The Universities for Fair Trade Programme and Its Contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals in the Spanish University System

Abstract

This article analyses the role of the Spanish university system in promoting fair Trade (FT) and the sustainable development goals (SDGs), with a particular focus on the Universities for Fair Trade (UxFT) programme. A mixed methodology combining qualitative and quantitative approaches was used to review and analyse the websites of 90 Spanish universities (both public and private) to assess their commitment to FT and the SDGs. This was based on four variables: (1) reference to the SDGs; (2) a structured programme to promote the SDGs; (3) specific actions to promote or raise awareness of the SDGs; and (4) working on FT. The results show that, while most universities include the SDGs in their institutional strategies, only some have structured programmes. Regarding FT, several universities carry out activities linked to this movement, with some actively participating in the UxFT. Public universities demonstrate greater commitment. The SDGs that are most frequently addressed are 12 (Responsible consumption and production), 4 (Quality education) and 13 (Climate action), highlighting the close relationship between FT and sustainability. The study reveals a gap between discursive commitments to sustainability and the actual implementation of FT practices, suggesting that the integration of FT is not automatic even when SDG strategies are present. This has important implications: promoting FT within universities requires not only structured SDG strategies, but also explicit institutional policies, dedicated resources, and greater awareness of FT transformative potential. The findings underscore the need for stronger institutional commitment to move beyond isolated actions and toward a university model grounded in social justice and sustainability. Integrating the UxFT programme more broadly could help foster critical thinking, participatory governance, and more coherent practices aligned with the 2030 Agenda.

1. Introduction

In a globalised context in which economic and social inequalities are becoming more and more apparent, Fair Trade (hereafter referred to as FT) offers an ethical and sustainable alternative to traditional trade practices. It is vital that universities, as places where people go to obtain an education and as agents of social change, become involved in promoting these initiatives.

The Universities for Fair Trade (UxFT) programme combines the social function of universities with FT principles. It aims to foster commitment among university communities to responsible consumption, education in ethical values and the promotion of sustainability. Reference [1] points out that the practice of fair trade is significantly associated with the presence of a global cognitive orientation, which goes beyond simple solidarity. He argues that interest in production conditions and awareness of global complexity are part of a broader consciousness that enables consumers to understand and address global issues. This idea highlights the pivotal role of universities in driving societal change. By initiating campaigns, organising events and formulating institutional policies connected to FT, universities evolve into agents of transformation within society [2,3]. The ways in which they can make an impact include the education and training of professionals, research, and bringing attention to the institutions’ own practices [4].

In Spain, the FT movement has grown in prominence in recent years, with an increasing number of universities obtaining UxFT certification. However, the level of implementation and the challenges faced by these universities vary significantly. This means that an in-depth analysis of the impact of these initiatives and their potential for development in the educational and social spheres is necessary. The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are another proposal that shares similar objectives to FT. FT directly aligns with several of the SDGs, and, as agents of social transformation, universities play a pivotal role in promoting the SDGs. Furthermore, they are in a position to promote FT as a tool for achieving these goals, integrating it into their institutional practices and training generations committed to a more equitable, fair and sustainable model of development, by means of their educational, research and awareness-raising capabilities.

Research into sustainability has emphasised the value of encouraging more collaborative university projects as a key part of making local and regional processes more sustainable, while also keeping social justice as a central concern [5,6,7]. The UxFT programme has the potential to be a driving force in the transformation of universities, contributing to sustainability while upholding social values. This initiative not only connects universities with society but also fosters a reciprocal relationship, highlighting the importance of mutual engagement in achieving positive change [8]. In addition, recent studies, such as the one carried out by [9] argue that, first, scientific production on FT has declined in the last decade, although interest has remained in certain key areas, such as sustainability, consumer behaviour, food security and trade policies; and second, there are research gaps that can be addressed by future studies, especially with regard to the implementation and evaluation of public policies on FT, which is precisely the gap that this article aims to fill.

In this context, the guiding research question of this article is as follows: To what extent are Spanish universities truly committed to Fair Trade and the Sustainable Development Goals, and how is this reflected in their institutional strategies, programmes and practices? The article analyses the Spanish University System’s (SUE) real commitment to its role as an agent of social transformation, examining the implementation of the UxFT programme in relation to the SDGs.

