based on:

• Existence of measurement – maximum of one point for whole university, 0.5 for partial measurement

• Evidence provided – up to one point

• Is the evidence provided public – one point

2.2 Indicator: Campus food waste

The second question (indicator 2.2: Campus food waste) calculates the food waste per person. These values will only be scored where universities have indicated that they are measuring food waste across the whole university. This indicator is normalised and a maximum score is worth 7.7% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 2% of the overall score).

• • • • Total food waste - This is the total offood (metric ton)that is discarded or lost uneaten by all catering services on campus in year 2019.
    •  
      • Number of campus population - This is the sum of the FTE (Full Time Equivalent) number of students and the FTEnumberofemployeesin year2019.

3 Student hunger

Universities need to realise students at risk of being food insecure, which means they do not have access to nutritious, affordable food.

There are a total of 12 points that could be gained from meeting the criteria in this metric, a maximum score is worth 19.2% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 5% of the overall score).

3.1 Student food insecurity and hunger - 4.80% in SDG (1.25% Overall)

Have a programme in place on student food insecurity. Up to three points based on:

• Existenceofprogramme –onepoint

• Evidence provided – up to one point

• Is the evidence provided public – one point

3.2 Student and staff hunger interventions - 4.80% in SDG (1.25% Overall)

Provide interventions to prevent or alleviate hunger among students and staff (e.g. including supply and access to food banks/pantries). Up to three points based on:

• Provision of intervention – one point

• Evidence provided – up to one point

• Is the evidence provided public – one point

3.3 Sustainable food choices on campus - 4.80% in SDG (1.25% Overall)

Provide sustainable food choices for all on campus, including vegetarian and vegan food. Up to three points based on:

• Existence of choices – maximum one pointfor all food outlets, only 0.5 points for selected food outlets

• Evidence provided – up to one point Is the evidence provided public – one point

3.4 Healthy and affordable food choices - 4.80% in SDG (1.25% Overall)

Provide healthy and affordable food choices for all on campus. Up to three points based on:

• Existence of choices – maximum one point for all food outlets, only 0.5 points for selected food outlets

• Evidence provided – up to one point • Is the evidence provided public – one point

4. Proportion of graduates in agriculture and aquaculture including sustainability aspects.

Here we measure the proportion of total graduates who receive a degree associated with any aspect of food sustainability within an agricultural and aquaculture course.

This metric tries to capture whether an institution actively teaches food sustainability within accredited undergraduate and postgraduate agriculture and aquaculture courses. This metric relates to the UN Targets 2.3.

This indicator is normalised and a maximum score is worth 19.2% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 4.98% of the overall score)

5. National hunger

A university’s effort against hunger aggregated at national level. Hunger here is defined as a severe lack of food which causes suffering or death, capturing the concept of food security.

There are a totalof12points that could begained from meeting the criteria in this metric, a maximum score is worth 19.2% of the score in this SDG (equivalent to 5% of the overall score).

5.1 Acess to food security knowledge

Provide access on food security and sustainable agriculture and aquaculture knowledge, skills or technology to local farmers and food producers. Up to three points based on:

• Provision of access – maximum one point for free, only 0.25 points forpaid

• Evidence provided – up to one point

• Is the evidence provided public – one point

5.2  Events for local farmer and good producers

Provide events for local farmers and food producers to connect and transfer knowledge. Up to three points based on:

• Provision of events – maximum one point for free, only 0.25 points forpaid

• Evidence provided – up to one point

• Is the evidence provided public – one point

5.3 University access to local farmers and food producers

Provide access to university facilities (e.g. labs, technology,plantstocks)to local farmers and food producers to improve sustainable farming practices. Up to three points based on:

• Provision of access – maximum one point for free, only 0.25 points for paid

• Evidence provided – up to one point

• Is the evidence provided public – one point

5.4 Sustainable food purchases

Prioritise purchase of products from local, sustainable sources. Up to three points based on:

• Existence of prioritisation – one point

• Evidence provided – up to one point

• Is the evidence provided public – one point