Making Strides Toward a Greener ‘Gate: Sustainable Athletics
ENST 390: Community-Based Environmental Study of Environmental Issues
Lindsey Sagasta, Oliver Hunt, Lexi Panepinto
Spring 2015
Colgate University
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………………. 3
Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
Background …………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
Overview of Sustainability
Sustainability and Athletics
Methods …………...…………………………………………………………………………….. 8
Overview
Interview
Surveys
Results …………………………………………………………………………………………..10
Interview
Peer-Institution Survey
Student-Athlete Survey
Discussion …………………………………………………………………………………..…..17
Recommendations…...……………………………………………………………………...…..19
References……………………………………………………………………………………….21
Appendix
Sustainable Athletics 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of sustainability initiatives at Colgate University, one of the main goals is to build
an ethos of environmentally sustainable living. Integrating environmentally sustainable practices
into athletic activities is an important way to achieve this broader institutional objective.
Throughout the Spring 2015 semester, our Environmental Studies 390 group evaluated
environmental sustainability in athletics. First, we assessed the current state of environmental
sustainability in athletics and, then, analyzed the environmental, economic, and social extent, to
which we could feasibly integrate environmentally sustainable practices within Colgate’s
athletics program.
Our research question asks: to what extent can environmentally sustainable practices be
integrated into Colgate’s Division 1 Athletics Program? In order to address our primary research
question, we also needed to consider: what is economically viable; what is environmentally good;
and what is socially acceptable/attainable? In order to answer these questions, we collected data
from primary and secondary sources and conducted our own surveys at Colgate and with other
higher education institutions. After analyzing the data, we developed recommendations for
Colgate Athletics.
We began our data collection with a literature review of sustainable athletics in general.
After this review, we gauged the current status of environmental sustainability in athletics at
Colgate by interviewing key stakeholders from the Office of Sustainability and the Division 1
Athletic program. We also contacted key constituents from institutions that have already initiated
the integration of environmental sustainability into their athletic programs to learn first hand
about their successes and challenges. We used this background research as the basis of our
methods.
Our methods to assess the extent and feasibility of integrating environmentally
sustainable practices within Colgate’s Division 1 Athletics included an interview and two
electronic surveys. The interview was conducted on campus with Colgate Athletic
administrators. One survey was distributed to Colgate’s student-athletes to assess their current
behaviors and willingness to make changes in terms of sustainable practices. The other survey
went to peer institutions inquiring about their status and practice of sustainability within their
athletic programs. We cross-examined these responses to identify commonalities among these
successful institutions.
Through our methods, we determined that (1) Colgate has already begun to implement
sustainability practices into the Athletics Department, (2) peer institutions all have a top-down
and bottom-up approach to sustainable athletics, and (3) a high percentage of Colgate studentathletes are willing to change their behaviors in order to better integrate sustainability in their
athletic activities. These findings led us to the development of a series of recommendations for
the Athletics Department. One primary recommendation is the creation of a sustainabilityfocused “green team” within athletics. We also provide recommendations to reduce waste and
conserve energy within the department.
Sustainable Athletics 3 INTRODUCTION
This project seeks to address 1) the current status of environmental sustainability within
Colgate’s Division 1 Athletics and 2) the environmental, economic, and social feasibility of
integrating such environmentally sustainable practices among the student-athletes and athletic
administration. Specifically, our research question asks: to what extent can environmentally
sustainable practices be integrated into Colgate’s Division 1 Athletics Program?
We refer to the integration of environmentally sustainable practices in athletics as
“sustainable athletics.” We define “sustainable athletics” as a value set that incorporates
environmental and social consciousness into day-to-day decision-making (John Pumilio,
personal communication, February 26th, 2015). Moreover, sustainable athletics within college
campuses seeks to integrate the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, environmental, and
social) in the athletic program for present and future athletes, coaches, students, administration,
and fans. In the same manner, our research analyzes the (economic, environmental, and social)
extent to which Colgate Athletics can integrate more sustainable practices in their everyday
activities. We began our analysis by collecting background information, through interviews of
key informants, on the current status of environmental sustainability within Colgate’s athletics,
and Colgate’s university as a whole. From these interviews, and email correspondence with peer
institutions, we created and administered two separate surveys. The results of these surveys
provide several options for increasing the environmental sustainability of our Division 1
Athletics Program, and allow us to recommend changes for Colgate Athletics.
BACKGROUND
OVERVIEW OF SUSTAINABILITY
Defining Sustainability
The Brundtland Commission was the first to refer to sustainability in the context of the
global impacts of humans on the environment in the 1987 “Our Common Future” report. The
definition most commonly referred to is that of sustainable development, however, this term is
often used interchangeably with “sustainable” and “sustainability” in writing (Theis & Tomkin,
2012, p. 4). Sustainable development is the “ability to make development sustainable- to ensure
that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs” (Kates, Parris, & Leiserowitz, 2005, p. 10). Since 1987, however, a
multitude of alternative definitions have been articulated and promoted by many scholars. The
creation and promotion of these alternative definitions have caused a fixed definition of
sustainable development to remain unknown (Kates et al., 2005, pp. 9-20). Therefore, it is
advantageous to provide a working definition of sustainability: behaving sustainably requires
one to consider the economic, environmental, and social impacts their decisions will have on the
present and future inhabitants of this planet.
Our working definition of sustainability includes the three pillars of sustainability:
economic, environmental, and social. The economic aspects of sustainability pertain to the
framework for making decisions, such as the flow of financial capital and facilitation of
commerce. Environmental aspects distinguish the interconnectedness and diversity of living
systems, the goods and services that can be provided, and the impacts of humans on these things.
Sustainable Athletics 4 The third dimension pertains to the social interactions between institutions of all natures that
depend on collective actions. Thus, the integration of these three aspects provides the idea that
although technological advances and economic viability are important to society, sustainability
requires a social construct that “seeks to improve the quality of life for the world’s peoples:
physically… aspirationally… and strategically” (Theis & Tomkin, 2012, p. 4).
Sustainability in Higher Education at Colgate
Higher education – undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate – can play a large role in
sustainable development. It is a space that can foster the advancement of all three dimensions of
sustainability, especially the social dimension. Many institutions have taken strides towards
transformative change using an interdisciplinary approach. Since the early 1990’s, there have
been waves of the campus sustainability movement sweeping across colleges and universities.
Leith Sharp (2009) defines the campus sustainability movement as a “movement dedicated to
transforming our campuses into living laboratories for the demonstration and practice of
environmental sustainability” (p. 1). To progress even further, another wave needs to emerge.
Sharp (2009) states that this next wave needs to “address the less rational, unconscious and more
complex nature of our organizations” to foster new organizational capacity for innovation and
transformation, steered by a system-thinking perspectives (p. 7). To strengthen social
sustainability, institutions must change the attitudes and values of the different constituents on
campus, while garnering a sustainability movement heavily laced with teamwork and leadership.
