Employment Benefits from California Climate Investments and Co-investments

From the launch of California Climate Investments in 2013 through 2016, the state appropriated about $2.2 billion to 29 programs aimed at reducing GHGs. Of these, 13 were transportation programs that received nearly$1.8 billion in California Climate Investments, including the High-Speed Rail Project, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program, the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, and otherLow CarbonTransportation investments.How do these programs translate into jobs? Researchers at the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation conducted the state’s largest study of the employment impacts of CCI transportation investments

Dispersive, superfluid-like shock waves in nonlinear optics

In most classical fluids, shock waves are strongly dissipative, their energy being quickly lost through viscous damping. But in systems such as cold plasmas, superfluids, and Bose-Einstein condensates, where viscosity is negligible or non-existent, a fundamentally different type of shock wave can emerge whose behaviour is dominated by dispersion rather than dissipation. Dispersive shock waves are difficult to study experimentally, and analytical solutions to the equations that govern them have only been found in one dimension (1D). By exploiting a well-known, but little appreciated, correspondence between the behaviour of superfluids and nonlinear optical materials, we demonstrate an all-optical experimental platform for studying the dynamics of dispersive shock waves. This enables us to observe the propagation and nonlinear response of dispersive shock waves, including the interaction of colliding shock waves, in 1D and 2D. Our system offers a versatile and more accessible means for exploring superfluid-like and related dispersive phenomena.Comment: 21 pages, 6 figures Revised abstrac

Brace for Impact: The Environmental and Economic Effects of Shifting Passenger Travel from Airplanes to High-Speed Rail 

This research synthesis surveys recent literature from 2011 to 2020 on the environmental and economic effects of high-speed rail (HSR) projects from across the globe, with relevant lessons for implementation of the California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) project. Recent literature shows that—under the right conditions—HSR can lead to both environmental and economic gains across a variety of metrics. To maximize environmental gains, HSR ridership needs to be high, energy propulsion must be powered largely by renewables, and displaced demand for intrastate air travel must not be replaced by longer-haul flights. For there to be economic gains, cities connected by HSR must play complementary roles, rather than competitive ones, within the economy. Otherwise, economic benefits will be consolidated in core cities along HSR routes at the expense of intermediate cities, and efficiencies from agglomeration may lead to an overall decline in employment and economic value added. This synthesis closes with some recommendations for future research questions that can inform the development or refinement of policies that support the successful implementation of CAHSR

Evaluating Place-Based Transportation Plans

We ask how place-based transportation plans are being evaluated, and what insights from the broader policy and plan evaluation research literature might inform evaluation design. We complement a review of the evaluation literature with six expert interviews with 15 people. We find that California agencies and their community partners have high expectations for evaluations of place-based transportation plans. So far, however, those evaluations have been less successful in providing detailed information on outcomes and the causal impact of interventions. This does not reflect the shortcomings of the evaluation teams, but rather the inherent challenges in holistically assessing a diverse set of projects on different implementation timelines in a project area with porous boundaries. There is also a fundamental difficulty with the evaluation scale. California’s place-based transportation plans have often been evaluated individually. But in general, evaluations, particularly quantitative causal inference methods, are most effective with a larger number of projects or sites. We suggest a two-pronged approach to addressing the tensions that we identify between place-specific knowledge and generalizable conclusions. The first prong, at the site level, would emphasize process evaluations and assessment of outputs and outcomes. The second prong would focus on impacts across multiple sites and the extent to which place-based transportation programs have a causal role

Employment Benefits from California Climate Investments and Co-investments

From the launch of California Climate Investments in 2013 through 2016, the state appropriated about $2.2 billion to 29 programs aimed at reducing GHGs. Of these, 13 were transportation programs that received nearly$1.8 billion in California Climate Investments, including the High-Speed Rail Project, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program, the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, and otherLow CarbonTransportation investments.How do these programs translate into jobs? Researchers at the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation conducted the state’s largest study of the employment impacts of CCI transportation investments

Brace for Impact: The Environmental and Economic Effects of Shifting Passenger Travel from Airplanes to High-Speed Rail

UC-ITS-2021-52This research synthesis surveys recent literature from 2011 to 2020 on the environmental and economic effects of high-speed rail (HSR) projects from across the globe, with relevant lessons for implementation of the California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) project. Recent literature shows that\u2014under the right conditions\u2014HSR can lead to both environmental and economic gains across a variety of metrics. To maximize environmental gains, HSR ridership needs to be high, energy propulsion must be powered largely by renewables, and displaced demand for intrastate air travel must not be replaced by longer haul flights. For there to be economic gains, cities connected by HSR must play complementary roles, rather than competitive ones, within the economy. Otherwise, economic benefits will be consolidated in core cities along HSR routes at the expense of intermediate cities, and efficiencies from agglomeration may lead to an overall decline in employment and economic value added. This synthesis closes with some recommendations for future research questions that can inform the development or refinement of polices that support the successful implementation of CAHSR

Transform Fresno: 2023 Progress Report on Implementation of the Transformative Climate Communities Program Grant

