IJSBE 75 No.

of Pages 7
2 April 2015

International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015) xxx, xxx–xxx

1
H O S T E D BY
Gulf Organisation for Research and Development

International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment

ScienceDirect
www.sciencedirect.com

2 Original Article/Research

3 Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher

4 education in India
5 Shaila Bantanur a,⇑, Mahua Mukherjee b, R. Shankar b
a
6 IIT Roorkee, India
b
7 Faculty in Department of Architecture and Planning, IIT Roorkee, India
8 Received 18 May 2014; accepted 10 March 2015
9

10 Abstract

11 The institutions of higher education provide role models for excellence in education. But also have the added responsibility of
12 providing guidance to the community for social upliftment and environmental sustainability. It becomes imperative, therefore to assess
13 the extent to which sustainable practices have been adopted in these institutions and their adequacy. It is anticipated that a holistic
14 assessment will indicate strengths and weaknesses in sustainability practices so that effective measures can be taken to initiate the creation
15 of a more sustainable environment. To achieve the foregoing objective parameters like Land use and Energy have been identified. An
16 analysis of the basic sustainability parameters with regard to the various institutional surveys indicates the changing trends over the
17 years. The trend reflects institutional growth, improvement in the economy and growing of awareness of sustaining the ecological
18 environment. However, the extent to which each parameter is addressed varies from institution to institution, as well as the geographical
19 location and climatic variations due to the diverse nature of these two factors in the Indian context. Increasing awareness issues pertain-
20 ing to sustainability in institutions of higher education is reflected by relevant practices adopted, however it is expected that initial
21 momentum generated in this direction will lead to further adoption of sustainable practices consistent with the cultural geographical
22 and socio economic scenario prevailing.
23 Ó 2015 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
24

25 Keywords: Land use; Energy consumption; Campus sustainability; Higher education

26

27 1. Introduction be groomed to shoulder the responsibility towards achiev- 32

ing a sustainable environment. A clearer understanding of 33
28 Educational campuses are a part of the urban ecosys- the need for sustainability and how it can be achieved will 34
29 tem. It is important to gauge various activities within a to some extent enable to contribute towards a sustainable 35
30 higher educational campuses with regard to sustainability, planet-to which the need is increasing with the passage of 36
31 within the immediate environ-the campus, so that they may time. Sustainability as applicable to Higher Educational 37
Campus is a process of developing and managing campuses 38

⇑ Corresponding author.
through efficient use of renewable resources and other 39

Peer review under responsibility of The Gulf Organisation for Research

green practices. Sustainability practices differ from campus 40
and Development. to campus and the perception about the sustainability 41

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004
2212-6090/Ó 2015 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Bantanur, S. et al. Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher education in India. International
Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004
 IJSBE 75 No. of Pages 7
2 April 2015

