changing climate in philadelphia : expert elicitation of ...6525/datastream... · changing climate...
TRANSCRIPT
Changing Climate in Philadelphia: Expert Elicitation of
Climate Risks and Recommendations
A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty
Of
Drexel University
By
Griffin M. Kidd
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree
of
Master of Science in Environmental Engineering
June 2015
ii
© Copyright 2015
Griffin M. Kidd. All Rights Reserved.
iii
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge the input I received from CUSP, CCRUN,
Dr. Franco Montalto, Dr. Patrick Gurian, Dr. Christiain Hunold, Stephanie Miller, and all
20 of the Expert respondents. This Thesis is a result of the time each of you has
generously given to me over the past year. I also want to thank my loving wife and my
three girls for your patience and support.
iv
Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. vi
ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. vii
1. INTRODUCTION ..……………………………………………..…………………………………………………….… 1
2. IMPLIMENTING CLIMATE CHANGE STRATEGIES .………………………………………………………. 7
2.1 Cities and Climate Change ……………………………….……………………………………………………… 7
2.2 Philadelphia Services ……………………………………….……………………………………..…………….… 9
2.3 Philadelphia Climate Action Plans ………………………………………………………..……………….. 12
3. METHODS …..……………………………………………….…………………………………………..……………… 18
4. SYNTHESIS OF THE SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW RESPONSES …….…….……….………… 24
4.1 How Climate Change Affected Expert Responses .…………………………...……………………. 24
4.2 The Risks …………………….…………………………….……………………………….…….……………………. 27
4.2.1 Stormwater Runoff ……………………………………………………………………….……….………….. 28
4.2.2 Sea Level Rise ……………………………………………………………………………….………….………… 29
4.2.3 Excessive Heat ………………………………………………………………………………………….………… 30
4.2.4 Poor Air Quality ……………………………………………………………….…………………………………. 33
4.2.5 Loss of Tree Canopy …………………………………………………………………….…………………….. 33
4.2.6 Increased Storm Intensity …………………………………………………………………………………… 34
4.3 Vulnerable Populations …………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
4.3.1 Flood Prone Regions …………………………………………………………………………………………… 36
4.3.2 Elderly and Young ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 37
4.3.3 Poverty ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 37
v
4.4 Recommendations ……………………………………………………………………………….……………….. 39
4.4.1 Greenhouse Gas Reductions …………………………………………………………….………………… 41
4.4.2 Reduce Impervious Surfaces ……………………………………………………………….……………… 42
4.4.3 Retreat from Flood Prone Areas ……………………………………………………….……………….. 44
4.4.4 Implement Flood Resiliency Strategies …………………………………………….………………… 45
4.4.5 More Green Infrastructure (Public) …………………………………………………….……………… 46
4.4.6 Green Roofs, Gardens, and Rain Barrels (Private) ………………………………………….…… 47
4.4.7 A Greater Investment in Trees …………………………………………………………….……….…….. 48
4.4.8 Education and Outreach ………………………………………………………………….……………….… 50
4.5 Costs and Benefits ……………………………………………………………………………….…….…………. 52
5. CONCLUSIONS ...…………………………………………..………………………..……………………………….. 58
LIST OF REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 63
vi
List of Figures
1. Mental Model of Expert Responses ……………………………………………………………………….. 26
2. Frequency of Expert Responses on Climate Risks …………………………………………………… 28
3. Frequency of Expert Responses on Vulnerable Populations …………………………………… 36
4. Frequency of Expert Responses on Recommendations …………………….……………………. 40
vii
Abstract
Changing Climate in Philadelphia: Expert Elicitation of
Climate Risks and Recommendations Griffin M. Kidd
Philadelphia residents and business are at risk from current climatic conditions
that exist in the region: risks of damage to property and infrastructure from flooding
and extreme storm conditions, economic impacts due to loss of productivity, as well as
risks of severe health impacts and death from poor air quality and extreme heat events.
While there is historical data that can be used to determine the current extent of these
risks, the regional effects of climate change will have a strong affect on the extent of
these risks in the future. This thesis discusses the political and operational structure of
Philadelphia services in regards to the feasibility of implementing climate change
adaptation plans, reviews several climate action plans that have been developed for
Philadelphia, and provides current expert views on climate risks and adaptation
strategies designed to reduce the climate risks in Philadelphia. Expert views were
collected through the use of a semi-structured interview conducted with 20 experts in
Philadelphia and their responses have been synthesized in order to determine the main
climate risks in Philadelphia, identify populations that are most vulnerable to these risks,
and establish a list of recommended strategies to adapt to these risks in order to limit
the long term impacts of a changing climate. There are several climate risks that experts
identified for Philadelphia: Stormwater runoff and localized flooding, excessive heat,
increased storm intensity, poor air quality, coastal flooding, invasive species and water
viii
pollution. While these risks are currently present in Philadelphia and currently cause
negative economic and health impacts, with the progression of the regional effects of
climate change these conditions as well as their impacts on Philadelphia will certainly
get worse unless some intervention is implemented. The vulnerable populations that
were identified are: coastal property, flood prone neighborhoods, elderly, children, and
the poor. Experts offered many ways to mitigate the impacts of climate change through
the implementation of several adaptation strategies: greenhouse gas reduction,
reducing impervious surfaces, retreat from flood prone areas, flood resiliency, more
public green infrastructure, more private green infrastructure, greater tree canopy, and
more public engagement. Given the current predictions of climate change for America
it is imperative for the health and survival of American cities to adopt a climate change
strategy that incorporates both mitigation strategies as well as adaptation and resiliency
strategies and address the regional predictions of climate change for the city, (Karl et. al.
2009).This thesis is designed to provide the prevailing expert opinions on the climate
risks and recommendations to address these risks, which provides the first step towards
enacting meaningful change in Philadelphia.
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
American cities face many different challenges such as providing services for the
citizens of the city, promoting growth within the city, and raising revenue to fund the
operational expenses of the city. There are also challenges that cities face coping with
natural conditions such as stormwater runoff, flooding, and extreme heat. This second
set of challenges will be exacerbated by the effects of climate change which include an
increase in heavy downpours, increased intensity of storms, and increased
temperatures (Karl, Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009, IPCC 2014). The worsening effects of
climate change will continue regardless of any greenhouse gas emission reductions that
take place due to the current levels of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere and the
longevity of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations ("Northeast Impacts &
Adaptation," 2013). There are two responses to climate change that can be employed by
cities to address the progression of the regional effects of climate change: mitigation
strategies where reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are implemented in order to
slow down the progression of climate change effects, and adaptation strategies that are
designed to increase the resiliency of the city from worsening climatic conditions (Karl,
Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009). The operational structure of city government and
interwoven relationships between the city government, non-governmental agencies and
private industry that exists in American cities makes it more difficult to simply adopt a
climate change strategy and implement it unilaterally. While mitigation strategies have
2
been adopted and are apparent in many city action plans, adaptation strategies are
lacking in city planning. Given the current predictions of climate change for America it is
imperative for the health and survival of American cities to adopt a climate change
strategy that incorporates both mitigation strategies as well as adaptation and resiliency
strategies and address the regional predictions of climate change for the city (Karl,
Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009).
This thesis focuses specifically on Philadelphia and includes a discussion on the
operational structure in Philadelphia, a review of the regional climate action plans that
have been developed and implemented identifying strategies that are currently being
highlighted, and the results of a semi-structured interview conducted with 20 experts in
Philadelphia identifying the main climate risks and a list of recommended strategies to
adapt to these risks.
The first section of the thesis, Cities and Climate Change (section 2.1), provides a
discussion about implementing climate change strategies in American Cities. When
examining the prevailing regional climate risks and recommendations for risk reduction
it is necessary to also consider the mechanisms for implementing the recommendations.
There are several strategies offered such as incorporating climate change adaptation
considerations into infrastructure projects that are currently needed and also using a
cost benefit analysis to calculate future loss savings to justify the upfront investment
(Bulkeley & Betsill, 2013, Winkelman & Lowe, 2011,, Hunt & Watkiss, 2010).
3
The next section, Philadelphia Services (section 2.2), examines the operational
structure of Philadelphia. The implementation of a unilateral climate change adaptation
strategy is made difficult by the fact that many of the city services are managed by
separate “quasi-public” authorities that operate under the authority of their own board,
such as the Water Department, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority, the
Delaware River Port Authority and the Penn’s Landing Corporation; however, it is easier
for any one of these agencies to implement their own strategies based on their own
assessment of risk (Adams, 2007). For example, the Philadelphia Water Department
developed the Green City, Clean Waters plan to implement more green stormwater
infrastructure with a planned investment of $2.4 Billion over a 25 year period,
specifically citing climate change as one of the motivating factors for this substantial
investment (Green City Clean Waters, 2011). This demonstrates the ability of an agency in
operating in Philadelphia to be able to implement a major infrastructure project with
the stated objective of addressing climate change impacts.
The third section, Philadelphia Climate Action Plans (section 2.3), provides a
discussion of some of the existing climate action plans created for Philadelphia
highlighting some specific features of the different plans. For example, the Greenworks
Philadelphia plan focuses mainly on greenhouse gas reduction, the Connections 2040
plan promotes community engagement, and the Green2015 plan is to reclaim 500 acres
of property and convert it back to green space. In this discussion of climate action plans
there is also a description of some of the ecosystem services provided by trees and
4
other forms of green infrastructure, such as carbon sequestration, reduction in the
urban heat island effect, mitigation of stormwater runoff, and providing shade to cool
neighborhoods. The ecosystem services provided by trees and other green
infrastructure are the reason for promoting their implementation; it is these services
that reduce vulnerabilities to climate risks.
