National Academies Press: OpenBook

Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States (2016)

Chapter: Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators

« Previous: Appendix A: Committee on Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities Biographical Information
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×

Appendix B

Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators

Note for online reading: A metric column is included on the even-numbered pages only due to continuation of the table to the next odd numbered page.

ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS

Metric Vancouver Los Angeles New York Philadelphia
Air Quality Criteria Pollutant (NAAQS) Nonattainmenta PM-2.5 (24 hr), Ozone (8 hr) Canadian Ambient Air Quality (AQ) Stds. PM-2.5, 8-hour ozone, lead PM-10, 8-hour ozone 8-hour ozone
Particulate Matter 2.5 (ppm) (2011) (Average density of fine particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter in micrograms per cubic meter (PM2.5))b 4.3 (2011)
4.1 (2012)
6.6 (2013)
8.1 10.8 11.6
Air Quality Index (AQI) (EPA, 2012):c AQHI 2013 AQI AQI AQI
Total days AQI available NA 366 366 366
Good days (AQI = 0-50) >99% hr 33 130 109
Moderate days (AQI = 51-100) <1% hr 228 214 230
Maximum AQI (out of 500) 0% 192 150 154
Median AQI (out of 500) NA 77 55 58
Greenhouse Gas Emissions of SMA in 2010d
Residential CO2 per capita (metric tons of CO2 per capita from residential energy consumption) 0.80 1.6 1.8 1.8
Commercial CO2 per $ gross domestic product (GDP) (kgCO2/$-GDP (2005-$)) NA 0.04 0.01 0.02
Industrial CO2 per $ value of products (kgCO2/$-GDP from industry (2005-$) NA 0.27 NA NA
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Pittsburgh Chattanooga Grand Rapids Cedar Rapids Flint U.S.* Std**
8-hour ozone, PM-2.5, SO2, lead PM-2.5 Population Exposed**: 130,886 in 000s Y
14.0 13.5 12.2 11.1 12.2 10.2 Y
AQI AQI AQI AQI AQI AQI N
366 352 366 366 242
80 194 254 227 178
230 150 97 138 50
200 137 135 104 147
62 48 41 44 40
17.62
2.7 3.1 4.7 NA NA 3.41 N
0.05 0.07 0.22 NA NA 5.20 N
0.44 0.75 1.22 NA NA 5.74 N
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Metric Vancouver Los Angeles New York Philadelphia
Water Quality 2012e: State level only NA 1,052 1,543 6,954
Number of waterways impaired
Example of a waterway applicable to the city LA River East, Harlem, Hudson Rivers Schuylkill, Delaware Rivers
Hydrologyf
Average Annual Precipitation in inches/year 46.8 18.67 46.23 41.45
Landslide Vulnerabilityg L M/H L L
Existing Tree Canopy (% land cover)h 18 21 21 20
Park Acres/1,000 residents 2014i NA 9.3 4.6 7.0
Ecological footprint by Global Footprint Network (Ecological Footprint is calculated by considering all of the biological materials consumed by all the residents in a city and all of the carbon dioxide emissions generated by that city in a given year). Units are global hectares per capita.j 6.21 6.4 6.1 6.2
Natural Hazards Vulnerabilityk (#events 1/1/05-6/1/15) NA 411 656 500+
ECONOMIC INDICATORS
Economic sector mix (% employment)l
Agric, forestry, fishing, hunting, and mining 0.97% 0.40% 0.10% 0.30%
Construction
Manufacturing 4.53% 6.40% 5.40% 4.80%
Wholesale trade 5.12% 8.10% 3.30% 5.70%
Retail trade 3.77% 3.10% 2.30% 2.30%
Transportation, warehousing, and utilities 9.13% 9.30% 9.00% 8.80%
Information; finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 4.30% 5.90% 6.10% 6.00%
