AN EARTH CHARTER BASED ASSESSMENT OF THE
GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION AND LEARNING CENTER
AT FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY
Prepared by Richard M. Clugston, Ph.D.
Coordinator, Earth Charter Scholarship Project
Prepared for President Wilson G. Bradshaw, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs
Ronald Toll, Vice President for Administrative Services and Finance Joe Shepard,
and College of Arts & Sciences Dean Donna Price Henry
Final Version
July 28, 2009
AN EARTH CHARTER BASED ASSESSMENT OF THE
GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION AND LEARNING CENTER
AT FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3
What is the Earth Charter? .............................................................................................................. 3
EC-Assess ....................................................................................................................................... 4
Preliminary Considerations: The Earth Charter’s Worldview ........................................................ 4
Applying EC-Assess to FGCU Commitments and the Green Building ......................................... 6
Group 1: Earth Charter Principles and Supporting Principles that can be directly applied
to the Green Building project. ....................................................................................................7
Group 2: Earth Charter Principles and Supporting that deal with social and educational
dimensions of activities in the building. ..................................................................................10
Group 3: Earth Charter Supporting Principles that have implications for design and
educational programming but which are not a significant part of the LEED/FGCU
framework. ...............................................................................................................................12
Group 4: Earth Charter Supporting Principles that are not relevant. .......................................12
Reflections and Directions for Applying the Earth Charter to the Green Building Design ......... 13
Conducting an Earth Charter Design Charrette Early in Fall 2009 .............................................. 13
Appendix A: Model Green Buildings, The Earth Charter, and Their Example for FGCU .......... 18
Case #1: Adam Joseph Lewis Center at Oberlin College ....................................................... 18
Case #2: The John T. Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies .................................................. 21
Case #3: Unity House at Unity College in Maine................................................................... 23
Case #4: The University of South Carolina Green Dormitory Initiative ................................ 25
Case #5: The Willow School .................................................................................................. 26
Appendix B: EC-Assess Worksheet ............................................................................................. 28
Notes ............................................................................................................................................. 34
References ..................................................................................................................................... 35
2
AN EARTH CHARTER BASED ASSESSMENT OF THE
GREEN BUILDING DEMONSTRATION AND LEARNING CENTER
AT FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY
Introduction
This paper provides background information for an analysis of the Green Building
Demonstration and Learning Center at FGCU (referred to in this paper as the Green Building)
through the lens of the Earth Charter. This paper: 1) Gives a brief overview of the Earth Charter;
2) Describes EC-Assess, the assessment instrument based on the Earth Charter; 3) Demonstrates
how the Earth Charter “worldview” and EC-Assess can be brought to bear on the project and
gives preliminary findings on how existing building design and proposed programs express
commitment to Earth Charter Principles and Supporting Principles; 4) Offers some reflections
and suggested directions for the way forward with the green building design; and 5) Describes
the process of conducting an EC-Assess of the Green Building in a Fall 2009 charrette process
and raises some issues to be resolved this summer.
EC-Assess is intended to be a community-wide process that draws on and combines the
perceptions of critical stakeholders. Thus, to do EC-Assess properly, we would need to involve
FGCU administration, faculty, staff, and students and draw on participants’ various perspectives
on the institution’s commitment to and actions for Earth Charter Principles and Supporting
Principles.
The Earth Charter, as a document and the focus of a social movement, is making a catalytic
contribution to accelerating our transition to sustainable ways of living. Its integrated ethical
vision increasingly serves as an inspiration as well as a “standard by which the conduct of all
individuals, organizations, businesses, governments and transnational institutions are to be
guided and assessed” (Earth Charter, 2000, Preamble, paragraph six). Over the 20 years that
individuals and organizations have been drafting the Earth Charter and translating it into action,
the Earth Charter has been used as an assessment framework for local and state governments,
corporations and NGO’s.
What is the Earth Charter?i
The Earth Charter is a declaration of fundamental ethical principles for building a just,
sustainable, and peaceful global society in the 21st century. It seeks to inspire in all people a
sense of global interdependence and shared responsibility for the well-being of the diverse
human family, the whole community of life, and future generations. It is a vision of hope and a
call to action.
The Earth Charter is centrally concerned with the transition to sustainable ways of living and
sustainable human development. The four major themes of the Earth Charter are expressed in its
four parts: Part I, Respect and Care for the Community of Life; Part II, Ecological Integrity; Part
III, Social and Economic Justice; and Part IV, Democracy, Nonviolence, and Peace. The Earth
Charter vision reflects the conviction that caring for people and caring for Earth are two
interrelated dimensions of one great task. It supports the view that economic institutions and
activities should promote equitable human development and should value and protect Earth’s
ecological systems and the many services they provide. The Earth Charter is both a people3
centered and ecosystem-centered document. Recognizing that our environmental, economic,
social, political, and spiritual challenges are interdependent, the Earth Charter provides an
integrated framework for thinking about and addressing these issues. The result is a fresh, broad
conception of what constitutes a sustainable society and sustainable development.
The Preamble of the Earth Charter briefly describes our cosmological, ecological, and social
circumstances and the major challenges and choices facing humanity. The concluding section,
The Way Forward, calls for the participation of all members of society in the transition to
sustainable ways of living. The Earth Charter does not attempt to describe the mechanisms and
instruments required to implement its principles. Yet during the 20 years that individuals and
organizations have been drafting the Earth Charter and translating it into action, many practical
applications have been developed. The Earth Charter has been used as an assessment framework
for local and state governments, corporations and NGO’s.
EC-Assess
Developed by Earth Charter International, EC-Assess is an assessment tool for evaluating the
sustainability of organizations, projects, initiatives and individuals. It is an ethical assessment
tool that can be used by individuals or groups who want to evaluate and improve both their level
of declared commitment and their level of performance in pursuit of a more just, sustainable, and
peaceful world. EC-Assess is based on the ethical framework of the Earth Charter, and uses a
simple worksheet based on the Earth Charter’s 53 Supporting Principles in Parts II, III and IV.
Evaluators first identify which Supporting Principles are relevant to the subject of the
assessment. They then evaluate the extent to which each Supporting Principle is espoused
publicly and the extent to which actual planning and performance reflects the implementation of
that Supporting Principle in practice.
The results allow the evaluator to identify areas where either the declared embrace of a
Supporting Principle is strong or weak, and where the actual practice of a specific Supporting
Principle is strong or weak. By utilizing EC-Assess as a normative, systemic, and customizable
assessment, individuals and organizations can stimulate discussion and inspire action to change
lifestyles, goals, and operations to better reflect their espoused values. The results highlight those
areas where declared commitment to a principle, and the practices of that initiative or
organization, are not in harmony with one another. This enables the evaluator to identify
priorities for improvement.
Preliminary Considerations: The Earth Charter’s Worldview
EC-Assess focuses on the ethical actions suggested in the Supporting Principles of Parts II, III,
and IV of the Earth Charter. However, the integrated vision of the whole Earth Charter points
toward a worldview that is necessary to meet our global challenges, emphasizing the critical
challenges we face and the changes we will need to make if we are to deal successfully with
them. The following quotes from the Earth Charter Preamble illustrate these themes:
“We stand at a critical moment in Earth’s history….”
“The dominant patterns of production and consumption are causing environmental
devastation, the depletion of resources, and a massive extinction of species.”
4
“Fundamental changes are needed in our values, institutions and ways of living. We must
realize that when basic needs have been met, human development is primarily about
being more not having more.”
“The spirit of human solidarity and kinship with all life is strengthened when we live
with reverence for the mystery of being, gratitude for the gift of life, and humility
regarding the human place in nature.”
The Earth Charter calls on us to confront in a compassionate way the drivers of our unsustainable
way of living, and to be moved to action to change them. This is not an easy task, for it draws us
into facing the systemic ills of our social structures and our own personal contradictions. This
calls for new human-earth relationships (Berry/Tucker, 2006) to clarify what sustainable
development really is about, and what education really is for (Orr, 1992).
What this will require is that we not only make our lives our message (Gandhi) but make our
institutions our message! David Orr poses the question “What is education for?” and challenges
us to recognize that often it is the most educated humans that do the most damage to the social
and ecological fabric necessary to support sustainable living for all. He also argues that our
buildings and other institutional practices are crystallized pedagogy, teaching students and others
what we really value in life.
David Gruenewald provides a useful perspective on the Earth Charter’s potential contribution to
higher education. He states:
The Earth Charter’s educational proposals appear to recognize that the disciplinary
boundaries, norms, routines, and standardizations that characterize conventional
education work against the experiential, collaborative, interdisciplinary, action-oriented,
and transformative goals of the Earth Charter.