The main research conducted for this thesis was performed using a semi-
structured interview in order to elicit the prevailing expert opinions on climate risks in
Philadelphia, vulnerable populations, recommendations for addressing the identified
risks, and how opinions are affected by climate change. The methods chapter details the
research methods employed to choose the semi-structured interview questions, define
and solicit experts, conduct the survey and how the survey results were systematically
coded to produce some quantitative data. This research was modeled after the first part
of a similar research project conducted in the New York City region, “Contrasting
Perspectives Regarding Climate Risks and Adaptation Strategies in the New York
Metropolitan Area after Superstorm Sandy” (Miller et al., 2014), using the same semi-
structured interview questions (modified for Philadelphia) and similar research methods
to elicit expert opinions in order to allow for cross study comparison.
The semi-structured interview questions were designed to elicit the prevailing
expert opinions on the climate risks Philadelphia is faced with, the populations that are
vulnerable to these risks, recommendations for addressing the risks, costs and benefits
of their recommendations, and an explanation of how their answers were affected by
5
climate change predictions. All of the twenty expert respondents stated that their
responses were shaped by the climate change predictions for Philadelphia, primarily by
increasing the urgency for action. The risks that expert respondents identified for
Philadelphia are: stormwater runoff and localized flooding, excessive heat, increased
storm intensity, poor air quality, coastal flooding, invasive species and water pollution.
These risks that the experts identified reflect the regional climate change predictions of
an increase in heavy downpours, increased storm intensity, and increased temperatures
and extreme heat events (Karl, Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009, Petkova, Horton, Bader, &
Kinney, 2013). The vulnerable populations that were identified are: coastal property,
flood prone neighborhoods, elderly, children, and the poor. The recommendations for
risk reduction that were identified are: greenhouse gas reduction, reducing impervious
surfaces, retreat from flood prone areas, flood resiliency, more public green
infrastructure, more private green infrastructure, greater tree canopy, and more public
engagement.
The climate related risks identified by Philadelphia experts were nearly identical
to the risks identified in the New York study and the recommendations for risk reduction
had several categories in common. The main deviations in recommendations between
the New York region and Philadelphia were additional recommendations for New York
that were not provided for Philadelphia such as building a multi-purpose storm surge
barrier and building sand dunes and barrier islands (Miller et al., 2014). The similarities
in climate risks and recommendations provided by experts for both Philadelphia and
6
New York demonstrates that cities that are in the same region of the country potentially
have very similar risks, while the differences signal the need for regional studies to
identify risks and recommendations that are specific to a particular city.
7
CHAPTER 2: IMPLIMENTING CLIMATE CHANGE STRATEGIES
2.1 Cities and Climate Change
The effects of climate change in cities do not produce new issues, the issues of
stormwater runoff, drought, and extreme heat have been ongoing and cities already
have strategies in place to deal with them(Lowe, Foster & Winkelmand, 2009).Climate
change will increase the frequency and intensity of these events, but the framework for
addressing these issues is already a part of the local governmental system and funding
for projects can be accomplished by using climate change adaptation strategies as a
method of addressing other societal issues such as roads and other infrastructure needs
(Bulkeley & Betsill, 2013). Climate change adaptation can be accomplished in part by
increasing current methods to increased stress levels that coincide with climate change
predictions ("Northeast Impacts & Adaptation," 2014). Some examples of adaptation
strategies listed on the EPA web site are to update coastal evacuation routes in
response to potentially greater storm surge levels, planting more heat resistant crops,
“harden” energy plants to withstand greater storm and wind events, and to implement
early warning systems for severe weather ("Northeast Impacts & Adaptation," 2014).
Bulkeley & Betsill also recommend that the city government and businesses within the
city work as partners in adopting adaptation strategies as they will be mutually
beneficial (Bulkeley & Betsill, 2013).
8
The 2011 report released by the Center for Clean Air Policy, Lessons Learned on
Climate Adaptation from the Urban Leaders Adaptation Initiative recommends several
suggestions for implementing adaptation and mitigation strategies, one of which is to
calculate future loss savings to financially justify the upfront cost of adaptation
strategies. The literature review written by Hunt and Watkiss (Hunt & Watkiss, 2011)
strongly favors the strategy of assessing and promoting climate change adaptation
strategies based on projected cost savings and provided examples from both London
and New York where this strategy has been used along with stakeholder engagement to
disseminate important information (Hunt & Watkiss, 2011). The report indicates that
this method has been effective for implementing short and medium range strategies,
but due to the variability in the long range climate change predictions, based on the
different emission reduction scenarios, this strategy becomes less effective for
implementation of long range adaptation strategies (Hunt & Watkiss, 2011).
Adopting resiliency strategies that are designed to minimize the impacts of
climate change on a neighborhood level, such as tree plantings and community gardens,
will benefit individual citizens by protecting personal property as well as reducing
energy costs and healthcare costs. Following the recommendation of calculating future
loss savings could be a strong motivator to spark community involvement in calling for
the implementation of resiliency strategies at the neighborhood level. Individual
citizens can be motivated to promote community action even more so when there is
9
personal gain, what is good for the community will also be good for the individual
(Molotch, 1976).
When climate change progresses cities will have no choice but to address the
regional effects as they will have direct impacts on the cities and their citizens; however,
cities that have plans in place ahead of any further shift in climate will fare much better
financially than cities that are unwilling to plan now for the predicted effects.
Implementing adaptation strategies is in the best interests of the City of Philadelphia,
the various quasi-governmental agencies, the private businesses, the nonprofit sector,
and the citizens of Philadelphia.
2.2 Philadelphia Services
The political system in Philadelphia is a complicated arrangement of operational
relationships that at times coalesce with common goals and agenda for the city and its
citizens and at other times work against one another with some animosity at cross
purposes. The three articles by McGovern (2009) and Adams (2003, 2007) provide an
interesting glimpse into the fragmentation of the basic operations of the City of
Philadelphia and the strained relationships that exist between the City of Philadelphia
and some of the major stakeholders in the city, provides insight on the potential
roadblocks to implementation of climate change strategies, and also offers some
potential benefits to the independence of the agencies.
10
The functioning of the City of Philadelphia as a governing body capable of
making and implementing public policy has been eroded over the past 50 years. In the
article by Caroline Adams (Adams, 2007) she illustrates the evolution in Philadelphia of
what she describes as the “quasi-public” authorities that have taken over operational
control of many of the cities services. Some of the services that are under this
operational structure are the Water Department, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit
Authority, the Delaware River Port Authority, and the Penn’s Landing Corporation just to
name a few. The City of Philadelphia has abdicated its responsibility for the major
infrastructure and public works to many different separate governing bodies, each with
their own board capable of making decisions that ultimately affect the citizens of
Philadelphia without the input from the citizenry. With this splintering of city services it
becomes more difficult to implement city wide climate change strategies; however,
each of these agencies has the ability to develop and implement its own plans.
Adams explains that one of the positive outcomes of surrendering control of
public services for Philadelphia is that they are removing the power that comes with it;
public services become insulated from political rancor and are not as affected by the
election cycle. Adams asserts in her article that because these agencies have a singular
objective, they can operate much more efficiently than if the same services were being
managed by the city (Adams, 2007). Additionally many of the services governed by the
various authorities extend beyond the Philadelphia city limit which produces a shared
connection between Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs.
11
Some of the most dramatic examples of the implementation of climate change
adaptation strategies come from the regional authorities operating in Philadelphia. One
example comes from the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) that has
been participating in a pilot program from the Federal Transit Administration designed
to reduce the vulnerability from climate change on the railway system, specifically
disruptions in service and damage associated with extreme weather events due to the
proximity of infrastructure to the “flood-prone Schuylkill River” ("FTA Releases SEPTA
Climate Adaptation Report," 2015). The implementation of some of the projects has been
incorporated with updating aging systems with the purpose of improving the resiliency
to climate change impacts. Funding for these projects comes in part from a federal grant
providing $87 million for resiliency projects such as raising signal huts in flood prone
regions and installing turnabouts to divert trains away from flooded sections of track
("FTA Releases SEPTA Climate Adaptation Report," 2015).
Another example comes from the Philadelphia Water Department which
established the Green City, Clean Waters plan to implement more green stormwater
infrastructure with a planned investment of $2.4 Billion over a 25 year period and
specifically cites climate change as one of the pressures to the system that this
investment is designed to address (Green City Clean Waters, 2011).
If each agency that controls a public function in Philadelphia is under an
independent authority then it is difficult to present a unified strategy for unilateral
implementation. Each agency would have to choose to adopt or reject the plan based
12
on the individual interests of the board members of that agency and fund the projects
out of their operating budget or seek funding through grants. If these systems were
operated by the City of Philadelphia then a single, comprehensive climate change
adaptation plan could be more easily constructed and implemented for the city;
however, there would have to be significant support from the citizens of Philadelphia to
justify the funding needed for implementation.
2.3 Philadelphia Climate Action Plans
Although it is more difficult to implement, a climate action plan that
incorporates city wide adaptation strategies needs to be adopted by the Philadelphia
region in order to protect residents and businesses from the increasing climate risks in
Philadelphia. The Local Action Plan for Climate Change and the Greenworks Philadelphia
plan have similar strategies and goals for the city of Philadelphia laid out in them. In fact
one of the goals presented in the Local Action Plan for Climate Change was to develop a
city Office of Sustainability, which is the office that maintains the Greenworks
Philadelphia plan (Local Action Plan for Climate Change, 2007, Greenworks Philadelphia,
2009). Predominantly the goals presented in these two plans are for climate change
mitigation through the reduction of greenhouse gas (Local Action Plan for Climate Change,
2007, Dews, Freeh, & Wu, 2014). This can be accomplished to a small extent through some
of the means described in these plans, but without sweeping legislation and carbon
taxes being levied on companies it will be difficult to make significant progress in the
13
reduction of greenhouse gas. According to the EPA, the worsening effects of climate
change will continue regardless of any greenhouse gas emission reductions that take
place due to the current levels of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere and the longevity
of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations ("Northeast Impacts & Adaptation," 2013).
Additionally since the Greenworks Philadelphia plan is from the office of the mayor,
Michael Nutter, and his term is ending soon, it may be difficult to sustain this agenda
through another mayoral term depending on the priorities of the incoming mayor.
