1  

   

ECOnometrics Consulting Services                        Laurie  Kaye  Nijaki,  Ph.D.,  M.U.P.                          lnijakikaye@yahoo.com    

                   (818)  795-­‐4165    

CONCEPT  PAPER: University-­‐Community  Networks:  Advancing  Urban  

Sustainability  at  the  Local  and  National  Scale  

 

 Problem  Statement   Cities increasingly use sustainability to frame local action. So do businesses, education stakeholders, environmentalists, and neighborhood and community organizations, among many others. The result is a highly fragmented and increasingly more crowded policy and practice arena in which many common terms, like sustainability, are applied with disparate meanings. While most of these efforts are well intended and focused on the triple bottom line (environmental, economic, and social equity), these piecemeal non-systematic approaches to urban well-being waste already stressed resources and foster a competitive climate among stakeholders. For cities to adapt to the volatile climatic, economic and social conditions caused by climate change, population growth, and resource depletion will require systems thinking and the creation of processes and capacities that move all local players in parallel toward a more collective impact. In other words, we must move from isolated interventions to deep collaboration to solve multiple interrelated urban challenges simultaneously and across broad geographies.

Solution   As primary stakeholders in the vibrancy of their host cities, urban-serving universities can provide the critical leadership needed to design and build the systems required to promote sustainability at the urban and regional scale. Each urban-serving university plays many valuable roles:

• a respected voice and trusted convener of partners; • a generator of economic growth through the development and application of new

technologies;

 

  2  

• a beacon of opportunity for educational advancement and a critical source of workforce training;

• a producer of scientific expertise at the cutting edge of sustainability solutions; • an integral part of the urban fabric as a contributor of local culture and a large scale

landowner; and • a significant stakeholder in terms of its immediate and secondary impact on the

community through its procurement and employment practices With its mission of education, discovery and service, its role as a neutral convener, and its networks of expertise that reach into the community and across the globe, the university sits at the center of local and regional sustainability actions in a way that no other institution can.  The Coalition of Urban Serving Universities (USU), a president-led national network of more than three-dozen urban-based institutions of higher education, proposes to bring its members together to work cooperatively to strengthen sustainability in their cities. Rather than creating or replicating single projects, our approach seeks to develop and field test common processes of community engagement through which cities can achieve sustainability goals, replicable pilot projects, and research efforts, and identify and implement policies and programs that can provide a national impact. Given the wide-ranging nature of sustainability challenges, no one project will achieve maximal results across all campuses or cities. Specifically, we seek to develop a methodology for universities to advance urban sustainability through partnerships and pilot projects that merge, and then enhance, the dynamic activities already in place. In effect, we are looking at local system building. Our methodology builds on the proven practices of collective impact, defined by a common commitment across actors from disparate sectors for a common agenda that effectively leverages a centralized infrastructure, designated staff, extensive and regular communication, and shared metrics to address a critical and often seemingly intractable societal problem.1 Providing one example, the “Strive” partnership has already successfully applied collective impact in the reform of cradle to career education through a powerful partnership between over 300 cross-sectional representatives. “Strive” focused on common sets of goals and outcomes across 53 success indicators hinged on an innovative collective action approach linked by “shared community vision,” “evidence based decision making,” “collaborative action,” and “investment and sustainability.” USU was instrumental in advancing the “Strive” collective impact framework from the Cincinnati region to become a national movement for promoting increased high school graduation rates.2 Our approach around urban sustainability is inspired by Strive’s and USU’s success in bringing together partners through a collective action approach—moving beyond joint projects and other more commonplace collaborations. Delving deeper than chasing funding sources or constructing new programmatic entities oriented around isolated challenges, we will leverage our urban sustainability partnership locally and nationally through common metrics and deep collaboration in this tradition of success.

                                                                                                               1 Kania, J. and M. Kramer. 2011. “Collective Impact.” Stanford Social innovative Review, Winter. 2 More information on the Strive Program can be found at: http://www.strivetogether.org  

 

  3  

Towards that end, we propose to work with several USU members, chosen through a competitive RFP method, which will serve as exemplary universities for urban sustainability. We will share the selected cohort’s learning and engender wider engagement across USU through structured sister university networks for urban sustainability. We build on popular conceptualizations of sustainability to define urban sustainability3 as “urban design in the physical, social, and economic sphere that supports an environmentally, economically, and equitably prosperous city, reflected and promoted through local institutions and a built environment that is adaptable to a changing ecosystem.” As stakeholders in our cities, our definition emphasizes the urban lens, but also recognizes that cities anchor urban-to-rural continua, with far-flung resource sheds that supply water, energy, food, and other materials to urban dwellers. Our sustainability vision focuses on social equity as a guiding value for both economic and environmental benefits of urban sustainability action. We aim to focus on co-benefits—merging economic and environmental values with equity gains through the enhancement of procedural, distributive, and structural equity within the city. To operationalize this conceptualization of urban sustainability and in order to achieve the broadest impact, our work will focus on four key topical areas across all USUs and their metropolitan areas:

(1) Transportation and air quality with a focus on environmental justice (2) Water policy (3) Food security and the social equity dynamics of land use/vacancy (4) Climate change policy with a focus on climate equity

We will measure the success of our engagement in each city in terms of: 1) Alignment of previously separate projects 2) Commitment across the urban stakeholder ecosystem to a set of common sustainability metrics that track mutually agreed upon outcomes 3) Presence of a body, new or assigned, tasked with maintaining the momentum of the emergent system

A common characteristic of many USU members is that their research portfolios tend to include projects that merge the applied with the theoretical in order to solve complex problems at the urban scale. This means that their faculty may be inclined and well positioned to take on practical projects of greater direct benefit to municipal offices than those of their counterparts at traditionally research oriented universities, who tend to focus on more abstract, conceptual approaches. As a result, many USU member faculty, staff and students develop close partnerships with those local city departments responsible for sustainability outcomes, such as planning, environment, housing, and transportation. These collaborations lead to a variety of innovative policy experiments that generally have not been publicized outside of their local settings and provide the skeleton for a collective impact strategy. Our students also are predominately locally based, both coming from and ultimately remaining within a short radius

                                                                                                               3 Sustainability, and related concepts such as resilience, has been defined is a myriad of ways and lacks a standardized definition across groups and locations. Our definition is rooted in the tradition of the Brundtland conventions’ widely used definition and the United Nations subsequent definitions of sustainability development, and specifically seeks to operationalize these goals in our urban serving university context.

