Great Lakes AOC & CSO

Great Lakes AOC & CSO

Beyond Water to Vacant Lands

Beyond Water to Vacant Lands

Remediating Water & Vacant Lands Issues With Ecosystem Services- Gained substantial attention with publication of

Costanza et al.’s 1997 Nature paper which valued the world’s ecosystem services at $16-54 trillion or 88-300% of global GDP at the time.

- “These “ecosystem services”—the storage of carbon in trees, the pollination of crops by insects—are often closely tied to the economic fortunes of the poorest in the developing world.” The Economist “The Road to Rio” 11/17/11

- “To protect its watershed, New York pays farmers in the Catskills not to develop their land.” The Economist “The world’s lungs” 9/23/10

- “The city plans to spend $660 million to preserve that watershed in good health; the alternative, a water treatment plant, would have cost $4 billion to build.” The New York Times “How Much Is Nature Worth? For You, $33 Trillion” 5/20/97

- The USDA’s Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) “Benefits”: “protects millions of acres of…topsoil from erosion and is designed to safeguard the Nation's natural resources…reducing water runoff and sedimentation…protects groundwater and helps improve the condition of lakes, rivers, ponds, and streams. Acreage…planted to resource-conserving vegetative covers, making the program a major contributor to increased wildlife populations in many parts of the country.” (CRP: Status and Current Issues, CRS Report for Congress, 9/15/2010)

- 31.3 million acres as of July 2010 (↓10.9%) at $53-129 per acre

- Already a prime example of ecosystem service efficacy and supply-side acceptance

- ''Nature's Services; Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems” by Gretchen C. Daily

Remediating Water & Vacant Land Issues With Ecosystem Services- Collective property regimes (Acheson 1988, Cole 2002):

- England’s open-field system- Andean Mountain common-field agricultural tradition- Japanese Iriachi common lands- Maine’s “harbor gangs”- Great Lakes Basin’s Vacant Lands?????

- Flood control, soil formation, pollination, food and timber production, provision of the raw material for new medicines, recreational opportunities and the maintenance of a favorable climate are among them.

Municipal Concerns

How to maintain economic viability of shrinking cities?

• Continuous economic growth may not be realistic assumption“…advance the steady state economy, with stabilized population and consumption…Continuous economic growth on a finite planet is wishful thinking…limits to growth…[including] physical and ecological principles…a way to achieve sustainability and equity in an increasingly constrained world…work[ing] closely with economists and scientists…” — Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE)

• Embrace shrinkage?“It’s reality. We’re simply recognizing and accepting the reality of what’s happened to this city over the past several years…We haven’t gone in and aggressively shut down streets, but, over time, that’s part of the plan.”— Jay Williams, Youngstown, OH

“Decline in Flint is like gravity, a fact of life. We need to control it instead of letting it control us. A lot of people remember the past, when we were a successful city that others looked to as a model, and they hope. But you can’t base government policy on hope. We have to do something drastic.”— Dan Kildee, Flint, MI

Municipal Concerns

How to maintain economic viability of shrinking cities?

• Minimize social disruption and protect property values

• Enhance vacant land fiscal condition—maximize revenues or minimize costs

• Protect and restore natural resources

Background• Revitalization efforts in Great Lakes cities

• local• small-scale• variable

• Large-scale, regional revitalization: Does it make sense? • triple bottom line: social, environmental, economic• needs research to justify investment

Income Per Capita

NR

G:G

DP

“In ecological and thermodynamicterms, all material economic ‘production’

is consumption.” – Rees (1992)

Current Monetization FrameworkWag+Stat Adj+Prof+Int+Ren = GDP = Con+Inv+Gov+(Exp–Imp)

--------------------------------------------Ecological Footprint-------------------------------------------- Total Footprint:City

Ratio Arable Land Pasture Forest Hydrocarbons Urban Water

km2 -----------------------------km2----------------------------- Cleveland 38,970 194.0 1,809 6,704 5,411 15,589 2,765 5,631

