DOCSLIB.ORG

A Network and Landscape Analysis of Environmental and Diversity Organizations in Durham and Orange Counties, North Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Network and Landscape Analysis of Environmental and Diversity Organizations in Durham and Orange Counties, North Carolina A Network and Landscape Analysis of Environmental and Diversity Organizations in Durham and Orange Counties, North Carolina By: Emma Fulop and Bhargavi Karumuri Duke University | Nicholas School of the Environment April 26, 2019 Faculty Advisor: Dr. Nicolette Cagle, PhD Masters Project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Environmental Management degree in the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University Acknowledgements We would like to thank our advisor, Dr. Nicki Cagle, for her support throughout this process and her dedication to furthering DEI initiatives in her work and in the Nicholas School. Dr. Mozhgon Rajaee, Dr. Jim Moody and Dr. Randy Kramer provided valuable assistance with our tools and analysis. Thank you all for your insight and encouragement. And lastly, we want to thank our survey respondents and community partners, without whom this project would not have been possible. 1 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 5 Trends in the Environmental Movement .................................................................................... 5 Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Environment .................................................................... 6 Representation in Environmental Organizations ....................................................................... 7 Collective Impact ......................................................................................................................... 8 Durham and Orange Counties as a Case Study............................................................................... 9 Network and Landscape Analysis Project ....................................................................................... 9 Research Questions .................................................................................................................. 10 Methods ........................................................................................................................................ 10 Methodological Literature Review ........................................................................................... 10 Network Analysis .................................................................................................................. 10 Landscape Analysis ............................................................................................................... 11 Defining Sampling Process ........................................................................................................ 11 Survey Design and Expert Review ............................................................................................. 11 Informational Interviews ...................................................................................................... 11 Expert Review ....................................................................................................................... 12 Target Population ..................................................................................................................... 12 Organizational Criteria .......................................................................................................... 13 Data Collection .......................................................................................................................... 13 Timeline of Implementation ..................................................................................................... 13 Coding ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Methods of Analysis .................................................................................................................. 14 Results ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Response Rate ........................................................................................................................... 15 Landscape Analysis ................................................................................................................... 15 Summary Statistics ................................................................................................................ 15 Locations Served ................................................................................................................... 17 Organizational Diversity ........................................................................................................ 18 Communities Served ............................................................................................................. 20 Organizational Focus ............................................................................................................. 21 2 Regional Focus ...................................................................................................................... 22 Network Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 22 Density .................................................................................................................................. 23 In-degree as a Measure of Centrality ................................................................................... 24 Collaboration between Types of Organizations ................................................................... 26 Relationships within the Network ........................................................................................ 28 Organizational Attributes .......................................................................................................... 35 Discussion...................................................................................................................................... 36 Composition of Typical Respondents in the Network .............................................................. 36 Populations Served ................................................................................................................... 36 Network Trends ........................................................................................................................ 37 Density .................................................................................................................................. 37 Cross-collaboration ............................................................................................................... 38 Relationship Characteristics .................................................................................................. 39 Strengthening Collective Impact ............................................................................................... 39 Limitations................................................................................................................................. 40 Overall Recommendations........................................................................................................ 41 Consider power dynamics ..................................................................................................... 41 Identify partners that already work with communities of interest ...................................... 42 Identify organizational assets and resources ....................................................................... 43 Diversify staff and governing boards .................................................................................... 43 Adopt goals that lead to systemic change ............................................................................ 