(TCC) is an innovative investment in community-scale climate action, with potentially broad implications. Launched in 2017 by the California State Legislature, TCC funds the implementation of neighborhood- level transformative plans that include multiple coordinated projects to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The program is also designed to provide an array of local economic, environmental, and health benefits to disadvantaged communities, while minimizing the risk of displacement. TCC empowers the communities most impacted by pollution to choose their own goals, strategies, and projects to enact transformational change — all with data-driven milestones and measurable outcomes. The California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) serves as the lead administrator of TCC. At the time of this report, SGC has awarded 11 TCC implementation grants to 11 communities across the state (ranging from $9.1 million to$66.5 million per site). Additionally, SGC has awarded 25 TCC planning grants to communities that are in the early stages of forming a coalition to address local climate action goals (ranging from $94,000 to$300,000 per site). The state legislature has allocated funding to distribute two additional rounds of TCC grants.1 The UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation (LCI) serves as the lead evaluator for five communities that have received TCC implementation grants: all three Round 1 sites (Fresno, Ontario, and Watts), one Round 2 site (Northeast San Fernando Valley), and one Round 3 site (Stockton). LCI researchers are working with these communities to document their progress and evaluate the impacts of TCC investments. This progress report is the fourth in a series of five that will provide an overview of the key accomplishments and estimated benefits of TCC-funded activities in the City of Fresno, collectively referred to as Transform Fresno.2 This report documents progress through the end of fiscal year (FY) 2021-2022, which overlaps with about 15 months of postaward planning (January 2018 to April 2019), and 39 months of grant implementation (April 2019 through June 2022). The majority of implementation has occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, so project partners’ responses to the pandemic are also highlighted throughout

Green Together: 2023 Progress Report on Implementation of the Transformative Climate Communities Program Grant

(TCC) is an innovative investment in community-scale climate action, with potentially broad implications. Launched in 2017 by the California State Legislature, TCC funds the implementation of neighborhood-level transformative plans that include multiple coordinated projects to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The program is also designed to provide an array of local economic, environmental, and health benefits to disadvantaged communities, while minimizing the risk of displacement. TCC empowers the communities most impacted by pollution to choose their own goals, strategies, and projects to enact transformational change — all with data-driven milestones and measurable outcomes. The California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) serves as the lead administrator of TCC. At the time of this report, it had awarded 11 TCC implementation grants to 11 communities across the state (ranging from $9.1 million to$66.5 million per site). Additionally, SGC has awarded 25 TCC planning grants to communities that are in the early stages of forming a coalition to address local climate action goals (ranging from $94,000 to$300,000 per site). The state legislature has allocated funding to distribute two additional rounds of TCC grants.1 The UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation (LCI) serves as the lead evaluator in five communities that have received TCC implementation grants: all three Round 1 sites (Fresno, Ontario, and Watts), one Round 2 site (Northeast San Fernando Valley), and one Round 3 site (Stockton). LCI researchers are working with these communities to document their progress and evaluate the impacts of TCC investments. This progress report is the third in a series of five annual reports that will provide an overview of the funded projects, key accomplishments, and estimated benefits of TCC activities in the Northeast San Fernando Valley, collectively referred to as Green Together.2 This specific report documents progress through the end of FY 2021-2022, which overlaps with about 42 months of program implementation for leveraged projects (December 2018 to June 2022), almost 25 months of implementation for funded projects (May 2020 through June 2022), and three years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Leveraged projects were allowed to begin when the grant was awarded; funded projects could begin at the time of grant execution. Project partners’ responses to the pandemic are also highlighted throughout the report

Ontario Together: 2023 Progress Report on Implementation of the Transformative Climate Communities Program Grant

(TCC) is an innovative investment in community-scale climate action, with potentially broad implications. Launched in 2017 by the California State Legislature, TCC funds the implementation of neighborhoodlevel transformative plans that include multiple coordinated projects to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The program is also designed to provide an array of local economic, environmental, and health benefits to disadvantaged communities, while minimizing the risk of displacement. TCC empowers the communities most impacted by pollution to choose their own goals, strategies, and projects to enact transformational change — all with data-driven milestones and measurable outcomes. The California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) serves as the lead administrator of TCC. At the time of this report, SGC has awarded 11 TCC implementation grants to 11 communities across the state (ranging from $9.1 million to$66.5 million per site). Additionally, SGC has awarded 25 TCC planning grants to communities that are in the early stages of forming a coalition to address local climate action goals (ranging from $94,000 to$300,000 per site). The state legislature has allocated funding to distribute two additional rounds of TCC grants.1 The UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation (LCI) serves as the lead evaluator for five communities that have received TCC implementation grants: all three Round 1 sites (Fresno, Ontario, and Watts), one Round 2 site (Northeast San Fernando Valley), and one Round 3 site (Stockton). LCI researchers are working with these communities to document their progress and evaluate the impacts of TCC investments. This progress report is the fourth in a series of five that will provide an overview of the key accomplishments and estimated benefits of TCC-funded activities in the City of Ontario, collectively referred to as Ontario Together.2 This report documents progress through the end of FY 2021-2022, which overlaps with about 14 months of post-award planning (January 2018 to March 2019) and 40 months of grant implementation (March 2019 through June 2022). The majority of implementation has occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, so project partners’ responses to the pandemic are also highlighted throughout