 

  4  

from the campus, and are powerful tools in the diffusion of projects and in bolstering equity as a guiding value for our efforts. They are a key, defining asset to our ability to impact urban sustainability in a powerful and enduring manner. USUs are not the only universities carrying out urban research or that have partnerships with government agencies. What most distinguishes the USU coalition, however, is that it represents an existing network with common characteristics that makes it well-suited for developing a methodology that can eventually be translated to other urban players. Working through USU, urban-serving universities can thus promote sustainability both within and beyond their campuses through cross-campus and inter-city comparisons that allow them to identify and share their most effective practices. In what follows, we outline a four-part process through which universities can help significantly impact the long-term sustainability of cities.  

The  Project   The four-phase roadmap we propose follows the selection of an initial, small set of “exemplary universities,” which will be chosen through a competitive RFP that employs rigorous selection criteria vetted by a national expert committee.4 The four phases are:

1) Each campus will work with city officials and other stakeholders to generate urban sustainability stakeholder action plans focused on a particular sustainability area and designed with implementation in mind. 2) University-city partnerships will disseminate and scale the most effective practices and replicable pilot projects that jointly engage the USU and partners throughout its host city. 3) USU will link and spread these practices and pilot projects through the creation of sister university networks for urban sustainability. 4) USU will coordinate and align national resources by networking the networks.

Taken together, this multi-pronged strategy will deepen our understanding of the processes and partnerships that effectively advance urban sustainability actions, implement and disseminate those practices, and then work to scale them locally and nationally.

                                                                                                               4 A critical step in project success is the careful selection of an initial cohort of USUs. We will develop a detailed rubric for evaluating universities. We will work with those universities, and their proximate metropolitan areas, that will have the largest impact. Towards that end, one approach is to target “sustainability leaders” (either in terms of (1) university-driven or (2) community/metropolitan-based accomplishments/actions around urban sustainability) as participants. Another approach is to target “sustainability laggards”, but where there are areas of potential low hanging fruit where there is potential for leadership in particular areas. Our cohort will include, along with readiness, universities with varying local conditions, and which are leaders in various segments of sustainability. Additionally, we will want to have a national spread of locales in order to accommodate local differences in sustainability context. We can choose universities that are leaders in particular areas of sustainability—everything from sea level rise to urban agriculture. One potential way to assess readiness, moreover, is having universities that apply do so with collaboration with a local partner, or collaborative local partners. For example, we can have as a requirement that responders to an RFP apply with this partner, or set of partners.  

 

  5  

Phase  1:  Exemplary  Universities  for  Urban  Sustainability  Stakeholder  Action  Plans     Each selected exemplary university for urban sustainability will develop and deliver a “university and community sustainability stakeholder action plan” that will collectively define a comprehensive set of actions for university engagement with external networks of stakeholders to meet mutually generated urban sustainability goals. Based upon different local contexts, each USU will focus on a particular topical area underneath our definition of urban sustainability in order to foster the greatest impact and depth and reach across approaches. These areas will become the focus of both the stakeholder action plans, as well as the pilot project selected in each locale. As one sample approach using our existing steering committee, with key issue listed followed and secondary sustainability issues:

1. Florida International University (FIU); Coastal Vulnerability and Resilience/Sea Level Rise Additional Areas: Freshwater, Transportation, Agro-Food Security, Ecosystems Dependency 2. University of Wisconsin Milwaukee; Water issues/water quality Additional Areas: Storm water Management, Urban Food Systems, Transportation/Biking 3. Arizona State University; Urban Heat Island Additional Areas: Water Policy; Air Quality/Transportation; Energy Production 4. California State University, Los Angeles; Drought/Access to Water Additional Areas: Food Deserts; Air Quality/Goods Movement 5. University of Illinois, Chicago (UIC); Storm water Management Additional Areas: Energy Efficiency/Clean Energy; Transportation; Waste 6. Portland State University (PSU); Climate Action Policy and Climate Equity Additional Areas: Transportation; Land use/Urban Growth Boundary 7. Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI); Urban Agriculture and Gardening Additional Areas: Urban Vacancy/Redevelopment; Watershed Preservation; Greening Transportation and Logistics 8. University of Akron (UA); Green Manufacturing Additional Areas: Smart Transit; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Neighborhood Revitalization and Brownfields Redevelopment

Carrying out this unified process across a range of urban-serving universities will test a framework through which universities can systematically define and map their stakeholders’

 

  6  

most pressing priorities, determine the most effective mechanism of engagement, and identify pilot projects that could be connected and scaled locally and studied nationally. Impacted stakeholders will be significant as each USU tends to have around 40,000 students and operate in a largely populated metropolitan area. As a small measure of our wide-ranging impact, students for the steering committee listed alone collectively number over 330,000 students. Overall, the action plans will:

• Document the range of sustainability challenges locally, gaps in resources in meeting such challenges, and the most pressing applied research challenges.

• Catalogue the diversity of activities in which universities engage, emphasizing those that reach beyond the campus boundary.

• Identify the partners and networks of local stakeholders (both within each urban area and between such local networks nationally) involved in the activities, who in turn can map their own current activities and future progression.

• Build a common vision, grounded in a mutual understanding of the challenges they face. • Develop strategies to expand sustainability impacts in the city in a way that merges

existing resources and initiatives, creates cross-stakeholder synergies, and is grounded in a common measurement system that tracks outcomes and provides evidence for determining what works.

• Identify a support organization tasked with managing the strategy. • Disseminate effective practices and replicable pilot projects through interactive national

networks.

The  essential  role  of  urban  universities:    The  data   In each city, there are plans and initiatives galore, but they lack the deep collaboration needed to steer community-wide improvements and align complementary activities to achieve major social breakthroughs. Networks of well-connected stakeholders working together around sustainability goals are beginning to develop locally, as well as nationally. We aim to build on these emerging efforts through a systems based approach. We see why the university is in the ideal position to provide critical leadership in urban sustainability by examining draft stakeholder maps put together by eight USU members--Portland State University, Florida International University, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Arizona State University, University of Akron, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, California State University, Northridge, University of Illinois at Chicago (see appendix)—and then grouping them thematically by mode of engagement. We identified the following six areas where university engagement is used to advance regional environmental objectives (see Table 1in the appendix for details).

• Communicator and campus showcase, whereby the university communicates best practices in sustainability through programs, communication vehicles, or its own actions.

• Convener and coordinator, where the university brings together actors across the city, state, nation or international arena to advance goals.

• City agency capacity builder, in which the university offers technical and other support to city agencies.

• Coalition member, where universities add their strengths to local and other coalitions.

 

  7  

• Consultant, in which universities are partners with government agencies to undertake funded research projects to advance policy or practice.

• Community partner capacity builder, which brings university expertise to the aid of community-based partnerships and other relevant nonprofits.