Finally, the focus on the Spanish university context is especially relevant because it provides a specific institutional and political framework in which the integration of Fair Trade and the Sustainable Development Goals can be meaningfully analysed. Spain—particularly through initiatives in autonomous communities such as the Basque Country—has become a fertile ground for experimentation in educational innovation and ethical consumption [10,11]. By studying the Spanish case, this article seeks to identify both the structural conditions that facilitate transformative university engagement and the specific barriers that may hinder the full institutionalisation of Fair Trade principles. Moreover, it enables a comparative perspective in order to examine whether the implementation of these initiatives follows similar patterns in public and private universities.

2. Theoretical and Contextual Framework

2.1. Background: Fair Trade

The World Fair Trade Organisation (WFTO) [12] defines Fair Trade (FT) as a trading system based on dialogue, transparency and respect. It seeks to promote greater equity in international trade by paying special attention to social and environmental criteria. The aim is to transform global trade by moving away from a model based on unequal economic growth in the Global North, and instead promoting sustainability and equity between the Global North and Global South [8,13]. Fair Trade is not just a certification or a label; it is a socio-economic practice that challenges the unfair dynamics of conventional trade and encourages reflection on global relations, socio-economic justice and more sustainable and equitable practices [14]. FT provides fair and stable income to producers in the South and this helps to mitigate the inequalities generated by the neoliberal system [15]. Currently, over 2.5 million producers in more than 75 countries are part of this movement [16].

Fair Trade (FT) began in the United States in the 1940s and 1950s with organisations such as Ten Thousand Villages and SERRV. In Europe, Oxfam and UNCTAD began promoting fairer trade in 1964 [16]. The first FT shop opened in the Netherlands in 1969, and coffee became the first food product to be marketed as such in 1973. The movement became more professional during the 1980s and 1990s with the creation of the Fair Trade label by Max Havelaar in 1988 [17], and was consolidated internationally in 1992 with the formation of the Fair Trade Labelling Organizations International (FLO), now known as Fair Trade International [18]. In Spain, FT began in 1986 with Traperos de Emaús in Donostia-San Sebastian and the Cooperativa Sandino in Cordoba. It grew to reach EUR 144.1 million in sales in 2021 [2]. In short, FT acts as a civil force to push for reforms in international trade, aspiring to a more equitable global system [19].

It operates on the basis of a set of defined principles that guide the behaviour of agents, organisations and companies working in a given sector. FT principles include paying a fair minimum price, stable trade relations, transparency, decent working conditions in accordance with the International Labour Organisation (ILO), respecting the environment and supporting local development [3] (https://comerciojusto.org/que-es-el-comercio-justo/los-10-principios-internacionales/, accessed on 12 January 2025). However, there is criticism of the dependence on external regulation and strict certification processes, which are perceived as being more commercial than supportive [20].

2.2. Fair Trade Universities Programme

The Fair Trade Universities programme emerged in the early 2000s as part of the global Fair Trade Towns movement (FTT). Garstang in the United Kingdom was the first FT town in 2000, and there are now more than 2000 worldwide, including 40 in Spain [21]. The UxFT programme is a global initiative that seeks to encourage higher education institutions to promote FT. The University of Oxford (United Kingdom) was recognised as the first UxFT in 2003 [22]. Since then, hundreds of universities in more than 30 countries have obtained this distinction [21]. These include the University of Jaen in Spain (a pioneer in 2009), Arizona State University in the United States, the University of Sussex in the United Kingdom, the University of Melbourne in Australia, and the Cooperative University of Colombia in Latin America [21].

In 2012, Spanish universities signed the FT Declaration, committing to integrate these principles into their institutional policies and promote sustainable development models [3]. This commitment includes raising awareness of the benefits of FT among the university community, promoting responsible consumption and disseminating sustainable development models that positively impact producers in the Global South. Currently, thirteen Spanish universities are participating in the programme, which is coordinated by IDEAS [3].

2.3. Accreditation Criteria for Becoming a UxFT

Implementing the UxFT programme requires compliance with a series of standardised criteria that demonstrate the university’s commitment to FT. One of these criteria is formal institutional commitment, which is demonstrated by the approval of an official policy in support of FT. In Spain, this requires a statement from the Governing Council that includes the obligation to incorporate FT criteria into institutional procurement and contracting [21], while in the US a formal resolution approved by the university administration or student government is required [23]. This step is essential for integrating FT into the university’s social responsibility strategy.

