8
Building the Ideal Sustainable City
Researchers and practitioners across different domains described what sustainability means in their field, as well as ways in which their local communities strive for sustainability. This session closed with a panel in which keynote speakers talked more broadly about the idea of sustainability and where we go from here.
8.1 AN URBAN HISTORY LESSON FOR THE SUSTAINABLE CITY
Brian Beach, Vanderbilt University, explained that from an economist’s perspective, sustainable cities comprise institutions that promote growth and co-existence. Measures of success include continuous improvements in well-being (e.g., income, health, happiness), resources allocated to their highest valued use instead of being wasted, and limits on a person’s ability to impose uncompensated costs on other members of society (e.g., a person who pollutes and thus hurts neighbors).
Beach noted that urban areas face many environmental, social, and economic challenges such as wildfires, storms, droughts, and heat waves as well as inequality, mobility, and housing affordability issues. The path forward includes markets that guide development, innovation, and adaptation; environmental regulations that limit uncompensated costs; and policy reforms that address persistent inequities. He pointed out that much pessimism surrounds cities: they use a significant quantity of resources, contribute to air pollution, experience urban heat island
effects, and offer limited green space. However, because cities contain many people, he said that these costs should be deflated by the number of people living in cities. At the household level, cities are actually very “green,” while the suburbs have a much higher carbon footprint. Therefore, he asserted, people should be encouraged to move to cities because their density fosters both innovation and a lower carbon footprint.
Beach indicated that much progress has been made in cities over the past two centuries: cities are currently the best they have ever been, and they continue to improve. Life in 19th and early 20th century cities was short and bleak, with rampant infectious disease, air and water pollution, and fires. He presented an 1851 map of the “urban mortality penalty” in England and Wales: the denser the city, the deadlier the city until approximately 1940. By 2018, the mortality rate in London had fallen by 75 percent. A map of New York City showing mortality from 1800 to 1930 reveals that mortality was high throughout much of the 19th century, owing to epidemics. After 1890, these epidemics started to be better controlled, and the mortality rate started to decrease and continued to decline until the COVID-19 pandemic. Improvements in nutrition related to income and regulation (e.g., meat inspection and milk pasteurization), better sanitary infrastructure, technological improvements (e.g., sulfa drugs, vaccines), and decreased industrial air and water pollution led to the initial transition to lower mortality.
However, Beach highlighted several “missteps” that occurred throughout this transition that resulted in the following three lessons learned. First, inaction is a choice that has a cost. For example, typhoid fever accounted for about 3 percent of all deaths in the United States in 1890 owing to consumption of water contaminated by sewage. “Long typhoid” left individuals with increased mortality risk for several years. However, methods of controlling waterborne disease were understood by the 1890s, and two methods of epidemic intervention had emerged in Massachusetts. In Lowell, a transition away from river water to a driven well system began, and in Lawrence, a new filtration plant opened in 1893. Yet, adoption of Lawrence’s proven solution among large cities was slow, likely because filtration plants were expensive. In 1908, Jersey City offered the low-cost alternative of chlorination, which was more readily adopted. Beach explained that this delay in intervention incurred a cost that can be measured in three ways:
- Value of a statistical life: Benefits in lives saved easily exceeded the cost of investment by a factor of 10–20.
- Productivity, for which good health is crucial: Gains offset the cost of sanitary infrastructure by a factor of 4–12.
- Revealed willingness to pay: Differences in land values suggest that the benefits of sanitary infrastructure exceeded costs by a factor of 60.
He remarked that environmental toxins still exist today via lead water pipes, air pollution, and wildfire smoke. All three measures demonstrate the value of investments to improve environmental quality, and he proposed a shared framework to measure benefits and convert future benefits to dollars of support.
Second, Beach said that institutions often fail in terms of equity. Racially segregated cities were the first to invest in water infrastructure but lagged in their ability to control waterborne disease; segregation facilitated the exclusion of Black neighborhoods from obtaining sanitary infrastructure. For example, Chicago’s first zoning ordinance disproportionately assigned industrial-use zoning to minority neighborhoods, and in 2022, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) accused Chicago of environmental racism by moving polluters to Black and Latinx neighborhoods. Some variation in access to amenities is expected based on preferences or income, he continued, but current institutions rely heavily on political representation, which is an outsized determinant.
