When Governing Urban Waters Differently: Five Tenets for Socio-Environmental Justice in Urban Climate Adaptation Interventions
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Water Equity: A Starting Point
2.2. Towards Environmental Justice
3. Methods
4. Study Context
5. Results
5.1. Drivers for Implementation
5.2. Management of Rainwater Harvesting Systems
6. Discussion
6.1. Distributional Justice
6.2. Recognition Justice
6.3. Procedural Justice
6.4. Interactional Justice
6.5. Mobility Justice
6.6. Engaging with Socio-Environmental Framework in GSI
7. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- IPCC. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability; International Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Chinowsky, P. Intense Heat and Flooding Are Wreaking Havoc on Power and Water Systems as Climate Change Batters America’s Aging Infrastructure. The Conversation. 2022. Available online: https://theconversation.com/intense-heat-and-flooding-are-wreaking-havoc-on-power-and-water-systems-as-climate-change-batters-americas-aging-infrastructure-189761 (accessed on 22 October 2022).
- Naishadham, S. Here’s How Cities in the West, including Las Vegas, Have Water Amid Drought. Nevada Public Radio. 2022. Available online: https://knpr.org/knpr/2022-05/heres-how-cities-west-including-las-vegas-have-water-amid-drought (accessed on 24 October 2022).
- Smith, H. California Drought Pits Farmers vs. Cities. But Neither is the Biggest Water Victim. Los Angeles Times. 2022. Available online: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-10-03/californias-environment-takes-biggest-hit-during-drought (accessed on 22 October 2022).
- UN DESA. Revision of World Urbanization Prospects; Population Division of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs [UN DESA]: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Rigaud, K.; Sherbinin, A.; Jones, B.; Bergmann, J.; Clement, V.; Ober, K.; Schewe, J.; Adamo, S.; McCusker, B.; Heuser, S.; et al. Groundswell: Preparing for Internal Climate Migration. The World Bank. 2018. Available online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29461 (accessed on 20 October 2022).
- Staddon, C.; Ward, S.; De Vito, L.; Zuniga-Teran, A.; Gerlak, A.K.; Schoeman, Y.; Hart, A.; Booth, G. Contributions of green infrastructure to enhancing urban resilience. Environ. Syst. Decis. 2018, 38, 330–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- EPA. Why You Should Consider Green Stormwater Infrastructure for Your Community. Environmental Protection Agency. 2022. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/G3/why-you-should-consider-green-stormwater-infrastructure-your-community (accessed on 22 October 2022).
- Zhang, K.; Chui, T.F.M. Linking hydrological and bioecological benefits of green infrastructures across spatial scales—A literature review. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 646, 1219–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- ASCE. The Economic Benefits of Investing in Water Infrastructure: How a Failure to Act Would Affect the US Economic Recovery. American Society of Civil Engineers. 2020. Available online: http://www.uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/publications/The%20Economic%20Benefits%20of%20Investing%20in%20Water%20Infrastructure_final.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2022).
- Zuniga-Teran, A.A.; Staddon, C.; de Vito, L.; Gerlak, A.K.; Ward, S.; Schoeman, Y.; Hart, A.; Booth, G. Challenges of mainstreaming green infrastructure in built environment professions. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2019, 12, 710–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shokry, G.; Connolly, J.J.T.; Anguelovski, I. Understanding climate gentrification and shifting landscapes of protection and vulnerability in green resilient Philadelphia. Urban Clim. 2020, 31, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabisch, N.; Haase, D. Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2014, 122, 129–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anguelovski, I.; Brand, A.L.; Connolly, J.J.; Corbera, E.; Kotsila, P.; Steil, J.; Garcia-Lamarca, M.; Triguero-Mas, M.; Cole, H.; Baró, F.; et al. Expanding the Boundaries of Justice in Urban Greening Scholarship: Toward an Emancipatory, Antisubordination, Intersectional, and Relational Approach. Ann. Am. Assoc. Geogr. 2020, 110, 1743–1769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoover, F.A.; Meerow, S.; Grabowski, Z.J.; McPhearson, T. Environmental justice implications of siting criteria in urban green infrastructure planning. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2021, 23, 665–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blaikie, P.; Brookfield, H. Land Degradation and Society; Routledge: London, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Zuniga-Teran, A.A.; Gerlak, A.K.; Elder, A.D.; Tam, A. The unjust distribution of urban green infrastructure is just the tip of the iceberg: A systematic review of place-based studies. Environ. Sci. Policy 2021, 126, 234–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kull, C.A.; Arnauld de Sartre, X.; Castro-Larrañaga, M. The political ecology of ecosystem services. Geoforum 2015, 61, 122–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Robertson, M.M. The Nature That Capital Can See: Science, State, and Market in the Commodification of Ecosystem Services. Environ. Plan. Soc. Space 2006, 24, 367–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swyngedouw, E. Power, Nature, and the City. The Conquest of Water and the Political Ecology of Urbanization in Guayaquil, Ecuador: 1880–1990. Environ. Plan. Econ. Space 1997, 29, 311–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heynen, N.; Kaika, M.; Swyngedouw, E. Nature of Cities: Urban Political Ecology and the Politics of Urban Metabolism; Routledge: London, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Gandy, M. Urban political ecology: A critical reconfiguration. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2022, 46, 21–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mora, C.G. Making Hispanics: How Activists, Bureaucrats, and Media Constructed a New American; Chicago University Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Chou, B. Going Green in the Desert: Tucson, Arizona Is Now an NRDC “Emerald City”. Natural Resources Defense Council. 2013. Available online: https://www.nrdc.org/experts/ben-chou/going-green-desert-tucson-arizona-now-nrdc-emerald-city (accessed on 23 November 2022).
- UN General Assembly. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2022).
- WHO. A Guide to Equitable Water Safety Planning: Ensuring No One is Left Behind. World Health Organization. 2019. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/311148 (accessed on 22 October 2022).
- NAWC. NAWC Adopts Five Principles for Advancing Water Equity. National Association of Water Companies. 2021. Available online: https://nawc.org/press/nawc-adopts-five-principles-for-advancing-water-equity/ (accessed on 26 October 2022).
- Blatter, J.; Ingram, H. Reflections on Water: New Approaches to Transboundary Conflicts and Cooperation; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Perreault, T. What kind of governance for what kind of equity? Towards a theorization of justice in water governance. Water Int. 2014, 39, 233–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingram, H. The importance of equity and the limits of efficiency in water resources. In Water, Place and Equity; Whiteley, J.M., Ingram, H., Perry, R.W., Arnold, T., Baer, M., Eds.; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Goff, M.; Crow, B. What is water equity? The unfortunate consequences of a global focus on ‘drinking water’. Water Int. 2014, 39, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prieto, M. Equity vs. Efficiency and the Human Right to Water. Water 2021, 13, 278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakker, K. From State to Market?: Water Mercantilización in Spain. Environ. Plan. Econ. Space 2002, 34, 767–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bustamante, R.; Crespo, C.; Walnycki, A.M. Seeing through the concept of water as a human right in Bolivia. In The Right to Water: Politics, Governance, and Social Struggles; Sultana, F., Loftus, A., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Radonic, L. Through the aqueduct and the courts: An analysis of the human right to water and indigenous water rights in Northwestern Mexico. Geoforum 2017, 84, 151–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strang, V. The Meaning of Water; Berg Press: Oxford, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Holifield, R.; Chakraborty, J.; Walker, G. (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Environmental Justice; eBook; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Pellow, D. Resisting Global Toxics: Transnational Movements for Environmental Justice; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Pellow, D.; Roberts, J.T.; Harlan, S.L.; Bell, S.E.; Holt, W.G.; Nagel, J. Climate justice and inequality. In Climate Change and Society: Sociological Perspectives; Dunlap, R.E., Brulle, R.J., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Schlosberg, D. Defining Environmental Justice Theories, Movements, and Nature; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Bullard, R.D. Solid waste sites and the black Houston community. Sociol. Inq. 1983, 53, 273–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- US General Accountability Office. Siting of Hazardous Waste Landfills and Their Correlation with Racial and Economic Statis of Surrounding Communities. 1983. Available online: https://www.gao.gov/assets/rced-83-168.pdf (accessed on 18 July 2021).
- Bullard, R.D. Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class, and Environmental Quality, 3rd ed.; Westview: Boulder, CO, USA, 1990; Available online: http://www.ciesin.org/docs/010-278/010-278chpt2.html (accessed on 18 July 2021).