It also requires certified products to be regularly available in university canteens, shops and vending machines. In Spain, at least three different products must be offered in each of three cafeterias, and all university shops must have at least one [21]. In the US, on the other hand, two products are required at all university-operated points of sale [23]. Other universities, such as those in the United Kingdom, encourage the exclusive use of Fair Trade coffee and tea at official events, as well as selling other certified products, such as chocolate, sugar and fruit, in catering services [24].

Another key requirement is educating and raising awareness within the university community through regular activities. In Spain, at least two internal communication activities and two awareness-raising initiatives must be carried out each year, including one linked to World Fair Trade Day [22]. In the United States, at least four educational events per year are required, such as talks, screenings, or themed fairs [23]. In the United Kingdom, the inclusion of FT in the academic curriculum and student campaigns is also valued [25].

Implementing the programme requires the formation of a multidisciplinary working group comprising students, teachers, technical staff and representatives from cafés or collaborating organisations. This committee coordinates actions, ensures the programme’s continuity and liaises with the administration [21,23].

Finally, accreditation schemes promote a comprehensive approach that encompasses multiple areas of the university, such as research, purchasing, teaching and student participation. These schemes have tiered criteria that allow for the progressive recognition of efforts [24,25]. In many countries, the process requires time and planning, with periods of one or two years to meet the criteria before an evaluation or audit. While the approach varies by region, all agree that becoming a Fair Trade University involves more than selling products; it requires a transformation of institutional culture towards equity and sustainability. This transformation is facilitated by the fulfilment of specific objectives, while respecting creativity and institutional commitment [26].

In this context, the Conference of Rectors of Spanish Universities (CRUE) approved the “Declaration of Spanish Universities in Favour of Fair Trade and Responsible Consumption” in 2017. This declaration establishes the principles for the participation of universities in the programme based on ethical criteria.

• Set up working groups to promote FT at each university.
• Offer at least three FT products in the university cafeteria and one in the university shop.
• Carry out two communication activities and two awareness-raising activities each year.
• Support local producers through fairs and solidarity economy activities.
• Develop at least one academic or research activity related to FT.
• Set up a coordination group to streamline the programme’s activities.

The implementation of these principles involves complex processes, particularly with regard to the licensing of cafés and vending machines, for which the use of products such as coffee, cocoa and cane sugar is required. Universities apply these criteria with varying degrees of enforceability, resulting in varying degrees of effectiveness in ensuring the use of FT products [3].

While many universities have incorporated these criteria into their cafeteria, restaurant and catering services, not all comprehensively monitor the volume of products purchased. Access to FT products in university settings has a limited impact on sustainable development in the Global South due to low sales volumes. However, their main contribution lies in raising awareness and promoting responsible consumption [3].

2.4. Some Impacts and Results to Date

Despite the limitations in implementing the UxFT programme, it has notably increased social awareness within the university community [3] and opened up opportunities for collaboration, study and research into FT, as well as its societal and sustainable development impacts [27]. At numerous universities, particularly those with a long history, such as the University of Edinburgh, a culture of ethical consumption has been established and integrated into student life [28]. Internal surveys at universities such as Leeds reflect high levels of appreciation and recognition of the Fair Trade label (more than 90% of students associate it with ethical production) [25]. However, there is still a need to strengthen formal education on sustainability and FT due to a lack of in-depth understanding of the concept.

In terms of institutional policies, the programme has prompted reflection on purchasing practices at numerous universities, which now include FT clauses in their tenders. This has had a multiplier effect, including increased demand for certified products, changes in suppliers (e.g., Sodexo and Aramark), and progress towards ethical procurement becoming standard practice, as seen at the University of Reading [29] and the Spanish universities of Cordoba and Burgos (IDEAS, 2024) [21]. Being designated as a UxFT implies an explicit responsibility, as highlighted in the Albany Statement [30]. Additionally, some institutions, such as the universities of Cambridge and Greenwich, publish specific data on their fair consumption [31], thereby reinforcing transparency and their structural commitment to sustainability. This institutional integration allows even those who are not familiar with the programme to contribute indirectly to its goals through everyday purchasing decisions.

