Books by Brian Kermath
It has been estimated that 369,000 species of flowering plants are known to science (RBG Kew 2016... more It has been estimated that 369,000 species of flowering plants are known to science (RBG Kew 2016) and that the planet harbors somewhere between 400,000 (Gaston 2010) and perhaps 450,000 (Pimm and Joppa 2015) species of flowering plants total. Between 30,000 and 50,000 plants may be edible in some form to people (SEB n.d.; FAO 1985). Of these edible species, estimates of the numbers that have been used as food by people somewhere at some time range from 7,000 (FAO n.d.) to 12,000 (Kunkel 1984). Perhaps 3,000 (Shand 2005) to 6,000 (Chweya and Mnzava 1997) taxa of plants are still harvested with some regularity for use as food or in food products worldwide.
Yet despite this vast endowment of edible plants, relatively few species have come to dominate human diets. For example, Myers (1984) reported that 7 crops provide 75% of human nutrition, Robert and Christine Prescott-Allen (1990) found that 103 species account for 90% of the global food supply, and Padulosi and Pignone (1997) documented only 150 commercialized species of edible plants around the world. Elusive though the exact number of how many edible plants exist and how many dominate in providing human nutrition, it is easy to identify a list of the principle crops including: sugarcane, maize, rice, wheat, potatoes, soybeans, beets, cassava (manioc), tomatoes, bananas/plantains, citrus, barley, watermelons, sweet potatoes, onions, apples, grapes, cabbage and other leafy brassicas, cucumbers and gherkins, rapeseed (for oil), yams, sorghum, coconuts, eggplant, beans, cottonseed (for oil), mangoes, peanuts, sunflower seed, peppers (Capsicum), melons, peas, millet, pears, lettuce, squash, garlic, spinach and oats.
Although it might be nice to have precise numbers relating to specific questions with well-defined criteria in addressing the question of “how many plants feed the world,” the real value in this discussion is the knowledge that the diets of most contemporary people are not as diverse as they could be and not as diverse as perhaps they should be for optimal nutrition, culinary interest, gastronomic enjoyment, food security and the overall sustainability of food systems. Despite recent food movements (e.g., “slow food” and “local food”), as a society, we ask few probing questions about the foods we eat, we know little about where and how they are grown and processed, we are largely incapable of identifying food plant origins, we are disconnected from the importance of the wild relatives of our favorite foods that help maintain healthy crops, and we wonder little about how many desirable edible plants we might be missing. In general, we demand only that our food satisfies our palates (which is easily done with fat, sugar and salt), curbs hunger and provides basic nutrients and calories.
The hope for this dictionary is to help draw attention to the potential of the tremendous diversity of food plants in the Americas by documenting their origins, uses and common names. We do not contend that all of the plants presented have commercial potential, but merely that nature’s food pantry is wide, deep and scarcely appreciated.
Contained in 3,990 entries the compendium includes:
• More than 4,100 taxa, mostly at the species level, with some subspecies, hybrids and varieties;
• 6,854 Latin names including synonyms;
• More than 31,000 common names primarily in English, Portuguese and Spanish, with some from French-speaking areas and Suriname, as well as many from indigenous languages.
Common names in indigenous languages generally are listed under the dominant language of the region with the native language in parentheses. Many of the native names are spelled phonetically.
Information has been derived from extensive fieldwork by the authors along with consulting 2,325 secondary references. The entries are organized by genus and species. The status of the Latin names follows The Plant List and Tropicos from the Missouri Botanical Garden (MBG-Tropicos).
Teaching Resources by Brian Kermath
Sustainability represents a societal condition where people live quality lives in good communitie... more Sustainability represents a societal condition where people live quality lives in good communities on healthy landscapes, meeting their needs in ways that permit other people everywhere to do the same into the distant future (adapted from WCED 1987). Sustainable communities are nurturing places where people prosper and cultures thrive; they maintain capital stocks including environmental services and natural capital; they are characterized by a diversity of ideas, economic activities, and landscapes; they ensure access to natural and social resources, and they achieve social justice in seeking equity, while maintaining freedom and opportunities.
The sustainability path involves the merging of the historically distinct and often conflicting goals of development and nature conservation, which requires that societies work to:
• create opportunities where people may realize their full potentials, find productive livelihoods, and prosper according to broad-based quality of life measures;
• protect and enhance human health and encourage wellness;
• restore and preserve nature's life-support systems including its evolutionary potential;
• enjoy the benefits of natural capital while fully accounting for their costs in order to encourage market mechanisms to maintain stocks for future generations;
• achieve social justice and strive for equity;
• construct resilient, livable communities
• guarantee that basic human needs are met for all members of society.
The path to sustainability depends on appropriate institutions, policies, strategies, collaborations, and technologies that are governed effectively in a just transition that moves society toward the proper state in a process of continuous improvement. The ideal consists of the simultaneous establishment of two spatially and temporally essential and universal conditions — maintaining ecological integrity and social justice — in realizing effective development and conservation goals. Development must be measured broadly focusing on quality of life and ensuring the attainment of basic human needs. Other criteria must also work properly for initiatives to succeed from sustainability’s multiple dimensions the social, cultural, economic, and political/governance realms, among others.
The important symbolism of the double helix of DNA is rather straight forward and represents reasonable approaches to thinking about sustainability.
