Jennifer Tsai
ESYS 190B
UCSD Sustainability Department vs. Preuss Ecology Club – Pros and Cons of a Top down
and Bottom up Approach to Sustainability
Abstract:
For a university like UC San Diego (UCSD), it appears that they are at the forefront of most
innovative environmental projects and objectives. However, as they continue to receive national
attention for its partnerships and achievements, the question remains: has UCSD effectively
communicated the “sustainability message” to the campus community, and if not how should
they go about doing it? The purpose of this project was to perform a case study of sustainability
methods at another institution – Preuss – and see how their success in sustainability differed
from that of UCSD. In order to analyze better methods for implementing sustainability on a
campus such as UCSD, I thought it might be useful to evaluate sustainability efforts in a smaller
scaled campus, specifically Preuss. Through my internship at the UCSD Sustainability
Department and my volunteer experiences at Preuss, I had the opportunity to observe two
different methods of sustainability outreach, top down with the UCSD and bottom up with
Preuss’ Ecology Club. Three significant projects the Sustainability Tracking Assessment and
Ratings System (STARS) pilot program, the Power Down for the Planet project, and Earth
Week/ Day events allowed me to make my assessments. The results varied with each project.
Yet, it allowed me to conclude that bottom up approaches are more effective in promoting the
sustainability message, and UCSD must return to grassroots efforts in order to further
accomplish the environmental goals of the university.
Tsai 2
Introduction:
“UC San Diego (UCSD) has a long history of advancing sustainability through academic
research and education.”1. In the past few years, the university has initiated many projects that
reflect the growing efforts to become a “greener” campus. After June of 2004, all new and
developing buildings are required to achieve a LEED standard of silver or silver-equivalent.
Organizations composed of student groups and facility management staff are looking to retrofit
existing buildings to comply with LEED Existing building (EB) silver or equivalent standards.
Currently, 26 buildings on the UCSD campus are or in the process of becoming LEED silver, the
equivalent or higher. Great achievements have been made in the use of renewable electricity on
campus. As of 2008, 21% of the electricity used on the main campus is considered renewable
energy. In the area of waste diversion, UCSD had set a goal of 50% waste diversion by June 30,
2008 – a goal they far surpassed when they were able to divert 67.4% of all campus waste.2 Plans
for making the university a zero waste campus by 2020 are well on their way.3 UCSD Fleet
Services and Transportation are also making commendable accomplishments in improving
alternative transportation options. Currently, 37% of the fleet vehicles used run on biodiesel or
diesel, electric, hybrid and CNG options.4 UCSD has shown to be a very capable university in
campaigning sustainable practices in such areas as green building practices, recycling and waste,
transportation, and purchasing, amongst other similar categories. However, “the most important
challenge lays in the campus growth…UCSD efforts are supported by the interest and dedication
of top-level administration at UCSD…”5 again, cite source of quote.
1
Jewel, Amy and Souder, Margaret. UC San Diego Sustainability Assessment Report. June 2008.
Jewel, Amy and Souder, Margaret. UC San Diego Sustainability Assessment Report. June 2008.
3
Jewel, Amy and Souder, Margaret. UC San Diego Climate Action Plan. December 2008.
4
Jewel, Amy and Souder, Margaret. UC San Diego Sustainability Assessment Report. June 2008.
5
Jewel, Amy and Souder, Margaret. UC San Diego Sustainability Assessment Report. June 2008.
2
Tsai 3
For a university like UCSD, it appears that they are at the forefront of most innovative
environmental projects and objectives. However, as they continue to receive national attention
for its partnerships and achievements, the question remains: has UCSD effectively
communicated the “sustainability message” to the campus community, and if not how should
they go about doing it? The purpose of this project was to perform a case study of sustainability
methods at another institution – Preuss – and see how their success in sustainability differed
from that of UCSD.
Background:
UCSD established the office of Sustainability Coordinator in 2004. The Sustainability
Coordinator is Maggie Souder, in the Auxiliary and Plant Services Department (A&PS), which
encompasses six different divisions including imprints, transportation services, UCSD bookstore,
and Facilities Management – divisions that offer services to UCSD students, faculty, staff, and
the community. In addition, the divisions that comprise A&PS are strong supporters of UCSD’s
Environmental Resource Management. Though the Sustainability Coordinator does not fall
under one of the six specific divisions of A&PS, the role of the coordinator takes on a unique
significance. The Sustainability Coordinator acts as a liaison between students, other
environmental departments, and the service sectors that UCSD offers. Additionally, the
coordinator is responsible for bringing UCSD to the forefront of sustainable practices. It is very
evident that though the Sustainability Coordinator tries to achieve administrative and student
goals, the instructions of the administration weighs more heavily in her decisions.