2 S. Bantanur et al. / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

42 differs from person to person. Some believe that they have 3. Data collection 97
43 met the challenges of sustainability through signing
44 National or International declarations (Wright, 2002) and Data were collected from administrators and service 98
45 for some; it may be limited to introducing Master plans, providers with regard to the quantities associated with each 99
46 Environmental plans, Environmental guidelines etc. parameter and the measures adopted to make the environ- 100
47 (Velazquez et al., 2006). Energy consumption per square ment sustainable. The data so collected, especially with 101
48 foot has been analysed for Rowan University (Peter regard to quantification of parameters were lacking consis- 102
49 et al., 2004). Works have been reported in Japan on the tency. IITK had adopted a data centric approach in keep- 103
50 verification of energy consumption through investigations ing with emerging trends where as IISc had, maintained 104
51 of energy consumed in the entire campus (Watanabe records based on past practices. 105
52 et al., 2005). A study was also conducted to review all Based on the information provided by the institution, 106
53 the Chinese practices on establishing green universities required data have been calculated. Like, in IISc, Plinth area 107
54 including best practices and relevant policies. Another is calculated based on AutoCAD Drawing of Campus 108
55 study called, a systems transformation analysis of seven Master Plan and to calculate built up area building pho- 109
56 case studies from seven worldwide universities was con- tographs are taken to observe the number of floors. Thus, 110
57 ducted and the evaluation was based on tri-dimensional Built up area is calculated by multiplying plinth area by 111
58 Framework-Level-Actors (FLA) (Ferrer-Balas et al. number of floors. Areas covered under roads, playgrounds, 112
59 (2008). Lukman et al. (2009) evaluated environmental per- forest/farm land and unmanaged green spaces is calculated 113
60 formance of the University of Maribor on the basis of life based on the AutoCAD drawing of Campus Master Plan. 114
61 cycle analysis. Ozawa-Meida et al. (in press) conducted a Similarly, detailed data were not available in IISc, 115
62 consumption based carbon footprint study for the UK related to monthly power consumption in buildings like 116
63 University. Environmental Management System (EMS) Institutional/Administrative, hostels and other facility 117
64 was adopted by European Universities (Disterheft et al., buildings from the year 2007 to 2012. Whereas IITK, has 118
65 2012; Shaila et al., 2012). Emphasis more on Physical plan- detailed power consumption data on all types of buildings 119
66 ning & Lad use structure to make the campus more sus- present in it (Table 2). 120
67 tainable. Built spaces require energy to carry out various
68 activities within. Energy is an important parameter which 4. Methodology 121
69 measurably contributes in making the campuses more sus-
70 tainable. As the student’s intake increases, new buildings The two select campuses lie in two different climatic zones 122
71 are constructed resulting in an increase in the energy con- of India. The select campuses were visited personally and 123
72 sumption. Various studies have been conducted on energy primary data are collected from various departments of 124
73 consumption structures to investigate the critical areas. the institutions both by online and offline. Focus is given 125
74 Educational campuses cover a huge area where they have on Land use structure and Energy consumption structure; 126
75 the higher potential of generating the energy from various further detailed area covered under all the buildings was 127
76 renewable energy resources like Biomass, Solar thermal, considered for their percentage distribution with respect to 128
77 Solar photovoltaic, Geothermal and Wind energy (Shaila total campus area. Per capita distribution of area under 129
78 et al., 2012). various land uses has been calculated for both the institu- 130
tions for comparative analysis. Data on Power consumption 131
79 2. Introduction to study area structure from 2007 to 2012 are considered to study the con- 132
sumption trends and further per capita Power consumption 133
80 Campus Sustainability in India is in its very nascent has been calculated to draw the inferences. Finally, per stu- 134
81 stage, not having been recognised even by many of the dent built area provided by the institutions is correlated with 135
82 leading institutions at National level. Case study approach the per capita Power consumption to draw inferences. 136
83 is employed in this paper, to identify Land use structure
84 and actual Energy consumption structure along with sus- 4.1. Land use structure 137
85 tainability initiatives undertaken. Indian Institute of
86 Science (IISc) Bengaluru India and Indian Institute of Land use structures of both the institutions are analysed 138
87 Technology Kanpur (IITK) were selected located in differ- in two ways namely; Total built up area analysis and area 139
88 ent climatic zones (Fig. 1). covered by plinth area (footprint area) analysis. Built up 140
89 Brief profile of the institutions was collected from the area of buildings are grouped into four zones namely; 141
90 respective institutions as shown in Table 1. Total pop- Institutional and Administrative, Hostel, Staff quarters 142
91 ulation of Student, Faculty and Staff was collected from and Facility buildings. Foot print area of Land uses are 143
92 Dean Academics of the respective institutions to calculate grouped into ten zones namely; Institutional and 144
93 per capita consumption of energy. Population trend over Administrative, Hostels, Staff quarters, Facility buildings, 145
94 five years (2007–2012) of Student, Faculty and Staff is Roads, Playgrounds, Forest/Farm land, Managed green 146
95 taken for study by considering 2007 as a baseline year spaces, Unmanaged green spaces and Water body. 147
96 (Fig. 2). Depending on the areas being utilised by occupants in 148

Please cite this article in press as: Bantanur, S. et al. Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher education in India. International
Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004
 IJSBE 75 No. of Pages 7
2 April 2015

S. Bantanur et al. / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx 3

Figure 1. Location of study area on geographical map of India.