Colgate can potentially enter this next wave if all members of the community, including Division
1 Athletics, embrace our sustainability efforts.
In recent years, Colgate has garnered new excitement around sustainability. In 2005,
Colgate formed the Colgate Sustainability Council, which was charged with the goal of
developing a “coordinated environmental vision to ensure a safe, healthy, and sustainable
environment” (Colgate University, 2011, p. 17). In 2009, Colgate became a signatory of the
American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment, (ACUPCC) which is a
presidential commitment to develop and implement actions to achieve climate neutrality
(Colgate University, 2011, p.10). This commitment was followed by Colgate’s 2011
Sustainability and Climate Action Plan, which created a roadmap to a more sustainable Colgate.
The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan aims to bring Colgate to carbon neutrality by
Colgate’s bicentennial anniversary in 2019. The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan consists
of 27 mitigation projects that will together lead Colgate to climate neutrality.
Colgate’s most recent greenhouse gas inventory (2013-2014 fiscal year) suggests that
Colgate is currently ahead of schedule in our goal of reaching climate neutrality. Within
athletics, Colgate reduced overall electricity consumption through a lighting upgrade in the
Sanford Field House during the summer of 2013. We replaced 156 1,000-watt high-pressure
sodium (HPS) lamps with high-efficiency T-5 fixtures. Last year, this project saved over 37 tons
of greenhouse gas emissions, 623,000 kWh and over $35,000 in electricity and labor costs
(Colgate University Office of Sustainability, 2014, p. 4). Further, the athletics department made
several programmatic shifts towards improved sustainability, which will be discussed in the
“Current Sustainability within Colgate Athletics” section.
SUSTAINABILITY AND ATHLETICS
Sustainable Athletics 5 Defining Sustainable Athletics
For the purpose of this report, a working definition of sustainable athletics must be
established: We believe that sustainable athletics is a value set that incorporates environmental
and social consciousness into day-to-day decision-making (John Pumilio, personal
communication, February 26th, 2015). It is a value(s) or practice(s) that is expressed as important
in everyday athletic activities. Moreover, sustainable athletics within college campuses is the act
of being environmentally, economically, and socially conscious about the decisions made in the
athletic program for present and future athletes, coaches, students, and fans. To put this
definition in context, Yale University’s Bulldog Sustainability, which will be discussed in more
detail later, has a mission to cultivate a culture of sustainability in Athletics by integrating
environmental and social values into internal operations, staff and student behavior, and sporting
events (Yale Athletics, 2010). Like general sustainability, sustainable athletics, seeks to integrate
the three dimensions. It also incorporates a spatial dimension to pursue the longevity of our
planet and Colgate community. Thus far, the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC), the
Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), and the
National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) have compiled reports including case studies
of collegiate athletic departments to demonstrate the feasibility of sustainable athletics. A few of
the peer institutions in these reports were involved in the research of our project, as they embody
role models for athletic departments everywhere.
Peer Institutions
In this project, we designated Bowdoin College, Middlebury College, Yale University,
and University of Pennsylvania as peer institutions. These institutions are similar to Colgate in
terms of population (student body and student-athlete body) size, affluence, and level of athletic
competition. Bowdoin, Middlebury, Yale, and UPenn already established an ethos of
sustainability within their athletics. Each institution not only practices sustainability within
individual actions, but also practices sustainability as a collective. All four institutions have some
form of “green team.” Yale University created the “Bulldog Sustainability” Team; Bowdoin
founded the “Green Athletics” organization; Middlebury elected a team of sustainability liaisons
from each sports team; and University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) established a university-wide
Eco-Reps program with representatives from the Athletics Department.
All of these “green teams” are organizations made up of both student-athletes (bottomup) and administrators/staff (top-down) that work together to promote sustainability within
athletics. The organizations are primarily driven by the student-athletes, and are then supported
and given assistance from the Athletic Departments and Offices of Sustainability. This top-down
and bottom-up approach, which meets in the middle, enables for a cultural shift towards
sustainable athletics via various projects and initiatives.
The most common sustainable projects and initiatives promoted by each institution’s
green team involve energy efficiency, waste reduction, and recycling. Yale’s Bulldog
Sustainability, for example, invests in reusable mugs instead of disposable cups. They also work
to upgrade recycling rates, by studying the ideal placement of recycling receptacles within
athletic facilities and at athletic events (Henly, 2013, p. 70). Bowdoin’s Green Athletics also
focuses their work on recycling and waste reduction. Recently, Green Athletics launched a
project working with each varsity team to help them implement various waste reduction practices
into their seasonal routines (Emese Gaal, personal communication, 2015). Not only does Green
Sustainable Athletics 6 Athletics challenge their fellow student-athletes to waste reduction, but challenges teams with
five specific actions, such as taking short showers and carpooling (Tim Ryan, personal
communication, 2015).
Bowdoin’s challenge for teams to perform specific sustainable actions have taken a more
structured form of “green certification programs” at other schools, such as Yale, Middlebury, and
UPenn. In 2011, Yale’s Bulldog Sustainability Team initiated the “Green Athletic Team
Certification” program. The team introduced a certification checklist to all sports teams,
including varsity, club, and intramural. The certification recognizes green efforts in
transportation, waste, water, energy, food, and community engagement (Henly, 2013, p. 71). A
spreadsheet of various green action items is given to the leaders of all sports teams. This
spreadsheet serves as a basic guideline and checklist for student-athletes in their performance of
sustainable action. If teams consistently complete more than eighteen green actions, they receive
Bulldog Sustainability recognition from the Athletic Department and Office of Sustainability
(Henly, 2013, p. 72). Green certification programs like Yale’s is currently being established at
Middlebury and UPenn as well.
Current Sustainability Within Colgate Athletics
The Athletics department has begun to incorporate some sustainable practices into
athletics facilities and activities, largely due to the effort of Colgate as a whole to become more
sustainable. The 2011 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan looked to implement sustainable
changes to two specific aspects regarding Colgate Athletics. One of these areas was the
conservation of energy in Sanford Field House through lighting upgrades, occupancy sensors,
and unoccupied hours setback in Sanford Field House (Colgate University, 2011, pp. 40-41). In
2013, the existing lighting fixtures in Sanford Field House were replaced with high output
fluorescent fixtures (Colgate University Office of Sustainability, 2014, p. 4). It is estimated that
this lighting change in Sanford reduces electricity consumption from 174 kW to 37 kW per year
and reduces the connected lighting load by 80% (Office of Sustainability, 2014, p. 4).
