In 1992, Bill McKibben wrote The Age of Missing Information in which he contrasted the information he received in watching Fairfax County, Virginia cable television versus time spent alone on a mountain in the Adirondack Mountains in New York. The blog posts below follow his lead in exploring what it means to live in the “Information Age.”
By Anonymous
Interaction(s)
The human-environment interaction that is the focus is squirrel and human interaction, specifically in this location under a walkway bridge. During the fall squirrels are seen in abundance in this specific location due to its distance from humans as opposed to a regular pavement walkway and a significant canopy cover.
Resource characteristics
These aspects have been found to support urban wildlife such as squirrels. Incorporating walkways that avoid areas where wildlife feed allows their populations to remain stable. Canopy cover is also a very important aspect of urban wildlife populations because it provides protection and food (Apfelbeck, B et al., 2020). Squirrels are an important aspect of the environment due to their seed dispensing behaviors, and also serve as prey to other animal (Lawniczak, M. K.).
Governance/user characteristics
Stakeholders involved include students, faculty, and employees of the university. The infrastructure and construction are funded through the state.
Social/economic impacts
Squirrels have both negative and positive economic impacts. On one side, squirrels can be very destructive (eating trash, chewing through walls etc.) (Lawniczak, M. K.) However, especially on college campuses, squirrels are often seen in a positive light and the topic of many conversations. Although they may not seem important they do have a cultural significance among students and faculty (Peplinski, J., & Brown, J. S., 2020).
What can we do?
This “interaction” is more so a separation of humans and wildlife. Creating spaces in urban environments that accommodate for wildlife supports essencial ecosystems in the area (Apfelbeck, B et al., 2020). Mason should continue to support urban wildlife through changes in landscaping and infrastructure with ecology in mind and stakeholder involvement.
References
Apfelbeck, B., Snep, R. P. H., Hauck, T. E., Ferguson, J., Holy, M., Jakoby, C., Scott MacIvor, J., Schär, L., Taylor, M., & Weisser, W. W. (2020). Designing wildlife-inclusive cities that support human-animal co-existence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 200, 103817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103817
Lawniczak, M. K. (n.d.). Sciurus carolinensis (eastern gray squirrel). Animal Diversity Web. Retrieved November 9, 2022, from https://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Sciurus_carolinensis/
Peplinski, J., & Brown, J. S. (2020). Distribution and diversity of squirrels on university and college campuses of the United States and Canada. Journal of Mammalogy, 101(4), 930–940. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyaa033
By Anonymous
Interaction(s)
The interaction I will be examining is land use on campus and how it affects biodiversity, specifically looking at the small lawn next to Finley lot. This space is a flat, clear, mowed grass lawn that does not appear to serve any real function. This area used to be an asphalt parking lot, so the transition to a greenspace is a step up, but as it stands right now, there are several alternatives that would make the space more beneficial for both humans as well as the environment.
Resource characteristics
The environmental resources of this lawn consist of the monoculture turf grass and approximately three trees, as well as the unseen soil microbiome and any potential insects. Other resource factors include the water and potential fertilizer or pesticides used to maintain the lawn, and the carbon emissions released by lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and other manicuring tools. Studies have shown that intensely managed lawns, such as the one next to Finley lot, are not effective in supporting biodiversity, and can even be a barrier in urban landscapes (Aronson et al., 2017). The species of grass used for manicured, turf lawns in America such as this one are almost exclusively nonnative grasses that contribute very little to the biodiversity of the area. This lawn does have some environmental benefits, as almost any greenspace would, including heat and noise reduction, and those benefits are not to be overlooked, but maintained turf grass lawns have the lowest levels of these benefits of almost any kind of greenspace (Francoeur et al., 2021).
Governance/user characteristics
The governance involved would be that of George Mason University, specifically Mason Facilities’ Office of Planning, Design, and Construction (George Mason University, n.d.). The users involved would theoretically be the GMU community and anyone who comes onto campus and passes by this lawn. Mason Facilities is in charge of the planning and landscaping of GMU’s campus, and is also responsible for the maintenance of the grounds. The main goal (in terms of land use) of the university as a whole, as well as facilities, is to have a well-maintained, aesthetically pleasing campus to attract more people to attend GMU in order to generate more revenue and power for the school. America’s social norms have dictated that for an urban greenspace to be aesthetically pleasing, it must be uniform and manicured; a space allowed to grow becomes ‘wild’ and is often considered ugly and a sign of laziness (Joyce, 1998). Therefore, the default for land-use on many college campuses is to create manicured lawns to fill space on campus and increase the visual appeal, and so when being converted from a parking lot, Mason Facilities went with the norm and turned this space into the lawn that we see today.
