Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

Convened February 5, 2025

Higher Education’s Path to Sustainability and Resilience
Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

People, communities, and nature are directly and indirectly affected by long-term shifts in the environment. Transformative action is necessary to respond to these shifts and infuse sustainable practices throughout affected sectors and communities. Higher education institutions are central in identifying sustainable and resilient paths forward that incorporate fundamental research, workforce development, education, and community engagement.

On February 5, 2025, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (the National Academies) convened a public workshop to build upon national dialogues and explore additional mechanisms to advance the role of the higher education sector in supporting sustainability and resilience. The Board on Higher Education and Workforce,¹ in collaboration with the National Academies Climate Crossroads initiative,² brought together higher education stakeholders to share visions of collaboration and success, possible frameworks for cooperation and implementation, and potential partners for sustainability and resilience initiatives—including surrounding communities, industry, and state and local government. The workshop was held both online and in person at the National Academy of Sciences Building in Washington, DC.

WELCOME AND WORKSHOP GOALS

Amanda Staudt (National Academies Climate Crossroads Initiative) welcomed workshop participants. She described the role of the National Academies, focusing on how the organization has helped explore options for addressing climate change. The Climate Crossroads initiative was launched in 2023 in recognition of the need to support new pathways for sustained global leadership in climate sciences in the coming decades. The initiative aims to facilitate cross-disciplinary and cross-sectoral dialogues to improve navigation of climate challenges and opportunities.

Workshop planning committee chair Gillian Bowser (Colorado State University) set the tone for the workshop by emphasizing: “The Earth is one. The world is not.” To describe our universal dependence on the biosphere for sustaining our lives, Bowser highlighted two countries’ approaches to sustainability and sustainable development. First, she described Norway’s leadership of Our Common Future,³ also known as the Brundtland Report, published in October 1987 by the United Nations. This work defined

__________________

the long-haul scale of sustainable development, and Bowser emphasized both the global environmental governance and the need to balance the present with the future. Bowser referred to the Brundtland report definition of sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”⁴

Second, Bowser described Fiji’s participation in the 23rd Conference of the Parties (COP23) for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). As the president of COP23, the Republic of Fiji introduced the Talanoa Dialogue process to explore how to address climate change. Talanoa Dialogues are based on the Fijian concept of “talanoa” (storytelling) to build consensus by asking three simple questions: Where are we now? Where do we want to go? And how are we going to get there? Bowser asked workshop participants to follow this spirit to create a space, outside of the current discourse, focused on the global context and the holistic sense of sustainability for the long haul. She related this discourse to the concept of a land-grant institution with its explicit mission of public service and programs such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture’s Cooperative Extension System as examples of government initiatives that leverage public institutions for community good.⁵

Answering where institutions are right now, Bowser encouraged participants to think about not just education, but about their facilities, interdisciplinary work, and informal classrooms. When posing the question of where institutions want to go, she emphasized considering all parts of institution’s communities—students, faculty, staff, campus, etc.—to collaborate and find transformational pathways toward resilience against changing environmental conditions. For how to get there, Bowser stressed that institutions need to support engaged scholarship on a platform of effective, respectful, and sustained community relationships.

FRAMING THE CHALLENGE: SETTING THE STAGE FOR CHANGE

Bowser then moderated the workshop’s first panel with David Orr (Arizona State University) and Maya Tolstoy (University of Washington). Orr framed the challenge for representatives from higher education as a conflict between their stock and trade—truth and replicability—and an inability to sustain public dialogue across all our differences. He described the current time as one where science is “buffaloed,” and the public debate about climate issues has profound implications and left multiple environmental crises unsettled.

Orr suggested that all who graduate from higher education have a foundational understanding where they are in the cosmos and how the planet works as a physical system, whatever their discipline or career goals. For this, an understanding of earth systems sciences is integral. In addition, he discussed the importance of civic education, “you really shouldn’t get out of school without understanding the basic principles of civic democracy… how democracies work and why they’re essential to how we conduct public business.” He urged higher education leaders to be courageous and model the kind of world that they want their institutions to live in, demonstrating leadership in a time where it is necessary. Ultimately, Orr urged higher education leaders to consider brave and potentially uncomfortable new connections and strategies at their institutions.

Tolstoy emphasized the extraordinary power of the U.S. higher education system and how every piece of the system needs to be at the table with others (industry, government, private sector) in the resilience conversation, from the education of electricians at our community colleges to the millennia-long knowledge represented by our original land stewards at tribal colleges and universities. She urged institutions to not lose fundamental research as part of the conversation around solutions. The United States is the global envy in terms of our research capability, and that research capability needs an innovative, thriving economy.

Tolstoy noted that her institution, the University of Washington, is seen as serving the public good and delivering impact based on their long-standing partnership with their local community. She encouraged participants to take care with their messaging of the work they do to emphasize how vital it is and how it impacts every U.S. citizen, from those impacted by extreme Southern California wildfires to the skilled trained workers essential for our infrastructure and global competitiveness to national security.