- Pulido, L. Environmentalism and Economic Justice: Two Chicano Struggles in the Southwest; University of Arizona Press: Tucson, AZ, USA, 1996; p. 282. [Google Scholar]
- Bell, D.; Carrick, J. Procedural environmental justice. In The Routledge Handbook of Environmental Justice; Holifield, R., Chakraborty, J., Walker, G., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Edge, S.; Brown, E.L.; Ghosh, S.; Murnaghan, A.M. Procedural environmental [in]justice at multiple scales: Examining immigrant advocacy for improved living conditions. Local Environ. 2020, 25, 666–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holland, B. Procedural justice in local climate adaptation: Political capabilities and transformational change. Environ. Polit. 2017, 26, 391–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schlosberg, D. Reconceiving Environmental Justice: Global Movements and Political Theories. Environ. Polit. 2004, 13, 517–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraser, N. Rethinking Recognition. New Left Rev. 2000, 3, 107–120. [Google Scholar]
- Fraser, N. Social justice in the age of identity politics: Redistribution, recognition, participation. In Culture and Economy after the Cultural Turn; ProQuest Ebook Central; Ray, L., Sayer, A., Eds.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1992; pp. 25–53. [Google Scholar]
- Boone, C.G.; Buckley, G.L.; Grove, J.M.; Sister, C. Parks and People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2009, 99, 767–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Byrne, J.; Ambrey, C.; Portanger, C.; Lo, A.; Matthews, T.; Baker, D.; Davison, A. Could urban greening mitigate suburban thermal inequity?: The role of residents’ dispositions and household practices. Environ. Res. Lett. 2016, 11, 095014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ernstson, H. The social production of ecosystem services: A framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 109, 7–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kato-Huerta, J.; Geneletti, D. Environmental justice implications of nature-based solutions in urban areas: A systematic review of approaches, indicators, and outcomes. Environ. Sci. Policy 2022, 138, 122–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Low, S. Public space and diversity: Distributive, procedural and interactional justice for parks. In The Ashgate Research Companion to Planning and Culture; Young, G., Stevenson, D., Eds.; Routledge Taylor and Francis: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Wolch, J.R.; Byrne, J.; Newell, J.P. Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2014, 125, 234–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dai, D. Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where to intervene? Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 102, 234–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jennings, V.; Johnson Gaither, C.; Gragg, R.S. Promoting Environmental Justice through Urban Green Space Access: A Synopsis. Environ. Justice 2012, 5, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Heynen, N.; Perkins, H.A.; Roy, P. The Political Ecology of Uneven Urban Green Space: The Impact of Political Economy on Race and Ethnicity in Producing Environmental Inequality in Milwaukee. Urban Aff. Rev. 2006, 42, 3–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anguelovski, I.; Irazábal-Zurita, C.; Connolly, J.J.T. Grabbed Urban Landscapes: Socio-spatial Tensions in Green Infrastructure Planning in Medellín. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2019, 43, 133–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carmichael, C.; Danks, C.; Vatovec, C. Green Infrastructure Solutions to Health Impacts of Climate Change: Perspectives of Affected Residents in Detroit, Michigan, USA. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rigolon, A.; Németh, J. “We’re not in the business of housing:” Environmental gentrification and the nonprofitization of green infrastructure projects. Cities 2018, 81, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sultana, R.; Birtchnell, T.; Gill, N. Urban greening and mobility justice in Dhaka’s informal settlements. Mobilities 2020, 15, 273–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radonic, L.; Cooper, L.T.; Omans, M. At the Crossroads of Flood Mitigation and Urban Revitalization: Residents’ Perspectives of Shifting Floodplain Governance in the United States Rust Belt. Hum. Organ. 2020, 79, 117–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernard, H.R. Research methods in anthropology. In Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches; Altamira Press: Lanham, MD, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Guest, G.; Bunce, A.; Johnson, L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods 2006, 18, 59–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paolisso, M.; Weeks, P.; Packard, J. A Cultural Model of Farmer Land Conservation. Hum. Organ. 2013, 72, 12–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radonic, L. When Catching the Rain: A Cultural Model Approach to Green Infrastructure in Water Governance. Hum. Organ. 2018, 77, 172–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kosko, B. Fuzzy cognitive maps. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 1986, 24, 65–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evans, J.; Jones, P. The walking interview: Methodology, mobility and place. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31, 849–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volkmann, T.H.M.; Lyon, S.W.; Gupta, H.V.; Troch, P.A. Multicriteria design of rain gauge networks for flash flood prediction in semiarid catchments with complex terrain: Multicriteria design of rain gauge network. Water Resour. Res. 2010, 46, 9145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Dominguez, F.; Gupta, H.; Zeng, X.; Norman, L. Urban Effects on Regional Climate: A Case Study in the Phoenix and Tucson “Sun Corridor”. Earth Interact. 2016, 20, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zuniga-Teran, A.A.; Tortajada, C. Water policies and their effects on water usage: The case of Tucson, Arizona. Water Util. J. 2021, 28, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- Radonic, L. Re-conceptualising Water Conservation: Rainwater Harvesting in the Desert of the Southwestern United States. Water Altern. 2019, 12, 16. [Google Scholar]
- Rupprecht, C. Tucson Water Conservation Program. City of Tucson Water Department. 2020. Available online: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/water/docs/FY18-19-Conservation-Report-Final.pdf (accessed on 12 June 2020).
