\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Sustainability Indicators for Universities: Revision for a Colombian Case},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2017-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2017)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2017-01-15}
\title{Sustainability Indicators for Universities: Revision for a Colombian Case}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Daniel Gomez  Gutierrez}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 12 December 2016 Accepted: 5 January 2017 Published: 15 January 2017}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


The purpose of this paper is to orient universities on their first versions of the sustainability reports based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines, which, as mentioned by Hussey et al. (2001), Lozano (2006) and Morhardt et al. (2002) is the best option for sustainability reporting in universities.The paper analyses the sustainability indicators reported by 26 universities following the GRI guidelines, 18 revised by the authors and others reviewed by Lozano (2011), in order to establish a pathway for new universities wanting to elaborate their sustainability reports and also offers a perspective of new indicators that can be covered in forthcoming reports.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{sustainability index; global reporting initiative; sustainability indicators; universities; higher education institutions.}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
any universities are striving on sustainability. One of the pathways is sustainability reporting as tool for making public all the actions on this matter. There are many reporting methodologies that have been put in place in universities, but \hyperref[b13]{Lozano (2011)} established that the best option is the Global Reporting Initiative methodology, that although it was not designed for higher education institutions covers most of the activities except for research and teaching.\par
First, universities need to establish a sustainability committee that will be responsible for the sustainability policy and evaluating the data for the report. If there is an existing committee that takes care of environmental issues in the institution, this can be made in charge of the sustainability aspects.\par
An analysis of the sustainability reports (using the GRI methodology) presented by more than 20 universities worldwide gives a starting point and allows identifying both the most relevant and mostly used sustainability indicators. The list of performance indicators revealed can help higher education institutions drafting the first sustainability report and establishing a milestone for future sustainability reporting. 
\section[{II.}]{II.} 
\section[{Literature Review}]{Literature Review}\par
Before mentioning the methodologies to determine the sustainability indexes for universities, there is the need to define or make an approach to the definition of a Sustainable University and its implications. According to Velasques, Minguia, Platt \&Taddei (2005), a Sustainable University is defined as a higher education institution, as a whole or a part, that tackles, involves and promotes, at a regional or global level, the mitigation of the negative environmental aspects, economic, social and health related, generated by the use of resources for the purpose of teaching, researching, government, extension and work in society in ways that it helps society make its transition towards a sustainable way of life.\par
The process for the transformation of a higher education institution towards a Sustainable Institution starts, theoretically speaking, according to Velasquez et al.  {\ref (2005)}, when someone or a group of persons in the institution dreams or envisions that the members of it (including stakeholders) behave according to the philosophy of sustainable development defined by the Brundtl and Commission in 1987.\par
The model of Sustainable University, according to Velasquez et al  {\ref (2005)} supposes the conformation of a sustainability committee responsible of creating and establishing the policy, objectives and goals in a way that all of the stakeholders can understand them. The most important task of the committee is creating the sustainability policy for the institution.\par
According to \hyperref[b2]{Bauer (2004)}, for an effective sustainable development in an institution, it must be permeated to all aspects of the university. \hyperref[b16]{Rogers (2004)} found that authors in this matter conclude that a sustainable campus must incorporate educational and operative elements in its design. Velasquez et al.  {\ref (2005)} established that in order to disseminate sustainable development along the university, the people involved in the initiative of the sustainable university must improve its knowledge in subjects related to it. On the other hand, the use of technologies that allow a reduction of the negative environmental impacts in a local or global level is a must and requires being done according to the level of implementation of the initiative. It needs to be recalled that increasing the level of knowledge about sustainable development does not produce immediate results.\par