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission released the DVRPC
Connections 2040 plan which is different from the Greenworks Philadelphia plan
because there is much more attention to the future predicted conditions in Philadelphia
and incorporates many more adaptation strategies. The DVRPC Connections 2040 plan
has many attributes that provide it with the opportunity to be successful in Philadelphia.
One unique aspect of this plan is that it incorporates community involvement and public
outreach in order to engage the citizens of Philadelphia (Connections 2040 Plan for
Greater Philadelphia, 2013). Through community involvement and education about the
climate risks that exist and the benefits of implementing adaptation strategies, the
citizens of Philadelphia can and should become engaged and invested in the process.
Community engagement in climate action is important not only for the community
members, but also for the experts and policy makers who are making the decisions. It is
the residents who have firsthand experience with the effects of extreme events in their
14
neighborhoods and could not only identify the vulnerabilities in their neighborhoods,
but may also have strategies in mind to address the vulnerabilities.
Another factor in favor of the DVRPC Connections 2040 plan is that it is federally
funded (Connections 2040 Plan for Greater Philadelphia, 2013). It is wonderful to have a
plan, but funding for the initiatives laid out in the plan can take them from being a good
idea to being an achievable goal. Implementation of this plan will not be without
difficulties, the largest being the fact that since Philadelphia services are so fragmented,
there will need to be a lot of cooperation and buy in from the various agencies. Given
the political condition in Philadelphia, however, the DVRPC structure seems to be one
that can withstand political turmoil and reap the benefits of being an independent
agency. With public outreach and engagement coupled with funding this plan has great
potential to make lasting changes in the Philadelphia region.
The park system and green spaces is one of the major ways Philadelphia is being
protected from climate change. According to the Green 2015 Action plan, “Green space saves
money by catching stormwater runoff and managing flood waters, reduces deaths caused by
excessive heat, protects our drinking water, saves energy, and helps reduce the impact of
climate change” (Green 2015: An Action Plan for the First 500 Acres, 2010). This highlights
the importance of the existing park system and the need to reclaim unused paved plots
in Philadelphia. The Parkland Forest Management Framework, executive summary, 2013
released by the Philadelphia Department of Parks and Recreation discusses the
degraded state of the park system in Philadelphia, the pressures the park system has
15
been under, and the need for restoration of these green spaces (Parkland Forrest
Management Framework, 2013). While there is no direct mention of climate change,
highlighted in the executive summary is the ability of a healthy canopy to sequester
large amounts of carbon from the atmosphere as well as help modify local temperatures
(Parkland Forrest Management Framework, 2013). These are some of the ecosystem
services that trees provide for a community and are the main reason there is such a
push to expand the tree canopy. Another positive feature of the report is the promotion
of an adaptive management style where the structure of the management plan is not
rigid and can change based on new information. This structure is crucial for the ability to
become more adaptive to changing climatic conditions. While climate change
adaptation is not put forth as a reason for the proposed pilot projects, several of the
recommended projects have the purpose of strategic implementation of several
strategies such as digging trenches creating wetlands in order to manage stormwater
runoff. While this action will increase the ecosystem services for the region under
current climatic conditions, they become even more necessary with the regional
progression of climate change impacts such as increased intensity of rain events (Karl,
Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009).
The Green 2015 report released by PennPraxis in 2010 is an excellent promotion
of adaptation and mitigation strategies presented for the City of Philadelphia. The
underlying mission laid out in this plan is to reclaim 500 acres of unused property and
convert it into public parks, reducing the amount of impervious surfaces in Philadelphia.
16
The authors of Green 2015 clearly discuss the ecosystem services that parks offer such
as reduction of greenhouse gasses, managing stormwater runoff, and providing land
that could be used for growing food locally (Green 2015: An Action Plan for the First 500
Acres, 2010). The targeted areas for parks are areas of the city where there is not
currently any green space. This means that these areas will be gaining vital ecosystem
services where they previously did not exist. With climate change predictions in the
Northeast that include heavy rains and increased heat waves (Karl, Melillo, & Peterson,
eds., 2009), the ecosystem services listed for the benefits of removing impervious
surfaces and replacing it with parks, such as carbon sequestration, reduction in
stormwater runoff, and a reduction in the urban heat island effect provide direct
protection from these events (Green 2015: An Action Plan for the First 500 Acres, 2010).
In recent years there has been increasing attention on the climate related risks
of extreme heat and stormwater runoff in Philadelphia and several calls to action to
address these risks. While there has been progress in implementing programs to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, increase efficiency, and increase tree coverage, there is
much more that needs to be done in order to protect the city, its businesses, and its
residents. A letter signed by Mayor Nutter and the Philadelphia Director of
Sustainability, Katherine Gajewski at the beginning of the 2014 Greenworks 2015
progress report provides this insight.
17
“Despite tremendous progress, work to advance sustainability in Philadelphia is far from
complete. Having experienced and tracked the outcomes of five years of extreme
weather events, we understand firsthand that our climate is changing. We know that
climate change will require the City to adapt its programs, policies, and infrastructure,
and we’re spearheading an effort to identify ways in which Philadelphia can prepare for
coming shifts.” (Dews, Freeh, & Wu, 2014)
This statement is a mandate for Philadelphia to make real progress implementing
climate change adaptation initiatives that will protect Philadelphia, the residents, and
the businesses from the upcoming climatic conditions. This thesis is designed to
document the prevailing expert opinions on the climate risks and recommendations to
address these risks, which answers this call to identify ways to prepare Philadelphia.
18
CHAPTER 3: METHODS
The main topics of investigation selected for this thesis are to elicit the prevailing
expert opinions on: the existing climate risks faced by Philadelphia, how climate change
predictions affect the experts’ responses, an identification of the vulnerable
populations, and a list of recommendations for addressing the identified risks. Research
design is determined by the “elements of inquiry” where research follows a particular
theoretical perspective, employs a strategy to conduct the research that reflects the
research perspective, and uses a method for data collection and analysis appropriate to
accomplish the goals of the research (Creswell, 2003). The perspective represented in
this research design most closely fits the pragmatic world view because the data
collected is “problem-centered” focusing on what the prevailing risks are in Philadelphia
and the recommendations for addressing the identified risks. The strategy chosen for
accomplishing this goal was a qualitative approach using a semi-structured interview for
data collection. The reason the semi-structured interview was chosen for this research is
the same reasons this method is used in the mental models method of risk
communication, in a semi-structured interview the researcher begins interviewing with
a general question so that the respondent can simply reply with the first responses that
he/she thinks of, the researcher can then follow up with clarifying questions to better
understand the specialist’s meaning (Morgan, 2002). This approach is well suited for
accomplishing the goals of this research because it allows respondents to produce new
19
categories of risks, vulnerable populations, and recommendations as they provide their
own views on these topics based on their professional experiences instead of simply
picking from a list of predetermined possibilities.
This research was modeled after a similar research project conducted in the New
York City region, “Contrasting Perspectives Regarding Climate Risks and Adaptation
Strategies in the New York Metropolitan Area after Superstorm Sandy” (Miller et al.,
2014), using similar semi-structured interview questions to the ones used in the New
York study (modified for Philadelphia). This was done in part to bring continuity
between the two studies in order to allow for cross study comparison of results.
Once the topic of study was selected, the perspective was considered and the
tool was selected the participants in the study needed to be solicited. For this research,
twenty experts working in Philadelphia were sought to respond to eight semi-structured
interview questions. This is the same response rate that was used in the New York study
chosen to provide more comparative consistency. The questions used in the semi-
structured interview are designed to elicit the prevailing expert opinion on the climate
related risks that Philadelphia is facing, which populations are the most vulnerable to
the risks, and a list of recommended strategies to address the risks that are identified. In
order to conduct these interviews individuals who were classified as experts in
Philadelphia were identified from a list and contacted via email and asked if they would
be willing to participate. The expert classification includes individuals working in a
20
position that provides him/her with firsthand experience, expertise, or knowledge of
climatic conditions in Philadelphia and their direct effects on the city of Philadelphia.
The interview respondents are representative of many different areas of expertise and
perspectives in Philadelphia including City of Philadelphia officials, engineers working in
transportation, biological scientists, educators, medical professionals, and employees of
regional authorities and national environmental agencies. As each interview was
scheduled, future solicitation of expert respondents excluded individuals working for
the same agencies or in the same specific field in order to prevent an over-
representation of any one perspective in the survey responses. While there was one
instance where two expert respondents work for the same agency, there is significant
enough variability in the backgrounds of the 20 expert respondents as to limit a
response bias where the frequency of responses is simply a reflection of an
overrepresentation of one perspective.
Once a positive response was received, interviews were scheduled and
conducted over the phone. As part of the research protocol, expert respondents are
provided with anonymity, and therefore will not be identified by name or specific
occupation within this report and will furthermore be referred to simply as expert(s) or
respondents. With this protection experts were more freely able to respond honestly to
the interview questions based on their personal experiences and expertise and not
necessarily as an official representative of an agency or organization.
21
The following is a list of the interview questions used in the semi-structured
interviews. Additional clarifying questions were added as necessary during the course of
the interview in order to prompt the respondent for more clarity on their opinions.
These questions were taken from the 2014 study, “Contrasting Perspectives Regarding
Climate Risks and Adaptation Strategies in the New York Metropolitan Area after
Superstorm Sandy” (Miller et al., 2014) and modified to prompt respondents to discuss
Philadelphia.
1. What do you consider the most serious climate-related risks faced by Philadelphia?
2. To whom do they matter most? Who is most vulnerable to these risks?
3. What specific actions can be taken to reduce the climate risk(s) that you have
identified?
4. How much would this solution cost (monetarily but also in terms of tradeoffs)?
5. Who would bear these costs?
6. What benefits would this solution provide?
7. Which stakeholders would benefit most?
8. How do the climate change predictions for Philadelphia affect your responses to
these questions?