What is needed most for local communities working towards achieving higher levels of sustainability is an action-driven, evidence-based comprehensive roadmap for university engagement that creates synergies across a range of urban projects that meet and even exceed locally vetted sustainability goals. This process can help us develop the right mechanisms to engage with community partnerships and networks of stakeholders to help create local systems that advance sustainability by building on existing networks of sustainability stakeholders at the metropolitan level. Our approach will leverage the USU network and build further on the type of information gathered by this initial set of universities outlined in the appendix below. Universities tend to engage in one or two modes of engagement, Our proposed approach across multiple USU participants selected as exemplars through a competitive RFP process will further provide a template for a comprehensive approach towards multi-modal engagement in urban sustainability. Towards that end, each participant will commit to engaging across all 6 methods of engagement in the development of pilot projects and other policy efforts.  

How  these  collective  action  plans  complement  and  enhance  climate  action  plans  and  other  strategies   Climate action plans for cities, sustainability plans, and other municipal plans seek to define areas of action, often creating a catalogue of programs, policies and initiatives touching broad notions of urban sustainability, and suggest further actions across a diverse array of city departments and regional government institutions. Currently, climate actions plans are often incomplete and have struggled with implementation challenges because sustainability programs are not the purview of any one particular city department and require immersion across city departments. Sustainability challenges, as a result, often fall in between traditional government silos within cities, between nonprofit stakeholder interests, and between different government entities across regions. Government stakeholders, as well as nonprofit partners, are multiple and include departments as dispersed as public works and transportation. Cities have begun to use their sustainability directors as coordinators across such diverse approaches. Likewise, networks of stakeholders around sustainability, both within and beyond government, are beginning to emerge nationally. As the role of sustainability directors emerges, as sustainability stakeholders begin to make solid connections yielding impressive gains, and as interdisciplinary and interdepartmental sustainability goals are integrated in city departments, we aim to push this system-building one step further. We will focus on implementation by filling the gap in leadership needed in many metropolitan areas seeking sustainability solutions, while lacking the resources and infrastructure needed to achieve goals. Urban serving universities, moreover, are uniquely positioned to engage the social equity challenges that are connected with sustainability goals, and which often emerge as sustainability’s most difficult aspect. It is often acknowledged that lower income communities and communities of color are most often underserved and underrepresented in climate action and other environmental and economic development benefits that stem from other local policy efforts. Their voices are most often left off the table, and sustainability’s inherent complexity in implementation strategies further intensifies and magnifies these issues. Given a more

 

  8  

comprehensive approach grounded in collective impact, urban serving universities may in fact help to fill a leadership void in achieving well researched, innovative, and implementable sustainability solutions locally. The stakeholder action plans that we propose here complement and enhance the tactics commonly employed through climate action plans in the following ways:

• They will be action-driven, focused around devising strategies that advance the work already on the ground, and aim to meet a set of clear objectives while grounded in a common vision and understanding of the problem.

• The plans will be evidence driven because they will engage the university’s research role in the process and will have the stakeholders commit to a shared measurement system.

• A national community of practice aimed at sharing and replicating effective strategies will support local efforts.

• The community will be engaged in defining and owning common measures of success. • We offer a more holistic approach with a more textured definition of sustainability in

achieving all of this. As a neutral convener aiming to draw wider networks, this definition positions us as leaders in the integration of social equity considerations into a dynamic sustainability call for action.

We believe that our approach will develop and/or strengthen local governance institutions to deepen collaboration across the range of sustainability initiatives and sustainability networks toward collective impact. There are many possibilities of what such collaborative strategies, or engagement frameworks, might look like. We aim to tease out different engagement strategies, and consider how such engagement strategies might differ given local contexts. As one example, the university and city agencies may explore the potential to appoint a joint representative, or liaison, focused around this interaction and reporting to a mixed board or task force of faculty, students, nonprofit stakeholders, city officials, and other key local actors. This individual can be charged with the development and implementation of a range of policy projects (each representing the different avenues of engagement) within the locale, building on lessons learned from implementing programs across USU nationally. USU can then draw on its wide network of participants, helping to provide a learning community, exportable practices and engagement frameworks, and the development of useable metrics for other regions. We will show, in real time, how the network of stakeholders around urban sustainability grows with online maps drawing stakeholder connections between one another and incorporating the USU as a central organizing node. In each selected exemplary university, participants will be able to see how networks will grow as we visually expand our maps and identify potential for further nodes of interaction. Our efforts will specifically target the inclusion of stakeholders that represent communities that have been historically underserved by environmental and economic development policies and underrepresented in terms of the decision making process. This will help to mitigate the structural barriers towards equitably enjoying the benefits of climate action and other efforts towards bolstering urban quality of life. Figure 1 provides a conceptual map of this approach.

 

  9  

Figure  1.  Exemplary  Universities  for  Urban  Sustainability  Stakeholder  Action  Plans:  One  Example  of  Engagement  through  University-­Community  Liaison    

 

 

 

   

 

  10  

   

Phase  2:  Dissemination  and  Scaling       From the results of the planning exercise, we will extract and share effective and promising practices through a variety of social media, as well as develop guidelines for universities to use for deepening the sustainability activities within cities. We foresee the following outcomes. • Identification and exchange of strategies and effective practices that engage stakeholders

through sustainability initiatives. Build innovative and integrative governance structures that enable sustainable projects to scale, and which uniquely draw in traditionally underrepresented voices in the urban sustainability dialogue.

• Articulation of the challenges endemic to urban locales, and the role universities can or should play in finding solutions.

• Development and implementation of a framework for university engagement in urban sustainability that provides a comprehensive approach towards linking the university with external partners.

• Discovery of policies and programs that are relevant to all, or most, universities. • Leveraging different and multiple roles of engagement, development of individual pilot

projects for replication and adaptation across USUs. Our blueprint will distill down and define elements of success.

• Engagement in the broader national and global conversation on how to advance sustainability and social justice goals in urban areas through collective impact.

   

Phase  3:  Create  Sister  University  Networks  for  Urban  Sustainability     USU includes universities operating in cities facing diverse sustainability challenges, constraints, and opportunities. Focused thematically around this diversity of sustainability challenges, networks of sister universities of common typologies can foster information sharing, replicable pilot projects, and research using an array of tools including listservs, social media, and speaker events. This can allow us to draw beyond our small initial cohort of universities. Equally significant, these networks can link administrators, researchers, and students across universities to create joint projects to address common local sustainability challenges. Competitively selected exemplary universities can each volunteer to work as a convener within a sister university network for urban sustainability. Even more, the exemplary institutions can further their interaction with USU by serving as mentors for their networks, to help up the game of their peers through collaborative networks of mutual support. The structures of these learning networks would be derived from the knowledge acquired in the first phases of this project. Leveraging across the USU network, our approach enables us to drill down to understand and then effectively characterize local differences in sustainability challenges. Several categories and themes of challenges and solutions can be identified across and between USUs. One method would be to create an urban typology based upon location characteristics such as population, the history and density of sustainability programs as measured

 

  11  

by a sustainability index5, or common geographies or environmental ecosystems. Another classification might be to categorize them by common sustainability challenges such as industrial decline or coastal erosion. Table 4 in the appendix provides one sample approach utilizing the current steering committee and the broader USU network. This may contribute towards a more complete understanding of urban sustainability complexities towards the establishment of an urban genome project6 of challenges and solutions. Particularly related to partnerships, moreover, different avenues of engagement can be explored in the context of these thematically similar locales.