What the Earth Charter offers instead is a set of shared if contested counterstandards ‘by
which people may measure progress toward a just and sustainable society, standards
enforced by the authority of moral judgment and the power of public opinion’ (Sauer,
2002, pp. 26–27).
A transformative discourse constantly challenges the assumptions and purposes behind
existing practices and articulates a fundamentally different vision. Such is the vision of
the Earth Charter. Thus from an educational perspective, the power of the Earth Charter
is in its potential to engender conversations, to interrupt our discourse, and to challenge
our norms and routines with a comprehensive, socioecological vision for society and
education. For if Bowers (2001) is right and we need to replace the destructive metaphors
of modernism with new, and old, ecological metaphors, we desperately need
conversations out of which these metaphors can emerge and circulate. As a cross-cultural
people’s treaty for global interdependence and shared responsibility, the Earth Charter is
a text around which these conversations might begin. (Gruenewald, 2004, p. 99)
5
Applying EC-Assess to FGCU Commitments and the Green Building
Assessment of all functions is necessary for improvement and continual renewal.
The University is committed to accounting for its effectiveness through the use of
comprehensive and systematic assessment. Tradition is challenged; the status-quo
is questioned; change is implemented. (Florida Gulf Coast University Guiding
Principles, 1996)
Conducting an Earth Charter Assessment to guide the planning and growth of a university green
building presents Florida Gulf Coast University with the opportunity to deepen its approaches to
green building design. The preliminary exercise before conducting the EC-Assess is to consider
what the basic assumptions described in the previous sections imply for the way Florida Gulf
Coast University understands its mission and core tasks. How would conducting an EC-Assess
influence the campus master plan and other dimensions of planning, academic programs, and the
design of the Green Building Demonstration and Learning Center? How do Florida Gulf Coast
University commitments align with Earth Charter principles?
A review of the various documents that guide and constrain the design and programming of the
Green Building--such as LEED certification requirements, the FGCU Campus Master Plan, the
University Environmental Stewardship Management Plan, and the University Mission, Vision,
and Goals--gives a picture of the environmental and social commitments of the University. These
commitments often align with Principles and Supporting Principles of the Earth Charter.
Therefore, it is likely that an Earth Charter Assessment of the Green Building would reveal that
many of the Earth Charter’s principles may already be expressed in FGCU’s building design.
Approximately three-quarters of the Earth Charter’s Principles and Supporting Principles are
strongly affirmed by FGCU commitments. For example, Principles and Supporting Principles of
Earth Charter Part II: Ecological Integrity are expressed in FGCU commitments to conservation
and rehabilitation in planning; preserving ecosystems and biodiversity on campus in the context
of the Western Everglades; using native plants, xeriscaping, managing sources of water and
runoff and sourcing sustainable products; and analyzing the carbon footprint of building
materials and electricity.
Principles and Supporting Principles of Part III: Social and Economic Justice are expressed in
FGCU commitments to use products that are sustainable, fairness in salaries and compensation,
strengthening families, protecting women on campus, and practicing non-discrimination policies.
Principles and Supporting Principles of Part IV: Democracy, Nonviolence, and Peace are
expressed in FGCU commitments to provide outreach to local communities and schools,
including arts and humanities education; to encourage global collaboration and partnerships; and
to resolve conflicts collaboratively.
A detailed breakdown of how various University commitments align with Earth Charter
principles is beyond the scope of this paper. Indeed, such an analysis would emerge as the result
of a thoughtful Earth Charter Assessment planning charrette at FGCU. The tables below provide
an illustrative review of how FGCU’s commitments correlate to Earth Charter Principles and
6
Supporting Principles. These Principles and Supporting Principles fall into the following four
groups:
1) Principles and Supporting Principles that can be directly applied to the green building
project;
2) Principles and Supporting Principles that deal with social and educational activities in the
building;
3) Supporting Principles that have implications for design and education programming but
which are not a significant part of the LEED/FGCU framework; and
4) Supporting Principles that are not relevant to the green building, such as those that focus
on military issues.
If Florida Gulf Coast University is to conduct an EC-Assess for the Green Building, it would
involve a more complete, participatory charting of Earth Charter principles—including the 53
Supporting Principles recognized in EC-Assess—corresponding FGCU commitments, and/or
LEED standards. Appendix B provides the complete matrix of the 53 Supporting Principles of the
EC-Assess that would be used in a Fall Earth Charter assessment charrette.
Group 1: Earth Charter Principles and Supporting Principles that can be directly applied
to the Green Building project.
These are Principles and Supporting Principles that are closely connected to LEED credits, to the
13 goals of the Environmental Stewardship Advisory Council, and to the Campus Master Plan.
Examples are listed below.
Earth Charter Principles
and Supporting Principles
FGCU Commitments
LEED 2009 Credits
Supporting Principle 5.a Adopt at all levels sustainable
development plans and
regulations that make
environmental conservation
and rehabilitation integral to
all development initiatives.
Campus Master Plan (CMP) Policy
901.1.5 - Restore/enhance natural
on-site wetland areas and
incorporate into the stormwater
management system per the
Southwest Florida Water
Management District conceptual
permit.ii
Sustainable Site Selection
Credit 1 - Avoid the
development of inappropriate
sites and reduce the
environmental impact from the
location of a building on a
site…. During the site selection
process, give preference to sites
that do not include sensitive
elements or restrictive land
types. Select a suitable building
location and design the building
with a minimal footprint to
minimize disruption of
environmentally sensitive
areas.iv
Environmental Stewardship
Management Plan (ESMP) Goal 3.5
- Demonstrate exemplary practice
in restoring, sustaining, and
managing ecological systems.iii
Supporting Principle 5.d Control and eradicate nonnative or genetically modified
CMP Policy 1301.3.4 - Preserve
and restore on-campus wetland
areas and adjacent upland buffer
Sustainable Site Credit 5.1:
Protect or Restore Habitat Restore or protect a minimum
7
organisms harmful to native
species and the environment,
and prevent introduction of
such harmful organisms.
areas as potential wildlife habitat,
by removal of exotic vegetation and
maintaining them free of exotic
infestation.v
ESMP Task 3.5.1 - Report the
number of acres cleared and free of
exotics with hydrological elements
restored, and total acres remaining
to be cleared and restored.vi
Principle 7 - Adopt patterns of
production and consumption
that safeguard Earth’s
regenerative capacities.
CMP Policy 1301.4.2 - Design all
University buildings with facilities
to accommodate collection, storage,
and disposal of recycled
materials.viii
CMP Policy 1301.4.3 - Coordinate
on-campus recycling programs with
those of local government in regard
to materials collected, and
disposal/collection procedures.ix
ESMP Goal 3.2 - Promote the use
of recycled materials in
procurement, the use of recycling
practices in disposal activities, and
conservation of resources used.x
Supporting Principle 7.b Act with restraint and
efficiency when using energy,
and rely increasingly on
renewable energy sources,
such as solar and wind.
CMP Objective 301.7: Energy
Efficiency - Develop, where
feasible and cost-effective,
buildings on campus that
incorporate passive energy
efficiency design practices.xii
CMP Objective 501.4: Energy
Conservation - Develop academic
facilities that consider and
incorporate passive energy
efficiency design practices as
practicable and economical
advantages.xiii
of 50% of the site (excluding
the building footprint) or 20%
of the total site area (including
building footprint), whichever is
greater, with native or adapted
vegetation.vii
Materials and Resources
Prerequisite 1 - Provide an
easily-accessible dedicated area
or areas for the collection and
storage of materials for
recycling for the entire building.
Materials must include, at a
minimum: paper, corrugated
cardboard, glass, plastics and
metals.
MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse Use salvaged, refurbished or
reused materials, the sum of
which constitutes at least 5% or
10%, based on cost, of the total
value of materials on the
project.xi
Energy and Atmosphere
Prerequisite 2: Energy
Performance - Establish the
minimum level of energy
efficiency for the proposed
building and systems to reduce
environmental and economic
impacts associated with
excessive energy use.xiv
FGCU commitment also
demonstrated by signing the
American College and University
Presidents Climate Commitment.
8
Group 1, continued…
Supporting Principle 7.c
Promote the development,
adoption, and equitable
transfer of environmentally
sound technologies.
CMP Policy 301.7.12 - Encourage
architects to utilize the following
specific passive energy efficiency
design principle for campus
buildings:
a.) Overhangs and recesses to shade
southern-facing glass areas.
b.) Maximize shaded outdoor
corridors for circulation.
c.) Maximize shading of buildings
through plant placement and
selection.
d.) Design outdoor courtyards,
arcades, etc., to maximize natural
ventilation and air movement.
e.) Select roof materials and
building colors to minimize heat
gain.
f.) Exceed, minimum insulation
requirements for ceilings and
walls.xv
“Based on existing and proven
technology, the LEED Green
Building Rating Systems
evaluate environmental
performance from a whole
building perspective over a
building’s life cycle, providing
a definitive standard for what
constitutes a green building in
design, construction, and
operation. The LEED rating
systems are based on accepted
energy and environmental
principles and strike a balance
between known, established
practices and emerging
concepts.”xvii
ESMP Goal 3.1 - Design and build
facilities for sustainability.
