A university¡¯s final score in the overall table is calculated by combining its score in SDG?17 with its top three scores out of the remaining 16?SDGs. SDG?17 accounts for 22?per cent of the overall score, while the other SDGs each carry a weight of 26?per cent. This means that different universities are scored based on a different set of SDGs, depending on their focus.

The score from each SDG is scaled so that the highest score in each SDG in the overall calculation is?100 and the lowest score is?0. This is to adjust for minor differences in the scoring range in each SDG and to ensure that universities are treated equitably, whichever SDGs they have provided data for. It is these scaled scores that we use to determine which SDGs a university has performed most strongly in; they may not be the SDGs in which the university is ranked highest or has scored highest based on unscaled scores.

The individual SDG tables display an institution¡¯s score for that SDG as well as its score in the overall Impact Rankings, if applicable.

View the full methodology for the overall Impact Rankings

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Editor¡¯s note: April 2022

Following the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, we have taken steps to give Russian and Belarusian universities less prominence in the rankings, and have removed links to their university profiles. Our full statement on Ukraine can be found?here.

In addition, the table for SDG?16 (peace, justice and strong institutions) will not display Russian or Belarusian universities.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Editor¡¯s note: June 2022

After the publication of the Impact Rankings 2022, Elsevier advised us that bibliometric data understated the number of publications across a number of SDGs for two institutions: Oklahoma State University and Linnaeus University. In line with our corrections policy, the affected universities¡¯ scores were recalculated.

Four universities originally did not submit enough data for inclusion in the overall ranking, but have now been added after providing the relevant data. The institutions are Czech University of Life Sciences Prague (CZU), UGHE ¨C University of Global Health Equity, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology (Taiwan Tech), and Suranaree University of Technology.

Meanwhile, four other universities submitted incorrect data in the portal: Aalborg University, Monterrey Institute of Technology, University of Stavanger and Ulster University. We have recalculated their scores using the correct data. The changes have not affected their positions in the overall ranking, but they have changed their positions in some SDG tables.

The updated ranks as a result of these corrections are listed in the following table:

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

As per?°Õ±á·¡¡¯²õ rankings correction policy, the amendments made only affect the universities in question. We do not rerun the complete ranking. All other universities maintain their original rank.?

THE?is committed to transparency and accountability across all of its rankings.?Our corrections policy is available to view?here.