Social/cultural/economic/political settings or related ecosystems
As mentioned above, societal and cultural norms in America have long preferred monoculture turf grass lawns as the go-to for greenspace, regardless of the local native landscape or any alternatives that may be better for the environment and less work to maintain. This is especially true for college campuses, as open lawns are often used as a gathering place for students to attend events or sit and study with friends. This lawn, however, does not appear to serve that purpose as a gathering space. In fact, as a GMU senior, I have never once seen anyone occupying this lawn for any reason. This is likely due to the fact that there are many other, more central lawn spaces that are more well-known to students, and this lawn space is somewhat out of the way. Additionally, this lawn is not in a location where it feels comfortable or inviting. The lawn goes right up to Patriot Circle, the main road running around the campus, and is located directly next to a parking lot. This means that the lawn is subject to constant traffic noise, which is not ideal for events or simply relaxing, and also makes it so that the lawn feels like an exposed, unsafe area due to the proximity of so many cars.
What can we do?
In order to best utilize this space, and potentially other similar spaces on campus, instead of focusing largely on aesthetics, Mason should focus on how to simultaneously maximize environmental as well as human benefits. There are many ways that this lawn space could be adjusted to better support biodiversity. Some options include planting trees to reforest the area, converting it into a large, walk-through pollinator garden, or cultivating it into a certified wildlife habitat through the National Wildlife Federation. Another alternative could be a significant reduction in the maintenance conducted on the lawn. Studies have shown that reducing how frequently a spaced is mowed can allow it to convert from an urban lawn to an urban meadow, and see a significant increase in native biodiversity (Chollet et al., 2018). Converting this lawn to an alternative that promotes biodiversity will also benefit Gerorge Mason, as public perceptions are shifting to favor spaces that support native wildlife, and there is a positive correlation between community mental health and biodiversity (Kiers et al., 2022).
If relevant
I was unable to find any information about this lawn or if the university has any plans for this space.
References
Aronson, M. F., Lepczyk, C. A., Evans, K. L., Goddard, M. A., Lerman, S. B., MacIvor, J. S., Nilon, C. H., & Vargo, T. (2017). Biodiversity in the city: Key Challenges for Urban Green Space Management. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 15(4), 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1480
Chollet, S., Brabant, C., Tessier, S., & Jung, V. (2018). From urban lawns to urban meadows: Reduction of mowing frequency increases plant taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 180, 121–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.08.009
Francoeur, X. W., Dagenais, D., Paquette, A., Dupras, J., & Messier, C. (2021). Complexifying the urban lawn improves heat mitigation and arthropod biodiversity. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 60, 127007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127007
George Mason University. (n.d.). Planning, Design, and Construction – Facilities. Facilities.gmu.edu. Retrieved November 8, 2022, from https://facilities.gmu.edu/about/campus-planning/
Joyce, S. (1998). Why the grass isn’t always greener. Environmental Health Perspectives, 106(8). https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.98106a378
Kiers, A. H., Krimmel, B., Larsen-Bircher, C., Hayes, K., Zemenick, A., & Michaels, J. (2022). Different Jargon, Same Goals: Collaborations between Landscape Architects and Ecologists to Maximize Biodiversity in Urban Lawn Conversions. Land, 11(10), 1665. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11101665
By Amanda Jones
Interaction
I am focusing on the Green Studio Garden next to the Art and Design building. Adjacent to the green studio garden is a steep slope alongside the building that is eroding into the garden. Certain species of native plants are drought tolerant and have extensive root systems to withstand soil disruption and erosion. A native plant buffer would also act as a natural pollutant filtration system and prevent footpath flooding by soaking up the water. This solution would also reduce damage to the adjacent building which currently has a border of foam and a soil cover to prevent flooding.
Resource Characteristics
The Resources involved would be the native plants, the soil and the sloped land. Native plants such as grasses can be effective at increasing the soil’s resistance to erosion. From an ecological standpoint sediment runoff is harmful as it degrades the quality of water for drinking, wildlife and the land surrounding streams (“What Is Erosion and Sedimentation?,” 2017). Maintaining soil structure is essential for sustaining a vibrant ecosystem and to prevent damage to the university building.
Governance/ User Characteristics
The Mason Land Development team oversees the maintenance of the eroded area near the Green Studio Garden. In addition, volunteers and Jenn Ashworth maintain and make decisions on how to use the space (Mason Land Development Division, nd). No political institutions are involved in the Green Studio. Incentives to implement a native plant buffer would be to prevent erosion from damaging the building edge. In addition, it would look aesthetically pleasing to cover the eroded land with native foliage which looks good all season and attracts beneficial insects and other species.