Consider sustainability and
environmental impact in the design
and construction of FGCU
facilities, and construct buildings to
meet green building certification
requirements.xvi
9
Group 2: Earth Charter Principles and Supporting Principles that deal with social and
educational dimensions of activities in the building.
These Earth Charter Principles and Supporting Principles reflect the FGCU Vision, Mission, and
Guiding Principles,xviii Student Learning Goals and Outcomes,xix university policies on
affirmative action, campus safety, freedom of information, grievance procedures, environmental
education and education for sustainability, and so on. Examples are listed below.
Earth Charter Principles and Supporting
Principles
FGCU Commitments
Supporting Principle 9.b – Empower every human
being with the education and resources to secure a
sustainable livelihood.
Mission – Florida Gulf Coast University… practices
and promotes environmental sustainability.
–and –
Supporting Principle 14.a – Provide all with
educational opportunities that empower them to
contribute actively to sustainable development.
Guiding Principles – Informed and engaged citizens
are essential to the creation of a civil and sustainable
society.
Student Learning Goal 3: Ecological Perspective –
Know the issues related to economic, social, and
ecological sustainability. Analyze and evaluate
ecological issues locally and globally. Participate in
collaborative projects requiring awareness and/or
analysis of ecological and environmental issues.
Supporting Principle 14.b – Promote the
contribution of the arts and humanities as well as
the sciences in sustainability education.
Student Learning Goal 1: Aesthetic Sensibility –
Know and understand the variety of aesthetic
frameworks that have shaped, and continue to shape,
human creative arts
Supporting Principle 12.a – Eliminate
discrimination in all its forms, such as that based
on race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion,
language, and national, ethnic, or social origin.
Mission – Florida Gulf Coast University…
embraces diversity.
–and–
Principle 11 – Affirm gender equality and equity
as prerequisites to sustainable development.
Guiding Principles – Diversity is a source of
renewal and vitality. The University is committed to
developing capacities for living together in a
democracy whose hallmark is individual, social,
cultural, and intellectual diversity. It fosters a
climate and models a condition of openness in
which students, faculty, and staff engage
multiplicity and difference with tolerance and
equity.
Student Learning Goal 2: Culturally Diverse
Perspective – Analyze, evaluate, and assess the
impact of differences in ethnicity, gender,
socioeconomic status, native language, sexual
orientation and intellectual/disciplinary approaches.
10
Group 2, continued…
Supporting Principle 12.a – Eliminate
discrimination in all its forms, such as that based
on race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion,
language, and national, ethnic, or social origin.
–and –
Principle 11 – Affirm gender equality and equity
as prerequisites to sustainable development.
The Office of Institutional Equity and Compliance
seeks to foster productive educational and work
environments that nurture and value equity,
diversity, respect, human understanding, and access
for our constituents by providing awareness, tools
and resources to eliminate bias, illegal
discrimination and harassment to support the
University’s vision, mission and strategies; and to
develop and foster a setting, which celebrates
differences, and welcomes and serves students,
faculty, staff, visitors and vendors from all aspects
of diversity.xx
FGCU adheres to Federal nondiscrimination laws,
such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act; Equal Pay
Act of 1963; Age Discrimination in Employment
Act of 1967 (ADEA); Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
Sections 501 and 505; Titles I and V of the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA);
and the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
Supporting Principle 13.c – Protect the rights to
freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful
assembly, association, and dissent.
FGCU Guiding Principles – Academic freedom is
the foundation for the transmission and
advancement of knowledge. The University
vigorously protects freedom of inquiry and
expression and categorically expects civility and
mutual respect to be practiced in all deliberations.
Supporting Principle 9.c – Recognize the ignored,
protect the vulnerable, serve those who suffer, and
enable them to develop their capacities and to
pursue their aspirations.
FGCU Division of Justice Studies Human Slavery
Symposium and Human Trafficking Symposium
Supporting Principle 13.f – Strengthen local
communities, enabling them to care for their
environments.
FGCU Guiding Principles – Service to Southwest
Florida, including access to the University, is a
public trust. The University is committed to forging
partnerships and being responsive to its region.
Supporting Principle 16.a – Encourage mutual
understanding, solidarity, and cooperation among
all peoples and within and among the nations.
The International Services Office provides services
and support to students, faculty and staff
participating in international education, study abroad
and exchange programs, international internships,
service learning, and degree programs abroad.xxi
11
Group 3: Earth Charter Supporting Principles that have implications for design and
educational programming but which are not a significant part of the LEED/FGCU
framework.
These are Earth Charter Supporting Principles that emphasize lifecycle analysis, investment
policies, full cost accounting, indigenous spirituality, outreach to developing countries and local
poor communities, and that encourage us to “adopt lifestyles that emphasize the quality of life
and material sufficiency in a finite world,” and so on. Examples are:
Supporting Principle 6.c – Ensure that decision making addresses the cumulative, longterm, indirect, long distance, and global consequences of human activity.
Supporting Principle 7.d – Internalize the full environmental and social costs of goods
and services in the selling price, and enable consumers to identify products that meet the
highest social and environmental standards.
Supporting Principle 7.f – Adopt lifestyles that emphasize the quality of life and material
sufficiency in a finite world.
Supporting Principle 8.b – Recognize and preserve the traditional knowledge and
spiritual wisdom in all cultures that contribute to environmental protection and human
well-being.
Supporting Principle 10.a – Promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations
and among nations.
Supporting Principle 12.b – Affirm the right of indigenous peoples to their spirituality,
knowledge, lands and resources and to their related practice of sustainable livelihoods.
Supporting Principle 12.d – Protect and restore places of cultural and spiritual
significance.
Supporting Principle 14.d – Recognize the importance of moral and spiritual education
for sustainable living.
Group 4. Earth Charter Supporting Principles that are not relevant.
These include Supporting Principles that focus on military issues, such as the following:
Supporting Principle 16.d – Eliminate nuclear, biological, and toxic weapons and other
weapons of mass destruction
Supporting Principle 16.e – Ensure that the use of orbital and outer space supports
environmental protection and peace
The alignment of Earth Charter principles, Florida Gulf Coast University commitments, and
LEED credit requirements raises probing questions for the design of the Green Building
Demonstration and Learning Center. For example, what kind of buildings best express FGCU’s
values, principles, mission, and vision? What basic messages about sustainable living should the
building communicate through its design and functioning? Do we need to provide students with
ever more spacious and lavish lodging to attract them to FGCU? How big should offices be?
12
How would the signature elements of coming on to campus include the Earth Charter and Green
Building?
Reflections and Directions for Applying the Earth Charter to the Green Building Design
The Florida Gulf Coast University Campus Master Plan states:
Overall, there is a common architectural vocabulary used throughout [the FGCU campus]
with little variation in features and treatment. While this consistency of design does help
to unify the campus’ built environment, the introduction of distinctive architectural
features and treatments could help enliven the campus. This would be especially
appropriate if included in the design of ‘signature’ buildings. (pp 3-4)
The proposed site of the Green Building is outside the academic core and is therefore more
focused on outreach. The Sugden Welcome Center is the nearest building. The topography of the
area lends itself to a less rectilinear building design. Landscaping would emphasize native plants
in an edible landscape with low inputs of water, pesticides, and fertilizer (e.g. permaculture) and
education for sustainable living.
The architectural vocabulary that emerges from the Earth Charter is, not surprisingly, more
“Earthy” than a green building as an ecoefficient machine. The design metaphors are more
rounded and nested – a place celebrating diversity, linkages, interconnectedness, humility, and
responsibility. The Green Building would incorporate the best in ecoefficiency in FGCU’s
bioregion (recognizing the limits of the LEED model applied to diverse regions.) Embodying the
Earth Charter, the building would also display/integrate into the design an appreciation of
indigenous and vernacular traditions, clarify full cost accounting, celebrate green business
practices, and emphasize international and local connections in artwork.
Conducting an Earth Charter Design Charrette Early in Fall 2009
This section begins with a general description of the EC-Assess process, and then raises some
issues for determining the parameters and participants in the Fall charrette. A major question is
what are the costs and benefits of working with the current plans for the Green Building verses
going back to the drawing board to reflect more Earth Charter principles, new LEED standards,
and the latest green building technologies?
