National Academies Press: OpenBook

Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop (2010)

Chapter: Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs

« Previous: Appendix C: Roundtable Roster
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

Appendix D
Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Smart Growth Program Research

(http://www.epa.gov/dced/publications.htm#tools)


AGENCY: US EPA


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

Ongoing research is being conducted to estimate and quantify the benefits of compact, mixed-use development for reducing VMT and associated environmental/climate impacts. A number of research projects are underway:

  1. Location efficiency tool—This effort will create a location efficiency score at the census block group level that will reflect the location’s density, walkability, distance to jobs and transit, as well as access to transportation alternatives. It will be produced in the form of a tool that communities can use to evaluate how a location performs relative to its region, state, or the nation, and to evaluate the impact of potential policy changes.

  2. Mixed-use development evaluation method—This effort, developed in partnership with the Institute for Transportation Engineers, will lead to a spreadsheet tool that generates trip reduction estimates associated with a proposed project. Input factors include project characteristics (design, density, etc.,) as well as location (walkability, regional distance to job centers, etc.,). The results will likely be published in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, enabling policy makers to more accurately reflect the trip generation reductions associated with mixed-use, compact developments.

  3. Carbon assessment tool—This effort will support local governments to estimate the GHG reductions associated with proposed developments. The spreadsheet tool will consider emissions associated with construction, operations and maintenance, and transportation connections.

  4. Evaluation of Infill Development as a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy—This effort will use case studies to estimate the cost effectiveness of GHG-reduction strategies achievable through TOD and infill projects. It will consider the total public investment in a range of projects, calculate the anticipated (or realized) GHG reductions resulting, and illustrate a range of costs for each strategy, and which dimensions of particular strategies are most effective in dollars of net public expenditure per ton of emissions avoided .

  5. Energy consumption white paper—This effort will quantify the energy consumption with residential buildings, considering both their construction (conventional or green certified, single-family or multi-family, attached or detached), as well as their location (low-density suburban locations or transit-rich urban locations).

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

A more recent, completed effort evaluated the residential construction trends in urban centers, noting that center cities were gaining share of total development activity faster than suburban areas, even despite the market slow-down (“Residential Construction Trends in America’s Metropolitan Regions” was published in January 2009).


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

Effort #3 above is in beta testing; the others are still in development.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

Effort #2 above is an effort done in partnership with the Institute for Transportation Engineers; many of the others will likely involve local or regional government partners in their testing and roll-out (specific communities yet to be determined)


PROJECT PERIOD:

#1 – Phase 1 will be completed in December 2009

#2 – Will be completed by spring 2010

#3 – In beta testing now; will be completed by early 2010

#4 – Will be completed in early 2010

#5 – Will be completed by December 2009


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED):


#1 – Roughly $40,000

#2 – Roughly $100,000

#3 – Roughly $250,000 over two year period

#4 – Roughly $150,000

#5 – Roughly $15,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM:

“Boston Metropolitan Area ULTRA: Exploring past, current and future socio-ecological dynamics in a founding city”

(http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=0948857)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: National Science Foundation with USDA Forest Service


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Over the next 50 years, U.S. cities will double in population and land area, creating a pressing need for science to inform sustainable growth. While considerable advances have been made in the ecological study of cities, many research challenges remain. A particular need is for greater understanding of the complex responses of ecological systems to changing human policies and activities and responses of humans to these changes. As one of the nation’s mature founding cities, Boston has been evolving for almost 400 years, but the metropolitan region is projected to grow in population by 5.5 percent and lose 140,000 acres of open space to residential subdivisions by 2030. This two-year project launches an interdisciplinary long-term research program for the Boston Metropolitan Area (BMA ULTRA) that will provide a national model of sound science in service of the common ecological good of urban communities and their surrounding regions. Through an innovative partnership between the City of Boston, the non-profit Urban Ecology Institute, and 7 academic institutions, the research program will address three main areas: (a) the primary historical and social drivers of local and regional changes in land use; (b) the complex linkages between social conditions (e.g., wealth, social capital, land-use policies), biophysical processes (e.g., resources for animal populations, or hydrological flows), and social-and-ecological outcomes (e.g., people’s attachment to place, or an area’s biodiversity); and (c) future conditions for people and the environment in greater Boston under different scenarios. Land use changes of focus include urban greening at local scales and suburbanization and urban infill at broader scales. Urban greening, such as tree planting, community gardening, and riparian restoration, represents a significant, though understudied avenue for feedback between human actions, ecosystem changes, and new human energy in response. The project treats citizen-driven greening projects as opportunistic experiments, with testable predictions regarding consequences for people and the environment. From this perspective, urban greening can be placed in the context of broader scale processes, such as suburbanization and urban infill. Partnership with two extensive non-profit networks will facilitate active involvement of citizens and decision makers in field studies as well as synthesis of data from ongoing research. Their involvement in turn facilitates study of feedbacks from information to knowledge to action and ecosystem response. A series of scenario building workshops will examine alternative spatial patterns for locating development, forest cover and plantings under the Mayor’s 100,000 trees initiative. Scenarios will also address the potential impacts of climate change. Stakeholders and scientists will collaborate on defining the goals, policies and assumptions for the scenarios. Maps and images of scenarios will be used in transmitting and translating project findings. In addition to directly supporting undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate education, BMA ULTRA leverages programs serving over 2000 middle and high school students annually, approximately 90 percent from underserved communities.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

A central recent advance in urban ecology has been the recognition that human actions strongly influence ecological patterns and that these human actions are themselves conditioned by values, lifestyle, experiences, social group, and institutional forces. Research supported by BMA ULTRA will deepen and extend these theoretical insights by focusing explicitly on a diverse set of socioeconomic drivers that are changing the forest cover and composition of the Boston Metropolitan Area. The program’s focus on urban greening as a form of urban land use-land cover change creates opportunities for new insight into feedback loops between humans and the environment. Hitherto, greening has been viewed as a set of practices rather than as an integral component of an urban system. Through the use of scenarios, the program begins to make a more thorough integration of urban ecological theory and the science of climate change. Strong academic-civic partnerships together with the diverse composition of the metropolitan area, its historic nature, and the progressive state of regional development make greater Boston an ideal setting for testing urban ecological theories and developing new insights for application nationwide.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: No results yet; funding begins January 2010


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): Partners include the non-profit Urban Ecology Institute based in Boston, MA as well as the City of Boston, Massachusetts Dept of Conservation and Recreation, and the USDA Forest Service.


PROJECT PERIOD: January 2010-July 2012


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): Current NSF funding = $300,000; current UMass additional funds = $141,848

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Central Arizona Phoenix Long Term Ecological Research Program (CAP LTER—http://caplter.asu.edu)


AGENCY: NSF


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Multi-decadal, multidisciplinary investigation of the impact of Metro Phoenix on the underlying desert ecosystem and the constraints provided by that ecosystem on the growth and development of the city.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: Part of the significance of CAP LTER (and its sister program, the Baltimore Ecosystem Study) to the NRC workshop is that it provides a focal point for an expanding and expansive view of how urban systems work. At ASU, CAP LTER became the basis for a broad research and teaching agenda related to cities, which in turn led to the creation of our Global Institute of Sustainability and degree-granting School of Sustainability. It spawned two $3M IGERT (Integrated Graduate Education and Research Traineeship) grants from NSF to develop graduate training programs in urban ecology. It also became the foundation for us to partner with a number of federal and state agencies, including NASA (“100 Cities” remote sensing program), EPA (“National Center of Excellence” dealing with the urban heat island), CDC (funding to examine the health effects of urban heat), and others. The heat island work also received financial support from more than a dozen companies involved with urban systems, like cement manufacturer CEMEX, and remote sensing tool manufacturer Raytheon.

One recommendation is that NSF’s LTER program (which also funds 26 non-urban centers) be expanded to include more cities. One way to do that is by supporting additional urban LTERs. A faster and cheaper way would be to provide supplemental funding to existing non-urban LTERs (most of which are run by universities located in major cities like Minneapolis, Boston, and Albuquerque) so they could add staff (perhaps one per LTER site) to coordinate interdisciplinary studies of the urban systems where the universities are located. These could then be networked together to form a national network of urban environmental research programs.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): Current and past: NASA, EPA, Center for Disease Control, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Arizona Department of Water Resources, Maricopa Association of Governments, Maricopa County Department of Public Health.


Proposed: USDA through ULTRA; Department of Justice to look at urban crime data; NASA proposal on aircraft-based urban remote sensing currently being prepared by Ames Research Center, Goddard Space Flight Center and ASU (with other partners) at $10M/year for 3 years.


PROJECT PERIOD: 1997-indefinite future (CAP LTER)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): NSF: approximately $1M/year, indefinitely for CAP LTER. NASA 100 Cities (now completed) received $350K; EPA National Center of Excellence ($100K); consortium of corporations supporting National Center of Excellence ($400K). State agencies (approximately $50-150K for each, total around $250K).

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Weatherization Assistance Program

(http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wip/wap.html)


AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The overall goal of the Weatherization Assistance Program is to reduce the burden of energy prices on the disadvantaged. The Weatherization Assistance Program’s weatherization services are cost-effective energy efficiency measures for existing residential and multifamily housing with low-income residents. Under this definition, it includes a wide variety of energy efficiency measures that encompass the building envelope, its heating and cooling systems, its electrical system, and electricity consuming appliances. In other words, the full range of energy efficiency measures in buildings that apply to all homes and apartment buildings is included in weatherization technologies.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: During the past 32 years, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program has provided weatherization services to more than 6.2 million low-income families. For every $1 invested, weatherization returns $2.73 in benefits. These include $1.65 in energy-related benefits and $1.07 in other benefits such as reducing pollution, unemployment, and adverse health concerns.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): DOE provides funding and technical guidance to the states, but the states run their own programs and set rules for issues such as eligibility. They also select service providers, which are usually nonprofit agencies that serve families in their communities, and review their performance for quality. Together, this group of more than 900 agencies makes up a nationwide weatherization network.


PROJECT PERIOD: This is an ongoing program since 1976.


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): In Fiscal Year 2009, $250 million dollars were appropriated by Congress, which was in addition to Recovery Act funding of $5 billion. The average expenditure limit is $6,500 per home.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Building Technologies Program

(http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/)


AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Building Technologies Program


The Building Technologies Program (BTP) funds research and technology development to reduce commercial and residential building energy use. The program is working to achieve the goal of net-zero energy buildings, which produce as much energy as they consume.


To achieve the goal of net-zero energy buildings, the Building Technologies Program supports research and development of innovative new technologies and better building practices. The program is divided into three interrelated strategic areas designed to overcome technical and market barriers: Research and Development, Equipment Standards and Analysis, and Technology Validation and Market Introduction.


The BTP’s funding is organized in five key program areas. Each of these areas contains projects and programs addressing one or more of the strategic elements:


Research and Development

  • Residential Integration—reduce energy loads by 70-80 percent and integrate renewable technologies in new construction to create marketable net-zero energy homes in the five major U.S. climate zones at net-zero financed cost to home buyers; to increase homeowner energy savings by supporting energy efficient retrofits and new homes while raising consumer awareness of the benefits of increased health, safety, and durability of energy efficiency.

  • Commercial Integration— to partner with major companies that design, build or operate large fleets of buildings and that commit to exemplary energy performance in selected new and existing commercial buildings; invest in commercial building technology solutions, design approaches and tools to enable net-zero energy performance.

  • Emerging Technologies—to accelerate building technology RD&D through R&D projects to advance lighting, HVAC, water heating, solar heating and cooling, thermal envelope, and window technologies, via national laboratory as well as with the private sector to develop more efficient technologies contributing to 70 percent energy savings in new construction and deep retrofit in existing homes and commercial buildings.

Technology Validation and Market Introduction

  • DOE-EPA Energy Star - a joint undertaking with DOE, EPA, and the private sector to promote energy efficient products designated by the Energy Star label, used to alert the consumer to the energy savings offered by such products.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  • Building Codes—working with other government agencies, state and local jurisdictions, national code organizations, and industry to promote stronger building energy codes and help states adopt, implement, and enforce those codes.

