School of Sustainability Graduate Culminating Experiences

This report is concerned primarily with explaining the deliverables that our team, the Sustainable Saguaros, developed for the Kim Center for Social Balance (The Kim Center), as a requirement for graduation from the Master of Sustainability Solutions program at Arizona State University. As a growing non-profit organization, the Kim Center for Social Balance has a vision for integrated gender equity in workplaces nationwide but lacks the bandwidth to advance its strategy forward. The requested deliverables are: (1) a set of sector analyses for municipal government, healthcare, construction, and finance, (2) a summary of the gender-related reporting requirements for three reporting standards, and (3) a strategic action plan to improve the Kim Center’s board governance and engagement. Our sector analyses revealed common themes associated with gender-specific challenges in the workplace and identified sector-specific challenges that should be addressed in ways that are tailored to the sector. We developed the sector analyses by conducting extensive research into the current state of each sector as it pertains to gender equity, and then identifying challenges to women in the workplace. While we attempted to assess the state of each sector beyond the gender binary, consistent or reliable data was not readily available in most cases. We see this as an area where the Kim Center could help organizations improve in recognizing and supporting employees across the gender spectrum. The summary of reporting standards revealed that the existing gender-related requirements for the most well-established reporting standards are highly inconsistent. The gender-related reporting requirements for GRI, SASB, and NASDAQ did not have any significant overlap. The information required by these standards is routinely collected by US companies as part of their EEOC compliance, but may not be legal to collect in other countries. The strategic action plan for the Kim Center’s Board of Directors was formulated by analyzing the board’s bylaws, a survey conducted with current board members, and an internal non-profit assessment that was answered by their Executive Director. Using these resources, our team identified gaps in board governance that must be addressed in order to build the internal capacity for the Kim Center to operate effectively. From there, our team developed a case for improving board governance and outlined specific recommendations to strengthen the Kim Center’s board alignment and responsibilities.

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.