Table 1
Brief profile of the institutions.
Description IISC IITK
Type of institution Residential Residential
Year of establishment 1902 1959
Total area 178 ha. 426.90 ha
Student population (2012) 3237 11,257
Faculty population (as on 2012) 486 354
Staff population (as on 2012) 763 570
Total campus residents (as on 2012) 8086 15,881
Student:faculty 1:7 1:13
Type of programmes UG, PG, PhD, (Recently introduced) UG, PG, PHD
Funding by central government Fully funded Fully funded
Note: UG – Under Graduate, PG – Post Graduate and PhD – Doctor of Philosophy.

149 various zones built up (b/up) area per occupant and foot 0.5
150 print area per occupant are calculated (Table 3). 0.4 IISc students
151 Depending on the results obtained built up area/occu- 0.3
IITK students
152 pant (Fig. 3) and foot print area/occupant (Fig. 4) of vari- 0.2
153 ous land uses in both the institutions are compared to draw IISc Faculty
0.1
154 the inferences. 0
IITK Faculty

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 IISc Staff

-0.1
-0.2 IITK Staff
155 4.2. Energy consumption structure
-0.3

156 Electricity being consumed for various purposes like; Figure 2. Population of Student, Faculty and Staff trend over the five
157 Lighting, Power system, Air Conditioning system (AC), years in IISc and IITK.

Please cite this article in press as: Bantanur, S. et al. Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher education in India. International
Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004
 IJSBE 75 No. of Pages 7
2 April 2015

4 S. Bantanur et al. / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Table 2
Status of data availability in institutions of IISc and IITK.
Data Available Not
Available
Land use as on 2012
Total built up area of Institutional/Administrative buildings, Hostels, Staff Quarters, Other Facility Buildings and Total IITK IISc
built up area of the campus
Total foot print area of Institutional/Administrative buildings, Hostel Buildings, Staff Quarters, Other Facility buildings
and Total footprint area of the campus
Total area covered under Roads and Play Grounds IITK IISc
Total area covered by Forest/farms IISc, IITK
Total area covered by Managed green spaces IITK, IISc
Total area covered by Unmanaged green space IISc, IITK
Total area covered by Water body IISc,
Total campus area IITK, IISc
Energy
Month wise power consumption by Institutional/Administrative buildings from 2007 to 2012 IITK IISc
Month Wise Power consumption by Hostels from 2007 to 2012 IITK IISc
Month Wise Power consumption by Staff Quarters IITK, IISc
Month Wise Power consumption by Other Facility buildings IITK IISc
Month Wise Power consumption by entire campus-2007–2012 IITK, IISc

158 Water heating, Cooling, and others. For the purpose of consumption for the entire campus is considered for the 166
159 comparative energy consumption analysis, monthly energy comparison. Fig. 5 shows average yearly energy consump- 167
160 consumption of entire campus from the year 2007 to 2012 tion (2007–2012) in campuses of IISc and IITK. Fig. 6 168
161 was collected from both the institutions. Detailed monthly shows average monthly power consumption units for the 169
162 energy consumption of all buildings was not available in year 2012. 170
163 IISc where as IITK has maintained detailed monthly Student, Faculty and Staff population (2007–2012) in 171
164 Energy consumption of all buildings present in the campus. both the institutions shows a considerable increase in stu- 172
165 Due to lack of data, available, only total monthly power dent population where as faculty and staff population is 173