Professional, scientific, management, and administrative, waste management services 13.08% 11.20% 15.40% 8.50%
17.49% 13.50% 14.10% 12.20%
Educational services, and health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food services 19.33% 20.60% 25.20% 30.80%
Other services (except public admin) Public administration 13.20% 11.10% 10.00% 9.20%
Armed forces 4.96% 6.60% 4.90% 4.50%
4.11% 3.70% 4.20% 6.80%
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Financial Health (G.O. Bond ratings 2014 or 2015 S&P ratings or *Moody’s – AA+ is S&P equivalent to Aa1)m AA+ AA- AA A+
Median Household Income (2009-2013)n $56,113 (2010) $55,909 $53,107 $37,192
% Unemployment (% of population 16 and older seeking work or employed, but are unemployed)o 7.1 (15 yrs and older) 9.9 7.2 10.0
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Pittsburgh Chattanooga Grand Rapids Cedar Rapids Flint U.S.* Std**
6,954 1,012 2,584 480 2,584 Y
Allegheny Monongahela, Ohio Rivers Tennessee River Grand River Cedar River Flint River
N
34.8 52.44 38.27 37.63 31.38 40.78
H H/M L L L N
42 23 34 13 13 24.95 N
9.8 NA NA NA NA 12.5 N
NA NA NA NA NA 6.7 N
500+ 290 163 500+ 365 500+ N
NA NA N
0.50% 0.10% 0.50% 2.00%
3.90% 5.10% 4.30% 6.10%
5.80% 12.60% 15.70% 10.50%
1.90% 2.40% 2.50% 2.60%
6.10% 12.60% 7.40% 11.60%
3.50% 7.30% 2.30% 4.90%
16.00% 9.70% 6.20% 8.70%
13.00% 10.50% 10.90% 10.90%
32.90% 22.90% 33.30% 22.80%
8.30% 9.10% 8.40% 9.50%
3.40% 4.40% 4.90% 5.00%
4.60% 3.10% 3.60% 4.80%
0.00% 0.30% 0.10% 0.70%
A+ AAA AA- Aa1* AA+ N
$51,366 $46,702 $51,667 $57,260 $42,089 $53,046 N
6.5 7.9 6.5 4.8 9.7 7.6 N
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Metric Vancouver Los Angeles New York Philadelphia
ENERGY SECTOR
Average residential electricity rate (cents/kWh)p 7.75 13.03 23.21 12.90
Energy Intensity of SMA in 2010q
Residential energy consumption per capita (MMBtus) 30.8 34.5 49.3 71.2
Commercial energy intensity (kBtu/$ GDP (2005-$)) 0.9 0.6 1.2
Industrial energy intensity (kBtu/$GDP(2005-$)) 24 8.0 NA NA
LED Street Lighting (Yes or No)r Yes Yes Yes Yes
System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI)s 3.29 65.0 19.0 66.5
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR
Transportation mode share (% by public transportation)t 30.4 10.4 58.7 29.3
Transportation alternatives:
walkscore.com (out of 100)u
Walk score 78 64 88 77
Transit score 74 50 81 67
Bike score 56 65 68
Transportation Usage:
Annual Vehicle Miles of Travel 2012v Total in thousands (U.S. in millions) 2,908 272,850 290,116 102,015
Per capita DVMT per capita (cities); VMT and DVMT for the United Statesx NA 23.1 16.3 19.8
Licensed drivers per 1,000 driving-age population (state only)y NA 807 705 857
Mean Travel Time to Work in Minutes (all modes) 2014z 20.9 33.6 44.6 35.0
Congestion –TTI (auto only)aa
Yearly delay (hours/commuter) 85 74 48
Excess fuel (gallons) 25 35 23
Cost (dollars/commuter) 1134 (metro 1711 1739 1112
Public Transportation Ridership Average Vancouver) 1433 11664 (NYCT only) NA
Weekday in ‘000s 2014bb
WATER SECTOR
Water usage, countycc 73 100 75 52
Domestic gallons per capita per day
SOCIAL INDICATORS
Population (in ‘000s)dd
City 603,502 3,928,864 8,491,079 1,560,297
CBSA 2,313,328 (metro) 13,262,220 20,092,883 6,051,170
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Pittsburgh Chattanooga Grand Rapids Cedar Rapids Flint U.S.* Std**
11.44 10.13 13.71 12.99 13.71 11.88 N
312 N
66.4 91.9 71.6 NA NA NA