If one accepts that we are in a state of unsustainability, and if the “sustainable world” exists on another plane from where we are today, then we need to move society to that better place. Two simple analogies serve to illustrate the transition. First, imagine that we are in a hole that we must climb out of to reach the sustainable world plane. To do so, we build a ladder with two rails, one representing the natural dimension and the other the human dimension. The natural rail becomes nature conservation and the human rail becomes development. The rungs become the many parts of society that must operate properly to advance sustainability objectives to the desired ends. These may be subsets of the larger whole such as the political, economic, cultural and social, or functional parts such as institutions, education, and collaborations, or process related parts like energy, resiliency, and technology.
The second analogy is similar: imagine that we are approaching a chasm that we must pass over to find the sustainability plane. To cross safely we need a bridge, where the two parallel beams provide the support over the chasm from one rim to the other. Similar to the rails of the ladder, these long beams represent conservation and development. The smaller ties that connect the cross beams together, like the rungs on the ladder, represent the many elements of society that must be organized and managed to properly support sustainable activities.
In reality, the move from the unsustainable plane to the sustainable plane is not a simple step, but rather a transition. This transition is represented by the process of twisting the ladder or the bridge to produce the double helix. The twisting further represents the complex interplay between the natural and human dimensions that characterizes our multifaceted world. At this point, the model takes on additional meaning representing the essential elements that must become deeply embedded into society’s collective wisdom in order to achieve sustainability. Another feature of the model is that it is open-ended on both ends permitting the inclusion of an ever expanding chain of elements that are integral to the transition process and durability.
To understand sustainability sufficiently enough for meaningful analysis and successful real-worl... more To understand sustainability sufficiently enough for meaningful analysis and successful real-world implementation, it is essential to make sense of its abstractness, complexities, holistic nature, and multiple dimensions. Here, I offer a generalized Earth Systems Model that depicts the planet's dominant systems and processes, some of the system complexities that challenge our understanding and practice, and some of the possible negative and positive drivers and outcomes.
Websites by Brian Kermath
Why teach sustainability?
'Sustainability implies that the critical activities of a higher edu... more Why teach sustainability?
'Sustainability implies that the critical activities of a higher education institution are (at a minimum)
conducive to quality lives for people today and into the distant future. A truly sustainable college or university would emphasize these concepts in its curriculum and research, preparing students to contribute as citizens to an environmentally sound and socially just society. The institution would function as a sustainable community itself, embodying responsible consumption of resources, treating its diverse members with respect, and supporting these values in the surrounding community.'
– Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future
A central goal of a liberal arts education is to broadly train students so that they may become responsible citizens who can understand and respond to the complex issues that they face. Sustainability represents a complex, interconnected and ever-changing set of issues, and the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh has adopted it as an Essential Learning Outcome in its new general education program, the University Studies Program.
The sustainability concept grew out of concerns that post-World War II development efforts were falling short on two fronts: 1) although they were contributing to economic growth, they were performing poorly in improving human welfare in many regions; 2) they were depleting resources faster than they could be renewed or substituted, degrading the environment in many places, pushing global biogeochemical thresholds in unprecedented ways, and undermining ambitious nature conservation efforts.
In this context, sustainability represents the merging of conservation and development goals for the long-term health of human societies and Earth’s life-giving processes that support them. Sustainability is now widely accepted as the way forward by governments, businesses, educational institutions, NGOs, communities, and individuals worldwide.
Below are some resources that may be of value as you begin incorporating sustainability ideas into your courses. These resources are part of a Sustainability Reference Database that contains academic and popular articles, books, reports, videos, links, and other resources related to sustainability.
Papers by Brian Kermath
This FAQs sheet was written initially in support of the Florida Native Landscape Project at Stets... more This FAQs sheet was written initially in support of the Florida Native Landscape Project at Stetson University in DeLand, Florida (see Kermath 1999, 2008). The project was first funded in 1995 and planting began in 1998. In 2000, the project received an award from the Florida Native Plant Society. I conceived of the project in the context of the role that urban landscaping plays in biodiversity conservation, specifically in how it serves as a pathway for the introduction of exotic species into natural areas and how it reflects and may affect cultural values. The idea was that by converting key landscapes in highly visible places to sustainable native landscapes that reflect a deep appreciation and concern for natural heritage, perhaps a desirable change in worldviews would follow (See Kermath 2008). The FAQs sheet was developed in response to questions that came up over time from the earliest days of conception through early development and implementation. The first draft was printed...
It has been estimated that the planet harbors up to 400,000 species of plants (Gaston 2010). The ... more It has been estimated that the planet harbors up to 400,000 species of plants (Gaston 2010). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations suggests that 50,000 of these plants are edible by people (FAO 1985). The Society for Economic Botany (n.d.) puts the number at 30,000. Of these, 7,000 (FAO n.d.) to over 12,000 (Kunkel 1984) have been used as food by people somewhere at some time. Perhaps 3,000 are still harvested with some regularity for use as food (Shand 2005). Yet despite this vast endowment of edible plants, relatively few species dominate human diets. Myers (1984) reported that 7 crops provide 75% of human nutrition. Robert and Christine Prescott-Allen (1990) concluded that 103 species account for 90% of the global food supply. Elusive though the exact number may be, it is fairly easy to identify most of the dominant crops including: maize, wheat, rice, potatoes, cassava, soybeans, sweet potatoes, sugarcane, citrus, apples, tomatoes, sorghum, yams, bananas, p...