Another area that Colgate focused on in the 2011 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan
is water conservation on Tyler’s Field. Watering the artificial turf of Tyler’s Field for field
hockey practices uses approximately 210,000 gallons of water annually. Eliminating this
wasteful procedure for field hockey practice sessions would reduce the amount of annual water
usage by about 210,000 gallons). Implementation of this project has not yet been recorded
METHODS
Overview
In order to collect data related to sustainability and athletics, we conducted an interview
with stakeholders in Colgate’s athletic department, and created and distributed two electronic
surveys. The interview with the athletic stakeholders was designed after speaking with John
Pumilio about the basic relationship between the Athletics Department and the Office of
Sustainability. This interview also served as a guide for the creation of the two electronic
surveys, which were also based on reviewed literature from the Green Sports Alliance (GSA)
and Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) websites
and engagement with stakeholders at peer-institutions. We designed one survey to be
administered to student-athletes and one survey to be administered to the previously contacted
stakeholders at peer-institutions. The student-athlete survey provides us with information related
Sustainable Athletics 7 to the student-athletes’ perception of sustainability, which helps us formulate recommendations
that would be consistent with the trends in athletics. Some data was collected from our
conversations with peer-institutions, yet we decided that to collect a cohesive dataset from these
stakeholders, it would be advantageous to have individuals answer identical questions in a survey
format. The surveys allow us to collect meaningful quantitative and qualitative data from a
significant sample of the student-athlete population and from individuals at comparable schools.
Interview
The interview with Ann-Marie Guglieri, Senior Associate Athletics Director/Internal
Operations-SWA, and Jamie Mitchell, Assistant Athletic Director for Event Management and
Facilities was designed to provide us with information related to current sustainable practices
and past sustainable initiatives in Colgate Athletics. The interview was conducted on
Wednesday, March 4th in Ms. Guglieri’s office in the Huntington Gymnasium. We prepared a
series of questions related to sustainable athletics and, also, generated other questions throughout
the interview. The interview lasted 30 minutes, and both Ms. Guglieri and Mr. Mitchell provided
signed informed consent.
Surveys
Peer-Institution Survey
We distributed the peer-institution survey to four similar colleges and universities to
collect data on institutions that have sustainable athletics. After contacting stakeholders at these
institutions and collecting information for our research about successful sustainable athletics
initiatives, we created a survey to send to these stakeholders. We created this survey using the
guidance of an AASHE survey related to collegiate athletics programs. Mark McShery created
the AASHE survey and wrote a report using results from the questionnaire (McSherry, 2009,
pp.1-20). The survey focused on the current practices within athletics at a school, the perceived
future of sustainability in athletics at a school, and the successes and obstacles that are faced
when promoting sustainability in athletics. Unlike the student-athlete survey, we used the peerinstitution survey to create a matrix that illustrates the best practices at other colleges. We were
only able to distribute the survey to four schools; therefore the survey is more of a structured
interview rather than a survey designed to represent a greater population. The data collected from
the survey allowed us to cross-examine institutions similar to Colgate and direct our attention
towards the successful initiatives that trend across these colleges and universities. The survey
consisted of 17 questions and took roughly 10 minutes to complete. A list of the survey questions
and explanations of the format of the survey can be found in Appendix III.
Student-Athlete Survey
The student-athlete survey consisted of a series of questions that provided insight into the
understanding of sustainability among Colgate’s student-athletes, the sustainable practices with
which student-athletes are currently engaged, and the willingness of student-athletes to change
their actions in order to be more sustainable. With this data, we are able to gain an accurate
understanding of the current state of sustainability in athletics, specifically the social pillar of
sustainability, and identify plausible programmatic changes that will promote sustainability in
Colgate’s Division 1 athletics program. This survey was distributed to student-athletes with the
help of Ann-Marie Guglieri and Beth Holcomb, the Colgate Athletics Administrative Assistant
for Compliance. Every Division 1 athlete at Colgate received the link via email from Ms.
Sustainable Athletics 8 Holcomb and had equal opportunity to complete the survey. After 1 week, Ms. Holcomb emailed
the survey to student-athletes a second time in order to generate a greater number of responses.
The survey was open to student-athletes for 10 days (April 7th to April 17th). There are 609
student-athletes at Colgate and we intended to receive responses from at least 83 students in
order to achieve a confidence level of 90% with a margin or error of ±10%. The survey took 5
minutes to complete. A list of the survey questions and explanations of the format of the survey
can be found in Appendix II.
For data analysis, the first aspect of sustainability within athletics that we examined was
the actual sustainable behavior engagement for athletes and the relationship that that variable has
with potential sustainable behavior if promoted by the athletics department. We ran a chi-square
test of association using the data we obtained from questions five and six (Appendix II). We
transformed this data into two categories: current behavior engagement and behavioral
willingness. For question five, we assigned answers “always” and “frequently” with a value of 1,
indicating “high engagement”, the answer “sometimes” with a value of 2, indicating “moderate
engagement”, and “rarely” and “never” with a value of 3, indicating “low engagement”. We used
this process for question 5a, 5b, and 5c, because we determined that they were best fit to
represent the current level of sustainability in athletics. We excluded 5d and 5e because there are
external variables that make these practices less exclusive to athletics. For question six, we
assigned answers “strongly agree” and “agree” with a value of 1, indicating “high willingness”,
“neither agree nor disagree” with a value of 2, indicating “moderate willingness”, and “disagree”
and “strongly disagree” with a value of 3, indicating “low willingness”. Again, we used sub
questions 6a, 6b, and 6c, in order to stay consistent with question five. We then took the mean
for each respondent across questions 5a, 5b, and 5c, and again with 6a, 6b,and 6c. We assigned
means between 1 and 1.65 to a value of 1, indicating “aggregate high engagement or
willingness”, means between 1.66 and 2.32 to a value of 2, indicating “aggregate moderate
engagement or willingness”, and means between 2.33 and 3.00 to a value of 3, indicating
“aggregate low engagement or willingness”. For example, if an athlete response was recorded as
a 1 for 5a, a 2 for 5b, and a 1 for 5c, they would have a mean of 1.33, and receive an overall
engagement score of 1, or high engagement. We used a chi-square analysis to test the association
between the overall engagement variables (aggregate of 5a, 5b, and 5c) and the overall
willingness variables (aggregate of 6a, 6b, and 6c).
The results to the question “Have you ever taken an Environmental Studies course at
Colgate?” and the results to question nine were used to assess if taking an Environmental Studies
course influence student-athletes desire to see the Athletics Department change. For question
three, respondents either answered “yes” for a value of 1, or “no” for a value of 2. In Question 9,
student-athletes were asked to indicate their level of agreement to the following statement: I
would like to see the Athletics Department promote environmental sustainability more. We
assigned student-athletes who “strongly agree” and “agree” with a value of 1, “neither agree nor
disagree” with a value of 2, and “disagree” or “strongly disagree” with a value of 3.
