Assessment of Sustainability Knowledge and Attitudes Among Undergraduate Students in Penang Island

Abstract

Introduction

To date, many universities worldwide have implemented a variety of sustainability initiatives aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Chankseliani & McCowan, 2021). These actions have been fostered and legitimized by erratic changes in climate across the globe, which in turn, have strengthened awareness of the importance of sustainability among students, specifically in higher education. Awareness of sustainability is mostly measured by studying students' knowledge, behavior, and attitudes and how these measures are interrelated and connected (Alsaati et al., 2020; Syed Azhar et al., 2022).

This Perspective addresses the relationship between knowledge and attitude toward sustainability among undergraduate students at the Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) main campus in Penang. Knowledge is defined as “the fact or condition of being aware of something” as well as “the range of one's information or their understanding,” while attitudes are “a mental position, feeling or emotion with regard to a fact or state.” The discussion as presented may be of interest to policy makers, educators, and other stakeholders who are working to promote sustainable practices and behaviors.

Research Methods and Materials

Between June 2020 and March 2021, full-time undergraduate students enrolled at the USM main campus were randomly chosen and divided into two disciplinary clusters: Sciences Students (SS) and Non-Sciences Students (NSS). The respondents were between the ages of 18 and 35. The survey was conducted in English given the diversity of language backgrounds among undergraduate students at USM. There were 537 responses, with 4.46 percent failing to meet the study's eligibility requirements. A total of 513 valid replies (SS=238, NSS=275) were gathered, which was greater than the minimum targeted response of 375.

Study Instrument

The questionnaire, the study's principal tool, was designed to accommodate a range of student levels and study programs and thus includes a broad range of questions on sustainability and SDGs. Some of the questions were adapted from various published sustainability survey sources, such as the Mediterranean youth's responses toward sustainable development and the current crisis (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2015), Western Michigan University Student Sustainability Survey (Western Michigan University, 2018), and the Ohio State University Campus Sustainability Survey (Walpol et al., 2018). Other questions were created by the authors based on information retrieved from the USM Policy on Sustainability 2014 (Centre for Global Sustainability Studies, 2014) and the USM-APEX Sustainability Roadmap: Aspiring to Meet Global Challenges (Centre for Global Sustainability Studies, 2009).

The questionnaire is comprised of 60 closed-ended questions and is divided into four sections: the demographic profile, general sustainability knowledge, attitudes toward sustainability, and perceptions of USM's existing sustainability activities. For the purposes of this Perspective, the focus is on the sections related to students' knowledge of sustainability and attitudes toward sustainability. This aspect of the study is related to 14 items on knowledge and seven items on attitude. Each item was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 is strongly disagree; 2 is disagree; 3 is uncertain; 4 is agree; and 5 is strongly agree.

Results and Discussion

Respondents Demographic Profile

Table 1 shows the demographic profile of the respondents. Of the 513 respondents, 78.4 percent are female and 21.6 percent male. Male to female ratios is disproportional in most Malaysian public universities (Tienxhi, 2017).

Table 1.

Respondents' Demographic Profile

Item	Sample No.	Percent (%)
Total no. of respondents	513	100
Gender
Male	111	21.6
Female	402	78.4
Age
under 20 years old	27	5.3
20-25 years old	467	91.0
26-30 years old	12	2.3
31-35 years old	7	1.4
Nationality
Malaysian	488	95.1
Other	25	4.9
Cluster
Sciences	238	46.4
Non-Sciences	275	53.6
Resident
Off Campus	224	43.7
On Campus	289	56.3

Table 2 shows respondents' knowledge of basic information about sustainability: 87.7 percent of the respondents said they are familiar with the term sustainability while 12.3 percent said they are not; 66.9 percent said they are aware of USM policy on sustainability and 33.1 percent said they are not; 71.5 percent said they are aware of sustainability-related programs on campus and 28.5 percent said they are not. Overall, respondents' basic sustainability knowledge is very good, demonstrating a high level of familiarity and awareness of sustainability and its programs on campus. These results are similar to the findings of Ariffin & Ng (2020), which show that youths in Penang have a well-developed knowledge of sustainable development.

Table 2.

Respondents' Basic Information on Sustainability

Item	Percentage (%)
Familiar with the term Sustainability
Yes	87.7
No	12.3
Aware of USM policy of sustainability
Yes	66.9
No	33.1
Aware of sustainability-related programs on campus
Yes	71.5
No	28.5

In order to determine how respondents acquire sustainability information students were asked to provide information on their source of sustainability information (Figure 1). Respondents were given the option of selecting multiple sources, and the data was then generated and analyzed in Excel using pivot tables.