In addition to interning for the Sustainability Coordinator, I volunteered at Preuss School. Preuss
is a charter middle and high school located on the UCSD campus. Preuss is “…dedicated to
providing a rigorous college prep education for motivated low-income students who will become
Tsai 4
the first in their families to graduate from college.”6 Preuss maintains a small student population
and instills strong student- teacher relationships “…to create a highly enriched secondary
school.” The mission of Preuss “…includes the development of strong character, healthy
lifestyles, good judgment, ethical behavior and instilling a sense of service to one’s home
community.”7 A reflection of the Preuss mission is their Ecology Club, one of the many student
clubs at Preuss, which offers students the opportunity to develop healthy lifestyles and instill
service to their community. The Ecology Club meets weekly to perform a variety of service tasks
namely for the Preuss campus. Some of the Ecology Club activities are: campus beautification,
composting, planning Earth Day events, generating environmental awareness on campus, and
running the school’s recycling program. The Ecology Club is very much a student run program
that has little influence from the Preuss administrative staff.
My responsibilities at UCSD and Preuss School were quite varied. During my time at the
Sustainability Department, I was involved tasks, such as data collection, data verification, and
event planning. I worked on numerous reports that would reflect and assess sustainability
practices at UCSD. I worked on verifying statistical data on UCSD and environmental facts that
would be distributed to students, faculty, staff, and visitors of the university. I assisted in projects
with the sole purpose of getting the word of sustainability out to the UCSD community. At my
internship at UCSD, I was very much a participant and driving force of the sustainability
movement at the UCSD campus.
At Preuss, however, my obligations were very different. Though I was able to instill
some of my ideas and offer advice to the Ecology Club, my main role was to oversee the
students and tasks the club was undertaking. I tried to help expand their program. However,
6
7
“About the Preuss School.” May 2009. < http://preuss.ucsd.edu/about/>.
“About the Preuss School.” May 2009. < http://preuss.ucsd.edu/about/>.
Tsai 5
unlike UCSD, I was not the driving force behind their sustainability efforts, and my efforts did
not get very far. I was an observer, a helper, and the students of Ecology Club were the main
players to achieve their environmental goals.
Methodology:
Step 1: Identification of the theory
In order to analyze better methods for implementing sustainability on a campus such as
UCSD, I thought it might be useful to evaluate sustainability efforts in a smaller scaled campus,
specifically Preuss. The experiences at these two institutions have led me to the observation that
the “green movement” taking place at UCSD and Preuss are the result of two very different
social structures. Described in planning terms, “top down” is an “approach in which the board
decides what results are to be achieved and how, and passes the plan down the hierarchy or
management levels.”8 On the other hand, bottom up planning is the method where plans are
developed at the lowest level of the firm; and then these plans are channeled through each next
higher level for its participation until they reach the board of directors for the final approval.”9 In
this respect, sustainability at UCSD is very much a top down framework, while Preuss is very
much a bottom up configuration.
UCSD and Preuss differ in the structure of sustainability decision making. At UCSD, the
sustainability coordinator answers to the Vice Chancellor of Business Services, who then
answers to the Chancellor. Many of the projects that we see going on at UCSD are a direct result
of the ideas that university leaders would like to implement. Many of the resultant projects are
also carefully crafted plans by department heads and project leaders. UCSD has tried to include
8
“Top Down”. Business Definitions. May 2009. <http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/topdown.html>
9
“Bottom Up”. Business Definitions. May 2009. <http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/topdown.html>
Tsai 6
as much student participation in these projects as possible, but the root and factors that allow
these ideas to take place are not student based. Rather these projects can only take place as a
result of the approval of key UCSD players. Preuss, however, is completely opposite. The
principal and administrative staff, though supportive of Ecology Club efforts, have limited
involvement. Most of the projects are student ideas that formulate within the club itself, and are
carried out as a result of the club’s own will. Though praise is given, key administrators supply
little monetary, labor, or marketing support to the Ecology Club.
There were three significant projects that I became involved in at UCSD that juxtaposed
three significant projects I implemented or tried to implement at Preuss. These three projects
were the Sustainability Tracking Assessment and Ratings System (STARS) pilot program, the
Power Down for the Planet project, and Earth Week/ Day events. These three projects and the
ability to compare the effect of these projects at UCSD and Preuss has helped me evaluate and
apply the top down and bottom up theories as well as analyze which sustainability approach may
be more appropriate to achieve the goal of effective communication of the sustainability message
to individuals.
Step 2: Evaluation of Institutions - STARS
The Sustainability Tracking Assessment and Ratings System (STARS) pilot program was
created by the international organization called the Association for the Advancement of
Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE). It was an attempt to create a cohesive framework
for different colleges and universities to voluntarily report the environmentally preferable
practices that they are undertaking on their campus. UCSD was one of the 70 universities that
participates in this program. The report features a numeric point system that grants points based
on a set of sustainable practices criteria used to gauge how “sustainable” a campus is. There are
Tsai 7
108 credits in the report, with each category having an allocated point system. The highest point
system an institution may receive is 197.6 points. According to AASHE, STARS was designed
to:
1. Provide a guide for advancing sustainability in all sectors of higher education.
2. Enable meaningful comparisons over time and across institutions by establishing a
common standard of measurement for sustainability in higher education.