In order to determine whether students were knowledgeable about their behaviors, we
performed a chi-square analysis of association between their behavioral engagement responses,
and their responses to question 4b, where they indicated their level of agreement to the
following: I, as a student-athlete, practice environmentally sustainable behaviors during my
athletic activities (competitions, traveling, practice, etc.). We assigned student-athletes who
“strongly agree” and “agree” with a value of 1, “neither agree nor disagree” with a value of 2,
and “disagree” or “strongly disagree” with a value of 3.
Sustainable Athletics 9 RESULTS
Interview
For the results of the interview with Ann-Marie Guglieri and Jamie Mitchell, we focused
on the improvements the Athletics Department has made since the Colgate Sustainability and
Climate Action Plan of 2011. Currently, “[a] big area for us is concessions at all football games,
all basketball games, and all hockey games, which are quite a few events every year. Everything
we do concession-wise, in terms of what the food is being put into and then where it is going
after they’re done, that stands out as a pretty big area for [sustainability] as well” (Ann-Marie
Guglieri, personal communication, March 4th, 2015). The department is aware of the many
unsustainable components of concessions, which create notable waste at events. Although the
changes thus far have been minimal, the department continues to work with the food supplier.
Ms. Guglieri and Mr. Mitchell also mentioned that plastic cup usage is another point of
consideration for sustainability within the department. They are aware that individual athletes
use multiple cups during training sessions because of consistent one-time use, adding up to each
member of a team throwing away numerous cups per practice. Some teams have taken to buying
water bottles for their athletes, but, overall, the Athletic Department continues to purchase cups
due to the health concerns that arise when water bottles are not cleaned properly or shared
between teammates.
The lighting systems in many of the outdoor facilities have been re-designed to be more
energy efficient. Prior to this shift, lights at these facilities were left on regardless of the fields’
scheduled usage. Now, the majority of the fields have lighting on computer timers or have
schedules to coordinate the usage of manually controlled lights. Specifically at the newly built
(2014) Beyer-Small ‘76 field, they were conscious of light spill that commonly occurs with the
poor placement of stadium lights, “When we built Beyer-Small, the lights that we used there are
highly technological. So, there’s not a lot of light spill. Because if you have a lot of light spill
then you have to have the lights on stronger, but what we have now is all the lights really
directed on the field, so you don’t lose a lot of excess” (Ann-Marie Guglieri, personal
communication, March 4th, 2015). The placement allows for effective management of energy
used to power the lights. There are also two modes associated with the lighting systems - high
and low - and the department is mindful of utilizing the high-mode only when completely
necessary. For lights in indoor facilities, the department has begun to make improvement to more
sustainable lighting. Similar to Stanford Field House, upgrades to more sustainable lighting in
Huntington Gym occurred in Spring 2015. The inclusion of turf on Beyer-Small ‘76 field instead
of grass was influenced by sustainability to reduce fertilizer use and mowing.
Ms. Guglieri and Mr. Mitchell reported that sustainability is higher on the list of priorities
for athletics than most people would think. However, specific decisions will be “high on the list,
if it’s cost effective… anything that we can afford, we absolutely do” (Ann-Marie Guglieri,
personal communication, March 4th, 2015). For example, they did a cost-benefit analysis on
sustainable paper towels to clean machines in Trudy Fitness Center, and unfortunately, the
expenses are too high for the athletic department to make a transition. Beyer-Small ‘76 mention
earlier, is a good example of a project that incorporated sustainability due to presence of a return
on investment and cost-effectiveness. The LED lights at Beyer-Small ‘76 will pay for themselves
in energy savings, and the turf will reduce water and chemical usage that is associated with the
management of grass. Also, Mr. Mitchell has noted that they are attempting to increase recycling
bins in athletic facilities.
Sustainable Athletics 10 Peer Institution Survey
Four stakeholders at peer-institutions completed the Peer-Institution Survey. These
individuals were the following: Julian Goresko, the Sustainability Outreach Manager at
University of Pennsylvania; Tim Ryan, the Director of Athletics at Bowdoin College; Barbara
Chesler, a Sustainability Professional and Senior Associate Athletics Director at Yale; Erin
Quinn, the Director of Athletics at Middlebury College.
The fourth question on the peer institutions survey asked stakeholders whether their
institution’s athletic program has a formal strategic sustainability plan. Both Bowdoin and Yale
reported that they have formal strategic sustainability plans in athletics. Mr. Ryan reported that,
at Bowdoin, the strategic sustainable athletics plan involves “supporting the College’s goal of
carbon neutrality by 2020 and have initiated an efficiency initiative challenge between our
athletic programs. The challenge provides goals for our teams to achieve in support of reducing
our impact on the environment.” Ms. Barbara Chesler reported that Yale has both short- and
long-term goals in its strategic sustainable athletics plan. The short term goals are to “increase
waste diversion at major sporting venues, especially Yale's football stadium, educate sports fans
about university recycling efforts, encourage low-carbon transportation to athletic events,
promote the sport-sustainability nexus as an area of academic research, grow paper towel
composting program in university gymnasium, increase participation in sneaker recycling and
athletic clothing donation programs, and institute public service announcements (PSAs) about
waste management and other environmental initiatives on game day.” While the long-term goals
are to “increase participation in and difficulty of Green Team Certification, reduce energy and
water use in all athletic facilities, transition from printed game programs to electronic programs,
explore lower-carbon transportation options to off-campus athletic facilities, and finalize a multiyear sustainability action plan for the Department of Athletics with oversight from the Office of
Sustainability.”
Table 1 highlights the commonalities between these institutions. Each school had some
form of green team, though UPenn does not consider their Eco-Rep program as a typical green
team. At UPenn, Eco-Reps is an institution-wide program with a sub-group that facilitates
sustainability within athletics called the Athletic Eco-Reps. Each of these universities have
successful bottom-up initiatives in athletics organized by student groups, and three out of four of
these institutions sees their green team as the most effective initiative for sustainable athletics at
their institution. This is not to say that the administration is uninvolved. Respondents from each
school reported that either the Athletic Director or other administrators from Athletics or
Sustainability were highly involved in the guidance of these student-led teams. Specifically, at
UPenn, the connection between the Athletic Department and the Office of Sustainability has
been made via the Associate Director of Facilities and Operations, as well as the Assistant
Swimming Coach/Gym Facilities Manager. These stakeholders are members of the campus-wide
Sustainability Committee. At Yale, the Associate Athletic Director is the member of the
university's committee as well. Bowdoin and Middlebury did not report that members of the
Athletic Department are not members of a campus-wide sustainability committee, however, they
stated that the Athletic Director is a primary driver of sustainable athletics.