Equipment Standards and Analysis

  • Residential Appliances —develops test procedures and sets efficiency standards for residential lighting, equipment and appliances.

  • Commercial Equipment Standards —develops test procedures and sets efficiency standards for commercial lighting and equipment.

RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:


BTP’s Recent Accomplishments:

  • Residential:

    • Completed research and best practices for 30 percent energy savings in all climates, and 40 percent savings in Marine and Hot/Mixed-Dry, research ongoing.

    • In response to the DOE Builders Challenge 345 builder partners have labeled more than 1000 homes with 30 percent greater energy performance while meeting stringent quality criteria

  • Commercial:

    • Launched the Net-Zero Energy Commercial Building Initiative

    • Launched Retailer Energy Alliance, Commercial Real Estate Energy Alliance, and Hospital Energy Alliance

  • Emerging Technologies:

    • SSL prototype cool white LED that delivers world record 107 lm/W.

    • Commercialization of dynamic insulation, cellulose with doped phase change material

    • General Electric Hybrid Water Heater announced that will meet new Energy Star Advanced Water Heater Specification; development assisted under a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement with DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

  • Building Codes:

    • 2009 International Energy Conservation Code will improve new home energy efficiency by 15 percent over 2006 edition.

  • ENERGY STAR:

    • Market penetration for the main DOE products-windows, refrigerators, dishwashers, and CFLs. CFLs market profile shows that there are 4.3 Billion residential sockets, of which 0.5 Billion are filled with CFLs.

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS: Working with other federal and state agencies, and industry representatives from a variety of business sectors to achieve the goal of marketable net-zero energy buildings.


PROJECT PERIOD: The strategic goal is to create technologies and design approaches that lead to marketable zero energy homes by 2020 and zero energy commercial

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

buildings by 2025. Goals for retrofit of existing homes and commercial buildings are being formulated.


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): Fiscal Year (FY) 2009- $140 million + $346 million of Recovery Act Funds. FY2010- Proposed $237 million. The chart below shows the break-out of funds for the five key programs.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: CDC’s Climate Change and Health Program

(http://www.cdc.gov/climatechange/)


AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: As the nation's public health agency, CDC is uniquely poised to lead efforts to anticipate, prevent and respond to the broad range of effects on the health of Americans and the nation's public health infrastructure. CDC's expertise and programs in environmental health, infectious disease, and other fields form the foundation of public health efforts in preparedness for climate change. In FY2009, Congress appropriated $7.5 million for CDC to formally establish its Climate Change and Health Program. The Program is addressing five broad areas:

  1. Expanding the climate change research foundation: Seventeen intramural research awards have been awarded competitively, amounting to nearly $3 million. Additionally, approximately seven extramural research grants will be awarded.

  2. Developing partnerships: The focus is to develop innovative partnerships to better understand predicted health outcomes and to ensure cooperation between diverse stakeholders.

  3. Enhancing climate change capacity at state and local health departments: CDC is supporting state and local health departments through pilot programs run by ASTHO and NACCHO. Five states have received $90,000 each, and six local jurisdictions will receive $50,000 each to conduct needs assessments and develop strategic plans to address weaknesses and bolster climate change capacity.

  4. Promoting workforce development: Projects include funding post doctoral work and dissertation awards in climate change and health, developing web-based training, and a global workshop on climate change.

  5. Communicating health-related aspects of climate change: This aspect supports evidence-based communication strategies.

RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

  1. Expanding the climate change research foundation: When funding intramural research projects, CDC implemented a two-pronged approach by supplementing existing projects and funding new projects.

    • The Climate Change Program provided resources to add a climate change component to existing CDC projects. This approach builds climate change capacity by leveraging infrastructure established at CDC and improving sustainability of projects.

    • New projects were conceptualized as multi-year projects. Initially funding one-year of the project allows CDC to evaluate the projects for long-term feasibility, sustainability, cost effectiveness, and broader application at the conclusion of the first year. This evaluation will inform decisions regarding funding for years two and three of each projects.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  1. Developing partnerships: Conducted a series of six workshops with diverse stakeholders to clarify the public health priorities, impact, and future research needs for the public health response to the effects of climate change.

  2. Enhancing climate change capacity at state and local health departments: At the conclusion of the currently funded one-year pilot projects, CDC, ASTHO, and NACCHO will evaluate these projects to inform future development of climate change programs in state, territorial, city, and county health departments.

  3. Promoting workforce development: Developed web-based training for coaches and secondary school educators to identify and prevent heat-related illness in student athletes.

  4. Communicating health-related aspects of climate change: Developed a comprehensive communications campaigns for coordinated public health response to extreme heat events.

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

Government

  • U.S. Global Change Research Program

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

  • U.S. NOAA’s National Weather Service; National Climatic Data Center

  • 5 state health departments (MN, CA, FL, NH, MA)

  • 3 cities (Baltimore, Detroit, Austin)

  • 6 county health departments (Travis Co, TX; Mercer Co, IL; Orange Co, FL; Thurston Co, WA; Hennepin Co, MN; Imperial Co, CA)

  • U.S. Geological Survey

  • U.S. NASA

Nongovernmental

  • National Association of County and City Health Officials

  • Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium

  • American Meteorological Society

  • American Public Health Association

  • American Water Works Association

  • Associations of Schools of Public Health

  • Association of State and Territorial Health Officials

  • International Society for Disease Surveillance

  • National Hispanic Environmental Council

  • AARP

  • National Network of Public Health Institutes

  • Physicians for Social Responsibility

  • West Harlem Environmental Action, Inc

  • Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

International Indian Council of Medical Research

  • European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control

  • Health Canada

  • Public Health Agency of Canada

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

  • World Bank

  • Pan American Health Organization

  • World Health Organization

Academic

  • Arizona State University

  • Emory University School of Public Health

  • Colombia University

  • University of Michigan School of Public Health

  • Center of Excellence in Climate Change Communication Research, George Mason University

PROJECT PERIOD: Ongoing


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): FY2009 $7.5 million

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM:

Healthy Community Design Initiative, National Center for Environmental Health

(http://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/)


AGENCY:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

The Healthy Community Design Initiative establishes an evidence base that describes the relationship between health and the design of the built environment, directs a program that builds capacity and facilitates efforts to achieve outcomes in the built environment that improve public health, and works to instill a practice of decision-making among leaders and other stakeholders that ensures that health impact is considered in all projects and policies that affect the built environment. Key activities include developing and promoting the use of health impact assessment by decision makers; strengthening partnerships with organizations within and outside of the health sector that work with transportation, land-use planning, and other areas that impact health; developing surveillance systems that track built environment-related indicators and health impacts; conducting research and evaluation to define the health outcomes and populations affected by transportation systems, land-use, and greenspace; and developing communications strategies to raise awareness of healthy community design issues.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

HCDI has written or supported numerous publications on topics such as documenting the amount of walking associated with use of public transit, creating a model curriculum for a course on health and built environment, inventorying health impact assessments completed in the United States, and developing a workplace walkability audit tool. HCDI staff have given dozens of presentations to international, national, state, and local audiences that have raised awareness of the links between health and the built environment. Anecdotal evidence suggests that decision makers have been influenced by HCDI’s projects, publications and presentations to consider health in their decisions.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

HCDI partners include the US Environmental Protection Agency, US Department of Transportation, American Planning Association, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, National Association of County and City Health Officials, Association of Schools of Public Health, National Environmental Health Association, Institute of Medicine, Safe Routes to School National Partnership, Trust for Public Land, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The Prevention Institute, Local Government Commission, Congress for New Urbanism, the US Green Building Council, and schools of planning and of public health at various universities.


PROJECT PERIOD: Ongoing


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED):

Approximately $1,500,000 per year

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM:

Healthy Communities Program, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (http://198.246.98.21/healthycommunitiesprogram/index.htm)


AGENCY:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

CDC’s Healthy Communities Program supports local communities in implementing evidence-based interventions and policy, systems, and environmental changes to achieve the critical local changes necessary to prevent chronic diseases and their risk factors. The program mobilizes community leadership and resources to bring change to the places and organizations that touch people’s lives every day—at work sites, schools, community centers, and health care settings—to stem the growth of chronic disease.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

Local communities funded through the Healthy Communities Program have produced positive results, including reducing obesity through community-based interventions, reducing chronic disease risk factors and health care costs; creating healthier school environments; implementing clean indoor air ordinances; and reducing blood sugar levels among diabetes patients. Specific positive results for the program include the following:

  • The percentage of adult smokers who were advised to quit by a health care provider increased from 63 percent to 71 percent during 2004-2006

  • The percentage of adults with diabetes who reported having a foot exam in the past year increased from 71 percent to 77 percent during 2004-2006.

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

CDC funds 14 communities (via 5-year cooperative agreements) through the Strategic Alliance for Health (SAH) program. SAH communities represent a mix of urban, rural, and tribal communities funded through state and local health departments and tribes. CDC also funds ACHIEVE communities (Action Communities for Health, Innovation, and EnVironmental changE). CDC provides funds to selected national organizations, which provide technical support and funds to selected communities (approximately 40 new communities per year). CDC collaborates with five national partner organizations to extend the reach and impact of the program: National Association of County and City Health Officials, the National Association of Chronic Disease Directors, the National Recreation and Park Association, and the YMCA of the USA


PROJECT PERIOD:

Ongoing


FUNDING LEVELS (Average awards per year):


SAH communities—State coordinated small cities and rural areas - $900,000; Large cities/urban communities - $600,000; Tribes —$400,000. National Organizations under ACHIEVE: $875,000.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Decision Center for a Desert City (DCDC)

(http://dcdc.asu.edu).


AGENCY: NSF


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: As the largest of five academic projects funded by NSF’s Decision Making Under Uncertainty program, DCDC charged ASU to work with private and public water providers, local utilities, and state and federal agencies to develop tools to help water managers evaluate future water needs in the face of uncertainty due to population growth, drought, climate change, land-use change, and the urban heat island effect.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

DCDC builds tools, mostly implemented in ASU’s Decision Theater (http://dt.asu.edu), to help decision makers and the public understand the implications of specific policy choices related to water use. The tools are designed to help non-experts and experts better understand in a very interactive way the future implications of current policy choices. Widely used models like MODFLOW and PowerSim form the basis for the visualization tools, like WaterSim (http://watersim.asu.edu).


The relevance of DCDC to the NRC workshop is that computer-based models alone are insufficient to affect policy. Public officials needs convenient ways to see alternative futures. They also need to have input into research agendas carried out by universities. The original DCDC research proposal to NSF was developed with considerable input from local, regional and state stakeholders.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

Arizona Department of Water Resources, Bureau of Reclamation, Salt River Project, over a dozen other private and public water providers.


PROJECT PERIOD: 2005-2010 (renewal proposal submitted for another five years).


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $7.5M to date from NSF

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Workshop on Southeast Regional Planning & Sustainability (SERPS)

(http://www.serdp-estcp.org/workshops/serps/)


AGENCY: DoD - Office of the Secretary – the Sustainable Ranges Initiative (SRI), the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), and the Environmental Technology Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP).


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Given the tremendous economic and population growth taking place in the Southeast U.S.—along with the fact that many DoD bases are located in this region – the Southeast represents a major challenge and opportunity for sustainability planning. At the same time many academics and other stakeholders in the Southeast and around the country are undertaking—or could potentially undertake—various types of analysis and research (science, policy, and community-based) that could benefit DoD's broader sustainability efforts and be directly applied to current regional initiatives. The Sustainable Ranges Initiative (SRI) recently completed a project, funded by the DoD Legacy Program, to begin better engagement with the academic community on sustainable planning issues. This included the SRI hosting a day-long brainstorming session with a small group of academics in Atlanta in April, 2006.


