Cargando…
Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship
Evaluating sustainability stewardship at higher educational institutions is essential to working towards improving our environment. Many institutions have used environmental footprint indicators as a way to evaluate, track, and improve their impact on the environment. In this article, we present the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9994435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36910689 http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/scc.2022.0067 |
_version_ | 1784902632123400192 |
---|---|
author | Dukes, Elizabeth Cheng, Selina Mogen, Samuel Galloway, James Leach, Allison Trimble, Andrea Ruedy Pettit, Andrew Compton, Jana Pennino, Michael |
author_facet | Dukes, Elizabeth Cheng, Selina Mogen, Samuel Galloway, James Leach, Allison Trimble, Andrea Ruedy Pettit, Andrew Compton, Jana Pennino, Michael |
author_sort | Dukes, Elizabeth |
collection | PubMed |
description | Evaluating sustainability stewardship at higher educational institutions is essential to working towards improving our environment. Many institutions have used environmental footprint indicators as a way to evaluate, track, and improve their impact on the environment. In this article, we present the web-based Integrated Environmental Footprint Tool (IEFT), which allows users to test how changes in certain activities impact nitrogen (N), greenhouse gases (GHG), phosphorus (P), and water (W) footprints for a university campus. This study uses the University of Virginia (UVA) as a model to show the impacts of their existing sustainability plans on multiple footprint indicators. Strategies from the University of Virginia's (UVA) two exisiting action plans, the GHG Action Plan and the N Action Plan, are evaluated to determine their impact on each of the footprints (GHG, N, P, and W). Based on the 2025 goal year, the strategies in these action plans are estimated to reduce the GHG, N, P, and W footprints by −38%, 32%, 25%, and 2.7% respectively. The damage costs associated with GHG and N footprints are assessed and reveal a 38 percent reduction in damage costs for GHG and a 42 percent reduction in costs for N. Using the IEFT to evaluate the impact of these action plan strategies, UVA optimized environmental outcomes. The model shown here can be used at other institutions to evaluate the environmental impact of planned changes to an institutions' operations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9994435 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99944352023-03-09 Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship Dukes, Elizabeth Cheng, Selina Mogen, Samuel Galloway, James Leach, Allison Trimble, Andrea Ruedy Pettit, Andrew Compton, Jana Pennino, Michael Sustain Clim Chang Original Articles Evaluating sustainability stewardship at higher educational institutions is essential to working towards improving our environment. Many institutions have used environmental footprint indicators as a way to evaluate, track, and improve their impact on the environment. In this article, we present the web-based Integrated Environmental Footprint Tool (IEFT), which allows users to test how changes in certain activities impact nitrogen (N), greenhouse gases (GHG), phosphorus (P), and water (W) footprints for a university campus. This study uses the University of Virginia (UVA) as a model to show the impacts of their existing sustainability plans on multiple footprint indicators. Strategies from the University of Virginia's (UVA) two exisiting action plans, the GHG Action Plan and the N Action Plan, are evaluated to determine their impact on each of the footprints (GHG, N, P, and W). Based on the 2025 goal year, the strategies in these action plans are estimated to reduce the GHG, N, P, and W footprints by −38%, 32%, 25%, and 2.7% respectively. The damage costs associated with GHG and N footprints are assessed and reveal a 38 percent reduction in damage costs for GHG and a 42 percent reduction in costs for N. Using the IEFT to evaluate the impact of these action plan strategies, UVA optimized environmental outcomes. The model shown here can be used at other institutions to evaluate the environmental impact of planned changes to an institutions' operations. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers 2023-02-01 2023-02-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9994435/ /pubmed/36910689 http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/scc.2022.0067 Text en © Elizabeth Dukes et al., 2023; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This Open Access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License (CC-BY) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Dukes, Elizabeth Cheng, Selina Mogen, Samuel Galloway, James Leach, Allison Trimble, Andrea Ruedy Pettit, Andrew Compton, Jana Pennino, Michael Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship |
title | Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship |
title_full | Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship |
title_fullStr | Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship |
title_full_unstemmed | Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship |
title_short | Footprints in Action: How UVA Is Managing Its Sustainability Stewardship |
title_sort | footprints in action: how uva is managing its sustainability stewardship |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9994435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36910689 http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/scc.2022.0067 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dukeselizabeth footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT chengselina footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT mogensamuel footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT gallowayjames footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT leachallison footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT trimbleandrearuedy footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT pettitandrew footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT comptonjana footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship AT penninomichael footprintsinactionhowuvaismanagingitssustainabilitystewardship |