Figure 1.

Source of information on sustainability on campus

Most of the respondents who are aware of sustainability-related programs on campus obtain this information from social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. (78 percent). This is in line with Ahamad and Ariffin (2018) who conclude that in today's world, social media is quite significant. Social media communication is inexpensive, easily accessible on the Internet, and has become even easier to use via smartphone apps (Lin et al., 2020). As a result, social media has emerged as the most popular channel for facilitating quick and effective communication as well as broadcasting information and news to a larger audience (Von Nordheim et al., 2018).

At 65 percent, the category Family, Friends, and Lecturers plays a significant role in communicating sustainability information. According to 59 percent of respondents, the university website is a useful place to learn about sustainability programs on campus. The Others category, which is comprised of campus student clubs and associations, nongovernmental youth organizations, and campaigns, appears to be the least important source, accounting for 2.0 percent of total contributions.

Table 3 shows the respondents' familiarity toward specific sustainability issues and challenges. Most students indicated that they are somewhat familiar with the listed sustainability issues. Only a few of the respondents said they are not familiar with the sustainability issues listed.

Table 3.

Respondents' Familiarity Toward Sustainability Issues and Challenges

Item	I don't Know (%)	A little (%)	Well versed (%)
Water cycle in nature	5	47	47
Adaptation to climate change	5	48	48
Non-Conventional water resources	9	60	31
Depletion of natural resources	9	50	41
Biodiversity	8	43	50
Alternative energy resources	5	47	48
Waste management	7	44	49
Gender issues	9	44	47
Marine litter	10	47	43
Sustainable management of protected areas	14	56	30
Public participation in decision making on sustainable development issues	17	54	29
Integrated water resources management	22	55	23
Principles of sustainable development	17	51	32
Environmental refugees	19	58	23
Major pollutants	4	44	51
Land erosion	8	46	46
Human rights	7	46	48
Cultural diversity	8	44	48
Sustainable production	9	53	38
Eutrophication of aquatic systems	24	47	29

As indicated in Table 3, less than 5 percent of the respondents are unfamiliar with all 20 of the listed sustainability issues and challenges. However, most respondents are unfamiliar with six of the listed issues: protected areas; public participation in decision making on sustainable development issues; integrated water resources management; principles of sustainable development; environmental refugees; and eutrophication of aquatic systems. Among these six issues, the only two items with a response rate greater than 20 percent are eutrophication of aquatic systems (24% responded “I don't know”) and integrated water resources management (22% responded “I don't know”). Respondents also are unfamiliar with environmental refugees, principles of sustainable development, public participation in decision making on sustainable development issues, and sustainable management of protected areas (14% to 19% responded “I don't know”).

The survey found that most of the respondents are well-versed in the topic of major pollutants (51% responded “well-versed”) and biodiversity (50% responded “well-versed”), but least well-versed in integrated water resources management and environmental refugees (only 23% responded “well-versed” on both items).

In summary, Table 3 indicates that USM undergraduates in general have at least some degree of familiarity with sustainability issues and challenges and that some sustainability topics are less understood than others. It is interesting to note that fewer than 10 percent of USM undergraduates stated that they do not know anything about the sustainability topics.

Sustainability Knowledge

The United Nations (2018) defines sustainability literacy as the knowledge, skills, and mindsets that allow individuals to become deeply committed to building a sustainable future and assisting in making informed and effective decisions. According to Shephard (2008), the cognitive and affective domains of students' learning are the primary means through which they acquire their knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding sustainability. He argues that knowledge is associated more with cognitive learning while values, attitudes, and behaviors are associated more with the affective domain. The ability of students to recognize concepts and patterns of behavior that are relevant to issues of sustainability and the environment, as well as potential solutions to those issues, is an indication of the depth of their understanding of sustainable development and the environment (Laroche et al., 2001).

In this section of the survey, 14 items were used to assess respondents' sustainability knowledge. The respondents' knowledge of sustainability on campus was assessed using an interpretive scale (1-5), with a mean of between 1.00 and 2.33 indicating low, 2.34 and 3.66 indicating moderate, and 3.67 and 5.00 indicating high (Jannah et al., 2013). In terms of respondents' knowledge, the findings of the mean analysis show that students' knowledge of sustainability on campus is moderate, with an overall mean value of 3.53 (Table 4).