Phase  4:  Networking  the  networks   What is ultimately missing in the urban sustainability conversation is strong coordination and implementation, spanning all six modes of engagement, across diverse locales. Through stakeholder mapping, USU proposes to identify, and then build bridges to link across existing consortia of local governments (Table 2 and Figure 1 in appendix) and universities (Table 3 in appendix). Our collective action approach aims to build a national system to address urban sustainability challenges. Conceptually, Figure 2 uses select USU members to provide a network map of these connections, which could be extended to any cohort of USUs chosen through the proposed competitive RFP process. A more elaborate map was generated through network software and in included in the appendix Figure 2. Leveraging USU’s relationships as an established national coalition, we can link local networks into national structures. Currently, there is little connectivity between metropolitan and university networks, with few partners playing prominently across these critical networks. Funders provide the most common connecting partner. As demonstrated by Appendix Figure 2 and Figure 3, USU can provide a new important node through which to connect the entire system.

Figure 2: Merging University and Metropolitan Networks

     

                                                                                                               5  Portney,  Kent  E.  2002.  Taking  Sustainable  Cities  Seriously:  Economic  Development,  the  Environment,  and  Quality  of  Life  in  American  Cities.  Cambridge:  MIT  Press.  6  Fink,  J.H.,  2011.  The  Case  for  an  Urban  Genome  Project:  A  Shortcut  to  Global  Sustainability?  Nat.    Academy  of  Engineering  Bridge  41  (1):  5-­‐12.  

 

  12  

We believe our approach provides a powerful framework that will naturally create synergies among ongoing initiatives because it brings to the table four elements the others lack: 1) Urban-Scale Orientation: Our view creates a visual and knowledge-rich map of sustainability practices across the urban area, identifies opportunities for replicable pilot projects based upon the six types of urban serving university engagement, and engages across cities in order to achieve unmatched scale and impact in the urban sustainability space. Our approach uniquely leverages the USU in general, and senior administrators in particular, as critical partners in linking together relevant local and regional stakeholders. Many existing networks are focused on one particular stakeholder group (sustainability directors, mayors, etc.), and reach across cities to link such stakeholders across the country (USDN, US Council of Mayors). As sustainability approaches mature, networks are becoming increasingly complex, multi-dimensional, and effective. Multiple diverse and multi-faceted stakeholder groups are linking across stakeholders at the local level, and making connections across cities, through the application of sustainability metrics such as the STAR Communities program. As conceptually demonstrated in figure 3 below, we aim to build on such efforts to bring such networks of stakeholders together. The USU will serve a key role in further developing such metrics and implementing results. The reach of the USU Coalition enables us to create multi-dimensional and implementation focused stakeholder networks across the country that build on sustainability networks that link key stakeholders across particular metropolitan areas, and then connects those urban regions. 2) Sustainability Framing: This framework is centered around urban sustainability and adaptability, rather than on climate change as in the case of the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment, or resilience like Second Nature’s Alliance for Resilient Campuses. To reiterate, our specific definition of sustainability hinges on two critical elements: good urban design in the physical, social and economic sphere oriented around creating a more environmentally, economically, and equitably prosperous city through institutions and the built environment, and adaptability to a changing environment. Our strategy specifically reaches beyond the climate action plans that some universities and some locales have already undertaken through this expanded definition and reach. 3) Collective Impact: Our proposal is grounded in university-city partnerships that aim to bring all urban stakeholders together into a common framework in each city and connect university and local government stakeholders nationally through USU. We will define and explore effective modes of collaboration in urban sustainability, and facilitate the adoption of pilot projects that replicate effective engagement between USUs and their surrounding metropolitan areas.

4)Targeting Social Justice and Equity: Through the constituents that they serve and the array of resources that they can bring to bear, urban serving universities are uniquely positioned to address urban social equity challenges. Acting as a neutral convener, USU provides the opportunity to engage less frequently heard voices in the sustainability debate. By drawing and then expanding the network of stakeholders through a collective impact approach towards urban sustainability, we aim to fundamentally change the system and provide access to stakeholders representing constituencies facing historical and current disparities. Their voice of what concerns

 

  13  

them in their communities—such as access to green job training is critical. Sustainability initiatives that work at the intersection of these concerns with environmental and climate action goals will be most successful. As this system is built, this will ultimately lead to more proportionate distribution of environmental and economic amenities. This approach directly gets at the root of the problem of environmental and economic disparities. 5) Leadership: USU is a president and chancellor-run network which brings university leaders to the table to advance change in their institutions, in their cities and nationally, by working together. This brings a critical new and potentially powerful stakeholder to the existing set of urban-oriented sustainability networks. In the end, the outcome of our approach is focused around impact and scale. Our work goes much deeper than establishing a process for process sake, or in developing another environmentally oriented local plan. Instead we offer a process that is strongly centered on clear outcomes in sustainability arenas, and is fundamentally focused on understanding and then bolstering linkages by strengthening and diversifying modes of engagement between USUs and other key stakeholders. The goal of stakeholder mapping through our sustainability action plans is not just about documenting what’s in place, but identifying breaks in the network and bringing key stakeholders together, identifying what’s already in motion, and as a city/metro collective, agreeing to one or two metrics that they, as a region, intend to promote. Our approaches won’t be the same for all metro locales, but will have meaning and significance both locally and globally. For example, Portland may choose carbon reduction as the metric they will collectively drive—others may focus on water quality or air quality or soil/coastal challenges. We will better define avenues of engagement for USUs in partnership with critical external stakeholders. As sister university networks for urban sustainability share similar goals, they can further foster impact. Having several cities working together on a critical sustainability issue will help to scale up actions to maximize impact.