3. Create incentives for continual improvement toward sustainability.
4. Facilitate information sharing about higher education sustainability practices and
performance.
5. Build a stronger, more diverse campus sustainability community.10
STARS, like many other evaluative reports, require in depth information on specific practices
that was being implemented in different campus service departments. To gather the data
necessary to answer most of the STARS questions required information from the following
departments: purchasing, housing and dining, administration and finance, facilities management
(which encompasses energy management, waste and recycling management, building
commissioners, and grounds), transportation services, student org and faculty diversity and
equity administrators, and other environmental departments on campus – most notably the
Environmental Solutions Institute, now known as the Sustainability Solutions Institute (SSI). A
total of 10 departments were contacted in our attempts to generate the information necessary for
the report.
In order to perform a case study of Preuss, I had to be able to evaluate its current campus
sustainability efforts. Rather than try and duplicate a comprehensive STARS report for Preuss,
10
“Sustainability Tracking Assessment Ratings System (STARS)”. May 2009.
<http://www.aashe.org/stars/index.php>.
Tsai 8
only a specific portion of STARS – the materials, recycling, and waste minimization category –
was used as a guideline to appraise the Ecology Club. I assessed their recycling program to see if
the program would fit STARS standards, and if it was comparable to the recycling program at
UCSD.
The second action I implemented at Preuss, to fortify my theory that Preuss’ approach to
sustainability is bottom up, was to evaluate how effective it would be to institute the idea for an
expanded recycling program. Realizing a need for recycling bins outside of the classroom at
Preuss, I tried to take on a role similar to what the sustainability coordinator did at UCSD - that
is, to bridge the gap between the students of the Ecology Club and their administrative staff, as
well as bringing in a corresponding relationship with the staff of UCSD (seeing as how Preuss is
a satellite campus of UCSD), in an efforts to achieve a specific goal. I brought in the recycling
coordinator at UCSD, Maureen McManus, and we set up a meeting with the Preuss Director of
Business, Ceasar Dispo, and the Preuss Grounds Manager, Paul Johnson to discuss future
possibilities.
On the grounds that an attempt to include the administration in this particular sustainability effort
failed, another step was to be taken. At a general club meeting, I took a random survey from about
10 members of the Ecology Club, including the faculty advisor, to assess what their needs were.
Using the information I had acquired from the survey, I then generated a letter to the principal.
The letter was a request for a single Rubbermaid recycling bin that had four sections, each
section designated to a specific recyclable material (i.e. glass, paper, aluminum, and plastic). The
bin would cost approximately $800, and it was suggested that the bin placed outside in the lunch
area, monitored by Ecology Club members, so that it may generate convenient and regular
recycling practices, as well as act as an educational tool for proper recycling methods.
Step 3: Application – Power Down for the Planet
Tsai 9
After being able to assess the pros and cons of the institutions’ environmental efforts, I
was able to actively observe the two theories (top-down UCSD and bottom- up Preuss) to very
specific projects that might provide insight to solutions to my problem. The first project was
collecting pledges for the Power Down for the Planet competition. Power Down for the Planet is
“… a challenge program designed to encourage universities and their campus communities to
reduce their own IT power consumption and get their students, faculty, and staff involved in the
fight against climate change” (Powerdownfortheplanet.org). UCSD was amongst one of the eight
universities that participated. The first part of the competition was generating community –
though mainly student – enthusiasm for a viral video challenge. The purpose was to create a
video that reflected the mission of Climate Savers Computing, the organization that introduced
the Power Down for the Planet competition, which is to “educate, entertain, and/or inform others
about the importance of energy efficient computing to the global environment
(powerdownfortheplanet.org).” Winners of the viral video challenge won great prizes such as
$5000 in cash, specialized bikes, laptops, etc. Because the viral video challenge started before
the pledging competition, the Sustainability Department first had a meeting regarding key
strategies that might be able to promote the video challenge. Many e-mails were sent out to key
groups like the Visual Arts department, A.S., and the Video Production Club.
The second component of the competition was to actually get UCSD staff, faculty, and
students – that is, anyone with a @ucsd.edu e-mail address – to participate in the challenge.
Weeks before the actual pledging began, members of the sustainability department comprised of
the Sustainability Coordinator, Sustainability Analyst, and myself, met with key members of the
administrative staff, namely, the Vice Chancellor of Business affairs and the Assist Vice
Chancellor, to discuss effective strategies that could motivate participation. Some of the key
Tsai 10
approaches discussed and later utilized were developing an intra-campus competition amongst
the six colleges of UCSD, enlisting help from often frequented locations such as the library and
the bookstore, and targeting the UCSD community by tabling at specific locations. Additionally,
numerous e-mails were sent out to student groups, environmentally and technologically related
departments, and academic departments. Many flyers were printed and posted for distribution
amongst the resident halls and Price Center. Student volunteers were asked to collect signatures
on library walk and around their living quarters. Ads were placed on websites and newspapers
easily accessible to the UCSD community like the Guardian, student flyers, and the UCSD
website. About a week and a half after promotion for Power Down had started, the Assistant
Vice Chancellor of the Auxiliary, Plant, and Services Department issued a campus-wide e-mail
asking members to participate in the pledge. About a week before the competition was going to
end, the director of certain IT departments and academic departments at UCSD, who were
already using the power saving modes on their computer, were contacted and asked to provide a
list of e-mail addresses with all the employees who worked in the department(s).