Table 4.

Respondents' Knowledge of Sustainability on Campus

Item	Mean	SD	Interpretation
^*1. USM is the top 50 world rank in UI Green Metric Sustainability World Ranking in 2019.	2.22	0.93	Low
2. Sustainability includes environment, economy, and social pillars.	4.19	0.85	High
^*3. Sustainability is defined as ensuring the world is free from any environmental issues	2.27	1.06	Low
4. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), adopted by all United Nations member states in 2015, provides a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future.	3.89	0.92	High
^*5. There are 18 Sustainable Development Goals in the 2030 Agenda.	2.84	1.19	Moderate
^*6. Gender equality is not one of the goals in SDGs.	3.31	1.27	Moderate
7. Orange-colored recycle bins are for plastics and aluminum cans.	4.01	1.12	High
^*8. Brown recycling bins should be use for recycling papers.	3.61	1.41	Moderate
^*9. Pizza boxes should be discarded in the blue recycle bin.	2.29	1.24	Low
10. Ozone forms a protective layer in the Earth's upper atmosphere and protects us from harmful UV rays.	4.31	0.90	High
11. Global warming affects excess ice melts in polar regions.	4.43	0.87	High
12. Overexploitation of natural resources causes a serious threat to the health of ecosystems and the welfare of future generations.	4.35	0.87	High
^*13. There is no point in individuals getting involved in efforts that address environmental issues since governments and industries have all the power and they do whatever they want.	3.63	1.34	Moderate
14. Sustainable development is not yet fully understood by the wider public.	4.11	0.97	High

Indicates statements that were purposely written as negative/false statements.

Table 4 shows that USM students' knowledge on sustainability on campus is high on seven out of the 14 items. Knowledge on global warming (item 11) was highest with a mean of 4.43, followed by knowledge about overexploitation of natural resources (item 12), ozone layers and harmful UV rays (item 10), the three sustainability pillars (item 2), the issue of public awareness of sustainable development (item 14), the purpose of orange-colored recycling bins (item 7), and the Sustainable Development Goals (item 4) with means of 4.35, 4.31, 4.19, 4.11, 4.01, and 3.89 respectively.

The authors purposely asked negative/false statements (items 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 13) to test the knowledge of the respondents. The low response for items 1, 3, and 9 indicates that respondents do not not agree with the statement, as it is a false statement and not correct. However moderate knowledge is seen for items 5, 6, 8, and 13.

These results indicate that the sustainability knowledge of USM students is quite high despite the mean analysis showing that the students' knowledge of sustainability on campus is at a moderate level. This result is consistent with results from Radwan and Khalil (2021), and Sousa, et al., (2021).

Gender

Sustainability knowledge was normally distributed for both males and females, with skewness of 0.17 for males and skewness of 0.14 for the females. An independent samples t test showed no significant difference between male (M=3.55, SD=0.40) and female students (M=3.53, SD=0.41; t (511)=0.62, p=0.54, two-tailed). Mojilis (2019) has similar findings. It's worth noting, however, that male students had a slightly higher mean score than female students. The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference=0.03, 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.11) was very large (eta squared=0.41). Expressed as a percentage, 41 percent of the variance in sustainability knowledge is explained by gender.

Disciplinary Clusters

Sustainability knowledge was normally distributed for both disciplinary clusters SS and NSS, with skewness of 0.08 for the SS and 0.26 for the NSS. Hence, an independent samples t test to compare the SS and NSS scores found a statistically significant difference in scores for SS (M=3.65, SD=0.39) and NSS (M=3.44, SD=0.40; t (511)=6.02, p=0.000, two-tailed). The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference=0.21, 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.28) was very large (eta squared=0.39) indicating that 39 percent of the variance in sustainability knowledge can be explained by disciplinary clusters.

Residency

On-campus and off-campus residency was approximately normally distributed for sustainability knowledge, with skewness of 0.107 for students living on campus and skewness of 0.190 for those living off campus. An independent samples t test showed no significant difference in scores for on-campus students (M=3.56, SD=0.41) and off-campus students (M=3.50, SD=0.41; t (511)=1.45, p=0.15, two-tailed). On-campus students had a slightly higher mean score than off-campus students. The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference=0.05, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.12) was medium (eta squared=0.41). Expressed as a percentage, 41 percent of the variance in sustainability knowledge can be explained by residential type. These results, like those of Mojilis (2019) show no significant difference in sustainability awareness based on residential type.