Economic setting /Cultural Implications and Related Ecosystems
Implementing and maintaining a native plant erosion buffer is an economically feasible solution for the university. Compared to the last attempt to seal off the building, this solution will be sustainable and self-maintaining. The native plants are low maintenance and resilient as they are adapted to the local climate. The plants will also be self-replacing as they will be perennial and regenerate yearly, thus preventing runoff indefinitely. Additionally, a native plant buffer serves as a visually appealing feature for the university compared to a barren slick of soil and patchy grass.
Improvement
My main suggestion for improvement is to utilize native plants to absorb the water and reduce erosion. Native plants provide a biotechnical barrier to reinforce soil and stabilize slopes (USDA, 1998). This would provide an effective low maintenance solution because the plants do not need to be mowed and grow well with indirect sunlight. The current foam and black fabric solution is deteriorating and is not reducing the runoff.
Is the University acting?
The George Mason University grounds keepers previously installed a foam buffer and cover to prevent damage to the building and reduce runoff. However, no action has been taken to improve the resulting erosion. Jennifer Ashworth and I are meeting with a grounds keeper to discuss implementing a native plant buffer.
References
What Is Erosion and Sedimentation? (2017, February 1). Retrieved from Pike
County Conservation District website: https://pikeconservation.org/what-is-erosion-and-sedimentation/
“Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices.” USDA 1998 Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group.
Erosion control: Virginia, USA: Plant nova natives. Plant Nova Natives. (n.d.). Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://www.plantnovanatives.org/erosion-control
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Soil Bioengineering for Upland Slope Protection and Erosion Reduction. Engineering Field Handbook, Part 650, Chapter 18.
Mason MS4 program. Facilities. (n.d.). Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://facilities.gmu.edu/resources/land-development/ms4/
By Anonymous
Interactions
Mason Pond is a stormwater retention pond that was built in 1989 and serves mason through treating a third of the Fairfax campus’ drainage area, which equates to approximately 163 acres (Sustainability Map, 2022). Mason pond is also the subject of stormwater research with the National Stormwater Monitoring Project, and it has its water quality and chemistry tested on a regular basis. (Sustainability Map, 2022).
Resource characteristics
Stormwater retention ponds have been monitored and found to be beneficial not just to the hydrology but also the biodiversity of an area (Le Viol et. al, 2009). These ponds collect and store stormwater runoff preventing the surrounding area from being flooded. The ponds treat the water by allowing particles to settle, allow ion exchange of pollutants, and allow biological uptake of excess nutrients (GMU Facilities, 2022).
Governance characteristics
George Mason created and implemented the retention pond back in 1989, and it has remained almost unchanged since its creation (Sustainability Map, 2022).
Social/cultural/economic/political settings or related ecosystems
Virtually everyone, Students, alumni, and faculty, love Mason pond because it is a beautiful spot to take a picture at or go past on a walk and because of this it has a great cultural/social importance in our community. The pond also aids the school in maintaining water quality standards, which are very strict with us being in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and saves money from needing to implement other action plans or pay fines.
Current action
Mason planted trees along the hills next to the pond bank to help keep the soil in place. Mason has also started the “Necklace Phase One and Stream Restoration” project, which will renovate, clean, and restore the stream that will begin from the southwest corner of Patriot Circle/Aquia Creek and flow down into Mason Pond (GMU News, 2022).
What can we do?
I believe that mason pond would benefit greatly from introducing more wetland plant life and having more of a fluvial transition rather than a steep grassy hill for a bank. This shift would be beneficial for both biodiversity and cultural systems. The fluvial marsh like environmental transition would be more natural to biodiversity and provide the makings a real/natural ecosystem with sub habitats and niches and it provides more plant life to keep the soil erosion from affecting the banks and increase biological uptake. Having a more naturalistic pond with not only lots of plants and vegetation around the banks but lots of diverse plants will only aid in the aesthetic beauty of the landscape.
References
By Kiersten Hoff
The human interaction that occurs between this small patch of trees near the Innovation Food Forest, is the interaction with wildlife, plants, and biodiversity. Students and faculty walk the pathway daily through underneath the trees past the food forest. Since this patch of trees in literally right next to the Innovation Food Forest, there are other plants and small animals living within the vicinity. Some students and faculty volunteer to clear-up and plant in the food forest, while simultaneously learning about plants, nutrition, and the overall environment. Others just walk past it, enjoying the natural beauty of the Innovation Food Forest, along with the autumn leave colors during the fall.
As part of the resource system, the forest is working as a system, responding to changes in the environment, as seen in the photo above. As stated in “Thinking in Systems,” a deciduous tree via chemical messages, will cause nutrients to move out of the leaves and into the trunk and roots, weakening the stems, causing the leaves to fall (Meadows, 2009). Chemical and biological aspects of the environment are involved, with chemicals and nutrients causing leaf color changes and the falling of leaves. Wildlife and plants are involved since the autumn leaves can provide shelter for certain small organisms and can benefit soil nutrition needed to help plants grow (Richardson & Hanna, 2021). This process can also benefit the food forest, by having healthier soils for food growth, which can benefit people, especially those living at George Mason (Richardson & Hanna, 2021). Trees themselves also provide a habitat for animals such as birds and squirrels.