This FAQs sheet was written initially in support of the Florida Native Landscape Project at Stets... more This FAQs sheet was written initially in support of the Florida Native Landscape Project at Stetson University in DeLand, Florida (see Kermath 1999, 2008). The project was first funded in 1995 and planting began in 1998. In 2000, the project received an award from the Florida Native Plant Society.
I conceived of the project in the context of the role that urban landscaping plays in biodiversity conservation, specifically in how it serves as a pathway for the introduction of exotic species into natural areas and how it reflects and may affect cultural values. The idea was that by converting key landscapes in highly visible places to sustainable native landscapes that reflect a deep appreciation and concern for natural heritage, perhaps a desirable change in worldviews would follow (See Kermath 2008).
The FAQs sheet was developed in response to questions that came up over time from the earliest days of conception through early development and implementation. The first draft was printed in 1997 and a series of updates followed.
Although I hold the opinion that “working landscapes” that produce food or environmental services are the most desirable landscaping practices for developed lands, I also recognize that many people, institutions and organizations still prefer more conventional landscaping designs. For these more conventional approaches, I recommend considering sustainable native landscapes over landscapes that emphasize exotic species, mowed turf, and artificial chemical management and to blur the lines between 'working' landscapes and aesthetic landscapes by planting native plants that also 'work' such as with edible native plants.
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Jan 1, 2007
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to illustrate that campus and urban landscaping has import... more Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to illustrate that campus and urban landscaping has important connections to biodiversity conservation, perceptions of natural heritage, sense-of-place, ecological literacy and the role of campus landscapes in the larger community. It also aims to show how campus landscapes express values and perform as a teaching, research and outreach resource.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper was written as a literature review applied to a case study. Drawing on E.O. Wilson's idea that society must assign the same value to natural heritage as it does cultural heritage to successfully safeguard biodiversity for the long haul, the paper argues that by altering key elements of human landscapes in strategic places – campus landscapes in this case – to reflect a deep appreciation of natural heritage, we can help shift worldviews to foster real sustainability. It also raises a set of questions based on popular perceptions and some challenges based on the broad literature, then shows how the case study performed in addressing the questions and meeting the challenges.
Findings – Stetson University's project helped push the campus' nascent green movement beyond the remedial and reactive approaches too often seen in most regions to a proactive, holistic campaign.
Practical implications – The paper should inspire other campuses and organizations to proactively manage landscapes for natural heritage education, biodiversity conservation, and sustainability, just as the featured case study has done in its larger community.
Originality/value – In the world of campus sustainability, biodiversity often takes a backseat to energy use, resource consumption and waste management. The paper calls attention to this shortcoming and in so doing hopefully will encourage research and applied projects to address the biodiversity crisis and the role that universities play.
Annals of Tourism Research, Jan 1, 1992
While a rich body of literature focuses on the dual nature of Third-World economies, a scarcity o... more While a rich body of literature focuses on the dual nature of Third-World economies, a scarcity of research on duality within a tourism context exists. This article models formal and informal sector development within the resort of Sosúa, Dominican Republic. The authors illustrate the spatial dynamics of the two sectors as the resort evolves. Results of this analysis demonstrate that the tourism-related informal sector contracts as the tourism-related formal sector expands. Moreover, the research indicates that displaced informal sector individuals are not likely to be absorbed into the expanding formal economy. The investigation also helps fill a research gap by combining general theories of development with those of tourism.
Journal of Geography, 91(5):219-225., May 1, 1992
Since the early 1970s, the growing attraction of beaches has led to a proliferation of seaside re... more Since the early 1970s, the growing attraction of beaches has led to a proliferation of seaside resorts along the Atlantic and Caribbean shores of the Dominican Republic. The distribution of beach resorts reflects a combination of quality and quantity of natural resources, proximity of urban centers and/or airports, and intensity of development efforts exerted by private entrepreneurs and/or government agencies. Both domestic and international tourism are responsible for beachfront urbanization in the Dominican Republic. At least five discrete types of coastal resorts may be identified: 1) the urban balneario, 2) the domestic destination resort, 3) the “integrated” domestic/international destination resort, 4) the “interactive” enclave resort, and 5) the “self-contained” enclave resort. Each of these resort types is characterized by a particular tourist clientele and a distinctive urban morphologic pattern. Although overlap between types may occasionally blur the distinctions, this typology is presented to better understand evolving touristic landscapes. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00221349208979846#preview
Since the early 1970s, the growing attraction of beaches has led to a proliferation of seaside re... more Since the early 1970s, the growing attraction of beaches has led to a proliferation of seaside resorts along the Atlantic and Caribbean shores of the Dominican Republic. The distribution of beach resorts reflects a combination of quality and quantity of natural resources, proximity of urban centers and/or airports, and intensity of development efforts exerted by private entrepreneurs and/or government agencies. Both domestic and international tourism are responsible for beachfront urbanization in the Dominican Republic. At least five discrete types of coastal resorts may be identified: 1) the urban balneario, 2) the domestic destination resort, 3) the "integrated" domestic/international destination resort, 4) the "interactive" enclave resort, and 5) the "self-contained" enclave resort. Each of these resort types is characterized by a particular tourist clientele and a distinctive urban morphologic pattern. Although overlap between types may occasionally blur the distinctions, this typology is presented to better understand evolving touristic landscapes.