__________________

Bowser began a dialogue by asking Orr and Tolstoy how institutions can address the needs of sustainability with basic science and train students in an interdisciplinary way. Orr encouraged researchers to rethink priorities on societal crises around food, human health, justice, and fairness: are we making the tough choices about the most important things to do with human intellect? He also suggested that systems thinking should be embedded across education programs and incorporated into graduation requirements. Bowser asked about interconnectivity and the issue of trust within science and between scientists and communities. Tolstoy mentioned that systems-based thinking is part of the University of Washington College of the Environment’s strategic plan. It is the foundation for addressing interconnectivity at the scale of a college, and she said she thought it could be applied to other institutions, to a national educational system, or to a nation.

Orr shared that if institutions emphasize the urgency and relevancy of the data that needs to be addressed, the students will be energized to participate in hands-on campus and community sustainability efforts. Tolstoy concurred about empowering campus community members to do local, solution-oriented work. Bowser, Orr, and Tolstoy closed the session with hopeful messages for campuses responding to environmental challenges. Bowser described the small but powerful symbols of campus pollinator gardens. They are inspirations for campuses and communities. Orr and Tolstoy offered brief but emphatic messages to campuses to remain steadfast and organized in their sustainability missions.

CATALYSTS FOR CHANGE - LEADERSHIP IN SUSTAINABILITY

Workshop planning committee member Daniel Wildcat (Haskell Indian Nations University) moderated the next panel, exploring the critical role of leadership in advancing sustainability initiatives across higher education institutions.

Wildcat first asked the panel to consider the broad range in the types of U.S. higher education institutions and their various institutional cultures. Elizabeth Drake (Swarthmore College) described what leadership looks like at her institution. Her sustainability and strategic initiatives office emphasizes to students, staff, faculty, alumni, and community members that they are not the ones to do sustainability work on campus. Instead, they are there to serve as catalysts for others to coordinate, inspire, support, provide resources, and make connections. The key to effective sustainability leadership, Drake said, is to embed it across faculty research and scholarship, student activities and organizations, staff working on their own initiatives, and other community-led efforts.

John B. King, Jr. (State University of New York) described leadership at a large state system and the culture-change work by campus leaders, presidents, and trustees. They are visible champions for sustainability, and the institution needs every SUNY community member who has a share of the decision-making to buy into the sustainability goals.

Meghan Chapple (Odwaga) noted that her small consultancy focuses their efforts on supporting courageous higher education leaders with bold strategies that consider the life and livelihoods of others on the planet. She described efforts at urban institutions like The George Washington University and Georgetown University to develop their community gardens through the efforts of students and the willingness of staff to bring these urban farms to life.

Matt St. Clair (University of California Office of the President) explained that their system-wide structure is comprised of faculty, administrators, students and experts from inside and outside UC. Their sustainability efforts owe much to students and the academic senate for elevating the priority to create more sustainable campus energy systems.

Wildcat asked the panelists for effective strategies in rallying leadership and institutional commitment to sustainability issues. King responded that to meaningfully engage a broad institutional commitment, the consequences of extreme environments for the entire planet must be made clear through visible leadership and embedded sustainability initiatives across institutions to build and expand capacity. Additionally, leaders should consider the practical arguments of understanding the commitment their students want and what their state economies need for jobs in sustainability and resilience. Chapple added that leaders can show the business imperatives, citing her work helping large corporations

with collective visioning, improving water conservation at higher education institutions, and addressing how campuses can serve as a resource for communities facing environmental disruptions.

Wildcat then inquired about how to leverage the interconnected themes of their campuses in a holistic vision. Drake described the Swarthmore campus energy plan as “an incredible opportunity” to bring in faculty and students for a research opportunity in the curricula and provide a platform for community engagement. The leadership work is weaving, connecting, and aligning complementary parts of the campus. St. Clair added that the UC developed a series of “sprint topics” where people demonstrated the benefits of sustainable approaches to all UC campus community members.⁶ Chapple described how she encourages her clients to think about their institution’s role in a multi-faceted system and the gifts that institutions can offer to their broader interconnected communities. To get to the holistic goal, King talked about their leadership goal of ensuring every SUNY undergraduate has an internship experience, and that to be effective in this moment, “we also need to look outside of our institutions for partners.”

