skip to main content

Explore Research Products in the NSF-PAR

Title: Mapping supply of and demand for ecosystem services to assess environmental justice in New York City
Livability, resilience, and justice in cities are challenged by climate change and the historical legacies that together create disproportionate impacts on human communities. Urban green infrastructure has emerged as an important tool for climate change adaptation and resilience given their capacity to provide ecosystem services such as local temperature regulation, stormwater mitigation, and air purification. However, realizing the benefits of ecosystem services for climate adaptation depend on where they are locally supplied. Few studies have examined the potential spatial mismatches in supply and demand of urban ecosystem services, and even fewer have examined supply–demand mismatches as a potential environmental justice issue, such as when supply–demand mismatches disproportionately overlap with certain socio-demographic groups. We spatially analyzed demand for ecosystem services relevant for climate change adaptation and combined results with recent analysis of the supply of ecosystem services in New York City (NYC). By quantifying the relative mismatch between supply and demand of ecosystem services across the city we were able to identify spatial hot- and coldspots of supply–demand mismatch. Hotspots are spatial clusters of census blocks with a higher mismatch and coldspots are clusters with lower mismatch values than their surrounding blocks. The distribution of mismatch hot- and coldspots was then compared to the spatial distribution of socio-demographic groups. Results reveal distributional environmental injustice of access to the climate-regulating benefits of ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructure in NYC. Analyses show that areas with lower supply–demand mismatch tend to be populated by a larger proportion of white residents with higher median incomes, and areas with high mismatch values have lower incomes and a higher proportion of people of color. We suggest that urban policy and planning should ensure that investments in “nature-based” solutions such as through urban green infrastructure for climate change adaptation do not reinforce or exacerbate potentially existing environmental injustices.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1934933 1444755
NSF-PAR ID:
10283040
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Ecological Applications
Volume:
0
Issue:
0
ISSN:
1051-0761
Page Range / eLocation ID:
e02390
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ( , Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning)
    null (Ed.)
    Green infrastructure (GI) has become a panacea for cities working to enhance sustainability and resilience. While the rationale for GI primarily focuses on its multifunctionality (e.g. delivering multiple ecosystem services to local communities), uncertainties remain around how, for whom, and to what extent GI delivers these services. Additionally, many scholars increasingly recognize potential disservices of GI, including gentrification associated with new GI developments. Building on a novel dataset of 119 planning documents from 19 U.S. cities, we utilize insights from literature on justice in urban planning to examine the justice implications of criteria used in the siting of GI projects. We analyze the GI siting criteria described in city plans and how they explicitly or implicitly engage environmental justice. We find that justice is rarely explicitly discussed, yet the dominant technical siting criteria that focus on stormwater and economic considerations have justice implications. We conclude with recommendations for centering justice in GI spatial planning. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ( , World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2021)
    null (Ed.)
    Urban water system managers face a set of interrelated water security challenges as they pursue the goals of sustainable sources of water, mitigating flood hazards, and improving water quality. These challenges are often subject to change (and hence highly uncertain) due to the coupled effects of hydro-climatic variability, socio-economic trends, and regulatory reforms. To meet these intersecting goals, we present a mechanistic framework with illustrative examples that evaluates an urban water system’s resilience under future uncertainty. By employing principles from engineering design, ecosystem science, and social equity studies, our resilient urban water systems (ReUWS) framework explores the potential of effectively combining green and gray infrastructure (GGI) in an urban watershed while prioritizing stakeholder and community engagement throughout the lifecycle of water system projects. A nested set of hydrology, ecosystem, and hydraulic models are developed with data flow among them defining the boundary and initial conditions for each other. An example is shown with the Baltimore water system on an approach to evaluate the effects of GGI hybrids on major water security metrics. The corresponding engineering designs, ecosystem service potentials, and measures of equitable access to services are also analyzed using the framework. The results evaluate performance of the existing systems under future conditions and also compare different GGI-based strategies for improving resilience in urban water systems. The findings of the study help to evaluate the potential for using GGI strategies to cope with changing climate extremes and other environmental factors as well as social change. Trade-offs derived from the case studies also can be used to adjust local/regional policies and regulations. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ( , Water Resources Research)
    Abstract

    Outdoor water use represents over 50% of total water demand in semiarid and arid cities and presents both challenges to and opportunities for improved efficiency and water resilience. The current work adapts a remote sensing‐based methodology to estimate growing season irrigation rates at the census block group scale in Denver, Colorado. Results show that city‐wide outdoor water use does not change significantly from 1995 to 2018, while per capita water use and total water use significantly decrease from 2000 to 2018. Because total water use, but not outdoor use, is decreasing, the percent of water used outdoors significantly increases across the city from 2000 to 2018. Climate variables account for one‐quarter of interannual variation in mean irrigation rates due primarily to changes in temperature, not precipitation. Percent impervious land cover exhibits a significant inverse nonlinear relationship with irrigation rates at the census block group scale. Finally, 38% of Denver census block groups show significantly increasing irrigation rates between 1995 and 2018 driven primarily by increasing temperatures. The increasing proportion of water used for irrigation highlights the importance of outdoor demand management for urban water systems as indoor efficiencies improve. We advocate that resilient water systems necessitate integrated land use, infrastructure, and water planning in the face of urban growth and climate change. While minimizing irrigated urban areas may reduce demand, remaining green spaces should be designed to maximize multiple benefits including reductions in water demand and urban heat islands, stormwater management, and recreation to improve the sustainability of growing cities.

     
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ( , npj Urban Sustainability)
    Abstract Maximizing the functional performance of urban green infrastructure is important to deliver critical ecosystem services that support human well-being. However, urban ecosystems are impacted by social and ecological filters that affect biodiversity, shaping how species’ traits are functionally expressed, thus affecting ecosystem services supply. Our Social–Ecological Traits Framework addresses the impacts of socio-ecological systems on the phenotypic expression of traits and ecosystem services delivery. This functional approach to examining the supply of ecosystem services can improve the incorporation of biodiversity knowledge in urban planning decisions for maximizing the effectiveness of ecosystem services as nature-based solutions under multiple types of social and environmental change. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ( , Earth's Future)
    Abstract

    Cities are the drivers of socioeconomic innovation and are also forced to address the accelerating risk of failure in providing essential services such as water supply today and in the future. Here, we investigate the resilience of urban water supply security, which is defined in terms of the services that citizens receive. The resilience of services is determined by the availability and robustness of critical system elements or “capitals” (water resources, infrastructure, finances, management efficacy, and community adaptation). We translate quantitative information about this portfolio of capitals from seven contrasting cities on four continents into parameters of a coupled system dynamics model. Water services are disrupted by recurring stochastic shocks, and we simulate the dynamics of impact and recovery cycles. Resilience emerges under various constraints, expressed in terms of each city's capital portfolio. Systematic assessment of the parameter space produces the urban water resilience landscape, and we determine the position of each city along a continuous gradient from water insecure and nonresilient to secure and resilient systems. In several cities stochastic disturbance regimes challenge steady‐state conditions and drive system collapse. While water insecure and nonresilient cities risk being pushed into a poverty trap, cities which have developed excess capitals risk being trapped in rigidity and crossing a tipping point from high to low services and collapse. Where public services are insufficient, community adaptation improves water security and resilience to varying degrees. Our results highlight the need for resilience thinking in the governance of urban water systems under global change pressures.

     
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email