On the governance side, students and faculty interact with this food-forest system, but the main drivers and organizers are the faculty involved with the university layout and the office of sustainability (Who We Are & What We Do, University Sustainability). Economics can be utilized to demonstrate the benefits and costs of green spaces, which can be presented to policy makers (Jalon et al, 2020).
Social and cultural systems play a role in this plant and biodiversity area. Studies have shown that student use and access to green spaces improves mental health (McFarland, et al., 2008). In one study by McFarland, et al., it was found that on average, more than half the students used campus green spaces a lot while very few students did not utilize campus green spaces (2008). Development, upkeep, and improvements of any kind rarely do not require any money or funds; therefore, economics does play a role in campus biodiversity. Students and professors of sustainability at GMU utilize the area of the trees to get to the food forest. Faculty and students from any area of study can easily utilize and enjoy the trees of the food forest since there is a walkway to the Johnson Center and the garden itself is just outside of Innovation Hall. Green spaces on campus also serve as common meeting places among students and faculty along with event organizations (McFarland, et al., 2008).
What can be done are measures to preserve trees and other plants in green spaces or plant new trees should any need to be cut down. GMU has a sustainability program and is trying to become more eco-friendly. This along with social and ecological benefits of the trees and other green spaces, can be used for economic and governance reasons as to why this type of biodiversity should be conserved (Jalon et al, 2020).
The university is doing what it can to sustain green spaces, and other beneficial flora with the determination to improve its green spaces (Landscaping, University Sustainability). Although the website does not specifically mention much about trees on campus, there are a host of other actions to benefit biodiversity on campus (Landscaping, University Sustainability).
References
George Mason University Essential Information. Washington Apple Pi. https://www.wap.org/events/july2009/
Jalon, G., S, Chiabai, A., Tague, Mc., A, Artaza, N., Ayala, A., Quiroga, S., Kruize, H., Suarez, C., Bell, R., Taylor, T., (2020, April 19). Providing Access to Urban Green Spaces: A Participatory Benefit-Cost Analysis in Spain. National Library of Medicine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216070/ doi: 10.3390/ijerph17082818
Landscaping. University Sustainability. https://green.gmu.edu/campus-sustainability/landscaping/
Meadows, D. H. (2009). Thinking in systems: A primer (D. Wright, Ed.). London, UK: Earthscan.
McFarland, A. L., Waliczek, T.M., Zajicek, J. M. (2008, January). The Relationship Between Student Use of Campus Spaces and Perceptions of Quality of Life. American Society for Horticultural Science. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.18.2.232
Richardson, S., J. Hanna, E., L., Dalal. (2021, July 1). Leaf Litter Decomposition as a Contributor to Ecosystem Service Provision. SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-72854-0_22
Who We Are & What We Do. University Sustainability. https://green.gmu.edu/
By Anonymous
The traditional manicured green lawn has been a national staple since the birth of the ‘American Dream’ – originating in Europe in the 1700’s, the concept of closely cut lawns quickly gained popularity in the Americas in the last few centuries (Pennington 2020). As it is a fairly recent development in landscaping, it would make sense that lawns are still a favored means of maintaining greenspace; however, research has proven that keeping a lawn is actually an extremely unsustainable practice. Contrary to popular belief, most grasses that occupy American lawns are non-native and are in fact invasive – the introduction of lawns in America are primarily to blame for the rise of highly invasive plants, like English ivy and Japanese wisteria (Wagner 2019 Curbed). As these grasses are non-native, their interaction with native wildlife can be detrimental. They absorb resources, like freshwater, nutrients, and fossil fuels for upkeep and mowing, while also displacing native ecosystems and introducing chemicals into the soil.
George Mason University, a relatively sustainable college, is still a culprit of maintaining these manicured lawns on campus. A big driver for these lawns is aesthetics – often surrounded by landscaping or architecture, these greenspaces can be a nice contrast paired with their urban surroundings. Another reason could be student involvement – large lawns allow for students to socialize and relax, as well as keep an open space for an event. There are upsides to these lawns, but when regarding the health and wellbeing of the ecosystem and its wildlife, they need to go.
I decided to focus on the greenspace next to Mason Pond – while it is a beautiful area to lounge, these lawns have the potential to be a thriving habitat for countless species. Planting native grasses in the area will strengthen biodiversity and help pollinators (including the bees at the campus apiaries!). Overall, killing lawns and replacing them with native foliage would benefit overall campus health, ecological and physical. The elimination of lawns significantly lowers the risk of runoff and exposure to chemicals from fertilizer, while also providing a beautiful, functional greenspace.