As a key pilot effort of the SRI, DoD has joined with other Federal agencies and state governments of five Southeast coastal states (North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, and Alabama) to form the Southeast Regional Partnership for Planning and Sustainability (SERPPAS). SERPPAS is working to promote improved regional, state and local coordination and to better manage, sustain and enhance natural, economic and human resources as well as national defense. In particular, SERPPAS is identifying shared issues to be addressed in the region and is developing several focused collaborative projects.


Given the growing significance of the SRI overall and its interest in the Southeast in particular – and the value that can be added by enhanced research and further linkages with the academic community and others—the SRI and SERDP/ESTCP jointly sponsored a multi-day workshop to take place April 25-27, 2007. The workshop, held in Atlanta, provided a forum of about 75 participants, including not only DoD representatives and academics but also outside stakeholders representing a cross-section of groups and interests. The goals of the workshop were to:

  • To identify the high-priority issues of shared concern between the military, academia, and other key stakeholders related to sustaining military training land, regional planning, and compatible land use in the Southeast.

  • To explore collaborative approaches— particularly ones that engage the academic and research community —that can build on existing efforts and help address these high-priority issues.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: To identify shared issues of concern among the military and stakeholders as well as potential collaborative approaches to meet those concerns, the workshop was divided into five Breakout Groups — Military, Forests, Agriculture, Land Corridors, and Built Environment. A Final Report integrates the main recommendations from these Breakout Groups, and divides those recommendations into areas of policy, research, and outreach. It calls for increased DoD collaborative efforts with researchers and other stakeholders to meet the sustainability challenges of the Southeast, and identifies a number of promising areas offering opportunity for future progress. The report also includes the Breakout Reports from each of the five Breakout Groups.


The Final Report provides a suggested roadmap as the military further pursues changes in sustainability policy, research, and outreach. From fostering a new generation of military sustainability professionals to creating living laboratories for universities to engage in cutting-edge conservation research, the proposed solutions offer myriad opportunities for shifting the current thought and behavior patterns of business as usual to more sustainable approaches.


For more information about the workshop and Final Report, see http://www.serdp-estcp.org/workshops/serps/


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): DoD —SRI, SERDP/ESTCP, US Army Southern Regional Environmental Coordinator, US Army IMCOM Southeast, US Marine Corps, Installations East, American Farmland Trust , USDA Forest Service, University of Virginia, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Maryland, Clemson University, North Carolina State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Texas A&M University


PROJECT PERIOD: June 2006 – December 2007


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $200,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Sustainability Assessment of a Military Installation: A Template for Developing a Mission Sustainability Framework, Goals, Metrics and Reporting System

(http://www.serdp.org/Research/upload/SustainAssessMili.pdf)


AGENCY: Department of Defense - Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP)


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The sustainable management of U.S. military bases is a matter of increasing priority. Effective management of all the relevant aspects of long-term stability, reliability, and resilience of operations requires a comprehensive framework as well as appropriate management metrics and reporting systems to highlight emerging issues and systemic problems. The primacy of the mission to the U.S. military, together with the complexity of base operations and their relationships with the surrounding environment and community, means that simple adaptation of existing sustainability metrics and management frameworks would not produce an adequate set of tools. A tailored approach is required. To fill this gap, the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) worked in collaboration with sustainability experts and military personnel, to develop a suitable Mission Sustainability Framework (MSF) and set of sustainability metrics that could be adapted to virtually any military installation across the United States.


Naval Base Ventura County (NBVC) in southern California was selected as the prototype and reference location for the research and development (R&D) process. Highly representative of U.S. military bases in general, NBVC consists of 73 commands, in two separate locations (Pt. Mugu and Port Hueneme) housed in 1,500 buildings. NBVC exists to fulfill three main functions: training, mobilization, and testing. NBVC operates an airfield as well as a seaport. It has base housing and deploying units. It also serves many commands not directly associated with these three functions. This diversity of functions ensured that the MSF and metrics would be robust across different types of military bases.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: The key results of this project include the development of: (1) is a framework on which to build a comprehensive sustainability metrics system for U.S. military installations, (2) the Issues and Elements of management and measurement interest, (3) Conceptual Examples of sustainability metrics in each MSF category, and (4) a Conceptual Design Sketch for a sustainability reporting system, which can be further developed to work in harmony with other metric reporting systems now in use or development.


Next steps in that process should include: (1) moving beyond the Conceptual Metrics to define specific sustainability metrics for each of the Issues and Elements based on available data for an installation; (2) validating and adjusting those metrics through a data assessment process and in dialogue with expected end-users; and (3) constructing an actual sustainability reporting system (document and digital versions), using all available and relevant data, for trial use in real-time base sustainability management.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):


SERDP, NBVC, AtKisson Associates, and HydroGeoLogic, Inc.


PROJECT PERIOD: January 2006 – September 2009


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $300,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROGRAM: Urban Forestry Research and Development

(http://www.fs.fed.us/research/)


AGENCY: U.S. Forest Service


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:


Forest Service R&D supports several centers for urban forestry research. These include centers in Chicago, IL (social sciences); Davis and Riverside, CA (urban forestry, social science, and recreation); Gainesville, FL and Athens, GA (urban-wildland interface, recreation); Baltimore, MD (urban ecosystems), and New York City and Syracuse, NY (urban forest function and restoration). The Syracuse and Chicago centers have been conducting urban forestry research since the mid-1970s. Comprehensive research projects have taken place in Dayton, OH, Oakland, CA, Chicago, IL, New York, NY, Sacramento, CA, Baltimore, MD, Atlanta, GA, and several other cities. In addition to the urban focused research centers, the Northern Research Station initiated the Urban Natural Resources Institute (UNRI), which conducts research training workshops and informational web-casts.


Projects include research for the development of urban forestry management and planning tools such as iTree, long-term ecological research of urban ecosystems (Baltimore Ecosystem Study, ULTRAex grants), interdisciplinary studies (e.g., Watershed 263 in Baltimore, Calumet Initiative in Chicago), urban greening and woodland restoration (New York City PlaNYC), wildfire in the urban-wildland interface (Florida), and benefits and costs of urban forests.


Much of the Forest Service Urban R&D is applied by the State and Private Forestry (S&PF) Urban and Community Forestry field staff. In addition, we receive advice on research and technology transfer from the National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council (NUCFAC), a 15 member board appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:


i-Tree Suite of Management Tools and Web Interface that features the Urban Forest Effect Model (UFORE) and Street Tree Resource Tool for Urban Forest Managers (STRATUM). Forest Service R&D and S&PF Urban and Community Staffs have worked with private sector partners to implement i-Tree decision computer programs in hundreds of cities nation-wide. For example, Mayor Bloomberg, New York City, recently expanded the city forestry budget to increase tree cover in an effort to improve air quality, storm water runoff and other benefits.


Baltimore Ecosystem Study Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Site

  • Urban watershed studies (salinity of surface waters, post-drought response of urbanized watersheds, and elevated surface water temperature)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  • Urban stream ecology (the “hydrologic drought” syndrome and “curb subsidy” of organic matter and contaminants)

  • A spatial predictive model of heavy metal contamination of soils

  • Carbon sequestration in urban ecosystems (mechanistic models to estimate above and belowground carbon sequestration)

  • First permanent eddy covariance flux tower located in an urban landscape

  • Urban Tree Canopy assessment and tree planting goals

  • Community revitalization through watershed restoration


Chicago

  • Climate Project (development of UFORE model, cost-benefit analyses, urban heat island)

  • Aesthetic quality and public acceptance of land management

  • Urban natural resource stewardship

  • Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI, first status report of urban-wildland interface in the USA)


New York City

  • Urban-Rural Gradient Ecology (URGE) project (pioneered use of urbanization gradients to study urban environmental effects on forests)

  • Ecological reforestation of vacant urban land

  • Living Memorial Project (Memorial to victims of September 11 terrorist attack)

  • Urban Forestry Field Station (a collaborative with Department of Parks and Recreation to establish facility for urban ecological restoration research and management)


California

  • Urban atmospheric pollution and effects on adjacent forested ecosystems

  • Development of passive air monitoring systems

  • Cost-benefit analysis of green infrastructure

  • Tree benefits (carbon calculator, stormwater runoff, energy conservation)


Florida

  • Developed a dichotomous key for resource managers and homeowners to categorize ornamental shrubs by flammability characteristics

  • Urban growth effects on coastal plain ecosystems

  • Establishment and implementation of an urban forest strike team to assist local governments with damages to the urban forest by catastrophic storms


Resources Planning Act Assessment 2000 (First national assessment of urban forest ecosystems)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATE, & LOCAL):


The urban forestry research program has too many partners to list. Some critical partnerships include, National Science Foundation (LTER, ULTRAex), other federal agencies (USGS and NRCS), academic institutions (SUNY-CESF, UC Los Angeles, UC-Davis, UM Baltimore County, U Illinois, U Vermont, Columbia U, U Florida, to name a few), non-profits (American Forests, Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, and others), and the private sector (Davey Tree).


PROGRAM PERIOD: 1975 to present


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $5.45 million fiscal 2009

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Global City Indicators Program

(http://www.cityindicators.org/)


AGENCY: Global City Indicators Facility, University of Toronto, Canada


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The Global City Indicators Program was established by the World Bank and is designed to help cities monitor performance and quality of life by providing a framework to facilitate consistent and comparative collection of city indicators. The Program includes a set of indicators that are standardized, consistent, and comparable over time and across cities. This standardization enhances the ability of cities to observe trends and to facilitate comparisons with other cities. The Program recognizes the urgent need for a single comprehensive system for measuring and monitoring city performance and urban quality of life that would:

  • Enable elected officials, city managers, and the public to monitor the performance of cities over time;

  • Facilitate comparisons across cities and over time; and

  • Provide enhanced government accountability demanded by policy makers and the public.

RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

The Program was piloted with nine cities and membership is growing with over 50 cities since recent launch; creation and development of GCIF website; hosting international workshop on Metropolitan Governance; review and Technical Workshop for analysis of first round pilot city indicators; preparation of reports and publications; establishment of offices at the GCIF headquarters based at the University of Toronto; creation of advisory council and governing board.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):


Institutional partners: World Bank, UN-HABITAT, Center for Research and Urban Innovation (Dubai), CAI-Asia, ICLEI, ICMA, Metropolis, League of Cities of the Philippines, Cities Alliance; Federation of Canadian Municipalities


Private Partners: IBM, IBI Group, Zerofootprint, Design & Development International


PROJECT PERIOD: 2008-2012


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED):

Current funding: World Bank $1.2 million

Proposed funding: Ministry of Research and Innovation, Ontario Government $4 million

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: FEMA RVII: LONG-TERM COMMUNITY RECOVERY,

OVERVIEW OF SUPPORT OF SUSTAINABLE (GREEN) ACTIVITIES IN GREENSBURG, KS AND IOWA

(http://www.fema.gov/media/2008/greensburg_1yr/index.shtm)


FEMA’s ESF#14 Long-Term Community Recovery (LTCR) team helped support sustainable (green) initiatives for the Greensburg, KS tornado (DR-1699-KS) and Iowa flooding (DR-1763-IA).

Greensburg

  • Discussions involving sustainable (green) rebuilding began the night after the tornado when the Mayor and the Regional Administrator discussed the concept while sheltering in the courthouse basement during a second round of severe storms in the community.

  • The ESF#14 LTCR program provided a framework for the community to explore the elements and nuances of sustainable (green) rebuilding.

    • Organized community meeting for citizens to discuss issues, needs, and a post-disaster vision. These discussions would pave the way path for sustainability as a integral part of Greensburg’s future.

    • Organized a “Community Conversation” where 20 facilitated groups of citizens simultaneously discussed issues related to Greensburg’s future. Green rebuilding was a prominent theme throughout the conversations.

    • Hosted and coordinated community rebuilding fair. Architects and resources specific to green rebuilding were among the educational opportunities at this fair.

    • Hosted a two-day Design Workshop to review ideas and develop design concepts. Architects, planners and other technical specialists participated side by side with residents to design and plan the community. Sustainable design was a prominent theme during the workshop.

