"Greening the Office"

 

 

 

 

 

Environment and Resource Studies 250

March 29, 2001

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sabina Khan

Annabel Onyango

Eryn Prospero

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Page

  1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………..4
  2. ABOUT ERS250 & WATgreen ……………………………………………..5
  3. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………6
  4. OBJECTIVES…………………………………………………………………...7
  5. SYSTEMS OVERVIEW ………………………………………………………..8
    1. Selection of Study Group………………………………………………..8
    2. Systems Diagram "Trickle-Down Effect" ……………………………..9
    3. The Study Group……………………………………………………….10
    4. Actors……………………………………………………………………11
  6. METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………..13
    1. Recycling/Waste Audit Sheet………………………………………….13
    2. Waste Classifications…………………………………………………...14
  7. LIMITATIONS………………………………………………………………....15
  8. RESULTS & DATA ANALYSIS……………………………………………...16
    1. Faculty of Arts………………………………………………………….16
    2. Faculty of Engineering…………………………………………………18
    3. Faculty of Environmental Studies…………………………………….20
    4. Faculty Mathematics…………………………………………………...21
    5. Faculty of Science……………………………………………………....23
    6. Overall Analysis………………………………………………………...24
  9. RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………………………….31
  10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………34
  11. BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………35
  12. APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………..36

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The "Greening the Office" initiative is one that is concerned with the waste management practices of selected Dean’s offices around campus. The aim of the study is to assess and evaluate the garbage generated by the Dean offices of different faculties, then make pertinent recommendations as to how systems can be altered in a way that is environmentally sustainable.

It is our hope that our efforts will serve as a valuable contribution to the overall commitment of WATGreen, benefit each individual faculty, and that the data obtained from the study will serve as useful precedence for future studies of this nature.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABOUT ERS 250 & WATGREEN:

Information pertaining to the background of WATgreen can be obtained at the following website: http://www.adm.uwaterloo.ca/infowast/watgreen/

The "Greening the Campus" program presents an opportunity for students, staff, and faculty to improve the quality of their environment, while decreasing the overall operating cost of the University. This initiative offers significant new directions and opportunities for education and research. It is promoting an environmentally aware campus community.

ERS 250 "Greening the Campus" as a course acts as a forum for second-year ERS students to make a positive contribution to the resolution of environmental issues facing UW.

WATgreen committee member, Patti Cook, was instrumental in providing contacts and references in the initial stages of the "Greening the Office" study. She provided invaluable advice, guidance and support throughout the duration of the term. Patti is also responsible for supplying the complimentary gift packages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

Sustainability is a fairly relative and subjective term, but the Brundtland report associates this concept with such ideas as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (Rowlands, 2000).

Integrating this notion with recent environmental concerns, it is pertinent that we adjust to more sustainable consumption habits of commodities in order to preserve natural resources for the generations to come. Furthermore, it is equally important that we adjust our waste disposal habits to accommodate for depleting land for use as waste disposal sites.

"Greening the Office" is essentially a follow-up study that elaborates on the work done in the 1991 initiative "Toward a Green Office". The latter project aims to theoretically create a completely sustainable office through the use of a Green Office Package to ‘minimise adverse effects environmental impacts’.

The purpose of the "Greening the Office" study, however, deals exclusively with waste management. The questions posed initially to address issues regarding how efficiently selected faculty Deans’ offices on campus dispose of their waste are as follows: Approximately how much waste is being generated, and what is the nature of this waste? Are there adequate recycling facilities? Are these facilities being used correctly and on a regular basis? Attempting to answer these questions is the basic motivation for this study. The data obtained is quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated and analysed, and serves as useful precedence for future studies of this nature.

 

OBJECTIVES:

"Greening the Office" hopes to accomplish the following objectives by its final stages:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SYSTEMS OVERVIEW:

Selection of Study Group

Concepts of the appropriate values, attitudes and skills necessary to operate within a particular social order are evident in the structure of the political arrangements and roles of governing bodies (Lofquist et al., 1991). The interconnecting theme of the world’s dynamic natural and social systems may thus indicate that these concepts, when manifested within the reactions and actions of these governing bodies, would ripple throughout and influence the systems they govern.