At Bowdoin College, the Athletics Department has been tasked with creating a
competitive challenge between the different athletic teams. Within the competitive spirit of
athletics, Bowdoin believes that generating a sustainability competition would help athletics, as
well as the college, reach its sustainability goals. This embodies a bottom-up solution to greening
Sustainable Athletics 11 the department. Yale University has a similar program as Bowdoin. The department grants teams
Green Team Certification if they meet sustainability standards. Generating competition in
athletics is an effective way of translating sustainability into the athletic environment. The fact
that every institution sees student-athletes as a primary driver of sustainability in athletics further
speaks to the importance of a bottom-up approach.
Although there is a notable appreciation for sustainable athletics across these four
institutions, there are inevitable barriers to implementing certain initiatives. The results of
respondents ranking the significance of these various barriers are illustrated in Table 2. Two
institutions state that a lack of expertise was the greatest barrier to implementing many
sustainable projects. This response also speaks to the necessity of connections between the
Athletic Department and Office of Sustainability and the importance of student-athlete expertise.
The other two institutions reported that economic cost and distraction from the Athletic
Department’s main goal as their greatest barrier. The high ranking of economic cost is consistent
with the stress that Ms. Guglieri and Mr. Mitchell placed on cost effectiveness in our interview.
The high ranking of the distraction from the department's main goal further supports the
importance of student-led initiatives because most administrators too occupied with the primary
objectives of their job. The means of Table 2 indicate that distraction from the department’s main
goal and lack of sustainability expertise within Athletic Departments are seen as the primary
barriers to sustainable initiatives in this sample of institutions.
Table 1: Comparison of peer institutions. This table draws on results from the peer-institutions survey, looking at the
drivers of their successful programs.
Student-athletes
are drivers in
sustainable
athletics
(Yes/No)
The Athletic
Director is a
driver in
sustainable
athletics
(Yes/No)
How is your
green team
structured?
(Top-down,
Bottom-up, or
both)
Most effective
initiative for
sustainable
athletics
Bulldog
Sustainability
Team
Solar Panels on
Field House and
Hockey Arena
Yale
Yes
No
Top-Down and
Bottom-Up
Bowdoin
Yes
Yes
Bottom-Up
UPenn
Yes
No
No official team
Eco-Reps
Middlebury
Yes
Yes
Top-Down and
Bottom-Up
Green Liaisons
Sustainable Athletics 12 Table 2: Barriers experienced by peer institutions. This draws on results from the peer-institutions survey, looking
at the barriers to implementing initiatives. A value of one indicates that the respondent believes it is the greatest
barrier to sustainability, whereas a value of 5 indicates the respondent believes it is the least problematic barrier. The
mean for each specific barrier has been recorded in the table. The lower the value, the greater a barrier it is across
these four institutions.
Economic Cost
Return on
Investment
Distraction from
Department's
Main Goal
Lack of
Sustainability
Expertise within
Athletic Department
Keeping Up with
Standards
Total
Ranking of Barrier to Sustainability Initiatives
1
2
3
4
5
1
1
0
2
0
Barrier Strength
2.5
0
0
2
1
1
3.75
1
1
1
0
1
2.25
2
1
0
0
1
2.25
0
1
1
1
1
3.5
4
4
4
4
4
Student-Athlete Survey
One hundred (100) student-athletes completed the survey (response rate = 16% ).
The first aspect of sustainability within athletics that we examined was the current
sustainable behavioral engagement for athletes and the relationship that that variable has
with potential sustainable behavior if promoted by the athletics department. The results can
be seen in table 3. Overall, the association between student athletes’ responses for current
engagement in sustainable behaviors and willingness to engage in sustainable behaviors are
not statistically significantly (χ2 (4), n= 100) = 4.005, p=.405). Looking further into table 3,
we see that 94.1% of student athletes who have a high engagement currently have a high
willingness, which is expected. Interestingly though, 88.5% that have low engagement with
sustainable behaviors had high willingness to engage in behaviors if
promoted.
Sustainable Athletics 13 Table 3: Current behavioral engagement and willingness to change behavior if the Athletics Department were
to promote environmental sustainability more. These are the results of a chi-square analysis testing the
association between behavioral engagement, and their willingness to change.
Behavioral Intentions, if promoted
by the Athletics Department
% (n) High
Moderate
Low
Willingness
Willingness
Willingness
Behavioral
Engagements
Total
High Engagement
94.1% (32)
5.9% (2)
0.0% (0)
34
Moderate
Engagement
87.5% (35)
10.0% (4)
2.5% (1)
40
Low Engagement
88.5% (23)
3.8% (1)
7.7% (2)
26
Total (n)
90
7
3
100
Table 4: Taking and environmental studies course and wanting to see the Athletics Department promote
sustainability more. These are the results of a chi-square analysis testing the association between athletes who
have taken an environmental studies course, and their agreement with the statement “I would like to see the
Athletics Department promote environmental sustainability more.”
I would like to see the Athletics Department
promote sustainability more
% (n)
Taken an
Environmental
Studies Course
% (n)
Agree
Indifferent
Disagree
Total
Yes
70.4% (19)
29.6% (8)
0.0% (0)
27
No
85.7% (60)
12.9% (9)
1.4% (1)
70
Total
79
17
1
97
Next, we ran a chi-square analysis of association between those athletes that have taken
an environmental studies course and those that would like to see sustainability promoted to a
greater extent in the athletic department. The chi-square association was not statistically
significant (χ2 (2), n= 97) = .4077, p=.130). However, as seen in table 4, of the people who have
taken environmental studies classes, 70.4% agreed with the statement, and 29.6% were
indifferent. Of the student-athletes who have not taken an environmental studies class though,
85.7% agreed, that they will like to see sustainability promoted by the athletic department.
In order to determine whether students were knowledgeable about their behaviors, we
performed a chi-square analysis of association. The chi-square test between these two variables current behavioral engagement and a students belief that they are sustainable in their athletics
activities - was statistically significant (χ2 (4), n=100) =26.458, p<.0001). Of the student-athletes
Sustainable Athletics 14 who are currently highly engaged in sustainable behavior, 73.5% agreed that they were
sustainable in their athletics activities. There was no clear majority between those that had
moderate levels of engagement and beliefs regarding sustainability in athletic activities. As
expected there was a slight majority (57.7%) who had low levels of sustainable behavior
engagement and thus disagreed what the statement regarding engaging in sustainable behaviors
in athletics (Table 5).
Table 5: Current behavioral engagements and a student belief that they are sustainable in their athletics
activities. These are the results of a chi-square analysis testing the association between behavioral
engagement and their agreement with the statement “I am sustainable in my athletics activities.” There was a
significant association (χ2 (df 4, n=100)=26.458, p<.0001).