    • Co-Hosted a second rebuilding fair with USDA that also provided resources for citizens and governmental leadership to explore sustainable (green) rebuilding.

    • Convened the Public Square where citizens could organize discussions, explore issues and develop community leadership.

    • Mission Assignments to DOE and EPA to provide subject matter expertise to support sustainable (green) rebuilding.

    • Provided office space to Integrated Building and Construction Solutions where classes and one-on-one green rebuilding strategies were available. Provided venue for demonstration display of rebuilding best practices.

    • Develop a Long-Term Community Recovery Plan that provides the framework for project implementation.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  • An entire section dedicated to exploring specific green rebuilding strategies

  • Explored green opportunities in nearly every project and program in the plan.

Inventory of Greensburg Green Rebuilding Projects

Long-Term Community Recovery Plan

Provided the framework for additional planning (such as the Sustainable Comprehensive Plan) as well as provided guidance for residential and infrastructure projects and programs to use sustainable development to redefine the community

Sustainable Comprehensive Plan

Explored green strategies for the entire community

Downtown Master Plan

Explored green strategies for downtown design and development

Kiowa County Courthouse Renovation

Designed and certified as LEED Gold

Sun Chips Business Incubator

Designed and certified as LEED Platinum

Community Arts Center

Designed and Certified LEED Platinum

BTI John Deere Dealership

1st LEED Platinum JD Dealership

Shank Motors

1st Green GM Dealership

Residential

Wide variety of projects exploring different strategies for rebuilding

Wind Farm

Greensburg City Hall

Designed as LEED Platinum

Kiowa County Memorial Hospital

Designed as LEED Platinum

Greensburg Schools

Designed as LEED Platinum

Iowa Flooding

Intro

Each plan explored strategies for green rebuilding based on the level that the community was interested in going green. Below is an inventory of project and programs that explored green rebuilding in each community plan or report.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  • Cedar Falls/Waterloo (Cedar River Initiative)

    • Smart Growth Implementation Assistance program (SGIA)

      • To identify critical corridors which can absorb new development. It will include a charrette/workshop for visualizing the redeveloped corridors.

      • Evaluates local codes policies and applicable state/federal programs (such as HMGP) to identify barriers and opportunities for support infill, better redevelopment and economic growth.

      • Includes a public open house of the benefits of smart growth approaches.

  • Cedar Rapids

    • Smart Growth Audit

      • Cedar Rapids is looking at developing policies to support sustainable building practices

      • LTCR Coordinated communication with EPA-SGIA and staff which helped identify processes Cedar Rapids Community Development Dept. could use to enhance and better implement Smart Growth principals. The Smart Growth Audit was identified as way to implement these concepts.

      • Drafted a Smart Growth Audit as a primer for Cedar Rapids

      • Developed initial implementation action steps.

    • Co-Generation Feasibility Study

      • Project background and summary and status organized for the Long-Term Community Recovery Report

      • Assisted the scoping of this project further for presentation to the Inter-agency Coordination Team (IACT)

      • A number of agencies agreed to continue to discuss this project further (current status unknown)

      • Developed initial implementation action steps.

    • Comprehensive Energy Plan

      • Project background and summary and status organized for the Long-Term Community Recovery Report

      • Assisted the scoping of this project further for presentation to the Inter-agency Coordination Team (IACT) where members identified Department of Energy as a possible partner for the project.

      • Developed initial implementation action steps.

    • Green Building Workshop

      • LTCR used project specific experience to provide detailed background information/sample of another Green Building Program including the ordinance

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

establishing the program, and checklists for staff, Planning Commission and City Council.

  • Developed initial implementation action steps.

  • Smart Growth Implementation Assistance (SGIA)

    • Project is to continue smart growth audit activities by reviewing development codes, policies and practices.

    • Help identify barriers to implementing smart growth initiatives

    • Establish and prioritize short and long-term smart growth opportunities.

    • Services available through FEMA ESF#14 Mission Assignment.

    • Site visit scheduled for September 9-10

    • Workshop is planned as part of the September site visit

  • Coralville

    • SGIA

      • Visioning exercise

      • Review of development codes and standards to encourage smart growth

      • Identify funding opportunities for smart growth initiatives.

  • Iowa City

    • Wastewater Treatment Plant Consolidation

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Strategy

    • SGIA

      • Visioning for the redevelopment of the South Gilbert Street Commercial Corridor

  • New Hartford

    • SGIA

      • To find solutions to storm water management issues

    • Expand City Limits (alternatives to floodplain location)

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Plan

    • Improve Stormwater Drainage System

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Plan

  • Oakville

    • Community Rebuilding/Relocation Strategies

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Plan

    • Construct Duplex Infill Housing

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Plan

    • Adaptive Reuse of Old Oakville School

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Plan

  • Palo

    • Center City and Future Growth Strategy

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Strategy

    • Iowa’s Living Roadways Community Visioning Program Implementation

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Strategy

  • Parkersburg

    • Relocate Ballfields Outside Beaver Creek Floodplain

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Report

  • Waverly

    • Identify Infill Opportunities

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Strategy

    • Remove and Construct Housing Outside the Floodplain

      • Scoping of project for the Long-Term Community Recovery Strategy

  • Inter-agency Coordination Team (IACT)

    • Provides a venue for projects that need multiple partners or may have some implementation barrier to be discussed between multiple state and federal agencies

  • Mission Assignment and Interagency Agreement to EPA for SGIA

    • Five communities selected to receive technical assistance for smart growth initiatives.

    • Includes potential workshops, audit of codes and land development regulations, development of green infrastructure strategies and more.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Research Program of the Chicago Wilderness Science Team (http://www.chicagowilderness.org/initiatives.php)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: Several institutions and agencies that are part of the Chicago Wilderness Alliance


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Socio-ecological research designed to provide a scientific foundation for the management, conservation and restoration of biodiversity and the delivery of ecosystem services in the greater Chicago metropolitan area


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: Building of a diverse research team that is now initiating several projects. The three major projects are listed below.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):


Note: The numbers in parentheses refer to participation in the three research projects listed below.


Chicago Department of the Environment (3)

DePaul University (1, 2, 3)

Field Museum (2, 3)

Lincoln Park Zoo (3)

Loyola University (3)

Purdue University (3)

University of Illinois at Chicago (1, 2, 3)

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2)

US Forest Service (2, 3)


PROJECT PERIOD: See below


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): See below


PROJECTS:

  1. 2009-2011 —Gaylord and Dorothy Donnelley Foundation ($236,000): “Chicago Wilderness land management research program: Building upon the foundations”

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  1. 2009-2013 —National Science Foundation (DEB-BE-0909451) ($1,474,491): “CNH: Collaborative Research: Coupled natural-human systems in the Chicago Wilderness: Evaluating the biodiversity and social outcomes of different models of restoration planning”

  2. PENDING (2009-2011) —National Science Foundation (0948484) ($299,920): “ULTRA-Ex: Connecting the social and ecological sciences with planners, managers, and the public: Building a broad foundation for the Chicago Region ULTRA"

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: National Park Service’s Center for Urban Ecology (http://www.nps.gov/cue/)


AGENCY: National Park Service (NPS)


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The Center for Urban Ecology's mission is to provide scientific guidance, technical assistance and education for the preservation, conservation and enhancement of park resources within urbanizing landscapes. Established in 1985, the Center for Urban Ecology (CUE) identifies and responds to the natural resource needs of NPS’s National Capital Region parks, located in the greater Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. The CUE staff focuses on urban ecology within the matrix of the region's nationally significant natural and cultural resources. Through science, service, and partnerships, CUE assists managers in understanding, protecting, and restoring natural resources for future generations. An interdisciplinary staff of 12 provides technical assistance on many aspects of natural resources and management. Due to the diversity of landscapes found in the National Capital Region parks, resource managers identify science and management issues based on individual park needs.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: NPS draws on Research Learning Centers, Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Units, and Inventory and Monitoring Networks to provide ecological science for managing natural areas of the national parks. In 1998, Congress authorized and directed NPS to assure that management of the national parks is enhanced by the availability and use of a broad program of science.


The Chesapeake Watershed Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, of which NPS is a partner, has promoted stewardship and integrated ecosystem management of natural and cultural resources within the Chesapeake Watershed since 2001 through collaborative research, technical assistance, and education. The Chesapeake Watershed is home to more than 3,600 species and over 15 million people, all competing for resources and space within the 64,000 square mile region. Twelve university/research institutions and six federal agencies comprise the Chesapeake Watershed Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit. These partners work together to provide leadership in watershed science and stewardship.


The National Capital Region Network, responsible for inventory and monitoring, has monitored vital signs in 11 National Capital Region parks since 2001. Vital signs monitoring informs managers of the condition of water, air, geologic resources, plants and animals, and the various ecological, biological, and physical processes that act on those resources. Knowing the condition of natural resources in national parks is fundamental to managing park resources in a manner that “preserves, unimpaired, the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations.”


The Urban Ecology Research Learning Alliance is an alliance of 15 parks in the region and 16 formal and 5 informal (research and education) partnerships. Since 2002, the Urban Ecology Research Learning Alliance has facilitated research in all parks within the

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

National Capital Region by following a goal of increasing research on the natural and cultural resources in the National Capital Region and communicating new information about its parks. The Alliance is the point of communication for scientific research and inventory and monitoring information to parks' staff and the public. Alliance projects provide opportunities for education and interpretation of the region's natural resources. The Urban Ecology Research Learning Alliance’s interdisciplinary research projects have developed through partnerships with various researchers, agencies and institutions, as well as the Chesapeake Watershed Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit. Additionally, 43 students have participated in diverse research and education projects facilitated by the Alliance. In FY08, the Urban Ecology Research Learning Alliance began implementing a comprehensive Urban Ecology Science and Education Program to promote science and resource management focused internships and fellowships in the National Capital Region’s parks.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

Research opportunities may include student, volunteer, and interpretive components. Projects are funded through the Urban Ecology Research Learning Alliance, the Chesapeake Watershed Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, and the National Capital Region Network.


PROJECT PERIOD: NA


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT): $3,125,000 (CUE Budget)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/)


AGENCY: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: A major emphasis of the NAWQA program is to understand the relationship between urban land use and water quality. Specifically, the goal is to describe biological, chemical, and physical characteristics of urban water resources over time, and relate those characteristics to natural processes and human activities that control the movement and quality of water within and among urban watersheds. The intended outcome is an improved scientific basis for decision makers to protect urban waters in varying geographic and environmental settings across the Nation, and to manage and prioritize competing demands, such as for safe drinking water, aquatic ecosystem health, native and endangered species preservation, and recreation in urban areas. NAWQA does not address urban issues with one network. The program uses a collection of networks and studies that are each designed with specific questions, that together help to accomplish the overall goal.

RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: 1


National Topical Studies

  • Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems (EUSE) addresses the magnitude and pattern of response in stream hydrology, habitat, water chemistry, and biological communities as watersheds are urbanized in 11 metropolitan areas.

  • Transport of Anthropogenic and Natural Contaminants to Public Supply Wells (TANC) provides local and regional-scale vulnerability assessments of public supply wells affected by contamination from multiple sources, including urban.

  • Mercury in Stream Ecosystems addresses the questions of what are the concentrations of mercury in water, sediment, and fish; and how do biological, chemical, and other environmental characteristics govern the methylation, transport, and bioaccumulation of mercury in undeveloped and urban streams in 3 metropolitan areas.

National- and Regional-Scale Assessments

  • Pesticides in urban streams (water, bed sediment, fish tissue) and shallow ground water.

  • Nutrients in urban streams and shallow ground water.

  • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in urban streams and shallow ground water.

  • Trace elements in bed sediments, fish tissue, and ground water in urbanized areas.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
  • Ecology sampling studies that assess health of fish, invertebrate, algal communities, and riparian habitat.

Special Studies

  • Parking Lot Sealcoats: A Major Source of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Urban and Suburban Environments is a collaborative study with the City of Austin, Texas.