Yearbook, Conference of Latin Americanist Geographers, 1994
Antecedents of resort tourism in the Dominican Republic are traced to the late 1940s, during the ... more Antecedents of resort tourism in the Dominican Republic are traced to the late 1940s, during the regime of Rafael Trujillo. Feasibility studies conducted during the late 1960s defined alpine and coastal regions with high potential for both domestic and international tourism development. Tourist capacity growth, unprecedented in the Caribbean, took place between 1970 and 1992 due to favorable interest rates on loans and government supported investment incentives. By the early 1990s the Dominican Republic achieves the highest physical carrying capacity in the Caribbean. Presently, the tourism service sector is recognized as the nation's third largest employer, after agriculture and manufacturing in industrial free zones.
Journal of Cultural …, Jan 1, 1992
Within the informal sector, legitimate services are provided by itinerant and semi-stationary ven... more Within the informal sector, legitimate services are provided by itinerant and semi-stationary vendors peddling items ranging from traditionally prepared food and beverages to locally manufactured folk handicrafts and souvenirs. In contrast, officious services are often rendered by the ubiquitous guides, money changers, personal secretaries, “beach boys.“ and prostitutes who cruise the streets and pathways of coastal resorts. Undesirable goods, include items made from endangered or exotic marine life forms, natural karst formations, and the sale of illicit if not illegal narcotics and drugs. Formal tourist development lends to manifest itself in three distinct forms: l) self-contained enclaves: 2) semi-insular/interactive enclaves; and 3) integrated domestic-international resorts. The luxury class enclave resort is highly restrictive, tolerating practically no participation by the informal sector. In contrast, the semi-insular resort model promoted by the Dominican government advocates controlled access via small concessions on the resort fringe away from beaches and hotels, yet within the tourist's reach. Finally, integrated domestic-international destination seaside resorts are characterized by the colorful and increasingly competitive participation between and among formal and informal sectors. Integration in this dynamic resort type may range from co-existence and non-interference, to semi-formalization. control, and ultimately the eradication of the informal sector.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08873639209478410
Ecotourism and Resource Conservation, Jan 1, 1991
Grants by Brian Kermath
According to a number of basic economic indicators, the policies that followed the signing of the... more According to a number of basic economic indicators, the policies that followed the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) by Canada, Mexico, and the United States in 1992 appear to have boosted Mexico’s economy. Yet, despite its recent successes, Mexico is plagued by development challenges. Its income distribution is among the world’s worst, a steady stream of migrants from the countryside continue to flood Mexico’s larger cities and the U.S., thereby causing urban and foreign relations challenges, its forests are being depleted, its water resources are being degraded, and its rich biodiversity is seriously threatened.
Unfortunately, these trends are likely to continue unless Mexico succeeds at forging sustainable, land-based livelihoods in underprivileged regions, especially those with large percentages of indigenous people. In 1996, Mexico amended its environmental legislation (LGEEPA) making sustainable development a national priority. Later, under the U.S./Mexico Partnership for Prosperity, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox committed an action plan to promote economic development in the parts of Mexico where growth has lagged and fueled migration.
This partnership between the Global Environmental Management Education Center (GEM) at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point (UWSP), the Oaxacan based NGO Estudios Rurales y Asesoría Campesina (ERA), the Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM, or Monterrey Tech), and the Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo (UACh) was conceived in response to the above challenge and to the USAID Mexico Country Plan’s focus areas #1) Economic growth (including natural resource management) and #4) Educational exchange and scholarships. The partnership specifically addresses the TIES II focus area III (Environment) program area 2 (Community Based Watershed Management) in recognizing the importance of maintaining healthy watersheds as a prerequisite for sustainable development. This partnership will address these development needs especially in the areas of non-consumptive forest utilization through watershed management, agroforestry, and the valuation of ecosystem services in 10 small indigenous communities of the Río Grande watershed in the underprivileged Sierra Norte region of Oaxaca in southern Mexico.
Uploads
Books by Brian Kermath
Yet despite this vast endowment of edible plants, relatively few species have come to dominate human diets. For example, Myers (1984) reported that 7 crops provide 75% of human nutrition, Robert and Christine Prescott-Allen (1990) found that 103 species account for 90% of the global food supply, and Padulosi and Pignone (1997) documented only 150 commercialized species of edible plants around the world. Elusive though the exact number of how many edible plants exist and how many dominate in providing human nutrition, it is easy to identify a list of the principle crops including: sugarcane, maize, rice, wheat, potatoes, soybeans, beets, cassava (manioc), tomatoes, bananas/plantains, citrus, barley, watermelons, sweet potatoes, onions, apples, grapes, cabbage and other leafy brassicas, cucumbers and gherkins, rapeseed (for oil), yams, sorghum, coconuts, eggplant, beans, cottonseed (for oil), mangoes, peanuts, sunflower seed, peppers (Capsicum), melons, peas, millet, pears, lettuce, squash, garlic, spinach and oats.
