Teamwork and project management (TPM) tools are important components of sustainability science curricula designed using problem- and project-base learning (PPBL). Tools are additional materials, beyond lectures, readings, and assignments, that structure and facilitate students' learning; they can enhance student teams' ability to complete projects and achieve learning outcomes and, if instructors can find appropriate existing tools, can reduce time needed for class design and preparation. This research uses a case study approach to evaluate the effectiveness of five TPM tools in two Arizona State University (ASU) sustainability classes: an introductory (100-level) and a capstone (400-level) class. Data was collected from student evaluations and instructor observations in both classes during Spring 2013 and qualitatively analyzed to identify patterns in tool use and effectiveness. Results suggest how instructors might improve tool effectiveness in other sustainability classes. Work plans and meeting agendas were the most effective TPM tools in the 100-level class, while work plans and codes of collaboration were most effective at the 400 level. Common factors in tool effectiveness include active use and integration of tools into class activities. Suggestions for improving tool effectiveness at both levels include introducing tools earlier in the course, incorporating tools into activities, and helping students link a tool's value to sustainability problem-solving competence. Polling students on prior use and incorporating tool use into project assignments may increase 100 level tool effectiveness; and at the 400 level, improvements may be achieved by introducing tools earlier and coaching students to select, find, and develop relevant tools.

The State of California has made great strides in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through mandated, rate-payer funded Investor Owned Utility (IOU) electricity Demand Side Management (DSM) programs. This study quantifies the amount of reduced GHG emissions in Arizona that result from DSM in that state, as well as the DSM reductions within Southern California Edison (SCE), Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E;), and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E;) during the 2010 through 2012 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) DSM program cycle. To accomplish this quantification, it develops a model to allocated GHG emissions based on "operating margin" resources requirements specific to each utility in order to effectively track, monitor, and quantify avoided emissions from grid-based utility resources. The developed model estimates that during the 2010-2012 program cycle, 5,327.12 metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) in GHG reductions (or 1.8 percent of total reductions) can be attributed to reduced demand from Arizona--based resources by California IOUs. By focusing on the spatial context of GHG emission reductions, this study models and quantifies the spill-over effect of California's regulatory environment into neighboring states.

This research addresses the ability for neighborhoods to assess resiliency as it applies to their respective local areas. Two demographically and economically contrasting neighborhoods in Glendale, Arizona were studied to understand what residents' value and how those values link to key principles of resiliency. Through this exploratory research, a community-focused process was created to use these values in order to link them to key principles of resiliency and potential measureable indicators. A literature review was conducted to first assess definitions and key principles of resiliency. Second, it explored cases of neighborhoods or communities that faced a pressure or disaster and responded resiliently based on these general principles. Each case study demonstrated that resiliency at the neighborhood level was important to its ability to survive its respective pressure and emerge stronger. The Heart of Glendale and Thunderbird Palms were the two neighborhoods chosen to test the ability to operationalize neighborhood resiliency in the form of indicators. First, an in-depth interview was conducted with a neighborhood expert to understand each area's strengths and weaknesses and get a context for the neighborhood and how it has developed. Second, a visioning session was conducted with each neighborhood consisting of seven participants to discuss its values and how they relate to key principles of resiliency. The values were analyzed and used to shape locally relevant indicators. The results of this study found that the process of identifying participants' values and linking them to key principles of resiliency is a viable methodology for measuring neighborhood resiliency. It also found that indicators and values differed between the Heart of Glendale, a more economically vulnerable yet ethnically diverse area, than Thunderbird Palms, a more racially homogenous, middle income neighborhood. The Heart of Glendale valued the development of social capital more than Thunderbird Palms which placed a higher value on the condition of the built environment as a vehicle for stimulating vibrancy and resiliency in the neighborhood. However, both neighborhoods highly valued public education and providing opportunities for children to be future leaders in their local communities.