National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 3 KNOWLEDGE GAPS, NEW MARKETS, AND POLITICAL WILL
Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×

4
INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainability indicators and performance metrics were specifically addressed in the day two panel discussion but were also raised by other presenters and participants. As metropolitan Atlanta attempts to put sustainability principles into practice, stakeholders are interested in measuring their progress. Participants described existing metrics, particularly to measure reductions in CO2 emissions, but several participants also described other types of metrics (e.g., related to community health or mobility). Many participants also noted that these metrics could become important in the context of competitiveness among metropolitan regions if citizens begin to demand more action on sustainability.

REDUCING THE REGION’S CARBON FOOTPRINT

Marilyn Brown, professor, School of Public Policy, Georgia Tech, examined sustainability through the lens of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. She began with a forecast of the growth of CO2 emissions in the United States and noted that a national goal ought to be not only to stop cumulative growth in emissions, but to make these growth rates negative. To do so, the United States needs to have a cumulative emissions budget. As Dr. Brown pointed out, however, implementation will fall primarily to cities and local governments, and thus it is important to understand emissions at the metropolitan level.


Dr. Brown cited a 2005 study by The Brookings Institution (Brown et al., 2008) of carbon footprints of the 100 largest metropolitan areas, which found that people living in dense urban areas generate significantly lower emissions. She explained that U.S. cities offer great opportunities for improvements in energy efficiency and conservation because of the high concentration of buildings and the compact

Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×

infrastructure (see Figure 4–1). Although they contain 65 percent of the population and create 76 percent of gross domestic product, they only produce 56 percent of carbon emissions. Dr. Brown noted that obtaining energy data at a county or zip code level is difficult. Some data are proprietary and can only be estimated.

FIGURE 4-1 Projections for energy efficiency gains in Georgia.

FIGURE 4-1 Projections for energy efficiency gains in Georgia.

Source: Brown, M.A., E. Gumerman, X. Sun, Y. Baek, J. Wang, R. Cortes, and D. Soumonni. 2010. Energy Efficiency in the South (Atlanta: Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance), April 2010. [online.] Available: http://www.seealliance.org/programs/se-efficiency-study.php. [accessed April 9, 2011]

SUSTAINABILITY AS A POINT OF DIFFERENTIATION

K.C. Boyce, Deputy Executive Director, Membership and Regional Impact, ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability, discussed how progress toward sustainability might be measured in the region. He presented the STAR Community Index, which uses comparative analysis to provide a common way of measuring progress in sustainability—

Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×

economic, environment, and equity indices. The index has 81 metrics categorized under 10 goal areas; each has its own structure, consisting of a goal, purpose, and measure. He emphasized that the STAR Community Index has a “high bar, but a low floor” so that top-performing communities would have incentive to continue making progress, but lower-performing communities would not be precluded from measuring their progress. Mr. Boyce also remarked that communities were expressing interest in understanding the range of positive possibilities for becoming more sustainable (rather than only measuring the decrease in undesirable indicators).


Mr. Boyce noted that, until recently, indicators of sustainability for different cities did not have enough in common to make useful quantitative comparison. This makes it difficult if not impossible to verify claims emanating from communities. To share a common vision and carry out concerted action, it is useful to have a common language and set of metrics. He acknowledged that this is not without challenges, and he cited the example of defining “adequate” health care. At the same time, Mr. Boyce noted that not all sustainability indicators are directly comparable between communities.


Carol Couch, Senior Public Service Associate, College of Environment and Design, University of Georgia, elaborated on this when she pointed out that stakeholders needed to have a benchmark for the region’s ecosystem services. Quantifying (and, where possible, monetizing) these services would help improve decision makers’ understanding of the tradeoffs inherent in different patterns of development. Graeme Lockaby, director, Center for Forest Sustainability, Auburn University, pointed out that macroeconomic analyses are not suited to local ecological scales, and so it is easy to miss declines in ecosystem services resulting from urban expansion. He cited two specific examples from his studies in western Georgia—first, that regional water availability tends to decrease as urbanization (i.e., land conversion) increases, and second, that the threshold for urban forest canopy and species diversity is about 15 percent. In these cases, changes to the land threaten services that at least some residents in the region value.


Environmental justice, a priority issue in metropolitan Atlanta and at a federal level, is another spatial indicator. Several participants noted that, in addition to concerns about environmental pollution’s adverse impacts on segments of the regional population (e.g., by race or income),

Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×

it will also be important to measure the degree to which all segments of the population are benefiting from environmental improvements in the region. Examples included access to green space, healthy food options, and multiple modes of transit.

PUBLIC HEALTH INDICATORS

Christopher Portier, Director of the National Center for Environmental Health, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), suggested that health indicators, such as gains in life expectancy from pollution reductions, offered a positive way to communicate the impact of sustainability efforts. In the same way that efficiency improvements are communicated in terms of consumer savings over time, improvements in the built environment that also improve health outcomes can be monetized (e.g., reduced medical expenditures) and provide a direct connection to citizens. Dr. Portier concluded that the way we design our communities and use our land will either promote or harm human health. Therefore, the CDC is becoming more involved in building capacity to support Health Impact Assessments for land-use and transportation projects.


Jeremy Hess, assistant professor, Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, posed a question to the group about which health indicators could be used as a measure of urban sustainability. As many participants noted, health problems such as asthma and obesity are significant concerns in metropolitan Atlanta, and so linking these concerns to their environmental stressors could help make sustainability a more tangible idea for residents in the region. Dr. Hess added survival from common cancers to this list. These indicators are highly correlated with poverty and restricted access to health care. Incidence of obesity and diabetes are linked to limited mobility, limited access to nutritious food, and poor education. Dr. Hess reiterated that shifting our attention and investment to creating livable and sustainable communities can have a positive impact on public health.

Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"4 INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY." National Research Council. 2011. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13143.
×
Page 26
Next: 5 INSTITUTIONALIZING SUSTAINABILITY »
Pathways to Urban Sustainability: The Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $21.00 Buy Ebook | $16.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The U.S. population is more than 80 percent urban. Recognizing that many metropolitan areas in the United States have been experimenting with various approaches to sustainability, and that despite the differences among regions, there are likely some core similarities and transferable knowledge, Roundtable members selected the metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia region as a case study. The Atlanta region provided a compelling example for exploring urban sustainability issues because of the region's rapid growth rate, well-documented challenges with water, land use, and transportation; and its level of engagement with federal government agencies on matters related to sustainability.

Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Lessons from the Atlanta Metropolitan Region: Summary of a Workshop explores the Atlanta region's approach to urban sustainability, with an emphasis on building evidence based foundation upon which policies and programs might be developed. The two day workshop held on September 30 and October 1, 2010 examined how the interaction of various systems (natural and human systems; energy, water and transportations systems) affect the region's social, economic, and environmental conditions. The intent of this workshop summary is to analyze a metropolitan region so that researchers and practitioners can improve their understanding of the spatial and temporal aspects of urban sustainability.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!