Building on the Vision for STARS 2.0 that the STARS Steering Committee distributed last month, AASHE would now like to encourage those with ideas for improving STARS to send them to stars@aashe.org. Whether you would like to see a new credit in STARS or have suggestions for improving the existing ones, now is the time to share your ideas. Comments will be reviewed and considered by staff and Technical Advisors as we move through the technical development process towards the launch of STARS 2.0. We ask that you submit your comments by Friday, March 30th.

In addition, AASHE is soliciting feedback on some topics of particular interest to individuals who have a working knowledge of STARS. Please take a few minutes to complete this brief survey and let your voice be heard on issues like the Education & Research section of STARS and the 2005 baseline in the Operations section.

We look forward to hearing from you!

Last month, STARS Participants joined the ranks of hundreds of U.S. and Canadian institutions to participate in Recyclemania, a friendly competition to see who can reduce, reuse, and recycle the most on-campus waste. While this annual competition recognizes institutions based on data submitted over an eight-week period, the Waste subcategory in STARS recognizes ongoing initiatives that move institutions toward zero waste. March’s STARS Facts and Best Practices blog focuses on OP 17: Waste Reduction and OP 18: Waste Diversion.

Overview of Credits

• OP 17: Waste Reduction recognizes institutions that have reduced waste generation over time. While other credits recognize the benefits of recycling, this credit acknowledges the importance of preventative measures to reduce total waste generation (garbage, recycling, and compost).
• OP 18: Waste Diversion recognizes institutions that are reducing waste and conserving resources. Institutions earn points by diverting materials from the landfill or incinerator by recycling, composting, reusing, donating, or re-selling.

STARS Facts
Based on the current STARS data, there is tremendous room for improvement to minimize waste on college and university campuses.

• OP 17: Waste Reduction – On average, institutions earned 1 point out of 5. Only 8 out of 175 institutions achieved waste reductions of 50% or more compared to a 2005 baseline.
• OP 18: Waste Diversion – On average, institutions earned 1 point out of 3. Overall, 22% of all waste has been diverted from the landfill or incinerator through recycling, composting, re-using, donating, or reselling.

With campus populations growing steadily, data submitted for OP 17: Waste Waste Reduction show that total waste generated per campus user has decreased by 4%, even while overall waste has increased by 5%.

In comparison to the 2005 baseline, average recycling and composting rates have increased for STARS-rated institutions while rates for disposed goods have decreased:

• 11% increase in recycling
• 2% increase in composting
• 13% decrease in disposed waste

AASHE Resource Center
Click here to access resources on Sustainable Management of Campus Waste & Materials.

Highlighted Institutions

• Arizona State University (STARS Gold, July 2011) published a Strategic Plan for Sustainability Practices in 2011 that declares zero waste as a primary goal for on-campus sustainability efforts. ASU has pledged to eliminate 90 percent of campus solid waste from the landfill by 2015. Over the last five years, ASU has launched over four dozen projects and initiatives, for both waste aversion and diversion, across diverse areas of operations, resulting in a 52% drop in total waste generated.

• In accordance with its strategic plan, Agnes Scott College in Decatur, GA (STARS Silver, February 2012) has established a campus-wide policy to “reduce, reuse, recycle and rethink”. Campus community members participate in aggressive waste reduction programs that include single-stream recycling, paper reduction initiatives, and numerous others. With a 2011 diversion rate of 73%, Agnes Scott College is on its way to achieving its zero waste goals.

The most successful campus waste reducers have established challenging waste reduction goals and are implementing broad and numerous initiatives to achieve these goals. Moving forward, a challenge for institutions is to systematically reduce total waste while still accommodating for campus growth. The STARS team would love to hear readers’ feedback on ways to shape STARS in the future to further promote zero waste initiatives. Please send your ideas to stars@aashe.org.

At AASHE 2011 last October, Julie Newman (Sustainability Director, Yale University) and Shana Weber (Sustainability Manager, Princeton University) hosted a workshop on “Framing a research agenda for campus sustainability”. For those not able to attend, an attendee did capture a partial transcription of the session here.

The importance of thinking further about the topics raised in that workshop came up recently as I was reading a study from Jasleen Kaur, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory who is also a doctoral student at Indiana University’s School of Informatics. Her research paper, “Evolution and structure of sustainability science” examines the rapidly growing body of research in sustainability science. Her research has shown that the number of authors writing about sustainability has doubled every 8.3 years between 1974 and 2010.

This is quite remarkable and I admit, had me recalling a recent comic about the word “sustainable” becoming "unsustainable".

Returning to Kaur’s research, she also unearthed the academic disciplines most contributing to the research in sustainability science and found that 34 percent of published research is from the social sciences, followed by biology with 23 percent and engineering with 22 percent. The below chart provides a further breakdown of represented academic areas (image courtesy of Indiana University):

A press release from IU regarding the research is available here.
The full paper is available for download here.

Returning for a just a moment to the comic strip referenced above, are two fascinating Google Ngram graphs for the word sustainable. Here is the word “sustainable” since 1800
and since 1960. (For background on how Google’s Ngram viewer works go here.)
As a colleague pointed out, the "since 1800 chart" is strikingly similar to the global warming hockey stick chart that is one of the most assiduously referenced Wikipedia entries of all time. The comic strip hits close to home.

What can we deduce from all of this growth? Some of the conclusions are quite obvious – major scientific and societal challenges facing humans are being rigorously studied. However, like Newman and Weber at AASHE 2011, I’m not convinced there is a unified practice of sustainability research underway (related: has this growth in research resulted in significant societal sustainability performance?).Far too often, the disciplines contributing to this research remain siloed into existing departments and are not adequately engaged in interdisciplinary research.

At the same time, I'm not convinced that the higher ed (HE) sustainability movement needs its own sector-specific sustainability research agenda – many of the challenges institutions face and are overcoming go beyond the confines of the campus and influence (or should) the broader community. Separating the HE sustainability movement from the broader societal sustainability movement is a silo we need to avoid.

Thoughts or observations? Share comments below.

All images courtesy of Indiana University

In a recent blog, Dave Newport, Director of the Environmental Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder, AASHE board member, and colleague began tolling the bell over the “Death of Campus Sustainability.” In his blog article, Dave asserts that what appears to be a flattening of the growth of sustainability activities (by a few measures) is a harbinger of death. He also asserts that campus sustainability has done little to go beyond environmental sustainability. On the latter (complex) point, I agree; on the former, I beg to differ.

