Natalie Simpson
Marketing Manager
March 3, 2026
Recent research shows that 63% of organisations now treat sustainability as a top strategic priority.
Sustainability reporting in higher education goes beyond internal accountability. It increasingly shapes how institutions are perceived externally; by students, regulators, funding bodies, and public sustainability benchmarks. Many universities are taking meaningful action toward their net-zero goals, yet still find their progress underrepresented in public narratives.
The disconnect usually sits within the data. More often than not, it is determined by how sustainability is reported, and whether institutions have access to the right data to evidence their impact clearly and confidently. The quality of this data ultimately shapes whether your sustainability impact can be clearly demonstrated in public reporting.
How to use data quality to improve sustainability reporting in Higher Education
Sustainability rankings often rely heavily on publicly available, verifiable data. When activity is not consistently measured, or when supporting information is fragmented across multiple systems, its impact is unlikely to be reflected externally.
This challenge is becoming more pronounced within technology infrastructure departments, and research indicates that 75% organisations identify energy efficiency as central to their IT strategies. Simultaneously, projected growth in data centre energy demand is increasing scrutiny on how IT-related sustainability claims are evidenced.
For higher education institutions where digital estates span teaching, research, and administration; access to clear, reliable sustainability data essential. Institutions must demonstrate progress, support governance, and maintain credibility with both internal and external stakeholders.
Public benchmarks and the risk of under-reporting impact
League tables and sustainability benchmarks are not inherently flawed; they can only assess what is visible, meaning that missing or incomplete data is often interpreted as missing activity.
As a result, institutions may be delivering strong outcomes in areas such as IT asset reuse, refurbishment, and responsible disposal without those achievements being fully reflected in public assessments. The issue is rarely performance – it is representation.
Crucially, this is not about challenging benchmarking methodologies.
We must ask ourselves a more practical question:
The overlooked role of IT asset lifecycle and circular economy data
One of the most common blind spots in sustainability reporting is IT asset lifecycle data. While energy consumption is often tracked, the environmental impact of devices across their full lifecycle procurement, reuse, refurbishment, recycling, and material recovery is frequently under-reported.
This matters because IT assets represent a significant sustainability lever in higher education. Circular economy reporting can quantify outcomes such as:
- Refurbishment versus recycling rates
- Avoided carbon emissions (often relevant to Scope 3)
- Energy savings from reuse
- Critical raw materials recovered
Without structured lifecycle data, these impacts remain largely invisible.
Circular economy reporting, delivered through DTP in partnership with HPEFS, provides a credible mechanism to close this gap.
By translating asset-level activity into auditable, reportable sustainability metrics, institutions gain clearer visibility, stronger evidence, and greater confidence in published disclosures.
The role of IT in sustainable reporting
IT teams are central to addressing this challenge. Asset management systems, disposal records, supplier data, and infrastructure telemetry all contain sustainability insights.
Best practice increasingly points toward integrated data platforms that bring together operational and sustainability metrics. This approach improves auditability and allows institutions to report with confidence by treating sustainability reporting as a data discipline.
Practical steps to improve sustainability reporting
Institutions do not need to overhaul their entire reporting approach to make progress. A few targeted actions can significantly improve clarity and credibility:
-
1. Bring IT asset lifecycle data into sustainability reporting
Ensure reuse, refurbishment, and disposal outcomes are captured consistently and translated into reportable metrics.
-
2. Standardise definitions across IT, estates, and sustainability teams
Shared definitions prevent conflicting figures and improve confidence in published data.
-
3. Automate data collection where possible
Automated reporting pipelines reduce errors, improve consistency, and make sustainability reporting easier to maintain year on year.
Register for our UCISA-hosted webinar, showcasing how circular economy reports translate IT asset activity into credible, reportable sustainability data – including practical examples and takeaways for Higher Education.
Accurate, well-structured reporting ensures institutions receive recognition for the progress they are already making. With the right data in place, sustainability reporting becomes truly representative.
