| 1. |
- Hoover, Fushcia-Ann, et al.
(author)
-
Environmental justice implications of siting criteria in urban green infrastructure planning
- 2021
-
In: Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning. - 1523-908X .- 1522-7200. ; 23:5, s. 665-682
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hoover, Fushcia-Ann, et al.
(author)
-
Why go green? Comparing rationales and planning criteria for green infrastructure in US city plans
- 2023
-
In: Landscape and Urban Planning. - 0169-2046 .- 1872-6062. ; 237
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Green infrastructure is an increasingly popular urban sustainability strategy, widely promoted for its ability to provide multiple benefits. We examined 120 planning documents from 19 U.S. cities to identify if and how the stated benefits that cities use within their rationales for green infrastructure programs (rationale statements) align with the criteria used to site green infrastructure at the neighborhood scale (siting statements). Our findings suggest that many of the desired benefits stated in the rationales for green infrastructure lack corresponding and specific siting criteria. This was particularly evident for rationale statements concerning social and cultural ecosystem services, seemingly because certain benefits, especially those related to stormwater management, are prioritized over other green infrastructure services. While multiple benefits remain a dominant rationale for green infrastructure in the cities analyzed, including stormwater management, social cohesion, and biodiversity benefits, siting criteria were dominated by stormwater management, available locations, and other logistical considerations. These findings indicate a large-scale misalignment between the multifunctional ideal of urban green infrastructure and the procedures used to implement green infrastructure programs. We conclude with a discussion of how siting criteria and processes can be elaborated to deliver the desired benefits of green infrastructure.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
