# data[].attributes.body
USC may just be trying to keep up with other universities by doing the USC 2020 plan.

Any evidence to support this?

# data[].attributes.body
The only mention of economic sustainability in the plan is " Support a community of interdisciplinary sustainability researchers with assured long-term funding" In another section of the plan it makes clear that this interdisciple research includes economics but it is clear that economic sustainability is far from the USC's top concern. This would be cause for concern according to Kersten.

# data[].attributes.body
USC's 2020 plan generally focuses on how the University can make tangible changes to its operation resulting in a more sustainable future. These goals include " Achieve 75% waste diversion levels by 2020"
" Decrease potable water use 10% by 2017 and 25% By 2020 "

USC's 2020 plan would be most likely critiqued by Newport for not having a strong focus on the social aspect of sustainability.

# data[].attributes.body
USC 2020 makes little mention of the social or political aspects of their sustainability plan. The outline generally focuses on how the university is going to meet its environmental goals by the year 2020. The main social aspect of the USC 2020 plan is the idea of educating the general population about making meaningful environmental choices.

These ideas are also extremely vague:

" Foster external partnerships with local government "
" Engage the community in the principles of sustainability"

# data[].attributes.body
In either article the role the environment plays in overall sustainability differs. In Newport's article, environmental concerns are level with social concerns. In Kersten's article, she argues that environmental concerns trump any other sustainability issue and says that other sustainability issues are merely distractions from the main goal.

# data[].attributes.body
Newport's article makes little mention of the economic aspect of sustainability. Kersten's article on the other hand uses the economic aspect of sustainability as a weapon against universities across the nation, Kersten claims that although universities are suddenly interested in sustainability, they are failing to realize that even they are unsustainable institutions in modern society. She mentions that the rising cost of college is unsustainable and may collapse. We are no strangers to that here at USC.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the key focus of the two articles provided. Newport argues that not only is a social aspect of environmentalism a good idea but it is actually necessary for sustainability to work.

Kersten on the other hand argues that the social aspect of sustainability is simply a distraction from the true focus of sustainability, the environment.

# data[].attributes.body
"sustaining
human existence which requires many things to be sustained including functioning economic, social, and
political systems along with a supportive physical and biological environment and more." (Theis)

# data[].attributes.body
To what extent does the USC: 2020 Plan promote meaningful change to support local and global sustainability?