I am sustainable in my athletics activities
% (n) Behavioral
Engagements
% (n)
Agree
Indifferent
Disagree
Total
High Engagement
73.5% (25)
23.5% (8)
2.9% (1)
34
Moderate
Engagement
45.0% (18)
32.5% (13)
22.5% (9)
40
Low Engagement
26.9% (7)
14.5% (4)
57.7% (15)
26
Total
50
25
25
100
When student-athletes were asked “do you feel that as a student-athletes that you have a
responsibility to be a leader in sustainability?”, 58% responded that they did have a
responsibility. When asked to explain why they believed they have this responsibility, some
reported the following:
“Yes, we are leaders on campus and should carry that through to environmental
sustainability”
“The school puts a lot of resources into our athletics program, so we should give back by
trying to conserve water, electricity, etc.”
“As part of the athletic community, it is important to represent Colgate i[n] the best way
possible at everything. As leaders on this campus we should actively participate in being
sustainable that has helped the school that has provided us with so many opportunities”,
“Student-athletes represent Colgate in a variety of ways, and if this is one of the way
Colgate wants to be perceived, we should help promote environmental stewardship
amongst the community.”
We also asked student-athletes to provide suggestions for making Colgate Athletics more
environmentally sustainable, and here are some examples:
Sustainable Athletics 15 “I think reusable water bottles would be beneficial. Currently when we get our water we
get disposable cups to drink out of at practice and in the weight room. Additionally, I
don't know the details of the system but it may be that the washing process may be able to
become more environmentally sustainable. Along with that there are no light sensors in
the locker rooms like there are around campus, which may help to conserve energy”,
“I think a lot of the changes are going to have to come from the Athletic Administration. I
feel like student-athletes would totally be willing to follow more sustainable practices if
they were easy to adhere to. Since many sustainable practices involve changes in how we
design our buildings and what products we use in locker rooms, the training room, and
other facilities, it’s more in the hands of the administration. For example, we could put
solar panels on Reid/Huntington, make the new buildings LEED certified, get more
sustainable products for the training room, and urge student-athletes and coaches to
adhere to sustainable practices like only using Nalgenes for water, turning off lights, and
recycling after competitions.
“Provide recycling bins in every locker room and urge students to turn off the lights. It
would also be really great if the athletics department could provide reusable water
bottles for every student-athlete.”
“A big problem is our use of plastic water bottles. If we can find a way to supply water
for water bottles instead it would help a lot.”
DISCUSSION
Every component of our method provides us with results that we can use to further
sustainability within Colgate Athletics. First, the interview with Ms. Guglieri and Mr. Mitchell
provided us with the useful information to answer the portion of our research question pertaining
to current sustainable practices in athletics. Prior to this interview with these two stakeholders,
our background literature review of the Sustainability and Colgate Action Plan led us to believe
that sustainability was not a priority for Athletics. The most notable components of our
discussion surrounded the topics of cup usage and recycling bins. Another overarching theme
was the importance of cost-effectiveness.
In our conversation with Ms. Guglieri and Mr. Mitchell, we discussed the wastefulness of
plastic and paper cup usage in athletic activities. The suggestion of using reusable water bottles
instead of these cups during training sessions and games had been previously rejected for several
reasons. Ms. Guglieri explained that cups are more sanitary due to the limited spreading of
illness, which is an important because the health of student-athletes is a priority for the
department. Further, Ms. Guglieri noted that they struggled to find cost effective ways to avoid
plastic cup usage. In the past, the proposed alternatives were more eco-friendly cups, but the cost
was out of range. The use of reusable water bottles instead of cups would mitigate the waste and
cost all together. Ms. Guglieri informed us that the Athletic Department spends roughly $1,500
on plastic cups each year. The estimated cost of a reusable water bottle - taken from consultation
with the Colgate Swimming and Diving Coach - is roughly $3.00. The purchase of reusable
water bottles for each student-athlete (609 in total) at Colgate would cost $1,827; a $327 change
Sustainable Athletics 16 in expenses. Further, the price estimation is not scaled to any discount rate that Colgate would
acquire with a mass purchase. The distribution of these water bottles could be included with the
current process of handing out the “Colgate grey” work out clothing. Every first year and junior
get a new set of clothing, and at this point, they could receive the water bottles- which would
reduce the amount of spending per year. For the first year, it would be $1,827, and then for each
following year, it would be $913.50.
There were many indications of the key stakeholders beginning to make efforts for
sustainability. During the interview, Mr. Mitchell stated that he has made an individual effort to
reach out to John Pumilio about increasing the number of recycling bins in the athletic facilities.
Despite no final purchases being made to date, Mr. Mitchell discussed what he saw as a growing
importance of sustainability at Colgate, as well as within the Patriot League. As Assistant
Athletic Director for Events Management and Facilities, Mr. Mitchell highlighted the lack of
accessibility to adequate waste management, things that he began to see at Patriot League
conferences and other schools. He recognized that generous crowds of 800-1500 people per
game only have access to one receptacle for recycling. This awareness has caused Mr. Mitchell
to work with John Pumilio in increasing accessibility by purchasing more recycling bins to place
in the various facilities. Mr. Mitchell demonstrated that there is a willingness to make this shift,
however, bureaucratic procedures are impeding the process. Another area that both Ms. Guglieri
and Mr. Mitchell have been aware off possible changes is concessions at Colgate Athletics
events. The concessions make-up a large percentage of the Athletic Departments waste disposal
and after looking further into the situation Sodexo, the food supplier for Colgate athletics’
concessions has an expiring contract. The new contract for the 2015-2016 academic-year
provides an opportunity for Colgate Athletics to pursue more sustainable food management from
the provider.
The athletics department has already begun recognizing the need for sustainability within
the Division 1 Athletics program. Ms. Guglieri and Mr. Mitchell both showed signs of increased
involvement since the 2011 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan, and look forward to future
changes that could be made. This is a good sign for Colgate Athletics and sustainability. When
key stakeholders are on board with changes there is a greater chance that initiatives take place.
Besides the positivity toward sustainable decision-making, another important factor that we
uncovered was the cost-effectiveness of decisions. Taking this into account, we can determine
that there might not be enough communication between the athletics department and Office of
Sustainability. We saw that a few times the Athletics Department has looked into more
sustainable options, but how much do they know about sustainability to know about every
alternative? Further, are they thinking about sustainability in every purchase, or only the
purchases the department knows have sustainable alternatives? Here they could reach out to John
Pumilio more often to find out if there are alternatives that work within their budget. Or, a new
position could be created that specifically deals with these issues.
The Peer Institution Survey allowed us to examine universities and colleges similar to
Colgate that have successfully implemented sustainable athletics. This survey allowed us to see
what types of initiatives have been successful at peer institutions, and gave us ideas for our
recommendations, to be discussed later. The biggest highlight is the success of various types of
“Green Teams” or “Eco-reps”, that allow for direct student involvement with athletics
administration and Sustainability Offices. We see with the interview that there is already a small
dialogue open between the Office of Sustainability and Athletics department, but students are not
Sustainable Athletics 17 involved yet. From here, student perceptions are the biggest key in understanding if a “Green
Team” is right for Colgate.