1.7 2.1 3.2 NA NA NA
14.2 25.4 20.2 NA NA NA
No Yes Yes Yes No N
75.0 83.8 218.0 108.1 218.0 NA N
17.6 0.9 3.5 0.6 2.4 5.0 N
NA N
60 27 48 32 40
54
40 30 55
33,226 NA NA NA NA 2,969w N
19 NA NA NA NA 9,457 VMT 25.9 DVMT N
857 890 882 876 882 NA N
31.4 24.1 22.7 20 24.9 25.7 N
39 28 39 7 25 NA
21 19 NA
889 730 854 153 570 NA
213 NA NA 21 NA
60 81 65 75 75 88 N
308.8 million N
305,412 173,778 193,792 129,195 99,002
2,355,968 544,559 1,027,703 263,885 412,895
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Metric Vancouver Los Angeles New York Philadelphia
Population Density (People per square mile)ee
City 13,598 8,382 28,060 11,635
CBSA 2,079 2,735 3,005 1,315
Demographicsff
Percent Black or African American 1% 9.2% 28.1% 44.1%
Percent Hispanic or Latino 1.6% 48.4% 29.0% 13.6%
Percent Asian 41% 14.8% 14.4% 7.2%
Median Age (in years) 39.7 35.5 35.8 33.7
Percent Female Population 51.1% 50.7% 52.3% 52.7%
Poverty and Wealth
% Below 100% of Poverty Levelgg 17.8% 20.4% 26.5%
Income Inequality (Ratio of household income at the 80th% to income 20th%)hh NA 5.3 10.8 6.2
Children in poverty % (NYC 5 counties are given: Bronx, Kings, NY, Queens, Richmond)ii NA 27% 42% 36%
33
27
22
19
Children in single-parent households % (NYC 5 counties are given: Bronx, Kings, NY, Queens, Richmond)jj NA 36% 64% 59%
39
42
33
27
% home ownership (2009-2013)kk 48.5% (2011) 46.9% 32.8% 53.3%
Housing Cost and Income:ll
% Median Gross Rent is of Median 16.1% 36.8% 32.2% 34.9%
Household Income
% Housing Costs are of Median Income
With Mortgages
Without Mortgages 32.1% 34.2% 30.5% 25.6%
17.4% 13.5% 15.2% 15.6%
Educationmm
High School Graduate (Among Those 25 or older) (2009-2013) 92.0% (2011) 76.6% 79.4% 81.2%
Some College (Among Those 25-44) (2009-2013) 73.0% (2011) 58.9% 63.9% 56.5%
Bachelor’s Degree (Among Those 25 or Older) (2009-2013) 43.5% (2011) 29.7% 33.7% 23.9%
Safety: Rate of Violent Crimes (Type 1 Violent Crime Offenses Reported/100,000 people)nn oo 474 628 1,190
Safety-Transportation: Roadway fatalities per hundred million Annual VMTpp 0.74 0.91 0.92 1.22
Health (selected indicators only) 197.5 265.7 363.1 492.1
Premature Age-adjusted mortality per 100,000 302.7
240.1
(NYC 5 counties are given: Bronx, Kings, NY, Queens, Richmond)qq 242.8
296.3
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Pittsburgh Chattanooga Grand Rapids Cedar Rapids Flint U.S.* Std**
89.5 N
5,513 1,267 4,365 1,825 2,907
446 261 369 131 648
N
13.4% 19.8% 10.4% 4.5% 20.6% 13.2% N
1.9% 5.1% 10.1% 2.9% 3.2% 17.4% N
3.4% 2.1% 2.8% 2.2% 1.1% 5.4% N
40.8 39.4 34.9 36.9 39.7 37.5 N
51.8% 51.8% 50.8% 50.6% 51.8% 50.8% N
12.9% 16.6% 15.5% 9.7% 21.0% 15.4% N
5.0 5.0 4.3 4.0 4.8 4.4 N
19% 26% 19% 12% 33% 23% N
33% 36% 32% 29% 44% 33% N
65.5% 64.9% 70.1% 73.0% 70.3% 64.9% N
30.3% 30.2% 34.3% 27.7% 49.3% 21.6% N
19.9% 23.5% 23% 20.9% 26.5% 33.6% N
13.9% 12.9% 12.9% 12.2% 15.9% 10.6%
N
92.9% 86.3% 89.4% 93.8% 88.7% 86.0% N
75.9% 64.7% 68.1% 76.2% 62.7% 56% N
35.9% 27.2% 31.7% 31.2% 18.9% 28.8% N
421 636 409 212 854 191 N
1.22 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 N
352.7 389.8 292.4 281.2 433.7 NA N
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Metric Vancouver Los Angeles New York Philadelphia
Adult obesity % (NYC 5 counties are given: Bronx, Kings, NY, Queens, Richmond)rr NA 21% 28% 30%
23
15
24
28
Poor or fair health % (NYC 5 counties are given: Bronx, Kings, NY, Queens, Richmond)ss NA 22% 24% 20%
18
16
18
12

