DRAFT EPA/600/R-15/312 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE External Review Draft June 2016 www.epa.gov/research Evaluating Urban Resilience to Climate Change: A Multi-Sector Approach NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT IS A PRELIMINARY DRAFT. It has not been formally released by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and should not at this stage be construed to represent Agency policy. It is being circulated for comment on its technical accuracy and policy implications. National Center for Environmental Assessment Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC 20460 DISCLAIMER This document is distributed solely for the purpose of pre-dissemination peer review under applicable information quality guidelines. It has not been formally disseminated by EPA. It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency determination or policy. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy. ii DRAFT―DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................ viii PREFACE ............................................................................................................................x AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS, AND REVIEWERS ..................................................... xi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. xii 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................1 1.1. MOTIVATION FOR A CLIMATE CHANGE AND URBAN RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK .......................................................................1 1.2. THE DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL POLICY CONTEXT ................5 1.3. OVERVIEW OF THE EPA CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ........................5 2. BACKGROUND TO CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND TOOL DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................................9 2.1. MULTICRITERIA ASSESSMENT AND MIXED METHODS ....................10 2.2. QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE INDICATOR DEVELOPMENT .11 2.2.1. Qualitative Indicator (Question) Development ....................................12 2.2.2. Quantitative Indicator Selection ..........................................................17 2.3. EXAMPLES OF THRESHOLDS FROM PEER-REVIEWED LITERATURE .................................................................................................18 2.4. EXAMPLE OF THRESHOLDS FROM GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS .........................................................................................19 2.5. EXAMPLES OF USING QUARTILES TO ASSIGN THRESHOLDS .........20 2.6. DATA GATHERING APPROACH ................................................................21 3. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................22 3.1. VISUALIZING RESILIENCE ........................................................................22 3.2. THE UTILITY OF QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS ..........................................24 3.3. INDICATORS OF RESILIENCE AND THEIR THRESHOLDS ..................25 3.4. SPECIFIC CHALLENGES IDENTIFIED THROUGH TOOL APPLICATION ...............................................................................................26 3.4.1. Discussions with Experts and Gathering City-Specific Knowledge ....26 3.4.2. Lack of Data and Spatial/Temporal Data Variability ..........................27 3.4.3. Sector Interconnectivity .......................................................................30 3.4.4. Revisions to Questions and Indicators .................................................30 3.4.5. Threshold Setting .................................................................................31 3.4.6. Integrating Qualitative Information .....................................................31 3.5. FUTURE STEPS .............................................................................................32 APPENDIX A. TECHNICAL STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS..........................34 APPENDIX B. WASHINGTON, DC CASE STUDY ......................................................38 This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy. iii DRAFT―DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE CONTENTS (continued) APPENDIX C. WORCESTER, MA CASE STUDY ........................................................82 APPENDIX D. COMPARISON OF RESULTS FOR WASHINGTON, DC AND WORCESTER, MA ...............................................................................109 APPENDIX E. QUALITATIVE INDICATORS (QUESTIONS) ..................................114 APPENDIX F. QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS..........................................................193 APPENDIX G. PARTICIPANTS ....................................................................................299 APPENDIX H. AGENDAS FOR WORKSHOPS IN WASHINGTON, DC .................303 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................307 This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy. iv DRAFT―DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE LIST OF TABLES 1. Example frameworks to assess community resilience to climate change ................3 2. Potential climate changes of concern for urban areas ............................................12 3. Water sector questions related to drought sensitivity, response, and learning ......15 4. Example question and indicator from urban resilience tool ..................................17 5. Macroinvertebrate index of biotic condition thresholds ........................................18 6. Palmer drought severity index (PDSI) thresholds .................................................19 7. Physical habitat index thresholds ...........................................................................20 8. Mobility management (yearly congestion costs saved by operational treatments per capita) thresholds and scores ...........................................................................20 9. Percentage access to transportation stops thresholds and scores ...........................21 10. Worcester, MA data availability ............................................................................28 11. Quantitative Data Limitations ................................................................................29 12. Major weather events and their impacts in the District of Columbia since 2003 ..41 13. Major weather and other events and their impacts in Worcester, MA ..................84 14. Washington, DC and Worcester, MA metrics at-a-glance ..................................110 This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy. v DRAFT―DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE LIST OF FIGURES 1. Urban climate resilience framework ........................................................................6 2. Example quadrant plot ...........................................................................................23 3. Washington, DC. Average question resilience and importance ............................58 4. Washington, DC. Average indicator resilience and importance ............................59 5. Washington, DC. Question quadrant mapping ......................................................61 6. Washington, DC. Indicator quadrant mapping ......................................................62 7. Washington, DC economy sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping ......63 8. Washington, DC energy sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping ..........65 9. Washington, DC land use/land cover sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping..................................................................................................................67 10. Washington, DC natural environment sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping..................................................................................................................70 11. Washington, DC people sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping ..........72 12. Washington, DC telecommunications sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping..................................................................................................................75 13. Washington, DC transportation sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping..................................................................................................................77 14. Washington, DC water sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping ............80 15. Worcester, MA. Average question resilience and importance ..............................89 16: Worcester, MA. Average indicator resilience and importance ..............................90 17. Worcester, MA. Question quadrant mapping ........................................................91 18. Worcester, MA. Indicator quadrant mapping ........................................................92 19. Worcester, MA economy sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping ........93 20. Worcester, MA energy sector. Question and indicator quadrant mapping ............95 21. Worcester, MA land use/land cover sector.