Award class badge:1st

University of Worcester

Rank 2. Total Score: 76.7%

In response to a query on the university's apparently very high percentage of grey water use (14.9%), the university responded:

The grey water usage is an estimated figure as we have been having issues with metering,this figure is based on design estimates. Grey water is installed on new build halls of residence. It may be an over estimation but until we have reliable data the university felt the most sensible return would be to use as designed data.

Section 1: Environmental Policy. Score: 100%

An environmental policy provides a formal, public and permanent demonstration of intent regarding performance. It is crucial in ensuring there is sustained, strategic improvement in environmental performance, backed up by senior management and with adequate resources.

Policy, targets and reporting are key drivers of performance improvement across the sector and the People & Planet Green League awards points for those with environmental policies and associated strategies which; set specific and time-bound targets or performance indicators covering all major aspects of environmental management.

Simply complying with environmental legislation is deemed insufficient. Universities are only awarded maximum points in this section if their policy or related action plan or strategy sets SMART targets for improvements in all eight key areas of environmental management.

1. Does University of Worcester have a publicly available environmental (or environmental sustainability) policy published within the last 5 years and reported on annually to a senior level of the university?


Score 50% (out of possible 50%)

2. Is the policy accompanied by an action plan/strategy OR separate policies and accompanying plans which cover the following areas (setting specific, time bound targets for reducing environmental impact)?

  • Construction & Refurbishment
  • Emissions & Discharges
  • Community involvement
  • Biodiversity
  • Waste management
  • Travel and Transport
  • Sustainable procurement
  • Water

Score 50% (out of possible 50%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 2: Human Resources for Sustainability 100%

It has been repeatedly demonstrated that without the expertise and championing of professional staff dedicated to environmental management, sustainability initiatives in universities are unlikely to be systematic, well-coordinated and resourced, or have significant long-term success.

Scores are awarded with recognition that institutions vary in their size, financial resource and approach to human resource management.

People & Planet appreciate that a broad range of staff may take on responsibility for sustainability and that for some universities, taking a holistic approach to embedding sustainability is the best cultural fit.

1 Governance: Is sustainability included within the portfolio of responsibilities of a member of the senior management team at University of Worcester?

Score: 15% (out of a max 15%)

2 Environmental sustainability staff

University of Worcester has more than 500 FTE staff in total. Score 55% (out of possible 55%)

3 Well resourced staff

3a. Does University of Worcester support ongoing staff development of sustainability staff through a framework which allows for the review and provision of training, peer support, life-long learning etc?

Score 10% (max 10%)

3b. Does University of Worcester resource sustainability staff with a budget, appropriate tools and access to shared approaches/ space for networks/partner organisations?

Score 10% (max 10%)

3c. Does the university support a staff engagement scheme to involve staff in improving the environmental performance of the university eg. departmental eco-champions or NUS Green Impact Universities and Colleges?

Score 10% (max 10%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 3: Environmental Auditing & Management Systems. Score: 100%

Only by analysing and regularly auditing its different environmental impacts can an institution set targets, assess priorities and monitor performance improvements.

In recognition of the rigour and accuracy of external environmental management systems, the People & Planet University League awards those universities that have opened themselves up to the external scrutiny of such schemes. In recognition of the incremental nature of accreditation for these schemes, we award points according to progress towards the highest achievable standard in each scheme, as well as taking into account whether or not the standard has been achieved across the majority of the estate and not simply on one campus/department.

University of Worcester is accredited to an external environmental management system.

Score: 100% (max 100%)

Full methodology

Section 4: Ethical Investment. Score 85%

A strong ethical investment policy ensures an institution’s investments and banking practices are conducted transparently and in an economically-viable, socially-responsible manner, not blind to wider social, environmental and humanitarian concerns. Institutions pride themselves on their work combating climate change, whether through their research, teaching and learning or carbon reductions. This ethos can be reflected in an institutions investments. However, investments in the fossil fuel industry or arms trade can be contradictory to an institutions broader sustainability aims and goals.

