84 research outputs found

    Ecosystem Services and U.S. Stormwater Planning: An Approach for Improving Urban Stormwater Decisions

    Get PDF
    Green stormwater infrastructure (GI) is gaining traction as a viable complement to traditional “gray” infrastructure in cities across the United States. As cities struggle with decisions to replace deteriorating stormwater infrastructure in the face of looming issues such as population growth and climate change, GI may offer a costeffective, efficient, and sustainable approach. However, decision makers confront challenges when integrating GI within city plans, including uncertainties around GI capacity and maintenance, resistance to collaboration across city governance, increasingly inflexible financing, accounting practices that do not incorporate the multiple values of GI, and difficulties in incorporating ecological infrastructure into stormwater management. This paper presents an ecosystem services framework for assessing the context-specific needs of decision makers, while considering the strengths and limitations of GI use in urban stormwater management. We describe multiple dimensions of the planning system, identify points of intervention, and illustrate two applications of our framework – Durham, North Carolina and Portland, Oregon (USA). In these case studies, we apply our ecosystem services framework to explicitly consider tradeoffs to assist planning professionals who are considering implementation of GI. We conclude by offering a research agenda that explores opportunities for further evaluations of GI design, implementation, and maintenance in cities

    Assessing the size and growth of the US wetland and stream compensatory mitigation industry

    Get PDF
    Interest has focused on quantifying the size and scope of environmental markets, particularly those that offset ecosystem impacts or restore natural infrastructure to improve habitat or promote clean air and water. In this paper, we focus on the US wetland and stream compensatory mitigation market, asking: what types of firms make up the mitigation “industry”? What are the economic impacts–i.e., the “size”–of the mitigation industry? How has this industry changed over time? We present the results of a national survey of mitigation firms and construct an input-output model of the industry’s economic impacts and employment. We also develop a comparative, 2014 model of the industry using data from a previous study of the broader, ecological restoration economy. Our findings suggest that the (2019, pre-COVID) mitigation industry collects annual revenues (direct economic impacts) in excess of 3.5billion,which,alongwithadditionalindirect(supplychain)andinduced(spillover)economicimpacts,combinetoover3.5 billion, which, along with additional indirect (supply chain) and induced (spillover) economic impacts, combine to over 9.6 billion in total output and support over 53,000 total jobs. We estimate 2014–2019 growth of ~35.2 percent in revenues, ~32.6 percent in total economic impacts, and a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.25%. This places the mitigation industry within the range of other, well-established industries within the technical services sector. We suggest establishing North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes specifically for ecological restoration and mitigation firms, an essential step in generating accurate and consistent employment estimates in the future, particularly at sub-national geographic scales

    Try, try again: Lessons learned from success and failure in participatory modeling

    Get PDF
    Participatory Modeling (PM) is becoming increasingly common in environmental planning and conservation, due in part to advances in cyberinfrastructure as well as to greater recognition of the importance of engaging a diverse array of stakeholders in decision making. We provide lessons learned, based on over 200 years of the authors' cumulative and diverse experience, about PM processes. These include successful and, perhaps more importantly, not-so-successful trials. Our collective interdisciplinary background has supported the development, testing, and evaluation of a rich range of collaborative modeling approaches. We share here what we have learned as a community of participatory modelers, within three categories of reflection: a) lessons learned about participatory modelers; b) lessons learned about the context of collaboration; and c) lessons learned about the PM process. First, successful PM teams encompass a variety of skills beyond modeling expertise. Skills include: effective relationship-building, openness to learn from local experts, awareness of personal motivations and biases, and ability to translate discussions into models and to assess success. Second, the context for collaboration necessitates a culturally appropriate process for knowledge generation and use, for involvement of community co-leads, and for understanding group power dynamics that might influence how people from different backgrounds interact. Finally, knowing when to use PM and when not to, managing expectations, and effectively and equitably addressing conflicts is essential. Managing the participation process in PM is as important as managing the model building process. We recommend that PM teams consider what skills are present within a team, while ensuring inclusive creative space for collaborative exploration and learning supported by simple yet relevant models. With a realistic view of what it entails, PM can be a powerful approach that builds collective knowledge and social capital, thus helping communities to take charge of their future and address complex social and environmental problems

    Preventing type 1 diabetes in childhood

    Get PDF
    Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is an autoimmune disease in which the insulin-producing β cells of the pancreas are destroyed by T lymphocytes. Recent studies have demonstrated that monitoring for pancreatic islet autoantibodies, combined with genetic risk assessment, can identify most children who will develop T1D when they still have sufficient β cell function to control glucose concentrations without the need for insulin. In addition, there has been recent success in secondary prevention using immunotherapy to delay the progression of preclinical disease, and primary prevention approaches to inhibiting the initiating autoimmune process have entered large-scale clinical trials. By changing the focus of T1D management from late diagnosis and insulin replacement to early diagnosis and β cell preservation, we can anticipate a future without the need for daily insulin injections for children with T1D

    Language endangerment and language documentation in Africa

    Get PDF
    Non peer reviewe

    Notated FY 2013-2018 USFWS Species Listing Work Plan

    No full text
    This dataset consists of annotations describing the availability and types of pre-listing conservation plans for species on the FY2013-2018 USFWS work plan, which are slated for formal endangered species listing decisions

    The System Dynamics of U.S. Automobile Fuel Economy

    No full text
    This paper analyzes the dynamics of U.S. automobile gasoline consumption since 1975. Using background literature on the history of domestic fuel economy and energy policy, I establish a conceptual model that explains historical trends in adoption of increased fuel economy. I then create a system dynamics simulation model to understand the relationship between increased fuel economy standards and potential changes to gas tax policies. The model suggests that when increases in mandated fuel economy are not conducted in an environment with rising fuel costs, fuel economy improvements may be directly counteracted by shifting tastes of consumers towards larger automobiles with lower fuel economy

    Redistribution Effects of Wetland Mitigation Over Space and Time

    No full text
    117 p.Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2007.Finally, the third section uses the same Chicago dataset to analyze whether mitigation programs actually relocate wetlands through off-site mitigation from urban to rural areas and whether that relocation causes socioeconomic disparities. I demonstrate that the extent of wetland relocation and redistribution differs significantly with choice of mitigation method, while the largest differences are observed for in-lieu fee mitigation. These findings suggest that planners must take relocation and redistributive effects into account in setting up and administering mitigation programs, particularly as responsibility for wetland protection shifts from federal to local regulators.U of I OnlyRestricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETD
    corecore