Third, Beach observed that data reveal important insights to those who listen. John Snow, who established that cholera was a waterborne disease, conducted an experiment with two rival companies competing in the same neighborhoods, both of which drew from the same polluted river. One company moved to a cleaner source while the other did not, and the “treated” households experienced a decline in mortality. Yet, people still were not convinced about the causes of the disease. Thus, Beach emphasized that data and statistical methodologies offer tremendous potential, but the interpretation of why a relationship is causal rather than coincidental could be better communicated, and data could be better used to dispel myths.
8.2 CLIMATE IMPACTS ON SUSTAINABILITY PLANNING
Alice C. Hill, Council on Foreign Relations, stressed that the climate is changing faster than at any point in the past 2,000 years: weather events and wildfires are becoming more frequent and more intense, and sea levels and temperatures continue to rise worldwide. She asserted that sustainable cities cannot be realized without preparing for and rapidly recovering from climate disasters, but the world is nowhere near ready especially as new, unfamiliar extremes mock the nation’s reliance on historical assumptions. For example, New Mexico had the largest wildfire
in the state’s history this year because the Forest Service conducted prescribed burns as they have always done instead of accounting for the drier conditions and climate risk. She cautioned against continuing to assume that the past will resemble the future.
Hill emphasized that cities should plan for an uncertain and unstable climate future. City infrastructure systems were built without consideration of the impacts of climate change and are already outdated. She further noted that a sustainable city should be prepared because each incremental rise in temperature results in worsening extremes. Furthermore, even if global emissions drop to zero in the near term, heating has been “baked in” from past emissions, and the world is beyond the point at which reducing emissions to zero alone is sufficient. She urged governments, communities, and businesses to move beyond a focus on mitigation in their sustainability plans to a focus on preparation for and adaptation to climate extremes. She stressed that now is the time to act on climate—yet the United States has no national strategy for adaptation to events already being experienced, let alone the climate disruptions that will occur in the future. She underscored that if these changes are not made, a cascading failure of infrastructure could begin—health and transportation sectors could fail, and deaths and costs will increase—signs of which have already emerged in places where it is impossible to generate enough power amid so much heat.
Hill cautioned that without a new approach, threats could become the norm. However, the federal government continues to fund new development in known fire and flood risk areas, and local governments continue to permit that construction. Without preparation for and attention to these rising risks, consequences ripple throughout societies, which will cause migration when people seek higher, safer ground. Because consequences fall hardest on those already most vulnerable, she emphasized that equity should be an essential part of any sustainability plan for adaptation. Yet, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) allocated billions of dollars to flood grant programs using a racially flawed system that has prioritized saving homes in rich areas or predominantly White communities.
Hill posited that accelerating climate change could overtake humans’ progress toward building sustainable communities, as climate changes today have already exceeded what scientists expected, and quality of life in many areas is already decreasing. Confronting climate change requires everyone’s help, but many have ignored the exponential growth of climate change and are not working at the level required. She urged city planners to consider future climate change in the sustainability decisions they make today.
Serving as session moderator, Barbara Brown Wilson, University of Virginia, asked what key elements could be included in a national strategy for resilience. Hill explained that a national strategy should define the role of the federal government—for example, how programs could be coordinated to prevent conflict between them, as is currently a challenge with FEMA and HUD. She added that the approach should be a whole-of-society effort, not just a whole-of-government effort, and suggested that the federal government provide reliable risk vulnerability analysis. China’s first adaptation plan emerged a decade ago and a new plan was recently issued for a substantial water infrastructure project, yet, the United States has no such national plan. She encouraged the United States to invest in that type of planning, to determine which projects will keep the nation safer moving forward, and to prioritize solutions that might take more resources but protect more people. Holm wondered how federal agencies and states could change the way they evaluate grant programs to address adaptation and sustainability instead of only short-term needs. Hill acknowledged this as a significant challenge: future investment measures that reduce risk are not being sufficiently weighted in cost-benefit analysis, and the nation waits for a crisis before investing. She proposed a more consultative way for local communities to understand their risks and discover what resources are available from the federal government. If the federal government could provide more data and incentives, she continued, communities could make more informed, climate-resilient decisions.