The latest scientific research shows that in order to stay below a 2c degree rise in global temperatures, 80% of currently known carbon reserves must be left unburnt. UK Universities currently invest £5.2bn into the fossil fuel industry, with many looking to shift their investments into more sustainable industries. Investments in the fossil fuel industry can also be financially unsustainable. Experts including the The World Bank, MPs and our own institutions have warned against the ‘Carbon Bubble’, which could see millions of pounds lost if investments are kept in coal, oil and gas. This is why The People & Planet University League focus’ not only on the transparency of a universities investments, but the areas within which these are held.

Ethical investment policies are not only necessary to direct decision-making around the investment of ‘extraneous funds’. They inform decisions about all areas of investment conducted by an institution, including but not limited to pension fund investments, equities investment and an institution’s choice of banking providers.

If an ethical investment policy isn’t put into practice then it is not worth the paper it’s printed on. The People & Planet University League only awards full points if there is a clear process for regular review of the ethical investment policy, with ongoing opportunities for staff, students and other stakeholders to engage with the policy and if there is clear evidence that the policy has been acted upon within the last year.

University of Worcester does not have funds to invest and was marked as such.

Ethical Investment Policy and Review

1. Does University of Worcester have a robust and publicly available ethical investment policy?

Score for essential criteria: 40% (max 40%) Score for desirable criteria: 5% (max 20%)

2. Has the institution evaluated implementation and progress towards its ethical investment policy objectives in the last financial year?

Score: 20% (max 20%)

3. Are there ongoing opportunities for staff, students and other stakeholders to engage with the ethical investment policy?

Score: 20% (max 20%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 5: Carbon Management. Score 60%

A steep and annual reduction in global carbon emissions is required to avert catastrophic global climate destabilisation. Countries like the UK - with a historical responsibility for creating the majority of emissions - must follow tragets to reduce carbon emissions at every level.

The UK public sector are expected to contribute to the 80% carbon reductions by 2050 enshrined within the Climate Change Act (2008). Within the Climate Change (Scotland) Act (2009), Scotland has set more ambitious medium-term targets of a 42% reduction by 2020.

Carbon management is central to the future of environmental management in universities, as recognised within the Hefce, Universities UK and GuildHE publication, Carbon Reduction Strategy (2010) - which set a sector-wide carbon reduction target. Although this strategy applies only to English institutions, similar requirements are in place for institutions in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales through devolved government and funding council targets.

Short-term targets are crucial to reducing the impact of cumulative emissions and tracking continual reduction to long-term targets.

Institutions should take a holistic approach to carbon management by including the full scope of their emissions in the reduction targets they set themselves. Transport, waste and procurement activities are shown to account for up to 50% of an institution’s carbon footprint. Guidance for how universities can measure, baseline and reduce these (Scope 3) emissions was published in January 2012 (transport,waste and water).

1. Does University of Worcester have a publicly available carbon management plan which meets the Carbon Trust and most current Capital Investment Framework requirements?

Score: 15% (max 15%)

2. Assessment of University of Worcester’s short term carbon reduction targets

Score: 35% (max 35%)

3. Carbon Management - Development Sections

Score: 10% (max 10%)

4. Does the carbon management plan includes a baseline and reduction targets for scope 3 emissions calculated in the following areas:

  • Waste: Score 0% (max 5%)
  • Water: Score 0% (max 5%)
  • Procurement (supply chain):Score 0% (max 5%)
  • Staff and student business trips e.g. flights to conferences and field trips: Score 0% (max 5%)
  • Staff and students commuting to university on a daily basis: Score 0% (max 5%)
  • Carbon emissions associated with the travel between students’ homes and the university at the start and end of term (including international students’ travel to and from their home country): Score 0% (max 5%)

5. Does University of Worcester take part in an externally verified accreditation scheme for Carbon Management? e.g. the Carbon Trust Standard or similar?

Score: 0% (max 10%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 6 Workers Rights. Score 65%

Previously in the People & Planet University League the labour rights criteria came under a section called ethical procurement. This year we have implicitly labelled this section Workers Rights in order to allow us to take a more holistic approach which includes labour rights for:

  • University staff.
  • Farmers and producers of crops in university global supply chains.
  • Workers involved in the manufacturing of goods for universities.

This reflects our belief that workers rights are a core issue in ethical procurement and we have set out to reward best practice across a range of approaches.