 

  14  

APPENDIX:      

Table  1:   Implementing  Urban  Sustainability:  A  Typology  of  University  Sustainability  Strategies      

 Table  2:     Metropolitan  Networks:    Some  Examples    Figure  1:     National  Network  Diagram  of  Metropolitan  Network  Connections    Table  3:     University  Networks:  Some  Examples    Table  4       Pilot  Projects  and  Sustainability  Action  Plans:  Thematic    

Approaches  to  Sustainability  Across  Participating  USUs    Figure  2:       Current  Division  Between  Metro  Networks  and  University  Networks    Figure  3:       Networking  the  Networks:  Proposed  Network  through  USU      Table  5:     Key Urban Sustainability Stakeholders: Related Metropolitan and

University Network Roles  Basic  Stakeholder  Maps:   Arizona  State  University  (ASU)         California  State  University,  Northridge  (CSUN)  

Florida  International  University  (FIU)         Indiana  University-­‐Purdue  University  Indianapolis  (IUPUI)  

Portland  State  University  (PSU)  University  of  Akron  (UA)  University  of  Illinois  at  Chicago  (UIC)  University  of  Wisconsin,  Milwaukee  (UWM)  

 

  15  

Table 1: Implementing Urban Sustainability: A Typology of University Sustainability Strategies  

Mode of Engagement: the 6 Cs

Description of Engagement Sample Programs/Projects from Participating USUs:

Communicator and Campus Showcase

This type of engagement can occur in three different areas of focus:

1. University provides outreach on behalf of the city. Opportunity to craft and showcase the image of the local city and university as a leader in urban sustainability.

2. University operates as a model for the broader city by showcasing best practices linked to urban sustainability. In some cases, such projects require direct coordination with a city agency.

3. University working collectively with other universities around such strategies in a network. This approach may not directly connect with external partners such as city officials.

• First Stop Portland (PSU): Convene meetings for global delegations seeking information about Portland’s green urbanism. Funded by local universities, companies, and government agencies.

• Multimodal Transportation Plan (UIC): UIC received a local technical assistance grant to develop, in conjunction with numerous city partners, a transportation plan for the university community.

• Alliance to Retrofit Chicago Higher Education: ARCH (UIC): This foundation funded initiative brings together higher education institutions inChicagoland to share and implement best practices for energy efficiency among sustainability faciliaties and financial staff across universities, in collaboration wh the Retrofit Chicago Iniattive.

• Chicagoland Network for Sustainability in Higher Education (UIC): Network of higher education institutions working with students, staff, and faculty to share best practices around climate change, sustainable food sourcing, and advancing bicycling in Metro Chicago. It is docused around the role of campus sustainability directors.

• UW System (UWM): Formed a collaboration of all UW system campuses on sustainability. Includes a website, listserv, monthly conference calls, and an annual conference.

• CSU Sustainability Network (CSUN): Network of CSU campuses around sustainability designed to extend reach of university-based programs. Focuses on institutions that are located in urban communities, with campuses such as CSU Long Beach, Cal Poly Pomona, Fullerton, Dominguez Hills, East Bay, SFSU.

Convener and coordinator (locally and across cities nationally).

University acting as a convener across:

1. Sustainability engagement across multiple actors in a particular city.

2. Sustainability engagement across multiple cities in its region.

3. Sustainability engagement across diverse cities nationally around urban

• Urban Sustainability Accelerator (PSU): Program convenes cohort of city officials and partners from 5-10 cities/year to work on specific sustainability projects. Project aims to form a learning network that leverages and transfers local knowledge to other cities. Supported through foundation funding, and contracts from participating cities.

• Sustainable Cities Network (ASU): Global Institute of Sustainability created network with local communities (including a broad range of professional disciplines from AZ cities, towns,

 

  16  

challenges. counties, and native American communities) as a vehicle for information sharing and coordination of efforts. Practitioners achieve knowledge, resources, and innovations to “accelerate the Valley towards national leadership in sustainability.”

• Community Solar Workshops (CSUN): Institute for Sustainability partnership with Pick My Solar and districts within City of Los Angeles, also other cities in neighboring counties, to conduct free workshops for residents on how to go solar. Relationship building and outreach in community for CSUN’s Institute. Currently funded internally. In process of seeking funding from LADWP and SCE (utility companies).    

City Agency Capacity Builder as staff member/expert consultant on local city-based projects

University provides technical support for city agencies. Includes niche staffing in cases where particular expertise is needed, or where cities lack the capacity to engage in a particular kind of sustainability project. Faculty can also provide research expertise. In many cases, projects incorporate students as technical experts and capacity builders for local agencies on projects. Rather than being programmatic, these tend to be policy based, contributing to large-scale city planning. University program provides a conduit through which faculty and students can engage in such local projects

• Sustainable Neighborhoods Initiative (PSU): “Neighborhood initiative connecting students and faculty with groups of community organizations in long term partnerships to advance sustainability at the neighborhood scale.” Faculty and student projects across 5 eco-districts run by boards that identify research priorities. Program serves as a liaison between faculty and community partners.

• PSU/Bureau of Planning and Sustainability Partnership (PSU): City requested 10 sustainability projects and was matched to faculty experts. Foundation funding used to pay for faculty time through course buy outs, as well as student time.

• Wastecorps (PSU): Proven model that’s helped Portland organizations improve recycling/waste programs for more than 25 years. Largely self-sufficient and externally funded by partners. Consists of over $1.5 million in current projects and employs 30 student-consultants that are offered direct compensation and tuition remission. Manages nationally recognized Portland International Airport waste/recycling program.

• Community Based Urban Design Program (CSUN): Faculty and students assess pedestrian and bicycle friendliness in the surrounding neighborhood across multiple project sites.  

• Milwaukee Harbor Campus Eco-District (UWM):  The School of Architecture and Urban Planning at UWM has worked with the City of Milwaukee over the course of several years to envision and redesign the Port of Milwaukee coal storage to an “eco-district” mixed use development built around public/private water technologies research and industrial park  

• Institute of Urban Agriculture and Nutrition (UWM): The Office of Sustainability and IUAN fosters community capacity building around the

 

  17  

city’s ability to “Grow, Move, Eat, and Return” within a local food system. The “grow” and “return” aspects connect Milwaukee Public Schools with a technology transfer between area high schools and the UWM campus to not only grow the local food system but also to build the bridge to high education for underrepresented students.

Coalition Member as board member on local studies and projects.

University provides technical expertise through membership on local or regional boards or studies. Typical areas of engagement are in climate action plans, watershed alliances, and economic development plans. These plans can be direct products of individual government agencies, or consortia of government agencies. In some cases, external partners coordinate such plans (typically a coalition of diverse stakeholders with philanthropic support). University advocates for particular policy approaches, often based upon technical expertise. University lends credibility to the study. Often includes an applied research focus.