Next, Wildcat asked panelists about the barriers they have encountered in their work and how they have overcome them. St. Clair shared that sustainability work involves change and people are resistant to change. He emphasized building trust as a key component to addressing sustainability within and across campuses. To engage plant operators and stationary engineers, who take great pride in keeping their campuses running, requires working with them as thought partners ready to take on challenges. Drake agreed with St. Clair that sustainability leaders within institutions need to respect the expertise and requirements that exist within different areas of our institutions. Chapple mentioned organizations that provide best practices, case studies, and networking for campus sustainability leaders who have encountered barriers, including Second Nature, an organization focused on climate issues in the higher education sector, and the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), a network of faculty and staff providing successful examples of sustainability work at their institutions. King added the challenge of funding to address issues. He described SUNY’s collaboration with the city of New York and Stony Brook on the Climate Campus on Governor’s Island, visible partnerships that lift public attention of environmental issues.

An audience member asked panelists for their ideas on how to address public trust in science and scientists. To connect the “Ivory Tower” with the everyday person, King encouraged participants to communicate their science directly to the public. Chapple reminded institutions seeking collaboration of the power of existing networks like Second Nature and AASHE. Wildcat closed by stating, “among my people, we always say, wealth resides in the number of good relatives that you have,” emphasizing that if we can be rich in relationships and “relatives”, the resources will follow.

RESILIENCY IN INFRASTRUCTURE

Workshop planning committee member Meghan Fay Zahniser (Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education) moderated the next panel to analyze strategies to integrate retrofitting aging infrastructure with innovative sustainable construction practices. Panelists described how to comprehensively approach creating resilient and efficient higher education campuses. Fay Zahniser’s organization represents thousands of sustainability change agents at higher education institutions all over the world, including faculty, staff, and students. In the following panel, speakers were asked to share possible tools, programs, partnerships, collaboration opportunities, metrics, and funding mechanisms.

Carol Dollard (Colorado State University) shared some promising practices for championing energy efficiency and sustainability during her time at Colorado State. She described an unusual sustainability structure where the institution does not have a sustainability director but rather leadership through the President’s Sustainability Commission, comprised of a group of campus stakeholders including students, professors, and employees who work in facilities—all of whom provide input. Fay Zahniser highlighted Colorado State’s success as a Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) Platinum institution, a tool AASHE provides for more than 1,000 campuses across 55 countries to mea-

__________________

sure their comprehensive sustainability performance across an institution.

Marcus Ollom (Truckee Meadows Community College) described a similar shared governance structure for their sustainability committee, which presents construction practices while simultaneously holding campus partners accountable to guidelines. His institution is a two-year feeder college to universities in Nevada with an emphasis on career/technical education including welding, robotics, electrician, and nursing education.

Andrea Trimble (University of Virginia [UVA]) mentioned UVA’s success under both AASHE’s STARS rating system and the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification process. She noted her institution’s success with their “Decarbonization Academy,” an 8-week immersive sustainability-focused living lab and engaged paid learning opportunity for students.

Lana Crouse (U.S. Green Building Council) described the LEED rating system as a multi-faceted tool for institutions to consider building location, resilience, general utility parts, and personal comfort. She also noted how LEED helps institutions demonstrate to public and private funders the proper and efficient use of funds. Fay Zahniser added that the LEED system is a way for leaders at any institution to highlight their achievements, as the paths to success across campuses will be different. Many sustainability programs have started as a result of one LEED building on their campus, she said, and it is the job of courageous leaders to uplift the achievements of others through organizations like AASHE. Other programs mentioned by Crouse included the TRUE program,⁷ the sustainable SITES initiative,⁸ Parksmart,⁹ and the new version of LEED, LEED V5.¹⁰

Panelists then spoke about partnerships between their institutions and the communities that have supported their infrastructure and sustainability goals. Ollom noted that Truckee Meadows’s partnership with public utility company NV Energy through their Green EnergyRider Initiative is a way for an institution like theirs to pay a premium to ensure that campus energy comes from renewable sources. Trimble highlighted the cross-sector power of UVA’s Sustainable Food Collaborative, which brings together faculty, students, staff, and community nonprofits to consider food availability across their region. She also emphasized their Resilient Together initiative with the city of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, building climate resiliency planning in parallel with UVA’s environmental action planning. In terms of an external partnership, Dollard noted Colorado State’s work with solar developers and power purchase agreements, increasing their capacity from zero to over 11 megawatts in about a decade, which facilitated long-term savings and was a minimal cost to the university.

Fay Zahniser asked the speakers to elaborate on maintaining leadership and funding for efforts, especially with limited budgets. She noted Dollard’s stories of student momentum demanding what they want from institutional leadership in terms of sustainability and environmental impact. Dollard reiterated that campus sustainability leaders should emphasize the power of lifecycle cost, especially at a long-standing institution. Another possible solution suggested by Trimble is aligning the investment of making buildings safer and healthier with other university priorities. UVA’s sustainable labs program is part of their lab ventilation management plans; if they can optimize the ventilation in a space, they can save energy and keep lab participants safe. Crouse highlighted the power of sharing of best practices across like-minded institutions, where they can share their arguments for the return on investment of their efforts.