Although it might be nice to have precise numbers relating to specific questions with well-defined criteria in addressing the question of “how many plants feed the world,” the real value in this discussion is the knowledge that the diets of most contemporary people are not as diverse as they could be and not as diverse as perhaps they should be for optimal nutrition, culinary interest, gastronomic enjoyment, food security and the overall sustainability of food systems. Despite recent food movements (e.g., “slow food” and “local food”), as a society, we ask few probing questions about the foods we eat, we know little about where and how they are grown and processed, we are largely incapable of identifying food plant origins, we are disconnected from the importance of the wild relatives of our favorite foods that help maintain healthy crops, and we wonder little about how many desirable edible plants we might be missing. In general, we demand only that our food satisfies our palates (which is easily done with fat, sugar and salt), curbs hunger and provides basic nutrients and calories.
The hope for this dictionary is to help draw attention to the potential of the tremendous diversity of food plants in the Americas by documenting their origins, uses and common names. We do not contend that all of the plants presented have commercial potential, but merely that nature’s food pantry is wide, deep and scarcely appreciated.
Contained in 3,990 entries the compendium includes:
• More than 4,100 taxa, mostly at the species level, with some subspecies, hybrids and varieties;
• 6,854 Latin names including synonyms;
• More than 31,000 common names primarily in English, Portuguese and Spanish, with some from French-speaking areas and Suriname, as well as many from indigenous languages.
Common names in indigenous languages generally are listed under the dominant language of the region with the native language in parentheses. Many of the native names are spelled phonetically.
Information has been derived from extensive fieldwork by the authors along with consulting 2,325 secondary references. The entries are organized by genus and species. The status of the Latin names follows The Plant List and Tropicos from the Missouri Botanical Garden (MBG-Tropicos).
Teaching Resources by Brian Kermath
The sustainability path involves the merging of the historically distinct and often conflicting goals of development and nature conservation, which requires that societies work to:
• create opportunities where people may realize their full potentials, find productive livelihoods, and prosper according to broad-based quality of life measures;
• protect and enhance human health and encourage wellness;
• restore and preserve nature's life-support systems including its evolutionary potential;
• enjoy the benefits of natural capital while fully accounting for their costs in order to encourage market mechanisms to maintain stocks for future generations;
• achieve social justice and strive for equity;
• construct resilient, livable communities
• guarantee that basic human needs are met for all members of society.
The path to sustainability depends on appropriate institutions, policies, strategies, collaborations, and technologies that are governed effectively in a just transition that moves society toward the proper state in a process of continuous improvement. The ideal consists of the simultaneous establishment of two spatially and temporally essential and universal conditions — maintaining ecological integrity and social justice — in realizing effective development and conservation goals. Development must be measured broadly focusing on quality of life and ensuring the attainment of basic human needs. Other criteria must also work properly for initiatives to succeed from sustainability’s multiple dimensions the social, cultural, economic, and political/governance realms, among others.
The important symbolism of the double helix of DNA is rather straight forward and represents reasonable approaches to thinking about sustainability.
If one accepts that we are in a state of unsustainability, and if the “sustainable world” exists on another plane from where we are today, then we need to move society to that better place. Two simple analogies serve to illustrate the transition. First, imagine that we are in a hole that we must climb out of to reach the sustainable world plane. To do so, we build a ladder with two rails, one representing the natural dimension and the other the human dimension. The natural rail becomes nature conservation and the human rail becomes development. The rungs become the many parts of society that must operate properly to advance sustainability objectives to the desired ends. These may be subsets of the larger whole such as the political, economic, cultural and social, or functional parts such as institutions, education, and collaborations, or process related parts like energy, resiliency, and technology.
The second analogy is similar: imagine that we are approaching a chasm that we must pass over to find the sustainability plane. To cross safely we need a bridge, where the two parallel beams provide the support over the chasm from one rim to the other. Similar to the rails of the ladder, these long beams represent conservation and development. The smaller ties that connect the cross beams together, like the rungs on the ladder, represent the many elements of society that must be organized and managed to properly support sustainable activities.
In reality, the move from the unsustainable plane to the sustainable plane is not a simple step, but rather a transition. This transition is represented by the process of twisting the ladder or the bridge to produce the double helix. The twisting further represents the complex interplay between the natural and human dimensions that characterizes our multifaceted world. At this point, the model takes on additional meaning representing the essential elements that must become deeply embedded into society’s collective wisdom in order to achieve sustainability. Another feature of the model is that it is open-ended on both ends permitting the inclusion of an ever expanding chain of elements that are integral to the transition process and durability.
Websites by Brian Kermath
'Sustainability implies that the critical activities of a higher education institution are (at a minimum)
conducive to quality lives for people today and into the distant future. A truly sustainable college or university would emphasize these concepts in its curriculum and research, preparing students to contribute as citizens to an environmentally sound and socially just society. The institution would function as a sustainable community itself, embodying responsible consumption of resources, treating its diverse members with respect, and supporting these values in the surrounding community.'
– Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future
A central goal of a liberal arts education is to broadly train students so that they may become responsible citizens who can understand and respond to the complex issues that they face. Sustainability represents a complex, interconnected and ever-changing set of issues, and the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh has adopted it as an Essential Learning Outcome in its new general education program, the University Studies Program.
The sustainability concept grew out of concerns that post-World War II development efforts were falling short on two fronts: 1) although they were contributing to economic growth, they were performing poorly in improving human welfare in many regions; 2) they were depleting resources faster than they could be renewed or substituted, degrading the environment in many places, pushing global biogeochemical thresholds in unprecedented ways, and undermining ambitious nature conservation efforts.