NOTES

*U.S. information is given where it is available and applicable. NA indicates not available. A double dash (—) indicates not applicable. National data for countyhealthrankings.org for the United States are primarily 2014 national average values from the RWJF (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation) and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

**Std signifies whether or not a regulatory standard is available for the indicator. Y = an official standard. N = no standard; however, guidelines might exist. A (—) = not likely to be relevant or applicable.

a Nonattainment in 1 or more counties in the Standard Metropolitan Area (SMA) and for various years, as listed in one or the other reports or both: (1) EPA. 2015b. Criteria Pollutant Nonattainment Summary Report (as of October 1, 2015). Online. Available at http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/multipol.html and (2) EPA. 2015c. Summary Nonattainment Area Population Exposure Report (as of October 1, 2015). Available at http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/popexp.html. Accessed February 5, 2016. The value indicated in the U.S. column is EPA’s estimate of “population living in an area” across all of the nonattainment criteria pollutants. See EPA. 2015c. Summary Nonattainment Area Population Exposure Report.

b RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table identified for each county. NYC values were weighted for the five counties. The U.S. average is inferred from the trends graph which compares smaller areas to the United States.

c Zero is the best value and 500 is the worst. Canadian cities use the Air Quality Health Index (AQHI). See EPA. 2015a. Air Quality Index. Online. Available at http://www3.epa.gov/airdata/ad_rep_aqi.html. Accessed February 5, 2016.

d Cox, W. 2014. Sustaining the City: Understanding the Role of Energy and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Sustainable Development in Major Metropolitan Areas. PhD dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Tables A.4, A.14, and A.22. The U.S. figure is the total for all sectors as Per Capita CO2 Emissions from the Consumption of Energy (Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide per Person). See Union of Concerned Scientists. 2014. Each Country’s Share of CO2 Emissions. Online. Available at http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html#. Accessed February 8, 2016. The residential, commercial, and industrial values for the U.S. are the unweighted mean values across the nation’s largest U.S. metro areas in 2010 based on Cox, 2014.

e Water quality. Impaired waters are listed by the U.S. EPA (2012) under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. See http://ofmpub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control.

f Hydrology. Source for average annual rainfall. US Climate Data. 2016. Online. Available at http://www.usclimatedata.com. Accessed February 8, 2016. Rainfall is one factor in the availability of water for consumption. Other factors include evaporation, uptake by vegetation, and runoff (not captured).

g Landslide incidence. Values are L, Low (less than 1.5% of area involved); M, Moderate (1.5%-15% of area involved); and H, High (greater than 15% of area involved). See USGS. 2014b. Landslide Overview Map of the Conterminous United States. Online. Available at http://landslides.usgs.gov/hazards/nationalmap. Accessed February 8, 2016.

h U.S. Forest Service. 2015. Urban Tree Canopy Assessments (New York City, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh). Online. Available at http://gis.w3.uvm.edu/utc. Accessed October 12, 2015; U.S. (forest only, 2006). See USGS. 2015. National Land Cover Database 2006 (NLCD2006): Product Statistics. Online. Available at http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd06_stat.php. Accessed January 25, 2016; Los Angeles (2008): See McPherson et al., 2008; Glick (1996): See American Forests, 2000.

i The Trust for Public Land. 2015. 2015 City Park. Online. Available at http://www.tpl.org/2015-city-park-facts. Accessed January 25, 2016. The U.S. figure is the median for all cities reported.

j Moore, D. 2011. Ecological Footprint Analysis: San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA. Global Footprint Network. Online. Available at http://www.footprintnetwork.org/images/uploads/SF_Ecological_Footprint_Analysis.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2015. p. 6.

k Natural Hazards (all hazards) – number of all events, January 1, 2005 through June 1, 2015. Compiled from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) Storm Events Database. The New York City number is for all five boroughs (counties) during the time period. 500+ signifies that the number of events exceeded NOAA’s 500-event threshold and the actual number has to be computed by subdividing and reaggregating the time periods (as was done for NYC).

l Industry Mix. U.S. Census Bureau. 2014b. American Community Survey 2014. Online. Available at http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml### Table S0804. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Pittsburgh Chattanooga Grand Rapids Cedar Rapids Flint U.S.* Std**
27% 29% 29% 28% 37% 28% N
13% 18% 12% 11% 19% 16% N

m Bond ratings (S&P except where otherwise noted). The scale for S&P ratings for investment grade (from high to low): AAA, AA+, AA, AA-, A+, A, A-, BBB+, BBB, BBB- (other ratings are below investment grade). Los Angeles: http://cao.lacity.org/debt/ratings.pdf; New York: http://comptroller.nyc.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NYC-GO-Announcement-060315.pdf; Philadelphia: http://www.phila.gov/investor/Bond_Ratings.html; Pittsburgh: http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2014/08/08/Moody-s-raises-Pittsburgh-s-bond-rating/stories/201408080164; Chattanooga: https://performance.chattanooga.gov/dataset/S-P-Bond-Rating/d8cz-pkf3; Grand Rapids: http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/09/credit_rating_why_we_care_what.html; Cedar Rapids: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/25/moodys-drops-cedar-rapids-bond-rating-a-notch; U.S.: Scaggs, 2015. See http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-10/s-p-affirms-u-s-aa-credit-rating-maintains-stable-outlook.

n U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Quick Facts: United States. Available at http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/00. Accessed October 2, 2015.

o RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table. Each city accessed in terms of the main county or counties that comprise the area. See Appendix Table 3 for a list of these counties.

p Applies to the territory served by the principal utility company serving the city. See Electricity Local. 2015. Local Electricity Information & Resources. Online. Available at http://www.electricitylocal.com. Accessed October 12, 2016.

q Cox, W. 2014. Sustaining the City: Understanding the Role of Energy and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Sustainable Development in Major Metropolitan Areas. Ph.D. dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Tables A.1, A.11, and A.19. MMBtu = 1 million British thermal units. The U.S. figure of 312 million Btu per person is for all sectors from U.S. Department of State. 2014. U.S. Climate Action Report 2014, p. 65.

r Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium. 2013. Primary Participants Organizations. U.S. Department of Energy. Online. Available at http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/consortium-participant-list.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2015. City, either the municipality or a utility in the municipality has installed light-emitting diode (LED) street lighting.

s SAIDI represents the average amount of time per year that power supply to a customer is interrupted, expressed in minutes per customer per year. 2013 (except Cedar Rapids, which is 2011); Applies to the territory served by the principal utility company serving the city and is not coterminous with the city of metro area. The principal utility company for each city is as follows. LA: Los Angeles Department of Water & Power; NY: Consolidated Edison Co-NY Inc; Philadelphia: PECO Energy Co.; Pittsburgh: Duquesne Light Company; Chattanooga: City of Chattanooga; Grand Rapids: Consumer Energy Company; Cedar Rapids: Cedar Falls Utilities; Flint: Consumer Energy Company. Sources: EIA, 2015. http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861; http://www.iowarec.org/media/cms/EDR20110150_IPL_6963C8356CC1C.pdf; State of New York Department of Public Service, 2014.

t Percent using public transportation: http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml### Table S0804

u Calculated using walkscore.com.

v DOT. 2014b. Table 5-4: Highway, Demographic, and Geographic Characteristics of 30 Largest Urbanized Areas: 2012. Values are for Daily Vehicle Miles of Travel (DVMT) for the Federal-aid urbanized area in 2012.

w DOT. 2014a. Table 5-3: Highway Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT: 2007, 2012). U.S. figures are in billions for total annual VMT, that is, total VMT in 2012 in the U.S. was 2,968,815,000,000 across the entire year. The per capita value for the U.S. is VMT over the year. An estimated conversion to DVMT (based on 365 days of travel) would be 25.9.

x DOT. 2014b. Table 5-4: Highway, Demographic, and Geographic Characteristics of 30 Largest Urbanized Areas: 2012. Values are for Daily Vehicle Miles of Travel (DVMT) for the Federal-aid urbanized area in 2012.

y Licensed drivers by sex and ratio to population. See FHWA. 2016. Highway Statistics 2013. Online. Available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2013; VMT by urbanized area. See FHWA. 2014b. Highway Statistics Series: Highway Statistics 2010, Table HM-71. Online. Available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2010/hm71.cfm. Accessed October 12, 2015.

z U.S. Census Bureau. 2014a. Online. Available at http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml### Table S0802. Accessed January 25, 2016.

aa TTI (Travel Time Index)—The ratio of travel time in the peak period to the travel time at free-flow conditions. A value of 1.30 indicates a 20-minute free-flow trip takes 26 minutes in the peak period. Excess Fuel Consumed—Increased fuel consumption [in gallons] due to travel in congested conditions rather than free-flow conditions. Congestion Cost—Value of travel time delay (estimated at $17.67 per hour of person travel and $94.04 per hour of truck time) and excess fuel consumption (estimated using state average cost per gallon for gasoline and diesel).

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×

See Texas A&M Transportation Institute and INRIX. 2015. 2015 Urban Mobility Scorecard, p. 18. Online. Available at http://d2dtl5nnlpfr0r.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility-scorecard-2015-wappx.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2016.

bb American Public Transportation Association. 2015. Public Transportation Ridership Report: Fourth Quarter & End-Of-Year 2014. Online. Available at http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2014-q4-ridership-APTA.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2016.

cc Domestic, publicly supplied per capita use, in gallons/day. See USGS. 2014a. Estimated Use of Water in the United States County-Level Data for 2010. http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/data/2010. Accessed January 25, 2016.

dd U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Quick Facts: United States. Online. Available at http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/00. Accessed October 2, 2015.

ee U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Accessed October 2, 2015. The U.S. population density would depend upon whether or not just land area is calculated (2,959,064.44 square miles) rather than total area of land plus water (3,119,884.69 square miles for the contiguous area), and whether or not density refers to the contiguous area of 48 states or the entire nation (including Hawaii and Alaska).