• Upper White River Watershed Alliance (IUPUI): Director of IUPUI Office of Sustainability sits on board of UWRWA Board of Directors (16 county consortium of local governments, industry, utilities, universities, agriculture and regional community).

• Green Ribbon Committee of the Chicago Climate Action Plan (UIC): Associate Chancellor for Sustainability serves on the Green Ribbon Committee—a committee of business and community leaders designed around performance review including an annual report and annual summit to showcase progress to date, energize the community and highlight the continuing importance of effective action.

• Mid-West Energy Research Consortium (UWM): UWM serves as a member of research consortium focused on the growth and economic competitiveness of the Energy, Power & Control Industry cluster across the Wisconsin/Midwest Region; consisting of the states of Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio. MWERC is actively expanding beyond Wisconsin by adding companies and expanding partnering activities in the other states within the Wisconsin/Midwest Region that complement the academic and industry capabilities of membership.

Consultant/sub-consultant as funding and research partner

Universities collaborating with local government agencies around funded research projects. Focus on research questions, often not directly connected to policy outcomes. Some research projects may engage other locales through a research network.

• UniverCity Alliance (FIU): Partnership between FIU and City of Sweetwater. Secured $11.4 million TIGER grant around infrastructure projects

Community Partner Capacity Builder

University providing technical expertise and administrative support through community based partnerships with local nonprofit organizations and other community institutions. Focus on local nonprofit partners, rather than on planning and projects housed within a city agency. Efforts tend to be programmatic, rather than policy focused.

• ACCESS (FIU): Partnership connects community, schools, students and partners with university expertise, resources and research-based intervention programs to address pressing educational and social needs of students at Miami Northwestern Senior High School and its feeder schools. Construction of the largest aquaponics lab in Miami Dade County.

• Food Forward (CSUN): Partnered with Food Forward nonprofit to pick and donate campus fruits to local food banks. Community workshops.

 

  18  

Operate student- and faculty-run organic garden on campus. In concept phase, conducted feasibility study for large sustainable urban farming project.

• Public Space Design Services (CSUN): faculty and students conducted workshops in development of design guidelines. Sample projects include: the Pacoima Wash RIO-River Improvement Overlay project in conjunction with an environmental equality CBO; community workshops for economic development project focused on minority and low income projects in conjunction with several community partners; preparation of mixed-use development alternatives on a site currently occupied by an asphalt recycling plant in a residential section of Pacoima with community partner; alternative designs for the newly acquired five-acre addition to the Aliso Canyon Park in collaboration with local councilmember.

 

 

  19  

Table 2: Metropolitan  Networks:  Some  Examples  Network  Name     Network  Focus   Additional  Partners/Funders  Ecodistricts   Cities  engage  in  model  of  urban  

development  through  the  development  and  deployment  of  district-­‐scale  projects.  Focus  on  developing  public-­‐private  partnerships.  Incubators  and  development  of  ecodistrict  protocol,  among  other  resources  for  districts  interested  in  engaging.    

• SEED  • Neighborworks  America  • CityCraft  Ventures  • Enterprise  Green  Communities  • USGBC  • NRDC  

C40  Climate  Leadership  Group:    

Fostering  climate  change  action,  risk  reduction  and  GHG  reduction  at  the  local  level  through  a  network  of  cities.  Operates  several  specific  networks:  bus  rapid  transit;  climate  positive  development;  climate  risk  assessments;  connecting  delta  cities;  cool  cities;  district  energy;  global  standards;  green  growth;  low  emissions  vehicles;  measurement  and  reporting;  and  municipal  building  efficiencies  

• Clinton  Climate  Initiative  • Bloomberg  Philanthropies  • Children’s  Investment  Fund  Foundation  • Realdamia  • Arup  • ICLEI  • Carbon  Disclosure  Project  • WRI  • Seimens  • World  Bank  • Thoughtbot  • Children’s  Investment  Fund  Foundation  • Citi  • Ford  Foundation  

US  Conference  of  Mayors  Climate  Protection  Agreement:  

Pledge  taken  by  mayors  to  reduce  GHG  emissions  (meet  or  exceed  Kyoto  Protocol).  Publish  best  practices  guides  and  surveys.    

A  program  under  the  US  Conference  of  Mayors.  Current  partnership  with  Walmart.    

Urban  Sustainability  Directors  Network:  

Peer  to  peer  network  of  120  municipal  governments;  centered  on  sustainable  directors  and  other  municipal  employees.  Provide  a  number  of  grants;  including  a  local  sustainability  matching  fund  and  an  innovation  fund.    

Key  Partners  • Institute  for  Market  Transformation  • C40  • National  League  of  Cities  • US  Conference  of  Mayors    • Institute  for  Sustainable  Communities  Leadership  

Network  • Barr  Foundation  • Bloomberg  Philanthropies    • JPB  Foundation  • The  Kendeda  Fund  • MacArthur  Foundation  • Rockefeller  Brothers  Fund  • Summit  Foundation  • Surdna  Foundation  • Garfield  Foundation  

 

  20  

 Institute  for  Sustainable  Communities  Leadership  Network    

Peer-­‐to  peer  network  of  municipal  leaders  within  particular  regions  for  building  relationships  and  sharing  best  practices  around  local-­‐scale  practices  around  urban  sustainability.  Particularly  focused  on  climate  change  mitigation  and  adaptation.    

Key  Partners:  • GE  • USAID  • The  Walt  Disney  Company  • Clinton  Global  Initiative  • HUD  Key  Funders  • Kresge  Foundation  • Blackstone  Ranch  Institute  • Funders  Network  for  Smart  Growth  &  Livable  

Communities  • Living  Cities  • Nathan  Cummings  Foundation  • Rockefeller  Foundation  • Siemens  • Surdna  Foundation  • MacArthur  Foundation  

 Emerald  Cities  Collaborative  

Green  jobs  and  social  justice,  specifically  job  training  and  energy  efficiency  in  large  urban  locales.  Coalition  of  nonprofit  organizations.    

Board  of  advisors:  http://emeraldcities.org/about/the-­‐organization/board-­‐of-­‐directors  Funders:  • The  Annie  E.  Casey  Foundation  • The  Joyce  Foundation  • The  Kresge  Foundation  • The  Rockefeller  Fund  • Kendeda  Fund  

ICLEI  Local  Governments  for  Sustainability    

Local  government  membership  organization  for  sustainability,  climate  protection,  and  clean  energy  goals.  Provides  a  range  of  tools,  including  local  rating  system  (STAR).    