Because Preuss is a charter school of UCSD, many of its staff and faculty have
@ucsd.edu e-mail addresses. As a result, the Power Down for the Planet competition was
extended to the Preuss School. A couple of weeks before the competition ended, the Ecology
Club advisor sent out a general e-mail formatted by UCSD to the entire Preuss campus.
Additionally, I was asked to give a short presentation at the Ecology Club meeting to describe
the purpose and intent of the Power Down competition to students of the club. Then, students
were asked to take pledge prior to performing their daily activities.
Step 4: Application – Earth Week
Tsai 11
Another project that allowed me to witness the differences between a top down and
bottom up structure was Earth Week. The events that were being organized during Earth Week
from both UCSD and Preuss have allowed me to observe the advantages and disadvantages of
the top down – bottom up approach, specifically pertaining to budget. UCSD, for the past three
years, has formatted Earth Day, April 22, into a weeklong celebration. This year, many UCSD
students, in collaboration with many UCSD departments such as the Sustainability Department,
Housing, Dining, and Hospitality, and Communications formed the Earth Week 2009 Planning
Committee. Since December, the committee has been meeting biweekly – then as Earth Week
neared, weekly – to discuss the events that were to be held each day of that week.
There were many events that were going to be held by students and the departments we
worked with. However, the two events I was most involved in were the Clean Car Show event
and the Eco-Friendly Fashion Show. The Clean Car Show entailed the cooperation of the UCSD
Fleet Manager and his staff, the Facilities Management Assistant, and me – here on known as the
Clean Car Show Committee. It was an event that would showcase alternative methods of
transportation, namely vehicles, available around the San Diego community, as well as those
used by UCSD transportation services. The Clean Car Show Committee met weekly to discuss
event details. A month prior to the day of the event, many members from different car companies
that had alternative vehicles (i.e. biodiesel, hydrogen converted, etc) were contacted via e-mail or
phone. Then two weeks before the event, a confirmation e-mail was sent out to participating
members, and details were confirmed as to the number of vehicles attending, the number of
people attending, location and time of event, and food preferences. A survey was given at the
end of the event asking participants the pros and cons of the event as well as interest in
participating next year.
Tsai 12
The Eco-Friendly Fashion show comprised of a team mainly of students. The purpose of
the event was to introduce environmentally friendly clothing from San Diego boutiques, as well
as allow students to become creative and create their own clothing designs from reusable and/or
eco-friendly materials (i.e. plastic bottles, newspaper, organic cotton, etc). The event was also
held in conjunction with a student organization on campus called Schools for Schools to hold a
silent auction that will benefit the children of Uganda. The event called for a script for the MC to
present eco-friendly facts relatable to the show and information on the models’ outfits.
Giveaways and prizes had to be packaged and distributed. The day of the event, rehearsal was
held prior, and on the night of, volunteers were coordinating the timing of the event, hair and
make-up, and judging.
Preuss, on the other hand, celebrated “Earth Week” for two days. The first event that the
Ecology Club put on was on the day of Earth Day during the high school lunch hour. Members
of the Ecology Club put up posters and set up a table on stage asking students to participate in
their events. An environmental trivia game was conducted and a prize – a bookmark donated by
the Geisel foundation – was handed out to winners. Additionally, students were asked to take the
“Lorax pledge.” The Lorax Pledge is a reflection of the Dr. Seuss book, “The Lorax,” pledging
to “Speak for the Trees” and then promising to modify one’s behavior so that it is
environmentally preferable. The other event that Preuss had was held on Arbor Day. Members
from the Geisel foundation donated a statue of the Lorax to Preuss, namely the Ecology Club. On
Arbor Day, a dedication ceremony was held to unveil the Lorax its new location – the Preuss
campus. Months prior, the Ecology Club had been renovating a patch of land on campus in an
effort at campus beautification – a drought tolerant garden – where the statue presently stands.
On the day of the event, members of the Geisel foundation were given a tour of the Preuss
Tsai 13
campus, a short skit was performed drama students, music was played by students of the music
program, and student winners of the Lorax poetry contest was read.
Results
STARS:
Out of a possible 108 credits, UCSD was able to complete or submit substantial information
for 61 of the credits (See Chart 1.1). Out of a total of 197.6 points, UCSD was able to obtain 79
points (See Chart 1.2). The criteria and points for “Operations and Grounds” were the most
comprehensive category that the university was able to complete. While the university struggled
with providing information for the academic and curriculum category, it was the Administration
and Finance Department that proved to be the most difficult in obtaining information for. In the
materials, Recycling, and waste minimization category, UCSD was able to score most of the
points – 13/17 (See Chart 1.2).