ff U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Accessed October 2, 2015. Principal county(ies) representing the case-study city (see Appendix Table 3). For NYC a weighted average for the five counties (boroughs) was used. U.S. population density is for the 50 states and DC. See U.S. Census Bureau. 2010. 2010 Census Data. Online. Available at http://www.census.gov/2010census/data. Accessed April 12, 2016.

gg U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Accessed October 2, 2015. Principal county(ies) representing the case-study city (see Table 2.3). For NYC each county (borough) is listed.

hh Principal county(ies) representing the case-study city (see Table 2.3). For NYC a weighted average for the five counties (boroughs) was used. See RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2015b. Los Angeles (LO). Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org/app/california/2015/rankings/los-angeles/county/outcomes/overall/snapshot. Accessed October 12, 2015; Similar citations for the remaining seven cities. RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2015a. County Health Rankings and Roadmaps. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

ii RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table selected for each county. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

jj RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table selected for each county. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

kk U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Quick Facts: United States. Online. Available at http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/00. Accessed October 2, 2015. Principal county(ies) representing the case study city (see Appendix Table 3). For NYC a weighted average for the five counties (boroughs) was used.

ll Governing Data. 2016. Housing Affordability Burden for U.S. Cities. Online. Accessed April 7, 2016. Available at: http://www.governing.com/gov-data/economy-finance/housing-affordability-by-city-income-rental-costs.html. Drawn from U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2012 American Communities Survey. U.S. Census Bureau. 2014c. American Community Survey 2014. Online. Available at http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_14_1YR_DP04&prodType=table. Accessed April 8, 2016. MetroVancouver. 2015. Housing and Transportation Cost Burden Study. Online. Available at http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/HousingAndTransportCostBurdenReport2015.pdf. Accessed April 8, 2015. Statistics Canada. 2010. Median total income, by family type, by census metropolitan area (All census families). Online. Available at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/famil107a-eng.htm. Accessed April 8, 2016. MetroVancouver. 2010. Metro Vancouver Housing Data Book. Online. Available at http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/MV_Housing_Data_Book.pdf. Accessed April 8, 2016.

mm U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Quick Facts: United States. Online. Available at http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/00. Accessed October 2, 2015. Principal county(ies) representing the case study city (see Appendix Table 3). For NYC a weighted average for the five counties (boroughs) was used.

nn Principal county(ies) representing the case study city (see Appendix Table 3). For NYC a weighted average for the five counties (boroughs) was used. See RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2015b. Los Angeles (LO). Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org/app/california/2015/rankings/los-angeles/county/outcomes/overall/snapshot. Accessed October 12, 2015. Similar citations for the remaining seven cities. See RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2015a. Loca and Roadmaps. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

oo Data not comparable to U.S. figures.

pp FHWA. 2014a. Fatality Rate Per 100 Million Annual VMT-2013(1): Functional System, Table FI-30. Online. Available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2013/fi30.cfm. Accessed October 12, 2015. States only. Per hundred million Annual VMT. Other sources include the NHTSA Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).

qq RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015. The health indicators used represent just a few that exist nationally, for example, from the Centers for Disease Control, and also locally. New York City, for example, has produced neighborhood level values under their “Community Health Profiles” for numerous health indicators. Some are disease specific and others pertain to specific dietary habitats.

rr RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

ss RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×

REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX B

American Forests. 2000. Regional Ecosystem Analysis: Chattanooga, Tennessee Metropolitan Area: Calculating the Value of Nature. Available at http://www.systemecology.com/4_Past_Projects/AF_Chattanooga.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2016.

APTA (American Public Transportation Association). 2015. Public Transportation Ridership Report: Fourth Quarter & End-Of-Year 2014. Online. Available at http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2014-q4-ridership-APTA.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Blazina, E. 2014. Rating agency gives Pittsburgh financial outlook an upgrade. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Online. Available at http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2014/08/08/Moody-s-raises-Pittsburgh-s-bond-rating/stories/201408080164. Accessed August 26, 2016.

City Administrative Officer of Los Angeles. 2015. City of Los Angeles Debt Ratings (As of December 31, 2015). Online. Available at http://cao.lacity.org/debt/ratings.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2016.

City of Chattanooga. 2015. ChattaData. Online. Available at https://performance.chattanooga.gov/dataset/S-P-Bond-Rating/d8cz-pkf3. Accessed January 25, 2016.

City of Los Angeles. 2008. ClimateLA. EnvironmentLA. Online. Available at http://www.environmentla.org/pdf/ClimateLA%20Program%20document%2012-08.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2016.

City of New York. 2015. The City of New York Announces Successful Sale of General Obligation Bonds. Online. Available at http://comptroller.nyc.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NYC-GO-Announcement-060315.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2016.