By Lucas Graziani
There are various human-environment interactions at George Mason University, some of which evidently play pivotal roles in our institution’s ability to adapt to a more sustainable way of life and the pursuit of being considered an environmentally cognizant college ever focusing on the future preservation of our planet. With regard to the ever-growing climate crisis and its prevalence in all facets of society, these changing times are also slowly giving rise to a shift in mentality in terms of being more environmentally conscious and recognizing the significance of living a renewable lifestyle. George Mason University and many other higher education institutions have declared a push towards becoming more sustainable, resource-friendly, and gradually lowering waste output and emission levels for the benefit of the natural environment. With society as a collective desiring more emphasis, financing, legislation, and effort in transitioning towards a more environmentally friendly direction, the formation of environmental declarations like the Stockholm Declaration in 1972 —referencing the focus on increased sustainability in higher education schools— primarily emphasized the important relationship and interdependency between the human species and the environment (Wright, 2002). Moreover, the subsequent Tibilisi Declaration and its respective conference reiterated the significance of human-environment interactions as well as voicing the need to push for widespread environmental education of all ages, giving way for more progressive and sustainable ideals in colleges and universities alike (Wright, 2002). With that being said, although there is a widespread positive outlook/opinion and consensus on shifting to a more sustainable campus living style among the students and faculty through newly implemented applications, amenities, and programs here at George Mason University, there are still certain persistent, unabating aspects of the institute’s less resource-friendly programs in motion. Furthermore, the intermittent and sporadic transitioning of Southside dining tableware to single-use plastics is the human-environment interaction that I have chosen.
As a consequence of the lack of dining hall staff members to wash dishes and utensils upon occasion, Southside superiors make the decision to switch all of the tableware to single-use plastics along with some mixed paper amenities. With that being said, this plastic tableware is also depicted as “Eco products”, “Eco friendly”, “Biodegradable”, or “Compostable” as an effort by the plastic manufacturers to appeal to the sustainable ideals of students to get them to use their products, when in fact they are not. This is a form of greenwashing, where unsustainable and environmentally harmful plastic companies make false claims of biodegradability and label their products with such phrases for financial gain (Viera et al., 2020). These companies can also utilize depictions of nature such as leaves or the color green to represent the illusion of sustainability or environmentally friendly motives (Viera et al., 2020). Moreover, manufacturing, use, and disposal of these single-use plastics directly implicate waste discharges, air emissions, land contamination, and use of resources regarding the aspects of the environment. The production requires the extraction and utilization of fossil fuels like gas and oil which create carbon emissions that contribute to global warming. The use of these products for food consumption also increases waste pollution and creates land contamination due to the false depiction of biodegradability. These single-use products remain in the environment almost indefinitely as they do not decompose or biodegrade for hundreds to thousands of years, adding to their negative environmental potential for threatening ecological wildlife as well as the discharging or spreading of their associated chemical toxins.
With regard to the human interaction side in this human-environment relation, students and faculty who utilize Southside dining and its “grab-n-go” system known as Gold Rush are involved in the false pretenses of this greenwashing scheme by the plastic manufacturing industry. It is currently unclear if the authoritative body of George Mason dining is aware they are fostering this issue and under the same mistaken impression of biodegradability and disinformation of the environmental impacts, or merely indifferent/unconcerned with the situation. Some notable drivers of the use of these single-use plastics are the lack of employees available to maintain the inflow of dishes to clean and the carelessness of students/faculty or the unintentional ignorance of the role of greenwashing. Although some items may state that they are biodegradable, compostable, eco-friendly, or decomposable, most of them are made of polypropylene, polystyrene, polyethylene, and/or PET which cannot be biologically destroyed or recycled at most recycling treatment facilities (Amhil admin, 2020).
In terms of social contexts with regard to this unsustainable problem, resource policies, media organization, market incentivization, and economic development play the biggest roles in influencing the resilience of these products in campus life. Social media incessantly advertises single-use plastic products from stores on campus to students, shifting resource policies mandate the use of these products when lacking in staff members, and lastly economic development and market incentives such as greenwashing and cheap costs advocate for the use of single-use plastic tableware. As for ecosystem-related settings, the use and disposal of these products lead to landfills or litter around campus that cannot degrade which in turn results in wildlife endangerment and the spreading of harmful toxins. If these products are also added to a composting initiative, they will only negatively affect its process.
Management strategies regarding this environmental sustainability dilemma can focus on the act of educating people and making them aware of greenwashing and its role in campus dining. People can also be more informed in matters of deciding purchases based on the correct labeling of single-use products and the proper manner of discarding waste. Increasing pay rates and hiring more staff members to account for the shortages may also prove to be a feasible option pertaining to the problem of not having enough people to maintain the tableware at dining halls. As far as the Student Environmental Justice Alliance organization, the Green Patriots organization, and I are aware, the university is currently fostering/abetting the random changes to single-use plastics as a way of mitigating staff compensation.