The model of the sustainable university, according to Velasquez et al.  {\ref (2005)}, cannot be completed adequately without defining the appropriate tools to measure, analyse and control the performance of the sustainable initiatives. In organizations, the GRI methodology offers a variety of indicators to diagnose the sustainability performance (Velasquez et al, 2005). Nevertheless, according to \hyperref[b11]{Lozano (2004;}\hyperref[b12]{2006;}, this methodology was never developed for universities.\par
It is worth mentioning, that according to \hyperref[b18]{Shriberg (2002)}   
\section[{J}]{J}\par
There are many methodologies used by universities to report sustainability indicators. According to \hyperref[b13]{Lozano (2011)} the most used guides include the ISO 14000 series (especially ISO 14031), EMAS (ECO-Management and Audit Scheme), Social Accountability 8000 standard and the GRI guidelines. Among the different guides, the best option, according to \hyperref[b10]{Hussey et al.(2001)}, \hyperref[b12]{Lozano(2006)} and \hyperref[b14]{Morhardt et al.(2002)}, is GRI (Global Reporting Initiative), although it is important to mention that this methodology was not developed by universities and that is the reason why it requires being adapted to activities performed in these institutions \hyperref[b13]{(Lozano, 2011)}. One of the required modifications is the inclusion of an education dimension, followed by the core competences of universities \hyperref[b12]{(Lozano, 2006)}. The indicators are organized in different categories that answer to specific aspects of the activities performed by the organization. According to the GRI Indicator Hierarchy (GRI, 2011) the environmental dimension relates to aspects such as materials, energy, water, biodiversity, emissions, waste, procurement, transportation and legislation compliancy, among others.Table1\par
The sustainability reports developed under the GRI 3.1 methodology are classified according to the grade of application that are defined with a grade in letters by the categories C, B and A with the option "+" for each measured category that is communicated externally. In the GRI methodology it can be observed that if a business reports the information of 10 indicators, including at least one per dimension (Economic, Environmental and Social), the score, complying also with the profile and management information required, is "C"; but if the report includes a set of 20 indicators, with at least one per dimension, the score is "B". It is supposed then, that if universities using this methodology should at least try to report indicators to obtain a "C" and make the report public to declare its sustainability according to GRI 3.1 methodology.\par
The GRI methodology has performance indicators that are not relevant to the activities of the universities, and on the other hand, it does not have indicators that show the actions performed in activities like research and teaching, as proposed by \hyperref[b12]{Lozano (2006)}. The main indicators for the curricular components as well as for teaching proposed by \hyperref[b12]{Lozano (2006)} include aspects related to sustainability as part of the curricula and the research activities. It is worth mentioning that there is noGRI methodology for Higher Education Institutions and the indicators shown are a proposal to measure the sustainability in universities.\par
On the other hand, Lozano (2011) developed a list of 12 universities that have published their sustainability reports using the GRI methodology, based on an internet search in the universities' webpages, the GRI website (www.globalreporting.org) and a list developed by the author in \hyperref[b12]{Lozano (2006)}.The list is included in Table \hyperref[tab_2]{2} and was very helpful to reference other universities that use the GRI methodology (see Table  {\ref 3}). From the analysis done to the sustainability reports of the universities, Lozano (2011) reported that there is a tendency documenting the environmental and economic indicators. The economic dimension reporting can be as a result of using the financial information available from the annual reports. The focus on the environmental dimension can be as a result of the environmental connotation of sustainability  {\ref (Arkinson, 2000;} {\ref Costanza, 1991;}\hyperref[b4]{Diesendorf, 2000;}\hyperref[b5]{Fadeeva, 2004;}\hyperref[b7]{Goldin \& Winters, 1995;}\hyperref[b9]{Hart, 2000;}\hyperref[b15]{Reinhardt, 2004)}.Nevertheless, this result can represent that the environmental issues are easier to measure, while the social aspects are more immature \hyperref[b17]{(Salzmann et al., 2003)}, making the difficult to monitor, establish and analyze \hyperref[b13]{(Lozano, 2011)}.\par
From this search, a new revision of the sustainability reports of the mentioned universities (Table \hyperref[tab_2]{2 and Table 3}) was made in order to determine the tendency in the indicators used. As well as what Lozano (2011) reported, it was found that the indicators most presented are in the economic and environmental dimensions. Nevertheless, it could be observed the use of indicators belonging to the social dimension; although it is worth mentioning that in this dimension the indicators less used belong to society performance (SO) category. These results are commented in broader detail in section 1.3.\par
