Student capstone and applied projects from ASU's School of Sustainability.

Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by

Clear all filters

Description

Across the world, music festivals draw in millions of fans and generate billions in revenue (Fesicket Writers, 2018). While the festival scene is extremely popular, stakeholders are beginning to take notice of its negative impacts. When improperly managed, festivals damage natural systems, miss out on opportunities to support and engage

Across the world, music festivals draw in millions of fans and generate billions in revenue (Fesicket Writers, 2018). While the festival scene is extremely popular, stakeholders are beginning to take notice of its negative impacts. When improperly managed, festivals damage natural systems, miss out on opportunities to support and engage with their fans, and exclude local businesses. The movement for sustainable music festivals has already begun, but it is still far from being the industry norm. Only a select few festivals have embraced sustainability as a core value while many others are still making no effort to mitigate their impacts. Even though many drivers are pushing for the transformation of this industry, the unaddressed barriers are holding organizers back. Sustainable Sound: Festival Guide has been created to educate organizers on how to plan and operate sustainable music festivals. It is based on tried and true methods to create holistically sustainable events. In this context, a holistically sustainable event is one that does not damage natural systems, protects and engages with its fans, and is economically positive. Various case studies from some of the world’s most sustainable festivals will also be highlighted throughout the guide. According to M3F, The Cosanti Foundation, and ASU’s CSSI, Sustainable Sound offers important and easy to understand information that festival organizations can use to improve the sustainability of their events.

ContributorsBurmeister, Matthew (Writer of accompanying material)
Created2019-12-06
126661-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Institutional factors are rarely examined in disaster risks in the Himalayan region, as much of the focus so far has been on improving the scientific understanding of the natural hazards and risks. This is particularly true for glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs), which are natural hazards endemic to high mountain

Institutional factors are rarely examined in disaster risks in the Himalayan region, as much of the focus so far has been on improving the scientific understanding of the natural hazards and risks. This is particularly true for glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs), which are natural hazards endemic to high mountain ranges such as the Andes, Alps, and Himalayas. While these have put mountain communities at risk for centuries, vulnerability is viewed to be increasing due to climate change. While the science behind the causes and characteristics of these hazards is now better understood, there is an absence of research understanding the social, cultural and institutional drivers behind creating effective strategies to mitigate risks from GLOFs. This is more so for the Himalayan region, where institutions have recently started to address this risk, but contention between local communities and external organizations can hinder mitigation efforts. To better understand how people’s perception towards disaster risk, a study conducted by Sherpa et al. (2019) examined the socio-economic and cultural perceptions surrounding GLOF hazards.

This research highlighted gaps in how scientific knowledge is disseminated to local communities, and the resulting distrust in government mitigation projects such as lake lowering and Early Warning Systems. A clear need developed to conduct an institutional analysis of the governance systems responsible for disaster risk management and their interaction with local communities. This study examines the institutional conditions under which mountain communities create effective adaptation strategies to address climate induced hazards. We use a mixed-methods approach, combining: a) quantitative analysis of household surveys collected in 2016-2017 and b) qualitative analysis that maps out the various factors of institutions that influence the success of community-based adaptation efforts. Additionally, GLOF case studies from Nepal are compared to those in Peru, where institutions have a longer history of managing GLOF risks. The research finds that there are several considerations including: lack of cross-scalar communication networks, lack of local knowledge and participation in policy processes, and ineffective interorganizational coordination of knowledge sharing and funding streams for local projects. This disconnect between external versus local and informal institutions becomes an inherent issue in projects where agenda setting by external organizations plays prevalent roles in project implementation.

ContributorsThompson, Ian (Author) / Shrestha, Milan (Contributor, Contributor) / Chhetri, Netra (Contributor, Contributor) / Agusdinata, Datu Buyung (Contributor)
Created2019-04-26