Because EC-Assess measures the perceived commitment to Earth Charter principles and the
actual commitment to principles, it is useful for a diversity of participants to be involved in the
assessment process. A community-wide charrette planning process based on EC-Assess would
need to involve representatives of the following stakeholders: the green building project
managers and engineers, FGCU administration, faculty, and staff (especially those who will have
offices in the building), FGCU students and student government leaders, and members of the
local Southwest Florida community.
The following are the six steps in the EC-Assess process:
1. Select the Subject: Name and briefly describe the entity you are going to assess.
In this case, the “subject” is the green building, set within the context of a university that
is committed to education and action for environmental sustainability, has pledged to
13
become carbon neutral, and is an affiliate of the Earth Charter Initiative. This context
asks the participants to design a green building with a range of concerns that include
much outside customary ecoefficiency orientations typical of LEED green building
charrettes.
2. Map What’s Relevant: Here the charrette team looks at the green building through the
lens of the Supporting Principles of Earth Charter Principles 5-16. Which of these are
relevant to building design in this larger context? How do we tie this design to the
implications of these broad global ethical principles? (The analysis above would be
illustrative of steps 2, 3, and 4.)
3. Evaluate the Values: For those Supporting Principles that are relevant, how are they
expressed in the guidelines for and proposed design of the green building and FGCU’s
mission, vision, goals, learning outcomes, and campus master plan?
4. Appraise the Performance: “Appraise the degree to which each principle is evidenced in
action” Clearly we can’t do this until the building has been built, but we can determine
the indicators/evaluative framework to determine how we would appraise the
performance. What sort of evidence will we look for?
5. Reflect on the Feedback: What seems to be missing or undesirable in the current design?
6. Create the Strategy: What will be done to modify the building design?
There are major issues for determining the parameters and participants in the Fall charrette. For
example, the blueprints for the Green Building Development and Learning Center were drawn by
Astorino and others in the fall of 2005 and approved in June 2006. These plans show an
innovative green building meeting the purposes it was intended to serve when drawn up and the
LEED standards of the time.
Much has changed over the past three years. Growing concern about climate change and the need
for energy independence has accelerated the development of many new green technologies,
designs and policies. FGCU has new leadership and renewed commitment to the founding vision
of environmental sustainability and stewardship, evidenced in the signing of the President’s
Climate Commitment and the Affiliate Agreement with Earth Charter International, building
LEED certified buildings, the solar farm, Lewis Johnson’s work (e.g., staffing the Environmental
Stewardship Advisory Council), and in many other ways.
These new circumstances may suggest modifications in the Green Building design:
1. The purpose of the building has changed. The Green Building Demonstration and
Learning Center design reflects a commitment to use the best in ecoefficient design and
technology, and to provide a large education space where green technologies can be
showcased – where green business can display its innovations and students and
community members can learn about them. With the Center for Environmental and
Sustainability Education housed in the building, the purpose shifts to education for
14
sustainable living, emphasizing ecocultural sustainability as well as ecoefficiency. In the
May 29, 2009 Green Building planning charrette, faculty members associated with the
Center emphasized a design especially for demonstrating the teaching/learning
methodologies of education for sustainable development and providing faculty
development opportunities to understand how these instructional approaches differ from
standard disciplinary instruction. Of course, this emphasis would incorporate the
crystallized pedagogy of a carbon neutral, net zero, LEED platinum building. Some
themes and ideas that emerged in the discussion were a health-oriented building,
curvilinear architecture, outreach to the underprivileged, University Colloquium as the
“heart” of the building, edible landscape, “off the grid”, nature trails, student gardens. For
more information, please refer to the Green Building planning charrette meeting minutes
of May 29, 2009.
2. The Earth Charter has been increasingly embraced as an orienting framework for
FGCU’s understanding and practice of sustainability, guiding educational activities of
the green building as well as its design and interior displays. Looking at the current
building design through the Earth Charter lens, about 75% of the 53 Supporting
Principles of the EC-Assess framework are intended to be implemented. Embracing some
of the missing 25%, the building would display/integrate into the design an appreciation
of indigenous and vernacular traditions, emphasize international and local connections,
and have more rounded spaces connected to the landscape.
3. LEED V3 has been developed. A new version of LEED assessment has been approved as
the new evaluation framework, with more and differently weighted credits than the
previous version. Increasing emphasis is being placed on adapting buildings to
bioregional contexts and creating buildings that can adapt and evolve to incorporate new
green technologies.
If we were beginning the design process now from scratch, it would be in the context of these
three factors (as well as others). However, going back to the drawing board is a costly and time
consuming process, using up limited financial resources, and is potentially demoralizing by
launching yet another green building effort that creates conflicting and unrealizable expectations.
The next step is to clarify the possibility of responding to the new factors through appropriate
design modifications of the Green Building plans. This requires we answer two critical
questions:
“How much can the existing design be modified to accommodate the design implications
of the new purposes, Earth Charter perspectives, LEED changes? What needs to remain
intact to not trigger the need for hiring a new architect and going through the various
permitting processes, etc?”
“What can be done in landscaping, interior design, room rearrangement to more fully
realize the new purposes and perspectives?”
Important background information for the Fall charrette would be a new design sketch showing
what the building and grounds could look like with possible CESE/Earth Charter modifications
15
that do not require a whole new design process, as well as clarity on what it would cost in time
and money to go back to the drawing board. The charrette could also explore new designs and
green buildings that have emerged recently to suggest either a new design or modifications of the
existing design.
Appendix A describes some green buildings that incorporate new green technologies and/or
embody Earth Charter Principles that are not as fully present in the Green Building
Demonstration and Learning Center plans. The following briefly summarizes the unique features
of these five buildings, which are described more fully in Appendix A.
The Adam Joseph Lewis Center at Oberlin College is perhaps the most advanced green
building on an American university campus, in terms of technology and curriculum. The
community-wide process in which it was imagined and planned is a model of community
participation in the design of a green building, but the process was quite lengthy. The
technologies and materials used in its construction demonstrate ecoefficiency and
showcase “off-the-shelf” environmental technologies. As a place of learning for
Oberlin’s Environmental Studies program, the center teaches through, what David Orr
calls, “crystallized pedagogy.”
The John T. Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies at CalPoly Pomona University is a
research facility, focused on environmentally-sound energy production and agriculture.
It’s curriculum in regenerative studies models how architecture interfaces with
academics. Its Masters degree in Regenerative Studies is an example for Florida Gulf
Coast University to consider in the design of a Liberal Studies degree based on the Earth
Charter.
The adaptive design of Unity House at Unity College in Maine demonstrates how its
planners considered the long-term use of a building and the needs of future occupants. It
was deliberately planned to be an affordable green residency, demonstrating that state of
the art technology can be available to all, and designed so that the space and technology
configurations could easily be changed in response to new purposes and innovations. As
the President’s on-campus residence, it is both a private home and a public space—a
gateway between the campus community and the wider Unity, Maine community.
The University of South Carolina Green Dormitory Initiative offers resident students a
“lived” experience of sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles. It provides outof-classroom education and service learning opportunities in environment and
sustainability. It suggests that Florida Gulf Coast University might consider the needs of
students outside of formal classroom instruction, such as a green building that provides
space for clubs and organizations or student study.
The Willow School’s grounds and campus buildings show how state-of-the-art green
buildings can interface with local and traditional architecture. Willow School buildings
were inspired by and blend in with the historic homes and buildings of central New
Jersey, and the use of salvaged materials further links the past and present. Overall, the
16
Willow School’s green buildings strive to fulfill the schools goals of modeling
sustainable living.
In the fall we would conduct a broader Earth Charter assessment and planning charrette to
explore the way forward with the Green Building. This charrette must be carefully constructed to
be clear on the constraints and to include the right mix of stakeholders for exploring how the
Earth Charter worldview and principles could be fully realized in the Green Building and its
wider institutional context. The Green Building could embody the Earth Charter through its
informative educational displays, the design of learning spaces, and the types of curriculum and
instruction that will occur in the building.
The Green Building would showcase the integration of the many aspects of environmental and
sustainability education. It would showcase local and international connections in the context of
Western Everglades ecological integrity. Students, faculty, physical plant staff, and community
representatives act as teachers and learners in the process of realizing the Earth Charter
commitments. The Green Building would house leading edge thinking and doing for an
environmentally and socially sustainable future, and emphasize interdisciplinary sustainable
development practice. FGCU, through the leadership of the Center for Environmental and
Sustainability Education, is at the leading, healing edge of Earth Charter scholarship and
practice.
17
APPENDIX A
MODEL GREEN BUILDINGS, THE EARTH CHARTER,
AND QUESTIONS FOR FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY
University campuses across the US and world are constructing green buildings as a
demonstration of their commitment to the environmental and sustainable development. The
following five institutions have elevated the goal of incorporating eco-efficiency and green
technology on campus. Their green buildings are not merely demonstration centers. Rather, they
are facilities placed at the center of learning, teaching, and living for sustainable development.