The indicators for supporting a claim of campus sustainability dying are simply not clear and represent too short of a time scale. Yes, there was rapid growth in numbers of the following in the “naughts”: membership in AASHE, signatories to the ACUPCC, and campus sustainability positions, and yes – they all seem to have flattened in the past year or two. But Dave’s claim that a lack of growth in number is the beginning of death is inconsistent with a wide variety of patterns we see both in nature and in human systems. It may be true in systems driven by greed that if you’re not growing you’re failing but the idea that you have to grow or die (we, by the way, do both simultaneously) is not a sustainable model. It makes more sense to me to think in terms of evolutionary change that looks at a longer time scale and allows change to be a driver of future states. I would recast Dave’s assertion then as “The Evolution of Campus Sustainability.” The movement will evolve and change as it should. And each of us who works in/with higher education institutions and believes we need to create a just and sustainable society has a responsibility to grow the impact of our efforts to ensure that we do become more important in shaping the future.

The other issue Dave raises is (to me) a more important issue. Dave does a good job characterizing a US-centric view of sustainability – a view that begins with concerns about the environment and moves to concerns about how the environment affects/shapes our economy and society. My experience in working with the tertiary education community is that in the US and some other developed, industrialized countries, many leaders of the sustainability movement came from the environmental movement as it evolved to include environmental justice and ecological economics. In other parts of the world, sustainability comes from an alternative view of socio-economic development.

A touchstone for me to remember how we got started thinking about sustainability is the statement in the Brundtland report (Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development) that defined sustainable development. We often see the first part of the definition quoted in a way that justifies the enviro-centric view of sustainability (although there is no reference to the environment within it): Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. But we seldom reference the two clarifiers that follow: It contains within it two key concepts: the concept of 'needs', in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs."

Two important points here – the imperative that we solve the issue of poverty and that we recognize the limits are environmental but in that the limits are a function of our technology and social organization. That is, we can alter the limit for meeting our needs through changes in technology (perhaps the green economy) and through changes in social organization (perhaps the goal of the occupy movement). The other critical point is that if we do not address the issue of poverty we will not be able to create a sustainable society.

My take-away from several discussions is the holistic nature of sustainability. Lowering GHG emissions to mitigate climate change will not necessarily eliminate poverty nor will the elimination of poverty end climate change. However, if what we seek is a sustainable society, we will need to embrace both and much more. As Monty Hempel of Redlands has said (and I paraphrase with apologies), "There isn’t environmental sustainability, or social or economic sustainability – there is only sustainability and all the parts must be working together.”

Going back to Dave’s claim about the death of campus sustainability, I would assert that campus sustainability will evolve just as higher education itself has evolved. Whether or not we continue to call our motivation campus sustainability, we will continue to have (holistic) utopian hopes that we use as implicit guides to our work in and with higher education. From a historical perspective, we are witness to a better world. That work will continue.

This installment of the AASHE Bulletin Sustainability Student Diary series features Meg Little, member of the award-winning permaculture team at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. For its pioneering efforts in campus permaculture, the Permaculture Committee was named Student Group of 2011 by the Real Food Challenge. Read on to learn about the committee's inception, inspirations and inner workings. We hope to see questions and feedback in the comments area! Submit diary entries of your own for consideration to bulletin@aashe.org.

As I look out onto the dormant January garden in front of Franklin Dining Commons at UMass, I can’t help but feel a sense of utter amazement at how much we accomplished in the past year and a half. In September 2010, this 12,000-square-foot plot was an unused patch of grassy lawn, unappreciated and overlooked by the campus community. Just one year later, it was transformed into a highly productive, beautiful permaculture garden; a space for students, staff and faculty to slow down and appreciate the wonderful smells, colors and unusual plants dwelling in the garden.

In September 2010, the word "permaculture" was practically unknown to the campus community. By September 2011, the word was almost commonplace among students, and our UMass Permaculture group was joyfully celebrating its accomplishments in the dedication event, "From Grass to Food in Under One Year" (featuring internationally acclaimed author Frances Moore Lappe).

The story begins in the fall of 2009 in a class called "Sustainable Agriculture." The final project for this class was to "come up with some way to change the world." Quite an overwhelming task for a class project! A group of students got together and decided to focus on what they believed had the most potential to change the world: local food. This led them to an idea: what if we had students growing food for students right here on campus? They dove into this project, focusing around the idea of establishing a permaculture garden adjacent to one of the Dining Commons to produce super-local food for students. Some students researched plants and design, and some looked at finance, interviewing administrators and chefs to see if there was actually funding interest in the project. It turned out that there was, and these students continued to push the project through administrative channels even after the class ended.

Later that spring, the project took a blow when discussions arose of building a temporary parking lot on that site. The project seemed defeated, along with the sense of empowerment students had felt in the process of establishing the project. However, Dining Services listened to student concerns and when the parking lot proposal fell through, Executive Director of Auxiliary Services and Enterprises Ken Toong began talking with Ryan Harb, a certified permaculture designer and recent graduate of UMass’s Green Building masters program. That fall, Harb was hired to oversee the project and put together a student committee to organize and plan for the successful implementation of a permaculture garden.

"...permaculture is the most promising solution to reverse the downward spiral of our current circumstances. It is systems thinking, it is gardens, it is communities, it is sustainable economies, it is rewriting our human impact to be regenerative for all living things by changing the way we relate ourselves to the world around us."

That’s where I come into the picture! As an environmental science major entering my junior year, I was run down and pretty downright depressed about our global situation. Having spent two years learning about the despondent state of our climate and the devastating impacts humans have had on it, I was desperate for a positive solution. In my first week of classes, I received an email looking for students to head the implementation of a permaculture garden on campus. "Permaculture?” I thought, "what is that?" So I started investigating. And the more I learned, the more I fell in love. This was the solution I had been searching for!

For those unfamiliar with the term, there are many definitions for permaculture. The Permaculture Institute defines it as an ecological design system for sustainability in all aspects of human endeavor. It teaches us how to build natural homes, grow our own food, restore diminished landscapes and ecosystems, catch rainwater, build communities and much more.