Chart 1.1:
Credits
Achieved
61
59%
Credits left
43
41%
Credits left
Credits Achieved
Tsai 14
Chart 1.2:
UCSD STARS Points
Recycling
Points
7%
Points
Received
33%
Points not
received
60%
Many of the credits that UCSD achieved were a result of operational accomplishments towards
better environmental practices. A majority of the points were awarded because UCSD
departments can implement the most innovative projects that place the university at the forefront
of sustainability. These projects that UCSD is notorious for are often a product of the
encouragement of senior administrators. The points and credits accomplished by STARS are
strong indicators that UCSD implements a top down approach.
From my evaluations I came to the conclusion that the Preuss Ecology Club’s methods of
collecting recycling bins bi-weekly from classrooms and sorting out recycling materials
constitutes as a sufficient recycling program, and will satisfy the recycling prerequisite necessary
for the STARS report. Preuss indeed had a very basic recycling program that collected and sorted
paper, plastic, aluminum, and glass. However, further observation, made me aware that if their
recycling program was further scrutinized in the category, in terms of materials recycled and
waste minimization, their program was lacking. The Ecology Club was just starting to test out
recycling electronic materials such as old batteries and have yet to recycle old toner cartridges
and electronic appliances. Though Preuss is a part of the UCSD Surplus Sales Program – “an
Tsai 15
outlet to dispose of used, excess property from the campus, of which anyone can purchase used
items from surplus sales” (Facilities Management website), they had not used the advantages of
this program yet, and many items were not recycled. Though Preuss, like UCSD, has a single-bin
recycling program, which “allows all designated recyclables to be placed in any campus
recycling container, including office bins,” many of the bins are open containers that warrant
cross-contamination as a result of negligence. Additionally, Preuss, unlike UCSD, does not instill
the ratio of “One recycling bin to every trash bin”11 Perhaps what is most concerning about
Preuss is that though most classrooms had a recycling bin, outside in the amphitheatre and lunch
areas, there were only trash bins and no recycling bins. The amount of waste generated from
discarded school lunch packaging from a typical American school kid in a year is equivalent to
67 pounds.12 If Preuss had recycling bins that were outside of the classrooms, they could reduce
their lunch waste consumption by ¼.
Thus, this resulted in my next attempts at instituting an expanded recycling program at
Preuss with the support and involvement of the Preuss administration. At the initial meeting,
many ideas were discussed for possibility of expanding the current Preuss recycling program was
discussed. The possibilities of an educational blast on recycling to engage students and faculty
were discussed, along with the possibility of bringing recycling bins to key areas of the (outside)
campus. However, after the initial meeting, no significant actions were taken by the Preuss
administrative staff, and no recycling bins or educational material were requested. In the survey I
conducted, most of those surveyed agreed that better equipment and increasing student, teacher,
and faculty participation was necessary. Though this information is disclosed in the letter I wrote
to the principal requesting the single Rubbermaid recycling bin, there has yet to be a response to
11
12
Tsai, Jennifer. Interview with Maureen McManus. Rec. February 20, 2009.
“What’s the Problem?” May 2009. <http://www.wastefreelunches.org>.
Tsai 16
the Ecology Club’s demands. No action has been taken, other than the continued efforts of the
Ecology Club to utilize the scarce materials and equipment they have to slowly work towards a
better recycling program. If Ecology Club wanted to have recycling bins out on the campus
amphitheater, the money would have to come from their own budget – a budget that cannot
afford such costs. Preuss sustainability practices remained a bottom up organization.
Power Down:
This was a project that allowed universities to attempt a bottom up approach. UCSD
managed to obtain 1228 pledges. This meant that the percentage of participants at UCSD in
comparison to the total staff, faculty, and student population reported to Power Down for the
Planet was 2.25321%. According to Power Down calculations, UCSD’s carbon offset was a total
of 224 tons per year. Additionally, UCSD was able to save 32,235 dollars per year as well as
save 295,027 kWh of energy per year. All the pledges ranked UCSD eighth from the top in the
Power Down competition out of 19 competing schools. Throughout the competition, updates
were given on UCSD’s progress. The updates are as follows: April 3 – 110 pledges; April 6 –
159 pledges; April 7 – 264 Pledges; April 9 – 365 pledges; April 13 – 1129 pledges (See Graph
1.1).
Tsai 17
Graph 1.1:
Power Down Pledges for UCSD
1200
1000
3-Apr
800
6-Apr
7-Apr
600
9-Apr
400
13-Apr
200
0
Number of Pledges
At Preuss, getting pledges for Power Down was fast and simple. Though the number of staff
and faculty pledges is unknown, the number of student pledges was easy to calculate. Students of
Ecology Club were not introduced to the Power Down competition until the last day the
competition was to end. However, within a matter of minutes, 40 students had taken the pledge.