The five cases studies below describe the institutions and green buildings, relate institutional
commitments to Earth Charter values, and raise questions for FGCU’s Green Building
Demonstration and Learning Center.
Case #1: Adam Joseph Lewis Center at Oberlin College
The Adam Joseph Lewis Center (AJLC) at Oberlin Collegexxii was conceived as an integrated
building-landscape system that would function as a core component of Oberlin’s Environmental
Studies curriculum. The AJLC is more than just a demonstration. It is a part of the larger
education of the Oberlin community aimed to promote the practical skills and analytic abilities
necessary to reweave the human presence in the world. It was designed to be a building that
would teach. Lessons embodied in its technology and design choices are intended to reinforce
those taught in its classrooms. The AJLC provides a fertile space that has attracted the focus of
courses in a variety of disciplines, lecture series, student research, Winter Term and summer
student projects, community groups, regional schools, and universities and professionals from
abroad.
With over 150 environmental sensors installed throughout the building and landscape, the
AJLC's data monitoring and display system provides a unique opportunity to visualize in realtime the flows of energy and cycling of matter that are necessary to support the built
environment. The Center’s goal is to make interactions between the built and natural
environments visible and easy to interpret. The premise of this work is that real-time feedback on
ecological performance increases awareness, connectedness to place, and motivation to act.
Feedback of this type may be a necessary prerequisite for facilitating a more sustainable
relationship among humans, technology and the natural world. Six key design elements were
considered in the design of the Adam Joseph Lewis Center, as described below: energy; heating,
cooling, and air quality; landscape; Living Machine and water use; weather conditions; and
materials.
Energy: Photovoltaic (PV) panels on the roof of the Center use renewable energy from the sun to
meet a substantial fraction of the building’s energy needs. Solar energy production is coupled
with energy efficient lighting, heating, and appliances to minimize negative environmental
impact. The Lewis Center's lighting is designed to optimize energy efficiency while creating a
pleasant, welcoming environment in which to work and study. Features employed include
orienting the building on an east-west axis in order to take full advantage of natural lighting;
strategic window placement and reflective surfaces to distribute light throughout spaces; and
18
energy-efficient lighting fixtures and control strategies, including motion sensing lights and
“WATT-Stopper” dimming system to set lighting depending on need.
Heating, Cooling & Air Quality: Relying on both active and passive systems, the Center provides
a comfortable working environment for students, faculty and staff. Active systems use
mechanical equipment to extract and move heat, while passive systems do so with a minimum of
mechanical devices.
Landscape: The Center was conceived as an integrated building-landscape system. The
landscape features a variety of constructed ecosystems that simulate native Northern Ohio
ecosystems and incorporate cultigens that produce food for humans. This landscape is designed
to demonstrate principles of green landscaping, including urban agriculture; diverse native forest
and wetland vegetation; responsible stormwater management and storage; restoration of
indigenous ecosystems; and some 50 emergent and open-water wetland plants, all endemic to
Ohio, that inhabit the Center's restored wetland. This repository for native species diversity is
complemented by an emerging forest, dry land community, circular fruit and vegetable garden,
terraced orchard, low-mow turf, and a sundial.
Living Machine & Water Use: The Living Machine is an ecologically engineered system that
combines elements of conventional wastewater technology with the purification processes of
wetland ecosystems to treat and recycle the building’s wastewater for reuse in the toilets and
landscape. The system is designed to remove organic wastes, nutrients, and pathogens, which
can damage human and environmental health if discharged. Water cleaned by the Living
Machine is reused in the building’s toilets and landscape. The Living Machine also serves as a
valuable research laboratory and educational tool for students and faculty. A team of student
operators maintain and monitor the living machine.
Weather Conditions: A weather station rises above the peak of the Center’s curved roof,
monitoring real-time conditions and trends for a variety of environmental variables.
Materials: Materials for the Center were selected to enhance its sustainability and were evaluated
based on criteria that required less energy inputs, encouraged local production and distribution,
and supported creative economic structures. Materials for the Center were selected to enhance its
sustainability and were evaluated based on the following criteria: recycled or reused; low energy
to produce, use, and maintain; locally harvested, produced and/or distributed; Supportive of
creative economic structures and addressing problems in ecological design; and products of
service (materials leased from a company rather than bought outright – when worn out, the
product is returned for recycling and replaced).
Adam Joseph Lewis Center and the Earth Charter
The Adam Joseph Lewis Center (AJLC) takes on board many of the Earth Charter educational
principles, as enumerated in the description of The Willow School. The AJLC also demonstrates
many of the Earth Charter Principles and Supporting Principles in Part II: Ecological Integrity.
For example, the building’s technological innovations “manage the use of renewable
resources”xxiii, “manage the… use of non-renewable resources such as fossil fuels”xxiv, and
“act[s] with restraint and efficiency when using energy, and [relies] increasingly on renewable
19
energy sources such as solar and wind”xxv. The center’s architecture and facilities “reduce, reuse
and recycle materials… and ensure that residual waste can be assimilated by ecological
systems”xxvi. As a demonstration and educational laboratory, the center also promotes “the
development, adoption, and equitable transfer of environmentally sound technologies”xxvii and
advances “the study of ecological sustainability and promote[s] the open exchange and wide
application of the knowledge acquired.”xxviii
Questions for Florida Gulf Coast University
The Adam Joseph Lewis Center’s example raises questions for the design of Florida Gulf Coast
University’s Green Building:
1. How can the Green Building function as a core component of the University’s
environmental studies and sustainability curriculum?
2. How can the Green Building serve as a part of the larger education of the Southwest
Florida and Western Everglades community?
3. How can the Green Building make interactions between the built and natural
environments visible and easy to interpret?
4. What kinds of materials will be used to construct the building? Are materials recycled or
reused? Are they locally harvested, produced, and/or distributed? Do they require low
energy to produce, transport, use, and maintain? Are they products of service?
20
Case #2: The John T. Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies
The mission of the Lyle Centerxxix is to advance the principles of environmentally sustainable
living through education, research, demonstration and community outreach. The term
“regenerative” describes processes that restore, renew or revitalize their own sources of energy
and materials, creating sustainable systems that integrate the needs of society with the integrity
of nature. Located on 16 acres (6.5 ha) within the Cal Poly Pomona University campus, the
Center researches and demonstrates a wide array of regenerative strategies, including low-energy
architecture, energy production technology, water treatment, organic agriculture, ecological
restoration and sustainable community development.
The Center is administered by the College of Environmental Design, and offers a Master of
Science in regenerative studies as well as a minor program at the undergraduate level. Faculty
are drawn from departments across campus, creating a unique interdisciplinary learning
environment. Students have numerous opportunities to get involved at the Lyle Center, beyond
taking classes. For example, students can conduct research or demonstration projects that
advance regenerative principles. The Center offers student housing for graduate and upper
division students, and a number of employment opportunities are available each year. All of
these opportunities are open to all Cal Poly Pomona students, regardless of their degree program.
The buildings at the Center are designed to minimize the amount of energy required for heating
and cooling of the interior spaces. They work with natural patterns of the sun as well as airflows
to passively regulate the internal temperatures of the buildings. Trellis structures on the south
side of buildings support grapes, chayote, or other deciduous vines. The shade from the vines
block direct sunlight from entering the buildings in the summer, helping to keep the interior
spaces from heating up. In the winter, the vines lose their leaves and lower sun angles allow
direct sunlight to penetrate into the interior spaces, passively warming the building. The
buildings are also designed to control airflow to increase human comfort. Hot air is allowed to
dissipate out of clerestory windows as cooler air enters the space from below, creating a chimney
effect that promotes airflow. The Riverfront Dormitory is elevated to allow cool evening air to
flow underneath the interior spaces. Building exteriors are finished with a fast-growing,
renewable cedar, and the Center is continually exploring alternative building materials,
particularly materials that are waste products of our society. Alternative materials are also being
routinely studied in small, temporary projects on display at the Center.
