Transcript (CBPR) in Local Climate Adaptation Planning and Evaluation

Community Engagement for ClimateReady Communities:
The Role of Community Based Participatory
Research (CBPR) in Local Climate Adaptation
Planning and Evaluation
Semra Aytur, PhD, MPH, Paul Kirshen, PhD, Mimi Becker, PhD, Sylvia von Aulock, MS,
Stephen Jones, PhD, Michele Holt-Shannon, MA, Bruce Mallory, PhD, Chris Keeley,
MS,David Burdick, PhD, Paul Stacey, MS, Cameron Wake, PhD, Robert Roseen, PhD ,
Steve Miller, MS, Kalle Matso, PhD, Cory Riley, MS
The University of New Hampshire, Town of Exeter, NOAA NERRS Science Collaborative
Background
• Preparing for climate change requires
community engagement and transdisciplinary,
cross-sectoral collaboration
• However, little is known about the role of
Community Based Participatory Research
(CBPR) within the context of local climate
adaptation planning and evaluation
What is CAPE?
Climate Adaptation Plan for Exeter
• An interdisciplinary, collaborative planning
project to develop a local climate adaptation
plan for the town of Exeter, New Hampshire.
• Uses a Community Based Participatory
Research (CBPR) process to engage residents,
understand local values, identify perceived
vulnerabilities, ground-truth technical
models, and inform the climate adaptation
plan
Why CAPE?
Working with Exeter to develop a plan to
prepare for challenges like this….
Why CAPE?
Context
Exeter has a range of land
uses on a major tributary
and estuary to Great Bay
where climate change
will exacerbate Exeter’s
present challenges with:
1) Storm water
2) Nonpoint source pollution
3) Land use
4) Protection and
restoration of downstream
marshes and fisheries
Objectives
• To define, apply, and evaluate a process
model of collaborative planning that will
result in the development of a high
quality, locally relevant adaptation plan.
Role of CBPR
CBPR is being utilized within the adaptation
planning process through:
1. A structured community engagement process to
ensure that the plan reflects Exeter's values,
priorities, and perspectives
2. Utilization of participatory action research
methods, including participatory mapping and
modeling, to capture stakeholders' input
3. A developmental evaluation designed to respond
to evolving community needs
4 Key Aspects of CAPE’s CBPR Approach
1. Listen:
•
What does Exeter care about?
•
Involve community leaders from diverse sectors in defining
core values that will guide the development of the climate
adaptation plan
2. Collaborate:
•
Engage residents in conversations about climate-related
topics, with a focus on storm water, nonpoint source
pollution, land use, habitat change and restoration
3. Model:
•
Use participatory planning methods to model a range of
scenarios
4. Recommend and Discuss:
•
Produce a set of recommendations for the Exeter town
government on an adaptation plan
Engagement
Stakeholder engagement activities
include:
• Public listening sessions
• “Floods, Rains, and Rivers:
What does it mean to you to prepare
Exeter for a changing climate?”
• Citizens Working Group (CWG)
– Participatory mapping
– Participatory modeling
• Focus groups
• Targeted outreach (e.g., vulnerable
residents, communities of place,
communities of interest)
Citizens’ Work Group (CWG)
– Works side by side with
the project research
team in participatory
modeling, mapping,
planning, and other
activities
– Meets monthly
• Provides continuous
feedback to the project
team on the data collection,
modeling, and analysis
– Ensures that the work of
the project team is
“ground truthed”
Conceptual diagram for Town of Exeter and the Exeter/Squamscott River. Not all
relationships are shown due to space limitations, such as flooding impacts. All impacts
also feed back to Exeter Stakeholders Choices & Impacts. For example, Exeter
Stakeholder’s Choices & Impacts affect both upstream and downstream flow and water
quality conditions, which impact Human Health & Safety and Aquatic Ecosystems. Tidal
Marshes can buffer (mediate) impacts to human health.
Modeling
Various sets of models are being used to translate impacts of changes in Precipitation (P),
temperature (T), and sea level rise (SLR) on users
HSPF
HEC-HMS/RAS
SWMM
Ecosytems
Model Comparisons
Model
Purpose
Subarea
Size
Land
Use
Climate
Data
Time
Step
Hydrology
Hydraulics Water
Quality
HECHMS
Flood
Runoff
Moderate
Yes
P
Small
Good
N/A
N/A
HECRAS
Flood
Routing
and
Elevations
N/A
N/A
Q
Steady
State
N/A
Very Good
N/A
HSPF
Monthly
River Basin
Flows and
Water
Quality,
Daily Low
Flows
Moderate
Yes
P, T
Moder
ate
Very Good
Good
Very
Good
Fine
Yes
P, T
Very
Small
Good
Excellent
Good
SWMM Urban
Drainage
and
Quality
from rain
storms
HEC-HMS is the Hydrologic Modeling System from the Army Corps of Engineers. It simulates precipitation and runoff processes in watersheds. HEC-RAS
models hydraulics of water flow through rivers and channels. HSPF is the Hydrological Simulation Program FORTRAN. It simulates watershed hydrology
and water quality for both conventional and toxic organic pollutants. SWMM is the Stormwater Management Model (EPA model). It provides analysis
of water quantity and quality performed on catchments having storm sewers or combined sewers and natural drainage, for prediction of flows, stages,
and pollutant concentrations.
Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (1)
Baseline survey (winter 2012) of town staff, land-use
board members, and stakeholders representing 12
different sectors indicated broad-based support for a
public health perspective within the process
– Public health messages about prevention and co-benefits
were effective (mean=4.58 (standard deviation (sd) 0.51))
– New connections between climate variability, water quality,
land use, biodiversity, health, and economic impacts were
identified (mean = 4.67 (sd 0.49))
– New community-academic partnerships were formed
(mean=4.63 (sd 0.52))
*Based on a five-point Likert scale
of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (2)
Results from Community Conversations and
CWG meetings:
• Identified local values
–
–
–
–
–
Historical character
Healthy environments
Water quality
Safety
Citizen engagement in town governance
• Identified perceived vulnerabilities to people,
infrastructure, and natural resources
www.capenh.net
Vulnerability:
Infrastructure-Areas of Concern
Exeter
Senior
Center
Court
Street
Area
Source: Community Working Group
• Water Treatment Plant and
Reservoir
• Waste Water Treatment Plant
• Great Dam
• String Bridge
• Swasey Parkway
• Great Bridget Transportation
Corridor
• Bow Street
• Larry Lane freshwater pump
station
• Pickpocket Dam
• Gas Line
PEOPLE: AREAS OF
CONCERN
Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (3)
• Growing awareness among
stakeholders of how climate change
will increase stresses:
– Tidal wetlands are threatened by poor
water quality, bordering development
and roads
– Sea level rise is occurring
– Precipitation extremes have increased
– Shift in river hydrographs
– Access to important social services has
been disrupted
– Damage to homes, businesses, and
valued public spaces
Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (4)
Ongoing discussions:
– Impact of long range decisions that the town must
make
• protecting tidal wetlands
• removing dams
– Moral and ethical considerations
• equity
• holistic view of the relationship between nature,
health, and quality of life
• stewardship and collective responsibility
Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (5)
• Developmental evaluation process1 to assess our
collaborative process in terms of:
– Salience, Credibility, Legitimacy
• Did CAPE create a fair, inclusive process that helps to ensure
that “science gets used?”
• Did CAPE create recommendations for a climate adaption
plan that facilitate implementation?
Through continuous evaluation of our collaborative
process, we have learned that the knowledge of many
stakeholders about cross-sectoral impacts of climate
change is increasing.
1Patton,
M. Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use.
Guilford, 2010. http://www.guilford.com/excerpts/patton.pdf
Conclusions
• CBPR can provide a successful template for local
climate adaptation planning
• Collaborative relationships must continually be
defined, nurtured, and refined
• A portfolio of different engagement approaches and
research methods is needed
• Partnerships between scientists, planners, town
leaders, natural resource managers, and citizens can
integrate climate change considerations into local
planning processes, highlighting opportunities to
extend CBPR to support resilient, climate-ready
communities.
Final Thoughts:
Moving from Risk to Resilience
Resilience –
The remarkable
capacity of
communities to
bounce back from
adversity and
thrive in a world
of uncertainty
and change.
Source: ASU Health Futures: Health in a New Key: http://slhi.org/pdfs/issue_briefs/ib-03fall.pdf
Moving from Risk to Resilience:
Planning as Prevention
Primary
Prevention
Secondary
Prevention
Land Use Planning
Decisions (e.g.,
Green
open space,
Infrastructure
conservation,
protect tidal wetlands)
Low Impact
Development
Tertiary Prevention
Emergency
Response
Strategies
Public Health Benefits Include:
•Lower exposure to environmental
toxins and vector-borne diseases
•Drinking water, sewage
•Increased physical activity levels
•Protection of open space and
recreational areas
•Fewer lives affected by the stress
associated with floods, property
damage, and disruption of the
local economy.
…saving approximately $147 billion in U.S. medical
expenditures
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to NOAA National Estuarine
Research Reserve System (NERRS) Science
Collaborative for funding this project.
We thank the Town of Exeter for their commitment
to this project.
Special thanks to our students and interns
(especially Hannah Coon and Keith Johnson) for
their contributions to CAPE.
Questions?
Vital Signs of a Resilient Community: Healthy
People , Healthy Ecosystems, Vibrant Economy