43 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 44 Citations ........................................................................................................................................ 45 Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 50 Survey Instrument..................................................................................................................... 50 Interview Questions .............................................................................................................. 68 Network Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 68 Measurements of Success .................................................................................................... 77 Landscape Analysis ................................................................................................................... 78 Staff Demographics ............................................................................................................... 86 Organization Size .................................................................................................................. 96 Organization Age ................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Voice of the Haw the Haw River Assembly April 2010 P.O
    Voice of the Haw The Haw River Assembly April 2010 P.O. Box 187 • Bynum, NC 27228 • (919) 542-5790 email: [email protected] • www.hawriver.org The Haw River Festival is celebrating its 21st year of exceptional local music, environmental education activities, local art, and unique children’s activities. This event is one of the Triangle region’s premiere outdoor spring environmental festivals. After 20 years in Bynum, we are moving upriver this year to the charming village of Saxapahaw, a one-of- a-kind mill village on the edge of the Friday mighty Haw River in Alamance County! April 30th, Please join us on the first weekend in May 6:30 pm - 9:30 pm to celebrate the presence of spring, the Haw River Film Festival with a kindheartedness of community, and the fabulous dinner by the Saxapahaw General river we treasure so much! Store chefs. Suggested donation $15 Film schedule and more info available online at This year, we are also expanding the www.HawRiver.org and www.RivermillVillage.com celebration into a full weekend of events, with all proceeds and donations benefit- Saturday May 1: ting the Haw River Assembly. See the All Day - Saxapahaw Open House, with tours of new mill full schedule of events at left. construction Our May 1 Haw River Festival, with free 10 am Poker Paddle with Haw River Canoe & Kayak Co. admission, will be a day for the whole Email [email protected] to reserve a spot. family to enjoy, with fun catching critters 1 - 8 pm Haw River Festival Free admission! down at the Haw River, live music, kids’ 8 pm Dance Party at the Paperhand Puppet Studio activities & guided canoe rides, nature walks, rain garden plant sale, river Sunday May 2: monitoring, kayak raffle, farmer’s market, 8 am Peddle & Paddle with craft sales, live art auction, & much more! Haw River Canoe & Our lineup of performers features: Kayak Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-05 138
    Chapter 5 - Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-05 Includes New Hope Creek, Northeast Creek and Jordan Reservoir 5.1 Water Quality Overview This subbasin includes large sections of the City of Subbasin 03-06-05 at a Glance Durham and Research Triangle Park. New Hope Creek and many of its tributaries are within the geological Land and Water Area (sq. mi.) Total area: 269 formation of the Triassic Basin, an area that covers about Land area: 251 1,100 square miles. The 7Q10 values are zero for all but Water area: 18 the largest watersheds. A large percentage of land use within this subbasin is urban and built-up. A map of the Population Statistics subbasin, including water quality sampling locations, is 1990 Est. Pop.: 102,058 people 2 presented in Figure B-5. Pop. Density: 407 person/mi Land Cover (%) Biological ratings for these sample locations are presented Forest/Wetland: 78.2 in Table B-5. The current sampling resulted in impaired Surface Water: 8.2 ratings for two streams in this subbasin. Refer to Urban: 6.4 Appendix III for a complete listing of monitored waters Cultivated Crop: 0.6 and use support ratings. See Section A, Chapter 3, Table Pasture/ Managed Herbaceous: 6.6 A-31 for a summary of lakes use support data. Use Support Ratings There are eight permitted dischargers in the subbasin. Freshwater Streams: Two facilities have permitted flows of greater than 1 MGD. These facilities discharge to Northeast Creek Fully Supporting: 52.5 mi. (Durham County Triangle WWTP) and New Hope Creek Partially Supporting: 39.9 mi.
    [Show full text]
  • State Parks and Development of the Raleigh
    “GREEN MEANS GREEN, NOT ASPHALT-GRAY”: STATE PARKS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE RALEIGH METROPOLITAN AREA, 1936-2016 By GREGORY L. POWELL Bachelor of Arts in History Virginia Polytechnic Institute Blacksburg, Virginia 2002 Master of Arts in History Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, Arizona 2007 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May, 2017 “GREEN MEANS GREEN, NOT ASPHALT-GRAY”: STATE PARKS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE RALEIGH METROPOLITAN AREA, 1936-2016 Dissertation Approved: Dr. William S. Bryans ________________________________________________ Dissertation Adviser Dr. Michael F. Logan ________________________________________________ Dr. John Kinder ________________________________________________ Dr. Tom Wikle ________________________________________________ ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I was fortunate to receive much valuable assistance throughout the process of researching, writing, and editing this dissertation and would like to extend my appreciation to the following people. My family has been unbelievably patient over the years and I want to thank my wife, Heather, and parents, Arthur and Joy, for their unwavering support. I would also like to thank my children, Vincent and Rosalee, for providing the inspiration for the final push, though they may not understand that yet. The research benefitted from the knowledge and suggestions of archivists, librarians, and staff of several institutions. The folks at the Louis Round Wilson Library at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, particularly those working in the Southern Historical Collection and North Carolina Collection, the David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Duke University, and the Z. Smith Reynolds Library at Wake Forest University, and the North Carolina State Archives deserve praise for their professionalism assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • Form-Based Solutions for Watershed Protection
    Form-based Solutions for Watershed Protection: A case study of the Jordan Lake Nutrient Strategy in North Carolina By Hannah Elizabeth Berg A Master’s Project submitted to the faculty the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Regional Planning in the Department of City and Regional Planning. Chapel Hill 2009 Approved by: ______________________________________ ____________________________________ ADVISOR READER (optional) Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Background ........................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Watershed Urbanization ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................................... 8 Water Quality Protection through Watershed Planning Strategies .......................................................... 9 Smart Growth Development Management ........................................................................................................ 10 Compact Development: New urban traditional neighborhood design .................................................