For me, permaculture is the most promising solution to reverse the downward spiral of our current circumstances. It is systems thinking, it is gardens, it is communities, it is sustainable economies, it is rewriting our human impact to be regenerative for all living things by changing the way we relate ourselves to the world around us. Needless to say, I was hooked, and I was ecstatic to hear I had been selected as a member of the eight-student UMass Permaculture Committee. We got right to work, focusing first on our mission statement:

"To offer education about sustainable living to the UMass Amherst community by creating model, edible and low-maintenance landscapes that are both highly productive and aesthetically pleasing."

As our site is located in a central area on campus, the educational aspect was incredibly important to us. Not only were we growing food, but with that we were changing paradigms on a local scale; changing the way UMass thinks about food production.

That fall we organized over 130 volunteers to help sheet mulch (a common permaculture practice to prepare the soil for growing) the entire 12,000-square-foot site, bringing in numerous campus and local groups including Big Brother Big Sister, Living Routes, and Amherst Regional High Green Action Club. We also started a blog, tabled and spoke at town and campus events, hosted a documentary screening, and had several media appearances. In the spring we pushed ourselves even further, adding on a few more committee members to assist in media outreach, enabling previous members to focus on designing the garden, participating in more local tabling and speaking events, hosting another documentary screening, and organizing a highly successful design charrette, which included over 100 students, faculty, staff and local community members who had the opportunity to take part in the design process, create their own designs for the garden, and voice their opinions on what they would like to see from the garden.

At the end of the spring semester, we put together an enthusiastic new summer committee and finally started planting. We worked diligently over the summer to make the garden as productive as possible, planting over 1,500 plants of more than 100 different species. All the while we strived to make it accessible to everyone by blogging about our struggles and successes, incorporating informational plaques throughout the garden, creating a self-guided tour for visitors, and hosting over 300 K-12 school children to come work, play and learn in the garden. By the time September rolled around, the garden was looking wonderful, and we produced 1,000 pounds of food for the Dining Commons. When students returned for the semester we were bombarded with compliments on the amazing transformation that had taken place over the course of the summer, which was extremely rewarding for all of us who had worked so hard.

For this academic year we’ve remodeled the student committee. Last year’s committee members now have the opportunity to both teach and learn alongside other students as facilitators working to assist new members. I work with other students to host events with the goal of engaging students and local community members in our project and creating space for them to learn about new permaculture-related topics, have fun, and participate in the processes of UMass Permaculture.

"...not only does permaculture grow food, it also heals and remediates degraded landscapes."

Which brings us back to today: a cold January morning in 2012. As we reflect on the past year and look forward to the one ahead of us, I feel incredibly fortunate to be a part of this amazing project. Due to the success of this garden, we’ve been granted land next to another Dining Commons on campus: neglected land that has compacted, rocky, dead soil, where even grass can barely grow. We’re all pretty excited about the challenge this presents, as we hope to use this site as an educational tool highlighting the regenerative capacity of permaculture; not only does permaculture grow food, it also heals and remediates degraded landscapes. We will also be hosting a "Permaculture Your Campus" conference this June. From colleges around the country, we invite student groups, dining services, sustainability committees and any other interested groups/individuals to come to UMass and develop their own unique action plans for how they will design and implement permaculture gardens on their own campuses. Interested schools can register beginning this month. Registration fees will contribute to our project’s financial sustainability as we move ahead with our own gardens and assist in the development of other projects across the world.

The work I’ve done for this group has without a doubt been one of the defining experiences of my undergraduate career. I have grown more from this experience than I could have imagined and have learned more than any number of classes could have taught me. Above and beyond my own personal gains, the project and the garden itself have become a visible example of student empowerment and shifting paradigms on campus. Students drove this movement, and students are helping it grow to new heights all the time. The Franklin garden’s location, in a highly visible and highly trafficked area for students, enables it to be seen by thousands every day and to begin to change the way UMass Amherst thinks about food. Our project may not be capable of feeding the 16,000 students on meal plans, but it can demonstrate different ways of thinking about how land is used, where food is grown, and who grows food. Our gardens are a site of education and student empowerment - and what a beautiful sight that is.

Meet Meg and other committee members in this UMass Permaculture Documentary series!

With costs for higher education rising continuously, institutions’ affordability and access programs are rapidly becoming a major factor for student success during the college years and beyond. In order for higher education to help society move toward greater equity, institutions must be accessible to diverse populations. February’s STARS Facts and Best Practices blog focuses on PAE Credit 10: Affordability and Access Programs.

Affordability and Access Programs
PAE 10 recognizes institutions that have policies and programs in place to make higher education accessible and affordable for low-income students. Such policies may include:
• Programs to minimize the cost of attendance for low-income students
• Participation in federal TRIO programs
• Programs to guide parents of low-income students through the higher education experience

STARS Facts – Affordability and Access
97 percent of STARS-rated institutions have policies and programs in place to promote accessibility and affordability for low income students. However, these policies and programs differ among institutions.

Of the STARS-rated institutions that submitted for a rating…

Highlighted Institutions

• Western University (STARS Silver, August 2011) participates in the Student Access Guarantee program in partnership with the government of Ontario. Under this program, every qualified Ontario student is guaranteed access to Ontario public colleges and universities. Through this guarantee, students’ financial needs not fully met by the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) are covered by Western University.
• New Mexico State University (STARS Bronze, September 2011) recently began the Red to Green money management program to help students learn to manage their finances. The program was designed by NMSU students themselves thanks to a grant from the Student Success Office. Red to Green is a requirement for all students that have acquired loans to help pay for college.
• Anne Arundel Community College (STARS Silver, November 2011) ranks third among the 16 community colleges in Maryland for lowest tuition and fees. AACC believes that no student should be restricted from attending college because of limited financial resources. The college offers grants, scholarships, loans, and employment programs to eligible full-time and part-time students in all degree programs and most certificate programs.
• The Watson and Odyssey Four Year Cohort Program at Elon University (STARS Silver, December 2011) in North Carolina supports affordability for low-income and first-generation students. This fall, 26 scholars will enter the program with their full financial need met by grants from university, federal and state sources and federally guaranteed loans. The students will receive educational stipends and study abroad grants. The Watson/Odyssey program uses a peer support model coupled with administrative support.

The STARS team would love to hear readers’ ideas on ways to shape STARS in the future to further promote affordability and access within higher education. Please give us your feedback by sending your ideas to stars@aashe.org.

The connection between the Occupy Movement and the establishment of a just and sustainable society is sometimes clear and sometimes foggy. To better help us all understand the relationship, AASHE solicited the thoughts of the higher education community. We asked: "What does the Occupy Movement mean to you in the context of higher education sustainability?"