Partners  and  funders  are  numerous,  http://www.icleiusa.org/library/documents/ICLEI_USA_Annual_Report_2010.pdf  Some  examples  include:    • Surdna  Foundation  • Mayor’s  Innovation  Project  • C$)  • ACEEE  • National  League  of  Cities  • National  Wildlife  Federation  • Kresge  • US  Green  Building  Council  • San  Diego  Foundation  

Resilient  Communities  for  America    

Resilience  as  a  framework  around  climate  change  adaptation,  includes  extreme  weather,  energy  security  and  economic  uncertainty.  Participants  asked  to  sign  the  “Resilient  Communities  for  America  Agreement”  with  focus  on  municipal  leadership.  

• ICLEI-­‐Local  Governments  for  Sustainability    • National  League  of  Cities  • US  Green  Building  Council  • World  Wildlife  Fund  • Mayor’s  Innovation  Project  • American  Council  for  Energy  Efficient  Economy  • World  Resources  Institute  

100  Resilient  Cities     City network supporting adoption of resilience efforts, including strategy development and resource sharing among member cities. Specifically advocate for and support the creation of a chief resilience officer in member

Key  funder  is  the  Rockefeller  foundation.  

 

  21  

cities.

Carbon  Disclosure  Project  Cities  Program  (Compact  of  Mayors)  

Program, in partnership with the C40 group, serving as the largest global reporting platform for cities. Currently, reporting information over 200 cities globally. Thought to provide a starting point towards working towards climate action.

Key  partners  are:  • C40  • AECOM,  • Bloomberg  Philanthropies.      

STAR  Communities   Rating tool and system to be used locally to achieve community-scale sustainability results and to track progress, including through membership across a national community of over 100 communities and towns.

• Kresge  Foundation  •  Summit  Foundation  •  Surdna  Foundation  • National  League  of  Cities  •  USDN,  • ICLEI,  • NRG,  • US  Green  Building  Council    

Carbon  Neutral  Cities  Alliance  

Lead by Mayors of 17 cities. Commitment to reduce GHG emissions by at least 80% by 2050 or sooner. Develop carbon neutral standards, advocate for public policy, and the creation of innovation fund.

• Urban  Sustainability  Directors  Network  • Kresge  Foundation  • Barr  Foundation  • V  Kahn  Rasmussen  Foundation  • Rockefeller  Brothers  Fund  • Summit  Foundation  

 

  22  

Figure  1:  National  Network  Map  of  Metropolitan  Network  Connections        

     This  figure  utilizes  network  software  in  order  to  visually  demonstrate  the  relationships  between  city-­based  networks.  Commonly  shared  funders  and  partners  provide  some  of  the  links  between  these  networks.  Red  lines  connect  partners;  black  lines  connect  funders  with  organizations/networks  of  organizations.                        

 

  23  

 Table  3:  University  Networks:  Some  Examples  

Driving  Group  Focus  Name  of  Group   Key  Area  of  Focus     Key  Members/  Partners  

Research  

External  

Engagement  

University  

Operations  

Curriculum/  

Student  

Focus  

American  College  and  Universities  Presidents’  Climate  Commitment  

Climate  change:  Reduce  GHGs  emissions,  create  inventories,  and    develop  climate  action  plans    

Many  colleges  and  universities;  focused  around  presidential  pledge  to  reduce  campus  carbon  emissions.  

       

Alliance  for  Resilient  Campuses  (Second  Nature)    

Climate  resilience  and  adaptation:  National  Climate  Assessment  and  the  creation  of  common  vulnerability  assessment  protocols.  Develop  assessment  from  joint  research  projects.  Emphasis  on  the  university  as  a  research  hub.    

Many  universities.  Partnership  with  Resilient  Communities  for  America.    

       

Campus  Ecology/  National  Wildlife  Federation  

Campus  sustainability:    Preservation  of  wildlife  and  habitat,  careers  in  conservation,  and  implementation  of  ACUPCC.  Divided  into  several,  independent  and  regional  networks:  the  Chicagoland  Network  for  Sustainability  in  Higher  Education;  Georgia  Campus  Sustainability  Network;  Texas  Regional  Alliance  for  Campus  Sustainability;  Upper  Midwest  Association  for  Campus  Sustainability.    

American  Association  of  Community  Colleges;  The  National  Educational  Association;  Campaign  for  Environmental  Literacy,  American  College  and  University  Presidents’  Climate  Commitment,  Earth  Day  Network,  the  Association  for  Career  and  Technical  Education,  Jobs  for  the  Future    

       

Clinton  Global  University    Network    

Social  justice:  Funding  for  social  justice  initiatives  led  by  student  leaders.    Participating  universities  must  provide  seed  funding.    

55  universities  and  colleges.            

National  Council  for  Science  and  the  Environment  

Environmental  policy  and  science:  Links  scientists  to  environmental  policy  and  advocacy.  Operate  membership  organizations  comprised  of  deans  of  environmental  studies  and  sustainability  programs.    

Many  universities  across  the  country.    

       

             USU  Sustainability  Strand    

Urban  sustainability,  with  an  emphasis  on  adaptability  and  urban  design:  Network  concentrates  on  sustainability  dimensions  across  locales  through  the  role  of  the  urban-­‐serving  university  as  an  anchor  institution.    

Members  from  the  USU  network.  Includes  both  leading  universities,  as  well  as  broader  learning  networks  based  upon  dimensions  of  surrounding  urban  locales.    

       

             

 

  24  

Table  4:  Pilot  Projects  and  Sustainability  Action  Plans:  Thematic  Approaches  to  Sustainability  Across  Participating  USUs   As stated above, we define urban sustainability as urban design in the physical, social, and economic sphere that supports an environmentally, economically, and equitably prosperous city, reflected and promoted through local institutions and built environment that is adaptable to a changing ecosystems. To operationalize our approach and achieve the broadest impact, our work will explicitly focus on the social equity dynamics of urban sustainability and specifically converge on four key topical areas across all USUs and their metropolitan areas: (1) Transportation and air quality with a focus on environmental justice; (2) water policy, including stormwater management and sea level rise, and flooding for vulnerable populations; (3) food security and the social equity dynamics of land use/vacancy; (4) climate change policy with a focus on climate equity. Based upon different local contexts, each USU will focus on a particular topical area underneath this in order to foster the greatest impact and depth and reach across approaches. These areas will become the focus of both the stakeholder action plans, as well as the pilot project selected in each locale. They will also form the thematic connectors across USUs through the generation of sister university sustainability networks.      Urban  Type  for  USUs  and  their  metros: Jointly Addressing 1) Transportation; (2)Water Policy; (3) Food; (4) Climate Change  

Key  Exemplary  University:  

Pilot  Project  Theme:  

Additional  Key  Sustainability  Issues:  

Sample  Sustainability  Sister  Urban  Serving  Universities:  

ASU   Urban Heat Island  

• Water Policy; • Air

Quality/Transportation

• Energy Production

 

Urban Designers In the Desert: Cities in these locales face challenges related to urban design in an arid climate. These cities often focus their pro-environmental behavior by confronting water policy and climate change as a key focus around environmentally preservative action. Urban design related to sprawl is also a common area of challenge, and an area ripe for policy development. Urban serving universities can engage sustainability in the context of the desert.  