  • Contaminant Trends in Lake Sediments (CTLS) uses sediment-core analyses to evaluate trends over time of persistent urban contaminants, such as trace elements, DDT, PCBs, chlordane, and PAHs in reservoirs and lakes in 42 metropolitan areas.

  • All USGS NAWQA Publications Dealing with Urban Areas (see urbanization link): http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/bib/

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Pesticide Programs, Superfund

  • Center for Watershed Protection

  • Source Water Collaborative

  • Duke University

  • City of Austin, Texas

  • Association of State Drinking Water Administrators

PROJECT PERIOD: 2001-2012


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT): $5 million (estimated NAWQA urban component) in Federal Fiscal Year 2009

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Impact of urbanization on nitrogen biogeochemistry in xeric ecosystems

(http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=0918457&WT.z_pims_ id=13690)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: NSF


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The overall objective of this new, three-year project is to understand how urbanization of desert ecosystems influences nitrogen cycling processes, especially those associated with stormwater. We ask three primary questions: 1) How does urbanization affect the processes controlling delivery of nitrate from upland to lowland parts of the desert landscape? 2) What are the dominant nitrate sources in arid urban watersheds? 3) How does the substrate type of washes, through which stormwater flows, modulate the removal or transformation of nitrate? Our results will help to inform better design of stormwater conveyance systems to enhance ecosystem services besides flood containment.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): The project is a collaborative effort between ecologists, hydrologists, and stable-isotope biogeochemists at the University of Arizona, Arizona State University (including the CAP LTER), and Purdue University. Community partners include the cities of Tucson, Phoenix, Tempe, Glendale, Scottsdale, and Mesa, and the USGS and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.


PROJECT PERIOD: September 2009-August 2012


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): Combined total of $876,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Effects of urban atmospheric pollution on desert ecosystems


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: NSF


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: This effort has been supported by a 3-year NSF grant and is currently under consideration for renewal. The objectives are to explore the potential for urban pollutants, especially inorganic nitrogen, organic carbon, and ozone to alter ecosystem functioning in unmanaged desert sites both within and downwind from cities. These chemical stressors also are considered in concert with other urban effects, such as recreational use and urban heat island. The research team has included atmospheric chemists, ecosystem scientists, ecohydrologists, and ecosystem modelers.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: Although impacts of urban pollution are well known for mesic biomes, this research to date has shown that desert ecosystems are relatively resistant to the effects of urban air pollutants.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): The project is a collaborative, multidisciplinary effort centered at Arizona State University, with co-investigators at The Pennsylvania State University and in private consulting, and closely aligned with the CAP LTER at Arizona State University. Community partners include private, city, county, and state parks and USDA Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management lands in the Phoenix metro area.


PROJECT PERIOD: April 2005-March 2009; renewal proposed for March 2010-February 2013


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): Funds received total ~$750,000; renewal request for $855,000.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: A Workshop on the Concept of a National Hazard Vulnerability and Resiliency Observatory

(http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/RAVON.pdf)


AGENCY: National Science Foundation (Infrastructure management and extreme events and decision risk and management programs) and United States Geological Survey.


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: This project will conduct a workshop of leading natural hazards and disaster researchers to address the creation of a National Hazard Vulnerability and Resiliency Observatory Network. The focus of this observatory network will be vulnerability and resiliency as they relate to natural and technological hazards and disasters, not deliberate or willful acts of terrorism.


There is a need for concerted research efforts to reduce our nation's vulnerabilities to natural disasters and to enhance resiliency. This workshop will take the initial steps toward the development of a national framework for interdisciplinary comparative research on natural hazard vulnerability and resiliency that should be undertaken through a national observatory network. This framework will identify the core research themes and more specific research questions related to hazard vulnerability and resiliency. The workshop will also identify critical data that should be collected and organized in order to enhance and facilitate research efforts for understanding and monitoring vulnerability and resiliency. The overall structure of the observatory network and location of research sites will also be addressed.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

A workshop was held in June 2008, and researchers throughout the United States and Canada attended. That workshop developed the concept of a Resiliency and Vulnerability Observatory Network (RAVON) as a necessary and fundamentally important complement to the existing national observatories such as the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS); the Long Term Ecological Research Network (LTER,); and the National Environmental Observatory Network (NEON), that would directly address the human and social structures and dynamics of our nation’s urban systems that are driving anthropomorphic environmental changes. Vulnerability research now increasingly includes not simply hazard exposure and the physical characteristics of hazard agents themselves, but also social factors that are now also seen as critical dimensions in vulnerability analysis and assessment. Even more recently, disaster resilience has emerged as a critical focus area demanding, not simply the modeling of how complex social systems resist, rebound and respond to disaster, but also a broader ecological perspective, placing social systems in interaction with bio-physical systems to better assess changing vulnerabilities and ultimately resilience. The emergence of vulnerability and resilience science in the hazards field has brought into even sharper focus the once chronic, but now acute limitations of current approaches to hazards research. RAVON offers the possibility of transforming the nature of research on natural hazard vulnerability and disaster resiliency so critical for establishing sustainable urban systems. It provides a mechanism for dramatically altering the nature of the resiliency and vulnerability science by providing the opportunities to develop

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

comprehensive long term data sets on urban systems in multiple locations that will make possible temporal and comparative investigations that researchers will never be able to undertake given normal funding opportunities and structures.


A summary document was produced entitled, Toward a Resiliency and Vulnerability Observatory Network: RAVON. Copies of the report can be obtained as the following website location: http://archone.tamu.edu/hrrc/Publications/researchreports/RAVON.pdf


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

This project was jointly funded by the Unites States Geological Survey and the National Science Foundation.


PROJECT PERIOD: August 2008-2010


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $83,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Twin Cities Household Ecosystem Project

(http://www.tchep.umn.edu/)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: NSF


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION (Proposal abstract): Humans are increasingly living in urban ecosystems. Cities cover only 1-2 percent of the earth’s surface, but they are important hotspots of biogeochemical cycling because they concentrate the consumption of food and energy that are produced beyond their boundaries. Thus, cities are largely unsustainable, requiring large imports of fossil fuels, food and water. Furthermore, cities are important sources of greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants resulting from fossil fuel combustion and waste generation that lead to nutrient loading downwind and downstream. Yet, little is known about the socio-ecological coupling between human behavioral factors and biogeochemical cycles. The long-term goal of the proposed research is to advance understanding of integrated human-biophysical interactions in urban ecosystems towards improved knowledge and management of urban biogeochemical cycles. Specifically, this research seeks to understand the coupling between household biogeochemical fluxes and socioeconomic factors along an urban to exurban gradient in the Minneapolis-St. Paul (Twin Cities) metropolitan region, Minnesota. The project focuses on household consumption because it contributes substantially to urban biogeochemical cycling and because it is potentially flexible and therefore amenable to reduction in response to changes in factors that influence household choices.


As part of the ongoing Twin Cities Household Ecosystem Project (TCHEP), a social survey of households (3100 respondents) was conducted along an urban-to-exurban gradient (from 6 to 1,200 houses/km2); landscape characteristics were surveyed for a subset of households. Survey-generated data about key behaviors that influence biogeochemical fluxes (e.g., driving, air travel, diet, pets, lawn care) are used as input to a Household Flux Calculator (HFC, developed with earlier funds) to generate total and component carbon (C), nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) fluxes for each household. The survey also gathered demographic data and linked behaviors with household attitudes, norms, and perceived control, all Theory of Planned Behavior factors. The proposed research aims to (1) use the TCHEP database to examine how socioeconomic and biophysical factors influence household decisions and, thus, the fluxes of C, N, and P through households along a gradient of housing density; (2) determine the effect of consumption and pollution production by single family homes on fluxes of C, N, and P at the scale of the urban study region; and (3) examine how behaviors can be influenced through social networks to change consumption choices and, therefore, elemental fluxes. Thus, the study will establish a feedback loop between household choices, elemental fluxes and back to household choices. Elucidating the nature of such socio-environmental coupling should stimulate novel approaches to making cities more sustainable, reducing urban pollution, and reducing urban contributions to climate change.


This study has intellectual merit in that it will integrate human choice into an overall model of urban biogeochemistry. The study will quantify the effect of behavioral flexibility (and its underlying behavioral controls) on elemental fluxes through households. Understanding of the coupling between human behavior and biogeochemistry will transform our approach to reducing pollution through identification

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

of behavioral changes that reduce pollutant sources. The study will achieve broader impacts through extensive educational training of numerous undergraduate, graduate and post-doctoral trainees; development of an interactive web page for non-scientists in collaboration with the Science Museum of Minnesota’s Earth Buzz web project; use of the HFC model as a teaching tool in undergraduate courses taught by project co-PIs; and global dissemination of the TCHEP survey tool, the TCHEP database, and the HFC tool through the world-wide web (via the Cedar Creek LTER website). In addition, project outcomes can be directly applied to developing a new paradigm for pollution control, a paradigm based on source reduction, information feedback loops to guide adaptive management, and greater citizen involvement.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: We designed and implemented a mail survey of single-family, owner-occupied, detached homes along an urban-exurban gradient. This poster focuses on the methodologies of the TCHEP survey and the contributions to an integrating Household Flux Calculator that estimates element fluxes associated with home energy use, air and car travel, diet, pets, paper and plastics, and vegetation. Our conceptual boundary for a household included the physical property of each household plus all personal transportation by household occupants. Using a modified Dillman method, we sent mail surveys to randomly selected homes in the sample frame and received approximately 3,000 responses, supporting generalizable findings; 2,000 of these respondents provided access to their energy records. We then conducted a field survey of vegetation at 400 randomly chosen respondent households. A key conclusion is that the unique TCHEP methodology, a hybrid approach that includes a mail survey, permission to access utility records, ground-based sampling, and readily available GIS data, can be used to estimate C, N, and P fluxes for large numbers of households. The simultaneous collection of demographic characteristics and behavioral attributes has allowed us to examine relationships between elemental fluxes and consumption behaviors in these households.


A key hypothesis is that most component fluxes (e.g., transportation) would be highly skewed. Results to date suggest that skewness follows the order airline > household energy > human food. The first major papers will be generated over the next six months.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): None


PROJECT PERIOD: Refunded, September 1, 2009 to August 31, 2012.


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $1.5 million

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Sustainability in a Changing Climate

(http://web.mit.edu/dusp/epp/music/wwd/projects/index.html)


ORGANIZATIONS: Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the U.S. Geological Survey


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

Over the course of the program’s research we will compare city pairs in different environments and cultures, which will include developing countries, to develop robust strategies and methods to achieve sustainability. Our research includes the use of role-play games to provide a “safe harbor” to explore planning options to achieve sustainable and resilient cites; one such project was conducted with the state of Maryland as part of their Coast Smart program. (Visit http://scienceimpact.mit.edu for the full range of MUSIC activities.) Our goal is to change practice through the development and implementation of new methods and tools.


Urban sustainability research and development undertaken by the MIT-USGS Science Impact Collaborative* (MUSIC) is organized under an activity called Communities and Climate Change. The underlying premise of this R&D is that collective action, at all scales and levels of governance and society, is needed to address the impacts of climate change to achieve sustainable communities and ecosystems. We ask the question: Do institutions need to be realigned in a way that fosters collective decisions made in the common interest and for the common good? Through case study research, we will examine how climate change effects strain the current institutional, legal, regulatory, and planning tools available, which evolved in a stable climate and with the assumption that climate would remain stable. That's no longer true. Current decision making processes and institutions are not adequate to deal with changing climate. Our research will consider if this assertion is valid. Through action research, we will develop and test alternative strategies, institutional arrangements, methods, and tools that include joint fact-finding, collaborative adaptive management, collaborative modeling, scientific and technological (engineering) applications, GIS, and scenario future planning to achieve sustainability in a changing climate. Cities are complex adaptive systems. They are dynamic, open and connected systems, which implies that social, ecological and economic elements of cities are interrelated, and are influenced in a complex way by diverse external factors. Moreover, the urban environment cannot be decoupled from the natural environment, they are interdependent; we have been taught this lesson many times—Hurricane Katrina is only one example—but have yet to learn it. Planning for cities and metropolitan complexes needs to be done within the context of natural processes and changing climate. Secure and healthy communities and towns are dependent upon healthy, functioning ecosystems. And, like ecosystems, to be sustainable cities need to be resilient so that they can adapt to inevitable surprises. To design cities to be resilient we need to analyze their vulnerabilities. Three fundamental questions of our research are: How does climate change influence the vulnerability of a city as a system

*

MUSIC is a partnership between the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the U.S. Geological Survey. It is a component of the Environmental Policy and Planning Group, which is a subgroup in MIT’s Department of Urban Studies and Planning.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

and how can interventions (adaptive strategies) be developed in order to reduce this vulnerability? Can adaptive strategies and collaborative governance help to make cities more resilient to climate change? How can we manage and make collective decisions across multi-jurisdictions and scales?


