2. Evergreen Economies:
Green Local Procurement Policy as a
Sustainable Economic Driver
Living Economy Salon
Laurie Kaye Nijaki, Ph.D.
University of Southern California; Price School of Public Policy
University of Michigan; Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise

3. Today’s Talk
• 1) Introduction to the Green Economy
• 2) Defining Differences in Opportunities
• 3) Green Economy Policies: A National
Perspective
• 4) Towards a Green Economy Action Plan: A
Focus on Procurement

4. Part 1
Introduction to the Green Economy

5. Traditional Development Theory and Defining Progress:
Economic Growth and the Urban Environmental Problem
 Traditional focus on growth (expanded GDP etc.) as central goal.
Environmental degradation is an externality of the pursuit of growth.
 Rhetoric: Economy versus Environment.
Fuels conflicts between stakeholders around development choices, and
the pursuit of quality of life issues.
 If we must choose between the economy and environment, can we ever
win?
(Source: Campbell, S. JAPA, 1995)

7. Moving Beyond Growth: Sustainable
Development Theory
 Sustainability/Sustainable Development: Economy, Environment, and Equity.
Moving Beyond Growth. (Higgens, 1996; Roberts,2004 et.al.)
 Rhetoric: Environment and Economy
New Strategic Framing around development. (Snow and Benford, 2004)
New benefits through new institutions and new partnerships between historically
adversarial groups.
 Key Question:
How can we establish economic development in communities and also provide
effective solutions to environmental degradation?
How can we best shape development in a manner that is preservative of
equity, environmental, and economic goals?
 Sustainability as a “fuzzy concept;” difficulty in measuring and institutionalizing the
rhetoric. (Gunder, 2007 et.al)

8. Why Study the Green Economy?:
Green Jobs as a Sustainable Solution?
 Operationalize/concretize “sustainability” through concept of green jobs as a
new form of economic growth created by new markets and made possible
through technological advance. Similarly fueled by the rise of corporate social
responsibility, and new niche, consumer-driven markets. (Dahlsrud, 2006, Younger and
Tiley, 2006, Hardjona and Klein, 2003)
 Green Jobs: “Activities which produce goods and services to measure, prevent,
limit, minimize or correct environmental damage to water, air and soil, as well
as problems related to waste, noise and ecosystems.” (OECD,2000)
Green jobs are economic opportunities in environmental
preservation/remediation.
 The green economy may be a new institutional nexus for dealing with
development decisions in communities and in providing economic goods to
communities while achieving environmental benefits.

9. Why Study the Green Economy?:
Trends in Term “Green Jobs”
In order to understand and build opportunities in this framework,
we need to define and systematically examine the “green economy.”

10. Defining Green Differently
• "Green collared jobs, as we define them are well-paid, career track jobs
that contribute directly to preserving or enhancing environmental quality.
Apollo
Like traditional blue collared jobs, green collar jobs range from low-skilled,
Alliance entry-level positions to high-skill, higher-paid jobs, and include
opportunities for advancement in both skills and wages.”
• “Cleantech jobs..are a direct result of the development of development,
production, and/or deployment of technologies, that harness renewable
Cleanedge materials and energy sources, reduce the use of natural resources by
using them more efficiently and productive, and cut or eliminate pollution
and toxic waste.”
• “Any activity that generates electricity using renewable or nuclear fuels,
agriculture jobs, supplying corn or soy for transportation fuel,
manufacturing jobs producing goods used in renewable power generation,
US Council equipment dealers and wholesalers specializing in renewable energy, or
of Mayors energy efficiency products, construction and installation of energy and
pollution management system, government administration of
environmental programs, and supporting jobs in the engineering, legal, and
consulting fields”.
Brookings • “Defined as the sector of the economy that produces goods and services
Institution with an environmental benefit.”

11. An Array of Green Actors
• Green Producers:
Job opportunities directly in the
manufacturing and production of green
goods and services
Ex: Solar panel manufacturing, installation of Product that
provides Green Supply
DFP filters on heavy duty vehicles. environmental Chain
• Green Consumers: Remediation
Job opportunities in companies that include
“environmental sustainability” as part of Everyday Green
Business
Sustainable Life
their operating principals. Practices
Green
Cycle of
Products
Theoretically, they are the customer’s of
the green producers. FIrm
EX: Environmental/sustainability
consulting, green restaurant owners and
workers

12. Dimensions of the Green Economy
Source: Nijaki et. al. Employment Development Department Green Jobs Survey, 2010

13. Green Jobs
or Green
Washing?
•What jobs are “green jobs”?
•Who determines the standards?
•And, how do we know it’s all reliable?
How do we ensure we are getting green
jobs and not green washing?

14. Part 2
Defining Differences in Opportunities
in the Green Economy

15. Are there Differences in Green
Economic Opportunities?
• A) Differences in aggregate number of green
Jobs.
• B) Differences in “type of green employment.”