Finally, universities have forged strong links with FT producers and promotional organisations. At the local level, they collaborate with NGOs and specialist shops, as in Zaragoza and Jaen, thereby strengthening the solidarity economy. Internationally, they have developed direct commercial and academic relationships. Examples include the University of California, San Diego, which works with Mexican cooperatives, and participatory research in Oaxaca supported by the Latin American and Caribbean Coordination of Small Fair Trade Producers and Workers (CLAC) [32]. These ties benefit producers economically by opening up previously inaccessible markets and enrich university education through activities such as lectures and collaborative projects. By educating responsible consumers, universities can act as a bridge between academia and production. Many are now expanding their activities to include other related movements, such as ethical public procurement and sustainable universities, thereby generating synergies that promote fairer trade.

2.5. The Universities for Fair Trade Programme in Spain

A University for Fair Trade (UxFT) incorporates FT products and producer awareness into its academic, research and management activities. The first Spanish university to obtain UxFT recognition was the University of Jaen in 2009, and today 13 Spanish universities participate in the programme [3]. However, the autonomous communities are unevenly represented, with only seven of the 17 autonomous communities that constitute Spain having universities in the programme. For example, the Autonomous Community of Madrid has only one university, while Catalonia, despite having a high number of universities, does not participate.

Figure 1 shows the geographical location of the programme’s universities and their recognition dates. UxFTs are clearly distributed heterogeneously across the country, with Andalusia, Castile and Leon, and the Valencian Community standing out as the autonomous communities with the most participating universities (three UxFTs in each case) [21].

2.6. Universities and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): An Opportunity for Fair Trade?

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which emerged in 2015, evolving from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), address social, economic and environmental challenges through 17 goals [33,34]. The SDGs universal scope aims to eradicate poverty, guarantee human rights and promote sustainable and inclusive development by integrating economic, social and environmental aspects. The SDGs propose a framework for international cooperation based on global solidarity and for fostering strategic alliances between countries, sectors and communities. They include specific targets for each goal to allow progress to be monitored and the impact of implemented actions to be measured. The 2030 Agenda therefore requires education, research and innovation [35] to achieve these goals, as well as collaboration among various stakeholders, including governments, businesses, civil society organisations and universities. Such cooperation is vital in addressing global challenges such as reducing inequalities, promoting gender equality, building inclusive and resilient societies, ensuring equitable access to education, and encouraging sustainable consumption and production practices.

In this context, universities play a crucial role in implementing the SDGs by acting as drivers of change through education, research and disseminating knowledge [36]. By providing opportunities for active learning based on real-world problem solving, universities enable students to engage with local issues, strengthening their professional skills while contributing to the sustainable development of their region [37]. This prepares them to lead sustainability initiatives on their campuses and promote responsible practices in their operations and administrative processes.

The process of integrating the SDGs into universities has generally taken place in four stages: initial recognition in the 1980s; integration into curricula in the 1990s; incorporation into the university mission in the 2000s; and alignment with the 2030 Agenda since 2015 [38,39]. This transition reflects universities’ growing commitment to addressing global challenges and building a more sustainable future.

Specifically, SDG 3 (Good health and well-being), SDG 8 (Decent work) and SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production) are particularly relevant to FT and universities due to their direct relationship with these organisations. SDG 3 aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all. In universities, this involves encouraging healthy habits and consuming FT products as part of a balanced, sustainable diet [35]. SDG 8 focuses on promoting decent working conditions, equal opportunities and labour rights for all. This encourages universities to adopt these same ethical and equality criteria institutionally and in their curricula. Finally, SDG 12 aims to promote sustainable consumption and production patterns. Universities can contribute to this goal by using FT products in their cafeterias and food services, and by raising awareness of the social and environmental impact of responsible consumption through educational programmes [35].

The University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU) is a notable example of commitment to the SDGs. It has developed and implemented the EHU Agenda 2030 (2019–2025), integrating the SDGs into its teaching, research, management and social commitment [40]. The UPV/EHU promotes sustainability in areas such as resource management, energy efficiency and the procurement of local and seasonal (FT) produce. It also fosters partnerships with institutions and companies to develop SDG-related projects and regularly monitors the impact of its actions. This strategy shows how universities can lead the way towards more sustainable development by incorporating the principles of the 2030 Agenda into all areas of their work. The CRUE has been promoting this approach since 2017 through the establishment of the Intersectoral Commission for the incorporation of the 2030 Agenda. Specifically, its latest report on the implementation of the SDGs in Spanish universities’ scientific and knowledge transfer activities concludes that public universities publish more articles related to the SDGs than private universities, and that there is generally greater interest in SDGs 3 (Health and well-being), 13 (Climate action) and 11 (Sustainable cities and communities) [41].