Here are their answers.

"At the core of this new society must rest equal access to higher education for all, no matter what their background or wealth."

Justin Mog, Assistant to the Provost for Sustainability Initiatives, University of Louisville

The Occupy Movement should give true sustainability advocates reason for hope. Sustainability isn't just about cleaning up our environmental act, but about building a new society that respects people and planet. Sustainability happens when Earth justice meets social justice. At the core of this new society must rest equal access to higher education for all, no matter what their background or wealth. Occupy the so-called 'Ivory Tower!' Demand publicly-funded, affordable education.

Photo credit: Nathan Gardner/The Louisville Cardinal.

"If we do not educate civilization about the critical need to change how people treat each other and their life-support systems, the likely result will be a dramatic collapse."

Paul Ehrlich, Bing Professor of Population Studies and President, Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University

Neither higher education nor our society is sustainable today, and will not become so without dramatic changes in the structure and scale of the human enterprise. If we do not educate civilization about the critical need to change how people treat each other and their life-support systems, the likely result will be a dramatic collapse. A social movement is critical if such dramatic change in attitudes and behaviors is to be accomplished - we clearly cannot depend on those on top to generate system change. I hope the Occupy Movement represents the start of such a movement toward greater equity and environmental sanity. For more, go to mahb.stanford.edu.

"We need the boldness of the youth to call out the dated values underpinning the economic and public education systems, to navigate uncharted waters, to innovate and write sustainability into new systems."

Natalie, Sustainability Education Program Coordinator

I once heard it said that colleges and universities must be watchdogs over governments or counterweights to them. Similarly, a professor once instructed me to speak truth to power. Occupy means facing the fact that the current economic system is incompatible with social and environmental justice. But the alternatives are little understood, controversial and largely absent from mainstream media. We need the boldness of the youth to call out the dated values underpinning the economic and public education systems, to navigate uncharted waters, to innovate and write sustainability into new systems. We need to be communities focused on this agenda.

"The expansion of Occupy serves as an important case study in uniting seemingly disparate constituents under a common purpose and working together to forge a better future for all."

Simran Sethi, Associate Professor, journalism

Occupy is a reflection of many facets of sustainability including social equity, consumer protection, environmental stewardship and economic justice. In teaching my journalism students about reportage on socio-economic class and the growing chasm between rich and poor, I highlighted Occupy as a powerful example of citizen journalism and detailed the ways in which the locus of storytelling - and legitimacy around said stories - has changed. We compared conventional news reports about the movement to the stories that were told from within (from tweets to livestreams to blog posts) and talked about the power of the stories we tell and the ways in which narratives impact engagement. This directly relates to my scholarship on sustainability and the critical role of communication in helping people make sense of and activate around sustainability issues. The expansion of Occupy serves as an important case study in uniting seemingly disparate constituents under a common purpose and working together to forge a better future for all.

Photo credit: Simran Sethi.

"...hope for our future."

David Smith, student

It has meant hope for our future. It is about time that the rest of the country is educated of the wrong-doings in this nation. Occupy movements may be the solution to educate others on environmental topics. After Occupy Earth in Washington D.C., I actually believed that as a nation there is hope to stop our environmental atrocities.

David is pictured above marching at the White House on November 6, 2011.

"Higher education should foster life, liberty and happiness..."

Peter Buckland, Ph.D. student and Research and Sustainability Assistant, Pennsylvania State University College of Education

Occupy makes me reflect on America’s founding documents: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.' Higher education should foster life, liberty and happiness by helping us live 'of…by…and for' the Creation. We need clean, equitable and convivial cultures made for living consonantly with Nature – including us. Invite the Creation to occupy us as individuals, communities, institutions and our technology with modesty, intelligence and cooperation. Down this path life, liberty and happiness thrive.

Peter is pictured above speaking at Marcellus Protest 2011: Power to the People, Not the Corporations, held at Pennsylvania State University Park on November 18, 2011.

"What neither the Occupy Movement nor many educators are emphasizing enough are the actual ecological limits and the fact that they necessitate for economies and populations to shrink, not grow."

Alex Lautensach, faculty

The Occupy Movement expressed three major agenda or concerns. All three tend to resonate with anybody who is concerned with educational efforts to achieve sustainable modes of living.

First, most Occupiers expressed their dismay at the growing disparity between the world’s rich and poor, caused by the poor getting poorer (in real terms, which means anything but money) and the very rich growing richer (by any standard) at a rate and into dimensions that can only be described as obscene. The middle classes see themselves balancing on the cutting edge of the blade and largely teetering towards the poor side. These trends render the transition to sustainability more difficult as both extreme affluence and extreme poverty create unnecessary environmental impacts and harmful trends that will be difficult to ameliorate. For education, the trends provide useful illustrations of ecological overshoot and of the connections between sustainability and justice.

Second, the Occupiers were particularly concerned about the roles played by banking institutions in the global recession, in the growing disparity, and in the demise of the middle classes while the richest remain well buffered. More than any other non-government institutions, the banking industry contributes and perpetuates unsustainable economic policies and global ecological overshoot. Educational efforts towards sustainability must empower learners to relocate their economic capital away from large banks and towards more local, community-based financial institutions.

Third, the Occupiers protested against government complicity, compliance and inaction in the face of the above wrongdoings. This includes the deliberate delay, distortion, denial and disparagement of information that highlights our overshoot, and the marginalization of critics. Addressing these issues also lies at the heart of education for sustainability.

What neither the Occupy Movement nor many educators are emphasizing enough are the actual ecological limits and the fact that they necessitate for economies and populations to shrink, not grow.

"Occupy UCSC combats the methods of privatizations of our university including tuition hikes, budget cuts and disenfranchisement of communities of color."

Gabi Kirk, student, University of California, Santa Cruz

The University of California, Santa Cruz has a vibrant history of political activism. Occupy UCSC combats the methods of privatizations of our university including tuition hikes, budget cuts and disenfranchisement of communities of color. We are also concerned about new development in the Upper Campus forest, and believe we cannot build more buildings when we cannot afford to pay teachers to fill them. On November 9, we held a rally with speakers powered by a bike generator and performances from the student Mexican folk dance troupe Los Mejicas. After, we marched through our beautiful campus to meet up with Occupy Santa Cruz. I have been involved with both sustainability organizing and the Occupy Movement since September 2009. Both movements have shaped my training and identity as a student activist.