Location of the Human-Environment interaction
References
Amhil admin. (2020). How plastic cups are made? Amhil. https://amhil.eu/en/2020/04/02/how-plastic-cups-are-made/
Viera, J. S. C., Marques, M. R. C., Nazareth, M. C., Jimenez, P. C., & Castro, I. B. (2020). On replacing single-use plastic with so-called biodegradable ones: The case with straws. Science Direct. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901119313656?casa_token=xDQ9Hv0lZCoAAAAA:6Goep3J-FYEir8nrs1-ZFpqNtRcO0EPm4HRJgHdojgPK1NPzVfrsjWRuezElxZmnu4l3uVOpFA
Wright, T. S. A. (2002). Definitions and frameworks for environmental sustainability in higher education. ScienceDirect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952873302000028?casa_token=IykLJmMvfmgAAAAA:nDqpv7Ml9z2Pszz72ZzXqg93zGDOlh3_KHNfUL5oIgptVHCQX6Z38aiGME3kzziCMkF597sShw
By Hannah McDonald
Human Environment Interaction
For my Mapping Mason project, I am choosing to focus on food waste on campus. Food waste is a troubling issue around the world not only for the environment but also for humans who rely on food as a source of energy. There can be various causes of food waste through the lifespan of food including production, processing, distribution, retail and consumption. For this project, I am focusing on food waste at the consumption stage at Southside Dining Hall on the George Mason University campus.
While people don’t often directly associate food waste with the environment, before the food even makes it to the consumers it has used up large amounts of environmental resources. To produce food, thousands of gallons of water, thousands of acres of land, soil nutrients, labor, fuel, energy, and even other natural resources are required. The use of land and need for nutrient dense soil in order to cultivate crops has contributed to soil degradation around the globe. “In Iowa, soil is eroding 10 times faster than regeneration rates…Across Europe, soil is eroding 3 to 40 times faster than regeneration rates…” (Nierenberg et al, 2018). Moreover, food waste ends up in landfills and decomposes releasing methane, a GHG 27 times more potent than carbon dioxide (Nierenberg et al, 2018). Furthermore, “Food waste accounts for one-third of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions and generates 8% of greenhouse gases annually” (Lewis, 2022). These are critical environmental factors and implications of the massive amounts of food wasted around the world on a daily basis.
Everyone is guilty of food waste from some point in time. Local and sometimes state governments are responsible for funding growth of food as well as waste management and disposal. This creates an anthropological/user side to the issue of food waste. “In 2015, food made up 15.1% (approximately 39.7 million tons) of total MSW (municipal solid waste); of this total about 2.1 million tons were composted, 7.4 million tons were combusted for energy generation, and 30.3 million tons were landfilled” (Muth et al, 2019). This proves that while some food waste can be used for composting or energy combustion, it most often ends up in landfills to decompose. Furthermore, “The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) established that food waste ends up wasting a quarter of our water supply in the form of uneaten food. That’s equated to USD$172billion in wasted water. They also determined that we spend over $220billion in growing, transporting and processing almost 70 million tons of food that eventually ends up in landfills” (Lewis, 2022). With the large amounts of waste that must be disposed of, the government is responsible for services to dispose of such waste including collecting waste and transporting it to the landfill which in turn costs governments more money for laborers and construction of landfills. Finally, the additional diesel and energy that goes into transporting food to consumers must also be taken into account.
Food waste can also be associated with several other systems including economic, political, and social. Food, which is required by all people to survive, can quickly become a scarce resource in both developed and undeveloped nations. Food takes up a large space in the world’s economy accounting for imports and exports and is a huge part of the supply chain worldwide. Food waste on all levels can contribute to supply chain issues. When food is wasted, so are resources, and when resources become scarce prices increase adding value to basic needs. When food values go up, people in poverty may no longer be able to afford it which only makes the issue of global hunger worse. Moreover, governments are forced to deal with the repercussions of malnourished people which can range anywhere from migration out of a certain area to social and civil unrest. Additionally, social systems also come into play when looking at food waste, groups including women and girls, ethnic minorities, and the rural poor suffer at higher rates from food insecurity, malnutrition and undernutrition than other populations. While people wasting food at Mason may not be directly contributing to the starving population in Yemen, “The later the food is wasted along the chain, the greater its environmental impact is…the more energy and natural resources are needed in the complete production process of the food” (Lewis, 2022). Meaning that once food gets to the plates of Mason students at dining halls and restaurants on campus, it has already used an immense amount of resources to grow and transport.
What Can We Do?