In this regard, the UxFT programme and the integration of the SDGs in universities represent a key opportunity to promote FT and contribute to sustainable development. Despite the uneven geographical distribution of participating universities in Spain, they play a fundamental role in raising awareness and adopting responsible practices. The relationship between SDGs 3, 8 and 12 and FT emphasises the potential of universities to drive change by monitoring goal fulfilment and promoting ethical consumption. By integrating the principles of the 2030 Agenda into their policies and activities, universities strengthen their commitment to sustainability and contribute to developing a fairer and more equitable society. In this context, FT is consolidating its position as an essential tool for achieving the SDGs, emphasising the strategic role of universities in building a more sustainable and inclusive future through their practices, teaching and research.

3. Research Methodology

This study has two objectives. First, it examines the commitment and contribution of the SUE to FT and the SDGs in the economic and institutional spheres. Second, it analyses whether the public or private nature of the university itself (or other characteristics) conditions its degree of commitment to these initiatives. This would subsequently enable a more detailed analysis of the context in which universities adopt this type of good practice.

The study adopted a mixed-methods design, combining qualitative and quantitative approaches to provide an in-depth, current overview of the integration of FT and the SDGs in Spanish universities. Specifically, a literature review was conducted alongside an analysis of information available on the institutional websites of 90 Spanish universities [42]. This process identified initiatives, programmes and references related to FT and the SDGs within the Spanish university sector in 2025. The data collection from university websites was carried out between March 2024 and February 2025.

However, the decision to use the universities’ institutional websites has limited the scope of the study, as information was collected exclusively from these portals. Consequently, any activity or programme related to the subject of the study that has not been disclosed through these platforms has been excluded from the analysis. Nevertheless, given that information is currently mainly disseminated through the internet and social media, it has been supposed that the omission of this data is minimal and not very representative.

In summary:

• The qualitative approach was used to classify universities into different categories according to predefined criteria, such as the existence of institutional policies and awareness-raising activities, participation in FT networks, and the implementation of programmes linked to the SDGs. To ensure consistency in the analysis, internal rules were established to enable uniform and objective assessment.
• The quantitative approach was used to classify universities into different subcategories and to perform statistical analyses on the degree of involvement of each institution. To this end, a database was created to systematise the collected information and draw informed conclusions.

Four analysis variables have been established for the study, and the selection criteria are set out in

Table 1. Variables and selection criteria for the sample.

Variable	Selection Criteria	Disqualification Criteria
(1) Reference to the SDGs	Any mention of the SDGs (e.g., articles, documents or news items) on the institutional websites of the SUE universities, provided that no specific work has been carried out on them. Any explicit mention of the SDGs on the university’s institutional website. This may include press releases, news items, research summaries, articles or general pages that describe the university’s alignment with the 2030 Agenda. Example: A university homepage includes a banner stating “Committed to the 2030 Agenda” or publishes a news item about a seminar related to SDG 13 (Climate action).	Mentions that do not appear on the official institutional website (e.g., social media or personal blogs), or that are too generic (e.g., vague use of terms like “sustainability” without explicit mention of the SDGs).
(2) Specific actions to promote or raise awareness of the SDGs	Presence of specific actions aimed at promoting the SDGs through one-off or recurring activities. These may include awareness campaigns, talks, workshops, exhibitions or roundtables directly referencing one or more SDG. Example: A university organises a week-long event with conferences and exhibitions on SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production)	Institutions already included in variable 3 (i.e., those with structured programmes on the SDGs) are not counted again under this variable to avoid duplication.
(3) Have a structured programme to promote the SDGs	Existence of a formal, structured programme, strategy or institutional plan that integrates the SDGs into several areas of university work (education, research, governance, etc.) as of December 2024. These programmes are usually documented in strategic plans, sustainability strategies or through dedicated SDG offices or platforms. Example: A university publishes its “2030 Sustainability Plan” structured around the 17 SDGs, with specific targets and actions by unit.	Strategic plans or institutional documents—even when formally approved by the university’s governing authorities—that merely mention the SDGs without defining concrete actions, implementation mechanisms, timelines or assigned responsibilities.
(4) Working on FT	Universities that formally belong to the “Universities for Fair Trade” (UxFT) programme and for which verifiable information is available through official sources. This includes the presence of UxFT certification, inclusion in the official UxFT network, or explicit references in institutional documents, websites or validated reports. Example: A university is listed as a member on the UxFT website, has a dedicated Fair Trade section on its institutional site and implements FT principles in procurement or awareness campaigns.	Universities that do not appear as members of UxFT or for which no reliable or verifiable data could be found regarding their participation in the programme.