The panelists mentioned funding mechanisms for resilience and energy efficiency across their institutions. Crouse encouraged institutions to consider the short-term and long-term justifications as they plan efforts with campus partners. The U.S. Green Building Council and similar organizations have case studies and products for campuses to use, especially in the evaluation of building energy costs. Trimble then provided a possible model for replication from her institution, the Building Energy Efficiency program, an energy engineer-led systematic review of buildings, labs, and clinics that has led to about $16 million in campus savings through recovered investments in utility bills and no upfront capital

__________________

needed from individual schools. Dollard urged schools to utilize creative solutions such as public-private partnerships, feasibility studies lifecycle costs, and project planning for potential crises. She highlighted the importance of embedding metrics that can be used to develop benchmarks for tracking progress. Ollom reiterated the importance of not removing sustainability from projects to cut costs in the short-term. You will be saving money for the future, he said, in transformative design and in sustainability partnerships across campuses.

Fay Zahniser then tasked panelists to describe how they measure impacts of their efficient infrastructure efforts. Trimble began by describing UVA’s primary way of measuring overall impact: a greenhouse gas inventory that is verified and reviewed annually by a third-party. This is paired with an annual report focused on quantifiable goals around wastewater, nitrogen, and food. These goals measure progress and opportunities at the school, unit, and building levels. Dollard compared Colorado State’s annual greenhouse gas inventory, held since 2008. While Colorado State’s inventory also focuses on Scope 3 emissions similar to UVA’s efforts, Dollard described how sustainability advocates at Colorado State also focus on overall reduction of burning emissions and influencing campus suppliers to reduce use of burned fuels.

Additionally, Dollard noted the value in using AASHE’s STAR Community Rating System for additional metrics; Fay Zahniser supported the STAR system as a tool created by the sustainability community, to support the community. Ollom described the Nevada governor’s office edict that buildings throughout Truckee Meadows be metered for energy and water usage. Crouse urged institutions to network with similar institutions about best practices and to start somewhere, for example, through the U.S. Green Building Council’s free Arc data/benchmarking platform.

In closing, Fay Zahniser invited institutional leaders to re-emphasize that resources and networks exist, such as those facilitated by organizations like Second Nature. She welcomed campuses to continue their progress via the support and convenings of higher education associations like AASHE, the U.S. Green Building Council, Second Nature, and similar organizations. Trimble reiterated that there is power in collaboration between institutions, to share lessons learned. Dollard expressed hope for institutions working towards resilience in infrastructure, and she noted that even incremental change on your campus is change, nonetheless. Ollom encouraged institutions to bring together campus groups and entities that may at first glance have disparate goals but can collaborate to solve energy-conscious goals. Fay Zahniser closed the panel by motivating campuses to seek out external resources and partners to inspire change agents of all disciplines on their campuses for efficiency and resiliency improvements.

REFLECTIONS FROM MORNING DISCUSSIONS

Workshop planning committee member Andy Hong (University of Utah) provided a reflection of the morning panels, including key themes. Hong began with the foundation set by Orr and Tolstoy, that higher education’s path to sustainability and resilience includes basic research and systems thinking. What resonated with Hong from the “Catalysts for Change – Leadership in Sustainability” panel was Chapple’s description of courageous campus leaders. The panelists emphasized leaders making practical and engaging arguments for their sustainability efforts. Wildcat concluded that leaders should seek to embody the leadership they want to see in their communities. Audience comments added to this idea of embodiment as a leadership tactic to respond to declining public trust in science.

Hong reflected on the “Resiliency in Infrastructure” panel. He highlighted Dollard’s description of her campus’s efforts as a bottom-up endeavor, spurred by students, and he contrasted this with St. Clair’s description of leadership striking the proper balance between top-down vs. grassroots leadership. In their comments, audience members saw value in Fay Zahniser’s detailing how leadership can be catalysts for change, but they questioned how leaders can truly push the envelope given current sustainability crises. Ultimately, Hong urged higher education sustainability leaders to take heed of what panelists shared: efforts and measurement of success should be geared for the long haul.

BUILDING THE SUSTAINABILITY WORKFORCE

Workshop planning committee member Bryan Alexander (Georgetown University) moderated the next panel, examining how workforce development programs and

curriculum design can collaboratively build a pipeline of sustainability professionals, aligning vocational training and academic education with the evolving needs of industry and community resilience. He requested panelists share their thoughts on how colleges and universities could best teach and prepare students for a changed world.

Jay Antle (Johnson County Community College) spoke from the perspective of his Kansas City, MO, metro area college’s sustainability center. His and other institutions experience a world of building resource pressures and unfavorable public opinions. Antle noted the public still sees value in community colleges, and despite receiving only 1.5 percent of higher education funding in 2023, they train a large portion of the U.S. workforce. Community colleges are still considered local institutions people can trust in many areas of the country. Antle closed by highlighting his college’s Sustainability Distinction Program as a unique curriculum option to help their students turn careers into callings with a sustainability focus.