Table 3
Land use structure of IISc and IITK campuses.
IISc IITK
Built up Area
Area in b/up area(%) b/up/occupant Area in % of b/up area b/up/
Sqm Sqm occupant
Institutional/administrative 319139.44 50.47 71.14 144,944 29.05 11.90
(student, faculty and staff)
Hostels (Students) 177913.50 28.13 54.96 183,800 36.84 16.33
Staff Quarters (faculty and staff) 116107.72 18.36 23.24 118,920 23.84 25.85
Other Facilities (student, faculty and staff) 19226.30 3.04 2.33 51,263 10.27 3.23
Total built up area 632386.96 100 151.68 498,927 100 57.31
Foot print area
Area in Footprint Foot print/ Area in Footprint area Sqm/
Sq m area (%) occupant Sq m (%) Occupant
Institutional /administrative 149739.54 9.25 33.36 79,695 1.87 6.54
(student, faculty and staff)
Hostels (students) 40064.6 2.47 12.38 81,577 1.91 7.25
Staff quarters (faculty and staff) 54566.02 3.37 10.92 79,230 1.86 17.22
Other facilities (student, faculty and staff) 19226.3 1.19 2.33 44,073 1.03 2.78
Total 263596.46 16.28 54.41 284,575 6.67 25.65
Roads (residents) 448142.2 27.68 5.00 407,402 9.54 25.35
Playgrounds (residents) 41190.1 2.54 63.89 402,550 9.43 0.00
Forest/farms (residents) 526233.4 32.50 9.25 0 0.00 94.78
Managed green space (residents) 76221.4 4.71 51.27 1,505,186 35.26 105.11
Unmanaged green space (residents) 261419.54 16.15 0.28 1,669,287 39.10 0.00
Water body (residents) 2336.9 0.14 33.36 0 0.00 6.54
Total campus area 1,619,140 100.00 243.11 4,269,000 100.00 284.68

Please cite this article in press as: Bantanur, S. et al. Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher education in India. International
Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004
 IJSBE 75 No. of Pages 7
2 April 2015

S. Bantanur et al. / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx 5

80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00 IISC
30.00
IITK
20.00
10.00
0.00
Instuonal Hostels Staff Quarters Other facilies
/Administrave

Figure 3. Built up area/occupant of various Land uses in IISc and IITK.

120.00

100.00

80.00

60.00

40.00
IISC
20.00
IITK
0.00

Figure 4. Foot print area/occupants of various Land uses in IISc and IITK.

174 decreasing (Fig. 2). As compared with the faculty, pop- 5000000
ulation of staff is more thus over the years whereas pop-
Consumpon(kwh)

175 4500000
Monthly Energy

IISc IITK
4000000
176 ulation of both faculty and staff is almost constant. Thus 3500000
177 total power consumption/student population is considered 3000000
2500000
178 for calculation to analyse the trends (Fig. 7). 2000000
1500000
179 Finally, total built area/capita provided by both institu- 1000000
180 tions is correlated with the power consumption/capita to 500000
0
181 draw inferences (Fig. 8). 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
182 4.3. Sustainability initiatives
Figure 5. Average yearly energy consumption of IISc and IITK from 2007
to 2012.
183 IISc has installed solar water heaters for the entire new
184 hostel and in some places LED lighting is used specially in
185 the corridor, 2 KW solar panel is being installed to gener- Land use structure analysis shows that, various spaces 196
186 ate the energy. Field observation shows various measures designed per occupant differ from zone to zone as well as 197
187 like use of solar water heater for all the hostels, Solar there is no similarity between the zones also. Which shows 198
188 photo-voltaic cells, for street lighting, Led’s, energy star that are is no set of guidelines for designing various spaces 199
189 rated appliances within the campus. IIT Kanpur is also of the educational institutions. Built area analysis shows 200
190 working on the solar-park projects to generate electricity that, IIsc has provided more space per occupant for institu- 201
191 through various innovative techniques. tional/administrative and hostels. Whereas built-up area 202
provided per occupant for staff quarters and for other 203
192 5. Discussions facilities are almost same. Similarly footprint per occupant 204
provided for institutional/administrative areas and for 205
193 Two of the selected institutions almost perform similar hostels is more in IISc and compared with the IITK which 206
194 function, both are fully residential, technical and research shows that more of open land is being utilised for 207
195 oriented and totally funded by the Government of India. constructing the building. IITK has provided more per 208

