The tool must be accessible. The makeup, use, and end product of the tool needs to be user friendly,
visually pleasing, and concise. Application of the tool should be efficient regarding cost, for
users with different financial and human resource abilities can utilize it.
The design of the tool should be accessible given the knowledge, volume, and organizational makes
of the utilizers.
The tool must be adaptable. The tool should be adaptable to and adequate for the specific
demands and needs of the users, and to their specific context. The tool
should be able to reflect different scales, cultures, and values of the group
that is using it, and will vary to what they are trying to accomplish. The tool needs to be able to
include a variety of spatial and temporary stages as necessary by the
nature of the campus environment.
Participatory process in tool development and use. The makeup of the tool needs to
utilize the viewpoint and values of the communities that will be using it.
Those who will use or be affected by the use of the tool should be actively
engaged in the application and use of the tool on-site.
of the 2 existing sustainability assessment tools was reviewed carefully
according to these 7 criteria. These were reviewed separately from the campus
specific sustainability assessment tools in order to widen our range of
literature reviewed to some other leading edge tools from other sectors.
indicator of sustainability is defined as a package of data in order to simple define, measure, and
communicate complex and ornate information for use by decision-makers, policy-shapers,
and the public.
this thesis, the literature was used to develop “indicator selection criteria”.
Our specific indicator set was developed using the experience, values, and
expertise of the sustainable experts. The set of criteria was developed to use
in determining a “good indicator” was that it is:
on accurate, available and accessible data of known quality. Can high-quality data be found and
of the phenomena being measured. Does the indicator actually represent the
larger phenomenon that it is attempting to paint a picture about?
to users, decision-makers, local and global sustainability challenges. Does the indicator help
decision-makers to be
proactive and take action? Does it without a doubt describe a phenomenon? Does it
make sense in terms of
reaching local and global sustainability? Does it inspire action?
Understandable to the university and broader
communities. Does the indicator
clearly describe a particular phenomenon in a method that is attainable to the communities