1. Is the University accredited by the Living Wage Foundation as a Living Wage employer?

Score: 10% (max 10%)


Fairtrade is about better prices, decent working conditions and fair terms of trade for farmers and workers. Products certified with a Fairtrade Mark means that the Fairtrade ingredients in the product have been produced by small-scale farmer organisations or plantations that meet Fairtrade social, economic and environmental standards.

It is an alternative approach that is based on partnership; one between those who grow our food and those that consume it. Fairtrade is 50% owned by producers. Fairtrade is a global movement with a strong and active presence in the UK, represented by the Fairtrade Foundation.

The Fairtrade Foundation is an independent non-profit organisation that licenses use of the FAIRTRADE Mark on products in the UK in accordance with internationally agreed Fairtrade standards.

People & Planet recognise the importance of an independent and external verification process. We do not agree that schemes funded by corporations are able to provide this.

2a.Is University of Worcester a Fairtrade University, accredited by the Fairtrade Foundation?

Score: 15% (max 15%)

2b. Are University Staff Uniforms made with Fairtrade Cotton?

Score: 10% (max 10%)


3. Is University of Worcester committed to only procure through suppliers that uphold International Labour Standards and Codes of Conduct?

Score: 10% (max 10%)

Monitoring the university supply chain

Across the global south workers are collectively struggling for better conditions and pay. Frequently these workers face violations of their human rights.

It is impossible for any given university to know with certainty that all factories are complying with labour standards. As with any impact area of sustainability, a university should scope, map or measure the university supply chain as a baseline.

4. Is University of Worcester mapping the supply chains of key industry areas (currently supplying the university) that are known to be high-risk industries for global workers and their human rights?

Score: 20% (max 20%)

Working in partnership to combat sweatshops

5. Is University of Worcester working with an NGO credible to the labour rights community to assess supplier compliance of labour rights standards, combat sweatshops in the university supply chain and support workers in setting up and maintaining systems which allow them to monitor and investigate working conditions in university supply chain manufacturing locations?

  • University is affiliated to the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) or similar organisation credible to the labour rights community in the garments industry

  • University is affiliated to Electronics Watch or similar organisation credible to the labour rights community in the electronics industry.

Score: 0% (max 35%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 7: Sustainable Food 75%

The food we consume accounts for around 30% of the UK’s carbon footprint according to Sustain, WWF and the Food Climate Research Network. Universities have a significant role to play in the food chain both as procurers and providers of food to over 2 million students each year.

People & Planet believes education institutions have a responsibility to address the sustainability and carbon intensity of their food supply chains, whether it is provided internally or through contractors. Universities are also key to shaping behaviour change in the choices we make regarding our attitude to food; the sector could become an example of best practice within the UK.

Sustainable Food Policy

1. Does University of Worcester have a publicly-available sustainable food policy (or a Sustainable Procurement Policy which integrates sustainability criteria for food) which sets specific timebound targets for improvements and is reported on annually at a senior level of the university?

Score: 20% (max 20%)

2. Do tender specification documents for university food suppliers or catering contractors include the requirement for service and supply standards to be met and delivered, as outlined within the university sustainable food policy?

Score: 10% (max 10%)

Sustainable Food Framework

3. Has the university implemented a comprehensive framework for continual improvement in sustainable food and catering that is regularly audited and verified by an external organisation credible to the sustainable food standards movement and stakeholder bodies?

University of Worcester has done this and was assessed on the following:

  • the proportion of university catering outlets covered by the framework and auditing process, as of 1 September 2014 .

  • the level of progress made against the framework as of 1 September 2014.

Score: 15% (max 40%)

Sustainable Food Actions

4. Has University of Worcester achieved 3 or more of the following sustainable food actions?

  • 4a. Does the university ensure that on an ongoing basis all whole/liquid/dried eggs are purchased from a free-range production system and any products purchased containing egg state that the eggs are from a free-range production system?
  • 4b. Are all university catering outlets certified to Marine Stewardship Council standards?
  • 4c. Do all food offers/menus change with the availability of seasonal produce with at least 2 (major) items per main dish served in the season it is naturally abundant?
  • 4d. Does the institution use 100% Red Tractor Assured meat & dairy products and/or follow Feel Good Food Days guidance on meat/dairy portions and/or hold at least one meatfree day each week?
  • 4e. Does the university use local food on university menus and / or campus to kitchen food projects?
  • 4f. Does the university provide free drinking water provisions for all staff, students and visitors to the university?