Source: Own elaboration.

.

It should be noted that isolated references to FT in articles or news items are not sufficient evidence to include a university in the “Working on FT” category.

Finally, with regard to the reliability of the data, the coding was checked for reliability using an ad hoc procedure. Two researchers independently coded a random sample of 20% of the universities (n = 90), and calculated Cohen’s Kappa coefficient with a minimum acceptable threshold of 0.80. Any discrepancies were resolved by consensus, and the operational definitions of the categories were adjusted where necessary. The final database was verified by cross-checking it with the original sources in order to detect and correct any inconsistencies.

4. Results

This section presents the findings obtained from the analysis of Spanish universities in relation to their involvement in the SDGs and FT. A quantitative approach is used to examine the presence of the SDGs in university institutions, distinguishing between those that merely mention them and those that have developed structured strategies or specific actions for their implementation. The degree of interrelation between FT and the SDGs within the university environment is also analysed, exploring whether the existence of formal sustainability programmes encourages the adoption of FT-linked initiatives.

The information is presented in graphs and tables. The first sub-section highlights the importance of the public/private nature of the university when integrating the SDGs and FT into institutional structures, as well as the most frequently addressed SDGs in this context.

The results obtained enable us to identify key trends and significant differences in how universities approach these global commitments. This provides a solid basis for further discussion and analysis of their impact on higher education.

4.1. General Statistical Analysis

Currently, Spain has 90 universities: 50 public and 40 private. This sample size is large enough to provide representative results on general trends regarding the integration of the SDGs and FT in the university environment, both in overall terms (n = 90) and according to the public/private nature of the university institutions (n = 50 and n = 40, respectively). Furthermore, the existing heterogeneity among universities enriches the comparative analysis (see Figure 2).

This Figure 2 marks the starting point of the study and provides a disaggregated view of institutional behaviour with respect to four key variables: reference to the SDGs; implementation of specific actions; the existence of structured programmes; and specific work on FT. The data are presented for all SUE universities according to their public/private status.

The data generally indicate that over 76% of universities refer to the SDGs, over 75% carry out specific actions relating to them, 44% have structured programmes in which they work on them, and 27% work on FT. Similarly, public universities demonstrate greater commitment in all four analysed variables, with significantly higher percentages than private universities.

Particularly striking is the difference in the category “Working on FT,” given that 92% of universities active in this area are public. This data supports the idea that public universities are more dedicated to social and environmental initiatives, potentially due to more stringent public policies on sustainability. It may also reflect a greater sensitivity to the values of equity and justice promoted by FT at an institutional level. Furthermore, it is evident that all SUE participants in the UxFT programme are public institutions.

The heterogeneity among the analysed universities enables us to examine differences in the implementation of sustainability and social justice policies. This is important because it shows how a university’s type, funding or internal policies can affect its commitment to the SDGs and FT.

4.2. Analysis of the SDGs in Universities

When analysing the implementation of the SDGs in Spanish higher education institutions, three of the four aforementioned variables were considered. Specifically, these were (1) reference to the SDGs; (2) specific actions to promote or raise awareness of the SDGs; and (3) having a structured programme to promote the SDGs.

Taking variables 1 and 2 from the study (Figure 2), of the 69 universities that refer to the SDGs and the 68 that carry out specific actions, more than 67% are public.

Similarly, variable 3 (having a structured programme to promote the SDGs) shows that, of the 40 universities which have developed a structured programme to promote the SDGs for implementation and do not merely mention the SDGs in their institutional documents or carry out specific actions, 75% are public (Figure 3). This represents an important step towards the institutionalisation of the SDGs, signalling a deeper and more sustained commitment within the SUE, particularly among public universities.

These data distinguish between universities that merely pay lip service to the SDGs and those that address them through strategic planning. Having a structured programme indicates a commitment to integrating the SDGs into management, teaching and/or research, which could have a significant transformative impact on the university community.