22
Question eight was not part of the New York study semi-structured interview, but was added to
this interview to provide greater insight on the extent climate change is a motivating factor for
experts in Philadelphia.
During the interviews detailed notes were taken of the responses provided and when
necessary follow up questions or probing questions were interjected in order to gain further
clarity on the opinions being offered. One of the benefits of conducting this research using the
semi-structured interview is that not only are the experts providing responses that can be
identified and sorted into different categories, but they are also providing additional insight as
to the underlying reasons for their responses.
Once twenty semi-structured interviews were completed, the responses
provided by the experts were reviewed as a whole in order to categorize the responses
and identify the trends that exist across the responses from the 20 experts. In order to
categorize and quantify the responses a systematic approach was conducted to analyze
the 20 expert responses. For three of the questions in the semi-structured interview,
identifying climate risks, identifying vulnerable populations, and providing
recommendations, the interview notes for each of the 20 respondents were read for
that particular question until a new response was identified. Then each of the other 19
interview notes was reviewed to determine if they had a response that fit the same
category. Using a yes/no system the 20 interview notes were separated into two piles,
one that included the new response and one that did not include the response. The new
response was then provided as a separate category within that question, the number of
23
responses that fall into the category were recorded. This process was repeated until all
of the categories in each of the three questions were identified and accounted for. The
results and the graphic of risks, vulnerable populations, and recommendations are
exhaustive of all of the experts’ responses.
The responses were read as a body of work and the collective reasons experts
gave for providing their response was synthesized and included in the results section for
each category. The trends in the responses coupled with the reasoning provided by each
expert provides a much more detailed view of the prevailing expert opinions on the
risks, vulnerable populations, and recommendations providing both qualitative and
quantitative data for review.
In the results section, Figure 1 represents an exhaustive summary of the climate
risks provided by the expert respondents. In this section there are 46 risk responses
provided by the 20 experts indicating that experts responding to the survey provided
multiple risks in their responses. Given the frequency of risks summarized in Figure 1,
there is reason to believe that a saturation of risk responses has been met. Additionally,
the two most frequent responses, stormwater runoff and localized flooding, and
excessive heat are not representative of the diversity of the expertise of the interview
respondents.
24
CHAPTER 4: SYNTHESIS OF THE SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW RESPONSES
4.1 How Climate Change Affected Expert Responses
Philadelphia residents and business are at risk from the current climatic
conditions that exist in the region; risks of damage to property and infrastructure from
flooding and extreme storm conditions, as well as risks of severe health impacts and
death from extreme heat events. While there is historical data that can be used to
determine the current extent of the risks, the regional effects of climate change will
have a strong effect on the extent of these risks in the future. The 20 experts who
responded to the semi-structured interview questions were asked how their previous
answers about climate risks and the recommendations for addressing these risks were
affected by the climate change predictions for Philadelphia.
All 20 of the expert respondents stated that their responses were shaped in
some way by the predicted effects of climate change for Philadelphia, citing increased
heat, increased precipitation in a single storm, increased storm intensity, and sea level
rise as the expected effects. This is directly reflective of the current published
downscaled predictions of climate change effects for the urban Northeast which include
an increase in heavy downpours, increased intensity of storms, and increased
temperatures (Karl, Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009, IPCC 2014). When discussing climate
change, four of the experts referred to historical data stating that the effects from
25
climate change have already been observed, sea level is rising, there are more extremes
in temperature and intensity in weather. According to a report put out by the Federal
Transit Administration about SEPTA’s vulnerability to climate change, 13 of the 21 floods
in the recorded history of the Schyulkill River have occurred since 2003 (Federal Transit
Administration, 2013). Climate change is not something we are waiting for to happen, it is
happening. One expert explained, “Climate change is here and will only get worse. Even
if we start addressing greenhouse gas the effects are already progressing. We are going
to have to adapt to a new reality. How much damage will be done until we get there?”
Another way that four of the experts responded to the question about climate
change is that it does not change their answers, but makes the recommendations for
action even more important, creating a sense of urgency. There are many organizations
in Philadelphia that were listed by the experts that are already implementing adaptation
strategies specifically incorporating climate change predictions, however based on the
expert responses, much more needs to be done.
Some experts warned that Philadelphia will be at great risk for substantial
impacts if nothing more is done and while it is important to study the various adaptation
strategies it is possible to get stuck in “analysis paralysis” where nothing actually gets
done. Another expert explained that there needs to be a holistic approach, and warned
against focusing on any one approach.
While climate change presents Philadelphia with many upcoming challenges as
the effects progress, it also presents unique opportunities. Some experts asserted the
26
need to educate and engage the community in climate change actions in order to inform
the public and create political will to initiate action.
Figure 1: Mental Model of Expert Responses
This figure represents the risks and recommendations provided by experts in the semi-structured interview. The recommendation for reduction in greenhouse gas has been omitted from this model as this recommendation addresses every listed risk.
27
4.2 The Risks
In the semi-structured interviews experts were asked to identify what they
consider to be the most serious climate related risks faced by Philadelphia. While the
underlying focus of this study is to be able to propose climate change adaptation
strategies, current climate related risks that exist in Philadelphia were asked for in the
semi-structured interviews because current conditions provide the foundation for the
risks that are already present as the regional effects of climate change progresses. The
effects of climate change in cities do not produce new issues, the issues of stormwater
runoff, drought, and extreme heat have been ongoing and cities already have strategies
in place to deal with them (Lowe, Foster & Winkelmand, 2009). The regional effects of
climate change in Philadelphia will predominantly be to exacerbate the risks that
currently exist. The expert respondents each provided a response that reflected their
area of expertise and collectively provided a comprehensive list of the major risks in
Philadelphia. While responses varied from person to person there were trends of
responses that emerged with multiple experts citing the same risks.
28
Figure 2: Frequency of Expert Responses on Climate Risks This figure represents an exhaustive listing of the risks provided by the expert respondents.
4.2.1 Stormwater Runoff
Extreme rainfall events resulting in stormwater runoff and localized flooding was
one of the primary risks identified in the semi-structured interviews. This risk was
identified by 14 out of the 20 expert respondents. With regional climate change
predictions of increased frequency and intensity of storms in the Northeastern United
States (Karl, 2009), issues associated stormwater runoff are only going to intensify in
Philadelphia as the effects of climate change progress in the region.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Stormwaterrunoff
Excessiveheat
Increasedstorm
intensity
Poor airquality
Sea level rise Loss of treecanopy
Nu
mb
er
of
resp
on
ses
o
ut
of
20
exp
ert
s Frequency of Expert Risk Responses
29
When describing the risks associated with stormwater runoff, experts explained
that stormwater runoff greatly contributes to localized flooding as well as pollution.
Many experts focused on the damaging effects of stormwater in terms of the localized
flooding when a heavy rain event occurs citing the amount of impervious surfaces in
Philadelphia as a contributing factor to the flooding. One major concern raised about
flooding was the strain flooding puts on an already aging infrastructure in Philadelphia
with an emphasis on infrastructure that is in flood prone areas along the Delaware and
Schuylkill rivers as well as several other low lying neighborhoods.
Another effect of stormwater runoff is that as the water runs down across the
impervious surfaces it collects pollutants that have collected on roads and sidewalks and
pollutes the water downstream. Water pollution from polluted watershed affecting
drinking water quality demonstrates the upstream and downstream concerns
connecting Philadelphia to the surrounding regions. It was also identified by experts that
the combined sewer system in Philadelphia has a limited capacity and once that
capacity is exceeded there is a potential for overflow of raw sewage that would produce
additional health hazards to Philadelphia citizens.
4.2.2 Sea Level Rise
Coastal flooding along the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers was another main
concern. This flooding was listed separately from flooding from stormwater runoff
because sea level rise will impact Philadelphia flooding due to the tidal nature of the
30
Delaware and Schuylkill rivers. Of the 14 experts who provided flooding as one of the
major risks Philadelphia faces, five of them specifically referred to tidal flooding and/or
sea level rise with an additional two experts specifically discussing flooding from the
Delaware and Schuylkill rivers, which are tidal rivers. One expert raised the point that
the Delaware River is tidal up as far as Trenton, NJ and stated specific concerns about
the infrastructure such as power supply, roadways and railways along the Delaware and
Schuylkill rivers that will be impacted by coastal flooding. Another expert cited that 10
of the 18 highest crests in the recorded history for the Schuylkill River have occurred
since 2010. Experts discussed the fact that in addition to the impact to coastal residents
and businesses that get flooded there will be additional economic impacts due to the
disruption of public services and transportation interruptions as a result of coastal
flooding.
4.2.3 Excessive Heat
Another risk identified by the expert respondents is excessive heat days
threatening the health and lives of vulnerable populations and causing heat stress to the
infrastructure such as roads and rail lines. This risk was identified by 10 out of the 20
expert respondents. There were two main causes provided by the experts for the
inclusion of excessive heat as a major risk for Philadelphia; the increasing number of
31
excessive heat days brought on by climate change, and the urban heat island effect. The
urban heat island effect is caused by the large amount of impervious in cities and the
lack of surface moisture, the effect is that on a hot day the surface temperatures of
impervious surfaces can be as much as 50o to 90o hotter than the air temperature,
retain the heat and then radiate heat after the sun goes down (Reducing Urban Heat
Islands: Compendium of Strategies, 2008). A recent downscaled climate change projection
developed specifically for Philadelphia, Boston and New York asserts, “Increased heat-
related mortality is projected to be among the major impacts of climate change on
human health, and the United States urban Northeast region is likely to be particularly
vulnerable” (Petkova et al 2013).