Similarly, the faculty Deans’ offices fall within a hierarchy of offices in the university’s administrative and governing system. Working with the "trickle down" effect described above, it is reasonable to assume that the waste disposal practices of its personnel will influence that of those of the administrative offices lower down in the hierarchy (see Systems Diagram, pg.9). This would then have an influence on the attitudes and behaviors of faculty members, teaching assistants, student social bodies and ultimately the largest group of individuals, students.

Thus, the faculty Deans’ offices are an appropriate study area because it may be quite influential in the waste management practices of the wider system that it co-ordinates.

Furthermore, an office is small enough to provide for an accurate and effective waste audit, while still maintaining an environment in which a large variety of materials are use and disposed of, in order to sufficiently generalise and amplify the applicability of our findings.

 

SYSTEMS DIAGRAM: "TRICKLE-DOWN" EFFECT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even further, any recommendations made in the study’s final stages will be on a scale small enough such that it can be conveniently implemented and would neither require any drastic changes in the daily functions of the administration or duties of the employees. Yet, whatever changes made would be in accordance with the concept of "think globally, act locally" in an effort to promote a more environmentally sustainable milieu.

The Study Group

The faculty Deans’ offices selected for this study were done so based on our personal relative familiarity with them. We chose five out of seven existing faculties on campus:

 

Faculty Dean Office

Executive Assistant

Telephone Extension

Location

Engineering

Bill Pudifin

2408

CPH 4301C

Math

Shirely Thomson

2592

MC 5108

Science

Karen Trevors

2101

ESC 252A

Environmental Studies

Joanne Holzinger

3640

ES1 325A

Arts

Anne Harris

2011

ML 231

 

We concluded that investigating waste disposal practices of five offices would be reasonably manageable given the limited four-week period of time available to us for the completion of the project. The variations in the size, location, the number of employees, and subsequently, the number of garbage and recycling receptacles within these offices were all taken into consideration throughout the study.

It should also be noted that this study is not about ‘pointing fingers’, but rather about determining causes and effects in order to make appropriate recommendations to improve current practices where necessary.

 

Actors

When examining the whole system in regards to "Greening the Office", there are many components that need to be taken into consideration. The study focuses on all actor systems as well as other relevant components (i.e. wastes) in the system and how they affect the overall project analysis.

Core Actors - All office staff as well as our participating group members are all considered core actors, as we are 100% involved in the project operations. The office staff is generating the results because it is their waste that is being audited by project members.

Shadow Actors All those indirectly involved with the project. Other staff and students that will have an effect on our project but will not have any significant influence involving our project concerning details and processes.

Supporting Actors - All those involved with the project in certain respects. For example, Susan Sykes helped with the survey and we collaborated with Patty Cook throughout the project stages. Our Teaching Assistant, Tanya, and Professor Susan Wismer were instrumental in providing suggestions and ideas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

METHODOLOGY:

The Deans of the respective faculties were contacted by telephone and e-mail and debriefed on the purpose and objectives of the study. Their permission was then obtained to conduct an audit of the garbage in their offices.

The audit was then conducted everyday at approximately the same time (3:30pm — 4:30pm) over a period of two consecutive weeks, whereby the waste in the garbage/recycling bins was recorded. It should be noted that offices have varying numbers of staff and disposal bins; the total amount of garbage in each office is considered 100% of the day’s total waste.

The raw data was recorded onto a waste audit sheet, whereby the actual contents of each bin were specified according to the nature of the materials and their frequency.

The data was then condensed by categorisation according to an official waste classification system used by the University of Waterloo Plant Operations department. The information was transferred onto graphs (using Excel) where the amount and quality of the garbage was assessed. Comparisons were then made between faculties according to what is being thrown away and how much waste is generated.

