“归根结底,你需要做点什么”:关于雨水解决方案优先级的论述

IF 2.4 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Robinson R. Low, Darby P. Swayne, Caitlin Magel, J. Israel, P. Levin
{"title":"“归根结底,你需要做点什么”:关于雨水解决方案优先级的论述","authors":"Robinson R. Low, Darby P. Swayne, Caitlin Magel, J. Israel, P. Levin","doi":"10.3389/frsc.2023.1134126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As urbanization continues to expand in the Puget Sound, Washington, USA region, stormwater management has wide ranging impacts to human and ecosystem health and is therefore fundamental to creating equitable and sustainable cities. This paper brings forward dominant discourses among stormwater experts in regard to which solutions should be implemented in the Puget Sound region and what outcomes would be most beneficial to this ecosystem. We used Q-methodology to investigate differences in prioritization of stormwater solutions currently being considered in the region and explore how emergent perspectives may affect decisions for stormwater management. We chose 29 stormwater solutions falling into three categories: source control, green infrastructure, and gray infrastructure, each leading to different co-benefits and environmental outcomes. The purpose of this study is to better understand which solutions lead to the most efficient and beneficial recovery of the Puget Sound ecosystem. Through centroid extraction analysis, we discovered three discourses that capture different themes, values, and beliefs held by stormwater experts. Within our 21 participants, each shared common stormwater goals: reducing the delivery of toxics to receiving waterways and reducing stormwater quantity. Even with these shared end goals, our participants disagreed on the prioritization and overall outcomes of solution types. Our findings are important to spark discussion between municipalities with differing worldviews and outcomes associated with stormwater management and to highlight multiple benefits associated with solutions and how they can be utilized to support environmental justice.","PeriodicalId":33686,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“At the end of the day, you need to do something”: discourses on prioritization of stormwater solutions\",\"authors\":\"Robinson R. Low, Darby P. Swayne, Caitlin Magel, J. Israel, P. Levin\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frsc.2023.1134126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As urbanization continues to expand in the Puget Sound, Washington, USA region, stormwater management has wide ranging impacts to human and ecosystem health and is therefore fundamental to creating equitable and sustainable cities. This paper brings forward dominant discourses among stormwater experts in regard to which solutions should be implemented in the Puget Sound region and what outcomes would be most beneficial to this ecosystem. We used Q-methodology to investigate differences in prioritization of stormwater solutions currently being considered in the region and explore how emergent perspectives may affect decisions for stormwater management. We chose 29 stormwater solutions falling into three categories: source control, green infrastructure, and gray infrastructure, each leading to different co-benefits and environmental outcomes. The purpose of this study is to better understand which solutions lead to the most efficient and beneficial recovery of the Puget Sound ecosystem. Through centroid extraction analysis, we discovered three discourses that capture different themes, values, and beliefs held by stormwater experts. Within our 21 participants, each shared common stormwater goals: reducing the delivery of toxics to receiving waterways and reducing stormwater quantity. Even with these shared end goals, our participants disagreed on the prioritization and overall outcomes of solution types. Our findings are important to spark discussion between municipalities with differing worldviews and outcomes associated with stormwater management and to highlight multiple benefits associated with solutions and how they can be utilized to support environmental justice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2023.1134126\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2023.1134126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着美国华盛顿州普吉特湾地区城市化的不断扩大,雨水管理对人类和生态系统健康产生了广泛影响,因此对创建公平和可持续的城市至关重要。本文就普吉特湾地区应实施哪些解决方案以及哪些结果对该生态系统最有利提出了雨水专家的主要意见。我们使用Q方法来调查该地区目前正在考虑的雨水解决方案的优先级差异,并探讨紧急视角如何影响雨水管理决策。我们选择了29种雨水解决方案,分为三类:源头控制、绿色基础设施和灰色基础设施,每种方案都会带来不同的共同效益和环境结果。本研究的目的是更好地了解哪些解决方案可以最有效、最有益地恢复普吉特湾生态系统。通过质心提取分析,我们发现了三种话语,它们捕捉了雨水专家持有的不同主题、价值观和信念。在我们的21名参与者中,每个人都有共同的雨水目标:减少向受纳水道输送有毒物质和减少雨水量。即使有这些共同的最终目标,我们的参与者在解决方案类型的优先级和总体结果上也存在分歧。我们的研究结果对于引发具有不同世界观和雨水管理成果的市政当局之间的讨论非常重要,并强调与解决方案相关的多种好处,以及如何利用这些好处来支持环境正义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“At the end of the day, you need to do something”: discourses on prioritization of stormwater solutions
As urbanization continues to expand in the Puget Sound, Washington, USA region, stormwater management has wide ranging impacts to human and ecosystem health and is therefore fundamental to creating equitable and sustainable cities. This paper brings forward dominant discourses among stormwater experts in regard to which solutions should be implemented in the Puget Sound region and what outcomes would be most beneficial to this ecosystem. We used Q-methodology to investigate differences in prioritization of stormwater solutions currently being considered in the region and explore how emergent perspectives may affect decisions for stormwater management. We chose 29 stormwater solutions falling into three categories: source control, green infrastructure, and gray infrastructure, each leading to different co-benefits and environmental outcomes. The purpose of this study is to better understand which solutions lead to the most efficient and beneficial recovery of the Puget Sound ecosystem. Through centroid extraction analysis, we discovered three discourses that capture different themes, values, and beliefs held by stormwater experts. Within our 21 participants, each shared common stormwater goals: reducing the delivery of toxics to receiving waterways and reducing stormwater quantity. Even with these shared end goals, our participants disagreed on the prioritization and overall outcomes of solution types. Our findings are important to spark discussion between municipalities with differing worldviews and outcomes associated with stormwater management and to highlight multiple benefits associated with solutions and how they can be utilized to support environmental justice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
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