The majority of the Center's energy production comes from various solar technologies. The
Center operates an Amonix Solar Concentrator unit. This unit tracks the sun throughout the day,
and is capable of generating up to 12.8 kWH on a summer day. This scale of technology is
appropriate for communities with large energy demand and adequate resources to routinely
provide maintenance. The center also has a number of smaller fixed and tracking photovoltaic
panels throughout the site, a portable solar energy cart, and solar thermal panels on the rooftops
of both dormitory buildings. Fixed panels, while not quite as efficient as tracking concentrators,
reliably produce power throughout the day. Another solar alternative on display at the Center are
solar shingles, located on the roof of the straw-bale building. This technology, while less
efficient than traditional photovoltaic panels, is a low-profile alternative for situations where the
appearance of solar panels is not desired. The Center operates one windmill, as part of a
solar/wind hybrid system located on a hilltop. Local conditions at the Center are not conducive to
21
high wind generation, so the hybrid system generates only about 5.5 kWH on windy days. The
Center is actively conducting research and outreach on bio-fuels, particularly bio-diesel, a
substitute for petroleum-based diesel fuel made from vegetable oil. The Center uses bio-diesel to
power its machinery, and conducts numerous workshops and demonstrations of the refining
process for the community.
Quality food is a necessity of life and an important part of sustainable communities. All of the
Center's gardens are fully organic, meaning that chemical pesticides and fertilizers are not used.
Successful organic gardens entail working with natural processes to enhance the soil and control
pests, two activities commonly managed with chemicals in modern agricultural operations. A
variety of techniques are used to replenish nutrients within the garden soil, including covercropping with legumes that return nitrogen to the soil, and composting of green waste. Flowering
plants in the garden attract predatory insects which feed on agricultural pests. Organic pesticides
made out of garlic and peppers are also applied.
The Lyle Center and the Earth Charter
The goals and practice of the John T. Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies overlaps with Earth
Charter principles and values. For example, the Lyle Center promotes systems thinking and
ecological understanding, mirroring the Earth Charter’s call to “live with a sense of universal
responsbility, identifying ourselves with the whole Earth community as well as our local
comunities.”xxx In particular, the Lyle Center works to “protect and restore the integrity of
Earth’s ecological systems, with special concern for biological diversity and the natural
processes that sustain life.”xxxi Its focus on regenerative studies models “patterns of production,
consumption, and reproduction that safeguard Earth’s regenerative capacities, human rights, and
community well-being.”xxxii
Questions for Florida Gulf Coast University
The Lyle Center’s example raises questions for the design of Florida Gulf Coast University’s
Green Building:
1. How can curriculum be influenced or guided by the Green Building? Can the project help
establish an Earth Charter-inspired degree in liberal studies?
2. What roles are available for students in and around the Green Building?
3. Are there opportunities for students to engage in monitoring, upkeep, and maintenance of
green building technologies?
22
Case #3: Unity House at Unity College in Maine
Unity House is the on-campus residence of the President of Unity College. It is a platinum level
LEED certified building designed by the OPEN Prototype Initiative, an architecture-research
group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The building was designed and fabricated to
accommodate centuries of change in technologies, occupancy and use. This is expressed in the
architecture and detailing which create a new model for design, fabrication, and assembly that
could establish a system for a series of affordable, high performance houses. For example,
special attention was given to the separation of shell and infill, easily accessible services, and
flexible space. Of great importance is the relationship between public and private space, allowing
for flexibility within a relatively short time.
The house reflects the college’s environmental commitments and its rural, New England nature:
modest, frugal, solid, high quality, appropriate in scale, and in touch with the local climate.
Structural elements include the use of local to New England timber, chosen to help facilitate
learning and connect people to local resources. The residence is powered by renewable energy. It
was designed to meet the goals of Net-Zero energy and Carbon Neutral initiatives as defined in
the Living Building Challenge. On-site renewable energy generation also provide ample
opportunity for experiential curriculum. The building uses water in a frugal and environmentally
responsible manner. Any fixture or activity that does not require potable water uses either grey
water or water from captured precipitation. Sources of indoor air pollution are eliminated by
incorporating the appropriate amount of air exchanges as defined in California Title 24
requirements and by not permitting toxic, high VOC materials into the space.
Notably, Unity House and the OPEN Prototype Initiative represent adaptive design. It is a
building that can adapt to new uses and technologies. The systems and components in the house
have been designed to accommodate changing uses and needs. The multi-use building serves
both as a residence and a public building, and so the function of the building changes--sometimes
very quickly. The ability to make larger scale modifications relatively easily is important.
Interior partition walls have been configured in a way that they can be “uninstalled” and moved.
The task of turning two bedrooms into one, or making a living room into a larger entertainment
area, becomes a straightforward operation. The de-mountable baseboard provides access to
wiring chases in the walls should outlets or data ports need to be changed or added. The easily
removed ceiling panels provide access to repair or modify plumbing, heating, and ventilation
systems.
This “Open Building” design views the home as a collection of layered systems. These layers
include the site, the structure, the skin, the space plan, the services, and the “stuff” within the
home. Keeping these layers separate, and disentangled, allows for the creation of systems that
use materials appropriate to their expected life spans. Access to the system, commensurate with
the need for future modification, is designed into the initial plan. For example, the plumbing,
electrical systems, the HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) systems are designed
into specific spaces that do not interfere with the building’s structure or skin. The backbone of
this system, which is not expected to change significantly over time, will be built of long-lasting
materials preinstalled in a central mechanical core wall. The branches of this system are
accessible within the Open Built ceiling system, allowing for service or modification, should the
layout of the home be changed.
23
Unity House and the Earth Charter
As a multiuse building that serves as a private residence and a public space, as well as being
situated between the campus grounds and the wider community, the Unity House strengthens the
local community, enabling it to care for its environment.xxxiii As a modestly sized residence of
1900 square feet, Unity House suggests, in the words of the Earth Charter, that, “when basic
needs have been met, human development is primarily about being more, not having more.”xxxiv
Its adaptive design is an example of decision-making that “addresses the cumulative, long-term,
indirect… consequences of human activities.”xxxv
Questions for Florida Gulf Coast University
The Unity House example raises questions for the design of Florida Gulf Coast University’s
Green Building:
1. Is the building’s interior architecture adaptive? How responsive will it be to potential
future uses?
2. Will the building be carbon neutral and/or feature net-zero energy use? How might the
building demonstrate FGCU’s pledge to the American College & University Presidents
Climate Commitment?
3. Are the building’s long-term maintenance needs considered in the initial design?
4. How will the campus community and the wider Southwest Florida and Western
Everglades community utilize the building?
24
Case #4: The University of South Carolina Green Dormitory Initiative
West Green Quad is the University of South Carolina’s newest residence hall complex, a 500bed Living and Learning complex that is certified as LEED Silver. West Green Quad, home to
the Environmental Awareness Community, is designed to be a sustainable living environment.
Residents live in a healthy and comfortable green building, are able to monitor their own
resource consumption, and participate in the programs of the West Quad Learning Center--films,
speakers, service projects, special courses, field trips, and other events. The West Green Quad is
particularly supportive of student-initiated projects and programs.
The West Green Quad is designed to be a model and advocate for sustainability on the USC
campus and in the community. It promotes interactions among students, faculty, staff, and
community members to explore the changes required to create a sustainable society. Green
values and a holistic perspective guide all the initiative’s programs, operations, and facilities.
The result is a unique “green bubble” within which students are able to begin or continue their
journey toward a more sustainable lifestyle.
With the West Green Quad, USC has imagined a living/learning facility that reduces negative
environmental impacts, increases positive local economic impacts, and builds a strong sense of
community. The Green Learning Community residency option is for residents to live in a small
community of 25-30 students who share a desire to learn more about how to live more
sustainably—personally and as a society. Everyone lives together on the same floor and has the
opportunity to initiate and participate in special programs. The Green Learning Community has
opportunities for attending community dinners, taking field trips to places of interest, meeting
informally with visiting speakers and activists, and getting priority consideration for living in the
West Green Quad.
USC Green Dormitory Initiative and the Earth Charter
Beyond the education for sustainable development they receive through formal academic
instruction, residents of the USC West Green Quad are adopting lifestyles centered on
sustainable development. In the words of the Earth Charter, “we must imaginatively develop and
apply the vision of a sustainable way of life locally, nationally, regionally, and globally.” xxxvi The
USC West Green Quad residency experience is an example of integrating into “life-long learning
the knowledge, values, and skills needed for a sustainable way of life.”xxxvii
Questions for Florida Gulf Coast University
The USC West Green Quad dormitory initiative raises the following questions regarding Florida
Gulf Coast University’s Green Building:
1. How are student needs addressed in the Green Building?
2. Are there opportunities for students to occupy and/or use the building outside of formal
classroom instructions? For example, can space be designated for use by student clubs
and organization, as study space, or as social space?
3. Will the Green Building be available for special events, programming, lectures, and
informal gatherings?
25
Case #5: The Willow School
The Willow Schoolxxxviii is a small, independent coeducational day school for students in
kindergarten through eighth grade, committed to combining academic excellence and the joy of
learning and to experiencing the wonder of the natural world. The Willow School campus is
located on a 34-acre site in the central New Jersey countryside. The grounds preserve the natural
beauty of the area, with design features that include many outdoor learning spaces and
constructed wetlands for the filtration of wastewater that provide for the return of an abundance
of clean water to the groundwater system. Natural meadows, butterfly gardens, water harvesting
and hedgerows are incorporated into the site. The grounds include gardens and woodlands for
environmental study.
