Developing brownfields ranking models using decision analytic methods

The redevelopment of Brownfields has taken off in the 1990s, supported by federal and state incentives, and largely accomplished by local initiatives. Brownfields redevelopment has several associated benefits. These include the revitalization of inner-city neighborhoods, creation of jobs, stimulation of tax revenues, greater protection of public health and natural resources, the renewal and reuse existing civil infrastructure and Greenfields protection. While these benefits are numerous, the obstacles to Brownfields redevelopment are also very much alive. Redevelopment issues typically embrace a host of financial and legal liability concerns, technical and economic constraints, competing objectives, and uncertainties arising from inadequate site information. Because the resources for Brownfields redevelopment are usually limited, local programs will require creativity in addressing these existing obstacles in a manner that extends their limited resources for returning Brownfields to productive uses. Such programs may benefit from a structured and defensible decision framework to prioritize sites for redevelopment: one that incorporates the desired objectives, corresponding variables and uncertainties associated with Brownfields redevelopment. This thesis demonstrates the use of a decision analytic tool, Bayesian Influence Diagrams, and related decision analytic tools in developing quantitative decision models to evaluate and rank Brownfields sites on the basis of their redevelopment potential

Listening and Negotiation II

This paper is based on a panel held in June, 2017 in Columbus, Ohio, jointly sponsored by the Women in Engineering Division and by the Minorities in Engineering Division. It is focused on negotiation, with an emphasis on providing practical strategies that are relevant in an academic setting. The panel featured academic leaders at multiple levels, including professor, chair and dean, from diverse engineering institutions, ranging from teaching-centric to heavily research-focused. Panelists discussed strategies for negotiation, with an emphasis on an approach that meets the interests of both parties to the extent possible. The panel was administrated with an opening lightning-round in which each panelist provided one strategy for negotiation; this was followed by a role-play of a negotiation, followed with questions and input from the audience. This paper, associated with the panel, provides several examples of negotiation that were presented in the panel discussion

Mobility in the Megaregion

Presented at the Megacities, Megaregions, and Spatial Planning Symposium, June 28-29, 2007, Atlanta, GA.Presented at 8:00 AM, June 29, 2007

Using the sustainability footprint model to assess development impacts of transportation systems

A review of the sustainability literature reveals the lack of viable frameworks and management tools that can be used to accommodate both spatial and temporal variability in how stakeholder entities meet their sustainable development goals, taking into account the fact that different entities may need to pursue different priorities and also deal with different constraints and schedules at different stages of their development. This paper presents a sustainability footprint framework and model that may be used in analyzing the impacts of transportation and other infrastructure systems on regional sustainable development. A specific application of the framework is in the quality of life contributions that transportation systems may make to communities as a function of their impacts on natural assets that contribute inputs and absorb the byproducts of development. The application is illustrated in a case study that uses data from the Atlanta and Chicago Metropolitan Areas to demonstrate how this model may be applied in real life situations. The implications of this model for transport systems research, policy and practice are discussed. The value of this framework and model lie in introducing both spatial and temporal flexibility that may enable stakeholders with widely different priorities to reach consensus on interim goals for sustainable development to ultimately attain sustainability.Sustainability footprint Ecological footprint Sustainable transportation Infrastructure decision making Consensus building