Photo Credit: Jasmin Avila.

"...that the monopoly that the infinite planet model has on our economic (and political) thinking and practice is being broken. It will be easier now for students - and policy makers - to find ways to step outside that outmoded idea system."

Eric Zencey, Fellow, Gund Institute for Ecological Economics and visiting Associate Professor, SUNY Empire State College

The Occupy Wall Street Movement had its origin in the pages of Adbusters, Kalle Lasn's "culture jamming" magazine published in Canada. As a reader and sometime contributor to the magazine, I was surprised and delighted to see his call for a Wall Street Occupation take root and grow; it turns out that ideas, critical ideas, can still have influence in the world. Those ideas include a sweeping challenge to neoclassical economics - not from the traditional Keynesian position, but from a more thorough-going critique grounded in the recognition that the planet is finite. Neoclassical economics - the reigning idea system of our day - systematically ignores that simple truth. To me, the Occupy Movement means that the monopoly that the infinite planet model has on our economic (and political) thinking and practice is being broken. It will be easier now for students - and policy makers - to find ways to step outside that outmoded idea system. For me, participation in the movement is a direct extension of my efforts to clarify and communicate what a finite-planet political economy must look like, deal with, acknowledge.

Photo credit: Kathryn Davis.

"[Sustainability and Occupy movements] share a sense of awareness; a willingness to challenge an obsolete paradigm with innovation; a common enemy; and, sadly, a rational sense of desperation and great uncertainty."

Karch, student

Only a few weeks after September 17, the Kent State Sustainability Collective (KSSC) voted unanimously to support any local Occupy effort. There are many ways to describe the connection between both [sustainability and Occupy] movements. A simple way might be to look at the components that give life to both, that is, the people involved. And how are the people of Sustainability and Occupy connected? In many cases they are one in the same. The collective concious of the movements share a sense of awareness; a willingness to challenge an obsolete paradigm with innovation; a common enemy; and sadly, a rational sense of desperation and great uncertainty.

Says Karch about the above photograph: "Occupier Laurie Beekman, our secretary for KSSC occupies her tent in front the local natural foods co-op. Our Occupy demonstration took a different form in Kent. In consideration of Kent's historical context, we developed a strategy called Tent the Town, in which we offered the idea of Community Based Economics as a positive goal-oriented solution to consider. Instead of densly occupying the public space of things the movement is against (big banks and mega corporations), we introduced ourselves to the community by occupying the public sidewalks with a single tent in front of things the movement ought to be for such as local, independent businesses that keep the community's money within the locale. In many ways this strategy let us engage the community in a positive discourse, inject a sustainable idea into the community concious, and a create an effective presence depsite our relatively low numbers."

"On a college campus, you often don’t have to look beyond cafeterias and food courts to see where inequality and sustainability meet. Next to walls lined with posters about 'sustainability,' the workers behind the counter have a different story to tell."

Kyle Schafer, staff, UNITE HERE

At its heart, the Occupy Movement is about inequality. On a college campus, you often don’t have to look beyond cafeterias and food courts to see where inequality and sustainability meet. Next to walls lined with posters about “sustainability,” the workers behind the counter have a different story to tell. Consider these facts:

• The annual median wage for food workers on campus in 2010 was $17,176, substantially below the federal poverty level of $22,050 for a family of four (Bureau of Labor Statistics, adjusted for hours).

• 22% of workers in food preparation and serving-related occupations live in food insecure households compared to the national average of 15% (2010 Census Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Survey).

Ed Childs, a Harvard dining worker (shown above), helped lead a fight for sustainable food and sustainable jobs on his campus. Kellyn Lewis (shown above), a student leader at Northwestern University, led a Living Wage Campaign on his campus. They are just two of many bringing the spirit of Occupy to the movement for sustainable dining on campus.

"Occupy Wall Street confronts the entire institution of the Master of Business Administration, raising deep questions about wealth, social responsibility, managerialism and leadership..."

Ralph Meima, Program Director, Marlboro MBA in Managing for Sustainability

On the evening of Friday, September 30, I happened to read about “The Declaration of the Occupation of New York City.” Until then, I had not paid Occupy Wall Street much attention. I was astounded by the breadth of the Declaration’s grievances. Corporate personhood, wealth concentration, debt, the Fed, health, energy, war, environment…exactly what our MBA students and faculty were concerned about. I immediately posted them to an open, public Google doc with an invitation to add ideas for action to the list. This American People’s New Economic Charter, publicized over Occupy livestreams, grew through feverish crowd-sourcing from two to 80-plus pages over three days as hundreds collaborated to express their concerns and hopes about our economy.

Occupy Wall Street has remained relevant for our program’s mission, with several visits to Zuccotti Park, the launch of OccupyMBA.com, and debates about the critical issues raised. For me as a business educator and MBA director, Occupy Wall Street confronts the entire institution of the Master of Business Administration, raising deep questions about wealth, social responsibility, managerialism and leadership - pointing, I believe, toward profound future changes in the way our society will conceive of and do business.

Ralph is picture above with protesters at Occupy Wall Street, Zuccotti Park, October 6, 2011.

"The access to education at all levels, the steep increase in student loans for higher education, and the ability to find work upon graduation due to the current state of economic affairs are of great concern to me."

Andrea Louise Cadwell, graduate student, environmental studies, Antioch University New England

The Occupy Movement in the U.S. grew out of social movements and revolutions worldwide including the revolution in Iceland that generated a new constitution and banking system. Followed by the occupation of Madrid’s town square in April 2010, the occupation of Tahrir Square in Egypt in February 2011 and the occupation of Jantar Mantar in Delhi in April 2011. It was at Jantar Mantar that I began my participation in the worldwide Occupy Movement with activist Anna Hazare. In September 2011, I helped to organize an affinity group in New Hampshire for Oct2001.org, the ongoing encampment on Freedom Plaza in Washington, D.C. and shortly thereafter, I went to Boston to help build the Occupy encampment there. In October 2011, I organized Occupy Keene as part of worldwide Occupation day.

I see higher education as an integral part of the economic and social justice issues being raised by the Occupy Together movement. The access to education at all levels, the steep increase in student loans for higher education, and the ability to find work upon graduation due to the current state of economic affairs are of great concern to me. As Robin Cook so aptly puts it: “Education is more than a luxury; it is a responsibility that society owes itself.”