16. A) Differences in Aggregate
Number of green Jobs.

17. Are there differences in green
employment by urban type?
Boston
Sacramento St. Louis Seattle
Portland
San Jose Santa Ana
Washington
Wichita Columbus Tampa New York
Albuquerque
Oklahoma Austin Mesa San Francisco
Tucson Charlotte Cleveland Oakland
Tulsa Philadelphia
San Antonio Nashville Los Angeles
Omaha San Diego
Louisville Minneapolis Long Beach Baltimore
Memphis
Fresno Raleigh Pittsburg Chicago
Virginia Beach Indianapolis Fortworth Atlanta
Miami Las Vegas
El Paso Jacksonville Houston Dallas
Milwaukee Detroit Kansas City
Denver

18. Differences in Green Jobs by Urban
Typology
2.
1. UNSUSTAINBLE 3. GREEN 4. LAGGING
ENVIRONMENTAL 5. GREEN GIANTS
UNDERDOGS BOUTIQUES LEVIATHANS
ENTREPRENUERS
Smaller Smaller Smaller
Populated Populated
populated populated populated
metropolitan metropolitan
metropolitan metropolitan metropolitan
areas. areas.
areas. areas. areas.
Low median Low median High median Low median High median
income. income. income. income. income.
Trailing Leading Leading Trailing Leading
sustainability sustainability sustainability sustainability Sustainability
programming. programming programming. programming. programming.

19. How Does Green Employment Vary by
Urban Type?
Total Green Employment
Green Jobs
46919.9375
50000
42734.3636
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
17763.3636
20000
12302.5
15000
7015.2857
10000
5000
0
1 2 3 4 5
Small Small Small Big Big
Poor Poor Rich Poor Rich
Trailing Leading Leading Trailing Leading

20. Green Jobs Per Capita
Green Employment Per Capita
0.025 0.021
0.02
0.013
0.015
0.01
0.01
0.01 0.008
0.005
0
1 2 3 4 5
Small Small Small Big Big
Poor Poor Rich Poor Rich
Trailing Leading Leading Trailing Leading

21. B) Differences in
“type of green employment.”

22. Green Economy Clusters
Green Building and • NACIS 24611 Industrial Building Construction
Construction • SOC 11-2051.12 Wastewater engineers
Transportation and Alternative • NAICS 4842 Specialized Freight Trucking
Fuel Vehicles • SOC 17-2141.01 Fuel Cell Engineers
Waste, Waste • NAICS 562112 Hazardous Waste Collection
Management, Recycling • SOC 51-9199.01 Recycling and Reclamation Workers
Environmental • NAICS 541620 Environmental Consulting Services
Compliance, Sustainability
• SOC 13-1199.05 Sustainability Specialists
Planning, Pollution Prevention
Energy Generation, Renewable • NAICS 541711 Research and Development in Biotechnology
Energy, Energy Storage • SOC 17-2199.11 Solar Energy System Engineers
See Appendix for Complete Codes

23. The “Type” of Green Economy Differs
Green Economy Clusters Per Capita Employment by MSA
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
San Francisco
0.06
Boston
0.04 LA
0.02
0
Green Building
Transportation
Waste
Environmental
Compliance Energy

24. Boston-Cambridge-Quincy MSA
9%
2%
11%
53%
25%
Green Building and Construction Cluster
Transportation and Alternative Fuel Vehicle Cluster
Waste, Waste Management, Recycling Cluster
Environmental Compliance, Sustainablilty Planning, and Pollution Prevention Cluster
Energy Generation, Renewable Energy, Energy Storage Cluster

25. San Francisco-Oakland-Freemont
MSA
33%
47%
11%
1% 8%
Green Building and Construction Cluster
Transportation and Alternative Fuel Vehicle Cluster
Waste, Waste Management, Recycling Cluster
Environmental Compliance, Sustainablilty Planning, and Pollution Prevention Cluster
Energy Generation, Renewable Energy, Energy Storage Cluster

26. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana
MSA
7%
2%
10%
53%
28%
Green Building and Construction Cluster
Transportation and Alternative Fuel Vehicle Cluster
Waste, Waste Management, Recycling Cluster
Environmental Compliance, Sustainablilty Planning, and Pollution Prevention Cluster
Energy Generation, Renewable Energy, Energy Storage Cluster

27. Part 3
Green Economy Policies: A National
Perspective

28. How Are Cities Taking About Green
Jobs?
Measure Impact of “Discourse”: Frequency of References of “green jobs” on each city’s website.
Average Frequency Green Jobs References by City Type
247.8125
250
200
150
100
42.4 39.1818
50
1.2857 6.6
0
1 2 3 4 5
Small Small Small Big Big
Poor Poor Rich Poor Rich
Trailing Leading Leading Trailing Leading

