Increased interest in school sustainability has led to the emergence of a variety of rating
systems to assess schools' contributions to sustainability. Such tools should have
substantial potential to contribute to school sustainability efforts but the few studies
completed to date suggest limited impacts. This paper asks whether weaknesses in the
design and governance of school sustainability rating systems (SSRSs) may be to blame
for the limited evidence of impact. Specifically, it reviews the extent to which 32
existing SSRSs have the following desirable characteristics: accountability mechanisms,
comprehensive scope, multiple levels of achievement, open governance processes,
performance-focused criteria, public reporting, and transparent criteria.
Results show that most SSRSs have transparent criteria and offer multiple levels of
recognition, but they also tend to have weak or non-existent accountability mechanisms,
limited topical scope, closed governance processes, criteria that focus on strategies rather
than performance, and minimal public reporting. Consolidation of SSRSs may help
remedy these weaknesses by increasing capacity for managing an effective SSRS,
improving brand recognition, facilitating benchmarking, and reducing duplication of
effort within the school sustainability community.Master of ScienceNatural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90923/1/School sustainability rating systems Strengths, limitations, and future prospects - final.pd