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

We have completed a study of Somerville, Massachusetts where we developed methods and tools to manage water drainage in a changing climate, and will do a comparative study in Aurora, Colorado— a different geographic, climatic, and ecological setting. We start a five-year program of action research and development September 2009 by looking at Rotterdam, the Netherlands and Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):


Communities and Climate Change is an interdisciplinary effort among urban planners, landscape ecologists, landscape architects, social scientists, natural scientists, and engineers; collaborating institutions include the Dutch applied science organization, TNO, the Dutch bureau for Environmental Assessment, the University of Amsterdam, the French environmental organization, Cemagref, the non-profit organization, Batelle, and the U.S. Geological Survey.


PROJECT PERIOD: 5 year program beginning in September 2009.


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): N/A

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: The Evolving Morphology of Metropolitan Regions (http://www.reeis.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/210442.html)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: University of California at Davis, Department of Environmental Design, Landscape Architecture Program


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

This ongoing project analyzes the historical growth and current built landscape patterns of urban regions, using GIS, historical maps from the Library of Congress and other sites, Google Earth, and local data. An initial phase of the project compared urban growth and morphologies of six U.S. regions: Boston, Atlanta, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, and Portland OR. Results were published as “The Evolution of Built Landscapes in Metropolitan Regions.” 2008. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 27 (4) 400-416. This article received an Honorable Mention for the Chester Rapkin Award honoring best article of the year in this publication.


A second phase of the project is analyzing the Sacramento metropolitan region in greater detail, mapping urban growth at 10 year increments, and comparing environmental characteristics of different built form types using CityGreen software. This phase of the project will be completed in late 2009/early 2010.


Additional phases of the project may compare development of U.S. metropolitan areas with others internationally.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

The most dramatic finding so far is the rapid growth of rural sprawl (lot sizes between 1 and 5 acres) in the 1980-2010 timeframe. This type of form accounted for 57 percent of land area developed in the six sample cities during this time period.


A second finding was the effectiveness of the Portland urban growth boundary in reducing rural sprawl, when the Oregon portion of that region is compared with the Washington state portion, and with other metropolitan areas.


A more general finding is the rapid proliferation of built landscape types in recent decades, and the increasing fragmentation of form within U.S. metropolitan regions. The lack of connection between different development types has profound implications for motor vehicle use and related emissions. New Urbanist-style development found in some regions represents an attempt to counteract this trend, but so far accounts for a very small percentage of the land area developed. More proactive public sector regulation of large-scale development patterns appears necessary to counteract fragementation.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): None


PROJECT PERIOD: 2005-ongoing


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $25,000 in UCD funds

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM:

Double Exposures: Socio-ecological Vulnerabilities in the Miami-Dade Urban Region, submitted and recommended for funding to the NSF Urban Long-Term Research Area Exploratory Awards (ULTRA-Ex) program.

(http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=0948988&WT.z_pims_ id=503283)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: Florida International University


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:


The greater Miami urban area is characterized by a unique and paradoxical set of conditions and forces: a global commerce center, where assets are vulnerable to catastrophic coastal disasters; an affluent city with among the highest rates of poverty in the nation; a de-vegetated city situated between and dependent upon unique and protected natural environments; a city that receives significant rainfall, but whose freshwater supply is critically vulnerable to climatic change. What unites these strengths and vulnerabilities is their shared dependence on the interaction between local and global drivers. We will use the two-year ULTRA-Ex award to ask: How do global biophysical and socio-economic drivers interact with local processes to determine the socio-ecological structure and dynamics of cities? In addressing this question we conceptualize urban Miami as uniquely vulnerable to the double exposure of economic globalization and climate change, while recognizing the linkages, feedbacks and synergies between the transformative processes of global environmental change and economic globalization as they impact local communities.


The project will convene three themed working groups —1) Coastal Vulnerabilities, 2) Urban Land Stewardship, and 3) Freshwater Sustainability—that will include researchers, educators, community stakeholders, and state and local government agencies. Each group will describe the spatial distribution of populations and resources; derive a conceptual model of the controls on population/resource vulnerability to climate change and globalization; and identify spatial and statistical relationships among resources and vulnerabilities, providing a template for future empirical validation. Working group products will include peer-reviewed articles; white papers for policy makers and community partners; educational products including course modules and dissertation research; and various technical products including GIS databases, algorithms, and interactive maps.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

South Florida Water Management District, Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Management, Miami-Dade County Climate Change Task Force, Miami-Dade County Water and Sewer Department, Miami-Dade School System, Everglades Foundation (NGO), U.S. Forest Service, Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden


PROJECT PERIOD: Two years, beginning January 2010

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $299,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM:

Earth Science and Applied Sciences Programs

(http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/index.html)

(http://appliedsciences.nasa.gov/)


AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

Although NASA has no official program dedicated to research on urban systems or urban sustainability, the NASA Earth Science Research and Analysis (R&A) and Applied Sciences (AS) programs have offered proposal calls related to urban analysis via the Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES) process. In the NASA R&A program (http://nasascience.nasa.gov/earth-science), urban systems and urban sustainability are addressed through the Land Cover and Land Use Change program. Additionally, urban sustainability research is also approached through the R&A’s focus areas on Carbon Cycle & Ecosystems and Climate Variability and Change. Perhaps a more pertinent avenue for research on urban systems and sustainability is provided by the NASA AS program. The AS program (http://nasascience.nasa.gov/earth-science/applied-sciences) has 7 focus areas: Agriculture, Air Quality, Ecological Forecasting, Natural Disasters, Public Health, Water Resources, and Weather. Outside of agriculture and weather, the remaining 5 focus areas all have direct or indirect applications to urban systems and sustainability. In particular, the air quality and public health national applications areas have proposals funded that relate to urban areas, urban decision making and urban sustainability.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

Studies completed as part of the AS program have related to the urban heat island effect (UHI) and its impact on air quality. These studies have looked at the relationship of urban areas, the UHI, and air quality impacts as associated with PM2.5 (particulate matter <2.5 microns); e.g., whether the UHI causes an increase in PM2.5 over urban areas. Ongoing studies are analyzing the public health impacts of PM2.5 and how cities exacerbate air quality and health impacts. Other studies have assessed how NASA satellite data can be used to quantify land surface temperatures over urban areas as they affect development of the UHI. It has been observed that city size and UHI development are directly related, which is of serious concern given that the number of “megacities” — those urban areas with 10 million or more inhabitants - will increase to over 20 by 2025. Additionally, NASA Earth science data have been incorporated into urban growth modeling scenarios to illustrate both how urban areas have expanded in the last 20-30 years, and how cities will grow given modeled input data to predict urban sprawl in the future.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

The NASA AS program in particular, has focused on bringing in partners at the national, state, and local level to illustrate how policy and decision makers can utilize NASA satellite data within a decision making framework. Partnerships at the federal level are

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

varied including, USGS, EPA, NOAA, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). State partnerships are even more wide-ranging, with the AS program working with state planning offices, state offices of public health, state emergency management agencies, and host of other intra-state agencies and offices. Numerous local partnerships are also part of the AS program’s collaborative network, all of which are related in some way to local decision making offices and agencies where it has been demonstrated, or is in the process of being demonstrated, that NASA Earth science satellite data can be an integral part of the decision making, risk management, public health, and overall public infrastructure process.


PROJECT PERIOD:

Funding for urban systems and sustainability work is conducted via the ROSES proposal process. Calls for proposals that have direct relevance to these areas are currently listed, or will be listed, on the NSPIRES web site at http://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/.


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED):

Current and proposed funding levels for are provided by the NASA Earth Science and Applications Programs as listed on the NSPIRES web site.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Greater Everglades Ecosystem Decision Support System (South Florida Ecosystem Portfolio Model, “EPM”)

(http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5181/)


AGENCY: USGS


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Land-use and preservation/restoration decisions have significant, but highly uncertain impacts on habitat quality and connectivity, water quality and quantity, flow patterns, and other aspects of ecosystem health in the Greater Everglades Ecosystem. In land use decision making these impacts are often considered at the scale of individual proposed land-use changes. Thus, impacts related to the cumulative regional impacts of multiple land-use changes are often ignored. This project designed and implemented a regional land-use use decision support system as a web-enabled GIS-based set of models and visualization tools. The South Florida Ecosystem Portfolio Model (EPM) compares proposed regional land use patterns (at the scale of Miami-Dade County) in terms of relevant ecological, economic, and social criteria that combine information about probable outcomes (potential land use consequences), as well as value judgments (preferences) elicited from users. Based on on-going meetings and interviews with stakeholders and potential tool users, we focus on three dimensions of land use/cover-related anthropocentric value: ecosystem services (or ecological value), market land price, and indicators of community quality-of-life.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE: The ecological value and market land price components (suite of models) have been implemented and the community quality-of-life component is currently being designed for later implementation. The EPM prototype is now available online (http://lcat.usgs.gov/ sflorida/sflorida.html; password protected: user = sflorida; password = alligator). The EPM is being tested by USGS with the Everglades and Biscayne National Parks using real-world proposed land-use change test cases in Miami-Dade County. Model results should support the responses that the Park Service provides in its role as stakeholder in regional land-use planning. The results of the methodologies used for test cases will be used to improve the EPM and will be published. The South Florida EPM approach has been extended to two other applications: (1) the Puget Sound EPM, a set of models that relate upland land-use change and nearshore human modifications (e.g., beach armoring) to changes in nearshore ecosystem goods and services; and (2) the Santa Cruz EPM, in support of the “Predicting Environmental Consequences of Urban Development on the US-Mexico Border” project.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): South Florida EPM: Everglades and Biscayne National Parks. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Vero Beach. Puget Sound EPM: U.S Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the U.S .Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA); Santa Cruz Watershed EPM: USEPA and other partners to be determined.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

PROJECT PERIOD: 2005 - 2010


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $410,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: The Land Use Portfolio Model (LUPM) -Risk Assessment and Analysis for Natural Hazards (Geographic Analysis and Monitoring) (http://geography.wr.usgs.gov/science/lupm.html)


AGENCY: US Geological Survey


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Natural hazards, including floods, fires, and earthquake-triggered hazards such as strong ground-shaking, landslides and liquefaction, pose a significant threat to public safety and economic health worldwide. This project focuses on applying economic and geographic tools to the study of natural-hazard risk and on developing decision support systems (DSS) for evaluating potential public policies for mitigating that risk. The underlying goal is to facilitate the use of USGS and other earth-science information to develop tools to aid communities in reducing their vulnerability to natural hazards. This involves integrating many kinds of data, such as natural science, geography, and socioeconomic, and developing methods using a DSS for translating the information into socially relevant forms. Furthermore, this project aims to understand the reasons behind, and research ways to reduce, the gap in the availability of natural-hazard DSS that estimate damage, loss, and risk, and the use of such tools by natural-hazards decision makers.