29. Type 1: Unsustainable Underdogs
Trailing
Small Low Median
Sustainability
Population Income
Indicators
• Little focus on green jobs. No references in city website.
• Exception: Omaha
Green Jobs per Capita .008
Total Green Jobs 7,015
Average # WebsiteReferences 1.2
Green Jobs/Sustainability Program 426
Green Jobs/Environmental Organization 194

30. Type 2: Struggling Startups
Small Leading
Low Median
Population Sustainability
Income
Programs
• Specific green jobs programs, but little impact.
• Specific websites focused on the green economy. (i.e. City of Tucson)
• Focus on workforce development programs-Green Jobs Corps.
(i.e. City of Fresno, City of Miami)
• Some Focus on Clean Technology.
Green Jobs San Antonio Clean Tech, City of Louisville financing programs/revolving loan fund)
(i.e. City of Per Capita .010
Total Green Jobs 12,303
Average # Website References 42.4
Green Jobs/Sustainability Program 461
Green Jobs/Environmental 230
Organization

31. Leading
Small High Median
Sustainability
Population Income
Programs
• Well developed programs around the green economy. Green Jobs as a
stated goal.
(i.e. Minneapolis “green economy” indicator on sustainability plan)
• “clean technology” focus.
(i.e. City of San Jose, City of Austin)
Green Jobs per Capita .021
Total Green Jobs 17,763
Average # Website References 39.2
Green Jobs/Sustainability Program 611
Green Jobs/Environmental 197
Organization

32. Type 4: Lagging Leviathans
Trailing
Large Low Median
Sustainability
Population Income
Programs
• Green jobs focus as inconsistent and diverse.
• Some focus on workforce development strategies.
• Green jobs focus tends to be “project specific.”
(i.e. City of Mesa Solar Energy Park,
City of Long Beach green goods movement focus)
Green Jobs per Capita .010
Total Green Jobs 45,530
Average # Website References 6.6
Green Jobs/Sustainability Program 1418
Green Jobs/Environment Organization 199

33. Type 5: Green Giants
Leading
Large High Median
Sustainability
Population Income
Programs
• Concerted and consistent approaches towards the green economy
• “clean technology” focused initiatives
(i.e. City of Chicago Clean Tech Jobs Center, City of New York Green Tech and
Manufacturing Initiative)
• Workforce development programs.
(i.e. “green collared jobs corps” City of Las Vegas, City of Oakland
City of New York jobs former felons)
Green Jobs per Capita .014
Total Green Jobs 46,920
Average # Website References 247.8
Green Jobs/Sustainability Program 1577
Green Jobs/Environmental Organization 244

34. Who’s Generating Green Jobs: Green Leaders and Brown Laggards
Urban Type Type Characteristics Per Capita Green Average # “Green
Jobs Jobs” Website
References
Unsustainable •Small Population
•Low Median Income .008 1.2
Underdogs •Trailing sustainability
Struggling Startups •Small Population
•LowMedian Income .010 42.4
•Leading Sustainability
Green Boutiques •Small Population
•High Median Income .021 39.2
•Leading Sustainability
Lagging Leviathans •Large Population
•Low Median Income .010 6.6
•Trailing Sustainability
Green Giants •Large Population
•High Median Income .014 247.8
•Leading Sustainability

35. A Package of Potential Programs
• Green Purchasing
• Green Business Certification
• Clean Tech Corridors/Land
Use Approaches
• Business Incubation
Strategies/university
partnerships
• Workforce development for
resulting opportunities

36. Part 4
Towards a Green Economy Action
Plan: A Focus on Procurement

37. Traditional Procurement
• Choosing the Lowest Cost Bid: the contractor who
produces the lowest cost service or product estimate in
response to a request for proposal (RFP).
• Key Goal: “Obtain the most appropriate and highest
quality good and service possible for the least cost.”
• Benefits:
– Transparency in choosing bids
– Regularity in evaluating bids
– Simplicity in decision-making process
– Economic efficiency/lowest cost

38. What is the Role of Government
Procurement?
Source: Nijaki, L. K. and Worrel, G. “Sustainable Procurement at the Local Government Level” International Journal of
Public Sector Management, Forthcoming

39. Types of Procurement: Going Beyond
Lowest Cost Estimates
• Purchasing for Economic Development
• Purchasing for Economic Equity
• Purchasing to Achieve Environmental
Benefits

40. Purchasing for Economic Development
• “Buy local” efforts
• Efforts seek to develop local markets through
government procurement
• i.e. “Buy America” provisions in ARRA

41. Purchasing for Social Equity
• Minority/Woman Owned Business
Requirements
• Using procurement to create targeted
business opportunities.
• i.e. City of Los Angeles MBE/WBE
requirements

42. Purchasing for Environmental Benefits
• Environmentally Preferable Procurement
• Defined as buying “products or services that
have a lesser or reduced effect on human
health and the environment when compared
with competing products or services.” e.g.
higher recycled content, energy efficient
machines, less toxic products.
• i.e. City of Santa Monica

44. Same City, Different Tracks
An Example: City of San Jose:
• Environmental: EPP policy: Procurement of
services and products that reduce
toxicity, conserve natural resources, material and
energy, maximize recyclability and recycled
content.
• Equity: Up to a 5 percent bid preference for
minority-owned and woman-owned businesses.
• Economic: Local Preference Policy gives up to 5
percent bid preference for local business
enterprises.

