44 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The 606 at Three: Trends in Use of Chicago\u27s Elevated Rail-Trail
The 606, Chicagoâs 2.7-mile, $95 million trail, is the only elevated, multiuse trail in the US. Opened to use in June 2015 after more than 15 years in planning and development, The 606 was designed to provide residents of nearby neighborhoods having major open space deficits with a safe, attractive place for recreation, fitness, commuting, and other purposes. Above all, The 606 was designed to be used, incorporating features to address concerns of local residents and facilitate walking, jogging, bicycling, and other activities. To better understand its use, we studied trends and patterns in trail traffic during the first three full years of operation (2016-2018). Based on analyses of counts taken with infrared sensors at two locations along the trail, our data show that, while The 606 is heavily used, total use declined in both 2017 and 2018. Cumulative trail traffic volume on the western, less affluent end of the trail declined 16.1% from 1.2 million in 2016 to just over 1 million in 2018. Cumulative volume on the eastern, more affluent end of the trail declined 11.9% from nearly 1.4 million in 2016 to just over 1.2 million in 2018. Despite these declines, patterns of use have remained consistent, with much higher use in summer and âshoulderâ seasons than in winter, higher use on weekends than weekdays, and different hourly patterns on weekends than weekdays. A statistical model shows that approximately 78% of the variation in daily use is associated with variation in weather and day-of-week. We hypothesize that the declines in use could be associated with differences in weather patterns over the years, congestion on the trail during peak periods of use, a novelty effect that has worn off over time, or changes user perceptions and preferences, perhaps associated with the resource. Research strategies to test these hypotheses are outlined
Might School Performance Grow on Trees? Examining the Link Between âGreennessâ and Academic Achievement in Urban, High-Poverty Schools
In the United States, schools serving urban, low-income students are among the lowest-performing academically. Previous research in relatively well-off populations has linked vegetation in schoolyards and surrounding neighborhoods to better school performance even after controlling for important confounding factors, raising the tantalizing possibility that greening might boost academic achievement. This study extended previous cross-sectional research on the âgreennessâ-academic achievement link to a public school district in which nine out of ten children were eligible for free lunch. In generalized linear mixed models, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)-based measurements of green cover for 318 Chicago public schools predicted statistically significantly better school performance on standardized tests of math, with marginally statistically significant results for readingâeven after controlling for disadvantage, an index combining poverty and minority status. Pupil/teacher ratio %bilingual, school size, and %female could not account for the greenness-performance link. Interactions between greenness and Disadvantage suggest that the greenness-academic achievement link is different for student bodies with different levels of disadvantage. To determine what forms of green cover were most strongly tied to academic achievement, tree cover was examined separately from grass and shrub cover; only tree cover predicted school performance. Further analyses examined the unique contributions of âschool tree coverâ (tree cover for the schoolyard and a 25 m buffer) and âneighborhood tree coverâ (tree cover for the remainder of a schoolâs attendance catchment area). School greenness predicted math achievement when neighborhood greenness was controlled for, but neighborhood greenness did not significantly predict either reading or math achievement when school greenness was taken into account. Future research should assess whether greening schoolyards boost school performance
An inclusive typology of values for navigating transformations towards a just and sustainable future
Diverse values of nature for sustainability
Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being(1,2), addressing the global biodiversity crisis(3) still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature's diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever(4). Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature's values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)(5) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals(6), predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature(7). Arguably, a 'values crisis' underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change(8), pandemic emergence(9) and socio-environmental injustices(10). On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature's diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions(7,11). Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures
Diverse values of nature for sustainability
Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating natureâs diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate natureâs values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a âvalues crisisâ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on natureâs diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures
Diverse values of nature for sustainability
Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being, addressing the global biodiversity crisis still implies confronting barriers to incorporating natureâs diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate natureâs values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature. Arguably, a âvalues crisisâ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, pandemic emergence and socio-environmental injustices. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on natureâs diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures
Recommended from our members