Waste/Recycling Audit sheet

Faculty_________ Room__________ Date___________

Garbage Recycling

Tim Horton’s cup x3

White paper full

Apple core

Coloured paper _

White paper x2

Shredded _

Styrofoam plate

 

Cellophane paper

 

Plastic candy wrapper x3

 
   
   
   

Waste Classifications

Material

Examples

White paper

Coloured paper

Magazines, post-it notes, envelopes

Boxboard

Kleenex, shoe boxes

Newsprint

Newpapers

Food and beverage glass

Juice and pop containers

Food and beverage cans

Juice and pop cans

#1 PET plastic bottles

See-through plastic pop

Styrofoam packaging

For packaging equipment

Toner and ribbon cartridges

For printers, faxes etc..

Yard & plant waste

Leaves, grass, plants

Other paper products

Paper towels

Compostable food waste

Fruits, vegetables, coffee grinds

Other food waste

Meats, fats, bones, dairy products, sandwiches

Miscellaneous

After clearance from the Office of Research Ethics at UW, a questionnaire was then administered to all the office staff directly participating in the study (core actors) to determine their environmental awareness and personal opinions regarding waste management. The survey also considers their waste disposal habits both within and outside of the office environment. The assumption is that those who show themselves to be most aware of the impact of waste on the environment will have the most favourable results (i.e., least incidence of disposing of materials in the wrong receptacles).

LIMITATIONS:

The limitations we encountered mainly pertained to the auditing part of the study.

These limitations were not so much problems, as much as important aspects to consider when comparing the data from faculty to faculty.

First of all, there are different numbers of people in each office. It is safe to say, therefore, that the more people per office, the more the overall amount of garbage. This is remedied by the idea that the focus of the study is not which faculty throws out the most garbage, but what materials are thrown out the most by each faculty.

Other limitations included that ‘garbage days’ varied from office to office, and also, different offices had different policies on waste disposal. Some offices appeared to be more conscious than others, which means they were not all on equal footing. The Environmental Studies office, for example, is the only one of the five that has a recycling awareness poster on the wall. The organic waste (e.g., apple cores, sandwiches) in that office is also disposed in separate receptacles than everything else.

One thing we did anticipate but had no control over were the ‘observer effects’, whereby people in offices generally seemed to alter their habits slightly when aware that they were under scrutiny.

It must also be noted that we were limited by time, and conducted the audit for only two weeks. Two weeks out of an entire year is rather insignificant, so it is difficult to say whether our results are ‘typical’.

 

 

RESULTS & DATA ANALYSIS:

Faculty of Arts:

The office is consists of a main room connected to other smaller rooms. One secretary works within the central room.

The Faculty of Arts disposed of boxboard materials, specifically Kleenex boxes and other cardboard-type materials, the most out of every classification.

The Faculty of Arts was noted for having the greatest amount of Tim Horton’s cups in their garbage, making up an approximately 16% of their garbage total. There is a Tim Horton’s in the basement of the Arts building that the Dean office is located in, and this might explain why they are so commonly used here. Also, the "Roll Up The Rim" contest was ongoing during the period of our study, and it is seen that more people buy Tim Horton’s cups during that duration of the contest. There are no existing facilities on campus for the recycling of Tim Horton’s cups.

Arts also had a high frequency of white paper (17% of total garbage) which could otherwise have been recycled.

The survey completed by the personnel of this office shows that paper is the material most often discarded, and that generally, they are conscious of their waste disposal habits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Faculty of Engineering:

Engineering had a total of five staff working in the main area of the office. Each desk had a garbage bin as well as white and coloured paper recycling bins. They also had special receptacles within this space for plastic and glass beverage recycling. This was not audited, as it is not emptied every day, thus these items accumulated until the receptacles were full.

The bulk of their garbage is in "Food and Beverage Plastic" category, which includes items such as cellophane, plastic bags, plastic utensils, and plastic food packaging.

Miscellaneous is the second largest classification of garbage, made up of materials that fall under none of the classifications. This consisted of odd items, specifically a T-shirt, which was found thrown away once. Despite having the largest overall garbage of all five faculties due to the number of people in the office, Engineering proved to be one of the least wasteful users of paper, throwing little away.