In this context, sustainability represents the merging of conservation and development goals for the long-term health of human societies and Earth’s life-giving processes that support them. Sustainability is now widely accepted as the way forward by governments, businesses, educational institutions, NGOs, communities, and individuals worldwide.
Below are some resources that may be of value as you begin incorporating sustainability ideas into your courses. These resources are part of a Sustainability Reference Database that contains academic and popular articles, books, reports, videos, links, and other resources related to sustainability.
Papers by Brian Kermath
I conceived of the project in the context of the role that urban landscaping plays in biodiversity conservation, specifically in how it serves as a pathway for the introduction of exotic species into natural areas and how it reflects and may affect cultural values. The idea was that by converting key landscapes in highly visible places to sustainable native landscapes that reflect a deep appreciation and concern for natural heritage, perhaps a desirable change in worldviews would follow (See Kermath 2008).
The FAQs sheet was developed in response to questions that came up over time from the earliest days of conception through early development and implementation. The first draft was printed in 1997 and a series of updates followed.
Although I hold the opinion that “working landscapes” that produce food or environmental services are the most desirable landscaping practices for developed lands, I also recognize that many people, institutions and organizations still prefer more conventional landscaping designs. For these more conventional approaches, I recommend considering sustainable native landscapes over landscapes that emphasize exotic species, mowed turf, and artificial chemical management and to blur the lines between 'working' landscapes and aesthetic landscapes by planting native plants that also 'work' such as with edible native plants.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper was written as a literature review applied to a case study. Drawing on E.O. Wilson's idea that society must assign the same value to natural heritage as it does cultural heritage to successfully safeguard biodiversity for the long haul, the paper argues that by altering key elements of human landscapes in strategic places – campus landscapes in this case – to reflect a deep appreciation of natural heritage, we can help shift worldviews to foster real sustainability. It also raises a set of questions based on popular perceptions and some challenges based on the broad literature, then shows how the case study performed in addressing the questions and meeting the challenges.
Findings – Stetson University's project helped push the campus' nascent green movement beyond the remedial and reactive approaches too often seen in most regions to a proactive, holistic campaign.
Practical implications – The paper should inspire other campuses and organizations to proactively manage landscapes for natural heritage education, biodiversity conservation, and sustainability, just as the featured case study has done in its larger community.
Originality/value – In the world of campus sustainability, biodiversity often takes a backseat to energy use, resource consumption and waste management. The paper calls attention to this shortcoming and in so doing hopefully will encourage research and applied projects to address the biodiversity crisis and the role that universities play.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08873639209478410
Grants by Brian Kermath
Unfortunately, these trends are likely to continue unless Mexico succeeds at forging sustainable, land-based livelihoods in underprivileged regions, especially those with large percentages of indigenous people. In 1996, Mexico amended its environmental legislation (LGEEPA) making sustainable development a national priority. Later, under the U.S./Mexico Partnership for Prosperity, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox committed an action plan to promote economic development in the parts of Mexico where growth has lagged and fueled migration.
This partnership between the Global Environmental Management Education Center (GEM) at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point (UWSP), the Oaxacan based NGO Estudios Rurales y Asesoría Campesina (ERA), the Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM, or Monterrey Tech), and the Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo (UACh) was conceived in response to the above challenge and to the USAID Mexico Country Plan’s focus areas #1) Economic growth (including natural resource management) and #4) Educational exchange and scholarships. The partnership specifically addresses the TIES II focus area III (Environment) program area 2 (Community Based Watershed Management) in recognizing the importance of maintaining healthy watersheds as a prerequisite for sustainable development. This partnership will address these development needs especially in the areas of non-consumptive forest utilization through watershed management, agroforestry, and the valuation of ecosystem services in 10 small indigenous communities of the Río Grande watershed in the underprivileged Sierra Norte region of Oaxaca in southern Mexico.
Yet despite this vast endowment of edible plants, relatively few species have come to dominate human diets. For example, Myers (1984) reported that 7 crops provide 75% of human nutrition, Robert and Christine Prescott-Allen (1990) found that 103 species account for 90% of the global food supply, and Padulosi and Pignone (1997) documented only 150 commercialized species of edible plants around the world. Elusive though the exact number of how many edible plants exist and how many dominate in providing human nutrition, it is easy to identify a list of the principle crops including: sugarcane, maize, rice, wheat, potatoes, soybeans, beets, cassava (manioc), tomatoes, bananas/plantains, citrus, barley, watermelons, sweet potatoes, onions, apples, grapes, cabbage and other leafy brassicas, cucumbers and gherkins, rapeseed (for oil), yams, sorghum, coconuts, eggplant, beans, cottonseed (for oil), mangoes, peanuts, sunflower seed, peppers (Capsicum), melons, peas, millet, pears, lettuce, squash, garlic, spinach and oats.
Although it might be nice to have precise numbers relating to specific questions with well-defined criteria in addressing the question of “how many plants feed the world,” the real value in this discussion is the knowledge that the diets of most contemporary people are not as diverse as they could be and not as diverse as perhaps they should be for optimal nutrition, culinary interest, gastronomic enjoyment, food security and the overall sustainability of food systems. Despite recent food movements (e.g., “slow food” and “local food”), as a society, we ask few probing questions about the foods we eat, we know little about where and how they are grown and processed, we are largely incapable of identifying food plant origins, we are disconnected from the importance of the wild relatives of our favorite foods that help maintain healthy crops, and we wonder little about how many desirable edible plants we might be missing. In general, we demand only that our food satisfies our palates (which is easily done with fat, sugar and salt), curbs hunger and provides basic nutrients and calories.