While excessive heat was provided as one of the major risks to Philadelphia by
half of the experts responding to the semi-structured interview, there were a wide
variety of reasons given by these experts as to why excessive heat is a major risk. Among
them is the risk excessive heat is to the elderly population in Philadelphia, with an
emphasis placed on the elderly who are living on their own and lack social
connectedness. Heat related mortality rates are higher with this population, according
to experts, and will only continue to grow with a greater number of days with excessive
heat as well as higher extremes in temperature. Another population that was identified
by experts of being at greater risk from the heat is the low income population in
Philadelphia, people who lack the means to afford air conditioning or other means of
32
escaping the heat. One factor that exacerbates the risk to low income neighborhoods,
according to several of the expert respondents, is that low income neighborhoods
disproportionately lack a tree canopy that would provide much needed shade, cooling
neighborhoods and reducing the heat island effect, therefore reducing the need for
running an air conditioner. The benefits of a healthy tree canopy are presented in a
report released by the Forrest Service, stating “Tree canopy provides many benefits to
communities, improving water quality, saving energy, lowering city temperatures,
reducing air pollution, enhancing property values, providing wildlife habitat, facilitating
social and educational opportunities, and providing aesthetic benefits (Pelletier, 2011).
The third population at risk from excessive heat is the trees themselves. Older trees and
trees that are currently at the southern end of their temperature range will experience
increased stress with the predicted increase in temperature in the region accompanying
the progression of climate change effects in Philadelphia. With an increase in
temperature coupled with a reduction in the tree canopy the rising temperatures will
have an even worse effect on the city of Philadelphia increasing the need to respond to
heat related incidents.
33
4.2.4 Poor Air Quality
Poor air quality including increased Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and
ground level ozone was another environmental risk that was provided by five of the
twenty expert respondents. The populations that were identified as being most at risk
are children, elderly, and people who have some sort of respiratory condition.
Essentially the same population that is vulnerable to excessive heat also is susceptible to
health impacts from poor air quality. According to the American Lung Association’s 2014
report, State of the Air, the Philadelphia-Reading-Camden Metropolitan region is ranked
the 16th worst region for high ozone days and 11th worst region for annual particle
pollution out of 277 metropolitan regions in the United States and received a failing
grade for both of these categories. This report further warns that with the rising
temperatures brought on by climate change there are also more favorable conditions
for the production of ozone; therefore cities need to do more to curtail ozone
production (State of the Air 2015, 2015).
4.2.5 Loss of Tree Canopy
In the semi-structured interviews, when asked for recommendations for
addressing climate risks seven of the twenty experts specifically discussed trees as being
an integral part of the solution, while an additional five included some form of Green
34
Infrastructure. A discussion about trees and their role in protecting Philadelphia has
been a theme that has emerged in the expert responses, so it is not surprising that four
of the twenty experts listed invasive species and migrating pests leading to loss of urban
tree canopy as another climate-related risk for Philadelphia. There is significant support
from the expert responses for the importance of the tree canopy in Philadelphia, many
of whom state that increasing the tree canopy is one of the primary ways to address the
climate risks in Philadelphia. If the existing canopy is insufficient and there are additional
pressures such as invasive species and migrating pests leading to an additional loss of
trees then Philadelphia will be at an even greater disadvantage in managing the climate
risks as climate change effects progress in the region.
4.2.6 Increased Storm Intensity
Climate change projections for the Northeastern United States predict more
intense storms, high winds, and increased precipitation. While 14 of the 20 experts
discussed intense storms with greater precipitation leading to increased pressures from
flooding, six experts specifically discussed increased intensity of storms with damaging
winds as being a significant risk to Philadelphia. This coincides with the regional
predictions of climate change impacts for the Northeastern United States which include
an increase in heavy downpours, increased intensity of storms, and increased
35
temperatures (Karl, Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009, IPCC 2014). Some experts discussed
the additional strain more intense storms will place on infrastructure while other
experts expressed concerns for the effects high winds and intense storms will have on
the tree canopy.
4.3 Vulnerable Populations
The second question the experts responded to in the semi-structured interviews
asked them to identify populations that are the most vulnerable to the risks that they
identified. Several of the experts asserted that the entire population of Philadelphia is
vulnerable to the climate risks, stating that not only is there the potential destruction of
property, businesses and infrastructure from extreme weather but there is also a
secondary effect in the disruption of services citywide as well as the negative economic
impacts any destruction or disruption would cause to both residents and businesses.
One expert asserted that all income brackets will be affected, but that residents who
depend on public services will experience the greatest hardship.
36
Figure 3: Frequency of Expert Responses on Vulnerable Populations
4.3.1 Flood Prone Regions
Since flooding was the most common climate related risk identified by the
experts, it is not surprising that neighborhoods and businesses along the rivers and in
flood prone regions were provided as being significantly vulnerable. The population
living and working in these regions was specifically provided by seven of the twenty
expert respondents. There are several low lying regions of Philadelphia that were
identified as being especially susceptible to flooding by various experts, such as the
airport, the Delaware River basin, Kelly Drive, Germantown, and Eastwick. Eastwick was
specifically identified as an especially vulnerable neighborhood by multiple experts due
to the fact that this neighborhood is already below sea level and since it was originally
built on unstable marshland some of the homes are sinking even further. This led one
0123456789
10
Coastal Property /Flood prone
neighborhoods
Elderly and Children Poor residents andneighborhoods
Nu
mb
er
of
resp
on
ses
o
ut
of
20
exp
ert
s
Vulnerable Populations
37
expert to ask the question, “What is going to happen when climate change makes a
neighborhood no longer viable?”
4.3.2 Elderly and Young
Another population that arose in the interviews as being at a greater risk was the
elderly and the young due to the fact that they are less able to cope with extreme
temperatures and poor air quality. This population was specifically identified by six of
the 20 respondents. One particular concern about this population was for the elderly
population that is aging in place and may lack social connectedness. These residents
have been found to succumb to the heat unnecessarily.
4.3.3 Poverty
A third factor that arose as a major contributor to climate change vulnerability is
poverty, which was provided by nine of the 20 experts responding; listing low income
neighborhoods and/or people with a low socioeconomic status (SES) as a community
that was at greater risk from climate change. One reason provided by experts for the
increased risk is that the neighborhoods with greater environmental risks, such as flood
prone communities like Eastwick, are neighborhoods where housing is more affordable.
38
Many residents who live in these neighborhoods lack the financial means to move
somewhere else or even to make repairs to their homes when they are damaged.
Another reason given that poverty is identified by experts as a risk factor is that
the tree canopy in Philadelphia is disproportionately distributed with a much greater
coverage in more affluent neighborhoods. There are many ecosystem services that trees
provide to neighborhoods, such as reducing stormwater runoff, reducing the localized
urban heat island effect, and providing shade. These ecosystem services contribute to
real personal economic impacts as well as tangible health benefits. With more shade on
hot days there is less need to run an air conditioner and also a reduction in heat stress.
It is the economically disadvantaged neighborhoods and residents that need these
services the most but have them the least. Many Philadelphia residents living below the
poverty line cannot afford an air conditioner or even the electric bill from running an air
conditioner. It was also cited by expert respondents that there are higher asthma rates
in communities with a low SES. One expert spoke about these issues identifying the lack
of environmental justice for individuals and communities living in poverty in part
because there is a lack of representation for this population in city government, stating
“this community is not at the decision table when policies are enacted and are not
educated on the issue.”
39
4.4 Recommendations
One purpose of this study is to determine a list of recommendations for actions
that can reduce the climate related risks to Philadelphia. Given the predictions of the
regional effects of climate change for Philadelphia, the climate risks that have been
identified by the expert respondents are storm intensity, precipitation amounts,
excessive heat days, and sea level rise will only worsen as climate change progresses.
These actions are designed to improve the lives of Philadelphia residents, boost the
economic health of businesses and residents, and reduce the economic impacts of
climate change. While there are many initiatives taking place in Philadelphia to address
the climate risks, there is much more that can be done. As the effects from climate
change progress further in Philadelphia the economic impacts to the city, businesses,
and residents could be devastating. One expert warned against climate change paralysis,
stating; “we need to refuse to be paralyzed by the overwhelming nature of climate
change.”
40
Figure 4: Frequency of Expert Responses on Recommendations
There are two approaches to addressing climate change: adaptation and
mitigation. Mitigation strategies are designed to significantly reduce the emission of
greenhouse gas in an effort to slow down the progression of climate change. Adaptation
strategies are designed to protect a region from the negative effects of climate change
(such as flooding, extreme heat, and sea level rise) by increasing the resiliency of a
region. Adaptation strategies are difficult to implement for two main reasons; first
because they require planning for future predicted conditions as opposed to being able
to look at historical data, and second because implementing adaptation strategies
implies an acceptance that the effects of climate change will not be stopped by any
mitigation strategies being implemented. Unfortunately, the worsening effects of
41
climate change will continue regardless of any greenhouse gas emission reductions that
take place due to the current levels of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere and the
longevity of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations ("Northeast Impacts &
Adaptation," 2013). Although it may be difficult, the overwhelming sentiment of expert
respondents was that adaptation strategies need to be implemented in Philadelphia.
The following is an exhaustive list of the adaptation strategies provided by the 20
experts who responded to the semi-structured interview questions as well as some
insights they provided regarding their recommendations.
4.4.1 Greenhouse Gas Reductions
The 20 experts who were interviewed for this study were asked what specific
actions can be taken to reduce the climate risks that they identified. Of the 20 experts
who participated in this interview process, five cited a reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions in Philadelphia and/or specific actions that lead to a reduction in greenhouse
gas emissions as one way to reduce the risks to Philadelphia. One of these five experts
explained that “in a broad sense we need to reduce fossil fuel emissions. Philadelphia
along with other regions can collectively reduce emissions.” This sentiment was echoed
by four other experts who provided some actions that can be taken to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. It was suggested that this can be accomplished in a
42
combination of ways, such as enacting mitigation policy and shifting to more renewable
energy sources, reducing the use of carbon based sources. It was also suggested that
there needs to be a “cultural shift in terms of energy resources affecting climate
change.” There were also recommendations about what individual citizens can do to
help reduce greenhouse gas production such as riding SEPTA, biking to work, and
investing in renewable energy sources, such as solar panels, for their homes.
