Abstract
This dissertation explores and challenges the normative approaches to defining and operationalizing institutional sustainability through an in-depth case study of campus sustainability at the University of Idaho (UI), located in Moscow, Idaho, United States (US). The UI is a public land-grant institution with a historical focus on natural resource industries (timber, mining, agriculture, etc.), located in a semi-rural region in a politically conservative state. In 2021, UI upper administration announced the institution’s desired pursuit of becoming a leader in sustainability in higher education, but campus community members expressed skepticism and uncertainty towards this charge. In the US, the most reputably sustainable higher education institutions (HEIs) are predominantly located in urban areas and historically liberal political climates. Moreover, sustainability broadly is commonly associated with urban, politically liberal settings, lifestyles, and cultures. Resultingly, there is a prevailing notion, especially amongst UI campus community members, that sustainability is incompatible with the UI’s semi-rural, politically conservative context. Inspired by this perceived incompatibility, this dissertation investigates mainstream interpretations of the concept of sustainability and the ideological biases attached to it, applying the theoretical lens of critical sustainability science to reimagine the normative model of sustainability in higher education settings. Comprised of three chapters, or studies, this case study utilizes a mixed-methods approach to provide a comprehensive analysis of the UI’s journey to becoming known for sustainability whilst navigating its complex socio-political environment.
The first chapter of this dissertation provides foundational knowledge on campus sustainability by outlining the history and evolution of sustainability planning at HEIs in the US in a systematic literature review. The findings indicate that US HEIs largely interpret the concept of sustainability solely as environmental protection, routinely neglecting interconnected issues of social injustice and economic inequities. The intricately bureaucratic landscape of American higher education is a significant barrier to successful sustainability initiatives, making long-term, highly collaborative directives, like sustainability, difficult to implement. The most effective strategy for campus sustainability planning in the US is to institutionalize sustainability, or to integrate sustainability as a customary value throughout the campus culture, by publishing campus sustainability policies or plans, writing sustainability into an HEI’s mission statement, or creating a sustainability office with an upper or centralized position within the organizational hierarchy.
The second chapter of this dissertation explores the impact of socio-political factors on campus sustainability at the UI through a moderation analysis of students’ demographic identities, environmental identities, and their willingness to engage in sustainability behaviors. Using secondary data from the UI’s annual sustainability survey, the analysis investigates whether a student’s social identity (i.e., gender, political affiliation, or the setting they grew up in) could moderate, or influence, the relationship between their environmental identity (i.e., how much they care for the environment) and their engagement in the most common behaviors associated with the mainstream sustainability movement (MSM). The findings reveal that both gender and political identity significantly predict a student’s willingness to behave sustainably, but identity attached to where a student grew up (i.e., a rural, urban, or suburban setting) is not as strong a predictor. Notably, of all the predictors tested, a student’s sense of environmental identity most strongly predicted sustainability behavior. Furthermore, none of the social identities tested significantly influence the relationship between a student’s environmental identity and sustainability behaviors. Put plainly, how a student identifies, in terms of their gender or political affiliation, can shift their level of engagement in sustainability behaviors. But a student’s connection to and care for nature is the most powerful motivator for sustainability behavior, regardless of how they identify. Having a strong sense of environmental identity is an equally strong predictor of sustainability behavior across the tested political, gender, and upbringing groups.
The third chapter of this dissertation proposes an alternative communicative framing strategy that intends to alleviate the political-gendered biases attached to the mainstream conception of sustainability. Twenty politically conservative male UI students were interviewed to understand their interpretations of mainstream sustainability and identify the factors that influence their participation in the MSM. The findings confirm that the study participants perceive the concept of sustainability as shaped by liberal political ideology, urban lifestyles, and feminine characteristics, which has discouraged them from openly engaging in sustainability behaviors or partaking in the MSM. According to the participants, the most common behaviors promoted by the MSM, including recycling, driving electric vehicles, and eating a plant-based diet, have little to no real impact on the environment. The participants defined sustainability as a practice or lifestyle that upholds the health and longevity of natural resources. The most sustainable, impactful, and socially acceptable behaviors were ones the participants believe bolster their abilities to directly provide for themselves or their families, such as hunting, fishing, and gardening. Using these findings, the study presents a communicative frame for sustainability that emphasizes themes of self-sufficiency, stewardship, and pragmatism as an alternative to the mainstream frame for sustainability, which typically caters to liberal, urban, feminized values and lifestyles.
This dissertation concludes with a proposed alternative approach to measuring sustainability behavioral intent at the UI. Using the findings from the interviews in the third chapter, a new sustainability behavior measure is introduced, consisting of the sustainability behaviors the study participants identified as most personally relevant and motivating to themselves. Using the participants’ suggested behaviors allows for an unconventional yet refreshing approach to sustainability that may effectively transcend the partisan, ideological divisions resulting from the MSM. Moving forward, the UI, as well as other institutions in similar socio-political contexts, would benefit from using the results of this dissertation to develop a model of campus sustainability that rejects partisan interpretations of the concept and is molded to the institution’s distinct political climate and semi-rural landscape. This can be achieved by embracing themes of self-sufficiency, stewardship, and pragmatism in sustainability programming, and ensuring programs and initiatives are accessible and inclusive to all students. By doing so, the UI will contribute to the great and urgent work of de-politicizing sustainability and reinvigorating what used to be a bipartisan movement rooted in care for the earth and for our communities.