All members of the Ecology Club were eager and willing to pledge to Power Down and do
whatever it takes to reduce their IT consumption. Additionally, before each student left for the
weekend, each computer in the classroom was turned off – a sign that students have heard the
Power Down message.
Earth Week:
Tsai 18
After many months of planning, members of the Earth Week planning committee felt that
this year’s Earth Week was a great success. Many participants of the Clean Car Show thought it
was a well put on event. There were a total of 24 participating vehicles – 13 from UCSD Fleet
Services, and the other 11 from various companies such as Pacific Honda, PowerGenix, and
VPSI vanpool. Additionally, there were 29 participating individuals – 6 of which were
volunteers of the event. Though well received, an end-of-the-event survey revealed that some
participants wished to be located in an area with more foot traffic – namely an area that can
generate more student participation. The Eco-friendly fashion show was well-attended by
students. The fashion show involved over 30 volunteers from both the Earth Week Planning
Committee, Schools for Schools, and even outside volunteers. The participants of the event,
either volunteering or as contestants were mainly students. Thus, the outreach to students was
better promoted. The success of the fashion show reveals that a bottom up approach to
sustainability is indeed feasible at UCSD.
The Preuss Ecology Club “Earth Week” events were also well-received. Many students
participated in their lunch time activity. They were able to obtain many Lorax pledges,
approximately 150, which they later hung on a nearby tree. The Lorax dedication event was
really well-attended Again, need quantifiable data. There were approximately 80 students,
administrative staff, and guests at the event – at least 10% of the school population. Students and
guests were clamoring to take pictures with the Lorax mascot, a student of Ecology Club dressed
up in the inflatable costume, and the Lorax statue. Speeches were given by the Mr. Barton, the
principal of Preuss, as well as the Chancellor of UCSD, Marye Anne Fox, and Audrey Geisel.
Though acknowledgement was given before, the Lorax dedication was the first time I heard the
principal vocally declare his appreciation for the Ecology Club and their efforts. In his opening
Tsai 19
speech, Principal Barton said, “We are proud of our rankings and our academic successes, but
also the achievements we have made in the arts, music, drama, and, yes, the environment”13. All
the students and the club advisor were extremely enthusiastic about the event and proud that their
efforts were part of something as monumental as the Lorax.
Analysis:
STARS:
Though sustainable practices seemed like something that everyone at UCSD advocated,
getting each individual department to cooperate to provide the answers to the sustainable actions
they are undertaking to form a cohesive campus report was difficult. First of all, each
department has a unique method of tracking and assessing sustainability. Additionally, each
department is at varying levels of accomplishing their sustainable goals – that is, for some
departments, many projects, such as LEED building projects, are in process the process of being
designed or in the process of being constructed, and could not be fully evaluated until they
become fully certified (people are accredited, buildings are certified in LEED). Thus, for some
departments, asking them to produce specific data on such questions like, “What is the
percentage of LEED buildings on campus,” is hard to answer. Also, for the purchasing and
transportation departments, many just did not have the proper tools utilized to track the
information needed to answer STARS questions. Cooperation was considerably more difficult
because many of the questions that were being asked overlap with information from other
departments. Due to a lack of communication between departments, information can often differ.
For example, to assess the number of environment- related classes at UCSD required an
assessment of the UCSD curriculum. However, the number of courses that ESI may consider
13
“Statue of Dr. Seuss Character Who Warned of Environmental Harm Unveiled at Preuss School to Celebrate
Arbor Day and New Ecology Garden.” April 27, 2009.
<http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/thisweek/2009/04/27_lorax.asp>.
Tsai 20
sustainability-related may not be equivalent to the number of courses that the UCSD course
catalog considers sustainability-related.
Due to a lack of communication, an incomplete tracking system, and varying stages of
projects in differing departments, gaining the support from these departments to answer our
questions was harder than anticipated. Out of an expected 85% cooperation rate, we received
about 65% cooperation – though not entirely at fault of the departments, but perhaps of the
timing and material requested from the STARS report itself. If points could have been for
incremental periods of development for certain programs, then UCSD probably could have
achieved a lot more points. Additionally, the methods of being able to achieve the necessary data
to assess the point systems would have been easier to implement if STARS was able to
accommodate the various stages of the university’s projects.
Furthermore, the administration and finance category that STARS required was hardest to
obtain information for because UCSD falls under the broader umbrella of the University of
California Office of the President (UCOP) divisions. “The Office of the President is the system
wide headquarters of the University of California. Its divisions oversee UC's academic mission,
budget, community affairs, legal matters, and business and financial activities...”14 Too much
information, it doesn’t relate to the point you are trying to make!!! As a result, many of the
sustainable practices asked by the administration and finance section of the STARS report falls
under the jurisdiction of the UCOP and are not under the direct control of UCSD itself.