Please cite this article in press as: Bantanur, S. et al. Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher education in India. International
Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004
 IJSBE 75 No. of Pages 7
2 April 2015

6 S. Bantanur et al. / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Figure 6. Monthly power consumption of IISc and IITK for the year 2012.

60.00
consumpon/student(kwh)

IISC IITK utilised for resource generation. Also the future vertical 223
50.00
growth will ensure to maintain at least same percentage 224
40.00 of open land. The study has also been conducted on power 225
power

30.00 consumption structure for five years which shows an 226

20.00 increase in the power consumption every year. Maximum 227

10.00
power consumption is due to heating and cooling equip- 228
ments, use of Air conditioners, Heavy duty lab equipments, 229
0.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Kitchen equipments in hostels. Power consumption/stu- 230
Year dent for both the campuses decreases with increase in time. 231
Various factors influence this trend namely; (1) use energy 232
Figure 7. Power consumption/student in IISc and IITK from 2007 to
efficient gadgets at individual level. (2) Replacing few 233
2012.
LED’s with existing CFL’s. (3) Student faculty ratio (4) 234
distribution of constant power demands amongst the total 235
100.00 users (5) Use of alternative renewable energy resources etc. 236
80.00 Further comparison of total built up area/capita and daily 237
60.00 power consumption/capita is shows a very strong cor- 238
40.00 IISC relation, which indicates that increase in per capita built 239
20.00 IITK space will increase the per capita power consumption. 240
0.00 Providing extra spaces will increase the load of lighting, 241
Total built up area/capita Power
consumpon/capita
fans, heating/cooling. But this cannot be true to constant 242
power demand areas which include heavy duty machines 243
Figure 8. Per capita built-up area and power consumption in IISc and of lab equipments, various kitchen equipments in hostel 244
IITK.
messes etc. 245

209 occupant area for the staff residences. Similar spaces were 6. Conclusion 246
210 noticed for other facilities. All physical plan of the IISc
211 shows a very scattered type of planning which has resulted In this paper, two educational institutions were studied 247
212 in an increase in percentage of road area as compared to with respect to land use structure and power consumption 248
213 the overall campus area. Total population of IISc is less to assess the extent of their efforts towards Campus sus- 249
214 as compared with the IITK thus playground area/occupant tainability. The conclusions based on the limited study con- 250
215 is more in IISc as compared to the IITK. Managed green ducted are as follows: 251
216 spaces include lawns and other green areas which require
217 a regular maintenance and this area is more in IISc. 1. Regional features like climate, social structure and cul- 252
218 Unmanaged green spaces include which does not requires ture embedded with dominating traditional values influ- 253
219 any maintenance and this area is more in IITK. The foot- ence the approach adopted to attain Campus 254
220 print area of both the campuses shows that there is still Sustainability. 255
221 more that 50% open land present (play grounds, green 2. Newer institutions have more organised data manage- 256
222 spaces and water body) within the campus which can be ment as compared to the older institutions. 257

Please cite this article in press as: Bantanur, S. et al. Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher education in India. International
Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004
 IJSBE 75 No. of Pages 7
2 April 2015

