No one is more excited about the sustainability movement than the workforce development community. When was the last time the public conversation about jobs was this hopeful, this positive? For the first time in recent memory, we feel that the asset that is the skills development system (community colleges, job training programs, community organizations, one-stop career centers) is being recognized as an ally in the effort to develop communities and create wealth, while improving air and water quality and optimizing power, water and materials. Certainly the funding for green jobs training is a welcome change after a decade of disinvestment in skills development.
But for the skills development system, we need to understand how those jobs and skills are distinct from their traditional counterparts (and how they are not) in order to add value to the process.
For example, let’s say that policies encouraging consumer recycling give rise to new recycling firms and one of those firms hires a bookkeeper. That firm is certainly a “green employer” and as such that bookkeeper’s job is a “green job”. Non-green firms hire bookkeepers too, of course, and if what that bookkeeper knows and what that bookkeeper does is no different than what she might do at a non-green firm then the job is – from a skills and education perspective – no different whether it’s bookkeeping for a recycling operation than for a polluting operation. So if the green jobs and non-green jobs are the same thing, what our training programs teach job seekers are the same. The Green Jobs programs look strikingly similar to what came before. So why bother? Perhaps that bookkeeper needs to track and report costs differently in order for the company to obtain the incentives that make the business profitable. That’s the green SKILL that makes the difference, and focused investment in addressing that skill differential is where the skills development system can truly add value.
The USDOL Occupational Information Network (known as O*Net) statistics is moving in this direction. They have created a classification of “green” jobs in three categories:
• Increased Demand – Existing occupational categories that are likely to experience growth because of increased demand for green products and services. These jobs typically don’t require a new set of skills. (An example is a machinist who works in a metal forming company that shifts to making parts for wind turbines.)
• Enhanced Skills – Occupations that will require a new set of skills to accommodate the requirements of green markets. (An example would be automotive service technicians who need to learn new skills to maintain electric vehicle.)
• New and Emerging Occupations – New occupational categories created by the development of new markets and new firms. (An example would be Biofuel Production Managers – individuals who manage operations at biofuels power generation facilities.)
The workforce development community needs to begin integrating these definitions in a disciplined way into our work, so that we can figure out when training for a “green” job means doing something different, or just more of what we are already doing.
Let’s continue to celebrate creation of those green jobs and the sustainability improvements they achieve. But let’s also force ourselves to be clear about why and how investment in skills make the sustainability impacts possible. | 