However, the analysed data reveals two interesting issues. Firstly, of the 50 universities without a structured SDG programme (55% of all Spanish universities), 56%—equivalent to 31% of all Spanish universities—have carried out specific actions related to the SDGs. This demonstrates a growing awareness of global goals, even in the absence of a formal programme or clearly defined strategy.

Conversely, some universities mention the SDGs but have not developed any activities. Examples include Camilo José Cela University (a private university) and Menéndez Pelayo International University (a public university). This disparity highlights the need to ensure that the SDGs are truly incorporated into university life, rather than just making formal declarations.

The data suggests that one-off actions can lead to more structured commitments in the future, and highlights that SDG implementation can begin informally before evolving into more systematic models as resources, networks and experience are consolidated.

When considering the SDGs, it is interesting to note the extent to which universities address them. Sixty-two percent of the institutions work on them in a general way, without focusing on specific goals; 14% focus on a subset of one to five SDGs; and 12% work across all goals.

The data in Figure 4 reflects a variety of institutional approaches. While some universities prioritise specialisation and in-depth study of specific objectives, others opt for general coverage. The analysis suggests that considerable progress can be made towards more integrated strategies that combine breadth and depth in the implementation of the SDGs.

Similarly, of the specific SDGs, SDG 7 (Affordable and clean energy) is the most frequently addressed, alongside SDG 4 (Quality education), SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production) and SDG 13 (Climate action). This is consistent with the central role of universities in educating people and raising awareness of the need to respect and care for our social, economic and environmental surroundings.

Figure 4 shows that universities are particularly committed to issues that align with their educational mission (SDG 4). This is consistent with studies by [43,44], which highlight the importance of SDG 4 (Quality education) as the foundation for achieving the other goals. The data also indicate a strong focus on environmental sustainability (SDG 13). However, the data also indicate that universities pay less attention to certain SDGs, such as 1 (No poverty), 2 (Zero hunger), 13 (Decent work) and 15 (Life on land). This suggests that there is still an imbalance in the attention given to different global challenges.

These results largely align with those of the latest CRUE report, which concludes that Spanish universities focused primarily on SDG 3 (Good health and well-being), SDG 13 (Climate action) and SDG 11 (Sustainable cities and communities) in terms of publications and knowledge transfer between 2015 and 2023 [41].

Cross-referencing both studies shows that, while universities are working more thoroughly and consistently on SDGs 14 (Quality education) and 13 (Climate action), the intensity with which other SDGs are addressed varies depending on whether they are being worked on at the research-publication or academic-institutional level.

4.3. Analysis of Fair Trade in Universities

Focusing the analysis on universities’ work in favour of FT, the data reveal that 20 of the 25 universities working on FT also have a structured SDG programme. This suggests a strong correlation between the two dimensions, indicating that clear sustainability planning favours the inclusion of FT-related actions.

The integration of FT appears to form part of a broader institutional vision of social responsibility, in which ethical and solidarity-based consumption practices are more naturally incorporated into planned strategies. This finding could also encourage universities that are already committed to the SDGs to incorporate this dimension.

Although the SDGs and FT share fundamental values, most universities that mention the SDGs have not incorporated FT into their strategy. This indicates a discrepancy between discursive frameworks and practical FT initiatives (see Figure 5).

The low level of FT integration may be due to a lack of knowledge, resources or institutional priority (Figure 6). In any case, this data highlights an opportunity to raise awareness of the synergies between the two agendas, promoting more coherent and comprehensive implementation.

Furthermore, breaking down the data according to universities that work on FT and those that have structured programmes reveals that only half of the universities with structured SDG programmes include FT in their activities. This demonstrates that strategic planning, while facilitating the adoption of FT, does not guarantee it on its own.

This finding raises questions about how structured SDG development programmes are designed. Do they focus on FT, or is it considered an ancillary aspect? The answer to this question may be key to understanding how to achieve deeper, cross-cutting integration of FT in universities.

Finally, when universities that develop FT initiatives incorporate the SDGs as a variable for analysis, they most commonly address SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production). This confirms the direct relationship between the two areas of work, given that FT promotes more ethical and sustainable production and consumption models. While the relationship between FT and SDG 12 is logical, it also suggests the potential for expansion to other related SDGs, such as SDG 1 (No poverty), SDG 8 (Decent work) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the goals). This overlap could strengthen both the SDG and FT agendas in a university setting.