- Gerlak, A.K.; Elder, A.; Thomure, T.; Shipek, C.; Zuniga-Teran, A.; Pavao-Zuckerman, M.; Gupta, N.; Matsler, M.; Berger, L.; Henry, A.D.; et al. Green Infrastructure: Lessons in Governance and Collaboration from Tucson. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 2021, 63, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartigan, J. (Ed.) Anthropology of Race: Genes, Biology, and Culture; SAR Press: Santa Fe, NM, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- U.S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates. 2021. Available online: https://censusreporter.org/profiles/16000US0477000-tucson-az/ (accessed on 22 October 2022).
- Sheridan, T.E. Los Tucsonses: The Mexican Community in Tucson, 1854–1941; University of Arizona Press: Tucson, AZ, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- City of Tucson Mayor and Council. Poverty and Urban Stress, 2020. Tucson, AZ. 2020. Available online: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/hcd/PovReport2020.pdf (accessed on 26 October 2022).
- Dialesandro, J.; Brazil, N.; Wheeler, S.; Abunnasr, Y. Dimensions of Thermal Inequity: Neighborhood Social Demographics and Urban Heat in the Southwestern U.S. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerlak, A.K.; Clarke, J.N. With South-Side PFAS Water Contamination History Repeats Itself. Arizona Daily Star. 2021. Available online: https://tucson.com/opinion/local/tucson-opinion-with-south-side-pfas-water-contamination-history-repeats-itself/article_d0aa9748-e40a-11eb-bc9a-f7abe1946fe1.html (accessed on 24 October 2022).
- Zwarteveen, M.Z.; Boelens, R. Defining, researching and struggling for water justice: Some conceptual building blocks for research and action. Water Int. 2014, 39, 143–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radonic, L. At the frontier of water conservation: Attending to relationships, values, and practices for inclusive infrastructure. Hum Organ. 2023; Under Review. [Google Scholar]
- Meehan, K.M. Tool-power: Water infrastructure as wellsprings of state power. Geoforum 2014, 57, 215–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meerow, S. A green infrastructure spatial planning model for evaluating ecosystem service tradeoffs and synergies across three coastal megacities. Environ. Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 125011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shi, L.; Chu, E.; Anguelovski, I.; Aylett, A.; Debats, J.; Goh, K.; Schenk, T.; Seto, K.C.; Dodman, D.; Roberts, D.; et al. Roadmap towards justice in urban climate adaptation research. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016, 6, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nero, B.F. Urban green space dynamics and socio-environmental inequity: Multi-resolution and spatiotemporal data analysis of Kumasi, Ghana. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2017, 38, 6993–7020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmer, A.; Cornea, N.; Véron, R. Of parks and politics: The production of socio-nature in a Gujarati town. Local Environ. 2017, 22, 49–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arshad, H.S.H.; Routray, J.K. From socioeconomic disparity to environmental injustice: The relationship between housing unit density and community green space in a medium city in Pakistan. Local Environ. 2018, 2, 536–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Data Collection Method | Data Collected | Data Analysis Method |
---|---|---|
Semi-structured interviews [65] | Demographic background and connection to the Tucson area; past and present experiences with rainwater harvesting, motivations for adoption, cistern use and maintenance practices. | Text analysis [65]. Interviews are transcribed and analyzed using an iterative coding approach where common themes are identified, defined, and then counted across transcripts. |
Mental models [67,68] | Individual understandings of the working dynamics of rainwater harvesting, with specific attention to the social, ecological, and economic (direct and indirect) benefits. | Fuzzy cognitive mapping (FCM) [68,69] offers individual mental models of people’s understandings of the environment that can be scaled-up to determine similarities and differences within and across groups. |
Outdoor surveys & walk-along interviews [70] | Type and extent of existing vegetation, the placement of cistern(s), and any other water-use features like swimming pools or hot tubs. Additionally, information about irrigation practices, landscaping practices, the story of different plants, and factors driving the selection of vegetation. | Quantification of plants and water features; and text analysis of walk-along interviews (see data analysis of semi-structured interviews above). |