    [Show full text]
  • B. Everett Jordan Reservoir (Jordan Lake) 2014-2016 Triennial Report. Cape Fear River Basin HUC: 0303000206 WS-IV,B;NSW,CA
    B. Everett Jordan Reservoir (Jordan Lake) 2014-2016 Triennial Report. Cape Fear River Basin HUC: 0303000206 WS-IV,B;NSW,CA North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Water Sciences Section Intensive Survey Unit May 2018 NC Division of Water Resources Water Sciences Section May 21, 2018 Memorandum To: Environmental Review Commission CC: Joint Legislative Oversight Committee Fiscal Research Division From: Taryn Davis Through: Eric Morris Subject: B. Everett Jordan Reservoir (Jordan Lake) 2014-2016 Triennial Report Purpose: The objective of this review is to evaluate progress in reducing nutrient and nutrient-related pollution in B. Everett Jordan Reservoir (WS-IV,B;NSW,CA), as required by the Jordan Water Supply Nutrient Strategy (15A NCAC 02B.0262) (i.e. the “Jordan Lake Rules”). Pursuant to SL 2009-216 Sec. 3(c), this report summarizes results of samples collected from January 2014 through December 2016. Water Sciences Section 2 Intensive Survey Unit Division of Water Resources B. Everett Jordan Reservoir Triennial Report 2014-2016 Cape Fear River Basin HUC: 0303000206 Background: B. Everett Jordan Reservoir (Jordan Lake) is a multipurpose reservoir constructed in Chatham County and filled in the late 1981. Major tributaries to the lake include the Haw River, New Hope Creek, and Morgan Creek. Constructed by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for flood control, this lake is used extensively for primary and secondary recreational activities and as a water supply for several municipalities. Ninety percent of the annual inflow to the lake comes from the Haw River. This arm of the lake has an average hydraulic retention time of five days1.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats for Orange County, North Carolina
    Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats for Orange County, North Carolina Dawson Sather and Stephen Hall (1988) Updated by Bruce Sorrie and Rich Shaw (2004) December 2004 Orange County Environment & Resource Conservation Department North Carolina Natural Heritage Program NC Natural Heritage Trust Fund Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats for Orange County, North Carolina Dawson Sather and Stephen Hall (1988) Updated by Bruce Sorrie and Rich Shaw (2004) December 2004 Orange County Environment & Resource Conservation Department North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Funded by Orange County, North Carolina NC Natural Heritage Trust Fund Prepared by Rich Shaw and Margaret Jones Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department Hillsborough, North Carolina For further information or to order copies of the inventory, please contact: Orange County ERCD P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 919/245-2590 or The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program 1601 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents Page PREFACE....................................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 1 Information Sources............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Landscape Plan Wildlife Habitat Connectivity
    A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR WILDLIFE HABITAT CONNECTIVITY IN THE ENO RIVER AND NEW HOPE CREEK WATERSHEDS, NORTH CAROLINA COVERING PORTIONS OF ORANGE, DURHAM, CHATHAM, AND WAKE COUNTIES A Partners for Green Growth project funded by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and Orange County, NC, and administered by the North Carolina Botanical Garden Foundation, Inc. Prepared by Julie Tuttle, Project Ecologist and Coordinator Brooke Massa, Olivia Munzer, Rich Shaw, Sara Childs, and Johnny Randall in collaboration with the steering, policy, and technical committees and members of the Eno-New Hope Landscape Conservation Group December 2019 Front and back cover photo credit: David Blevins Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge: The Partners for Green Growth Program of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and Orange County, North Carolina, for funding this project. The North Carolina Botanical Garden Foundation, Inc., for administering the project. The North Carolina Botanical Garden for generous provision of meeting space. Sara Childs from the Office of the Duke Forest at Duke University for generous provision of virtual space for storage and sharing of data and documents. Members of the Eno-New Hope Landscape Conservation Group for sharing their time, expertise, insight, advice, and collaboration on all aspects of this project, especially: Brooke Massa and Olivia Munzer of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Johnny Randall of the North Carolina Botanical Garden Stephen Hall of the North Carolina Biodiversity
    [Show full text]
  • New Hope Creek and Little Creek Watershed Improvement Plan
    DRAFT-Volume I New Hope Creek and Little Creek Executive Summary Watershed Improvement Plan Durham, North Carolina June 2021 PREPARED FOR: City of Durham Public Works Department Stormwater & GIS Services Division 101 City Hall Plaza, Third Floor Durham, North Carolina 27701 This page intentionally left blank. New Hope Creek and Little Creek Watershed Improvement Plan City of Durham Stormwater & GIS Services Division Public Works Department 101 City Hall Plaza, Third Floor Durham, North Carolina 27701 This page intentionally left blank. Acknowledgments The AECOM Team received assistance from many individuals while completing the Watershed Improvement Plan for the New Hope Creek and Little Creek Watershed Improvement Plan, including the following: City of Durham Team Paul Wiebke, Assistant Director, Public Works Sara Schwarzer Lance Fontaine, Project Manager J.V. Loperfido Sandra Wilbur, Engineering Manager Jonathan Baker Megan Walsh Michelle Woolfolk Laura Smith Joseph Smith Jeff Lecky Travis Marion Erin Harrison Cory Caddell Antwon Williams Sean McKnight AECOM Team AECOM Technical Services of North Carolina Brian Jacobson, Project Manager Brad Courtney Sujit Ekka, Deputy Project Manager Beth Kerby Hayden Strickling Laurie Huber Jonathan Lewis Wildlands Engineering Three Oaks Engineering Jeff Keaton Suzanne Young Carolyn Lanza Tom Dickinson Abigail Vieira Diana Young-Paiva Meghan Makoid Kimley-Horn Kate Monteith Sevick Beth Reed Lizzy Stokes-Cawley Jennifer Murphy Lillian Lovingood Andrew Jones Jared Hodes Davenport Brian Spiro Matt Michel