The questionnaire showed that a majority of the staff in this office were either indifferent or disagreed with the idea that their habits concerning waste disposal had any impact/influence on others in the faculty. Besides that, all seemed to be aware of the importance of recycling and sound waste management.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Faculty of Environmental Studies:

There are four ladies working in this office, each with a garbage and paper-recycling bin under their desks.

This was the only faculty with a recycling awareness poster (similar to the one in the complimentary package) on the wall. ES were also unique in the way they disposed of their organic waste in receptacles in a separate kitchen.

Results from the questionnaire showed that staff's opinions are that their waste management habits could affect others within the faculty.

Faculty of Math:

This faculty had only one person working in it apart from the Dean, yet generated more coloured (30%) and white (24%) paper waste than any other faculty. Recycling facilities are abundantly available in this office, so maybe a lack of awareness as to the importance of using them is lacking.

 

The staff member in this office was very accommodating to our study, and when informed that a lot of paper was being thrown away instead of recycled, promised to remedy the situation immediately by changing her practices. Her answers in the questionnaire reveal that she is aware that paper is the material most discarded in that office. She, however, did not feel that she influenced the waste disposal behaviours of others in the Math faculty.

 

 

 

 

 

Faculty of Science:

Other Paper Products was the classification under which the majority of this faculty’s garbage falls. This is explained by the fact that they discarded a lot of Tim Horton’s cups. Other Paper Products also includes paper towels and other non-recyclable food-containers.

Paper, glass and food containers (specifically Tim Horton’s cups) were specified as being materials most frequently discarded. This is explained by the fact that the staff of this office do not usually carry food from home, and therefore have to buy it in the non-recyclable containers supplied on campus. Most were undecided as to the influence of their waste disposal habits on the rest of the faculty.

 

 

Overall Analysis:

 

 

The total waste generated altogether by the faculty Deans’ offices was analysed and it was found that among twenty-five categories of items that could be disposed of, the four most disposed of items within the garbage bins, excluding items of the miscellaneous category included:

Overall, materials within the miscellaneous category were thrown away most often and this was not anticipated. This category of items is mostly impracticable since concrete evaluations or recommendations cannot be made about it because of the diversity of items included in it. This category consisted of anything from carbon paper to cotton clothing and toner cartridges.

The next largest category was "Food and Beverage Plastic" (22%) which encompassed mostly plastic bags and food and candy wrappers. "Other Paper Products" was the next largest component, encompassing 20% of the overall garbage generated. This category mainly constituted non-recyclable Tim Horton’s cups.

There is need to highlight that the "Coloured" and "White Paper" categories contributed altogether to 17.7% of the total waste generated by the faculty Deans’ offices. This is especially important since both of these types of items are recyclable. Thus, they should not have been disposed of in the garbage bin receptacles, but rather in the appropriate blue boxes.

Generally, it was interesting to note different reactions to having their garbage scrutinised. Many felt as if it was an invasion of their privacy. However, all office staff were pleased and encouraged when presented with the gift package. We have little doubt in our minds that some positive impact has been made in terms of creating a sense of self-consciousness concerning waste disposal habits.

There are many variables that can be identified that may contribute to the disposal practices of the employees within the five Faculty Dean offices. These have been identified as the following:

  1. Size of Faculty and Faculty Budgets:
  2. A famous classical economist, John Baptiste Say, once proposed what is now known as Say’s Law - "Supply generates demand" (Roistacher 1999). This law implies that the simple act of supplying some good or service on the market is sufficient to call forth demand for that product (Roistacher 1999). Thus, the availability of products influences the demand for those products. This theory can be used to explain the nature of the consumption practices of office supplies of the employees within the different faculty dean offices.

    It is reasonable to assume that the quantity of office supplies available for use by any faculty dean office would depend on the faculty’s purchasing power, which is determined by its budget and other monies collected (grants, stipends etc etc). Thus, the greater the purchasing power (supply), the more the office supplies purchased and available for use by office employees. The availability of these supplies may generate a greater "demand" for them because these may be used in an over-consumptive unsustainable manner.

