What is a Green Job?
Most people working in environmental and renewable energy jobs probably haven't given the term much thought, but now that the White House has 'a green jobs czar' , following on the Green Jobs Act of 2007, this got me wondering what qualifies as a green job.
Based on a quick search through the archives of Google News it looks like discussions of 'green jobs' dates to at least the late 1980's.
It wasn't until sometime around late 2006, however, that the term really exploded into the mainstream.
Now, three years later, people have been bombarded with proposals for 'greening' the economy, your job or pretty much anything you can think of.
With all the proposals on the table for the expansion of green jobs I bet a lot of so-called green professionals have wondered if that includes them.
The answer is: it depends.
From review of archived articles discussing the the promises of a green economy, in the early 1990's 'green job' was a catch-all for any job in an environmental or sustainable development field - including conservation, renewable energy or the environmental sciences.
Sometime in the late 1990s this definition seemed to narrow a bit.
No longer was it enough just to work towards ensuring a clean environment, through such hum-drum activities as maintaining compliance with 1970s era legislation like the Clean Water Act or National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
This would likely exclude fields such as forestry, hydrology, land remediation and other environmental science-type fields that take place in government or through consultancies.
While the first generation of green jobs included more traditional science and engineering jobs related to conservation, ensuring a clean environment and regulatory compliance the second generation should reflect the tenets of sustainability and be more inclusive - you don't need to be a scientist or engineer with a Masters degree.
You can be anyone working in a range of fields as long as you're contributing towards sustainability and 'green growth'.
Ideally these positions should also recognize the social equity bit of sustainable development.
This hasn't been as high on the list of priorities and organizations like Green for All and Apollo Alliance are making strides in this area.
This is probably how the term 'green collar came about - to encourage a more egalitarian approach to greening the economy.
Since the term green job has shifted and been politicized in recent years it's not surprising it's hard to pin down a definition - even from the Green Jobs Act.
For lack of a better one, here is the rather confusing definition of green jobs from WIkipedia: A green job, also called a green-collar job is any job in an organization that provides a product or service that allows consumers to either consume less, either because of the lower price or greater efficiency, or produce more due to the utilization of this product or service, both of which actions reduce total energy use and environmental impact on the planet.
This definition is broadly in line with recent proposals by the Obama administration and the Green Jobs Act.
As I see it, this definition seems primarily directed towards the renewable energy, resource efficiency and green building fields.
These are areas that can reliably produce jobs for a lot of people with varying backgrounds - including trades-people, scientists and engineers.
For instance Joe the Plumber can, with relatively little additional training, become Joe the solar heating installer and Sue, the Project Manager on large infrastructure projects, can become Sue the Project Manager for wind array installations.
What does not seem to be the case with the Wikipedia definition is whether green jobs and green collar jobs can be clumped together.
If green jobs encompass all jobs that encourage resource efficiency then my understanding is that green collar jobs are the working class bit - the tradesman that construct the smart grids, green communities and renewable energy installations.
This term seems to have been created to show that you don't need to be a tree-hugging liberal or have an advanced degree to make it in the green economy.
This still leaves one wondering where a lot of environmental, sustainability and other 'green' workers fit in to the green jobs equation.
If we're going by the Wikipedia definition of a green job then this would largely limit green jobs to those in the fields of renewable energy, carbon management, green building and manufacturing intended to reduce the footprint of the products it creates.
What wouldn't necessarily be included are conservationist, environmental scientists and the like - jobs associated primarily with environmental quality.
Perhaps this is rightly the case, since traditional environmental jobs are not necessarily concerned with wider issues of sustainable development, although I'm sure many would argue that point on good grounds.
What the definitions of green jobs appear to be hinting at is that green jobs should be consistent with the tenets of sustainable development and environmental jobs are concerned solely with environmental quality.
Does that mean that if you say, work for the Forest Service as a water quality technician, that you don't have a green job? I guess not.
Do you really care either way? I doubt it.
But if you're a water quality technician your job really isn't concerned with wider sustainability goals, it's concerned with making sure water quality is appropriate for environmental and/or human use.
There really isn't an economic or social aspect to it - remember that, in general, sustainable development should consider social, economic and environmental interests.
To develop a more concrete green job definition maybe we should start with the definition of sustainable development.
For the sake of argument, let's go with the 1987 Brundtland definition: Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
This definition contains the key concepts of providing for the needs of humanity and recognizing the opportunities and constraints of resource availability and use.
If we had to relate this to a job description, then it would probably entail the production of goods in a manner that is more efficient than it would have been produced under traditional means.
If this is the case then I propose this basic definition: A green job is one that provides a product or service that encourages resource and energy efficiency.
This of course is not a very sexy description and does not touch on the social and economic aspects of sustainable development - it doesn't say it should pay well or employ individuals from all portions of society.
While these are worthy goals, a specific job sector should not necessarily embody these goals, since markets and institutions should seek to achieve these ideals for all jobs.
In several years the whole concept of green jobs will likely fade away in recognition that green jobs aren't that different from any other job.
Oil workers of today will be solar and wind workers of tomorrow.
Corporate responsibility initiatives are tweaking traditional positions to become green jobs and with a little creativity most people could even make a green job out of the one they have.
Polls indicate that most people are enthusiastic about the prospect of millions of new green jobs intended to boost the economy, reduce our carbon footprint and achieve energy security, but it couldn't hurt for if we're going to be doling out millions in cash for green jobs initiatives shouldn't we decide on what a green job is?
