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.