Krista Hiser (Sustainability Education Accreditation Commission [SEAC]) started with the promise of accreditation for sustainability programs. She emphasized that the focus of sustainability education should be a workforce of professional problem solvers, meeting and addressing sustainability challenges. Hiser spoke of SEAC’s development of a set of eight common competencies, part of a new integrated skill set for all sectors which grew out of the National Academies 2020 study Strengthening Sustainability Programs and Curricula at the Undergraduate and Graduate Levels.¹¹ These sustainability education competencies could be infused across all domains of higher education, from general education to sustainability curriculum.¹²

Jianwei Li (Tennessee State University) shared his perspectives as an environmental science professor at a land-grant HBCU—one of 19 HBCUs established in 1890 by the Second Morrill Act. His institution is active in teaching, research, and education across sustainability and environmental science, and agriculture. Li elaborated on a range of programs and initiatives from an urban wetland in Nashville that offers field classroom learning and teaching to an agriculture program, TSUAg, that is among the largest research-based HBCU agriculture programs in the nation. Additionally, he expanded upon the Tennessee New Farmer Academy for Farmers, Ranchers and Returning Veterans, a certificate program designed for those interested in being agricultural entrepreneurs.

Leah Dundon (Vanderbilt University) runs an interdisciplinary partnership between the engineering school and their College of Arts and Science. Dundon noted this campus initiative grew out of a multi-institutional network called the Youth Environmental Alliance in Higher Education, as well as efforts by the National Science Foundation. Dundon elaborated that the initiative’s trifold goal is to bring students from a wider range of backgrounds into sustainability and climate studies; to support students from other schools’ non-accredited research programs; and to bring together students across various academic backgrounds. She further described her initiative’s efforts to bring down the walls between the university and community. Aside from internships, she depicted efforts to show the students how the world can solve environmental problems through teamwork and by using the UNFCCC as a framework.

Alexander asked panelists to share how they think the full breadth of U.S. institutions of higher education can best prepare students for the sustainability-focused workforce. Antle urged all institutions to not lose sight of the goal of persuading employers, workforce development programs, and students of the added value of “green” jobs. Across all workforce pipelines, he encouraged institutions to integrate the philosophical importance of sustainability content and the prospects of good careers, or “doing good by doing well.” Li expanded upon workforce preparation with an example from his courses. A student expressed a desire to develop a project of free composting facilities involving campus cafeterias and a community farm. While Li did not initially conceive of this project within his original curriculum design, he described how excited he was to see this student’s project grow. He helped the student navigate institutional and project obstacles. Li encouraged institutions to meet the students where their needs are and encourage what they want to work on.

__________________

Dundon continued with the theme of motivating students despite setbacks to progress in sustainability work. For Dundon’s students, she encourages them to dive into real-world applications and work with partners already in the workforce so that they can see themselves as solution-makers. Dundon also reminds students that progress has been made. Alexander then asked Hiser for her thoughts on how a complex academic ecosystem can best respond to workforce demands, especially in terms of accreditation. Hiser responded that a sustainability-focused workforce has competencies infused into their skills training. For example, an HVAC technician would have systems thinking as a competency. She also encouraged better integration of trades and professions. This involves employers and academia facilitating internships, experiential learning, capstone projects, and community partnerships.

A community college representative asked panelists for their perspectives on how to bridge divides between science, higher education institutions, and society. What are the incentives to address crises together? Hiser emphasized promoting an essential understanding of environmental literacy to address student misperceptions. The science of sustainability and resiliency should become an important part of core curricula across institutions, Dundon added. Antle noted how social media and the alternative press can promote misinformation. He suggested other, respected media personalities counter this misinformation. Li suggested beginning to bridge this divide through curriculum changes for students at younger ages. Panelists also discussed the need to assess the impact of efforts to reduce the cost of education while simultaneously encouraging the integration of more resiliency-focused content and its effect on the time to completion of undergraduate degrees.

An audience member asked the panelists for their thoughts on the feasibility and value of courses and training for people already in their careers. Dundon said that there is promise in these efforts, emphasizing that curriculum reform at the higher education and the mid-career levels are not mutually exclusive. This can be accomplished through certifications, online classes, and Massive Open Online Courses or MOOCs. Programmatic accreditation would work along similar lines with these courses and training, Hiser added, to improve program learning outcomes and maintain standards across professional employers. Antle mentioned that community colleges have community education programs that could be conceivable “houses” for these programs and urged course designers to think of incentives to leverage professionals into participating.