According to \hyperref[b13]{Lozano (2011)}, the universities show great advances on the environmental indicators, especially in those that are related to the use of materials, source separation of waste, energy and water consumption, water discharges and solid waste. Nevertheless, there is still work to be done in areas like biodiversity, supplier management, products and services, as well as environmental laws and regulation compliance indicators.\par
Since the environmental dimension is the most quantified in the sustainability reports reviewed, an analysis of the indicators was made in order to establish the best (the most reported) indicators to be used and serve as referents by universities starting the sustainability reporting path and trying to define sustainability indicators. A normalization of the indicators was not found, which makes it difficult to compare the environmental performance of the different universities nor making a benchmark study. To mention an example, some universities refer their energy consumption to the kWh unit, others to the kWh/m2, and few others to the kWh/FTE (FTE: Full Time Equivalent Student) unit.\par
Thompson The authors used the following elements to normalize their data: FTE, net campus area and cost of the infrastructure. They also mention that among the disadvantages of normalizing the data is the fact that an indicator can hide representative information. Also, the elements to normalize have to be specified to assure that the comparison is made on the same scale or if there is no hidden information. In this sense, for a university with off-campus and face-to-face students, the FTE can only reflect the in-campus students while other universities may reference all the students enrolled in the university.\par
On the other hand, a review of the possible sustainability indexes was made to integrate the indicators and generate an environmental performance score or key performance indicator that could be applied to higher education institutions. In this search, methodologies like the Dow-Jones Sustainability Index and the Walmart Sustainability Index were found. Nevertheless, for the type of indexes and for the fact that these methodologies were not designed for universities, it was not possible to find one that could be applied in this context. Also, it was considered that at a starting stage where the baseline is being defined by a University it is premature to consider an index for the sustainability performance. 
\section[{III.}]{III.} 
\section[{Results and Discussion}]{Results and Discussion}\par
From the analysis of the sustainability reports of the 26 universities studied, it was found that the most reported indicators by the universities, under the GRI 3.1 methodology, are those presented in Table \hyperref[tab_4]{4}, Table \hyperref[tab_5]{5} and Table \hyperref[tab_6]{6}, where each table corresponds to one of the established dimensions (Economic, Environmental and Social). The indicators listed above resemble those that were found with a frequency higher than 50\% of the universe established by the 26 sustainability reports.   
\section[{EN -3}]{EN -3}\par
Direct energy consumption by primary energy source. 
\section[{EN -4}]{EN -4}\par
Indirect energy consumption by primary source. 
\section[{EN -8}]{EN -8}\par
Total water withdrawal by source. 
\section[{EN -16}]{EN -16}\par
Total direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. 
\section[{EN -17}]{EN -17}\par
Other relevant indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. 
\section[{EN -22}]{EN -22}\par
Total weight of waste by type and disposal method. 
\section[{EN -28}]{EN -28}\par
Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non-monetary sanctions for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations. Also, in the indicators analysis, it was found that most of the reported indicators correspond to the core categories established in the GRI methodology. It was established that only two of the non-core (additional) indicators were reported with a frequency over 50\% in the different reports studied (LA-12 and PR-5).It can also be appreciated that in the case of the society indicators (SO), none of them were reported with a frequency over 50\%. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that the mostly used indicator is SO-1. 
\section[{Global}]{Global}\par
On the other hand, it was established that the mostly used indicator corresponds to EN-3, which is used to report the total consumption of energy by primary energy source. The other two most reported indicators are EC-1 and LA-1, which are used in the financial statement and the statistics about personnel, respectively. Table \hyperref[tab_7]{7} presents the indicators that showed the higher frequencies during the study. The results of the study are coherent with ones presented by \hyperref[b13]{Lozano (2011)} who states that there is a tendency in documenting the indicators of the economic and environmental dimensions. Also, it can be appreciated that universities are walking forward on the environmental dimension, but it can also be mentioned that there has been some advance in the social dimension, especially in areas related to working practices and labor performance. It is worth mentioning that although some universities use society indicators, the use of these indicators is limited and not proportional to the other two dimensions. 