Toledo 21,341 102.2 1,198 4,439 3,583 10,323 1,831 3,729 Youngstown 3,655 41.5 279 1,034 834 2,404 426 868

Akron 13,796 85.8 830 3,077 2,484 7,156 1,269 2,585 Chicago 283,038 481.0 11,770 64,530 36,285 102,477 18,610 37,019

Erie 6,097 107.0 442 1,681 1,295 3,731 763 1,348 Pittsburgh 26,341 183.3 1,363 5,184 3,993 11,506 2,353 4,156 Rochester 16,550 178.3 926 4,246 2,603 7,899 1,441 2,853

Buffalo 17,971 170.8 1,142 5,234 3,209 9,737 1,777 3,517 Duluth 5,089 28.9 359 1,693 1,000 3,034 484 1,096

Flint 5,894 67.7 446 1,846 1,503 4,007 768 1,447 Detroit 78,640 218.7 3,643 15,085 12,281 32,739 6,279 11,827

Gary 6,070 46.7 429 2,004 1,308 3,693 708 1,334 Milwaukee 57,702 231.9 2,417 11,901 7,845 21,725 3,798 7,848 Hamilton 17,242 75.7 2,746 1,857 2,382 9,449 808 2,827 Windsor 7,397 50.4 1,178 797 1,022 4,054 346 1,213 Toronto 85,542 135.8 13,623 9,215 11,820 46,878 4,007 14,023

Headline Vs. Real Spread Growing Wider• “Distinctions must be kept in mind between quantity and quality of growth, between costs and returns, and between the short and long run. Goals for more growth should specify more growth of what and for what.” — Simon Kuznets, New Republic, 1962

• Expropriating distant “elsewheres”

Future Monetization FrameworkGDP = Con + Inv + Gov + (Exp – Imp)

6CO2+6H2O↔C6H12O6+6O2

Organic C, N, P Mineral C, N, P

Mowing, pruning, animal control, security, trash pickup with ↓/↔ ROI

Biomass/rash to landfills ($21.44 million annually); disease; NO3

2-, NH4

+, PO42-, etc. to Sewer/CSO

Precipitation N, P, and S-Toledo & Cleveland = 822 NO3

2-, 368 NH4+, 1,175 SO4

2-, 1,930 PO4

2- Gallons Sq. Mile-1,462 N, 23,366 P, and 731 Tons K as Fertilizer

Huge Potential to be Monetized, Create Jobs, Stabilize Sewer Treatment Budgets & Real-Estate Values, Clean Air, Ameliorate “Heat Island” Effect

• Municipal compost to replenish/remediate vacant lands would generate $24.23 million in revenue, 7,352 jobs, $182-311 and $4.37-7.45 million in wages and taxes, and would offset 6.65 MT CO2 or 31% of N Ohio’s urban per capita emissions

• N Ohio’s urban trees provide $3.6-22.4 million in pollutant remediation

Potential Restoration Strategies

• Constructed Wetlands

--------------------Organic-------------------- -----------Mineral-----------CO2 Carbon Nitrogen Phosphoru

sNitroge

nPhosphorus Deposition

Tons yr-1 ------------------------------------kg yr-1------------------------------------Cleveland 7,774 1,923,316 6,225 48.720 3,498 29,130

Toledo 8,079 1,998,947 6,470 50.636 3,636 31,466Youngstow

n3,405 842,468 2,727 21.341 1,644 5,589

Akron 6,222 1,539,419 4,983 38.996 3,004 18,662Chicago 22,768 5,633,047 18,233 142.693 11,321 249,876

Erie 2,206 545,690 1,766 13.823 1,443 2,345Pittsburgh 5,560 1,375,712 4,453 34.849 2,684 14,904Rochester 4,617 1,142,429 3,698 28.939 2,797 10,278