Food waste has many environmental and social implications which create the need for a multifaceted approach to resolve the issue. While Mason has made the effort to add more composting locations on campus, this alone is not enough. People do not realize the effects of throwing away even just a small amount of food. “Throwing away a kilogram of beef is equivalent to throwing away 50,000 litres of water…Pouring a glass of milk down the sink is nearly 1,000 litres of water wasted” (Lewis, 2022). Since there are such drastic effects on the Earth’s resources even from such a small amount of food being wasted, it is important for Mason to highlight the drastic impacts to students. While adding a new compost receptacle by Northern Neck might collect some food waste, most of the food is wasted at the dining hall and inside of restaurants on campus. Adding more compost receptacles in dining halls and restaurants as well as outdoor locations for residents can be an excellent step closer to sustainability. Moreover, signage communicating the impacts of food waste can help make people more self aware. Dining halls can also start giving students to-go containers for leftover food that has already been taken in hopes of reducing the amount of food waste at dining halls.
There also are many additional measures Mason can take to reduce the amount of food waste in dining halls including repurposing, which for example is practiced through turning stale bread into croutons, making soups with excess vegetables, freezing foods that are close to expiration and using them for things such as soup, and preparing food as a salad bar topping so people are not wasting food they don’t like/want (Saber et al, 2022). Food drives can also be implemented for people who have unopened food they will never eat, as well as for opened foods that can be donated to nearby farms for animals to eat. Moreover, improvements in the food preparation at restaurants and dining halls on campus and education of food waste reduction should be offered or even required for people working in the kitchens at campus. Food waste is a very complex issue and will require large amounts of creativity to solve. Since Mason prides themselves on being such a sustainable campus, it is important for them to take the extra step to achieve more sustainable practices on all parts of the campus.
References
Lewis, J. (2022). How Does Food Waste Affect the Environment? https://earth.org/how-does-food-waste-affect-the-environment/
Muth, M., Birney, C., Cuéllar, A., Finn, S., Freeman, M., Galloway, J… (2019). A systems approach to assessing environmental and economic effects of food loss and waste interventions in the United States. Science of the Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.230.
Nierenberg, D., Fisher, F., Frederick, B., & Peñuelas, M. (Eds). (2018). Nourished Planet: Sustainability in the Global Food System. Barilla Center for Food and Nutrition. https://link-springer-com.mutex.gmu.edu/book/10.5822/978-1-61091-895-4
Saber, D., Azizi, R., Drever, S., Sanford, D., & Nadeau, H. (2022). Hospital Food Waste: Reducing Waste and Cost to our Health Care System and Environment. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing. 27(2). 10.3912/OJIN.Vol27No01PPT33
By Kathryn Hammond
Interactions
Proper recycling is incredibly important to reducing the amount of waste that ends up in landfills. However, pro-environmental labeling of recycling bins and their increasing numbers in institutions also increases overinclusive recycling, where non-recyclable items end up in those bins (Catlin et al., 2020). While municipal solid waste recycling has increased in the United States due to increased recycling program availability, campaigns, awareness posters, and proper signage, overinclusive recycling leads to over 25% of the materials put in recycling bins being unrecyclable. This contamination causes shutdowns in recycling machinery, and many recycling plants end up throwing the entire bag of recycling in the trash if it is contaminated (Catlin et al., 2020). Overinclusive recycling causes many awareness efforts to backfire, reducing the amount actually recycled compared to the amount perceived by consumers. This leads to a dilemma – consumers often don’t recycle as much as they should, but when they do, it may be overinclusive and lead to less actually being recycled overall. Increased awareness and signage is great, however without adequate education of what can and can’t be recycled, these efforts can be futile.
This labeled and sorted recycling and trash bin setup in the Johnson Center is a great example of accessible and easily understood recycling signage. Each bin is separated, and even includes visual examples of what can be put in each slot. The accessibility, size, and convenient placement of this setup helps to encourage even habitual non-recyclers to think twice (Rosenthal et al., 2021). It includes a combination of signage, instruction, and accessibility to increase both recycling rates and its sorting. Each bin is separated by recycling material type, labeled for cans, glass, and plastics, mixed paper, white paper, and trash. The cans, glass, and plastic bins being on both sides of the recycling station is a design choice that improves the accessibility of that slot if coming from either side. The trash bins both placed next to the recycling and integrated into the structure help to decrease the amount of contaminants such as used napkins and paper towels, food wrapping, plastic bags, and coffee cups found in the recycling (Andrews et al., 2013). This recycling station is placed at an intersection of three hallways on the top floor of the Johnson Center, a heavy traffic area with a nearby food court. There are a few others both in the JC and in Merten Hall (George Mason University, 2022). Both of these are prime locations for recycling bins, which is an important aspect to factor in when setting up these bins.
