# Sustainability Audit of University Websites in Poland:
## 5 Discussion
### Sustainability Performance of the Websites and Audit Recommendations  
The significant standard deviation and range suggest a lack of a common policy for managing websites' asset sizes. This suggests that, while some universities employ goodpractices for media file and source code optimisation, others can ignore this aspect. Such striking differences can be caused by dedicated content management systems (CMSs), extensive website infrastructure with abundant content, no image and media file compression, non-optimised interactive components, and uncontrolled video embedding. The scale of the divergence is an argument for standardising university website design and maintenance processes, especially regarding the Sustainable Development Goals. University websites with the highest audit scores share several commonalities. These may suggest a conscious attitude towards digital design, in line with sustainable development principles. Some of these institutions include the Gdansk University of Technology, Warsaw University, Jagiellonian University, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, and AGH University of Science and Technology in Krakow. Their websites have relatively low carbon footprints, ranging from 0.42 g to 2.36 g per page load, which is acceptable according to the Green Web Foundation guidelines [19]. In addition, these websites transfer relatively small data volumes per load (3-6 MB on average), which is a sign of both proper asset compression and minification and exclusion of \"large components\" such as media files and extensive gadgets. High values of quality scores, like the Kastor Global Score and Ecograder Score, indicate that the websites follow good practices for front-end and code structure optimisation. The most emission-heavy website of a regional university generated 25.25 g of CO\({}_{2}\) per page load (according to Kastor Green, sample average: 3.7 g). Such a high emission level can be due to video autolpaying, uncompressed raster images, and extensive JavaScript libraries. Other causes may include a large number of HTTP requests and a lack of mechanisms for delaying the loading of third-party content. Although extreme cases are rare, they may significantly affect maximums and standard deviations for the set. Still, their very existence highlights the divergent attitudes towards energy efficiency among universities and the potential to curb carbon footprints through relatively simple technical improvements. Sustainability-optimised websites also often scored high in SEO. All the websites with the best scores reached over 85 in Lighthouse (SEO Score Mobile), which suggests that website performance and care for the natural environment can be synergistic rather than contradictory. The audit results from Ecograder and Digital Beacon are relatively low. The websites often scored as low as E or F. Low SEO indicators may reflect the complexity of the websites and poor loading times. Such websites have high CO\({}_{2}\) emissions, in many cases exceeding 4-5 g per page load, and large asset sizes, often ranging from 15 to 30 MB. These values could be indicative of numerous high-resolution graphics and media files, as well as an underperforming source code structure. Regarding RQ1, the results reflect a moderate website conformity with sustainable design standards. The mean value of the Ecol Impact Score was 66.41; a large part of the websites used components larger than recommended (>3 MB) and exhibited too high CO\({}_{2}\) emissions per page load (>2 g). Regarding RQ2, the analysis demonstrated that the test applications are capable of evaluating technical quality attributes and converting them into CO\({}_{2}\) emissions and synthetic environmental impact indicators. This way, they can evaluate the website's environmental impact. Concerning RQ3, note that adherence to low-emission design principles at universities can be educational and formative.