Higher education serves to generate new pathways in technology, medicine, law, environmental science and ecology, human rights, the arts and so much more. Discourse gives birth to ideas that shape the world we live in. This year in March, Oct2011.org will host NOW, the National Occupation of Washington. Teach-ins, workshops and lectures will be held over the course of two weeks at this time. Academics and students from around the country will join in the effort to reform the structure of student loans and to increase access to higher education for all US citizens. I plan to participate in this event in the hopes that my education will open the doors for others to do the same.

Andrea is pictured above in Jantar Mantar, Delhi, India, "listening to Kiran Bedi announce to the the fasters and crowds that Prime Minister Mohaman Singh and the parliament at large have agreed to the demands of the fasters and the general public: governmental reform that will help to remove corruption in all facets of government."

"...the continuing encroachment on civil liberties is chilling the dialogue that should be surrounding national economic choices and the Occupy movement. We believe that endless war and enormous income disparities are inherently unsustainable."

Susan Jennings, Director, Office of Campus and Community Sustainability, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth

The UMass Dartmouth Sustainability Initiative believes that for sustainability to continue to be a vital and relevant force, we must deepen and broaden our conversation to include matters that concern us all. We recognize that Peak Oil and other resource limits are contributing to international economic woes. We also recognize that the continuing encroachment on civil liberties is chilling the dialogue that should be surrounding national economic choices and the Occupy Movement. We believe that endless war and enormous income disparities are inherently unsustainable.

As educators we believe that we should take a leadership role in open dialogue. Our weekly Sustainability Almanac draws from both traditional and untraditional sources to present a balanced and multidisciplinary view of the news. During the upcoming semester, we are also co-sponsoring, along with several other campus entities, a series of discussions and speakers called "Waking Up: Finding our Voices." Our speakers include Naomi Wolf, author of "Give me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries." We will also have discussions about campus free speech zones, as well as ways that students can become involved in issues that concern them.

"We have students graduating with outrageous debt, while big time athletic coaches pull in millions. What’s wrong with this picture?"

Terry Link, former Director of Sustainability at Michigan State University

Income inequality is the most unattended higher education issue related to the Occupy Movement. We have students graduating with outrageous debt, while big time athletic coaches pull in millions. What’s wrong with this picture? It’s time for honest discussions on campuses about establishing a reasonable wage ratio from bottom to top. Can we have a sustainable future with growing inequality?

To get the conversation going we could start here: National minimum wage is only $7.25/hour or roughly $15,000/year. If we think that no one should make more in one year than the lowest makes in a lifetime, then a maximum salary given a 50-year working life would be $750,000. Feeling more generous? The median household income is just under $50,000/year (and falling). A 50 to 1 ratio would cap salaries at $2.5 million. If you want to pay more, you must raise the floor, too! Hire a football coach for $4 million, then minimum wage at the institution should be $80,000/yr.

Successful companies do very well with much lower ratios: Ben and Jerry’s was 8 to 1; Whole Foods was 19 to 1. CEO to average worker ratios are recently estimated at 100 to more than 300 to 1.

"I've had a few people unexpectedly tell me that The Swarm is the best thing they've ever been involved in in their life."

Katherine Ball, student, Portland State University

We got the eviction notice for the camp three days in advance. An emergency general assembly was set up where we broke up into affinity groups and brainstormed a multitude of strategies that we could use to fight the eviction. One group came up with the idea to do an all night bike ride and march around the camps - and it hit me like a wave: The Swarm! This was an action I participated in in Copenhagen during the UN Climate Change Conference.

About 30 people showed up which grew into 125 over the night. Led by a tall bike, we biked in circles around the camp from 11 at night to 8:30 in the morning...weaving our way through the traffic and zipping right next to the cops. The cops hated being sandwiched between us bicyclists and the crowd in the camp, so they retreated to the opposite side of the street with the spectators...everytime we would go past the crowd they would cheer and we would cheer back at them. We would re-electrify each other, like dumping a bucket of water over and over on exposed powerlines...

At 5:00 am, the cops had dwindled so they were single file blocking one intersection, and this kid named Billy riding a classic Schwinn with slicked back hair and a jean bike club vest like he had biked right out of the 40s said: 'Let's bike through them.' So we turned the corner and started towards them, chanting, 'Look who's blocking traffic now! Look who's blocking traffic now!' and the 5,000 person crowd picked it up and we were all chanting in tandem: 'Look who's blocking traffic now!' Everyone went wild as we crossed the finish line.

I've had a few people unexpectedly tell me that The Swarm is the best thing they've ever been involved in in their life. Since then, The Swarm has become a full fledged action group that cycles in solidarity with marches and demos and has even started to organize its own actions.

Photo credit: The Oregonian.

Didn't have a chance to share your voice on this topic? It's not too late! AASHE will include the Higher Education Occupation project in its upcoming 2011 Higher Education Sustainability Review. We welcome more entries here until March 15.

Also check out AASHE's new Affordability & Access page in the Resource Center!

The article below was written by Julian Dautremont-Smith, STARS Steering Committee Chair. It describes the vision for STARS version 2.0 developed by the STARS Steering Committee.

With the recent approval of STARS v 1.2 (to be released on 2/8/12), the STARS Steering Committee has begun focusing more intently on the plans for STARS 2.0, which will be the first major update of STARS since the release of the original STARS 1.0 in 2010. To start the process, and provide transparency about this important step in the evolution of STARS, the Steering Committee has prepared a draft vision for STARS 2.0, included below.

The vision is intended to respond to the many comments and suggestions that staff and Committee members have heard from the campus sustainability community. We are hopeful that STARS 2.0 will significantly improve upon the foundation provided by STARS 1.0. To ensure that we are responding appropriately to the community's suggestions and are headed in the right direction, we are inviting comments on this draft vision. Please tell us what you think by adding a comment below. While public comments are encouraged in the interest of transparency and to facilitate dialog among interested parties, we also welcome comments at stars@aashe.org.

Please note that there will also be several opportunities to make suggestions on specific changes to individual credits later in the process. At this time, we are most interested in comments on the overall vision and goals. We look forward to your suggestions!

Draft Vision for STARS 2.0

This document outlines the STARS Steering Committee's vision and goals for the development of STARS 2.0. The purpose of this document is to provide STARS Technical Advisors with overall guidance about the kind of changes the Steering Committee is seeking in STARS 2.0 and to provide transparency to STARS Participants and the campus sustainability community as a whole regarding the program's direction. Under the STARS Governance Structure, the Technical Advisors work with staff to draft proposed changes to the STARS credits and the Steering Committee is responsible for approving all new versions of STARS.