4.4.2 Reduce Impervious Surfaces
While mitigation of climate change is predominantly accomplished through
significant reductions in GHG emissions on a global scale, there are a myriad of
adaptation strategies addressing climate risks that will vary from region to region. One
strategy that was proposed for Philadelphia by six of the 20 expert respondents is to
replace impervious paved surfaces. This is the main goal set forth in the Green 2015
action plan which identifies 500 acres of paved surfaces in Philadelphia that can be
converted to green space (Green 2015: An Action Plan for the First 500 Acres, 2010). While
not all surfaces can be replaced there are many vacant lots that have been identified
that are paved over and in a state of disrepair and are not being utilized for any
purpose. This type of property is a blight for a neighborhood. This proposal potentially
reduces several of the risks that have been identified. A report released by the Forrest
43
Service discusses the benefits of replacing impervious surfaces in Philadelphia with
green spaces and trees, stating “Philadelphia’s urban tree canopy is a vital city asset that
reduces stormwater runoff, improves air quality, reduces the city’s carbon footprint,
enhances quality of life, contributes to savings on energy bills, and serves as habitat for
wildlife” (Pelletier, 2011).
The extensive amount of impervious surfaces in Philadelphia is the main cause of
stormwater runoff that leads to flooding in low lying neighborhoods and downstream
pollution. In an extreme rain event if the water is not able to be absorbed into the
ground it flows downhill along any paved surface, collecting oils and other pollutants
that have been deposited on the pavement, flooding low lying neighborhoods and
inundating the combined sewer system. While replacing impervious surfaces will reduce
these effects, there are many viable options of pervious surfaces that it can be replaced
with. Urban parks and green infrastructure are not the only option, and according to
one study not necessarily the best option for water infiltration; in a study conducted in
Philadelphia and New York in 2002 porous concrete provided the greatest infiltration
rate with a mean above 0.7 cm/min while urban parks had the lowest infiltration results
with a mean below 0.1 cm/min (Alizadehtazi, 2012).
Additionally, impervious surfaces are the main cause of the urban heat island
effect. This is caused when paved surfaces such as asphalt and concrete are heated up
during the day well beyond the surrounding air temperature through absorption of solar
44
radiation and retain and radiate that heat in the night time (Reducing Urban Heat Islands:
Compendium of Strategies, 2008). This effect causes the city of Philadelphia to remain
much hotter in the day time as well as the night time than surrounding suburban and
rural communities (Reducing Urban Heat Islands: Compendium of Strategies, 2008). Any
reduction of this effect would reduce the amount of heat stress residents experience
and reduce the power demand that is otherwise being used to run air conditioners in
order to cope with the hot summer nights in Philadelphia.
4.4.3 Retreat from Flood Prone Areas
There were a few different strategies for risk reduction offered by experts that
specifically address risks from flooding. Retreating from flood prone areas, ceasing
development in flood prone regions and/or deciding not to rebuild homes and
businesses that are damaged from flooding was one of these strategies that was
provided by three of the 20 expert respondents. One of these experts suggested that
significantly increasing the cost of flood insurance would provide enough of an incentive
to cause residents and businesses to retreat from flood prone regions. Unfortunately,
this strategy may further disadvantage poor residents in Philadelphia who live in flood
prone neighborhoods because they are affordable. Many of these residents lack the
financial means to pay higher insurance premiums or to relocate.
45
4.4.4 Implement Flood Resiliency Strategies
Another approach to addressing the risk of flooding is to implement a strategy of
resilience where flooding will have less impact and will be easier to recover from. This
approach was included in the responses of seven out of the 20 experts participating in
the study, many of whom specifically discussed the need to update and protect the
infrastructure in Philadelphia. Some specific solutions provided were using bulkheads,
retaining walls, slope stabilization, upsizing culverts, and raising buildings along the
coast. Other suggestions were to implement geo-engineered structures to dissipate the
energy of surging flood waters and to build infrastructure that is submersible so that
there will be less damage left behind after flood waters subside. It was also stated by
multiple experts that any infrastructure improvements that take place need to
incorporate down scaled climate change predictions specific to Philadelphia so that they
are not designed only to address current conditions, but predicted changes in the region
as well. This approach to infrastructure improvement has already been adopted by
some agencies, with some experts providing examples of this strategy in practice, but
there needs to be a more widespread adoption of this strategy in order to provide any
significant protection from the potential economic devastation that would accompany a
large scale infrastructure failure. One way or another there will be the need for
investment in infrastructure. The only question is will it be an investment to update and
46
protect Philadelphia’s infrastructure from upcoming conditions, or to repair it once it
has been damaged or destroyed?
4.4.5 More Green Infrastructure (Public)
While some of the strategies offered by experts provided solutions in the event
of flooding, other recommended actions are designed to reduce the incidence of
flooding in an extreme rain event. Implementing additional green stormwater
infrastructure and stormwater management was a priority listed by 10 of the 20 experts
responding to the survey. Many of the experts that offered green infrastructure for
stormwater management cited the work that the Philadelphia Water Department
(PWD) has been doing in their Green City Clean Waters program and suggested that
other agencies should partner with them to expand this endeavor, this sentiment is
echoed in the Green 2015 report that recommends specifically that the Philadelphia
Department of Parks and Recreation and PWD should partner together since they had
similar initiatives (Green 2015: An Action Plan for the First 500 Acres, 2010). Experts
responding to the interview explained that increasing the amount of green
infrastructure would reduce the flow of stormwater runoff which will be needed even
more as rainfall amounts increase as climate change effects progress in Philadelphia.
The implementation of additional green infrastructure in Philadelphia would bring
47
reductions in flooding from intense rainfall, reduce the pollution from runoff, and
provide relief from the inundation of the combined sewer system potentially preventing
overflow (Pelletier, 2011).
4.4.6 Green Roofs, Gardens, and Rain Barrels (Private)
While many of the suggested stormwater interventions involving green
infrastructure would require significant investment from the City and other NGOs such
as the Water Department, there were some strategies offered by experts that could be
implemented by individual citizens. In fact seven of the 20 experts listed actions that
could be taken by Philadelphia citizens as well as individual businesses that can
contribute to a reduction in stormwater runoff: green roofs, rain barrels, urban gardens
and other means of intercepting water were offered as a way that residents could
contribute. Much like the concept of mitigation efforts through the reduction of GHG in
the atmosphere, where any one region taking action may have a nominal effect, with a
combined effort the cumulative effect can be significant. Providing incentives for green
roofs, roof gardens, and rain barrels is one way that was suggested that could help
engage Philadelphia citizens and business owners in Philadelphia’s fight against climate
change.
48
4.4.7 A Greater Investment in Trees
A greater investment in trees such as inventorying the tree canopy, planting
trees in neighborhoods that have none, and replacing dead and dying trees is a specific
action to reduce climate risk that was offered by seven of the 20 expert respondents.
Trees address the climate risks that have been outlined in a few different ways. When
impervious pavement is taken up for tree planting there is a direct intervention for
stormwater runoff because of the reduction in impervious pavement as well as the
water that the tree will intercept, trees also provide shade reducing the urban heat
island effect, and trees also perform carbon sequestration trapping the CO2 reducing the
greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere (Pelletier, 2011, Green 2015: An Action
Plan for the First 500 Acres, 2010). These are three very important ecosystem services that
trees provide for Philadelphia so it is no surprise that trees are presented as a part of
the recommendations for risk reduction. Experts offered a range of actions designed to
improve the health and proliferation of Philadelphia’s tree canopy. It was stated that
there needs to be an accurate inventory of the tree canopy in Philadelphia that includes
the dead and dying trees so that they can be removed and replaced. Several experts
asserted that there needs to be close attention paid to what trees should be planted
and where they should be planted. Experts explained that the trees that get planted
need to provide a full canopy without interfering with any existing wires. They also need
to be selected with the temperature regime in mind, not selecting species that are at
49
the southern end of their temperature regime, but instead look at predicted
temperature regimes 50 years from now. Experts also warned that in the selection of
tree species there needs to be consideration of disease and invasive insects such as the
Emerald ash borer that is moving into the region. One positive note about climate
change that was offered by one expert is that increased atmospheric CO2 has a positive
effect on vegetation, stating that trees grow faster and are more drought resistant.
In looking at the existing tree canopy and knowing the value trees provide to
neighborhoods through their ecosystem services, one expert pointed out the inequity in
Philadelphia in terms of the distribution of trees, citing neighborhoods such as
Kensington and South West Philadelphia where the tree canopy is in the single digits.
This statistic is also found in a detailed report on the tree canopy in Philadelphia that
cites
“Chinatown North, and South Philadelphia have the lowest percentage of their land covered by tree canopy at 3%. The Navy Yard, Eastwick, and Bridesburg have the highest percentage of their land available for tree canopy, with Possible Tree Canopy values of 76%, 72%, and 70% respectively” (Pelletier, 2011).
These poorer neighborhoods are the ones that need the ecosystem services of trees the
most, because residents in these neighborhoods are less able to afford air conditioning
or to make repairs in the event of a flood, yet with a lack of trees they are at a greater
risk from increased heat and inundation from stormwater runoff.
50
4.4.8 Education and Outreach
While many of the actions that were provided by the expert respondents to
reduce climate risk in Philadelphia involve major infrastructure projects there were also
many experts that recommended community engagement and education as a means of
reducing risk. In fact, eight of the 20 experts included specific actions that should be
taken on the community level to engage, inform, and protect the citizens of
Philadelphia. The communities that will benefit most from this strategy are the ones
that have already been identified by experts as being at greatest risk: the poor and the
elderly.