The Land Use Portfolio Model (LUPM) and GIS-based DSS were developed as tools to support natural-hazards risk analysis, and are designed to help decision makers analyze risk-reduction policies. The LUPM is a geospatial scenario-based tool that incorporates hazard-event uncertainties, asset values at risk, conditional-damage probabilities, and mitigation costs, to estimate loss, risk, and return on investment for different mitigation strategies. Current objectives include performing a comprehensive risk analysis demonstration for earthquake hazards for mobile homes in southern California; using simulation modeling as an alternate method for estimating LUPM model uncertainties and risk curves; designing a study to demonstrate how FEMA’s HAZUS-MH loss-estimation tool can be linked with the LUPM to improve natural-hazard decision making; and developing a tool to link the LUPM and HAZUS-MH software.


Past and present case studies include earthquake-triggered liquefaction in Watsonville, California; flooding in Squamish, British Columbia, Canada; earthquake hazards in Memphis, Tennessee; earthquake-triggered landslides in Ventura County, California; and earthquake hazards in the San Francisco Bay Area. The software that was developed to calculate the LUPM equations is designed to work within ArcGIS desktop applications. Two versions of the LUPM software (LUPM version 1.0) include an ArcGIS tool extension and an ArcGIS Model Builder tool accessible through ArcGIS Toolbox.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:


USGS and the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) scientists collaborated to apply the LUPM to natural-hazards risk-reduction decisions in Squamish, British Columbia, Canada. Squamish, a coastal community located about 40 miles north of Vancouver, will be the gateway to the 2010 Winter Olympics in Whistler, and is predicted to face rapid

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

population growth over the next 25 years. The LUPM was used to run scenarios to analyze the sensitivity of risk results to decision parameters. A hypothetical analysis of the cost-effectiveness of two mitigation strategies illustrated risk-return trade-offs between the two options. A GSC-USGS workshop presenting GIS analyses and LUPM results to Squamish community planners raised awareness and educated planners about how to integrate the risk of natural hazards into the planning process and the potential benefits of incorporating science into planning decisions.


The USGS collaborated with the City of Memphis and Shelby County, Tennessee, to develop a prototype web-based LUPM tool to evaluate alternative earthquake risk mitigation strategies. The DSS is intended to provide: (1) quantitative policy analysis of construction standards for earthquake risk mitigation for commercial and public property over long planning periods by estimating the expected return on investment for a proposed level of safety, and (2) estimates of the net benefits (losses avoided less mitigation costs) of alternative building standards. Work is ongoing to program the benefit-cost equations, integrate them with loss estimates, and design a prototype graphical user interface. An initial design for the map viewer, with hypothetical data input and run-output screens, was completed and will be followed by testing, refinements, and eventual transfer to cooperators. (Hearn et. al, expected in 2009)


Completed publications (not including abstracts or conference proceedings papers) include:

Dinitz, L., Champion, R., Wein, A., Ng, P., and Bernknopf, R., 2009, Assessing natural-hazards risks with GIS, in Thomas, C., and Humenik-Sappington, N., eds., GIS for Decision Support and Public Policy Making: Redlands, CA, ESRI Press, pp. 106-111.

Dinitz, L.B., 2008, Applying the Land Use Portfolio Model to estimate natural-hazard loss and risk; a hypothetical demonstration for Ventura County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1309, 12 p. [http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1309/].

Champion, R.C., 2008, A Bernoulli formulation of the Land Use Portfolio Model: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 2008-1310.

Bernknopf, R., Rabinovici, S.J., Wood, N., and Dinitz, L., 2006: The influence of hazard models on GIS-based regional risk assessments and mitigation policies, in International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, Vol. 6, Nos. 4/5/6, pp. 369-387.

Bernknopf, Richard L., Dinitz, Laura B., Rabinovici, Sharyl J.M., and Evans, Alexander M., 2001, “A Portfolio Approach to Evaluating Natural Hazard Mitigation Policies: An Application to Lateral-Spread Ground Failure in Coastal California,” in International Geology Review. Vol. 43, pp. 424-440.

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

City of Palm Springs, California; Geological Survey of Canada; and City of Memphis, Tennessee.


PROJECT PERIOD: FY2005 through FY2010


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT): $392,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT: Risk and Vulnerability to Natural Hazards

(http://geography.wr.usgs.gov/science/vulnerability.html)


AGENCY: Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey


PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A core element of the USGS mission is to provide reliable scientific information to minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters. Minimizing the impact of future disasters requires an understanding of natural hazards and of societal vulnerability to these threats. Although there is considerable attention paid to characterizing natural hazards, officials and the public need assistance, in the form of model development and case study assessments, to better understand their vulnerability. The primary research objectives are to (1) develop conceptual models of societal vulnerability to natural hazards, (2) develop geospatial metrics of vulnerability for the various sudden-onset and chronic hazards that threaten the Nation, and (3) collaborate with local officials and the general public to incorporate non-spatial aspects of adaptive capacity into vulnerability assessments. Geographic research focuses on the use of midresolution satellite imagery, geographic-information-system (GIS) tools, collaborative processes, dasymetric mapping, factor analysis, and systems analysis in characterizing community vulnerability. To maximize the use of research results by practitioners, the project is organized around the following hazard-specific themes:

  1. Tsunamis, with specific attention to those generated by a Cascadia subduction zone earthquake in the Pacific Northwest;

  2. Coastal storms and climate change, with a focus on climate-change-enhanced coastal hazards in the Pacific Northwest (e.g., erosion, flooding) and on the Gulf coast of Florida (e.g., hurricane storm surge);

  3. Volcano hazards in the Pacific Northwest (e.g., Mount Rainier, Mount Hood), with specific attention to lahars;

  4. Earthquake hazards in the Pacific Northwest (e.g., Tacoma Fault and South Whidbey Island Fault in Washington)

Research for each hazard and study area includes some level of GIS analyses of land-use/land-cover patterns and community assets, statistical analyses to develop comparative indices of exposure and sensitivity, and collaborative processes (e.g., focus groups, workshops) to examine system resilience. Partnerships have been developed with local and State emergency management agencies to ensure research results are well-grounded in practitioner needs.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:


Results: A quantitative method that integrates GIS software and statistical methods was developed to assess and compare community exposure and sensitivity to natural hazards. State-level assessments of variations in community exposure and sensitivity to tsunamis were completed for Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington (all published as USGS Scientific Investigations Report and coupled with supporting Excel databases). Each report summarizes the amount and percentage of developed land, residents, employees, tourists, dependent populations, critical facilities, and parcel values in tsunami-hazard zone of

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

each community. A similar USGS report (currently in press) summarizes variations in community exposure to lahar hazards associated with Mount Rainier, Washington. A method using midresolution satellite imagery was developed to approximate variations in community vulnerability to tsunamis. A method to integrate factor analysis and geospatial analysis was developed to model variations in demographic sensitivity to potential tsunamis along the Oregon coast. Public workshops have been held in Oregon and Florida to examine community sensitivity, adaptive capacity and post-disaster recovery. Articles summarizing these efforts have been published in Natural Hazards Review, Applied Geography, Coastal Management, Natural Hazards, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, and Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. Chapters in textbooks (one on volcano-hydrologic hazards and another on community adaptation to climate-change-enhanced coastal hazards) have been written to discuss societal vulnerability to natural hazards. Manuscripts currently in preparation focus on (1) the influence of climate change on increasing community vulnerability to hurricane-storm-surge hazards in west-central Florida, (2) the use of collaborative process to document stakeholder perspectives for adapting to climate-change-enhanced coastal hazards, and (3) inclusion of vulnerability metrics in the USGS National Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS).


Results from the various research efforts demonstrate that social vulnerability to natural hazards manifests itself differently throughout a community or region and that certain areas are likely to suffer disproportionately due to differences in pre-event socioeconomic conditions and other demographic attributes. Significant results include (1) distinctions of community vulnerability based on city size, (2) the identification of several dependent-population and public-venue facilities in hazard zones that were previously ignored in regional emergency planning, (3) strong correlations between the relative percentage of land and community assets in tsunami-hazard zones but no correlation between the absolute amount of assets and land, and (4) development of population metrics to characterize societal vulnerability.


Impact of Results: The State-level assessments of community vulnerability to tsunamis are definitive works on the subject and are the only assessments of their kind in the world. Emergency managers (city, county, and State) have responded very favorably to the reports. Memorandums of agreement to conduct further collaborative vulnerability assessment research have been developed with several county and State governments. Invited briefings have been done for directors of county and State emergency management departments, county and regional hazard organizations, and participants in regional functional exercises. Media (e.g., newspaper, radio, and Internet) have recognized the work. Tsunami results have been incorporated into the hazard mitigation plans for the State of Hawaii and the State of Washington. The PI was appointed to a National Research Council committee on tsunami preparedness. Local, State, and foreign governments have invited the PI to train them on vulnerability-assessment and risk-communication techniques. A research colleague from Penn State was asked to present results of our Florida work at a NATO-sponsored workshop on community adaptation to climate change.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

  • USGS personnel: Principal Investigator is Nathan Wood (USGS research geographer). Other project personnel include Amy Mathie, Rachel Sleeter, and Chris Soulard

  • Research partners: University of South Carolina, Pennsylvania State University, Oregon State University, Oregon Dept. of Geology and Mineral Industries, USGS Earthquake Hazards Program, USGS Volcano Hazards Program, USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program

  • Practitioner and Outreach partners: State of Washington Emergency Management, Hawaii State Civil Defense, Oregon Sea Grant, Clackamas County (OR) Emergency Management

PROJECT PERIOD: October 1, 2003 to September 30, 2013


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT): $301,500

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Multiple Hazards Demonstration Project: The Shakeout Scenario for Southern California - Economic Consequences

(http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1150/)


AGENCY: U.S. Geological Survey


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

The question is not if but when southern California will be hit by a major earthquake -one so damaging that it will permanently change lives and livelihoods in the region. How severe the changes will be depends on the actions that individuals, schools, businesses, organizations, communities, and governments take to get ready. To help prepare for this event, scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have changed the way that earthquake scenarios are done, uniting a multidisciplinary team that spans an unprecedented number of specialties.


The 'what if?' earthquake modeled in the ShakeOut Scenario is a magnitude 7.8 on the southern San Andreas Fault. The hypothetical earthquake was developed by considering the amount of stored strain on that part of the fault with the greatest likelihood of imminent rupture for a large earthquake. From this, seismologists and computer scientists modeled the ground shaking that would occur in this earthquake. Engineers and others used the shaking to estimate earthquake damage to buildings, roads, pipelines, and other infrastructure. From these damages, social scientists projected casualties, emergency response, and the impact of the scenario earthquake on southern California's economy and society.


The next phase of the Multi Hazards Demonstration Project will focus on a flooding and landslide scenario throughout California.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

By examining the consequences of one hypothetical earthquake and the dynamic interactions among elements of our physical infrastructure and economic and social systems, the ShakeOut Scenario is helping to identify potential points of failure and places where relatively small efforts or investments before the next earthquake could yield tremendous benefit after the earthquake (Perry and others, 2008).


In addition, the ShakeOut Scenario found that previous efforts to reduce losses through mitigation before the event have been successful. There are more actions and policies that could be undertaken at the individual and community levels to further reduce losses. For instance, actions to improve the resiliency of water delivery systems would reduce the loss from business interruption, as well as reduce the risk of catastrophic conflagrations. At an individual and business level, actions to secure non-structural items in buildings and retrofitting existing structures will greatly reduce individual risk. Planning and preparedness can improve personal and business resiliency (Jones and others, 2008).


Addressing the five major areas of loss identified could provide benefits in possible future disasters. The five major areas of loss include:

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

Older buildings built to earlier standards.

Non-structural elements and building contents that are generally unregulated.

Infrastructure crossing the San Andreas Fault.

Business interruption from damaged infrastructure, especially water systems.

Fire following the earthquake.