Students' Attitude Toward Sustainability on Campus

Specific attitudes are used to represent sustainability values. In psychology, an attitude is defined as “a set of emotions, beliefs, and behaviors toward a particular object, person, thing, or event” (Cherry, 2018). Attitudes are formed as a result of our experiences, and they can have a significant impact on our behavior. Because attitudes can change (Cherry, 2018), they may be related to the level of sustainability knowledge and experience of students. As students are exposed to sustainability concepts, they can develop new attitudes and as a result may even participate in protecting the planet and life on Earth.

Seven items were used to assess respondents' views toward sustainability on campus using an interpretives scale—a mean between 1.00 and 2.33 indicates low, between 2.34 and 3.66 indicates moderate, and between 3.67 and 5.00 indicates high (Jannah et al., 2013). Recent studies (Arrifin & Ng, 2020; Wee et al., 2017) identify a similar strategy for interpreting the Likert scale using averaging scoring. The mean analysis shows that students' attitudes toward sustainability on campus were moderate, with a mean value of 3.63.

Based on the findings, we can assume that USM students understand how to properly dispose of rubbish and recyclables on campus as this positive attitude has a high mean value (3.81) and is the highest mean value in respondents' attitude toward sustainability on campus. Table 5 shows a summary of these findings.

Table 5.

Respondents' Attitude Toward Sustainability on Campus

Item	Mean	SD	Interpretation
1. When deciding to come to USM, I was influenced by the university's sustainability programs and initiatives.	3.28	1.11	Moderate
2. I know how to properly dispose of my waste and recyclables on campus.	3.81	0.94	High
3. I can personally influence sustainability on campus.	3.70	0.97	High
4. I am aware of the sustainability resources around my community.	3.78	0.95	High
5. I am aware of various sustainability initiatives on campus.	3.77	0.97	High
6. USM leadership promotes my engagement in sustainability efforts on campus.	3.68	0.95	High
7. I am involved in leadership activities and/or student organizations involving sustainability.	3.41	1.13	Moderate

Overall, items shown in Table 5 indicate that USM undergraduates have a positive attitude toward campus sustainability. Balakrishnan et. al., (2020), whose research includes undergraduates from five Malaysian universities, also indicate that Malaysian undergraduates have positive attitudes toward sustainable development attributable to active efforts to include sustainability at Malaysian higher education institutions. The findings of this study as well as Balakrishnan et al. (2020) contradict those of Zainordin et al. (2017) whose study suggests that Malaysian undergraduates have a low level of understanding of sustainable development (SD) due to a lack of exposure and attention to SD. We believe that as a result of recent progress in the awareness of sustainability and sustainable development among Malaysian university students, the level of awareness has increased since the Zainordin study.

Gender

The gender difference in attitudes toward sustainability on campus was normally distributed for both males and females, with skewness of -0.86 for males and skewness of -0.68 for females. An independent samples t test was used to compare these scores for male and female students. Findings show there was no significant difference in these scores—male students (M=3.56, SD=0.82) and female students (M=3.65, SD=0.74; t (511)=-1.20, p=0.23, two-tailed). However, the mean score for female students was slightly higher than male students. The magnitude of the differences in the means in this present study (mean difference=-0.10, 95% CI: -0.26 to 0.06) was very large (eta squared=0.76), indicating that 76% of the variance in “Attitudes Towards Sustainability on Campus” is explained by gender. Similarly, Mojilis (2019) found no significant difference in gender. In contrast, Jannah et al., (2013) shows females have a higher level of environmental attitude compared to males.

Disciplinary Clusters

Data for both SS and NSS students show normal distribution in the attitudes toward sustainability on campus, with skewness of -0.07 for SS students and skewness of -0.82 for NSS students . An independent samples t test compared the SS and NSS scores and showed no significant difference—SS (M=3.59, SD=0.76) and NSS (M=3.68, SD=0.75; t (511)=-1.34, p=0.18, two-tailed). The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference=-0.09, 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.04) was very large (eta squared=0.76), indicating that 75.56 percent of the variance in attitudes toward sustainability on campus can be explained by disciplinary clusters. Note that NSS shows a greater mean score in attitude compared to SS, contrary to the findings of Afroz and Ilham (2020). Findings from Biasutti and Frate (2017) indicates that level of sustainability attitude depends on student academic background.