Hiser responded to an audience member interested in the growth of accredited undergraduate and graduate programs, as well as her thoughts on the advantages of additional program accreditation from SEAC. The audience member referred to Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)¹³ the common engineering education accreditation organization. Hiser described how SEAC is currently piloting the proposed standards across their key competencies in sustainability. There is a cohort of 52 program directors from a wide variety of institutions who are describing how they meet these standards. What they have heard from directors is that an ABET accreditation suits professional paths for accrediting an engineering program. SEAC accreditation allows program directors to be flexible in aligning learning and programmatic outcomes with the unique nature of sustainability problem solving. As Hiser noted, sustainability solutions do not have professional licensing in the way engineering does. SEAC’s accreditation leaves it to the decision of directors to see if participating in this collaborative and peer-led process will help their programs.

Another audience member described how many educators have flexibility in curricula creation. They asked the panelists to share their thoughts on the barriers to motivate educators to integrate sustainability into what they teach. Dundon shared her belief that there is will and interest for fundamental curriculum change across institutions; the barriers are the limited time that educators have as well as the siloed nature of what they teach. She expressed support for centers of interdisciplinary research at institutions to facilitate colleagues to collaborate across academic barriers.

Bowser helped Alexander and the panelists close with a plea to workshop participants that they should not forget the essentials of environmentalism, economics, and society when trying to engage with and train students. Students must be able to contextualize the application

__________________

of what is being taught to give them the “why” for their sustainability education.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND INNOVATION HUBS

Panelists in the penultimate session identified actionable strategies to build trust and foster partnerships between higher education institutions and communities, leveraging innovation hubs as catalysts for sustainability-focused research, development, and implementation. Workshop planning committee chair Gillian Bowser (Colorado State University) framed the spotlight presentation and the panelists’ remarks by calling back to the workshop themes of dialogue and collective engagement to address contentious issues. Bowser reminded participants of the community service mission of land-grant institutions to their communities, the nation, and the world.

SPOTLIGHT PRESENTATION: ACCELERATING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Cassi Pittman Claytor (Case Western Reserve University [Case]) presented a case study in developing accelerated community engagement from her hometown of Cleveland, Ohio. She described her career start as an assistant professor in sociology studying racial inequality at Case, but with no expertise in sustainability, climate change, or environmental justice. Her story began with the Arco recycling site in 2017 in East Cleveland. The area’s demolition of vacant and ruined homes had negative health effects on the majority Black community, including respiratory issues due to demolition debris and concerns about accumulation of asbestos and lead. She contrasted the suffering of a community just beyond her university’s borders with the creation of a new, LEED-certified student center and other sustainable and energy efficient designs on campus. Pittman Claytor inquired if higher education institutions are doing enough with campus-wide progress if there are still environmental issues in surrounding communities. Her presentation centered on the role of universities to address these discrepancies, using Case as a case study for community partnerships and sharing lessons learned with participants as a recipe for success.

Pittman Claytor began with the mechanisms for transformative impact in sustainable development and addressing environmental concerns. To accelerate institutional impact, she compared internal initiatives, policies, and practices to outward focused efforts and engagement. The internal efforts include offices of sustainability, campus action plans, and energy efficiency efforts; all initiatives that Pittman Claytor said are present at Case. Her institution balances this with their theoretical and practical outreach to their area, from public talks to partnerships with civic leaders and local governments. The key question, as she said, is where equity and commitment to community fit within the matrix of internal and external initiatives.

At Case, they engaged a focus group of community members to better understand attitudes, preferences, and concerns about climate and necessary actions. Importantly, this group was part of a coalition of faculty, staff, and students assembled to design potential interventions to minimize the often extractive nature of similar university-led activities.¹⁴ The interdisciplinary team organizing the focus group sought the feedback of the East Cleveland and Glenville communities. “People’s priorities are going to be a reflection of their economic and social realities,” Pittman Claytor said. If Case wanted to partner with communities that have concentrations of disadvantage, they needed to think about related workforce development for individuals who do not have college educations or formerly incarcerated community members, for example.

Focus group participants informed Case of shared values and priorities that they used to forge authentic partnerships. In these partnerships, she and the organizers were able to build pilot programs to utilize university faculty, staff, and student expertise in service to community members. To approach solutions as Case did, Pittman Claytor described the ingredients of authentic partnerships. These include an “intergenerational” approach to talent and skill development in their campus pipeline programs, “from preschoolers to pastors.” She urged institutions to build their campus-community responses with coalitions that include a variety of disciplinary, racial, global, industry, and other perspectives. To ensure successful campus-community partnerships, Pittman Claytor encouraged institutions to build long-term “marriages” with their areas: relationships that are con-

__________________

text-specific, place-conscious, and respectful of regional and local conditions. These relationships are intentionally not extractive and utilize distributive leadership as they co-design and communicate effective solutions. She emphasized the need to increase effective communication with local communities: “Everything we do needs to have a plan for how we’re going to disseminate that to the public.” Pittman Claytor provided suggestions, such as building alliances with pastors and social influencers who have prebuilt trusted and effective communication pathways with communities.

