A FRAMEWORK FOR EQUITABLE INVESTMENT

C. Tu, Richard A. Marcantonio
{"title":"A FRAMEWORK FOR EQUITABLE INVESTMENT","authors":"C. Tu, Richard A. Marcantonio","doi":"10.5070/BP328133861","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since 2012, California has generated billions of dollars from its market-based green- house gas emissions reduction program, commonly known as Cap-and-Trade. These rev- enues, deposited in the state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), must be invest- ed in projects that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions while maximizing benefits for disadvantaged communities and households. SB 535 (de Leon 2012), as amended by AB 1550 (Gomez 2016), requires at least thirty-five percent of these revenues to be invested in projects that benefit disadvantaged community residents and low-income households and communities. Implementing these statutory requirements has been the work of a coalition of policy-advocacy and organizing groups, who have too often seen public in- vestment in environmental justice communities fail to meet the needs of low-income residents of color—or worse yet, actually harm them. This article presents the“ disad- vantaged community benefits” framework that this coalition developed, which is now incorporated in large part into statewide guidelines on climate investments. The frame- work offers a four-step process for evaluating whether a project meaningfully benefits a disadvantaged community: (1) whether a project meets an important need identified by underserved residents (2) in a way that provides them a significant benefit and (3) targets its benefits primarily to low-income people while (4) avoiding substantial burdens on a disadvantaged community. This article discusses the genesis of this framework and its importance in enabling local residents to shape investment decisions in their commu- nities, and then assesses a GGRF investment in affordable housing according to this framework. A key lesson of California’s experience in directing climate investments to benefit disadvantaged communities is that the same investments that promote the state’s climate goals are also helping to tackle the crisis of extreme inequality.","PeriodicalId":39937,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Planning Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5070/BP328133861","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Berkeley Planning Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/BP328133861","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Since 2012, California has generated billions of dollars from its market-based green- house gas emissions reduction program, commonly known as Cap-and-Trade. These rev- enues, deposited in the state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), must be invest- ed in projects that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions while maximizing benefits for disadvantaged communities and households. SB 535 (de Leon 2012), as amended by AB 1550 (Gomez 2016), requires at least thirty-five percent of these revenues to be invested in projects that benefit disadvantaged community residents and low-income households and communities. Implementing these statutory requirements has been the work of a coalition of policy-advocacy and organizing groups, who have too often seen public in- vestment in environmental justice communities fail to meet the needs of low-income residents of color—or worse yet, actually harm them. This article presents the“ disad- vantaged community benefits” framework that this coalition developed, which is now incorporated in large part into statewide guidelines on climate investments. The frame- work offers a four-step process for evaluating whether a project meaningfully benefits a disadvantaged community: (1) whether a project meets an important need identified by underserved residents (2) in a way that provides them a significant benefit and (3) targets its benefits primarily to low-income people while (4) avoiding substantial burdens on a disadvantaged community. This article discusses the genesis of this framework and its importance in enabling local residents to shape investment decisions in their commu- nities, and then assesses a GGRF investment in affordable housing according to this framework. A key lesson of California’s experience in directing climate investments to benefit disadvantaged communities is that the same investments that promote the state’s climate goals are also helping to tackle the crisis of extreme inequality.
公平投资框架
自2012年以来,加州已经从其基于市场的温室气体减排计划中产生了数十亿美元的收入,该计划通常被称为“总量控制与交易”。这些收入存放在该州的温室气体减排基金(GGRF)中,必须投资于减少温室气体排放的项目,同时最大限度地为弱势社区和家庭带来利益。SB 535(德莱昂,2012年),经AB 1550(戈麦斯,2016年)修订,要求将这些收入的至少35%投资于有利于弱势社区居民、低收入家庭和社区的项目。实施这些法定要求一直是政策倡导和组织团体联盟的工作,他们经常看到对环境正义社区的公共投资无法满足低收入有色人种居民的需求,或者更糟的是,实际上伤害了他们。本文介绍了该联盟制定的“不利社区利益”框架,该框架现在已在很大程度上纳入全州气候投资指南。框架工作提供了一个四步过程来评估一个项目是否对弱势社区有意义的好处:(1)一个项目能否满足服务不足居民确定的重要需求;(2)以一种为他们提供重大好处的方式;(3)其好处主要针对低收入人群,同时(4)避免弱势社区的巨大负担。本文讨论了该框架的起源及其在使当地居民能够制定社区投资决策方面的重要性,然后根据该框架评估GGRF对经济适用房的投资。加州在引导气候投资造福弱势社区方面的一个重要经验教训是,促进该州气候目标的投资也有助于解决极端不平等危机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Berkeley Planning Journal
Berkeley Planning Journal Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: The Berkeley Planning Journal is an annual peer-reviewed journal, published by graduate students in the Department of City and Regional Planning (DCRP) at the University of California, Berkeley since 1985.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信