Therefore, though the vice chancellor and assistant vice chancellor may try to instill better
environmental practices at UCSD, they must also abide by the structure set up by UCOP. Thus,
many of the STARS points that were missed and were difficult to obtain the necessary
information were a result of strict UCOP practices. The difficulties of generating a STARS
14
“About UCOP.” May 2009. <www.ucop.edu/divisions>.
Tsai 21
report reveal that though the university may strive to obtain great projects, it lacks the bottom up
support needed from individuals of campus departments to understand the university’s overall
sustainability goals.
However, the possibility of even trying to create a comprehensive report for Preuss was
not even possible. In an initial conversation with the administrative staff of Preuss, many of the
leading sustainable practices that are being implemented at UCSD were unknown to Preuss.
LEED standards for new and existing buildings, for example, were an unfamiliar subject. Thus,
rather than try and bring Preuss up to UCSD standards, I had to look for the most basic and most
easily observable practices – those performed by the Preuss Ecology Club. The efforts of the
Ecology Club are very primitive. The administrative staff, though proud of what the students are
doing, really does not put enough time, effort, or money to support the club. The recycling bin,
for example, would have really helped improve student recycling practices. It would have also
shown that the Preuss administration supported the Ecology Club. Yet, rather than discuss ways
to really try and incorporate the recycling bin with Ecology Club members and/or myself, the
issue was skirted and no response was really communicated until many weeks later with a
rejection and that it was Ecology Club’s problem.
Something as simple as getting a recycling bin on campus is extremely difficult without
the support of administration. As STARS reflected, many of the projects going on at UCSD are
directly related to the administrative staff of UCSD either as a result of approval for a project or
an actual project proposal. Thus, due to the financial support and endorsement of the people like
the Vice Chancellor, UCSD is able to take many more risks in trying out the latest environmental
methods. On the other hand, Preuss is struggling to become up-to-date with current
environmentally preferable methods.
Tsai 22
Power Down for the Planet:
Trying to get the UCSD community involved in the Power Down for the Planet
competition was extremely difficult. Despite our efforts at flyering, sending out massive e-mails,
and contacting specific student organizations and departments at UCSD, the response we
received was luke warm at best. When trying to gain signatures from students on library walk,
many were too busy to stop and actually listen to what the competition was about. Additionally,
when a student was actually flagged down, they were extremely skeptical in signing their name
to anything as well as too disinterested in participating. UCSD was not able to generate many
pledges until April 6, when the Assistant Vice Chancellor of A&PS finally sent out a campus
wide e-mail enlisting his support for the competition and asking others to do the same. Even
though this helped a little, the majority of UCSD pledges were obtained when the Sustainability
Analyst contacted IT department heads and asked them to provide a list of e-mails of the
department’s employees who utilized computer sleep modes already. Almost half of our pledges
came from strategically persuading pledges from those who already utilized the option, and
exchanging prizes to students for their pledges. Through the Power Down competition, UCSD
proved to be a very apathetic community, even amongst those who vocally support the
environment. Interestingly, the percentage of pledges generated by UCSD in the competition was
very similar to the percentage of Sustainability representatives present. It is hard to make a
seemingly disjointed group of peoples come together to support a cause. Though the Chancellor,
Vice Chancellor, and those “above” really did advocate this event, without the support of the
students, staff, and faculty, UCSD still failed at gaining that many pledges.
Preuss, on the other hand, had a really strong support group. Getting pledges from
students was extremely easy. Additionally, students were enthusiastic which made the process
Tsai 23
that much more rewarding. On such a relatively small campus, and the Ecology Club members
comprising such a large percentage of the student population, there is no doubt that if the Power
Down competition had been extended earlier to Preuss, the school would have done very well. In
fact, the winners of Power Down, the University of Maine, Farmington, is quite similar to Preuss
in that the campus population is relatively small. Composed of only 2000 students, University of
Maine was able to get 24% of its campus community to participate. Preuss could have probably
achieved the same percentage if not a higher percentage. This is due to the fact that not only are
Ecology Club members enthusiastic about initiating environmentally friendly practices, but are
also strong advocators of such practices to the Preuss community, and given a small campus
where many are related or are friends, these messages carry on quite quickly. In a competition
such as Power Down, it could be seen that having a bottom up approach definitely proves to be
more effective.
Earth Week:
UCSD’s Earth Week was really successful. However, it could be said that the Earth
Week events that Preuss School held was equally as successful. Though the productions were on
two very different scales – UCSD’s events being much larger productions while Preuss’ events
being much smaller in scale – the bottom line is that both campuses achieved in spreading the
Earth Week message. Though Preuss was unable to hold events of such grandeur, they were able
to generate a lot of student support. The problem that UCSD’s Clean Car Show had with not
enough student participants probably would not have happened at Preuss. When the Ecology
Club holds an event, students of Preuss are naturally drawn towards the event either because they
are there to support their school and their friends. Contrarily, UCSD lacks school spirit and as a
Tsai 24
result of student apathy, the events that are held at UCSD often results in fairly low attendance
and involvement for such a large campus.