Willow School buildings include a mix of a historic 3-story colonial home, a state-of-the-art
13,500 square foot classroom building, and a LEED platinum certified arts and performance
center. The original three-story Colonial home has been converted into an administration
building with offices for the head of school, advancement and external affairs, admissions, and
business administration. The building also includes meetings rooms and a faculty workroom. The
library, containing over 3,600 volumes, is temporarily housed in the administrative building.
The classroom building, with natural wood siding and barn-like roof, conforms to the rural
character of the surrounding neighborhood. The interior consists of spacious classrooms to an
average of 14 students per grade, along with a teacher's lounge, a morning gathering space, and
interior play space. Each classroom opens directly onto the surrounding grounds to facilitate both
recreation and field studies as an integral part of the daily curriculum. The overall building
includes the latest in environmentally-sensitive and energy-efficient design. Clerestories provide
passive-solar heating, supplemented by geothermal heating and cooling systems. Rainwater
runoff and grey water are recycled to maintain the surrounding plantings, and the remaining
wastes are processed in the most environmental methods available. The Willow School's overall
goal is to teach in a building that not only houses the students but serves as a model to study
responsible living.
The Barn Studio is a unique space comprised of reclaimed and salvaged wood from the frame of
a historic barn in Hynemansville, PA. The Barn boasts platinum certification from LEED. The
building has 25’ ceilings, exposed pine rafters and beech ceiling boards. Daylight harvesting
techniques as well as 32 oversized ceiling lamps provides ample light for the space. Architectural
details such as a series of small windows, large floor to ceiling windows, floors made of
unfinished maple and a stage make this space a flexible venue for meetings and / or group
events. This space is designed with a rustic, open feel and an appreciation for the scenic beauty
that is part of the school campus location.
The Willow School and the Earth Charter
The Willow School would rate high on an Earth Charter assessment for a number of reasons. The
school’s teaching philosophy and architectural design “transmit to future generations values,
traditions and institutions that support the long-term flourishing of Earth’s human and ecological
communities”xxxix and “integrate into formal education and life-long learning the knowledge,
values and skills need for a sustainable way of life.”xl The campus grounds and buildings honor
26
the architecture of the local community and thus “protect[s] and restore[s]… places of cultural
significance.”xli
Questions for Florida Gulf Coast University
The Willow School’s example raises questions for the design of Florida Gulf Coast University’s
Green Building:
1. How might FGCU’s environmental mission and curriculum be reflected in the Green
Building’s design?
2. How might the FGCU Green Building preserve the natural beauty of the campus
grounds?
3. Does the building design feature outdoor learning spaces?
4. How might FGCU reuse locally sourced materials?
5. How might FGCU recreate traditional Southwest Florida architectural designs?
27
APPENDIX B
EC-ASSESS WORKSHEET
Below each Supporting Principle is a brief statement by the author on its application to Florida
Gulf Coast University campus issues. These suggestions are highlighted.
Relevance
of
Principle
YES or
NO
Declared
Level of
Care
0, 1, 2, 3
Level of
Engaged
Action
0, 1, 2, 3
Earth Charter Principles 5-16 (with Supporting
Principles)
Earth Charter Part II. Ecological Integrity
5. Protect and restore the integrity of Earth’s
ecological systems, with special concern for biological
diversity and the natural processes that sustain life.
a. Adopt at all levels sustainable development plans and
regulations that make environmental conservation and
rehabilitation integral to all development initiatives.
(conservation and rehabilitation in planning)
b. Establish and safeguard viable nature and biosphere reserves,
including wild lands and marine areas, to protect Earth’s life
support systems, maintain biodiversity, and preserve our natural
heritage. (preserve ecosystems and biodiversity on campus in the
context of the Western Everglades, e.g. no net loss)
c. Promote the recovery of endangered species and ecosystems.
(ecological restoration projects)
d. Control and eradicate non-native or genetically modified
organisms harmful to native species and the environment, and
prevent introduction of such harmful organisms.
(native plants, xeriscaping and GMO food policy)
e. Manage the use of renewable resources such as water, soil,
forest products, and marine life in ways that do not exceed rates
of regeneration and that protect the health of ecosystems.
(sources of water, sustainable forest products, and runoff)
f. Manage the extraction and use of non-renewable resources
such as minerals and fossil fuels in ways that minimize depletion
and cause no serious environmental damage.
(lifecycle analysis of building materials, such as metals, and
electricity generation)
< Averages for This Principle
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
6. Prevent harm as the best method of environmental
protection and, when knowledge is limited, apply a
precautionary approach.
a. Take action to avoid the possibility of serious or
irreversible environmental harm even when scientific
knowledge is incomplete or inconclusive.
(prevention principle)
28
b. Place the burden of proof on those who argue that a
proposed activity will not cause significant harm, and make
the responsible parties liable for environmental harm.
(precautionary principle/polluter pays)
c. Ensure that decision making addresses the cumulative,
long-term, indirect, long distance, and global consequences of
human activities.
(considering long term/remote consequences in planning
decisions)
d. Prevent pollution of any part of the environment and allow
no build-up of radioactive, toxic, or other hazardous
substances.
(toxic emissions from building in construction and functioning)
e. Avoid military activities damaging to the environment.
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
< Averages for This Principle
7. Adopt patterns of production, consumption, and
reproduction that safeguard Earth’s regenerative
capacities, human rights, and community well-being.
a. Reduce, reuse, and recycle the materials used in
production and consumption systems, and ensure that
residual waste can be assimilated by ecological systems.
(reduce, reuse, recycle in construction and on site practices)
b. Act with restraint and efficiency when using energy, and
rely increasingly on renewable energy sources such as solar
and wind.
(energy efficiency and renewable energy sources)
c. Promote the development, adoption, and equitable transfer
of environmentally sound technologies.
(developing and transferring green technology to “developing”
settings, and outreach)
d. Internalize the full environmental and social costs of goods
and services in the selling price, and enable consumers to
identify products that meet the highest social and
environmental standards.
(full cost accounting)
e. Ensure universal access to health care that fosters
reproductive health and responsible reproduction.
(sex ed/reproductive health care counseling)
f. Adopt lifestyles that emphasize the quality of life and
material sufficiency in a finite world.
(sufficiency, “small is beautiful” office size, being more, not
having more)
< Averages for This Principle
Relevance
of
Principle
YES or
NO
Declared
Level of
Care
0, 1, 2, 3
Level of
Engaged
Action
0, 1, 2, 3
Earth Charter Principles 5-16 (with Supporting
Principles)
8. Advance the study of ecological sustainability and
promote the open exchange and wide application of
the knowledge acquired.
29
a. Support international scientific and technical cooperation
on sustainability, with special attention to the needs of
developing nations.
(collaboration/outreach, esp. to developing nations)
b. Recognize and preserve the traditional knowledge and
spiritual wisdom in all cultures that contribute to
environmental protection and human well-being.
(traditional knowledge and spiritual wisdom)
c. Ensure that information of vital importance to human
health and environmental protection, including genetic
information, remains available in the public domain.
(public access to critical knowledge)
< Averages for This Principle
Earth Charter Part III. Social and Economic Justice
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
9. Eradicate poverty as an ethical, social, and
environmental imperative.
a. Guarantee the right to potable water, clean air, food security,
uncontaminated soil, shelter, and safe sanitation, allocating the
national and international resources required.
(meeting basic needs of all)
b. Empower every human being with the education and resources
to secure a sustainable livelihood, and provide social security and
safety nets for those who are unable to support themselves.
(social security/sustainable livelihoods)
c. Recognize the ignored, protect the vulnerable, serve those who
suffer, and enable them to develop their capacities and to pursue
their aspirations.
(protecting the most vulnerable)
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
< Averages for This Principle
10. Ensure that economic activities and institutions at
all levels promote human development in an
equitable and sustainable manner.
a. Promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and
among nations.
(equitable distribution of wealth, such as salaries, compensation)
b. Enhance the intellectual, financial, technical, and social
resources of developing nations, and relieve them of onerous
international debt.
(connection and transfer to developing countries)
c. Ensure that all trade supports sustainable resource use,
environmental protection, and progressive labor standards.
(products used in building are sustainably certified, fair trade etc.)
d. Require multinational corporations and international financial
organizations to act transparently in the public good, and hold
them accountable for the consequences of their activities.
(purchase from and invest in corporations committed to
sustainability)
< Averages for This Principle
30
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
11. Affirm gender equality and equity as prerequisites to
sustainable development and ensure universal access to
education, health care, and economic opportunity.
a. Secure the human rights of women and girls and end all
violence against them.
