The Provision of Green Infrastucture according to Income The Importance of Equity in Urban Responses to Climate Change
Overview of the Data
Figure 5
The first map below illustrates the percentage of people in each census tract of the study area who live at or below 150% of the federal poverty level, a common measure of income and poverty. This 150% equals an annual Climate change is scientifically proven to be caused by human action, and cities are major contributors due to the income of $19,320. For this map, the darker areas have higher percentages of people living at or below 150% the high concentration people and cars, impervious surfaces, and urban sprawl. In order to build urban resiliency and poverty level. Originally, I studied the census data for annual median income; however, there were several patches without any data in the study area. combat climate change effects, cities are beginning to install more green infrastructure, such as: -recycling centers -permeable pavement Noticeably, there are considerable areas to the southwest and southeast corners as well as two smaller areas in the -electric vehicle charging stations -bioswales central and northeast portions of the study area that have high percentages of people living with very low -rain collection and reuse systems -multi-modal transportation incomes. Several of these areas overlap with historically marginalized neighborhoods, including northeast OKC -outdoor facilities and seating -green spaces with native trees and plants and Capitol Hill. As cities are introducing these new types of sustainable infrastructure, it is important to ensure that provision of Figure 3 this green infrastructure is equitable so that all types of households have access to sustainable living and the benefits that come with it. However, city governments have a long history of diverting resources away from low-income neighborhoods towards improvements to wealthier areas, despite the fact that low-income households do not have the resources to compensate for the resulting low-quality environment. Wealthier neighborhoods tend to receive the most investment for new projects and maintenance, as they have the influence and time to demand it. Therefore, this research studies the planning issue of inequitable distribution of green infrastructure according to income. Studying the spatial relationship between green infrastructure and income is important because this illustrates who has access to green infrastructure and, therefore, who is able to make and benefit from sustainable living choices. For instance, even if a low-income family wants to live sustainably, they cannot possibly forgo a personal vehicle if there are not sidewalks, bike lanes, or transit that is safe for children and available according to their work and school schedules. If a high-earning household wants to live sustainably but also does not have that green infrastructure in their area, they have the resources to choose other sustainable living options, such as using an electric vehicle, purchasing ethical and sustainable products, or paying for alternative energy sources. Figure 1
(United; ”Open”)
Research Findings The main limitation in this research was the lack of data. Green infrastructure is still not widely used, especially not in politically conservative places like Oklahoma, so there was a general lack of green infrastructure data. Due to the limits in data, I was unable to include all the types of green infrastructure I had originally planned on including because it would have taken a great amount of time to observe the environment and catalog the data myself. There was also some data missing on median income from the census, but I overcame that limitation by utilizing a different measure of income that had complete data -- the federal poverty level data.
Figure 2
(United)
(Adams)
(Savage)
Research Objectives, Methods, & Scope This research revolves around green infrastructure in central Oklahoma City and its spatial relation to income; the research objective has been to determine whether wealthier areas of the study area are receiving more and/or better-quality green infrastructure than lower-income areas. Generally, green infrastructure is defined as physical infrastructure that has an environmental impact that is low enough to be used sustainably or infrastructure that enables people to make environmentally sustainable living choices. This research will focus on the latter type of green infrastructure because: - people have such a massive effect on the environment that the natural world cannot be analyzed in a vaccum without considering human actions -humans are a part of nature rather than separate from it, so considering human-centered methods of green infrastructure is equally important to ecologically centered strategies
The second map pictured focuses on recent and upcoming multimodal transportation projects from the Oklahoma City database and website with the same census data on poverty as the background. These projects include sidewalks, bike lanes, bike sharing stations, a transit center, and two streetcar loops. Likewise, the third map includes recent and upcoming projects for outdoor recreation and green spaces against the census data. These projects include green spaces, trails, and outdoor facilities. The datasets from the Oklahoma City database divided the information based on different project funding movements, such as bonds and penny sales taxes. Notably, although all these projects are relatively recent, the locations that receive these improvements often overlap. In order to showcase this, the labels on the map are make partially transparent, so the more vivid and opaque a labeled spot is, the more times it has been recently improved. For instance, in the southwest Capitol Hill area of Figure 4, one can see clearly transparent turquoise outlines; these are areas where sidewalk projects were funded only once or twice. By contrast, in the central business district area of the same map, one can see a vivid and opaque rectangle where a large area has consistently received sidewalk funding. Figure 4
For the green infrastructure from Figure 5, the projects were somewhat more balanced across different income levels. The trails system appears to be present and well funded across both high- and low-poverty census tracts, but there are clear differences between the green spaces and outdoor facilities. The low-poverty areas tend to have a greater quantity of small parks with higher concentrations of outdoor facilities while the high-poverty areas have fewer but much larger green spaces with a similar pattern of outdoor facilities. Whether one strategy is better depends on one’s outlook since they each come with benefits and disadvantages, such as differences in accessibility and space for activities.