City of Philadelphia. 2015. Investor Information. Online. Available at http://www.phila.gov/investor/Bond_Ratings.html. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Cox, W. 2014. Sustaining the City: Understanding the Role of Energy and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Sustainable Development in Major Metropolitan Areas. Ph.D. dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology.

DOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2014a. Table 5-3: Highway Vehicle-Miles Traveled (VMT): 2007, 2012. Online. Available at http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/state_transportation_statistics/state_transportation_statistics_2014/index.html/chapter5/table5-3. Accessed October 12, 2015.

DOT. 2014b. Table 5-4: Highway, Demographic, and Geographic Characteristics of 30 Largest Urbanized Areas: 2012. Online. Available at http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/state_transportation_statistics/state_transportation_statistics_2014/index.html/chapter5/table5-4. Accessed October 12, 2015.

EIA. 2015. Electric Power Sales, Revenue, and Energy Efficiency Form EIA-861 Detailed Data Files. Online. Available at http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861. Accessed October 12, 2015.

Electricity Local. 2015. Local Electricity Information & Resources. Online. Available at http://www.electricitylocal.com. Accessed October 12, 2016.

EPA. 2012. Assessed Waters of United States. Data Table. Online. Available at http://ofmpub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control. Accessed January 26, 2016.

EPA. 2015a. Air Quality Index Report. Online. Available at http://www3.epa.gov/airdata/ad_rep_aqi.html. Accessed February 5, 2016.

EPA. 2015b. National Area and County-Level Multi-Pollutant Information. Online. Available at http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/multipol.html. Accessed February 5, 2016.

EPA. 2015c. Summary Nonattainment Area Population Exposure Report. Online. Available at http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/popexp.html. Accessed February 5, 2016.

FHWA (U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration). 2014a. Fatality Rate Per 100 Million Annual VMT-2013(1): Functional System, Table FI-30. Online. Available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2013/fi30.cfm. Accessed October 12, 2015.

FHWA. 2014b. Highway Statistics Series: Highway Statistics 2010, Table HM-71. Online. Available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2010/hm71.cfm. Accessed October 12, 2015.

FHWA. 2016. Highway Statistics 2013. Online. Available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2013. Accessed October 12, 2015.

Glick, D. 1996. Cinderella story: Chattanooga transformed. Wildlife Magazine. Online. Available at https://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/National-Wildlife/News-and-Views/Archives/1996/Cinderella-Story.aspx. Accessed August 25, 2015.

Governing Data. 2016. Housing Affordability Burden for U.S. Cities. Online. Accessed April 7, 2016. Available at: http://www.governing.com/gov-data/economy-finance/housing-affordability-by-city-income-rental-costs.html.

Interstate Power and Light Company. 2012. 2011 Annual Reliability Report of Interstate Power and Light Company. Iowa Utilities Board. Online. Available at http://www.iowarec.org/media/cms/EDR20110150_IPL_6963C8356CC1C.pdf. Accessed January 28, 2016.

McPherson, E. G., J. R. Simpson, Q. Xiao, and C. Wu. 2008. Los Angeles 1-Million Tree Canopy Cover Assessment. U.S. Forest Service. Online. Available at http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr207/psw_gtr207.pdf. Accessed February 9, 2016.

MetroVancouver. 2010. Metro Vancouver Housing Data Book. Online. Available at http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/MV_Housing_Data_Book.pdf. Accessed April 8, 2016.

MetroVancouver. 2015. Housing and Transportation Cost Burden Study. Online. Available at http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/HousingAndTransportCostBurdenReport2015.pdf. Accessed April 8, 2015.

Moore, D. 2011. Ecological Footprint Analysis: San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA. Global Footprint Network. Online. Available at http://www.footprintnetwork.org/images/uploads/SF_Ecological_Footprint_Analysis.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2015.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×

Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium. 2013. Primary Participant Organizations. U.S. Department of Energy. Online. Available at http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/consortium-participant-list.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2015.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). Storm Events Database. Online. Available at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents. Accessed August 26, 2016.

NYS DPS (Department of Public Service). 2014. 2013 Electric Reliability Performance Report. NYS DPS. Online. Available at https://www3.dps.ny.gov/W/PSCWeb.nsf/96f0fec0b45a3c6485257688006a701a/d82a200687d96d3985257687006f39ca/$FILE/Service%20Reliability%20Report%202013.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2015.

RWJF (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation) and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2014. National Statistics Reference Table identified for each county. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2015a. County Health Rankings and Roadmaps. Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org. Accessed October 12, 2015.