8.3 ROAD TRIP: SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE
Lucia Athens, City of Austin, Texas, encouraged decision makers to extend beyond benefit-cost analysis to create an aspirational vision for sustainable cities.1 She discussed the Austin Office of Sustainability, whose mission is focused on quality of life now and in the future through net-zero emissions, a healthy and just local food system, and resilience and adaptation. Austin’s carbon footprint is 12.5 million metric tons, mostly from energy use in buildings and transportation, and Austin’s Climate Equity Plan has an aggressive goal to reach net zero by 2040.2
Athens pointed out that although much progress has been made in using the language of sustainability, a lack of understanding of what that means and how it is interpreted persists. She described sustainability as
___________________
1 L. Athens, 2022, Sustainability Revolutionists: Heroes and Hope for Our Planet’s Future, New York: Throughline Press.
2 For more information about Austin’s Climate Equity Plan, see https://www.austintexas.gov/page/austin-climate-equity-plan, accessed August 28, 2022.
the intersection of the environment (planet), the economy (profit), and the society (people). She noted that these three pillars of sustainability can inform infrastructure planning related to energy, mobility, living systems, and social capital and health.
She explained that on the path to sustainable energy, Austin plans to decarbonize its electric infrastructure and power production infrastructure through Austin Energy, with goals for carbon-free electricity by 2035 via significant investments in solar (375 megawatts of local solar by 2030) and wind, and for 40 percent of vehicle miles traveled to be electrified by 2040. Plans for increased mobility include 27 new miles of rail and 31 rail stations through 3 new rail lines, 4 rapid transit bus lines, 9 park-and-ride facilities, and 15 neighborhood circulator buses. Mobility could also improve with increases in bikers and pedestrians so that 50 percent of trips are car-free, as well as with 80 percent of new residential areas being located in an “activity center.” Plans for more sustainable living systems infrastructure include enhanced forests and waterways, parks and trail systems, and urban farms and gardens. These systems can deliver on carbon reduction and traditional infrastructure goals, but it is important to note that COVID-19 demonstrated that outdoor activities are also a vital part of the health infrastructure system. Austin is also working to advance social infrastructure projects that could deliver better green jobs and workforce development; protect art, music, and heritage sites; prevent displacement of artists and venues from the city; and create neighborhood resilience hubs (i.e., where people can go during a power or water emergency for information, water, food, electricity, and medical supplies).
Athens provided two examples that demonstrate how to leverage infrastructure investments to achieve sustainability and equity goals. First, the Civilian Conservation Corps,3 created with funding from the American Rescue Plan, offers job skills training and mentoring for natural systems work and protects urban forests to sequester carbon. Second, although the investments in new rail lines in Austin will lower the carbon footprint of transportation, concerns arose about the urban displacement that could accompany the new construction. As a result, $300 million of the $7 billion rail project budget is now allocated for anti-displacement measures (e.g., zero percent interest loans for nonprofits to preserve and create affordable housing, a focus on accessory dwelling units [ADUs] and land trusts, and other measures for wealth building through home ownership). In closing, Athens highlighted the importance of storytelling in sustainability work as well as learning lessons from “sustainability heroes” of the past.
___________________
3 For more information on the Civilian Conservation Corps, see https://www.austintexas.gov/department/austin-civilian-conservation-corps, accessed August 28, 2022.
8.4 DISCUSSION
Wilson inquired about strategies to improve data literacy so that decision makers become more receptive to data and could present data more accessibly. Beach suggested presenting a series of comparisons in context, instead of citing statistics in a vacuum, to foster better understanding of the relationships of correlation and causation. Hill advocated for “keeping it simple and stupid.” Climate change often centers on the notion of uncertainty, but in reality, much is already known about the issue. She encouraged using visualization to communicate information as well as storytelling to contextualize data. For example, Climate Central4 produces graphics that appeal to a wide audience and can be used by local news meteorologists, and the First Street Foundation5 has maps that reveal address-specific fire and flood risks to help citizens understand how climate will impact their homes. Athens added that Austin collaborates with local meteorologists because they are trusted, nonpolitical community spokespeople. She proposed including communications experts and graphic designers on data teams, both of whom help make science more understandable for community members and policy makers. She also advised including people’s lived experiences in data collection, which have as much value as quantitative data.