\section[{IV.}]{IV.} 
\section[{Conclusions}]{Conclusions}\par
First, it is worth mentioning, as it was established in the section 1.2, that there is not an adequate sustainability index methodology developed for universities. Nevertheless, the most recommended and used is the GRI methodology, which can be complemented with additional indicators as the ones described by \hyperref[b12]{Lozano (2006)} which are related to the teaching and research processes.\par
The starting point for universities is constructing the institutional profile information according to the GRI 3.1 methodology and to the initial conditions wanted to achieve by the University. In this matter, it is worth mentioning, as established by Velasquez et al. (2005), the higher education institution requires having a committee responsible for the report and the issues related to sustainability, as well as leading defining the sustainability policy for the University.\par
To start the sustainability index reporting process, the sustainability committee of the university needs to make a revision of the FRI 3.1 methodology. The committee also needs to start collecting all the available information that requires for the different environmental indicators. Usually, universities have the consumption data from electricity, water and waste bills. An additional effort needs to be done to establish the information related to the social and economic dimensions, although some of it may be already available, like the financial statements. In a first start, a university can obtain a C grade on its report based on the basic information, counting with a minimum of 10 indicators and at least 1 per dimension.\par
Besides, the main and mostly reported environmental indicators need to be continuously presented. The units of the indicators need to be expressed in the indicators, and a normalization process of the units needs to be explored, using the three reference units established by Thompson \& Creighton (2005) -FTE: number of Full Time Equivalent students, Net Campus Area (number of gross square feet in campus building) and the size of endowment.\par
As for the economic and social dimension, it is recommended that higher education institutions running for the first sustainability report search for the required information necessary for the indicators report presented in Table \hyperref[tab_8]{8}. When a university manages to generate the information required in all the indicators shown in Table \hyperref[tab_8]{8}, the higher institution can run for a report that could be graded with B and that could be upgraded to B+ if the report is externally assured.  
\section[{Global}]{Global} 
\section[{EC-3}]{EC-3}\par
Coverage of the organization's defined benefit plan obligations. 
\section[{EC-4}]{EC-4}\par
Significant financial assistance received from government. 
\section[{EN -1}]{EN -1}\par
Materials used by weight or volume 
\section[{EN -2}]{EN -2}\par
Percentage of materials used that are recycled input materials. 
\section[{EN -3}]{EN -3}\par
Direct energy consumption by primary energy source. 
\section[{EN -4}]{EN -4}\par
Indirect energy consumption by primary source. 
\section[{EN -8}]{EN -8}\par
Total water withdrawal by source. 
\section[{EN -16}]{EN -16}\par
Total direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. 
\section[{EN -17}]{EN -17}\par
Other relevant indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. 
\section[{EN -22}]{EN -22}\par
Total weight of waste by type and disposal method. 
\section[{EN -28}]{EN -28}\par
Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non-monetary sanctions for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations. 
\section[{LA -1}]{LA -1}\par
Total workforce by employment type, employment contract, and region, broken down by gender. 
\section[{LA -2}]{LA -2}\par
Total number and rate of employee turnover by age group, gender, and region. 
\section[{LA -4}]{LA -4}\par
Percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements. 
\section[{LA -7}]{LA -7}\par
Rates of injury, occupational diseases, lost days, and absenteeism, and total number of work-related fatalities, by region and by gender. 
\section[{LA -8}]{LA -8}\par
Education, training, counseling, prevention, and risk-control programs in place to assist workforce members, their families, or community members regarding serious diseases. 
\section[{LA -10}]{LA -10}\par
Average hours of training per year per employee, by gender, and by employee category. 
\section[{LA -12}]{LA -12}\par
Percentage of employees receiving regular performance and career development reviews. 
\section[{LA -13}]{LA -13}\par
Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per employee category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity. 
\section[{LA -14}]{LA -14}\par
Ratio of basic salary and remuneration of women to men by employee category, by significant locations of operation. 
\section[{HR -4}]{HR -4}\par
Total number of incidents of discrimination and corrective actions taken. 