Respondents conveyed the importance of engaging residents in climate change
action through education of community members by communicating the risks that exist
in their community as well as teaching residents things they can do in their homes and
in their neighborhoods to reduce these risks. Some experts expressed that community
outreach is often overlooked or at times not well received. One explanation offered was
that it is difficult for people in low income neighborhoods to be concerned about
climate change when they are trying to find a way to feed their family. Despite any
inherent difficulty, providing education and outreach in these neighborhoods that need
intervention the most can ultimately improve the health and wellbeing of individual
residents as well as the community. Even small changes in personal habits can have a
lasting positive impact on health. Some of the personal actions provided in the expert
51
responses were to teach people how to make their home environment safer and more
efficient through small changes. Some examples provided are putting up curtains to
block the sun in the summer and hold in heat in the winter, using “green” cleaners or
learning how to make their own cleaning products, monitoring humidity levels, fixing
leaks, not leaving food out, and vacuuming. All of these interventions would improve
indoor air quality, reduce indoor levels of VOCs, and ultimately relieve some of the
environmental conditions that exacerbate respiratory conditions. Improved health
provides opportunities for increased productivity as well as a reduction in personal
medical expenses.
Community engagement is a two way street. Experts and policy makers can learn
from residents who can best identify the vulnerabilities in their own neighborhoods
because they are the ones who experience the effects. Because of this residents could
also provide unique solutions for their specific locations that may not otherwise be
considered. In establishing a partnership communication can go in both directions.
Heat stress and extreme heat events (EHE) are a main environmental risk in the
City of Philadelphia, identified by 10 of the experts responding to this survey, which can
be mitigated through various outreach programs. Populations at the greatest risk from
EHE, among others, are the very young, the elderly, individuals with cognitive
impairments, and the poor due to economic constraints limiting access to air
conditioning ("Northeast Impacts & Adaptation," 2013). There are several strategies offered
52
by experts for reducing the risks and in turn reducing the mortality rate associated with
extreme heat events in Philadelphia. Some recommendations addressing the risks of
heat are to greatly expand on some programs that are currently in place and implement
additional interventions such as giving away fans and air conditioners to low income
residents, educate the community on the symptoms of heat stress, and to keep public
libraries open longer in a heat wave. One of the risks factors identified by experts was
for the elderly population that may lack social connectedness; people who choose to
age at home may not have the means to keep cool or to escape the heat. Increasing
social connectedness with outreach programs to check on vulnerable citizens was given
as an intervention to reduce this risk.
4.5 Costs and Benefits
After being asked to provide a list of recommendations for reducing the climate
risks in Philadelphia, experts were then asked how much their solutions would cost,
either monetarily or in tradeoffs, asked who would bear these costs, and asked what
benefits their solutions would bring. The responses were as varied as the
recommendations, but certain trends arose in their responses. The simplest answer that
was provided to the question of cost is that it will cost “more than we are currently
spending.”
53
When discussing the costs of implementing adaptation strategies, some experts
discussed the personal expenses that would be incurred by a homeowner in order to
implement adaptation strategies. These experts explained that the expense to the
resident/homeowner could vary greatly depending on the methods they chose. There
are some actions individuals can take such as planting a garden or changing cleaning
habits around the home that would be low cost interventions and some actions such as
going to cooling centers that would have no personal cost at all. In order to affect the
change in communities to promote personal involvement from citizens there needs to
be an investment in education. While the financial cost of climate education can be
minimal, there needs to be a buy in from community outreach organizations and
volunteers to make climate education a priority. Several experts suggested a grassroots
campaign to educate residents on low cost ways for improving their homes and
neighborhoods would help create a safer home environment and offer health benefits
such as potentially reducing childhood asthma. One expert explained the benefits of
educational outreach as providing, “a multitude of health benefits. You should be able
to breathe easier, have a home environment that supports your health in a sustainable
way.” Ultimately creating a healthier environment would reduce personal health care
costs as well as a reduction in expenses on the health care system.
Other actions that were offered by experts in order to help reduce the risks to
the elderly and the poor involved various interventions and alternatives to help these
54
residents stay cool in an extreme heat event. Respondents explained that there are
certainly costs associated with these interventions: costs of the air conditioners being
donated, extra staffing and hours at libraries, senior centers, and phone operators for
heat crisis hotlines. The expenses for these interventions would be incurred by the City
of Philadelphia, the Health Department, and the Philadelphia Corporation for Aging,
among others. One expert estimated the costs of these interventions to be under
$500,000 per summer, while the benefit is to reduce the number of heat related deaths.
Other options available to residents, such as putting in a green roof or investing
in solar panels, would have a greater impact, but would also have a much greater
upfront expense and therefore are not a viable option for many residents. The
overwhelming opinion offered by experts is that in the long run the benefits of a
personal investment outweigh the detriment of inaction. Taking actions to reduce
climate risks ultimately reduce personal energy costs, improve property value, and
improve the esthetics of the property, where the effects of inaction would cause
residents to incur the costs of repairing their property as well as the cost of repairing
infrastructure that would otherwise be damaged by flooding.
One source of revenue that was offered in the expert survey was an ecological
services tax, where a threshold of reasonable use of services such as water use and
waste management is set and beyond this threshold there would be an additional fee or
increase in cost. Similar fee structures based on water usage are currently being
55
implemented in response to the drought in Santa Fe, N.M. ("Santa Fe Cuts Water
Consumption By Imposing Tiered Pricing Model," 2015).
Urban forest management and significantly increasing the tree canopy in
Philadelphia is a strategy that was offered by seven of the 20 experts who were then
asked to then discuss the costs of proper implementation of this strategy. Two of these
experts each estimated a cost of one million dollars per year for planting and
maintenance and justified the expense in the savings trees would provide through
various ecosystem services. When experts were asked who would bear the cost of an
increased investment in trees there were a range of responses that ultimately tied back
to the citizens in Philadelphia subsidizing the cost through taxes and fees paid to the city
and other NGOs such as the Water Department. While there is a significant upfront
expense associated with the vast expansion of the tree canopy in Philadelphia that is
needed to cause any measurable effect, there is a real financial return on this
investment throughout the city. Some of the benefits provided in the expert responses
were benefits in energy costs to residents, but additionally there are benefits that would
resonate through the city. The reduction in the urban heat island effect, reducing heat
stress and reducing the EHE mortality rate would translate into significant healthcare
savings and a decrease in heat related deaths. One expert asserted, “Maintaining the
trees is important, it is not a tradeoff if it is saving lives. Urban forest management as a
56
health plan justifies the expense.” This expert went on to suggest the opportunity for
more creative funding sources for trees since they can be equated to healthcare savings.
The infrastructure in Philadelphia is another major concern when discussing
climate risks. The proposed strategies to update and protect the infrastructure in
Philadelphia would provide great financial benefits to the businesses and residents in
Philadelphia, protecting them from loss of services and loss of productivity that would
otherwise occur if the infrastructure were damaged or flooded. This strategy of
increasing the resiliency in Philadelphia, according to experts, would require a significant
investment, more money than what is available.
There are agencies in Philadelphia that are currently making significant
investments in climate change adaptation strategies and have made the financial
justification for these investments. For example, the Philadelphia Water Department is
implementing more green stormwater infrastructure with a planned investment of $2.4
Billion over a 25 year period, specifically citing climate change as one of the motivating
factors for this substantial investment (Green City Clean Waters, 2011). There is also the
work being done by SEPTA receiving $87 million in grant money from the Federal Transit
Administration for resiliency projects such as raising signal huts in flood prone regions
and installing turnabouts to divert trains away from flooded sections of track ("FTA
Releases SEPTA Climate Adaptation Report," 2015). This demonstrates the ability of an
agency in operating in Philadelphia to be able to implement a major infrastructure
57
project with the stated objective of addressing climate change impacts and also the
funding solutions so that the financial Burdon for major infrastructure projects does not
fall directly on Philadelphia residents and businesses.
Experts cite that the money needs to come from local, state and federal sources
and that still may not be enough. The investment in infrastructure; rail, roads, and
power that is needed has an enormous cost, potentially in the billions experts stated,
but there is an even greater cost for inaction. This funding shortage leads to a creative
funding suggestion that was offered of getting the private sector involved in funding
infrastructure projects. The thought is that if there is a failure in transportation routes
companies will have difficulties transporting their products to marketplaces, so these
private companies have a stake in the health of the roadways and transportation
systems in Philadelphia. If there is a breakdown in infrastructure there will be a
significant impact to the private sector, so private companies should be invested in
preventing any service disruption. One expert summarized this funding option, stating,
“Philadelphia could not bear the costs for what is needed. Users, industry, all hands on
deck are needed to find funds.”
58
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS
Philadelphia residents and business are at risk from stormwater runoff and
localized flooding, excessive heat, increased storm intensity, poor air quality, coastal
flooding, invasive species and water pollution. These are the risks identified by the
downscaled predictions for climate change in the Northeastern United States as well as
the risks identified by the regional experts that responded to the semi-structured
interview (Karl, Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009). While these risks are currently present in
Philadelphia and cause negative economic and health impacts, with the progression of
the regional effects of climate change these conditions as well as their impacts on
Philadelphia will certainly get worse unless some intervention is implemented
("Northeast Impacts & Adaptation," 2013). Given the predictions of climate change for
America it is imperative for the health and survival of American cities to adopt a climate
change strategy that incorporates both mitigation strategies as well as adaptation and
resiliency strategies and address the regional predictions of climate change for the city,
(Karl et. al. 2009). This thesis provides the prevailing expert opinions on the climate risks
and recommendations to address these risks, which provides the first step towards
enacting meaningful change in Philadelphia.
