Sponsor
This research was supported by the Urban Resilience to Extremes Sustainability Research Network, the SETS Convergence project, and the CAP LTER under the National Science Foundation grants SES-1444755, 1934933, and 1832016, respectively. The research was also supported by the resources of Water as an Integrated System and Environment (WISE) Lab at Portland State University and the Grimm Laboratory at Arizona State University.
Published In
Landscape and Urban Planning
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
4-1-2022
Abstract
Pluvial flooding is a serious hazard in inland U.S. cities. City managers and communities are increasingly interested in reducing their pluvial flood risk through the development of green infrastructure (GI) features. This research explores the relationship between pluvial flood exposure and GI placement in three inland cities– Atlanta, Phoenix, and Portland–and analyzes the variation of sociodemographic variables in census block groups (CBG) located in pluvial flood zones. Using the Arc-Malstrøm method, we estimated areas of pluvial flooding in the CBGs of our selected cities by relating pluvial flood area to the density of GI in CBGs and assigning CBGs one of four classifications: i) managed (large flood area, abundant GI), ii) prepared (small flood area, abundant GI), iii) vulnerable (large flood area, scarce GI), and iv) least concern (small flood area, scarce GI). Then, using the historical GI data, we examined the proportionality of GI investment over time to pluvial flood area. We found relationships between GI density, flood area, ethnic and racial minority populations, age, educational attainment, and median household incomes that indicated inequalities and potential discrimination in flood risk management, but also some evidence of equitable and appropriate management given differences in flood risk, especially in Phoenix and Portland. In Atlanta, newer GI installation prioritized white and wealthy neighborhoods where relatively higher flood risk exists (less equitable). Our classification framework may assist city flood risk managers to distribute GI more equitably according to equitability and need.
Rights
© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync- nd/4.0/).
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104417
Persistent Identifier
https://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/43003
Citation Details
Pallathadka, A., Sauer, J., Chang, H., & Grimm, N. B. (2022). Urban flood risk and green infrastructure: Who is exposed to risk and who benefits from investment? A case study of three US Cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 223, 104417.