Residency

Student attitudes toward sustainability on campus is normally distributed for both students who live on campus and off campus, with skewness of -0.78 for the on campus and skewness of -0.84 for off campus. An independent samples t test conducted to compare these scores show a significant difference in scores—on campus students (M=3.71, SD=0.80) and off campus students (M=3.54, SD=0.68; t (506)=2.59, p=0.01, two-tailed). This differential suggests that students who live on campus have more exposure to sustainability issues and awareness and hence show a higher positive attitude toward sustainability on campus. The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference=0.17, 95% CI: between 0.04 and 0.30) was very large (eta squared=0.75). Expressed as a percentage, 75.26 percent of the variance in the attitudes toward sustainability on campus may be explained by residential type. These findings contrast with a study by Mojilis (2019) observing no significant difference in sustainability awareness by residential type.

Relationship Between Students' Knowledge and Attitude Toward Sustainability on Campus

The relationship between sustainability knowledge and attitudes toward sustainability on campus was investigated using the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. Preliminary analyses were performed to ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity. The rating for student knowledge and attitudes toward sustainability on campus was M=3.53, SD=0.41, and M=3.63, SD=0.76, respectively. Findings show there is no relationship at all between the two variables and they were statistically not significant (r=.003, n=513, p>0.05). Hence, the findings indicate that students' knowledge does not affect or impact their attitude in any way.

Conclusion

As a university that embeds sustainability across the whole institution, understanding and embracing elements of sustainability are given great emphasis not only in its governance and research, but in teaching and learning, too. It is the vision of the university to be able to produce graduates who will not only become ambassadors of sustainability but will also practice sustainability in their daily lives. Students are introduced to sustainability concepts through various classroom assignments, projects, activities, and community programs. In assessing students' understanding of sustainability elements, this study was conducted to examine their knowledge of sustainability concepts, and their attitudes toward sustainability practices on campus.

The findings demonstrate that although students' positive attitudes toward sustainability on campus ranged from moderate to high, their level of sustainability knowledge ranged from low to high. This suggests the need for more hands-on opportunities for students to engage with sustainability initiatives. The research also indicates that the relationship between the two variables (knowledge and attitude) are not statistically significant, suggesting that students' knowledge has no bearing or influence on their attitudes. Despite the exploratory character of the survey, the results can be used as a springboard for understanding how sustainability agendas affect campus activities and the degree to which they determine students' acceptance of sustainability concepts. The results of this study may also be used as a baseline for policy makers in sustainability education and outreach, helping to ensure that future generations are equipped with the knowledge and skills they need to create a sustainable future for all.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support received from Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) Short Term Grant (code no. 304/PCGSS/6315279), entitled A Study on USM's Sustainability Awareness Level Among Undergraduate Students. This study has been approved by The Human Research Ethics Committee of USM (JEPeM) under study protocol code no. USM/JEPeM/19030206. The authors wish to thank representatives from the Students Development Affairs and Alumni Division (BHEPA), USM undergraduate students, and pertinent stakeholders for their time, input sharing, and their collaboration in completing this study. The authors also wholeheartedly thank the reviewers for their constructive feedback to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Authors' Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Methodology: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar, Noor Adelyna Mohammed Akib, and Suzyrman Sibly

Software and analysis: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Validation: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar, Noor Adelyna Mohammed Akib, and Suzyrman Sibly

Formal analysis: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Investigation: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar, Noor Adelyna Mohammed Akib, and Suzyrman Sibly

Resources: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Data curation: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Writing—original draft preparation: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar, Noor Adelyna Mohammed Akib,Suzyrman Sibly

Writing—review and editing: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Visualization: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Supervision: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Project administration: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Funding acquisition: Sharifah Nurlaili Farhana Syed Azhar

Funding Information

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support received from Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) Short Term Grant (code no. 304/PCGSS/6315279). This study has been approved by The Human Research Ethics Committee of USM (JEPeM) under study protocol code no. USM/JEPeM/19030206.

Author Disclosure Statement

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

References

Afroz

, & Ilham

(2020). Assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice of university students towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Journal of Indonesia Sustainable Development Planning, 1(1), 31-44.

Ahamad

N. R.

, & Ariffin

(2018). Assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice towards sustainable consumption among university students in Selangor, Malaysia. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 16, 88-98.