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Cape Fear River Basin Conservation and Restoration Analysis and Strategy
    2012 Upper Cape Fear River Basin Conservation and Restoration Analysis and Strategy Photo from Haw River Assembly Triangle J Council of Governments Piedmont Triad Regional Council September 2012 This page intentionally left blank. This Project Was Supported with North Carolina Division of Water Quality 205(j)/604(b) funds Contributors Piedmont Triad Regional Council Malinda Ford GIS Manager Cy Stober Water Resources Manager Elizabeth Jernigan Stormwater Education & Outreach Coordinator Triangle J Council of Governments Heather Saunders Benson Water Resources Senior Planner Mike Schlegel Water Resources Program Manager Table of Contents Project Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 Methods .................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Stress Raster Creation ............................................................................................................................... 4 Conservation Raster Creation .............................................................................................................. 13 Stress HUC Groupings .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lake & Reservoir Assessments Cape Fear River Basin
    LAKE & RESERVOIR ASSESSMENTS CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN University Lake Intensive Survey Unit Environmental Sciences Section Division of Water Quality June 4, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... 2 FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... 4 TABLES ............................................................................................................................ 5 GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................... 6 OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 8 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 8 ASSESSMENT BY 8-Digit HUC HUC 03030002 Reidsville Lake ...................................................................................................... 10 Lake Hunt .............................................................................................................. 11 Lake Brandt ........................................................................................................... 12 Lake Townsend ..................................................................................................... 13 Lake Higgins ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NCDOT STIP #U-5774 NC 54 Corridor Improvements Concurrence Point 2A
    NCDOT STIP #U-5774 54 NC 54 Corridor Improvements Concurrence Point 2A Concurrence Point 2A Bridging and Alignment Review April 23, 2019 NC 54 Corridor Improvements | U-5774 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Description ................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need .................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Detailed Study Alternatives ...................................................................................................... 2 2. Bridging and Alignment Review ....................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Site 1 ........................................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Site 3 ........................................................................................................................................ 6 2.3 Site 8 ........................................................................................................................................ 7 2.4 Site 9 ........................................................................................................................................ 8 2.5 Site 10 .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Cape Fear RBRP
    Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 What is a River Basin Restoration Priority? 1 Criteria for Selecting a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 2 Cape Fear River Basin Overview 3 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Goals 3 Cape Fear River Basin TLW Overview 5 Targeted Local Watershed Summary Table 6 Cape Fear River Basin Target Local Watershed Maps 9 Discussion of Cape Fear River Basin TLWs 11 Information on Watersheds with removed TLW designation 76 References 77 For More Information 78 Definitions 79 This Document was developed by Michele Drostin and Mike Herrmann Watershed Planners, NCEEP Cover Photo: Jumping Run Creek Restoration Project, Harnett County Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009 4 Introduction This document, prepared by the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), presents a description of Targeted Local Watersheds within the Cape Fear River Basin. This is an update of the original document developed in 2001 by the Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP), Watershed Restoration Plan for the Cape Fear River Basin. The 2001 plan selected 46 Hydrologic Units (HUs) to be targeted for stream, wetland, and riparian buffer restoration and protection and watershed planning efforts (i.e., Targeted Local Watersheds or TLWs). In this update, 25 TLWs are detailed as additional targets for restoration and preservation efforts in the Cape Fear River Basin along with 3 HUs identified as TLWs in 2001 that will have that status removed. In addition to updating the Watershed Restoration Plan for the Cape Fear River Basin (2001), this report complements information found in the 2005 Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
    [Show full text]