By applying the interdisciplinary approach of science, technology, and society, students can solve often-neglected research problems of shifting society's operation toward a sustainable state. A recent Penn State University student research report titled The Mueller Report: Moving Beyond Sustainability Indicators to Sustainability Action contained a detailed ecological analysis of one campus building and addressed methods to optimize its ecological performance in terms of sustainability by using both behavioral and technological improvements. This article analyzes the factors that affected the successful implementation of sustainable practices generated by student research: (a) choosing a receptive primary audience, (b) establishing interpersonal relationships with decision makers, (c) saturating the local media, (d) making sustainability convenient, and (e) demonstrating fiscal responsibility.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Museum of Natural History. (1998). National survey reveals biodiversity crisis—Scientific experts believe we are in midst of fastest mass extinction in Earth's history [News release]. New York: Author.
2.
Ayres, E. (2000). The four spikes. Futures, 32, 539-554.
3.
Barbier, E. B., Pearce, D. W., & Markandaya, A. (1989). Environmental sustainability and cost-benefit analysis. Environmental Planning, A1(22), 1259-1266.
4.
Brown, L. R., Flavin, C., & Postel, S. (1991). Saving the planet: How to shape an environmentally sustainable global economy. New York: Norton.
5.
Brundtland, G. H. (1998). Knowledge for a sustainable development. In G. Bang, G. Bennech, K. Hindar, L. Wallace, & A. Wijkman (Eds.), The Brundtland Commission's report—10 years (pp. 5-10). Oslo, Norway: Scandinavian University Press.
6.
Business Outlet, Inc. (2001). Recycled office furniture: Good for the environment, good for your business. Available from www.businessoutlet.com/pdfs/recycle.pdf
7.
Cobb, C., & Rixford, C. (1998, October). Competing paradigms in the development of social and economic indicators. Paper presented at CSLS Conference of the State of Living Standards and the Quality of Life in Canada, Ottawa.
8.
Collett, J., & Karakashian, S. (Eds.). (1996). Greening the college curriculum: A guide to environmental teaching in the liberal arts. Washington, DC: Island Press.
9.
Creighton, S. H. (1998). Greening the ivory tower: Improving the environmental track record of universities, colleges and other institutions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1992). Population, sustainability, and Earth's carrying capacity. BioScience, 42(10), 761-771.
11.
Daly, H. E. (1991). Towards an ecological economics (World Bank working paper). Washington, DC: World Bank, Environment Department.
12.
Dearing, J. W., Meyer, G., & Kazmierczak, J. (1994). Portraying the new: Communication between university innovators and potential users. Science Communication, 16(1), 11-42.
13.
Dickson, D. (1984). The new politics of science. New York: Pantheon.
14.
Dickson, D. (2000). Science and its public: The need for a “third way.” Social Studies of Science, 30(6), 917-923.
Energy Systems Laboratory. (2001). Continuous commissioning in energy conservation programs. Available from www.esl.tamu.edu/cc/index.html
18.
FASER Report. (1999). Mueller Building electricity usage, Mueller Building water usage. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.
19.
FASER Report. (2000). Mueller Building electricity usage, Mueller Building water usage. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.
20.
Filho, W. L. (2000). Dealing with misconceptions of the concept of sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 1(1), 9-19.
21.
Goodland, R., & Daly, H. (1996). Environmental sustainability: Universal and non-negotiable. Ecological Applications, 6(4), 1002-1017.
22.
Green Destiny Council. (1998). Penn State indicators report. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.
23.
Green Destiny Council. (2001). The Mueller report: Moving beyond sustainability indicators to sustainability action at Penn State. University Park: Pennsylvania State University. Available from www.bio.psu.edu/greendestiny/publications/gdc-mueller_report.pdf
Hawken, P., Lovins, A., & Lovins, L. H. (1999). Natural capitalism: Creating the next industrial revolution. Boston: Little, Brown.
26.
Lane, B. (2000). Public understanding of the environmental impact of road transport. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 165-174.
27.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. K. (1948). Mass communication, popular taste, and organized social action. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communications of ideas (pp. 95-118). New York: Institute of Religious and Social Studies.
28.
Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. I., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W., III. (1972). The limits to growth. New York: Universe Books.
29.
Messinger, P. R., & Narasimhan, C. (1997). A model of retail formats based on consumers' economizing on shopping. Marketing Science, 16(1), 1-23.
30.
Moxen, J., & McCulloch, A. (1999). Organizing the dissemination of environmental information: Lessons from Scotland. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 1, 155-165.
31.
Orr, D. W. (1995). Educating for the environment: Higher education's challenge of the next century. Change, 27(3), 43-46.
32.
Pearce, J. (2001). The use of self-directed learning to promote active citizenship in science, technology, and society classes. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 21(4), 311-320.
33.
Rees, W. E. (1996). Revisiting carrying capacity: Area-based indicators of sustainability. Population and Environment: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 17(3), 195-215.
34.
Robertson, D. S. (2001). The rise in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and the effects on human health. Medical Hypotheses, 56(6), 513-518.
35.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.
36.
Rude, C. D. (2000). Environmental policymaking and the report genre. In N. W. Coppola & B. Karis(Eds.), Technical communication, deliberative rhetoric, and environmental discourse (pp. 269-283). Stamford, CT: Ablex.
37.
Solow, R. (1992). An almost practical step towards sustainability (RFF discussion paper). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
38.
Stalford, C. B. (1987). Congruence in theory and practice: The convening process and the consensus development program. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 9(1), 4-18.
39.
Uhl, C., & Anderson, A. (2001). Green destiny: Universities leading the way to a sustainable future. Bioscience, 51(1), 36-42.
40.
Uhl, C., Kulakowski, D., Gerwing, J., Brown, M., & Cochrane, M. (1996). Sustainability: A touchstone concept for university operations, education, and research. Conservation Biology, 10(5), 1308-1311.
Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1995). Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on the earth. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publisher.
43.
Waks, L. J. (1987). A technology credo. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 7(1/2), 357-366.
44.
Weiss, J. (1965, Summer). The university as corporation. New University Thought, pp. 31-45.
45.
Wilson, E. O. (1992). The diversity of life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
47.
World Conservation Union, Smithsonian Institution, World Wild-life Fund, Nature Conservancy, Royal Botanic Gardens of the United Kingdom, et al. (1998). The 1997 IUCN red list of threatened plants. Cambridge, UK: IUCN Publications Service Unit.