Score: 15% (max 15%)

Community Food

5. Does the university provide space and / or other support for student / staff-led sustainable food projects

Score: 15% (max 15%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 8: Staff and Student Engagement. Score 100%

Whilst universities are directly responsible for many environmental impacts through their operations, the university community also contributes significantly to its overall environmental impact through its behaviour - for example, consumption of electricity or travel habits.

Universities that play an active role in encouraging and engaging students and staff in sustainable behaviour change will be able to make continual improvements in holistic sustainable development more smoothly, cheaply and quickly.

Engagement can have a wider and more significant impact when behaviour and values experienced by staff, students and visitors to the university begin or embed long-lasting change throughout a persons life.

1. Engagement Strategy

University of Worcester is committed to student and staff engagement for sustainability through the development of a strategy or several strategies that include SMART targets and commit resources to continual improvement in this area.

The following was considered:

1.University’s strategy for progress in student and staff engagement for sustainability.

  1. All staff inductions cover university sustainability policy, issues and areas for staff engagement.

  2. Invitations extended to recognised trade union environment reps (eg. GreenReps) or engagement with trade unions on sustainability issues

  3. Student representation on all university committees concerned with estates, planning, finance and resource allocation.

  4. Is the Students’ Union or Students’ Association associated to the institution working toward continual improvement for environmental sustainability by mapping, auditing and tracking annual progress of its impact areas?

    The Students’ Union or Students’ Association associated to the institution has achieved a Bronze, Silver, Gold or Green Impact Excellence Award in this year’s Green Impact Union Awards or similar scheme.

Score:65% (max 65%)

Staff induction

2. All staff inductions cover university sustainability policy, issues and areas for staff engagement.

Score: 15% (max 15%)

Trade Union

3. Invitations extended to recognised trade union environment reps (eg. GreenReps) or engagement with trade unions on sustainability issues

Score: 10% (max 10%)

Student representation

4. Student representation on all university committees concerned with estates, planning, finance and resource allocation.

Score: 5% (max 5%)

Students’ Union

5a. Is the Students’ Union or Students’ Association associated to the institution working toward continual improvement for environmental sustainability by mapping, auditing and tracking annual progress of its impact areas?

5b. The Students’ Union or Students’ Association associated to the institution has achieved a Bronze, Silver, Gold or Green Impact Excellence Award in this year’s Green Impact Union Awards or similar scheme.

Score: 5% (max 5%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 9: Education for Sustainable Developmenti (ESD). Score 100%

What is meant by education for sustainable development?

“There is increasing recognition that these three factors [economic, social and environmental] are interconnected, overlapping and interdependent. Drawing on both the 1987definition and its 2005 recalibration, the present guidance defines education for sustainable development as follows: Education for sustainable development is the process of equipping students with the knowledge and understanding, skills and attributes needed to work and live in a way that safeguards environmental, social and economic wellbeing, both in the present and for future generations.”

The United Nations World Summit, 2005

Education for sustainable development means working with students to encourage them to:

  • Consider what the concept of global citizenship means in the context of their own discipline and in their future professional and personal lives.

  • Consider what the concept of environmental stewardship means in the context of their own discipline and in their future professional and personal lives.

  • Think about issues of social justice, ethics and wellbeing, and how these relate to ecological and economic factors.

  • Develop a future- facing outlook.

  • Learning to think about the consequences of actions, and how systems and societies can be adapted to ensure sustainable futures.

What do the students think of education for sustainable development?

A study carried out by the National Union of Students (NUS), the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and change Agents UK showed that:

  • Over two thirds of students surveyed believe that sustainable development should be covered in their degree courses (surveyed in 2010, 2011 and 2012).
  • 80per cent of third year students (2,657 respondents) see universities as key actors in the delivery of skills for sustainable development.

2014 marks the 10th and final year of the UN Decade for Education for Sustainable Development.

Education for Sustainable Development is crucial for a society able to understand and tackle interlinked social and environmental problems. The university sector could and should be a major contributor to society’s efforts to make the transition to a low-carbon socially just economy - through the skills and knowledge that its graduates learn and put into practice.