PANEL DISCUSSION

Pittman Claytor joined a panel for a discussion, moderated by Bowser, on community engagement and innovation hubs. Each presenter presented examples from their institutions.

Neil Leary (Dickinson College) described his campus sustainability initiative that served as an educational and action hub for the people of Carlisle, Pennsylvania and Cumberland County. Dickinson College hosted public events for their community, such as climate action planning forums for local officials. Students in Leary’s Sustainable and Resilient Communities class performed an assessment of community resilience with Carlisle and county officials in “resilience dialogues.”¹⁵ Dickinson and local officials took a collaborative approach to solve community resilience issues. He noted that hazard mitigation planning that Dickinson College assisted with looked to the needs of their community, especially on how to mitigate local natural hazards.

Jason Cryan (Natural History Museum of Utah) described how the museum, located in Salt Lake City, serves as a public face for science in their region, as well as the local natural and cultural history hub. Their work is centered on sustainability and climate science communication. The information and knowledge generated by the museum is shared with the public via a suite of educational resources, programs, and public engagement activities. For example, their “Climate of Hope” gallery is centered on climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe’s concept of “rational hope,” to engage the public with solutions-based rational optimism and advocacy.

Katy Mike Smaistrla Lampe (University of Missouri–St. Louis [UMSL]) provided information about the UMSL campus, a metropolitan land-grant research institution. She also shared that, as a popular commuter school, they serve a student body that is older, in the workforce already, or transferring from community colleges. Finally, she noted the promotion of ecology and biodiversity through UMSL’s Harris World Ecology Center (HWEC), which works closely with the physical community presence of the Missouri Botanical Garden and the Saint Louis Zoo. Smaistrla Lampe described her work as a sustainability coordinator as “mak[ing] the unseen seen;” presenting a connected system built with a community, not for a community.

Jo Tavares (California Center for Climate Change Education at West Los Angeles College) shared her Center’s state-funded mandate to support climate change education and workforce development, through community engagement. Tavares inspires students to action in what she described as an urban campus oasis. She urged participants not to forget the complex financial and other realities of student experiences as they look to students as the bridges to the communities they serve.

Bowser started a discussion among the panelists related to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and how each of them incorporate human rights in their campus and community work. Pittman Claytor said that institutions should ultimately center this as part of their educational mission, serving both students and community members. Additionally, community advocates could benefit from institutional expertise with metrics and data-gathering to support their own efforts in addressing environmental discrepancies. Colleges and universities can also leverage the economic and political capital they have in their areas, in service to community members. As an example, Pittman Claytor highlighted the limited range of solar developers around Case and that institutions that are expanding their sustainable energy sources could leverage their purchasing power by procuring power from companies that the values of human rights in their operations through joint ventures with local communities.

__________________

Leary provided his perspective that resilient individuals, families, and communities are those that have access to capacities and capital to enable them to have efficacy and to act. Dickinson College’s unique strategies for building sustainability and resilience included efforts like promoting housing vouchers and a local food pantry to individuals. At the Natural History Museum of Utah, Cryan spoke about the museum’s response to this issue by expanding access to science through citizen science and outreach to local youth development programs and Native/Indigenous partners.

Bowser described campus gardens as hubs to promote local knowledge and further scientific engagement. She returned to Tavares to share more about West Los Angeles College’s garden. For Tavares’s students, the garden served as a social space and a way for students to grow their identities as part of their career preparation. Tavares emphasized, though, that for students to achieve true social and economic mobility, they also need financial support. Her students were paired with community-based organizations in paid work, and the garden was the start of efforts to cultivate her students’ development.

Smaistrla Lampe talked about the St. Louis urban ecosystem as a greater laboratory for all students. She also demonstrated the power of UMSL’s campus garden by explaining that students were able to share the lessons learned from the integration of their campus garden and campus dining with the food pantries of the local area. She encouraged institutions to consider the impact of new initiatives, such as campus-led food pantries, on existing community organizations to minimize the unintended consequences that may result from well-intentioned initiatives. Smaistrla Lampe also noted UMSL’s purchasing power in the local area; purchasing from neighbors has helped her institution and students conceive of themselves as part of a greater system.

Bowser asked what key concepts and words were needed to truly embed an institution within a community. Cryan started with accessibility and communication: the entire community must be able to hear your message, and that message must be targeted to community members of all ages. Bowser remarked that at a museum such as Cryan’s, their work brings “joy to discovery.” Leary encouraged humility for campus organizers, as they listen and conceive of mutual benefits in long-term “marriages” with communities. Pittman Claytor pleaded with campus organizers to start symbiotic relationships. These relationships share power and distribute leadership between institution and community. Smaistrla Lampe provided an inspirational statement: “Connections exist—find them.” Tavares indicated love and creativity as important foundational concepts.