    The key idea is that a positive feedback loop is set up in which as more office supplies are purchased, the more they may be used unsustainably. As the supply depletes, more is bought to replace the depleted stock, and as more is available, more is wasted.

    The 1998 and 1999 University of Waterloo (UW) Financial Statements cites the "Supplies and Other Expenses" expenditures of the five faculty dean offices for both years. From evaluations of these records, the dean faculty offices can be ordered, for both years, from the greatest expenditure to the least expenditure as — Math, Science, Engineering, Arts and Environmental Studies.

    This correlates with our waste audit report which shows that the Faculty of Math generated the most "White" and "Coloured" paper (office supplies) waste within their garbage bins. Even though there is some discrepancy with the correlations of the other faculties, with reference to the Math faculty, it is reasonable to assume that their greater expenditure may have been as a result to greater unnecessary over-consumption of available resources.

  3. Faculty Size, Quantity of Resource Users and Extent of Secretarial Duties:

The amount of work performed by the secretaries within these offices influences the amount and nature of waste produced, and this may also affect the waste disposal habits of these employees. The factors that influence this include:

  1. The size of the faculty;
  2. The number of administrative employees the secretaries directly interact with or perform duties for;
  3. The number of secretaries within the offices;
  4. The hours of operations of the offices;
  5. The atmosphere of the office operations.

These factors, when correlated appropriately, highlight a positive feedback loop which drives the amount of consumption of resources within the faculty dean offices, the nature of that consumption and ultimately the amount of waste generated and the waste disposal practices of the secretaries.

This is demonstrated with the observation that the 2001-2002 UW Undergraduate Calendar cites the full-time student enrolment figures for each faculty as of November 1 2000 ordered from greatest number enrolled to least number enrolled as follows: Arts, Mathematics, Engineering, Science and Environmental Studies. The order of the faculties with respect to student enrolment correlates strongly with the waste generated in the respective faculty dean office. This may be due to that fact that a greater student enrolment results in more administrative and secretarial duties to perform to co-ordinate the objectives and activities of the more numerous administrative staff within those faculties.

Efficiency in this process may require more manpower, thus more secretaries to perform these duties (as with Engineering that has five secretaries as opposed to three in Environmental Studies). More workers within the office means more resources are being assimilated. Subsequently, more waste is being produced.

Also, in high-volume atmospheres, less attention may be dedicated to ensuring the proper disposal of wastes, such as placing the recyclable white and coloured paper in the respective recycling boxes, rather than disposing of them in the garbage bins.

  1. Environmental Awareness, Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviours:

The qualitative survey that our study group conducted was aimed at evaluating the extent of environmental knowledge that the employees within the faculty dean offices posses. It would be expected that greater knowledge of the environmental impacts of unsustainable waste disposal practices may influence the nature and extent of those practices itself. Thus, someone who has greater awareness of the environmental impacts of their activities may develop more environmentally sustainable attitudes and behaviours.

According to the "trickle-down" effect described in the Systems Overview, the environmental stewardship and awareness of the actors higher in the UW hierarchical system, such as the administrative staff, may cause rippling effects in actor systems lower in the hierarchy, such as the faculty members and students. Working with this theory in the opposite direction, the environmental stewardship and awareness of the students and faculty members is a result of the behaviours observed at the top of the hierarchy.

In the "Campus Attitudes" WATGreen project in 1991, the study group investigated the differences, similarities and trends of the environmental awareness and attitudes towards recycling and composting of UW students enrolled in the different university faculties. Also, the level of environmental knowledge that these students possessed, with regards to recognising the importance of recycling, knowing how to recycle properly and where to find recycling facilities, was evaluated against the level of environmental action that they performed.

This study also implied that the level of reaction and action undertaken by students was dependent upon the environmental educational input to those students and this was influenced by the administrative decisions that result from their attitudes towards environmentalism.

It can be inferred that those faculty dean offices that have greater environmental awareness of proper waste disposal practices may manifest their awareness in their actions. Accordingly, it can be seen from the results of the waste audit and survey, coupled with observations made of the office surroundings, that environmental awareness strongly correlates with sustainable waste disposal habits.