Publications:


The ShakeOut Earthquake Scenario—A Story That Southern Californians Are Writing, 2008. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1324, California Geological Survey Special Report 207, version 1.0


By Suzanne Perry, Dale Cox, Lucile Jones, Richard Bernknopf, James Goltz, Kenneth Hudnut, Dennis Mileti, Daniel Ponti, Keith Porter, Michael Reichle, Hope Seligson, Kimberley Shoaf, Jerry Treiman, and Anne Wein


The ShakeOut Scenario, 2008. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 2008-1150 California Geological Survey Preliminary Report 25, version 1.0.


By Lucile M. Jones, Richard Bernknopf, Dale Cox, James Goltz, Kenneth Hudnut, Dennis Mileti, Suzanne Perry, Daniel Ponti, Keith Porter, Michael Reichle, Hope Seligson, Kimberley Shoaf, Jerry Treiman, and Anne Wein


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): Partners include the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Caltrans, Southern California Association of Governments, City of Torrance, City of Palm Springs, San Pedro Ports, SoCalfirst (banking consortium), CA Trucking Association, Metropolitan Transit Authority, Southern California Gas Company, and the Water districts including MWD, LADPW,


PROJECT PERIOD: May 2007 to May 2010


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT): $360,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: The Water Environment of Cities (workshop)

(http://www.springer.com/environment/environmental+management/book/978-0-387-84890-7)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION: NSF


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION (Project summary of proposal): The proposed workshop The Water Environment of Cities: Adapting to Change was an important step in the evolution of a holistic, interdisciplinary approach for managing the urban water environment that recognizes water as a core organizing concept for urban design. The proposed workshop will be the culmination of a book project, The Water Environment of Cities and a prolegomenon for future efforts to better understand and manage the urban water environment. Workshop participants (chapter authors, plus a small number of others) have expertise in surface and groundwater hydrology, civil and environmental engineering, environmental policy, urban planning, law, geomorphology, and recreation management. The main target audience for the book is graduate students across the many disciplines involved in water resources. Key themes for the proposed workshop and the book are: (1) water scarcity, (2) multiple uses of water, (3) water management institutions, (4) formation on new knowledge, (5) sustainability, and (6) resilience.


Outcomes from the workshop will include a workshop report, a synthesis chapter for the book and at least one journal article. The workshop report will focus on the process used in the workshop and key results. The synthesis chapter will be written in a didactic fashion to tie topical chapters of the book together. The journal article will be more heavily referenced, more theoretical in nature, more speculative, and will conclude with an “agenda for the future.”


Managing the water environment of the world’s burgeoning urban population is one of the critical needs for humanity. The broad impact of this workshop will be to create a more holistic, integrated concept of urban water management. One of the key ways this broader impact will be achieved is by integrating these concepts directly into graduate water resources education, using the resulting book, The Water Environment of Cities, as a teaching text for the next generation of water resources practitioners and scholars. Diffusion of these ideas will occur quickly because most of the participants in the workshop/book project teach courses in water resources.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

  1. Baker, L (editor). 2009. The Water Environment of Cities. Springer Scientific, Lowell, MA.

  2. The Water Environment of Cities: Adapting to Change. 2009. Workshop held at the Riverwood Inn, Otswego, Minnesota, January 16-18, 2008. NSF Project CBET 0739952

PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL): None

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

PROJECT PERIOD: Completed in 2008


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED): $45,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM: Opposition to Green Economy

Investments: Where and Why is it Emerging?


AGENCY/INSTITUTION:

Cornell University, Department of City and Regional Planning


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

Everyone can agree on the need to build a “green” economy when it is your community that is targeted for a wind farm, a bio-fuel processing plant, new transmission lines, or new regulations to promote energy efficiency, however, problems occur and opposition begins to arise. This research/action project responds to a clear need to understand: (1) how different types of communities respond to alternative energy investments and ( 2) what happens “on the ground” when projects are proposed and realized. This project has two goals. The first is to provide local policy makers with the information they need regarding the potential impact of alternative energy investments, both positive and negative. The second is to develop knowledge about “real” alternative energy investments and their impact on communities. One premise of this project is that not all investments labeled “green” are good for the environment or the community. Another is that local policy makers face substantial uncertainties in making decisions about what is best for their community. This project will develop information that aids their decision-making about green investments in the city or community, presenting what is known about both the upside and downside of these investments. It will also provide state and national policy makers with knowledge about the sources of community opposition to alternative energy investments. The project results will be presented in a series of policy briefs aimed at local officials and via a Web site: www.GREEENCHOICES.cornell.edu. The initial project research will focus on controversies affecting New York State cities and communities but resources and good practice examples will be drawn from national sources.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE:

Initial research has led to the development of a Web site

www.GREENCHOICES.cornell.edu and a policy report assessing the methods used in evaluating the local economic impact of ethanol plants.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

The research is supported by a small grant through The U.S. Department of Agriculture program that provides seed money research support to faculty in land grant Universities.


PROJECT PERIOD:

The initial one-year grant ends October 1, 2009. A second small grant will support some continued website development.


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED):

($20,000 - $28,000)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM

Eliminating Barriers to Transit-Oriented Development

(http://policy.rutgers.edu/vtc/tod/documents/FHWA-NJ-2010-002%20Eliminating%20Barriers%20to%20Transit-Oriented%20Development.pdf)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION

New Jersey Dept. of Transportation

Daniel Chatman, PI


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The research in this project centers on answering the question, “What are the barriers to housing projects approval near transit (TOD— which is considered a necessary element in sustainability planning) in New Jersey?”


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE

Project is on-going. Researchers have finished gathering data from households near transit, barriers to TOD, and observing parking practices. Professor Chatman is now synthesizing the information in a report.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL)

N/A


PROJECT PERIOD

This research project started in 2007 and will be finished in December 2009.


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED)

$164, 000 (current)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM

EFRI-RESIN: Assessing and Managing Cascading Failure Vulnerabilities of Complex, Interdependent, Interactive, Adaptive Human-based Infrastructure Systems

(http://nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=0835989&WT.z_pims_id=5 03431)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION

National Science Foundation (NSF) under EFGRI Grant No. 0836047.

Principal Investigator: Robert Bea (Engineering)

Co-Principal Investigator: Karlene Roberts (Haas Business School)

Co-Principal Investigator: John Radke (LAEP-DCRP, College Environmental Design)


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Assessing and Managing Failure Vulnerabilities of Infrastructure Systems: Resilience and Sustainability of the California Sacramento Delta Region Interconnected Critical Infrastructure Systems

Our regional focus studies the California Sacramento—San Joaquin Delta flood protection, water distribution, and power supply systems. These systems are embedded in a complex and sensitive ecosystem that co-exists with other important ICISs such as communications, transportation, and emergency services. The ultimate goal of this research is to learn how to improve the resiliency and sustainability of ICISs while maintaining other vital performance characteristics such as serviceability, safety, durability, and compatibility.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE

This research includes a collaborative interdisciplinary research team to create, validate, and apply new Risk Assessment and Management (RAM) methods to assess and improve the design, operation, and maintenance of interdependent complex infrastructure systems (ICISs).


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL):

Howard Foster, Ian Mitroff


PROJECT PERIOD

N/A


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED)

Award amount to date: $1,999,964

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM

Impact of Global Warming on California’s Urban Forests


AGENCY/INSTITUTION

Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management UC Berkeley

Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning UC Berkeley Joseph McBride, PI


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Global climate change presents a critical challenge to sustainability of trees in cities throughout the United States and in other parts of the world. Many commonly planted urban tree species will no longer be able to survive as the climate becomes warmer and drier. The research proposed in this study will investigate changes in the composition of California’s urban forests in response to global warming. Surveys of urban forest managers across climate zones, surveys of arborists at regional conferences, and measurements of chlorophyll fluorescence will be used to project the fitness of common urban trees for changing climates. The three sources of information will be combined to produce lists of trees suitable for cities in different parts of California as the climate becomes warmer. Lists will also be generated of trees not expected to survive the warming of cities in the state. These lists will be used to advise arborists, landscape architects, and urban forest managers on probable future response of urban tree species to climate change. California presents an unusual opportunity for this study because of its extensive range in temperature zones, recently developed models predicting climate change on a regional level, and an active community of arborists and urban foresters. Results from the study will have direct application to states neighboring California and the methods developed will be useful in conducting similar studies in other regions. The objectives of this project are to determine how tree species in California's urban forests will be affected by global warming and the implications of global warming for urban forest planning and management. The study will contribute to the knowledge of the urban forest's response to global warming and will inform arborists, landscape architects, and urban forest managers about appropriate species for future urban forests in California. The study will also add to our basic knowledge of how tree species from different parts of the world respond to increasing leaf temperatures.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE

The expected outcomes will be lists of trees appropriate to the future climates of various cities in California and species that are not expected to survive increasing urban temperatures.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL)

N/A


PROJECT PERIOD 2009-2012

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED)

“Urban forest composition, structure, and function in the world’s biomes” Farrand Fund for Research in Urban Forestry - $20,000 (2008 to 2010)

“Plant succession in the grasslands of Mt. Tamalpais State Park” California Department of Parks and Recreation - $97,000 (2007 to 2010)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

TITLE OF PROJECT OR PROGRAM

Shrinking Urban Transportation’s Environmental Footprint Evidence on Built Environments and Travel from 370 U.S. Urbanized Areas

(http://www.envplan.com/abstract.cgi?id=a4236)


AGENCY/INSTITUTION

National Science Foundation

Robert Cervero, PI


PROJECT/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Concerns over rising fuel prices and greenhouse gas emissions have prompted research into the influences of built environments on travel, notably vehicle miles of travel (VMT). Based on data from 370 U.S. urbanized areas and using structural equation modeling, population densities are shown to be strongly and positively associated with VMT per capita, however this effect is moderated by the traffic-inducing effects of denser urban settings having denser road networks and better local-retail accessibility. Accessibility to basic employment has comparatively modest effects as do size of urbanized area and rail transit supplies and usage. Still, urban planning and city design should be part of any strategic effort to reduce the urban transportation sector’s environmental footprint.


RESULTS, OUTCOMES OR IMPACTS TO DATE


The results demonstrate that higher densities are not sufficient, by themselves, to substantially lower transportation-related VMT and GHG emissions, and need to be supplemented by attention to road and community design and regional planning – such as jobs-housing balance and mixed-use integration—to leverage significant impacts.


PERFORMERS/OTHER PARTNERS (FEDERAL, STATES, OR LOCAL)

Robert Cervero, PI


PROJECT PERIOD

July 2007 to June 2009


FUNDING LEVELS (CURRENT OR PROPOSED)

$150,000

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Notable Examples of Urban Sustainability R&D Programs." National Research Council. 2010. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12969.
×
Page 114
Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban Systems: Summary of a Workshop Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $43.00 Buy Ebook | $34.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

More than half of the world's people now live in cities. In the United States, the figure is 80 percent. It is worthwhile to consider how this trend of increased urbanization, if inevitable, could be made more sustainable. One fundamental shortcoming of urban research and programs is that they sometimes fail to recognize urban areas as systems. Current institutions and actors are not accustomed to exploring human-environment interactions, particularly at an urban-scale. The fact is that these issues involve complex interactions, many of which are not yet fully understood. Thus a key challenge for the 21st century is this: How can we develop sustainable urban systems that provide healthy, safe and affordable environments for the growing number of Americans living in cities and their surrounding metropolitan areas?

To address this question, the National Research Council organized a workshop exploring the landscape of urban sustainability research programs in the United States. The workshop, summarized in this volume, was designed to allow participants to share information about the activities and planning efforts of federal agencies, along with related initiatives by universities, the private sector, nongovernmental groups, state and local agencies, and international organizations. Participants were encouraged to explore how urban sustainability can move beyond analyses devoted to single disciplines and sectors to systems-level thinking and effective interagency cooperation. To do this, participants examined areas of potential coordination among different R&D programs, with special consideration given to how the efforts of federal agencies can best complement and leverage the efforts of other key stakeholders. Pathways to Urban Sustainability offers a broad contextual summary of workshop presentations and discussions for distribution to federal agencies, regional organizations, academic institutions, think tanks and other groups engaged in urban research.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!