Buffalo 4,071 1,007,132 3,260 25.512 2,663 7,988Duluth 6,814 1,685,893 5,457 42.706 392 22,382

Flint 3,370 833,852 2,699 21.123 1,091 5,475Detroit 57,289 14,174,115 45,879 359.050 32,047 1,582,086

Gary 5,034 1,245,512 4,031 31.551 3,511 12,216Milwaukee 9,627 2,381,887 7,710 60.337 5,685 44,677Hamilton 6,447 1,595,039 5,163 40.405 4,218 20,035Windsor 4,159 1,029,105 3,331 26.069 2,327 8,340Toronto 17,837 4,413,150 14,284 111.791 8,869 153,368

• Agroforestry (aka, carbon farming)

• Strategies:

• intercropping, black walnut, silvopastoral, windbreaks, biofuels (Current urban tree estimate NTFB $199 million or $202 per capita annually)

• R&D:

• biological processes, erosion control, wildlife, vacant lands, specialty products, fine hardwoods, waste application, biomass and pulp

•

•Versus conventional farming:

NE Ohio vacant land back-of-the-envelope

• Increase (+) = 702 tons harvest, 687 tons N Inputs, 21,599 labor hours, $809,955 Net Revenue

• Decrease (-) = 4,759,236 kW of non-solar NRG inputs, 107 tons fertilizer, 48 tons N losses, 19,047 tons soil loss

Potential Restoration Strategies

• Agroforestry (aka, carbon farming)

• Benefits:• Reduce wind/H2O erosion• Reduce N2 fixation (offset tremendous urban N2O

emissions)• Reduce leaf decay• Increase yields due to reduced winds, cooler

temps, and less evapotranspiration• Energy savings of 15-30%• Bee/butterfly habitat ($75-188 million demand

value/$107 million supply value; $6.23 million in fruit & grain value; 16-40 plant species; 1.35-3.37 bird species)

• Shade for livestock• Absorb greenhouse gases¶

•

•

Potential Restoration Strategies

¶ From Fisher 2011: “[IPCC]…states that natural forests hold the greatest carbon storage potential…among managed systems, agroforestry systems top the list, followed by managed forests, and agricultural lands.” — USDA Secretary Vilsack’s “all lands” management speech

Mu

lti-

Sto

ry F

arm

ing

• Uneven or Even-Aged Forestry

• Uneven:

• More Continuous supply of NTFB and TFB revenue (High Value Crops), precipitation infiltration, Heat Island alleviation, carbon/nitrogen (NO3- & NH4+)/phosphorus (PO4

2-) sequestration → Reaches asymptote w/in 50 years

• Even-Aged:

• More Discrete supply of NTFB and TFB revenue (Low Value Crops), precipitation infiltration, Heat Island alleviation, carbon/nitrogen (NO3- & NH4+)/phosphorus (PO4

2-) sequestration → Never really reaches asymptote constantly being replanted

•

Potential Restoration Strategies

Tree Potential On Vacant Lands

Hardwood Plantations:• High value product, well-paying jobs, high above-

and belowground CO2 sequestration, stormwater remediation

$ and Jobs (Cleveland, Toledo, Youngstown, Akron):• Years 1-12 – Chestnut $682 million & 18,596 jobs;

Black Walnut $515 million & 14,026 jobs; Red Oak $124 million & 3,369 jobs

• Years 12-19 – Chestnut $1.71 billion & 46.477 jobs; Black Walnut $1.48 billion & 40,408 jobs

Softwood Plantations:• Biofuels/Pulp/Paper, well-paying jobs, high above-

and belowground CO2 sequestration, stormwater remediation

$ and Jobs (Cleveland, Toledo, Youngstown, Akron):

• Hybrid Poplar• Years 1-8 – $2.41 billion & 65,781 jobs• Years 1-14 – $562 million & 15,332 jobs• Years 1-18 – $509 million & 13,865 jobs

