Tough Targets, Tough Monitoring

The news that government departments are failing to meet their own green targets is disappointing, but perhaps not too surprising. The full details of the Sustainable Development in Government 2006 report can be broken down by both department and by subject field, and is available online and presented in a fairly easy-to-read form at the Sustainable Development Commission's website.

Just as the impact of Government is fairly significant in its sustainable development implications for the entire country (650,000 employees, 0.5% of the entire UK CO2 output, 2% of the UK's landmass), so too is UWA to the Mid/West Wales region (10,000 students and staff for a start) and what I have found the most useful is the extent of the detail that the Government's sustainable development reporting scheme provides. After all, commitments can eternally float around in the air unless they are pinned down to measurable, time-bound and reported targets and there are currently none that are a formal part of university policy. These are the details which the Sustainable Development Commission have used to assess progress (which it acknowledges is heavy on the environmental side and less on the social side):

- An environmental management system (EMS) to report publicly on improvements with verified data for 100% of the office estate
- Travel - CO2 emissions from transport reduced by 10% compared with four years ago.
- Water - consumption per full-time equivalent staff member down to 7.7 cubic metres
- Waste - annual 1% reduction in landfill waste and 5% increase in recycling.
- Energy - cutting carbon emissions, improving energy efficiency and 'green' energy procurement
- Sustainable Procurement (purchasing and contracts)
- Estates management - sustainable development a major factor in new buildings and major refurbishments
- Biodiversity - improved condition of SSSIs
- Social activities (no, not the number of pub crawls) - volunteer projects, tackling social exclusion, etc.

And of course, targets are reviewed annually and adjusted accordingly. A model to follow?