In fact, I may even say that Preuss’ Earth Week has surpassed that of UCSD. The
Ecology Club managed to acquire the support of their administrative staff and faculty as a result
of the Lorax unveiling. Having a very small budget and few resources, the Ecology Club
managed to make their Earth Week events suitable to their situation. Though much smaller in
appearance, the apparent encouragement for the sustainability practices occurring at Preuss is
much more evident than at UCSD. The feeling one received when attending the Lorax Statue
dedication was where one could feel the culmination of the collective pride and satisfaction the
students and staff radiated from finally being realized and commended for their efforts. Although
similar feelings were sensed during UCSD’s Earth Week, it was not as cohesive as the one felt at
Preuss. Certain UCSD students and staff that helped organize the event(s) held this sentiment,
but the emotions of the others participating at the events were not one of pride for what their
fellow peers have accomplished, but for some, an obstacle to get to their next class.
Furthermore, the distinction between a top down and bottom up approach can often take
care of the budgetary problems that come up with planning events and promoting sustainable
practices. For example, budget played a role in the outcomes of Earth Week for both schools.
UCSD does not have a specific budget dedicated to sustainability. However, with the support
from the top, many of the costs accrued from UCSD Earth Week were taken care of by certain
departments. Additionally, due to the nature of UCSD being a well known school, donations and
partnerships are much more available and easily accessible. Preuss had a very small budget
acquired from months of recycling bottles and plastic bottles – a budget of approximately $50 a
month. Ecology Club members tried the best they could to re-use old tools and hold events that
Tsai 25
were low-budget. The problem with bottom up approaches is the very fact that resources are
lacking. However, with some innovative thinking, Preuss was also able to produce very good
events for Earth Week.
Conclusion:
There are advantages and disadvantages to both a top down and bottom up approach. A
top down approach is effective in such projects as STARS and bringing innovative sustainable
projects like LEED to universities campus. Bottom up approaches are more effective in such
events as Power Down for the Planet and Earth Week. Yet, bottom up approaches have an
advantage that top down structures do not. Looking at the example of UCSD and Preuss, we can
see that the difference between the two is that Preuss’ bottom up approach has eventually
generated top down sponsorship. Given enough time, the administrative staff will and did
respond to the demands of the students of Ecology Club and changes are being made, where a
possible partnership can be formed between the needs of the Ecology Club and what the
administration has to offer. UCSD, on the other hand, has seemingly reached its peak. The
projects that are going on though innovative and groundbreaking, do not fabricate the same
support from the UCSD community. Though people from the top of the UCSD chain of
commandment are very much involved in the projects going on campus, the foundation is shaky.
As UCSD continues to grow and the school becomes better known for its environmental
projects, it is the enthusiasm of the students that will be able to lead UCSD to the next frontier of
sustainability. Students and staff need to become more involved in the environmental projects
that are going on at the UCSD campus, and they must feel a sense of ownership for their projects
as well as the campus. There will come a time where students must spread the word and
effectively communicate good environmental practices in order to alter bad behaviors. UCSD
Tsai 26
needs to return to grassroot efforts and rebuild the bottom layer of its structure. There is only so
much that the “top” can do before they must turn to the “bottom” for support. Without this
relationship, the top and bottom will become more disjointed and UCSD students will become
more apathetic towards the environmental movement – thereby, moving further away from our
mission to achieve sustainability. The top and bottom must work together to get rid of the top
down and bottom up structures. A direct partnership can result in which communication occurs
effectively and smoothly amongst people who identify with the two parties (top vs. down) to
achieve the same goals and tackle the same issues.
Future:
Hopefully, UCSD and Preuss can form a partnership where both can utilize the resources
that the opposite parties have to complement what the other party lacks. Preuss builds many great
students that often attend UCSD for college. If a partnership is achieved, the bottom up
sustainability efforts at Preuss can be carried over into forming a stronger foundation of student
sustainability advocates at UCSD. Additionally, UCSD can provide the necessary resources and
act as a model for future environmental projects that could be implemented at Preuss. In this
stage of our economy and the imperativeness of improving the environment and environmental
practices, it seems fitting that we look for help from and offer help to those around us to achieve
the overall goal of sustainability.
Also, another case study should be conducted to address problems that were not
accounted for in my project. Namely, budgetary restraints as well as campus size should be
addressed in the next evaluation. Perhaps a comparison between UCSD and another UC
university that has much more student oriented sustainability, like UC Santa Barbara, may be
appropriate in further analyzing the next steps necessary to promote sustainability at a large
Tsai 27
university setting. Using another UC may be advantageous in providing opportunities to control
certain campus variables while testing hypotheses because all UCs fall under similar jurisdictions
as dictated by the UCOP. Furthermore, another issue that should be accounted for in the next
extensive project is the fact that UCSD does have a small group of students really pushing
towards better environmental practices, yet why their efforts are not as effective in promoting the
sustainability message, whether or not their achievements and goals are being overshadowed by
the university, and how these differences can be amended.