5. Conclusions

This study has (1) analysed the contribution of SUE universities to the FT movement and the SDGs in academic and institutional spheres, through various interventions, and (2) examined the correlation between legal status and commitment to promoting FT and the SDGs. The conclusions aim to summarise the most relevant findings.

The main conclusion of the analysis is that the legal status of universities (public or private) is the determining factor when it comes to initiatives to promote and raise awareness of the SDGs or FT. It is evident, therefore, that Spanish universities are largely committed to working on the SDGs, with 76% of universities in Spain following some form of related work. The figure is lower in the case of FT, with only 25% of universities having some line of work related to it. This is consistent with the hypothesis proposed by Blasco et al., 2021 [45], which suggests that a university’s online presence is a positive factor for achieving the SDGs, as it enables them to promote these goals, be accountable and build trust among stakeholders. However, as the results show, public institutions particularly excel in this area compared to private institutions in all categories related to the SDGs (public universities account for around 70% of the total). This difference is even greater when it comes to FT: public universities account for 92% of institutions working in this area.

Conversely, regarding the analysis of SUE universities’ contribution to the FT movement and promotion of the SDGs, it is notable that fewer than 30% of SUE institutions work on FT, significantly lower than the proportion of universities working on the SDGs through specific actions and/or structured programmes (75.5%). This suggests that implementing structured programmes focusing on the SDGs in universities does not necessarily lead to awareness of or action on FT, although it can facilitate this.

The SDGs adopted by universities are generally addressed through specific actions and structured programmes. The most relevant of these are SDG 4 (Quality education), SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production) and SDG 13 (Climate action). This is consistent with the work of universities that collaborate through FT, as SDGs 12 and 13 are also the most frequently addressed. This suggests a certain convergence in the work carried out by institutions that work with FT and those that do not.

However, most centres seem to work on the SDGs in a more general way, which could suggest a preference for one-off actions over structured SDG programmes. This could be because these initiatives require less organisation, coordination and commitment, as well as fewer resources.

In short, Spanish universities are officially committed to the SDGs, but only to a lesser degree to the FT movement.

This has important implications for policy and practice: institutional efforts to integrate Fair Trade within the university structure should not be assumed as a natural consequence of SDG-related work. Instead, Fair Trade requires its own explicit policies, dedicated funding and awareness-raising strategies to ensure meaningful and lasting integration [3,8].

Furthermore, the greater involvement of public universities in both SDGs and FT initiatives highlights the potential role of public funding, longer-standing commitments to social responsibility, and structural alignment with values of equity and sustainability. This suggests that institutional and governmental support is essential to expand and consolidate Fair Trade in the higher education sector [45].

In this regard, the UxFT programme represents a strategic opportunity to strengthen the links between sustainability education and ethical consumption. By fostering spaces for student engagement, critical reflection and the co-creation of knowledge, it can contribute to building a university culture that is more inclusive, participatory and aligned with the 2030 Agenda [40,46]. A new university culture that embraces the challenges posed at local and global levels can only be ensured through institutional and governmental commitment.

Ultimately, promoting FT in universities is not only a matter of procurement or symbolic actions—it is a pedagogical and political commitment to forming socially responsible citizens. Therefore, future institutional strategies should consider the transformative potential of Fair Trade as an educational tool and as a lever for promoting broader sustainability goals [6,47]. This, however, requires caution, since universities may incur “dangers of institutional isomorphism” [48], using FT as an “ethical fig leaf” to legitimize their growing neoliberal corporatization, similar to some North American universities in the [49]. In this sense, support for Fair Trade within the university must be accompanied by a critical translation of its principles, because the way they are interpreted and implemented will determine whether they generate genuine empowerment or, on the contrary, reproduce relations of domination under a mere ethical veneer [50].

To this end, the authentic integration of the SDGs in higher education requires multi-level validation mechanisms that combine institutional analyses with faculty self-assessments, since this triangulation not only ensures coherence and transparency but also functions as a reflective tool for continuous curriculum development [51].

Finally, the present study is subject to certain limitations, notably the exclusive reliance on institutional websites as the primary data source. It is important to note that some of these websites may not be subject to regular updates, which has the potential to impact the comprehensiveness and precision of the data collected. In the field of research, there is a project currently underway that aims to provide further insights into the findings by collecting primary data through in-depth interviews and questionnaires. This approach is expected to facilitate a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of institutional commitment to Fair Trade and the SDGs.