RWJF and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. 2015b. Los Angeles (LO). Online. Available at http://www.countyhealthrankings.org/app/california/2015/rankings/los-angeles/county/outcomes/overall/snapshot. Accessed October 12, 2015.

Scaggs, A. 2015. S&P affirms U.S. AA+ credit rating, maintains stable outlook. Online. Available at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-10/s-p-affirms-u-s-aa-credit-rating-maintains-stable-outlook. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Schrank, D., B. Eisele, T. Lomax, and J. Bak. 2015. 2015 Urban Mobility Scorecard. The Texas A&M Transportation Institute and INRIX. Online. Available at http://d2dtl5nnlpfr0r.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility-scorecard-2015-wappx.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Scott, M. 2014. Credit Rating: What Went into Standard & Poor’s Grade for Grand Rapids Schools. Online. Available at http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/09/credit_rating_why_we_care_what.html. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Statistics Canada. 2010. Median Total Income, by Family Type, by Census Metropolitan Area (All Census Families). Online. Available at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/famil107a-eng.htm. Accessed April 8, 2016.

The Trust for Public Land. 2015. 2015 City Park. Online. Available at http://www.tpl.org/2015-city-park-facts. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Union of Concerned Scientists. 2014. Each Country’s Share of CO2 Emissions. Online. Available at http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html#. Accessed February 8, 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2010. 2010 Census Data. Online. Available at http://www.census.gov/2010census/data. Accessed April 12, 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2014a. American Community Survey 2014. Online. Available at http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml### Table S0802. Accessed January 25, 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2014b. American Community Survey 2014. Online. Available at http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml### Table S0804. Accessed January 25, 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2014c. American Community Survey 2014. Online. Available at http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_14_1YR_DP04&prodType=table. Accessed April 8, 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2014d. Quick Facts: United States. Online. Available at http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/00. Accessed October 2, 2015.

U.S. Climate Data. 2016. Online. Available at http://www.usclimatedata.com. Accessed February 8, 2016.

U.S. Department of State. 2014. 2014 U.S. Climate Action Report to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Online. Available at http://www.state.gov/e/oes/rls/rpts/car6/index.htm. Accessed January 25, 2016.

U.S. Forest Service. 2015. Urban Tree Canopy Assessments. Online. Available at http://gis.w3.uvm.edu/utc. Accessed October 12, 2015.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2014a. Estimated Use of Water in the United States: County-Level Data for 2010. Available at http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/data/2010. Accessed January 25, 2016.

USGS. 2014b. Landslide Overview Map of the Conterminous United States. Online. Available at http://landslides.usgs.gov/hazards/nationalmap. Accessed February 8, 2016.

USGS. 2015. National Land Cover Database 2006 (NLCD2006): Product Statistics. Online. Available at http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd06_stat.php. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Walk Score. 2015. Live Where You Love. Online. Available at https://www.walkscore.com. Accessed December 15, 2016.

The Washington Times. 2014. Moody’s drops Cedar Rapids’ bond rating a notch. Online. Available at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/25/moodys-drops-cedar-rapids-bond-rating-a-notch. Accessed January 25, 2016.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 154
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 155
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 156
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 157
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 158
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 159
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 160
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 161
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 162
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 163
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 164
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 165
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Details for Urban Sustainability Indicators." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23551.
×
Page 166
Next: Appendix C: Constraints on the Sustainability of Urban Areas »
Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities for the United States Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $69.00 Buy Ebook | $54.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Cities have experienced an unprecedented rate of growth in the last decade. More than half the world’s population lives in urban areas, with the U.S. percentage at 80 percent. Cities have captured more than 80 percent of the globe’s economic activity and offered social mobility and economic prosperity to millions by clustering creative, innovative, and educated individuals and organizations. Clustering populations, however, can compound both positive and negative conditions, with many modern urban areas experiencing growing inequality, debility, and environmental degradation.

The spread and continued growth of urban areas presents a number of concerns for a sustainable future, particularly if cities cannot adequately address the rise of poverty, hunger, resource consumption, and biodiversity loss in their borders. Intended as a comparative illustration of the types of urban sustainability pathways and subsequent lessons learned existing in urban areas, this study examines specific examples that cut across geographies and scales and that feature a range of urban sustainability challenges and opportunities for collaborative learning across metropolitan regions. It focuses on nine cities across the United States and Canada (Los Angeles, CA, New York City, NY, Philadelphia, PA, Pittsburgh, PA, Grand Rapids, MI, Flint, MI, Cedar Rapids, IA, Chattanooga, TN, and Vancouver, Canada), chosen to represent a variety of metropolitan regions, with consideration given to city size, proximity to coastal and other waterways, susceptibility to hazards, primary industry, and several other factors.

  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!