A number of universities have been pioneering ways to promote Education for Sustainable Development throughout the curriculum, in subjects as diverse as engineering, history, art and music.

Recognising that there are a number of different but equally valid ways to promote Education for Sustainable Development, People & Planet refer to the latest guidance for best practice ESD to evaluate university evidence, including:

  • Quality Assurance Agency for HE and Higher Education Academy Guidance for ESD.
  • The Future Fit Framework (Prof. Stephen Sterling, and HEA).
  • UNESCO publications (Prof. Daniella Tilbury) and UNESCO wesbite.

1. Commitment and governance for Education for Sustainable Development

University of Worcester demonstrates commitment to education for sustainable development through one of the following:

  • 1a. Education for Sustainable Development is included within the portfolio of responsibilities of a member of the university senior management team

  • 1b. University Strategic Plan commits to developing and promoting Education for Sustainable Development

  • 1c. The university Teaching and Learning Strategy includes a commitment to Education for Sustainable Development

  • 1d. The university environmental/sustainability policy commits to the development and promotion of Education for Sustainable Development through the curriculum

Score: 25% (max 25%)

2.Implementing and tracking progress in Education for Sustainable Development

Based on assessing one of the following:

  • 2a. The university has developed a framework or strategy for ESD which includes the following:

    • The university has mapped ESD impact and activity areas across teaching and learning operations.
    • The university has identified a mechanism for measuring and reporting on ESD which includes ‘input’ and ‘output’ indicators;
    • The university is networking and sharing best practice in a self-defined community, e.g. EAUC and HEA Sustainability Higher Education Developers (SHED).
    • The university has developed an ESD strategy/road-map and uses a framework to track progress and performance against an aspirational mission or vision e.g. LiFE index or EMS or T&L framework.
    • The university supports student and staff engagement in ESD development.
  • 2b. The university has a mechanism for reviewing and reporting on progress of the integration of Education for Sustainable Development into the curriculum.

Score: 30% (max 30%)

Supporting Academic Staff

3. The university makes available support AND training to help all academic staff integrate Education for Sustainable Development into the curriculum.

Scores are awarded for universities that demonstrated action and supplied evidence for at least 3 of the following areas:

  • a. Creating spaces for dialogue, collaboration and participation around ESD. (events, facilitated discussions, networking opportunities -open space / world cafe - working groups, academic talks or seminars)
  • b. Provision of training in ESD.
  • c. Inviting trade union representatives to participate in the development of ESD.
  • d. Monitoring the uptake of staff training and development for ESD with resources for continual improvement.
  • e. Allocating a number of Continuing Professional Development hours in ESD for academic staff.
  • f. Supporting the development of resources for ESD.

Score: 25% (max 25%)

4. Education for Sustainable Development Actions

Scores are awarded for universities that demonstrated action and supplied evidence for 2 of the following areas:

  • 4a. Coursework linked to sustainability projects within the university/estates department (10%)

  • 4b. The university supports and highlights School, Faculty or Research team projects for Education for Sustainable Development (10%)

  • 4c. Other: In the last academic year (2013/14) the university has undertaken action on Education for Sustainable Development that has not been identified by this section of the criteria (10%)

Score: 20% (max 20%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 10: Key Sustainability Impacts. Score 100%.

The aim of this section was to highlight a range of key sustainability impacts and action areas, as identified by the UK HE sector. However, responses proved so diverse and particular that a scored comparison was not possible. All universities were scored at 100%. This accounts for 6% of the grand total.

Score: 100%

Back to top of page

Section 11: Performance: Energy Sources. Score 38%

This and all the performance sections following are based on data from the Estates Management Record (EMR), specifically the Green Stats data which is made publicly available online by the Higher Education Statistics Agency, HESA. Developments on these criteria arose from discussions with the People & Planet University League Oversight Group, Jan-May 2014. In addition, universities represented by AUDE recommended that more indicators be taken from the 2014 EMR.

1. Whether a university has onsite Combined Heat and Power (CHP).

University of Worcester has 0.00 kWh energy generated by CHP.

Score: 0% (max 45%)

2. Percentage of renewable energy generated onsite or off site compared to consumption of grid electricity.

University of Worcester generates renewable electricity that is equivalent to 0.75% of the grid electricity it consumes.