Wilson posed a question about how communities could work toward longer-term sustainability amid frequent political office turnover. Athens explained that the political turnover in Austin is not significantly limiting because the community advocates for equity and the environment. She encouraged other cities to build similar coalitions with community members and nonprofits (e.g., Hill Country Conservancy6). Hill agreed that coalition-building is key. For example, although Louisiana is experiencing a dramatic loss of land, talking about climate change in a conservative community is difficult. However, with money from the BP oil spill, meetings were held in parishes to create plans for places that will be lost to sea-level rise; with this approach, community members better understood their risks, and community leaders had more leverage. She asserted that creating this level of buy-in takes both time and money but is essential for long-term planning. Beach also championed coalition-building. He added that individual community members have a responsibility to respond to sustainability challenges, and incentives could motivate action. For
___________________
4 For more information about Climate Central, see https://www.climatecentral.org/, accessed September 7, 2022.
5 For more information about the First Street Foundation, see https://firststreet.org/, accessed August 28, 2022.
6 For more information about the Hill Country Conservancy, see https://hillcountryconservancy.org/, accessed August 28, 2022.
example, he said that instead of implementing a water conservation policy, increasing water prices could make people think twice about filling up their swimming pools. Hill mentioned a challenge in increasing the price of water given inequality: the very rich are unaffected by such price increases, but the poor would be greatly affected.
Wilson wondered how cities could think differently about land-use regulations and building codes. Beach noted that zoning has both advantages and disadvantages. Zoning can be used to concentrate pollution and protect houses from environmental issues; however, some historic houses cannot be redeveloped even though they are inefficient, and some people cannot live in a city owing to its overly restrictive building codes. He suggested that relaxing concerns about density could be a significant win for the development of cities. Hill noted that Oregon and California recently approved the use of ADUs to address housing shortages even though some local communities were not in favor of additional buildings. She underscored that federal support should not be provided for communities that develop in environmentally unsound areas, and she suggested a “Manhattan Project for building codes” to address the problem of outdated data being used for new construction. Athens noted that as new weather data emerge, Austin is redrawing its floodplain maps to accommodate expanding high-risk areas. Furthermore, because Austin has been blocked from updating land-use codes for several years by people who fear density, the city has made piecemeal updates to the codes to make it easier to build ADUs and to provide incentives for other methods to “green” the city. She championed small-scale interventions that fit each neighborhood, and she cautioned that when regulations are implemented, unintended consequences (e.g., gentrification) should be considered. Wilson added that Charlottesville, Virginia, is actively working to update its comprehensive plan and its land-use codes, with an emphasis on protecting historically underserved neighborhoods.7
Wilson asked what types of data make the most compelling comparisons to understand the costs and benefits of infrastructure investment. Beach mentioned that Redfin and Zillow reveal information about how markets are responding to conditions; they offer real-time data for tracking progress and provide information about what people are willing to pay for amenities. Athens pointed out that climate projections are compelling, although not always perfect, and Austin takes climate models down to a local level to understand projections for the city. Her team includes a data analyst who conducts analysis and creates visualizations related to potential impacts of Austin’s Climate Equity Plan so that decision makers
___________________
7 For more information, see https://virginiaequitycenter.org/albemarle-county-equity-profile-1, accessed September 3, 2022.
better understand different scenarios. She also suggested leveraging data to enable behavior changes—for example, using utility data to create educational material on energy conservation for individual addresses. Hill explained that benefit-cost analysis is critical to long-term resilience and sustainability: investments that generate future benefit have high value, while short-term investment decisions lack value and leave communities vulnerable. She suggested that a performance code for infrastructure could help with these decisions. Wilson added that disaggregating existing data around race and income could help better understand who bears the biggest burden of costs in cities (e.g., see PolicyLink’s National Equity Atlas8).
___________________
8 For more information about the National Equity Atlas, see https://www.policylink.org/our-work/economy/national-equity-atlas, accessed August 28, 2022.