Assessing the feasibility of further integrating sustainable practices into the athletic
department is largely contingent on current student-athlete knowledge and behaviors. We found
that there was no significant association between current sustainable behavioral engagement and
behavioral willingness if the athletics department promotes sustainability. Yet there were high
percentages of athletes who would engage in sustainable behaviors if promoted by the athletic
department. From this result, we can conclude that if the athletics department further integrated
sustainable practices into Colgate’s Division 1 Athletics Program, the student athletes would
make changes to their everyday practices to support it. Interestingly, student athletes who are
predisposed to participating in sustainable practices are not the only students who would further
their sustainability for the department. Even current athletes who are not as sustainable would be
willing to take part in a programmatic shift within the department. Further, the lack of
association seen between taking an environmental course and wanting sustainability to be
promoted by the athletic department suggests that even student-athletes, who might have no
particular interest in or knowledge of environmental studies, would generally support
programmatic changes in the athletics department.
We found that there is a highly statistical significance between current behavior
engagements, and an athlete's belief that they are sustainable in their athletics activities. This is
imperative to our research, because it validates that student athletes can accurately assess their
engagement with sustainable practices. This validation further strengthens our conclusions that
student led initiatives can be effective. Students have demonstrated that they are capable of being
sustainable in their athletics activities, and that they are aware of effects of their behaviors. If
they are correctly aware of the effects of their behaviors, they can thus have a good indication of
the levels of improvement they can make. Student-athletes have the knowledge and willingness
to be more sustainable, however, there needs to be more opportunities for them to pursue
sustainable actions.
A majority of student-athletes responded positively to having a responsibility to be a
leader in sustainability as a student-athlete. In explanations of this feeling of responsibility,
respondents discussed their role as leaders on campus, which requires them to set examples for
the general student body. Further, student-athletes indicated a desire to represent Colgate in a
favorable way beyond their athletic activities. These responses reflect the high willingness of
student-athletes to alter their behavior for the furthering of sustainable athletics.
Athletes also discussed a need for reusable water bottles to avoid the waste associated
with the cup usage during athletic activities as well as the need for more recycling bins around
the athletics facilities to enable sustainable waste manage. The suggestions from these studentathletes demonstrated knowledge of sustainability, recognition of possible improvements of
sustainability, and a desire for the athletics department to provide opportunities for sustainable
practices.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Sustainable practices in athletics are proven to be essential in the development and
advancement of a campus-wide ethos of environmental sustainability. From our research, we
found that there is a great willingness from all Colgate Athletic stakeholders to integrate
sustainable practices into their athletic activities. We also determined which sustainable practices
Sustainable Athletics 18 are the most feasible to integrate into the athletic activities of Colgate student-athletes and
administrators, and the extent to which we can integrate them. We have several
recommendations for programmatic sustainable changes that we believe will be effective and
realistic for the Colgate Athletics department to implement.
Most imperatively, we recommend that the Athletic Department create some type of
“green team,” whether it is in the form of an organization, council, or club. We advise that this
green team adopts both a top-down and bottom-up approach and consists of constituents from
both the Athletics Department and Office of Sustainability. We advocate for all student-athletes
to be members of this green team and be leaders in promoting and performing its sustainable
initiatives. The effectiveness of our following recommendations relies heavily on the
implementation of this green team.
We also recommend the addition of better waste management practices. The reduction of
waste can be influenced by the number of recycling bins and proximity of those bins to regular
garbage cans in all locker rooms, main foyers at athletic centers, in the stands and around outside
fields. A decrease in waste can also occur at practices by providing one or two reusable water
bottles to every student athlete per year. Responsibility for the sanitation of these departmentsupplied water bottles can either fall on the student-athletes themselves or the Athletic Training
Staff. Further, we can aim to reduce waste from travel competitions by working with travel
companies to create a system of waste and recycling removal from the buses, or encourage
coaches to stop and allow student-athletes to refill the water bottles they were given. Other ways
that Colgate Athletics can become more sustainable is conserving energy by the addition of
automatic lights to newly built locker rooms in the new arena, as well as updating older locker
rooms with motion detectors.
So, how can we make sure student-athletes are responding to, and are knowledgeable of,
these changes? The green team will be in charge of facilitating, implementing, and promoting
these changes throughout both the student-athletes and the members of the Colgate community
who participate in athletic events. With the guidance of administrative advisors, an effectively
organized green team could maintain constant improvement of sustainable athletics.
Sustainable Athletics 19 REFERENCES
Colgate University. (2011). Colgate’s University’s sustainability and climate action plan.
Retrieved from Colgate University website: http://www.colgate.edu/docs/defaultsource/d_distincitly-colgate_sustainability_climate-action-planning/download-thecomplete-report.pdf?sfvrsn=0
Henly, A. (2013). Collegiate Game Changers Report: How campus sport is going green.
Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) website http://www.
nrdc.org/greenbusiness/guides/sports/files/collegiate-game-changers-report.pdf
Kates, R.W., Parris, T.M. & Leiserowitz, A.A. (2005). What is sustainable development: Goals,
indicators, values, and practices. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable
Development, 47 (3), 8-21
McSherry, M. (2009). Collegiate Athletic Department Sustainability Survey Report. Retrieved
from Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE)
website http://www.aashe.org/files/documents/resources/2009-Collegiate-AthleticDepartment-Sustainability-Survey.pdf
Sharp, L. (2009). Higher education: The quest for the sustainable campus. Sustainability:
Science, Practice, & Policy, 5(1) Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1428638887?accountid=10207
Middlebury University. (n.d.). Sustainability. Retrieved from Middlebury University website
http://athletics.middlebury.edu/information/sustainability
Theis, T. & Tomkin, J. (2012). Sustainability: A Comprehensive Foundation. Houston, TX: Rice
University. Retrieved from http://www.earth.illinios.edu/documents/coll13251.38.pdf
Yale Athletics. (2010). Yale’s Bulldog Sustainability. Retrieved from Yale Athletics website:
http://www.yalebulldogs.com/sustainability/index
Sustainable Athletics 20 APPENDIX
Appendix I: Metrics Diagram
Sustainable Athletics 21 Appendix II: Student-Athlete Survey
1. What Division 1 sport do you play at Colgate? (Respondents chose from a list of all Colgate
Division 1 Sports or selected “Other”).