Score: 18% (max 35%)

Total percentage of renewable energy purchased through green tariffs

University of Worcester buys 100.00% of its grid electricity through green tariffs.

Score: 20% (max 20%)

Back to top of page

Section 12: Performance: Waste & Recycling. Score 63%

1. Recycling and reusing

The percentage waste recycled, composted or anaerobically digested, (excluding construction waste classified as “other” in the EMR) at University of Worcester is 50.04%

Score: 25% (max 50%)

2. Waste mass per head

Waste mass equates to the total waste generated, including wastes that are classified as recycling. Reducing the total waste a university produces is imperative to the aim of reduction in associated carbon emissions and the impacts of resource management when whole-life-cycle costs are factored.

Waste mass also excludes construction waste, however, other sections of the methodology include questions around the commitment, action and performance of reducing construction and refurbishment waste.

‘Per head’ Staff and student numbers are calculated as Full Time Equivalents (FTE). This is a standard method used by universities to factor in part time study and work. Students and staff employed by research are also included in our calculation.

The FTE total is taken as the sum of student, research and staff FTE.

University of Worcester generates 66.140 kg waste per FTE.

Score: 38% (max 50%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page

Section 13: Performance: Carbon Reduction. Score 40%

Carbon emissions are critical to avoiding run-away climate change and relate directly to global absolute limits. As well as monitoring institutions’ carbon management plans and targets the People & Planet University League aims to track actual performance in reducing emissions. This criteria recognises those institutions whose ‘low-carbon transition pathway’ indicate they are delivering carbon reductions in line with the sector-wide cuts required. As in previous years, the People & Planet University League awards scores according to how closely an institution’s actual carbon reductions are to the linear trajectory that an institution would need to take to reduce emissions by 43% by 2020, from a 2005 baseline.

The allocation of scores for this section is based on two different measurements of carbon emissions using data from the latest Estates Management Record (EMR): We compare the change in carbon (CO2e) intensity at the same institution over the previous year, and the total emissions reductions against the 2005 baseline.

Both parts to this criteria use Scope 1 and 2 total CO2e emissions from the EMR data. This excludes significant other indirect emissions, for example from procurement, travel or flying.

Accommodation is often a large part of an institution’s total emissions, and only university-run accommodation emissions are reported on. This is included in the emissions calculations below. Universities asked us to also publish their emissions directly from accommodation, to give readers a fuller picture. University of Worcester’s emissions from accommodation are 1,625,939 kg CO2e.

1. Yearly reduction of Carbon intensity

We calculated Intensity = {Percent of Sector Emissions} ÷ {Percent of Sector Activities} for this year’s data and divided by last year’s, and expressed this as a % change.

By using this relative, change-based metric that compares an institution’s progress against itself we are able to compare a wide range of institutions, from research-intensive to teaching-only institutions. It also allows an institution to expand without penalty, as long as the expansion does not negatively affect the institution’s carbon intensity. People & Planet hopes that this will encourage institutions to always take the lowest-carbon path for new developments

University of Worcester’s Carbon intensity change (negative is good): -10.01%.

Score: 40% (max 50%)

2. Institutional carbon emissions reductions compared to sector-wide carbon reduction targets from 2005 baseline.

The EMR data is from 2012-2013, so we’re comparing against 2012, i.e. year 7 since 2005. The carbon reduction that HEIs should have achieved by 2012 (based on the Universities UK, GuildHE and HEFCE sector targets) was calculated as (43% by 2020) ÷ (15 years) × ( years) = 20.07%. Universities are now able to provide updated 2005 carbon baselines as part of their EMR return.

University of Worcester’s carbon reduction since 2005 (positive is good): -30.40%.

Score: 0% (max 50%)

Full methodology

Section 14: Performance: Water Reduction. Score: 83%

1. Water consumption per head

Per head staff and student numbers are calculated as Full Time Equivalents (FTE). This is a standard method used by universities to factor in part time study and work. Students and staff employed by research are also included in our calculation.

University of Worcester’s water consumption per head is: 4.68 cubic m/FTE.

Score: 50% (max 67%)

2. Grey or rain water used

University of Worcester’s use of grey or rain water accounts for 14.893% of its total water consumption.

Score: 33% (max 33%)

Full methodology

Back to top of page