Alsaati

, El-Nakla

, & El-Nakla

(2020). Level of sustainability awareness among university students in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 12, 3159.

Ariffin

F. N.

, & Ng

T. F

. (2020). Understanding and opinion on sustainable development among youths in higher educational institutions in Penang, Malaysia. Social Indicators Research, 147(2), 421-437.

Balakrishnan

, Tochinai

, & Kanemitsu

(2020). Perceptions and attitudes towards sustainable development among Malaysian undergraduates. International Journal of Higher Education, 9(1), 44-51.

Biasutti

, & Frate

(2017). A validity and reliability study of the attitudes toward sustainable development scale. Environmental Education Research, 23(2), 214-230.

Centre for Global Sustainability Studies. (2009). USM-APEX sustainability roadmap. Georgetown Centre for Global Sustainability Studies. Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang.

Centre for Global Sustainability Studies. (2014). USM policy on sustainability. Universiti Sains Malaysia. https://cgss.usm.my/images/pdf-file/usm-policy-on-sustainability.pdf

Chankseliani

, & McCowan

(2021). Higher education and the sustainable development goals. Higher Education, 81(1), 1-8.

10.

Cherry

(2018). Attitudes and behavior in psychology. Very well mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/attitudes-how-they-form-change-shape-behavior-2795897

11.

Jannah

, Halim

, Meerah

T. S. M.

, & Fairuz

(2013). Impact of environmental education kit on students' environmental literacy. Asian Social Science, 9(12), 1.

12.

Laroche

, Bergeron

, & Barbaro-Forleo

(2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503-520. https://www-emerald-com-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/insight/content/doi/10.1108/EUM0000000006155/full/html.

13.

Lin

, Hu

, Alias

, & Wong

L. P

. (2020). Influence of mass and social media on psychobehavioral responses among medical students during the downward trend of COVID-19 in Fujian, China: Cross-sectional study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(7), e19982.

14.

Mojilis

(2019). Sustainability awareness of students from a green university in Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Environment Management, 4(13), 24-33.

15.

Radwan

A. F.

, & Khalil

E. M. A

. S. (2021). Knowledge, attitude and practice toward sustainability among university students in UAE. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 22(5), 964-981. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-06-2020-0229

16.

Shephard

(2008). Higher education for sustainability: Seeking affective learning outcomes. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9(1). DOI:10.1108/14676370810842201.

17.

Sousa

, Correia

, Leite

, & Viseu

(2021). Environmental knowledge, attitudes and behavior of higher education students: A case study in Portugal. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 30(4), 348-365.

18.

Syed Azhar

S. N. F.

, Mohammed Akib

N. A.

, Sibly

,& Mohd

. (2022). Students' attitude and perception towards sustainability: The case of Universiti Sains Malaysia. Sustainability, 14(7), 3925.

19.

Tienxhi

J. Y.

(2017). The gender gap in Malaysian public universities: Examining the lost boys. Journal of International and Comparative Education (JICE), 1-16.

20.

United Nations. (2018). United Nations 2018 high-level political forum on sustainable development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdinaction/hesi/literacy#

21.

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2015). Mediterranean youth survey: Responses towards sustainable development and the current crisis. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/mediaservices/singleview/news/mediterranean_youth_survey_responses_towards_sustainable_de/

22.

Von Nordheim

, Boczek

, & Koppers

(2018). Sourcing the sources: An analysis of the use of Twitter and Facebook as a journalistic source over 10 years in the New York Times, The Guardian, and Süddeutsche Zeitung. Digital Journalism, 6(7), 807-828.

23.

Walpole

E. H.

, Herziger

, & Wilson

R. S

. (2018). Campus sustainability survey: Results and trends. A Report by the Environmental and Social Sustainability Lab, Ohio State University.

24.

Wee

M. I.

, Ariffin

F. N.

, Ng

T. F.

, & Shabudin

A. F. A

. (2017). Awareness and attitudes towards sustainable development amongst higher education students in Penang, Malaysia. Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in Higher Education, 4, 49-64.

25.

Western Michigan University. (2018, April 11). Spring 2018 student sustainability survey— Raw results compilation. https://wmich.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/u1640/2018/2018RawSurveyResultsFinal1_0.pdf

26.

Zainordin

, Wahi

, Petrus

, & Koh

C. T

. (2017). Sustainable development attitude: A study on perception among private and public higher learning institutions students in Malaysia. International Journal of Science and Technology, 3(2), 514-524.