Over the last few decades, sustainability has become a great focus for individuals as well as businesses globally. The focus of this study was to understand why businesses purchase certain office supplies and why they may not be choosing to purchase the most sustainable options. The research question asked, “why are certain businesses reluctant to make positive, sustainable changes to their usage of office materials in their workplace environments?” Most companies do not look for alternatives that would benefit the environment when purchasing products for their office space. The reasons behind this hesitancy to change was studied through current literature on the topic as well as interviews conducted with Office Managers of several different businesses. Comparisons were made between each businesses’ decision patterns in order to find the root cause or causes of why companies do not choose more sustainable options when purchasing products for their workspaces. The interviews revealed that cost and quality are the most important factors these businesses take into consideration when purchasing office supplies. While some companies have looked into alternative products for their supplies, they ultimately choose to still purchase the less sustainable option. This is because the less sustainable option is often cheaper, and the company knows what quality to expect for the item. Overall, all of the Office Managers who were interviewed acknowledged some sort of sustainable practice that their company was taking part in, even if it did not directly relate to the types of office supplies that they purchase. This inclusion of general sustainable practices demonstrates how businesses are making efforts one way or another towards a more sustainable future. Therefore, this awareness to sustainability suggests that most, if not all businesses will eventually end up purchasing sustainable alternatives for their office supplies. However, the timeframe for which this occurs for each company will likely vary.

Waste pickers are the victims of harsh economic and social factors that have hurt many developing countries and billions of people around the world. Due to the rise of industrialization since the 19th century, waste and disposable resources have been discarded around the world to provide more resources, products, and services to wealthy countries. This has put developing countries in a precarious position where people have had very few economic opportunities besides taking on the role of waste pickers, who not only face physical health consequences due to the work they do but also face exclusion from society due to the negative views of waste pickers. Many people view waste pickers as scavengers and people who survive off of doing dirty work, which creates tensions between waste pickers and others in society. This even leads to many countries outlawing waste picking and has led to the brutal treatment of waste pickers throughout the world and has even led to thousands of waste pickers being killed by anti-waste picker groups and law enforcement organizations in many countries. <br/> Waste pickers are often at the bottom of supply-chains as they take resources that have been used and discarded, and provide them to recyclers, waste management organizations, and others who are able to turn these resources into usable materials again. Waste pickers do not have many opportunities to rise above the situation they are in as waste picking has become the only option for many people who need to provide for themselves and their families. They are not compensated very well for the work they do, which also contributes to the situation where waste pickers are forced into a position of severe health risks, backlash from society and governments, not being able to seek better opportunities due to a lack of earning potential, and not being connected with end-users. Now is the time to create new business models that solve these large problems in our global society and create a sustainable way to ensure that waste pickers are treated properly around the world.

As temperatures increase across the United States, some populations are more at risk for heat-related death and illness than others. One of these at-risk demographics is mobile home and trailer park inhabitants, who are disproportionately represented among indoor heat-related deaths (Solís, “Heat, Health”). In this paper, we outline a cost-benefit analysis that was used to calculate the net present economic value of projects related to reducing heat burden on mobile home owners and parks in Maricopa County. We use this model to assess solutions developed by student teams under the Knowledge Exchange for Resilience’s Summer Heat Resilience Challenge. We find that one of the seven solutions has a positive net present value (NPV) even in the lowest effectiveness (10%), while three more solutions have a positive NPV in the mid-level (50%) effectiveness scenario, showcasing their economic viability.

With the rise of fast fashion and its now apparent effects on climate change, there is an evident need for change in terms of how we as individuals use our clothing and footwear. Our team has created Ray Fashion Inc., a sustainable footwear company that focuses on implementing the circular economy to reduce the amount of waste generated in shoe creation. We have designed a sandal that accommodates the rapid consumption element of fast fashion with a business model that promotes sustainability through a buy-back method to upcycle and retain our materials.