An audience member asked panelists about how to resolve tensions between serving the community and the concept of academic achievement through the scholarship that is traditionally rewarded in academia. Leary advocated for the continued reform of promotion and tenure criteria. This sometimes involves service to the college as a more substantial part of this process. As another audience member added, more work needs to be done in this reform to ensure that sustainability and community engagement will be a greater part of the tenure process. Tavares noted that for community college faculty, the career and technical education goals of the institutions may make it easier to align community service with scholarship. Pittman Claytor noted a possible model of success with Stanford University’s Impact Labs that combine research and practice. A local Washington, DC representative in the audience thanked panelists, vouching for the value of the academic and community partnerships to help community members to collect and present the data to justify what communities need.

CLOSING REFLECTIONS

On behalf of the workshop planning committee, Hong reflected on recurring workshop themes. He began with the keys to setting the stage for change at higher education institutions. Systems-based thinking was a common theme, with both leaders and students being vital to moving the needle—using both top-down and bottom-up leadership approaches. Regarding resilience in campus infrastructure, Hong emphasized that several speakers noted the importance of recognizing long-term impacts. Participants also emphasized the importance of workforce development, to turn “careers into callings” and that institutions should think not only about technical skills but also climate science, literacy, and competencies. The workshop concluded, he said, with the hope

that institutions can build trust and expand the partnerships between students, faculty, staff, and their broader communities. Hong then turned to each panel moderator for their additional thoughts on the panels they led.

In the “Catalysts for Change–Leadership in Sustainability” panel, Wildcat saw examples of “embodied leadership” among his panel and the others. These were affirmations of those within academia or partners who can “walk the walk,” beyond words. “Leadership is not just about what you do, but how you do things,” Wildcat said. He also applauded leaders at institutions who practice humility on their campuses and with community partners, as another part of embodied leadership. As faculty of a public tribal land-grant university, Wildcat urged institutions to consider that the protocol of quality community engagement takes relationship-building and time.

Hong shared takeaways from the panel led by committee member Fay Zahniser, “Resiliency in Infrastructure.” Infrastructure change is inspired through the top-down and bottom-up leadership of leaders and students. Additionally, institutions need to plan for and measure both the short-term and the long-term impacts of their campus energy efficiency and resilience efforts. This should be paired with the cultivation of relationships with community partners that they serve. Ultimately, institutions should not shy away from existing systems like the LEED program as the catalysts for campus-wide change.

From the “Building the Sustainability Workforce” panel, Alexander discussed both the challenges and opportunities for institutions in workforce development. First, institutions have the challenge of addressing the disconnect between science and society. Community colleges are well positioned in academia to address this disconnect as trusted members of the communities they serve. Additional challenges exist, such as whether industry has the capacity for growing a sustainability-focused workforce and how that workforce will be funded. Higher education can infuse sustainability in the curriculum, welcome more hands-on work by students, and expand their base of sustainability students to those who have not historically been included. Ultimately, there is power in tapping into the energy and excitement of all students for these careers.

Bowser summarized the last panel, “Community Engagement and Innovation Hubs.” She began with an anecdote about the power of an urban garden she had access to as a youth in Brooklyn, NY. This called to mind a quote by Nobel laureate Wangari Maathai: “The importance of community is to plant a tree.” To Bowser, building a small community or a nation can be as simple as empowering others to build a garden in a square of concrete. Bowser encouraged academic institutions to remember that in our sustainability discourse, you have faculty and community members who grew up in and understand their communities. It is important, she said, to empower them. She closed with words to inspire all institutions to remain purpose-driven in their sustainability and resilience efforts.

DISCLAIMER This Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief has been prepared by John Veras, Andre Porter, and Rian Lund Dahlberg as a factual summary of what occurred at the meeting. The committee’s role was limited to planning the event. The statements made are those of the individual workshop participants and do not necessarily represent the views of all participants; the planning committee; or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

REVIEWERS The Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief was reviewed in draft form by David Kay, Cornell University, and Rita Teutonico, Florida International University, to ensure that it meets institutional standards for quality and objectivity. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process. Marilyn Baker, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, served as review coordinator.

PLANNING COMMITTEE Gillian Bowser, Colorado State University (Chair); Bryan Alexander, Georgetown University; Andy Hong, University of Utah; Daniel Wildcat, Haskell Indian Nations University; Meghan Fay Zahniser, Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education.

SPONSORS This workshop was supported by the Lumina Foundation, National Science Foundation, and the National Academy of Sciences George and Cynthia Mitchell Endowment for Sustainability Sciences.

To watch the recorded webcast of the event, see https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/44057_02-2025_higher-educations-path-to-sustainability-and-resilience-a-workshop

SUGGESTED CITATION National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Higher Education’s Path to Sustainability and Resilience: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/29177.

Policy and Global Affairs Copyright 2025 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.