\section[{PR -5}]{PR -5}\par
Practices related to customer satisfaction, including results of surveys measuring customer satisfaction.\begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.11634980988593156\textwidth}P{0.426615969581749\textwidth}P{0.14543726235741444\textwidth}P{0.16159695817490494\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Number of Core\tabcellsep Number of Additional\\
Dimension\tabcellsep Category\tabcellsep Performance\tabcellsep Performance\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Indicators\tabcellsep Indicators\\
Economic\tabcellsep EC -Economic\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 2\\
Environmental\tabcellsep EN -Environmental\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep 13\\
\tabcellsep LA -Labor Practices \& Decent Work\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 5\\
Social\tabcellsep HR -Human Resources\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 2\\
\tabcellsep SO -Society\tabcellsep 8\tabcellsep 2\\
\tabcellsep PR -Product Responsibility\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 5\\
\tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep 55\tabcellsep 29\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_1}:}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{2} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.20777777777777776\textwidth}P{0.35888888888888887\textwidth}P{0.2833333333333333\textwidth}}
Institution\tabcellsep Year of Publication\tabcellsep Number of Pages\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_2}Table 2 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.6035626535626536\textwidth}P{0.009398034398034397\textwidth}P{0.06787469287469287\textwidth}P{0.04385749385749385\textwidth}P{0.1253071253071253\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Institution different higher education institutions, the environmental Year of Publication performance indicators should be normalized if a}\tabcellsep Number of Pages\tabcellsep Reference\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{University of Calgary, Canada comparison between the different institutions is wanted. 2010-2011}\tabcellsep 53\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
ETH, Zúrich, Switzerland\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2009-2010\tabcellsep 54\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
Hogeschool-Universiteit, Belgium\tabcellsep Brussels,\tabcellsep 2011\tabcellsep 89\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
Universidad del Bio-Bio, Chile\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2010\tabcellsep 138\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Industriales, Universidad Politécnica de}\tabcellsep 2009-2010\tabcellsep 77\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
Madrid,Spain\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
UniversidadeFeevale, Brazil\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2011\tabcellsep 107\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
Universidad de Cádiz, Spain\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2010-2011\tabcellsep 53\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
Universität Bayreuth, Germany\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2007-2008\tabcellsep 51\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
Anhanguera Educacional, Brazil\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2011\tabcellsep 102\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
UNED, Spain\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2009-2010\tabcellsep 101\tabcellsep GRI, 2012\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Universidad Tecnológica del Caribe,}\tabcellsep 2009\tabcellsep 117\tabcellsep Unitecnológica, 2009\\
Colombia\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep J\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_4}Table 4 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{5} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
Sustainability Indicators for Universities: Revision for A Colombian Case\\
difference in size, mission, budget and culture of the\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_5}Table 5 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{6} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
Year 2017\\
6\\
I\\
( ) Volume XVII Issue V Version J\\
Journal of Researches in Engineering\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_6}Table 6 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{7} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
J\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_7}Table 7 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{8} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.35233160621761656\textwidth}P{0.3963730569948186\textwidth}P{0.10129533678756476\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep Indicator\tabcellsep Frequency Range\\
\tabcellsep LA -4\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep LA -7\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep LA -10\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep LA -13\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep LA -14\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep EC -3\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep EC -4\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep EN -17\tabcellsep \\
Year 2017\tabcellsep LA -11 LA -12 EN -28 LA -8\tabcellsep 51 -60\%\\
8\tabcellsep HR -4 PR -5\tabcellsep \\
I\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
( ) Volume XVII Issue V Version J\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Journal of Researches in Engineering\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: © 2017 Global Journals Inc. (US)]} 
\caption{\label{tab_8}Table 8 :}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{Sustainability Indicators for Universities: Revision for A Colombian Case © 2017 Global Journals Inc. (US)} 			\footnote{© 2017 Global Journals Inc. (US)} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Hart (2000)]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		\textit{A better view of a sustainable community},  		 			M Hart 		.  		 \url{http://www.sustainablemeasures.com/node/26}  		2000. June 7, 2013.  	 	 (Recovered the) 
\bibitem[Lozano ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		‘A tool for a graphical assessment of sustainability in universities (GASU)’.  		 			R Lozano 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Cleaner Production}  		2006. 14 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Lozano ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		\textit{A tool for easy benchmarking sustainability reports in universities},  		 			R Lozano 		.  		2004.  		 			Environmental Management Sustainable Universities. Monterrey 		 	 
\bibitem[Bauer ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		\textit{Bridging the great divide at UC Berkeley. Environmental management sustainable universities},  		 			L Bauer 		.  		2004. Monterrey.  	 