45. Sustainable Procurement:
Three “E”s for Green Jobs?

46. Procurement for Sustainable Local
Development
1. Examinecurrent public procurement processes.
2. Definewhether or not any of those products could be
manufactured within their locale.
3. Analyzewhether growth is appropriate for the
community in terms of industrial mix and workforce
capabilities. Define occupations and industries.
4. Determineother economic incentives and industry
incubation strategies.
5. Implementprocurement strategies, considering phase-
in priorities and measurement of results. Three major
approaches: bureaucratic assistance, bid
preferences, and blanket policies.

47. Bureaucratic Assistance
• Offering case management within procurement process for
firms representative of sustainability values.
• Advantages:
– Strategic targeting of businesses
– Engage “start-ups”, opportunities to bolster innovation
– Long term personal and customized support
• Disadvantages:
– Long-term vision
– Time and resource intensive
– Potential for favoritism
• Sample Policies: King County, Washington; Portland and
Multnomah County, Oregon

48. Blanket Policies
• Widespread policy incorporating sustainability goals within
procurement decisions.
• Advantages:
– Sends strong message.
– Ensures outcome and rigorous evaluation of programmatic
goals.
• Disadvantages:
– May be politically infeasible.
– Inflexible in implementation
– Threshold levels may de-incentivize attainment of higher
environmental goals.
• Sample Policies: Woodbury County, Iowa; San
Francisco, California.

49. Bid Preferences
• Integration of sustainability goals within the ranking of
prospective firms.
• Advantages:
– Target particular groups for benefits
– Flexibility in meeting multiple outcomes
– Layer procurement policies on top of existing system
• Disadvantages:
– Favoritism and due to ambiguity
– Difficulties in being able to structure preferences to
achieve most sustainable end
• Sample Policies: Cal Trans, Marion County, Oregon

50. Key Challenges
• Political Feasibility and Ensuring Against
Favoritism/Transparency
• Training Staff
• Evaluating Products and Developing
Implementation Plans
• Coordination Between Disparate Departments
• Workforce Development and Economic
Development—Equity Considerations

51. Creating the “tools”
Based upon the results of this research, there is needed to develop a “green economy” growth
tool for local green jobs growth. There is a need to create an effective green economy database
for local communities that can consist of the following toolsets that collectively can indicate
avenues of opportunities. Such a tool should be available online.
For Businesses:
-Searchable database for city/county procurement requests for proposals.
-Searchable database for government incentives related to “green.”
-Searchable database for events relevant to the “sustainable business community.”
For Governments:
-Database of “local” and “nonlocal” businesses offering green products.
-Ability for businesses to “pitch” and/or showcase “green” products.
-Ability to locate “local businesses” on a map in order to showcase local impacts.
-Database for city/county procurement requests that can be done collaboratively across city
boundaries. Such a database can provide resources for cities looking to partner with one
another, as well as for regional government agencies seeking collaboration.

52. For Job-Seekers:
-Ability for “green businesses” to post help-wanted adds.
This will provide constituents interested in the green
economy with needed resources.
For Consumers:
-Searchable database for products that they may be able
to buy along with government procurement efforts in
order to expand market opportunities and to
foster public-private partnerships leading to the
proliferation of sustainable goods.

53. Policy Analysis:
• Climate Action Plans
• Sustainability Plans
• Alternative Fuels Policies/Transpotration Policies
• Water Policies
• Goods Movement Policies
• Water Efficiency/Re-Use Policies
• Energy/Energy efficiency/Solar Plans/RPS
Green Econony Plan:
Workforce Development Strategy
Land-Use/Geographically Specific
Strategies
Financing Mechanisms
Business Incubation
Government Procurement
Economic Development
Analysis: Stakeholder Analysis:
• Occcupational Analysis • Green Collared Jobs
• Industry Analysis Alliances
• Green Business
Associations

54. Some Key Resources for Green Jobs
Workforce Development Research:
• BLS Green Communities of Practice:
• https://greenjobs.workforce3one.org/
• State of California Employment Development
Department:
• http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov
• Onet Green Occupational Information:
• http://www.onetcenter.org/green.html

55. QUESTIONS AND
COMMENTS?
lnijakikaye@yahoo.com