There are several strategies for funding the implementation of climate change
adaptation strategies such as incorporating climate change adaptation considerations
into infrastructure projects that are currently needed and also using a cost benefit
59
analysis to calculate future loss savings to justify the upfront investment (Bulkeley &
Betsill, 2013, Winkelman & Lowe, 2011, Hunt & Watkiss, 2010). These strategies are
already being used in Philadelphia by both SEPTA and the Philadelphia Water
Department which have both begun major infrastructure projects and have committed
a significant financial investment to climate change adaptation strategies. The
Philadelphia Water Department developed the Green City, Clean Waters plan to
implement more green stormwater infrastructure with a planned investment of $2.4
Billion over a 25 year period, specifically citing climate change as one of the motivating
factors for this substantial investment (Green City Clean Waters, 2011). Southeastern
Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) has been raising signal huts in flood prone
regions and installing turnabouts to divert trains away from flooded sections of track to
reduce the vulnerability from climate change on the railway system ("FTA Releases
SEPTA Climate Adaptation Report," 2015). The implementation of some of the projects
has been incorporated with updating aging systems with the purpose of improving the
resiliency to climate change impacts and is funded in part from a federal grant providing
$87 million for resiliency projects ("FTA Releases SEPTA Climate Adaptation Report,"
2015). These two examples demonstrate the benefit of city services being under the
operational control of separate agencies. Because these agencies have a singular
objective, they can operate much more efficiently than if the same services were being
managed by the city (Adams, 2007).
60
Implementation of climate change adaptation strategies is lagging in other areas
of Philadelphia however; there is an insufficient tree canopy in Philadelphia and a large
acreage of unused impervious surfaces (Green 2015: An Action Plan for the First 500 Acres,
2010, Pelletier, 2011) both of which contribute to stormwater runoff and the urban heat
island effect. The worsening effects of climate change that will affect Philadelphia
residents and businesses will continue regardless of any greenhouse gas emission
reductions that take place due to the current levels of greenhouse gas in the
atmosphere and the longevity of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations ("Northeast
Impacts & Adaptation," 2013). Implementing adaptation strategies in Philadelphia is not
designed to change the climatic conditions, but instead make the region more resilient
in the face of these conditions. Resiliency essentially means that there will be a
reduction in property damage, infrastructure interruption, and negative health effects.
Resiliency is a reduction in the recovery time from a severe event. If a city is not
prepared, it will still have to react, but reaction to a severe event will be much more
costly than mitigation of future losses through implementation of resiliency strategies.
The research conducted for this thesis is designed to provide recommended
strategies needed to help protect Philadelphia from the progressive effects of climate
change. The research method used, conducting a semi-structured interview with 20
Philadelphia experts, was modeled after the first part of a similar research project
conducted in the New York City region, “Contrasting Perspectives Regarding Climate
Risks and Adaptation Strategies in the New York Metropolitan Area after Superstorm
61
Sandy” (Miller et al., 2014), using the same semi-structured interview questions
(modified for Philadelphia) and similar research methods to elicit expert opinions in
order to allow for cross study comparison. The risks identified by the 20 experts that
responded to the semi-structured interview for Philadelphia are: stormwater runoff and
localized flooding, excessive heat, increased storm intensity, poor air quality, coastal
flooding, invasive species and water pollution. These risks reflect the regional climate
change predictions of an increase in heavy downpours, increased storm intensity, and
increased temperatures and extreme heat events (Karl, Melillo, & Peterson, eds., 2009,
Petkova, Horton, Bader, & Kinney, 2013). The climate related risks identified by
Philadelphia expert respondents were nearly identical to the risks identified in the New
York study, however there was a greater response rate for coastal flooding in the New
York study. The recommendations for risk reduction that were identified for
Philadelphia are: greenhouse gas reduction, reducing impervious surfaces, retreat from
flood prone areas, flood resiliency, more public green infrastructure, more private green
infrastructure, greater tree canopy, and more public engagement. The main deviations
in recommendations between the New York region and Philadelphia were additional
recommendations for New York that were not provided for Philadelphia such as building
a multi-purpose storm surge barrier and building sand dunes and barrier islands (Miller
et al., 2014).
The similarities in climate risks and recommendations provided by experts for
both Philadelphia and New York demonstrate that cities that are in the same region of
62
the country potentially have very similar risks. Cities with similar features and climate
risks can learn from each other by looking at adaptation strategies that are being
successfully implemented. There is certainly an opportunity for Philadelphia and New
York to have a climate change information exchange as they both share many of the
same risks and both have very similar expert recommendations for adaptation
strategies. While there are similarities, there are also differences due to the proximity
of New York to the Atlantic Ocean. The differences signal the need for local studies such
as the one by Miller in New York and this study for Philadelphia in order to identify risks
and recommendations that are specific to a particular city.
With the changing climate in Philadelphia there will certainly be a cost
associated with extreme weather events. The question is will the cost be in the form of
an investment in strategies that will increase the resiliency of Philadelphia and
potentially save lives and help avoid detrimental impacts to the economy of the city, or
will the cost be borne by an overburdened healthcare system, insurance claims, loss of
income from service interruptions and repairing infrastructure after it fails? One expert
warned, “We cannot afford to continue waiting for something to happen and repairing
after the fact.”
63
List of References
Adams, C. (2003). The Meds and Eds in Urban Economic Development. J Urban Affairs
Journal of Urban Affairs, 25(5), 571-588. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9906.2003.00003.x
Adams, C. (2007). Urban Governance and the Control of Infrastructure. Public Works
Management & Policy, 11(3), 164-176. doi:10.1177/1087724x06297318
Alizadehtazi, B. (2012). Relationships between Land Cover and Infiltration Rates in Urban Landscapes
(Masters Thesis, Drexel University).
American Lung Association. (2015). State of the Air 2015.
Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M. M. (2013). Revisiting the urban politics of climate
change. Environmental Politics, 22(1), 136-154. doi:10.1080/09644016.2013.755797
Bulkeley, H., Carmin, J., Broto, V. C., Edwards, G. A., & Fuller, S. (2013). Climate justice and
global cities: Mapping the emerging discourses. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 914-925.
doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.010
City of Philadelphia, Sustainability Working Group. (2007). Local Action Plan for Climate
Change. Philadelphia, PA.
City Of Philadelphia, Sustainability Working Group. (2009). Greenworks Philadelphia.
Philadelphia, PA.
Corfee-Morlot, J. et al., “Multilevel Risk Governance and Urban Adaptation Strategy,” Climatic
Change 104 (2011): 169-197.
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Comission, DVRPC. (2013). Connections 2040 Plan for
Greater Philadelphia (Ser. 13042). Philadelphia.
Dews, A., Freeh, R., & Wu, S. (2014). Greenworks Philadelphia: 2014 Progress Report (City
of Philadelphia, Mayor's Office of Sustainability). Philadelphia, PA.
Federal Transit Administration. (2013). A Vulnerability and Risk Assessment of SEPTA’s
Regional Rail A Transit Climate Change Adaptation Assessment Pilot. Retrieved June 10, 2015,
from http://www.septa.org/strategic-plan/reports/ClimateAdaptationReport.pdf
64
Frederickson, H.G., Johnson, G.A., & Wood, C. “The Changing Structure of American Cities: A
Study of the Diffusion of Innovation,” Public Administration Review 64 (May/June 2004): 320-
330.
Foster, J., Winkelman, S., & Lowe, A. (2011). Lessons learned on local climate
adaptation from the Urban Leaders Adaptation Initiative. The Center for Clean Air
Policy.
FTA Releases SEPTA Climate Adaptation Report. (2015). Retrieved from
http://www.septa.org/strategic-plan/updates/2015-climate-adaptation-report.html
Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hunt, A., & Watkiss, P. (2010). Climate change impacts and adaptation in cities: A review of
the literature. Climatic Change, 104(1), 13-49. doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9975-6
Hoornweg, D., Bhada, P., Freire, M., Trejos, C. L., & Sugar, L. (2010). Cities and
climate change: An urgent agenda. The World Bank, Washington, DC.
IPCC, 2014: Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts,Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L.White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1-32.
Karl, T. R., Melillo, J. M., & Peterson, T. C. (Eds.). (2009). Global Climate Change Impacts in
the United States. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lowe, A., Foster, J., & Winkelmand, S. (2009). Ask the climate question: adapting to climate change impacts in urban regions (p. 17). Washington, DC: Center for Clean Air Policy.
McGovern, S. “Mobilization on the Waterfront: The Ideological/Cultural Roots of Potential
Regime Change in Philadelphia,” Urban Affairs Review 44 (May 2009): 663-694.
Miller, S., Kidd, G., Montalto, F., Gurian, P., Worrall, C., & Lewis, R. (2014). Contrasting
Perspectives Regarding Climate Risks and Adaptation Strategies in the New York Metropolitan
65
Area after Superstorm Sandy. J. of Extr. Even. Journal of Extreme Events, 01(01), 1450005.
doi:10.1142/s2345737614500055
Molotch, H. (1976). The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of
Place. American Journal of Sociology Am J Sociol, 82(2), 309. doi:10.1086/226311
Morgan, M. G. (2002). Chapter 2: Our mental models approach. In Risk communication: A
mental models approach (pp. 19-33). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Northeast Impacts & Adaptation. (2013, September 9). Retrieved from
http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/northeast.html
Pelletier, K. (2011). A Report on the City of Philadelphia’s Existing and Possible Tree Canopy.
Retrieved June 11, 2015, from
http://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/utc/reports/UTC_Report_Philadelphia.pdf
Penn Praxis. (2010). Green 2015: An Action Plan for the First 500 Acres. Philadelphia, PA.
Petkova, E., Horton, R., Bader, D., & Kinney, P. (2013). Projected Heat-Related Mortality in
the U.S. Urban Northeast. IJERPH International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 10(12), 6734-6747. doi:10.3390/ijerph10126734
Philadelphia Parks & Recreation. (2013, April). Parkland Forrest Management Framework.
Retrieved from
http://www.phila.gov/ParksandRecreation/PDF/PPR_Parkland_Forest_Mgmt_Framework.pdf
Philadelphia Water Department. (2011, June 1). Green City Clean Waters. Retrieved from
http://www.phillywatersheds.org/doc/GCCW_AmendedJune2011_LOWRES-web.pdf
Reducing urban heat islands: Compendium of strategies. (2008). Washington, DC: Climate
Protection Partnership Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Santa Fe Cuts Water Consumption By Imposing Tiered Pricing Model. (2015). Retrieved from
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=406505133
Trounstine, J.“Dominant Regimes and the Demise of Urban Democracy” Journal of Politics 68 (November 2006): 879-893.