Recommendations for Future Action Considering these findings, I have two recommendations to improve this planning issue as well as expand research on the topic: -Oklahoma City should divert more funds to the Office of Sustainability in the Planning Department on the condition that at least 50% of the annual budget are spent on sustainability improvements in high-poverty areas, specifically the census tracts with a majority of people living at or below 150% of the federal poverty line. This would include green infrastructure projects like the ones studied here as well as additional types, such as rain catchment, bioswales, and community gardens. These projects should be reviewed and approved by a design review committee consisting of representatives from those low-income neighborhoods. -Data must be continuously collected and recorded on this infrastructure after its construction to ensure that it is performing as desired. Gathered information would include rate of use, how it is used, who is using it, and how its impact on the environment and residents compares to gray infrastructure.
The information collected for this project consisted of data on sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, transit centers and stops, parks, and outdoor facilities as well as multiple measures of income, including median household income and poverty levels. These were collected from a variety of sources, including the US Census Bureau, the City of Oklahoma City database, as well as online maps. The data collected were all selected because they consisted of infrastructure that directly enable people to make sustainable lifestyle choices. Multi-modal transportation, such as public transit, sidewalks, and bike lanes are necessary for people to be able to forgo a personal vehicle as they move within a city. Public green spaces, parks, outdoor facilities, and trails are important for encouraging residential density because they decrease the need for large lots and personal yards. I chose this portion of Oklahoma City rather than the entire city for my research because of its sprawling urban form. Oklahoma City spreads far and wide, consuming 621 sq. miles; however, once you leave the central part of development, the city becomes less Oklahoma City and more the suburban cities that the capital has surrounded. My study area focuses on the central portion of development so that there is a tighter focus area, allowing the data to be more manageable for the researcher and readers. Notably, however, though the research focuses on just the central portion of the city, it still includes a variety of neighborhoods that have diverse demographics and development, so it should provide a range of data suitable for the overarching project.
Overall, I found that there is a bias toward areas with lower levels of poverty for green infrastructure in Oklahoma City. Specifically regarding multimodal transportation, there was green infrastructure across all levels of poverty; however, areas with lower levels of poverty tend to receive more projects, as shown by the overlapping labels. Additionally, the green infrastructure that provides more flexibility and accessibility -- the bike sharing stations and the streetcar stations -- are mostly concentrated in low poverty areas as well. Moreover, although there was green transportation infrastructure across much of the study area and across different income levels, there was a major gap in green transportation infrastructure projects in the southeast portion of the study area, possibly due to the lower levels of development.
Works Cited
(United; Spokies; “Open”; “Route”)
Emily Fitzsimmons, RCPL 5463, University of Oklahoma
Adams, Alonzo. “Photo & Film Policy.” Myriad Botanical Gardens. Myriad Botanical Gardens, 2021, https://oklahomacitybotanicalgardens.com/plan-your-visit/photo-policy/. Accessed 1 Dec. 2021. “Open Data Portal.” City of Oklahoma City. City of Oklahoma City, n.d., https://data.okc.gov/portal/page/catalog. Accessed 1 Dec. 2021. “Route Map.” Oklahoma City Streetcar. EMBARK, 2021, https://okcstreetcar.com/ride-guide/route-map/. Accessed 1 Dec. 2021. Savage, Caleb. “Coffee + Bikes in OKC.” Clarity Coffee. Clarity Coffee, 28 July 2018, https://www.claritycoffee.com/blog/coffee-bikes-okc. Accessed 1 Dec. 2021. Spokies. Spokies, 2021, https://spokiesokc.com/. Accessed 1 Dec. 2021. United States Census Bureau. US Department of Commerce, 2018, https://www.census.gov/. Accessed 1 Dec. 2021.