2. What is your graduation year? (Respondents selected 2015, 2016, 2017, or 2018)
3. Have you ever taken an Environmental Studies course at Colgate? (Respondents selected
“Yes” or “No”)
4. Please indicate your level of agreement and disagreement with the following statements:
(Respondents selected level of agreement along a 1 to 5 scale from “Strongly Agree” to
“Strongly Disagree”)
a. Colgate’s athletic department is not as environmentally sustainable as Colgate’s campus
as a whole.
b. I, as a student-athlete, practice environmentally sustainable behaviors during my athletic
activities (competitions, traveling, practice, etc.)
c. I believe it is easier to be more environmentally sustainable outside of my athletics
activities compared to within my athletic activities
5. Please indicate the extent to which you currently... (Respondents selected level of engagement
along a 1 to 5 scale from “Always” to “Never”)
a. Turn off lights in the locker room to conserve energy
b. Use reusable water bottles rather than plastic bottles/cups to reduce waste
c. Recycle items from the bus after away trips to reduce waste
d. Take showers of less than five minutes to conserve water
e. Walk or carpool to practice to reduce my carbon footprint
6. If promoted by the athletics department, whenever possible, I am willing to… (Respondents
selected level of agreement along a 1 to 5 scale from “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly Disagree”)
a. Turn off lights in the locker room to conserve energy
b. Use reusable water bottles rather than plastic bottles/cups to reduce waste
c. Recycle items from the bus after away trips to reduce waste
d. Take showers of less than five minutes to conserve water
e. Walk or carpool to practice to reduce my carbon footprint
7. Please indicate the extent to which you participate in environmentally sustainable behaviors
outside of athletics in the following locations: (Respondents selected level of engagement along a
1 to 5 scale from “Always” to “Never”)
a. In my residence
b. In my classrooms
c. In the library
d. In dining halls
8. Do you feel that, as a student-athlete, you have a responsibility to be a leader in sustainability?
(Respondents selected “Yes” or “No”, and were provided a text box to explain their reasoning)
a. Yes (If yes, why?)
Sustainable Athletics 22 b. No (if no, why?)
9. I would like to see the athletics department promote environmental sustainability more.
(Respondents selected level of agreement along a 1 to 5 scale from “Strongly Agree” to
“Strongly Disagree”)
10. Do you have any suggestions for making Colgate athletics more environmentally
sustainable? (Respondents were provided a text box to make suggestions)
Sustainable Athletics 23 Appendix III: Peer Institution Survey
1. What is the name of your college or university? (Respondents were provided a textbox to
record their answer)
2. What is your position at this college or university? (Respondents were provided a text box to
record their answer)
3. Please indicate how your athletic department is prioritizing environmental sustainability:
(Respondents selected level of priority along a 1 to 5 scale from “High” to “Low”)
4. Does your athletic program have a formal strategic sustainability plan with short-term and
long-term objectives? (Respondents chose yes or no)
4b. Please briefly indicate specific short- or long-term goals that your athletic department has
committed to. (If respondents chose yes in 4. they were provided a text box to answer this
question)
5. Who is/are the main drivers of sustainability in your athletic program? (Respondents were told
to check all of the 7 options that applied: Athletics Director, Athletics Department Facilities,
Event Operation, Office of Sustainability, A team of Athletics and Campus Management,
Student-athletes, and other)
6. Looking to the future, how do you see the emphasis on environmental programs in Athletics
changing? (Respondents selected level of significance along a 1 to 5 scale from “Increasing” to
“Decreasing” significantly)
7. How would you generally describe the perspective of the key decision makers
(administration/highest positions) in the Athletic Department towards environmental initiatives?
(Respondents selected level of perspective along a 1 to 5 scale from “Very Positive” to “Very
Negative”)
8. Have you seen any increase in your fans’ environmental consciousness/performance due to
sustainability initiatives that you have implemented? (Respondents selected level of change
along a 1 to 5 scale from “Significantly Increased” to “Significantly Decreased”)
9. Have you seen any increase in the student-athlete’s environmental consciousness/performance
due to sustainability initiatives that you have implemented? (Respondents selected level of
change along a 1 to 5 scale from “Significantly Increased” to “Significantly Decreased”)
10. How do the key-decision makers in Athletics rate the importance of student-athlete
engagement in the department’s environmental programs?(Respondents selected level of
importance along a 1 to 4 scale from “Critically Important” to “Not Important”, with a 5th
point of “Do Not Know”)
11. Please rank the following barriers to implementing an environmental sustainability program,
plan, or initiative at your institution, where 1 = greatest barrier and 5 = weakest barrier.
(Respondents were given the following possible barriers to rank: Economic Cost, Return on
Sustainable Athletics 24 Investment, Distraction from Department’s Main Goal, Lack of Sustainably Expertise within
Athletic Department, Keeping Up with Standards, and other)
12. Please indicate the level of emphasis that is placed on each of the following within the
athletics department and program. (Respondents were given a scale of “Very High” to “Very
Low” with an option for none, to determine the emphasis on: Energy Conservation, Energy
Efficiency, Alternative Energy, Green Buildings and Facilities, Recycling within Offices,
Recycling at Events, Water Conservation, Green Cleaning, Green Turf Management,
Transportation, Student Volunteer Work, Environmental Education for Employees, Promotion of
Sustainability through Sponsors and Advertisers, and three “other” options where they could
input their own initiative)
13a. Please indicate the extent to which you have implemented the following recycling initiatives
within the Athletic Department: (Respondents were given the options “Extensive”, “Moderate”,
“Minimal” and “None” to describe their implementation levels of the following recycling
initiatives: Office Training- Bottles and Cans / White Paper / Cardboard, Events- Packaging and
Cardboard / Commentator Announcements Promoting Recycling Initiatives/ Collection of Waste
and Recycling During Events)
13b.Please indicate the extent that you are using any of the following operation initiatives within
the Athletic Department facilities: (Respondents were given the options “Extensive”,
“Moderate”, “Minimal” and “None” to describe their implementation levels of the following
operations initiatives: Events- Food Composting, and Green Turf Management Practices)
14. Please describe what you consider to be your most innovative or effective environmental
initiative within athletics: (Respondents were given a text box to record their answer)
15. Have you formed an environmental or green team in the athletic department? (Respondents
answered “Yes” or “No”)
15b.How is this environmental or green team structured? (If respondents answered yes to the
previous question, they were given this question with the following options: Bottom-up (student
led), Top-down (administration led), Both bottom-up and top-down (students and administrators
meet in the middle to work together)
16. Is there a representative from the Athletic Department who is a member of your college or
university’s campus-wide environmental or sustainability committee? (Respondents answered
“Yes” or “No”)
16b.What position does this person(s) hold in the Athletic Department? (If the respondents
answered yes to the previous question, they were given a text box to record their answer to this
follow up)
17. If you have any additional comments that you would like to share with us, please do so here:
(Respondents were given a text box to record their answer)
Sustainable Athletics 25