CSUN

Drought/ Access to Water

• Food Desert • Air

Quality/Goods Movement

• California State University, Fullerton

• California State University, Fresno

• University of New Mexico  

UWM Water Issues/Water Quality

• Storm water Management

• Urban Food Systems

• Transportation/Biking

Midwestern Industrial Cities: Many such cities have a strong industrial past, and face a host of endemic challenges into the future. Many cities are located along railway freight lines and serve as major transportation hubs. Food systems and urban agriculture provide an emerging approach towards urban sustainability, often as a mechanism to grapple with vacancy and as an approach towards capitalizing on an industrial past. This local context offers an opportunity for urban serving universities to revitalize and redevelop the city.

IUPUI Urban Agriculture and Gardening

• Urban Vacancy/Redevelopment

• Watershed Preservation

• Greening Transportation and Logistics

• The Ohio State University • Cleveland State University • University of Cincinnati • Wayne State University • University of Memphis

 

  25  

University of Akron

Green Manufacturing

• Smart Transit • Greenhouse

Gas Emissions • Neighborhood

Revitalization and Brownfields Redevelopment

UIC Storm water Management

• Energy Efficiency/Clean Energy

• Transportation • Waste

High Tech, Climate Change Innovators: As strong market cities, many of these cities are widely known as sustainability leaders. Given their relatively high level of resources and historical commitment towards environmental preservation, many cities boast carbon emissions inventories and comprehensive planning approaches around sustainability through climate action planning and municipal sustainability plans. Many cities invest in eco-districts, and many employ clean tech and green tech focuses as an environmental strategy. Urban serving universities that operate within them can draw on this history of commitment around sustainability. Urban serving universities that operate within them can help such locales become a laboratory of sustainable urban development.

PSU Climate Action Policy and Climate Equity

• Transportation • Land

use/Urban Growth Boundary

• Boise State University • University of Minnesota • University of Colorado –

Denver • San Francisco State

University • San Jose State University • University of

Massachusetts Boston • Georgia State University • University of North

Carolina, Charlotte • University of Louisville • University of Missouri -

Kansas City

Coastal Cities: Cities located along the coast that face challenges related to the sustainability of coastal systems. Sea level rise is a key concern for these urban locales; in some cases adaptation to hurricanes is also key. Many locales are also home to large port complexes. Urban serving universities can engage in urban sustainability efforts in these cities focused around adapting and mitigating climate change in the coastal context.

FIU

Coastal Vulnerability and Resilience/Se Level Rise

• Freshwater • Transportation • Agro-Food

Security • Ecosystems

Dependency

• University of Houston • University of Washington,

Tacoma • University of Central

Florida • Virginia Commonwealth

University • Temple University • Morgan State University • California State

University, Long Beach • California State

University, East Bay • Stony Brook University

                       

 

  26  

Figure 2: Current Division Between Metro Networks and University Networks

The current figure uses network software in order to draw connections between the networks (both university based and metropolitan based). As demonstrated by the figure, little to no direct connectivity exists between universities and the networks that draw them together nationally, and cities and the networks that they currently collaborate between. Moreover, the university-based networks appear to be relatively nascent in their current state and could be further strengthened.

 

  27  

Figure 3:  Networking  the  Networks:  Proposed  Network  through  USU

This figure utilizes network software in order to demonstrate the potential network that could be drawn together through our efforts. USUs, their reference cities conceptually including the wide array of stakeholders within and beyond municipal government, and participation in networks are summarized by the figure above. We aim to collectively focus on connecting important nodes in the network: between cities, between universities, and then collectively through university-city pairings.

 

  28  

 Table 5: Key Urban Sustainability Stakeholders: Related Metropolitan Network Driving Roles  Different kinds of networks:

1. Pledge: Actors in the network agree to a stated goal. 2. Report Card: Actors in network apply a common rubric/measurement system. 3. Show and Tell: Actors share best practices. 4. Fort Knox: Actors are eligible for funding resources. 5. Pilot Projects: Actors engage in common pilot projects.

   Driving  Network  Roles:  

           Network  Name    

Main  Stakeholder  Group  Engaged  

Pledge    

Report  

Card  

Show

 and  

Tell  

Fort  Knox  

Pilot  

Projects  

Ecodistricts   City  Officials;  with  a  specific  focus  on  district  level  action  

         

C40  Climate  Leadership  Group:  

           

US  Conference  of  Mayors  Climate  Protection  Agreement  

Mayors            

Urban  Sustainability  Directors  Network:  

Urban  Sustainability  Directors    

         

Institute  for  Sustainable  Communities  Leadership  Network    

City  Government  Officials  

         

Emerald  Cities  Collaborative  

Nonprofits            

ICLEI  Local  Governments  for  Sustainability    

City  Government  Officials  

         

Resilient  Communities  for  America    

U.S.  Local  Elected  Officials  (Mayors,  County  Executives,  City  Council  Members)  

         

100  Resilient  Cities    

Resilience  Officers            

 

  29  

Carbon  Disclosure  Project  Cities  Program  (Compact  of  Mayors)  

Mayors            

STAR  Communities              American  College  and  Universities  Presidents’  Climate  Commitment  

University  Presidents  

         

Alliance  for  Resilient  Campuses  (Second  Nature)    

           

Campus  Ecology/  National  Wildlife  Federation  

Students            

Clinton  Global  University  Network    

Students            

National  Council  for  Science  and  the  Environment  

Deans  of  Environmental  Studies  Schools  

         

Carbon  Neutral  Cities  Alliance  

Mayors  of  International  Cities  

         

USU  Network   University  Presidents/Senior  Administrators  

         

     

 

 

  30  

Arizona  State  University  Stakeholder  Map  

 

 

 

  31  

California  State  University,  Northridge  Stakeholder  Map              

 

 

  32  

 Florida  International  University  Stakeholder  Map  

 

 

  33  

Indiana  University-­Purdue  University  Indianapolis  (IUPUI)  Stakeholder  Map  

 

                   

 

  34  

Portland  State  University  Stakeholder  Map      

                   

 

  35  

 University  of  Akron  Stakeholder  Map  

       

           

 

 

  36  

       

University  of  Illinois  at  Chicago  Stakeholder  Map              

   

 

  37  

   

University  of  Wisconsin,  Milwaukee  Stakeholder  Map