(protecting women on campus)
b. Promote the active participation of women in all aspects of
economic, political, civil, social, and cultural life as full and
equal partners, decision makers, leaders, and beneficiaries.
(status of women in building and on campus, like leadership
roles, pay, etc.)
c. Strengthen families and ensure the safety and loving nurture of
all family members.
(strengthening families)
< Averages for This Principle
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
12. Uphold the right of all, without discrimination, to a
natural and social environment supportive of human
dignity, bodily health, and spiritual well being, with
special attention to the rights of indigenous peoples and
minorities.
a. Eliminate discrimination in all its forms, such as that based on
race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, language, and
national, ethnic or social origin.
(non discrimination and celebration of diversity)
b. Affirm the right of indigenous peoples to their spirituality,
knowledge, lands and resources and to their related practice of
sustainable livelihoods.
(honoring indigenous rights, lands, spiritualities, sustainable
practices)
c. Honor and support the young people of our communities,
enabling them to fulfill their essential role in creating sustainable
societies.
(empowering youth)
d. Protect and restore outstanding places of cultural and spiritual
significance.
(preserve spiritual and cultural resources)
< Averages for This Principle
YES or
NO
Earth Charter Part IV. Democracy, Nonviolence, and Peace
13. Strengthen democratic institutions at all levels,
and provide transparency and accountability in
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3 governance, inclusive participation in decision
making, and access to justice.
a. Uphold the right of everyone to receive clear and timely
information on environmental matters and all development plans
and activities which are likely to affect them or in which they
have an interest. (communicate to FGCU and wider communities
development plans and invite input)
31
b. Support local, regional and global civil society, and promote
the meaningful participation of all interested individuals and
organizations in decision making.
(provide a locus for civil society activities)
c. Protect the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful
assembly, association, and dissent.
(encourage critical participation)
d. Institute effective and efficient access to administrative and
independent judicial procedures, including remedies and redress
for environmental harm and the threat of such harm.
(environmental grievances)
e. Eliminate corruption in all public and private institutions.
(expose corruption)
f. Strengthen local communities, enabling them to care for their
environments, and assign environmental responsibilities to the
levels of government where they can be carried out most
effectively.
(support local, sustainable systems)
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
< Averages for This Principle
14. Integrate into formal education and life long
learning the knowledge, values, and skills needed for
a sustainable way of life.
a. Provide all, especially children and youth, with educational
opportunities that empower them to contribute actively to
sustainable development.
(outreach to schools and communities on sustainability)
b. Promote the contribution of the arts and humanities as well as
the sciences in sustainability education.
(arts and humanities for a sustainable future)
c. Enhance the role of the mass media in raising awareness of
ecological and social challenges.
(media initiatives)
d. Recognize the importance of moral and spiritual education for
sustainable living.
(education on the moral and spiritual dimensions of
sustainability)
< Averages for This Principle
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
15. Treat all living beings with respect and
consideration.
a. Prevent cruelty to animals kept in human societies and protect
them from suffering.
(humane education and humane food, regulations on animal
experimentation)
b. Protect wild animals from methods of hunting, trapping, and
fishing that cause extreme, prolonged, or avoidable suffering.
(humane pest control, rodents, etc.)
c. Avoid or eliminate to the full extent possible the taking or
destruction of non-targeted species.
(hunting and fishing education/sustainable seafood)
< Averages for This Principle
32
YES or
NO
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 1, 2, 3
16. Promote a culture of tolerance, nonviolence, and
peace.
a. Encourage and support mutual understanding, solidarity, and
cooperation among all peoples and within and among nations.
(global collaboration and partnerships)
b. Implement comprehensive strategies to prevent violent conflict
and use collaborative problem solving to manage and resolve
environmental conflicts and other disputes.
(conflict resolution and collaborative problem solving)
c. Demilitarize national security systems to the level of a nonprovocative defense posture, and convert military resources to
peaceful purposes, including ecological restoration.
(probably not relevant except in certain educational programs)
d. Eliminate nuclear, biological, and toxic weapons and other
weapons of mass destruction.
(probably not relevant except in certain educational programs)
e. Ensure that the use of orbital and outer space supports
environmental protection and peace.
(probably not relevant except in certain educational programs)
f. Recognize that peace is the wholeness created by right
relationships with oneself, other persons, other cultures, other
life, Earth, and the larger whole of which all are a part.
(Emphasize our interconnectedness with all life, the need for
contemplative practice and right relationships with all present and
future beings)
< Averages for This Principle
33
NOTES
i
Much of this section is derived from various texts on the Earth Charter written by Steven C. Rockefeller,
chair of the Earth Charter Drafting Committee and co-chair of the Earth Charter Council.
ii
Florida Gulf Coast University Campus Master Plan 2005-2015 Volume 2 – Goals, Objectives and
Policies (CMP), p 9-2
iii
Florida Gulf Coast University Environmental Stewardship Management Plan (ESMP), p 24
iv
LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations 2009 Rating System, p 2
v
CMP, p 13-4
vi
ESMP, p 24
vii
LEED 2009, p 12
viii
CMP, pp 13-4 to 13-5
ix
CMP, p 13-5
x
FGCU ESMP, pp 20-21
xi
LEED 2009, p 47 and 51
xii
CMP, p 3-7
xiii
CMP, p 5-5
xiv
LEED 2009, p 31
xv
CMP, p 3-8
xvi
ESMP, p 16
xvii
LEED 2009, p xi
xviii
http://www.fgcu.edu/info/mission.asp
xix
http://www.fgcu.edu/Catalog/learninggoals.asp
xx
http://www.fgcu.edu/oiec/
xxi
http://studentservices.fgcu.edu/International/
xxii
See http://www.oberlin.edu/ajlc/ajlcHome.html for more information on the center.
xxiii
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 5.e
xxiv
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 5.f
xxv
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 7.b
xxvi
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 7.a
xxvii
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 7.c
xxviii
Earth Charter Principle 8
xxix
See http://www.csupomona.edu/~crs/ for more information
xxx
Earth Charter, Preamble, Paragraph 5, “Universal Responsibility”
xxxi
Earth Charter Principle 5
xxxii
Earth Charter Principle 7
xxxiii
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 13.f
xxxiv
Earth Charter Preamble, Paragraph 4, “The Challenges Ahead”
xxxv
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 6.c
xxxvi
The Earth Charter, They Way Forward, paragraph two
xxxvii
Earth Charter Principle 14
xxxviii
See http://www.willowschool.org/ for more information on The Willow School
xxxix
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 4.b
xl
Earth Charter Principle 14
xli
Earth Charter Supporting Principle 12.d
34
REFERENCES
Berry, T. (2006). Evening thoughts: Reflecting on Earth as sacred community. (M.E. Tucker,
Ed.). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Bowers, C.A. (2001). “How language limits our understanding of environmental education.”
Environmental Education Research, 7(2), 141–51.
Earth Charter International Secretariat. (2008). EC-Assess: The Earth Charter ethics-based
assessment tool. San Jose, Costa Rica: Earth Charter International. Available online at
http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/invent/images/uploads/EC-Assess.pdf
Earth Charter Commission. (2000). The Earth Charter. San Jose, Costa Rica: Earth Charter
International. Available online at http://www.earthcharter.org
Florida Gulf Coast University. (1996). “Vision, mission, and guiding principles.” Fort Myers,
FL: Florida Gulf Coast University. Available online at
http://www.fgcu.edu/info/mission.asp
Florida Gulf Coast University. (1997). “Student learning goals and educational outcomes.” Fort
Myers, FL: Florida Gulf Coast University. Available online at
http://www.fgcu.edu/Catalog/learninggoals.asp
Florida Gulf Coast University. (2006). Environmental stewardship management plan. Fort
Myers, FL: Florida Gulf Coast University. Available online at
http://www.fgcu.edu/planning/LRPIE/files/2006_EnvStewMgtPlan_Final.pdf
Florida Gulf Coast University. (2006). Campus master plan 2005-2015, volume 2 – Goals,
objectives and policies. Fort Myers, FL: Florida Gulf Coast University. Available online
at http://www.fgcu.edu/masterplan/
Gruenewald, D.A. (2004). “A Foucauldian analysis of environmental education: Toward the
socioecological challenge of the Earth Charter.” Curriculum Inquiry, 34(1), 71-107.
Orr, D.W. (1992). Ecological literacy. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Sauer, P. (2002). “Global ethics: An American perspective.” Orion 21(1): 18–27.
U.S. Green Building Council. (2009). LEED for new construction and major renovations 2009
rating system. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Green Building Council. Available online at
http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=5546
35