S. Bantanur et al. / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2015) xxx–xxx 7

258 3. The student faculty ratio varies depending on the type of Acknowledgements 295
259 programmes conducted by the Institution i.e. Institutes
260 having greater emphasis on research programmes have I would like to thank the faculty and staff of IISc and 296
261 a lower student faculty ratio as compared with the insti- IITK for their fullest support in providing relevant data. 297
262 tution with emphasis on undergraduate and postgradu-
263 ate academic programmes. References 298
264 4. Scatter type of planning in older campus has resulted in
265 greater built-up area as compared with the compact Orr, D.W., 1994. Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the 299
Human Prospect. Island Press, Washington DC. 300
266 planning adopted by the newer campus.
University Grant Commission Report (UGC) 2012. 301
267 5. Built-up area of institutional and hostel area per occu- Velazquez, L., Munguia, N., Platt, A., Taddei, J., 2006. Sustainable 302
268 pant is more in Institute with research programme as University: what can be the matter? J. Cleaner Prod. 14, 810e9. 303
269 compared with other programmes. Whereas built up Wright, T.S.A., 2002. Definitions and frameworks for environmental 304
270 area of staff quarters and facility building areas remains sustainability in higher education. Higher Education Policy 15 (2), 305
105e20. 306
271 the same to a great extent.
Annual Reports of Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 2007–2012. 307
272 6. Foot print area/occupant varies from campus to campus Annual Reports of Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur 2007–2012. 308
273 indicating no cohesive approach or absence of guidelines. Shaila, S.B., Shankar, Mahua M., 2012. Ushering in an Era of Campus 309
274 7. There is an increase in energy consumption over the Sustainability. J. Indian Inst. Architects, 24–28. 310
275 years in the older Institution whereas in the newer Disterheft, Antje, da Silva Caeiro, Sandra Sofia Ferreira, Ramos, Maria 311
Rosário, de Miranda Azeiteiro, Ulisses Manuel, 2012. Environmental 312
276 Institution it is almost constant.
management systems (EMS) implementation processes and practices in 313
277 8. Emerging sustainability awareness amongst the stake- European higher education institutions: top-down versus participatory 314
278 holders and implementing energy efficient appliances approaches. J. Cleaner Prod. 31, 80–90. 315
279 have resulted in decreasing the power consumption/stu- Lukman, R., Tiwary, A., Azapagic, A., 2009. Towards greening a 316
280 dent over the years indicating that the traditional older university campus: the case of the University of Maribor, Slovenia. 317
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 53, 639–644. 318
281 Institutions are realising the importance of Campus sus-
Ozawa-Meida, L., et al. Measuring carbon performance in a UK 319
282 tainability and adopting similar measures as the newer University through a consumption-based carbon footprint: De 320
283 Institutions. Montfort University case study, J. Cleaner Prod., in press. 321
284 9. It is anticipated that the growing awareness of Campus Wang, M., Wei, D.Y., He, Y.Q., 2010. A review of China’s green 322
285 Sustainability will, in time, influence appropriate efforts university construction and practices. Environ. Prot. 19, 44–47 (in 323
Chinese). 324
286 with regard to data collection and collation, planning
Ferrer-Balas, D., Adachi, J., Banas, S., Davidson, C.I., Hoshikoshi, A., 325
287 and execution to be extended to other sustainability Mishra, A., Motodoa, Y., Onga, M., Ostwald, M., 2008. An 326
288 parameters to an appreciable extent. international comparative analysis of sustainability transformation 327
289 across seven universities. Int. J. Sustainable High. Educ. 9 (3), 295– 328
316. 329
Watanabe, H., Suichi, Miura, Satoshi, Sudo, 2005. A study on the actual 330
290 7. Uncited references
conditions on energy consumption of school building in Tohoku area. 331
J. Environ. Eng. 597, 57–63. 332
291 Orr (1994), University Grant Commission Report Peter. J., James B., Patrick G., Dona J., Sara R., 2004. Undergraduate 333
292 (2012), Annual Reports of Indian Institute of Science Research on Sustainability: Campus Energy Analysis and Building 334
293 (2007-2012), Annual Reports of Indian Institute of Energy Audits, In: Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for 335
Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. 336
294 Technology (2007-2012), Wang et al. (2010).
337

Please cite this article in press as: Bantanur, S. et al. Emerging dimensions of sustainability in institutes of higher education in India. International
Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.004