Participants | Description | Land Tenure | Group Demographics | Time Living in Tucson |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rebate program | Participants who applied to the Rainwater Harvesting Rebate Program | Homeowners | White (90%) Middle aged (average 56) Medium-to-high level of formal education (above high school degree) Middle to high income | 60% are long term residents (over 11 years) 40% over 21 years |
Loan/grant program | Participants who applied to the rebate program through financial assistance from the Low-Income Rainwater Harvesting Program | Homeowners | Hispanic (65%) Middle aged (average 58) High diversity in formal education levels (40% high school degree or below) Low income | 91% are long term residents (over 11 years) 71.9% over 21 years |
Benefit | Definition | Rebate Participants Sample | Loan/Grant Participants Sample | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Frequency | Centrality | Frequency | Centrality | ||
Lush landscape | An increase in vegetation density in private property and/or an increase in the growth and robustness of existing plants. | 73% | 0.76 | 93.5% | 1.22 |
Water conservation | Includes: a decrease in use of tap/treated water; reduce extraction of groundwater and CAP water; reduce waste of rainwater. | 67% | 1.24 | 83.5% | 0.83 |
Financial savings | Reduction in water bill, electricity bill, and produce cost. | 50% | 0.64 | 87% | 0.76 |
Food production | Household production of fruits and vegetables increases and are often considered of better taste and quality. | 30% | 0.46 | 54.8% | 0.97 |
Cooling and shade | Creating a cooler environment around the house and in the city through the use of vegetation. | 43% | 0.78 | 29% | 0.45 |
Distribution | Identify where are existing GSI installations located and who are they favoring. Ask: why is that the case? Consider who needs GSI the most based on available data and/or indexes (i.e., heat index, tree canopy index, etc.) Identify who are the workers and/or businesses benefiting from publicly funded GSI, and if and why are they favored? |
Procedural | Analyze the demographic profile of the institution: is it representative of the population it is serving? Is appropriate representation present across the hierarchical institutional structure? Include culturally relevant forms of public participation in program development as appropriate. Compensate participation in engagement activities, especially to low-income people. Design engagement processes so that participation does not burden underserved participants. |
Recognition | Consider who are your stakeholders. Are there groups who are traditionally not at the table but whom should be included? Enquire why certain groups may be underrepresented? (e.g., language barriers, historical displacement, structural racism) Identify traditional knowledge of your local populations and consider and value the culture they bring to the table. |
Interactive | Identify how diverse peoples (with attention to race, ethnicity, gender, age, ability, religion, immigration status, sexual orientation, etc.) may engage differently with the same infrastructure. This can be addressed via focus groups asking questions around the design, the type of amenities, uses, quality, maintenance, among others. |
Mobility | Identify whether the policy/program can be linked to livelihoods and intentionally include underserved groups. Pay especial attention to potential gentrification processes and recognize how the consequences of GSI development may align with other processes in the urban environment. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Radonic, L.; Zuniga-Teran, A. When Governing Urban Waters Differently: Five Tenets for Socio-Environmental Justice in Urban Climate Adaptation Interventions. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1598. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021598
Radonic L, Zuniga-Teran A. When Governing Urban Waters Differently: Five Tenets for Socio-Environmental Justice in Urban Climate Adaptation Interventions. Sustainability. 2023; 15(2):1598. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021598
Chicago/Turabian StyleRadonic, Lucero, and Adriana Zuniga-Teran. 2023. "When Governing Urban Waters Differently: Five Tenets for Socio-Environmental Justice in Urban Climate Adaptation Interventions" Sustainability 15, no. 2: 1598. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021598