2023_0425_PWETCPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Selected Framework The advisory committee determined that a badge -based framework would best suit the needs of this program, where participants will receive badges based on actions they complete. The advisory committee also determined a tree-themed framework reflected the nature of this program's needs, complemented the GreenStep aesthetic of sustainability and goal setting, and made the program accessible and desirable to communities. To this end, we created leaf-themed badges (Figure 7) to award to communities based on the climate actions they completed. Figure 7: A sample tree design that includes We presented three possible structures of this tree-themed badge individual leaf badges (green are all badge format to the advisory committee. Each structure has some options; the empty leaves would be gold overarching similarities, namely that in order to receive a leaf, a and given as actions are awarded awarded). participant must complete climate actions under that leaf's category. Actions that communities can take to address climate change have been organized by four different categories: mitigation, planning, adaptation, and community. Other categories have the potential to be added later. Badge Structure 1 The first of these structures was one in which participants are required to complete a certain ° number of actions per certification period under a leaf category in order to receive that leaf. o The number of actions required would reflect their GreenStep City or Tribal Nation category, o 0 which is determined by factors such as number of city buildings and staff. Feedback indicated that this structure would not incentivize—and in some cases may even discourage —communities to join. Participants may feel as though there is no incentive to complete more actions in a given category if they've already completed enough to earn a leaf. There were also concerns about whether a certification period would make this program less accessible. Badge Structure 2 The second structure developed was to assign a point value to each action. The point value would be determined by factors including impact, priority, cost, difficulty, and accessibility. Upon meeting a point threshold by completing enough actions, participants would receive a leaf. Reception to this structure was mixed; quantitatively the advisory committee identified more cons, but the pros arguably had more weight from a qualitative standpoint. While praising its versatility, multiple committee members voiced concerns that this approach was too complicated. Additionally, calculating and assigning point values would be extremely challenging. Gold Leaf Program Proposal I www.MNGreenStep.org 10 Page 62 of 185