• Red Pine• Years 1-27 – $65 million & 1,780 jobs

• White Pine• Years 1-27 – $49 million & 1,355 jobs

Tree Potential On Vacant Lands

Uneven or Even-Aged Forestry

Uneven:

-Continues supply of NTFB and TFB revenue (High Value Crops), precipitation infiltration, Heat Island alleviation, carbon/nitrogen/phosphorus sequestration → Reaches asymptote w/in 50 years

Even:

-Discrete supply of NTFB and TFB revenue (Low Value Crops), precipitation infiltration, Heat Island alleviation, carbon/nitrogen/phosphorus sequestration → Never really reaches asymptote constantly being replanted

ReorganizationRenewal

Conservation

ReleaseGrowthExploitation

Weak StrongConnectedness

Sto

red

Cap

ital

Lit

tle

Mu

ch

Modified from Holling’s “Adaptive Cycle” (1987, 1992)

Potential Restoration Strategies

Uneven or Even-Aged Forestry

Uneven:

-Continues supply of NTFB and TFB revenue (High Value Crops), precipitation infiltration, Heat Island alleviation, carbon/nitrogen/phosphorus sequestration → Reaches asymptote w/in 50 years

Even:

-Discrete supply of NTFB and TFB revenue (Low Value Crops), precipitation infiltration, Heat Island alleviation, carbon/nitrogen/phosphorus sequestration → Never really reaches asymptote constantly being replanted

ReorganizationRenewal

Conservation

ReleaseGrowthExploitation

Weak StrongConnectedness

Sto

red

Cap

ital

Lit

tle

Mu

ch

Modified from Holling’s “Adaptive Cycle” (1987, 1992)

Schumpeter’s “Creative Destruction”re-imagined to yield “constant capital stock”

Potential Restoration Strategies

Current Costs• Retention and Runoff Currently

Precipitation:

-808 kg km2 yr-1

Runoff:

-530 million gallons mi2 yr-1

Health Costs to Be Alleviated By Vacant Land Restoration

CO2:

-$1.94 billion annually ($449 & $255 million from production & manufacturing)

Deaths & Emergency Room:

-1,195 deaths annually (1,002 non-infant & 193 infants); 6,965 Asthma admissions at cost of $216 million

Other:

-$1.06 & $1.41 billion due to physical inactivity and alcohol abuse; $146 million Heat Wave

OverviewHow this group can be involved:• Feedback, Participation, Economic

Equivalents or Proxies on Vacant Land

Examples:• Great Lakes Ag/Resource Econ Assoc

(GLAREA) Land Use Policy Workshop

Four fundamental questions:• Appropriate role of Social Science in land

conservation and development policy?• Why, where, when does land conversion occur?• What are land conversion & conservation

implications for property values/taxes, and vice versa?

• What are practical relationships among urban amenities, character, and policies designed to protect, create, or transform them?

Triple-Bottom Line Approach

• Social, economic, environmental concerns• Institutional, short- Vs. long-term, health, etc.

Cleveland Federal Reserve Inaugural Community Survey Top 3 Issues¶:

• Availability of Local Employment Opportunities, Vacant Properties, Budgetary Cuts and Financing Issues at the State Level

• “Federal budget cuts will cripple our operations.”• “No jobs, no income, no credit, no housing.”• “There is no apparent job growth to replace the elimination

of public-sector and service-sector jobs lost because of budget shortfalls”

• “New business and jobs must be at the top of every list. Suitable business development for small and rural communities is critical for this region, and appropriate tactics must be employed to address this issue. Entrepreneurship, rural business development (including farming), small-scale manufacturing, alternative energy, traditional energy, tourism, food, and technology-based businesses must be developed from within to stabilize and grow these communities.”

¶ Others included home foreclosures, quality K-12 education, small business loans,federal and local budgetary cuts, affordable housing, credit scores