Based on a quick search through the archives of Google News it looks like discussions of 'green jobs' dates to at least the late 1980's.
It wasn't until sometime around late 2006, however, that the term really exploded into the mainstream.
Now, three years later, people have been bombarded with proposals for 'greening' the economy, your job or pretty much anything you can think of.
With all the proposals on the table for the expansion of green jobs I bet a lot of so-called green professionals have wondered if that includes them.
The answer is: it depends.
From review of archived articles discussing the the promises of a green economy, in the early 1990's 'green job' was a catch-all for any job in an environmental or sustainable development field - including conservation, renewable energy or the environmental sciences.
Sometime in the late 1990s this definition seemed to narrow a bit.
No longer was it enough just to work towards ensuring a clean environment, through such hum-drum activities as maintaining compliance with 1970s era legislation like the Clean Water Act or National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
This would likely exclude fields such as forestry, hydrology, land remediation and other environmental science-type fields that take place in government or through consultancies.
While the first generation of green jobs included more traditional science and engineering jobs related to conservation, ensuring a clean environment and regulatory compliance the second generation should reflect the tenets of sustainability and be more inclusive - you don't need to be a scientist or engineer with a Masters degree.
You can be anyone working in a range of fields as long as you're contributing towards sustainability and 'green growth'.
Ideally these positions should also recognize the social equity bit of sustainable development.
This hasn't been as high on the list of priorities and organizations like Green for All and Apollo Alliance are making strides in this area.
This is probably how the term 'green collar came about - to encourage a more egalitarian approach to greening the economy.
Since the term green job has shifted and been politicized in recent years it's not surprising it's hard to pin down a definition - even from the Green Jobs Act.
For lack of a better one, here is the rather confusing definition of green jobs from WIkipedia: A green job, also called a green-collar job is any job in an organization that provides a product or service that allows consumers to either consume less, either because of the lower price or greater efficiency, or produce more due to the utilization of this product or service, both of which actions reduce total energy use and environmental impact on the planet.
This definition is broadly in line with recent proposals by the Obama administration and the Green Jobs Act.
As I see it, this definition seems primarily directed towards the renewable energy, resource efficiency and green building fields.
These are areas that can reliably produce jobs for a lot of people with varying backgrounds - including trades-people, scientists and engineers.
For instance Joe the Plumber can, with relatively little additional training, become Joe the solar heating installer and Sue, the Project Manager on large infrastructure projects, can become Sue the Project Manager for wind array installations.
What does not seem to be the case with the Wikipedia definition is whether green jobs and green collar jobs can be clumped together.
If green jobs encompass all jobs that encourage resource efficiency then my understanding is that green collar jobs are the working class bit - the tradesman that construct the smart grids, green communities and renewable energy installations.
This term seems to have been created to show that you don't need to be a tree-hugging liberal or have an advanced degree to make it in the green economy.
This still leaves one wondering where a lot of environmental, sustainability and other 'green' workers fit in to the green jobs equation.
If we're going by the Wikipedia definition of a green job then this would largely limit green jobs to those in the fields of renewable energy, carbon management, green building and manufacturing intended to reduce the footprint of the products it creates.
What wouldn't necessarily be included are conservationist, environmental scientists and the like - jobs associated primarily with environmental quality.
Perhaps this is rightly the case, since traditional environmental jobs are not necessarily concerned with wider issues of sustainable development, although I'm sure many would argue that point on good grounds.
What the definitions of green jobs appear to be hinting at is that green jobs should be consistent with the tenets of sustainable development and environmental jobs are concerned solely with environmental quality.
Does that mean that if you say, work for the Forest Service as a water quality technician, that you don't have a green job? I guess not.
Do you really care either way? I doubt it.
But if you're a water quality technician your job really isn't concerned with wider sustainability goals, it's concerned with making sure water quality is appropriate for environmental and/or human use.
There really isn't an economic or social aspect to it - remember that, in general, sustainable development should consider social, economic and environmental interests.
To develop a more concrete green job definition maybe we should start with the definition of sustainable development.
For the sake of argument, let's go with the 1987 Brundtland definition: Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
This definition contains the key concepts of providing for the needs of humanity and recognizing the opportunities and constraints of resource availability and use.
If we had to relate this to a job description, then it would probably entail the production of goods in a manner that is more efficient than it would have been produced under traditional means.
If this is the case then I propose this basic definition: A green job is one that provides a product or service that encourages resource and energy efficiency.
This of course is not a very sexy description and does not touch on the social and economic aspects of sustainable development - it doesn't say it should pay well or employ individuals from all portions of society.
While these are worthy goals, a specific job sector should not necessarily embody these goals, since markets and institutions should seek to achieve these ideals for all jobs.
In several years the whole concept of green jobs will likely fade away in recognition that green jobs aren't that different from any other job.
Oil workers of today will be solar and wind workers of tomorrow.
Corporate responsibility initiatives are tweaking traditional positions to become green jobs and with a little creativity most people could even make a green job out of the one they have.
Polls indicate that most people are enthusiastic about the prospect of millions of new green jobs intended to boost the economy, reduce our carbon footprint and achieve energy security, but it couldn't hurt for if we're going to be doling out millions in cash for green jobs initiatives shouldn't we decide on what a green job is?
Source...