Resource Characteristics
Recycling and proper waste management is important to maintaining a healthy environment through reducing waste in landfills, saving energy, and decreasing pollution (Nodoushani et al., 2016). Single-use plastics are cost-efficient and easy to transport, however they do not decompose and linger in landfills for thousands of years. Plastic can be recycled and made into other products or packaging, which both reduces the amount that ends up in landfills and reduces natural resource consumption and pollution due to less raw materials and energy required for production (Nodoushani et al., 2016). Paper consumption is also a major issue, as it consumes more resources and produces more waste than plastic, even with recycling. Recycling paper conserves these natural resources, saves energy, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, decreases the amount of waste in landfills, and saves water in comparison to producing paper from virgin materials. Recycling paper thus lessens the strain on freshwater ecosystems by conserving water, and reduces deforestation through decreasing the need for lumber (Nodoushani et al., 2016). Recycling is crucial to lessening human impact on already fragile ecosystems.
Governance/User Characteristics
Many environmental organizations focus mainly on increasing recycling rates, with somewhat simplified language such as labeling trash as “Landfill” and putting up “Save the Earth” signs (Catlin et al., 2020). These recycling awareness efforts by environmental activism groups may make recycling more common, but increased recycling by consumers without understanding the recycling process leads to less being actually recycled. In some cases, up to half of what ends up in the recycling is contaminated, and public waste collectors may send even lightly contaminated items for incineration (Rosenthal et al., 2021). Many people don’t know that all recycling needs to be clean, especially food packaging. Separating recycling materials by type improves efficiency of recycling when it reaches the recycling center. Many consumers don’t connect their actions to the rest of the system, either out of carelessness or lack of education. Many people, especially on college campuses, need the most low-effort and clear ways to change their behavior.
Related Systems
Culture and society plays a large role in recycling behavior, especially in a university setting. Attitudes toward recycling, as well as social norms, have a significant impact on recycling behavior. Recycling is often perceived as requiring a considerable amount of effort on the individual’s part, as it needs to be sorted, prepared, and stored (Ramayah et al., 2012). To improve the current system, recycling must be made easier and more accessible to students, to the point of it being equally as simple as throwing something away in the trash. By having bins clearly labeled and pre-sorted, it takes much less time and effort to recycle properly. Another psychological barrier is when individuals want to recycle, but aren’t sure whether something can be (Rosenthal et al., 2020). This is why visuals and clear instructions are important, so that people can recycle with confidence.
What can we do?
These effectively labeled recycling bins in the Johnson Center are an excellent example of guiding people to appropriately sort their recycling and differentiate it from trash. Careful placement of accessible, understandable, and labeled recycling and trash bins helps to steer human behavior and raises awareness for the importance of proper solid waste management (Rosenthal et al., 2021). A combination of both declarative information, explaining why recycling is important, as well as procedural information for how to do it properly, is integral to improving the current recycling system (Rosenthal et al., 2021). These are features already effectively implemented in these recycling stations.
The current bins placed are a great start, but they are few and far between on campus, located only in Merten Hall and the Johnson Center. George Mason’s recycling program emphasizes the importance of sorting recyclables to lower contamination and maintain clean recyclable materials. GMU pledged to have a 50% recycling rate by 2018, but only reached a 16.4% recycling rate, attributed to the university’s annual growth in both enrollment and development (George Mason University, 2022). To address this shortfall, the Office of Sustainability needs to improve the recycling accessibility and education. By continuing to implement these multi-stream recycling bin stations, and by using improving design and signage choices, Mason can effectively work towards its sustainability goals.
Location of the Human-Environment interaction
References
Andrews, A., Gregoire, M., Rasmussen, H., & Witowich, G. (2013). Comparison of recycling outcomes in three types of recycling collection units. Waste Management, 33(3), 530–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.08.018
Catlin, J. R., Leonhardt, J. M., Wang, Y., & Manuel, R. J. (2021). Landfill or recycle? Pro‐environmental receptacle labeling increases recycling contamination. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 31(4), 765–772. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1216
George Mason University. (2022). Recycling and Waste Management FAQ. Office of Sustainability. Retrieved November 7, 2022, from https://green.gmu.edu/recycling-and-waste-management-faq/
Nodoushani, O., Stewart, C., & Kaur, M. (2016). Recycling and Its Effects on the Environment. Competition Forum, 14(1), 65-69. http://mutex.gmu.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/recycling-effects-on-environment/docview/1837562644/se-2
Ramayah, T., Lee, J. W., & Lim, S. (2012). Sustaining the environment through recycling: An empirical study. Journal of Environmental Management, 102, 141–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.025
Rosenthal, S., & Linder, N. (2021). Effects of bin proximity and informational prompts on recycling and contamination. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 168, 105430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105430