\bibitem[Constanza ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		\textit{Ecological Economics: The Science of Management of Sustainability},  		 			R Constanza 		.  		1991. New York: Columbia University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Rogers ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		\textit{Educating for tomorrow: campus participation in developing a sustainable program},  		 			C Rogers 		.  		2004.  		 			Environmental Management Sustainable Universities. Monterrey 		 	 
\bibitem[Hussey et al. ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		‘Global Reporting Initiative Guidelines: an evaluation of sustainable development metrics for industry’.  		 			D Hussey 		,  		 			P Kirsop 		,  		 			R Meissen 		.  	 	 		\textit{Environmental Quality Management}  		2001. 11  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Shriberg ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		\textit{Institutional assessment tools for sustainability in higher education: strengths, weaknesses, and implications for practice and theory},  		 			M Shriberg 		.  		2002. Higher Education Policy. 15 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Atkinson ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		‘Measuring corporate sustainability’.  		 			G Atkinson 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Environmental Planning \& Management}  		2000. 43  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Fadeeva ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		‘Promise of sustainable collaboration -potential fulfilled’.  		 			Z Fadeeva 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Cleaner Production}  		2004. 13  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Morhardt et al. ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		‘Scoring corporate environmental and sustainable reports using GRI 2000, ISO 14031 and other Sustainability Indicators for Universities: Revision for A Colombian Case criteria’.  		 			J Morhardt 		,  		 			S Baird 		,  		 			K Freeman 		,  		 			D Newport 		,  		 			T Chesnes 		,  		 			A Lindner 		.  	 	 		\textit{Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management}  		2002. 2003. 9  (4)  p. .  	 	 (International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education) 
\bibitem[Reinhardt ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		\textit{Sustainability and the firm},  		 			F Reinhardt 		.  		2004. Zurich.  		 			University of Zurich 		 	 	 (Working Paper) 
\bibitem[Sustainability Disclosure Database ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		\textit{Sustainability Disclosure Database},  		 \url{http://database.globalreporting.org/search}  		2012.  	 	 (Recovered from the Global Reporting Innitiative) 
\bibitem[Thopson and Creighton ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		‘Sustainability Indicators Working Session. Sustainability Indicators Working Session’.  		 			G Thopson 		,  		 			S Creighton 		.  	 	 		\textit{Yale School of Forestry \& Environmental Studies}  		2005.  	 
\bibitem[Diesendorf et al. ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		\textit{Sustainability: The Corporate Challenge of the 21st Century},  		 			M Diesendorf 		,  		 			D En 		,  		 			J Dunphy 		,  		 			A Benveniste 		,  		 			\& P Griffiths 		,  		 			Sutton 		.  		2000. Sidney: Allen \& Unwin.  	 	 (Sustainability and sustainable development) 
\bibitem[Velázques et al. ()]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		‘Sustainable university: what can be the matter’.  		 			L Velázques 		,  		 			N Muguia 		,  		 			A Platt 		,  		 			J Taddei 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Cleaner Production}  		2006.  (14)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Salzmann et al. ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		‘The business case for corporate sustainability -review of literature and research options’.  		 			O Salzmann 		,  		 			A Ionescu-Somers 		,  		 			U Steger 		.  	 	 		\textit{European Management Journal}  		2003. 23  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Goldin and Winters ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		\textit{The Economics of Sustainable Development},  		 			I Goldin 		,  		 			L Winters 		.  		1995. London: Cambridge University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Adkins et al. ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		\textit{The Feasibility of Sustainability Reporting at Dartmouth College},  		 			R Adkins 		,  		 			R Aledort 		,  		 			R Borowick 		.  		2003. Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College.  	 
\bibitem[Fonseca ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘The state of sustainability reporting at Canadian universities’.  		 			A Fonseca 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education}  		2011. 12  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Lozano ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		‘The state of sustainability reporting in universities’.  		 			R Lozano 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education}  		2011. 12  (1)  p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