Overall Vision

Responding to feedback from the campus sustainability community, STARS 2.0 will facilitate more meaningful assessments of campus sustainability performance while remaining accessible and relevant to the diversity of higher education institutions.

Goals

1. Create opportunities for stakeholders to participate – To ensure that STARS continues to serve the needs of the campus sustainability community, we want to use the development of STARS 2.0 as an opportunity to engage stakeholders and give them a voice in the process. Vehicles for participation will include public comment periods and conference calls (organized like virtual Town Hall meetings).

2. Improve comparability of STARS data – We intend for STARS 2.0 to reduce ambiguity, with a focus on clearly defining terms that have been interpreted inconsistently in existing submissions.

3. Where possible, move away from "all or nothing" credits and towards credits based on a spectrum of performance – Credits that are binary in nature often don't capture more nuanced differences between the effectiveness of different programs. To the extent possible, we would like to modify binary credits to recognize multiple levels of achievement.

4. Evaluate all credits, adding credits addressing sustainability issues currently not covered in STARS and deleting credits when appropriate – STARS aims to be a comprehensive campus sustainability evaluation. To maintain comprehensiveness, we welcome new credits that capture aspects of campus sustainability that are not currently covered by STARS. This may include credits related to: biodiversity; health, safety, and wellbeing; and social justice.

5. Improve applicability of STARS to higher education institutions located outside of the US and Canada – STARS was originally designed with the United States and Canada in mind. Now that institutions from other countries have been invited to participate in STARS, we see a need to revise some of the credits to make them applicable to these institutions.

6. Adjust weighting of STARS credits and overall balance of the STARS point system –Using a consistently applied methodology, we aim to improve scoring and the balance of points across credits so that point weighting reflects as closely as possible the relative impacts of the actions required to achieve each credit, as determined by the best available science.

7. Increase technical rigor of STARS –To ensure that STARS continues to motivate institutions to strive for continuous improvement, toward full sustainability, we seek to incorporate more rigorous and challenging criteria, and in particular, to address the following priorities identified by our community for each category:

   • ER – Address the definition of sustainability, the identification of sustainability courses and research, improved direct measurements of learning, and the overall rigor of the category.

   • OP – Address the 2005 baseline such that both early and more recent adopters of sustainable practices are rewarded equitably for their efforts and achievements.

   • PAE –Build more rigor and scaling into these credits, with particular attention given to those that have proven to be the least challenging.

8. Balance the need for comprehensiveness and technical rigor with the need to ensure that STARS is accessible – As we design credits that enable meaningful comparisons, we also want to ensure that STARS can be understood and used by non-technical audiences. We also aim to reduce, or at least not substantially increase, the time required to complete a STARS Report and to streamline the credit requirements wherever possible.

9. Maintain overall continuity – We strive to ensure that STARS 2.0 is not so different from previous versions that participants feel they have to start from scratch when preparing their submission.

10. Enhance existing mechanisms for ensuring that submissions are accurate - Options under consideration include voluntary or required review of submissions by: AASHE staff, peers, trained students, community organizations, and/or independent consultants.

Possible 2.0 changes

In accordance with the STARS Technical Development Policy, the following changes are allowed in the move to STARS 2.0:

• Adding, deleting, or modifying individual data fields
• Adding, deleting, or modifying credits
• Changing the number of points credits are worth
• Adding incentives or requirements related to verification
• Changing how scores are calculated, rating levels, etc.
• Changing the organization of credits
• Creating new types of credits

Estimated Timeline (Subject to Change)

January - March 2012

• Welcome feedback on STARS 2.0 vision
• Host comment calls on particular categories or credits
• Technical Advisor discussions

April - June 2012

• Staff and Technical Advisors draft credit revisions
• Steering Committee approves draft of STARS 2.0

July - September 2012

• 60-90 day public comment period on draft

October 2012 - February 2013

• Consolidate feedback from public comment period
• Revise credits

March - June 2013

• Steering Committee approves STARS 2.0
• Prepare Technical Manual and Reporting Tool
• Launch STARS 2.0

Transitioning from STARS 1.x to 2.0

STARS Participants that already have data in the Reporting Tool when STARS 2.0 is released will have the option to migrate their data to the new version of STARS. However, with the likelihood of new and revised credits in STARS 2.0, this means there will be blank fields that need to be completed in addition to updating the content of the credits that have stayed the same. The STARS staff and Steering Committee aims to make the transition to STARS 2.0 as seamless as possible for institutions. This includes providing guidance about participation and reminders when a STARS rating is getting close to expiring (after 3 years).

Welcome to the second part of a two-part AASHE Bulletin Sustainability Student Diary entry by Darlene Seto, a graduate student at the Institute for Resources, Environment, and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia. Looking at ways that gender can play a role for a student of sustainability, this installment explores gender as a concern for students in their academic careers. In the first installment, posted last week, Seto talked about gender as it relates to environment-related research. This blog post was originally posted on the Getting to GREENR blog, which supports GREENR, an interdisciplinary web portal for environmental and sustainability studies. AASHE welcomes questions and invites feedback on each Sustainability Student Diary entry. Submit diary entries of your own for consideration to bulletin@aashe.org.

In my last post, I looked at how studying gender and environment can work together. In this post, I want to touch upon how gender matters and operates within my own life as an environment studies student.

Now, this task can be quite difficult to disentangle. For example, how has identifying as a female influenced my choice to enter environment studies? Or how has it influenced my choice of research topic? Or even how I go about doing my research and how I process information?

It certainly has, I’m sure, as surely as my own upbringing as a second-generation Chinese Canadian did, though I can’t necessarily point to specific incidents.

Looking ahead to future choices is another way to look at how issues of gender influences my life. For example, what kind of career, occupation or lifestyle would allow a balance between work and home? How would having and raising children differ if I were to be working on international development projects, working in an environmental nonprofit organization, or continuing on as an academic? Should I even want kids as an environmental activist, given the environmental pressures our population is already placing on the earth? Despite my still rather youthful status, issues such as these come to mind.

I say this not because men don’t think about these issues – I’m sure they do. However, I do believe such questions to be a greater dilemma for women who, in most scenarios, continue to be seen as the primary home-caretaker and care-giver. I see this daily, in my female mentors and professors who hold full-time jobs, write and publish articles, teach and mentor students, while simultaneously carrying the expectation of primary household responsibilities. I have taken a course with a professor, who not only taught while nine months pregnant, but gave birth and taught the very next week without break.