The hope for this dictionary is to help draw attention to the potential of the tremendous diversity of food plants in the Americas by documenting their origins, uses and common names. We do not contend that all of the plants presented have commercial potential, but merely that nature’s food pantry is wide, deep and scarcely appreciated.
Contained in 3,990 entries the compendium includes:
• More than 4,100 taxa, mostly at the species level, with some subspecies, hybrids and varieties;
• 6,854 Latin names including synonyms;
• More than 31,000 common names primarily in English, Portuguese and Spanish, with some from French-speaking areas and Suriname, as well as many from indigenous languages.
Common names in indigenous languages generally are listed under the dominant language of the region with the native language in parentheses. Many of the native names are spelled phonetically.
Information has been derived from extensive fieldwork by the authors along with consulting 2,325 secondary references. The entries are organized by genus and species. The status of the Latin names follows The Plant List and Tropicos from the Missouri Botanical Garden (MBG-Tropicos).
The sustainability path involves the merging of the historically distinct and often conflicting goals of development and nature conservation, which requires that societies work to:
• create opportunities where people may realize their full potentials, find productive livelihoods, and prosper according to broad-based quality of life measures;
• protect and enhance human health and encourage wellness;
• restore and preserve nature's life-support systems including its evolutionary potential;
• enjoy the benefits of natural capital while fully accounting for their costs in order to encourage market mechanisms to maintain stocks for future generations;
• achieve social justice and strive for equity;
• construct resilient, livable communities
• guarantee that basic human needs are met for all members of society.
The path to sustainability depends on appropriate institutions, policies, strategies, collaborations, and technologies that are governed effectively in a just transition that moves society toward the proper state in a process of continuous improvement. The ideal consists of the simultaneous establishment of two spatially and temporally essential and universal conditions — maintaining ecological integrity and social justice — in realizing effective development and conservation goals. Development must be measured broadly focusing on quality of life and ensuring the attainment of basic human needs. Other criteria must also work properly for initiatives to succeed from sustainability’s multiple dimensions the social, cultural, economic, and political/governance realms, among others.
The important symbolism of the double helix of DNA is rather straight forward and represents reasonable approaches to thinking about sustainability.
If one accepts that we are in a state of unsustainability, and if the “sustainable world” exists on another plane from where we are today, then we need to move society to that better place. Two simple analogies serve to illustrate the transition. First, imagine that we are in a hole that we must climb out of to reach the sustainable world plane. To do so, we build a ladder with two rails, one representing the natural dimension and the other the human dimension. The natural rail becomes nature conservation and the human rail becomes development. The rungs become the many parts of society that must operate properly to advance sustainability objectives to the desired ends. These may be subsets of the larger whole such as the political, economic, cultural and social, or functional parts such as institutions, education, and collaborations, or process related parts like energy, resiliency, and technology.
The second analogy is similar: imagine that we are approaching a chasm that we must pass over to find the sustainability plane. To cross safely we need a bridge, where the two parallel beams provide the support over the chasm from one rim to the other. Similar to the rails of the ladder, these long beams represent conservation and development. The smaller ties that connect the cross beams together, like the rungs on the ladder, represent the many elements of society that must be organized and managed to properly support sustainable activities.
In reality, the move from the unsustainable plane to the sustainable plane is not a simple step, but rather a transition. This transition is represented by the process of twisting the ladder or the bridge to produce the double helix. The twisting further represents the complex interplay between the natural and human dimensions that characterizes our multifaceted world. At this point, the model takes on additional meaning representing the essential elements that must become deeply embedded into society’s collective wisdom in order to achieve sustainability. Another feature of the model is that it is open-ended on both ends permitting the inclusion of an ever expanding chain of elements that are integral to the transition process and durability.
'Sustainability implies that the critical activities of a higher education institution are (at a minimum)
conducive to quality lives for people today and into the distant future. A truly sustainable college or university would emphasize these concepts in its curriculum and research, preparing students to contribute as citizens to an environmentally sound and socially just society. The institution would function as a sustainable community itself, embodying responsible consumption of resources, treating its diverse members with respect, and supporting these values in the surrounding community.'
– Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future
A central goal of a liberal arts education is to broadly train students so that they may become responsible citizens who can understand and respond to the complex issues that they face. Sustainability represents a complex, interconnected and ever-changing set of issues, and the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh has adopted it as an Essential Learning Outcome in its new general education program, the University Studies Program.
The sustainability concept grew out of concerns that post-World War II development efforts were falling short on two fronts: 1) although they were contributing to economic growth, they were performing poorly in improving human welfare in many regions; 2) they were depleting resources faster than they could be renewed or substituted, degrading the environment in many places, pushing global biogeochemical thresholds in unprecedented ways, and undermining ambitious nature conservation efforts.
In this context, sustainability represents the merging of conservation and development goals for the long-term health of human societies and Earth’s life-giving processes that support them. Sustainability is now widely accepted as the way forward by governments, businesses, educational institutions, NGOs, communities, and individuals worldwide.
Below are some resources that may be of value as you begin incorporating sustainability ideas into your courses. These resources are part of a Sustainability Reference Database that contains academic and popular articles, books, reports, videos, links, and other resources related to sustainability.