The most general trend observed was that students of the faculty of Environmental Studies were the most educated on environmental issues, considered recycling and composting necessary for environmental sustainability, aware of recycling and composting facilities and procedures and considered the recycling system at UW convenient. Accordingly, they were also the ones that acted on that knowledge by being the group that recycled and composted the most at school.

Correspondingly, the Environmental Studies faculty Dean’s office staff was assumed to have greater knowledge of the impacts of their activities on the environment since the academics and research within the faculty is "environmentally" oriented. They demonstrated this awareness by being the only faculty dean office which has recycling posters placed at the appropriate receptacles for waste disposal which help to guide people on recycling and composting procedures.

These results and observations have validated our bias that the Environmental Studies dean faculty office would be the most sustainable in their waste disposal practices simply because they would "practice what they preach".

Students of the faculty of Mathematics were found to posses the least awareness and knowledge of environmental issues and recycling and composting procedures and facilities. Accordingly, their attitudes towards these issues were manifested in their behaviour and thus, they were also the ones that recycled and composted the least.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Awareness through education is essential for any kind of change to be achieved towards more sustainable waste disposal practices. The poster included in the complimentary package outlines proper recycling procedures. Light-hearted pamphlets and materials of this sort should be circulated around the office.

Offices should also supply themselves with a fridge so that those who wish to do so can bring in lunch from home. Coffee machines and other hot beverages should be made available in the offices (or nearby) so that staff are not entirely obligated to buy from Tim Horton’s, Second cup and other outlets that supply non-recyclable paper and Styrofoam containers. The use of personal reusable porcelain and plastic mugs (like the one in the complimentary package) should be encouraged.

The issue of waste reduction was little looked into in this study, but one that is very important in managing garbage. Reducing over- consumption of material is a fundamental step towards ensuring that the environmental impact caused by wastes is kept to a minimum. Office staff should be made aware of the economic benefits for their respective faculties associated with the conservation and management of office materials.

  1. Reduce/readjust budget allotments to the faculty dean offices:
  1. Implement an economically-oriented incentive program to encourage better waste disposal practices:

There are several governmental websites outlining Environment Canada’s "Guides to Creating an Environmentally Friendly Office" from which offices can obtain information concerning waste management and other sustainable practices such as energy conservation. A sample of these is as follows:

www.ns.ec.gc.ca/greenman/office.html

www.ene.gov.on.ca

www.ec.gc.ca/ecoaction/gtips/waste4e.htm

To fulfil the objectives of promoting and encouraging an environment where waste is disposed of in a sustainable manner, and creating a sense of environmental awareness, a complimentary gift package was distributed to each faculty Dean office. It aims to encourage sustainable office waste and recycling practices through the provision of educational material. The package consisted of:

It is our hope that these items will act as incentive to office personnel to adjust their waste disposal practices in a manner that is favourable for the environment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

"Greening the Office" would like to extend our gratitude to the Waste Management Co-Ordinator; Patti Cook, and Professor Susan Wismer, for their help and support. We would also like to thank all office personnel and the Deans of the five participating faculties accommodating our objectives for this project.

 

 

APPENDICES:

What do YOU feel like doing?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Brown, T., Marshall R., Campus Attitudes: A WATgreen Initiative. 1991.

Coleman C. et al., Towards a Green Office: A WATgeen Initiative. 1991.

Marshall, R., An Educational Program to Improve On-Campus Recycling in the Faculties

of Math, Science and Engineering: A WATgreen Initiative. 1994.

Hughes C. et al., Waste Reduction Education: A WATgreen Initiative. 1994.

Lofquist S., et al., Green Education: A WATgreen Initiative. 1991.

Palys, Ted., Research Decisions 2nd Edition. Toronto; Harcourt Brace 1997.

Roistacher, E., ECON 100 — Economics and Society Lecture Notes. Fall 1999

Rowlands, I., ERS 219 — Approaches to Environmental Decisions Lecture Notes. Fall

2000.