While I admire her fortitude, I’m not so sure I want that for myself. Gender inequality continues, even in higher education. Though women now outnumber men in enrollment – and degrees, for that matter – there remain some significant inequities. At my own university, a 2011 gender equity report (using 2009 statistics) notes that only 20 percent of faculty employed at the professor level are women. There is almost a $15,000 differential in annual average pay between women and men. Even after accounting for gender differences in allocation of faculty across departments, differences in experience, and special research allocations, there is still a $3,000 pay differential. Aside from pay, many inequities may be more difficult to quantify: things like inequities in office space, research resources, as well as in a general climate of marginalization. These are sad statistics for a seemingly progressive university which counts itself for being among the best in the world, and I would suggest not out of line with other top universities.

That is, the glass ceiling continues to exist, at multiple levels and in multiple arenas. Taking stock of this, it might seem discouraging. Equity is a fundamental pillar of social sustainability. I would argue that a great deal of the crises our world is now facing is a direct result of the lack of female participation and leadership at all levels in society. If we haven’t managed to even achieve the quantitative measures of equity in the institutions in which we are taught, how can it be expected in the other reaches of society?

To be quite honest, I’m not quite sure what to say in terms of how we might get there, other than it will require a lot more work, and likely some more battles as well. In fact, issues of gender equity can be characterized as quite similar to sustainability in that a great deal more change – behavioral, institutional and structural – is required in the process towards each. Both issues can be difficult to talk about and provoke heated exchanges.

To that end, I think it important that gender play an significant role in environmental discussions in the future, both as a point of intersection in research, as I discussed in my last post, and as an issue in our everyday lives. Simply put, gender matters!

Joe Indvik graduated from Dartmouth College in 2010. As a student and later independent consultant, he led a team to design and implement a $1 million green revolving loan fund at Dartmouth. He now works as a consultant in the Climate Change and Sustainability Division of ICF International in Washington, DC. Despite his day-job in the beltway, he enthusiastically offers free-of-charge consulting and moral support to help folks set up their own green revolving funds.

In the last few years, universities have emerged as a hotbed of investment in clean energy and efficiency (“cleantech”).

An increasingly popular and innovative tactic for making these investments is the green revolving loan fund (GRF). A GRF issues loans to finance cleantech and sustainability projects that can generate monetary savings. The returns from these projects flow back into the fund (“revolve”) and are re-invested in future projects. GRFs are often managed by a committee of community members who review loan applications and oversee fund operations.

The number of universities with a GRF has quadrupled since 2008, growing to at least 47 by the end of 2011. The Sustainable Endowments Institute (SEI) along with numerous partner organizations including AASHE, recently launched the Billion Dollar Green Challenge, an ambitious campaign that encourages and facilitates university investment in GRFs, with the ultimate goal of directing $1 billion of capital into these funds nation-wide. With an estimated $65 million already committed to GRFs as part of the Challenge, continued growth is expected.

On the surface, this growth should not be surprising, as the case for making cleantech investments on campus is well established. Schools regularly report annual return-on-investment (ROI) in excess of 30% for cleantech projects (for additional statistics see the publication, Greening the Bottom Line). These projects usually pay for themselves in less than five years, and often much faster, while also reducing carbon emissions among other environmental benefits.

However, the choice to use a revolving loan mechanism to make these investments is not always so obvious. Any investment made by a GRF could also be made by spending directly out of the operating budget, capital improvement budget, or endowment. Energy savings would then be absorbed into the operating budget with no strings attached. So why use a GRF?

In my experience, there are several key factors that make GRFs the best choice for universities looking to make cleantech investments.

• The “sizzle” factor. A GRF is a unified, purposeful investment vehicle that is easy to market and generates a more positive public image than traditional investments. It demonstrates concrete commitment to sustainability in a way that one-time investments cannot.

• Turn expense into investment. Despite the massive cost-saving potential of cleantech investments, many colleges and universities are stuck in the rut of thinking about them as an expense only. By definition, the “revolving” mechanism brings savings into the limelight and explicitly directs them into future investments. When presenting this concept to administrators, I have shown the following graph. The first bar is annual ROI for the stock market (S&P 500). The second bar is annual ROI for university GRFs (reported to SEI).

• Leverage savings into opportunity. GRFs are a great way for schools to capitalize on the savings from cleantech projects to promote sustainability in general. For example, the Dartmouth Green Revolving Fund (full disclosure: I am a co-founder) directs 10% of the savings from renewable energy and energy efficiency projects into a Green Community Fund. Students, staff, and faculty can then apply for money from this fund for projects that promote sustainability on campus, whether or not they have financial paybacks.

• Bring the ivory tower down to the community. A GRF can engage the community by bringing diverse stakeholders to the table to make decisions about investments and chart a path toward sustainability. This happens via interactions on the management board and through the participatory process of writing proposals for funding. At a more basic level, GRFs are often started by students. Of the 47 funds surveyed by SEI, 17 were student-driven.

• Predictability and staying power. A GRF charter is usually written with specific requirements for projects to ensure fiscal discipline and environmental responsibility. Unlike investments made on a case-by-case basis, a GRF helps guarantee that money will be spent according to the criteria the founders intended.

• Check the box. Many rating systems, surveys and reporting programs look specifically for the existence of a GRF when reviewing organizations.

• Performance tracking. You can’t manage what you don't measure. A GRF allows a school to draw a figurative box around a body of money, invest it in sustainability projects on a recurring basis, and then track the financial and environmental performance of those projects. This model lends itself to metrics like payback period, return-on-investment, carbon mitigation per dollar, and so on. For example, check out the “By the numbers” section of Harvard’s fund website. Clean, simple, and compelling. Try doing that with a suite of traditional capital allocations!

• Infinite scalability. GRFs can be effective with starting capital of $10 or $10 million. Whether the first investment is one lightbulb or a solar array, the model works. Many schools have started their funds off small to demonstrate effectiveness, then scaled them up once the administrative machinery is up and running.

I am convinced that Green Revolving Funds are the wave of the future for cleantech investment on campus. They have a notable financial, environmental, and educational upside and negligible downside in most cases. With initiatives like the Billion Dollar Green Challenge and student entrepreneurs leading the way, it will be exciting to see what the next few years have in store.