I conceived of the project in the context of the role that urban landscaping plays in biodiversity conservation, specifically in how it serves as a pathway for the introduction of exotic species into natural areas and how it reflects and may affect cultural values. The idea was that by converting key landscapes in highly visible places to sustainable native landscapes that reflect a deep appreciation and concern for natural heritage, perhaps a desirable change in worldviews would follow (See Kermath 2008).
The FAQs sheet was developed in response to questions that came up over time from the earliest days of conception through early development and implementation. The first draft was printed in 1997 and a series of updates followed.
Although I hold the opinion that “working landscapes” that produce food or environmental services are the most desirable landscaping practices for developed lands, I also recognize that many people, institutions and organizations still prefer more conventional landscaping designs. For these more conventional approaches, I recommend considering sustainable native landscapes over landscapes that emphasize exotic species, mowed turf, and artificial chemical management and to blur the lines between 'working' landscapes and aesthetic landscapes by planting native plants that also 'work' such as with edible native plants.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper was written as a literature review applied to a case study. Drawing on E.O. Wilson's idea that society must assign the same value to natural heritage as it does cultural heritage to successfully safeguard biodiversity for the long haul, the paper argues that by altering key elements of human landscapes in strategic places – campus landscapes in this case – to reflect a deep appreciation of natural heritage, we can help shift worldviews to foster real sustainability. It also raises a set of questions based on popular perceptions and some challenges based on the broad literature, then shows how the case study performed in addressing the questions and meeting the challenges.
Findings – Stetson University's project helped push the campus' nascent green movement beyond the remedial and reactive approaches too often seen in most regions to a proactive, holistic campaign.
Practical implications – The paper should inspire other campuses and organizations to proactively manage landscapes for natural heritage education, biodiversity conservation, and sustainability, just as the featured case study has done in its larger community.
Originality/value – In the world of campus sustainability, biodiversity often takes a backseat to energy use, resource consumption and waste management. The paper calls attention to this shortcoming and in so doing hopefully will encourage research and applied projects to address the biodiversity crisis and the role that universities play.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08873639209478410
Unfortunately, these trends are likely to continue unless Mexico succeeds at forging sustainable, land-based livelihoods in underprivileged regions, especially those with large percentages of indigenous people. In 1996, Mexico amended its environmental legislation (LGEEPA) making sustainable development a national priority. Later, under the U.S./Mexico Partnership for Prosperity, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox committed an action plan to promote economic development in the parts of Mexico where growth has lagged and fueled migration.
This partnership between the Global Environmental Management Education Center (GEM) at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point (UWSP), the Oaxacan based NGO Estudios Rurales y Asesoría Campesina (ERA), the Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM, or Monterrey Tech), and the Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo (UACh) was conceived in response to the above challenge and to the USAID Mexico Country Plan’s focus areas #1) Economic growth (including natural resource management) and #4) Educational exchange and scholarships. The partnership specifically addresses the TIES II focus area III (Environment) program area 2 (Community Based Watershed Management) in recognizing the importance of maintaining healthy watersheds as a prerequisite for sustainable development. This partnership will address these development needs especially in the areas of non-consumptive forest utilization through watershed management, agroforestry, and the valuation of ecosystem services in 10 small indigenous communities of the Río Grande watershed in the underprivileged Sierra Norte region of Oaxaca in southern Mexico.
Under this backdrop, and amid the recent BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, renewable energy resources are being promoted as alternatives to fossil fuels that must be developed for societies to achieve sustainably. The State of Maine is well positioned to expand the use of its biomass, wind and other renewable energy resources and has made serious declarations toward such ends. Biomass fuels are especially attractive in the State and particularly so in Aroostook County with its abundance of forests and open space and long history in forestry and agriculture. Moreover, Mainers are relatively accustomed to, and accepting of biomass energy. Yet despite the urgency with which alternatives must be developed and the seemingly obvious logic of targeting biomass energy resources in Northern Maine, two areas need to be thoroughly investigated to ensure that the resources are developed and managed sustainably. As an academic institution, a third area will also be pursued: to disseminate findings in formats accessible to a range of audiences from secondary school students, to planners, and community stakeholders.
The project involves the purchase and installation of a large district biomass heating system that will be connected by underground water lines to nine university buildings (together, the “UMFK Facilities”), and two high school buildings (together the “Project Facilities”).
The district heating plant will provide the following benefits:
• lower fuel costs by up to 80% (compared with #2 distillate fuel oil),
• stabilize fuel prices,
• stimulate the local economy,
• enhance environmental sustainability,
• reduce dependence on foreign oil,
• reduce maintenance costs by displacing eight oil-fired boilers with a single state-of-the-art boiler with proven success,
• significantly help UMFK meet its climate neutrality obligations under the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment.
• complement other efforts between UMFK and MSAD 27"
The Center for Rural Sustainable Development with input from interested faculty, Ecology Committee students, and Facilities staff produced a sustainable landscape design as part of the Powell Hall renovation. The building project was submitted for certification by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) through its Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program. The landscape plan includes over 20 woody species native to Maine including several that produce edible fruit. The design includes many trees and shrubs, self-mulching beds, and significantly reduced turf area, which will need less mowing and maintenance once established. Species selections were made with the curriculum in mind particularly as a living learning laboratory for Forestry and Environmental Studies students.