Community Engagement for Climate-Ready Communities:

The Role of Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) in Local Climate Adaptation

Planning and Evaluation

Semra Aytur, PhD, MPH, Paul Kirshen, PhD, Mimi Becker, PhD, Sylvia von Aulock, MS, Stephen Jones, PhD, Michele Holt-Shannon, MA, Bruce Mallory, PhD, Chris Keeley, MS,David Burdick, PhD, Paul Stacey, MS, Cameron Wake, PhD, Robert Roseen, PhD , Steve Miller, MS, Kalle Matso, PhD, Cory Riley, MS

The University of New Hampshire, Town of Exeter, NOAA NERRS Science Collaborative

Background

• Preparing for climate change requires community engagement and transdisciplinary, cross-sectoral collaboration

• However, little is known about the role of Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) within the context of local climate adaptation planning and evaluation

What is CAPE?Climate Adaptation Plan for Exeter

• An interdisciplinary, collaborative planning project to develop a local climate adaptation plan for the town of Exeter, New Hampshire.

• Uses a Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) process to engage residents, understand local values, identify perceived vulnerabilities, ground-truth technical models, and inform the climate adaptation plan

Why CAPE?Working with Exeter to develop a plan to

prepare for challenges like this….

Why CAPE?

ContextExeter has a range of land uses on a major tributary and estuary to Great Bay where climate change will exacerbate Exeter’s present challenges with:1) Storm water2) Nonpoint source pollution3) Land use4) Protection and restoration

of downstream marshes and fisheries

Objectives

• To define, apply, and evaluate a process model of collaborative planning that will result in the development of a high quality, locally relevant adaptation plan.

Role of CBPR

CBPR is being utilized within the adaptation planning process through: 1.A structured community engagement process to ensure that the plan reflects Exeter's values, priorities, and perspectives2.Utilization of participatory action research methods, including participatory mapping and modeling, to capture stakeholders' input3.A developmental evaluation designed to respond to evolving community needs

4 Key Aspects of CAPE’s CBPR Approach

1. Listen: • What does Exeter care about? • Involve community leaders from diverse sectors in defining

core values that will guide the development of the climate adaptation plan

2. Collaborate:• Engage residents in conversations about climate-related

topics, with a focus on storm water, nonpoint source pollution, land use, habitat change and restoration

3. Model:• Use participatory planning methods to model a range of

scenarios

4.Recommend and Discuss:• Produce a set of recommendations for the Exeter town

government on an adaptation plan

EngagementStakeholder engagement activities

include:• Public listening sessions

• “Floods, Rains, and Rivers:What does it mean to you to prepare Exeter for a changing climate?”

• Citizens Working Group (CWG)– Participatory mapping– Participatory modeling

• Focus groups • Targeted outreach (e.g.,

vulnerable residents, communities of place, communities of interest)

Citizens’ Work Group (CWG)–Works side by side

with the project research team in participatory modeling, mapping, planning, and other activities

–Meets monthly• Provides continuous

feedback to the project team on the data collection, modeling, and analysis

– Ensures that the work of the project team is “ground truthed”

Conceptual diagram for Town of Exeter and the Exeter/Squamscott River. Not all relationships are shown due to space limitations, such as flooding impacts. All impacts also feed back to Exeter Stakeholders Choices & Impacts. For example, Exeter Stakeholder’s Choices & Impacts affect both upstream and downstream flow and water quality conditions, which impact Human Health & Safety and Aquatic Ecosystems. Tidal Marshes can buffer (mediate) impacts to human health.

HSPF HEC-HMS/RAS

SWMMEcosytems

ModelingVarious sets of models are being used to translate impacts of changes in Precipitation (P), temperature (T), and sea level rise (SLR) on users

Model ComparisonsModel Purpose Subarea

SizeLand Use

Climate Data

Time Step

Hydrology Hydraulics Water Quality

HEC-HMS

Flood Runoff

Moderate Yes P Small Good N/A N/A

HEC-RAS

Flood Routing and Elevations

N/A N/A Q Steady State

N/A Very Good N/A

HSPF Monthly River Basin Flows and Water Quality, Daily Low Flows

Moderate Yes P, T Moderate

Very Good Good Very Good

SWMM Urban Drainage and Quality from rainstorms

Fine Yes P, T Very Small

Good Excellent Good

HEC-HMS is the Hydrologic Modeling System from the Army Corps of Engineers. It simulates precipitation and runoff processes in watersheds. HEC-RAS models hydraulics of water flow through rivers and channels. HSPF is the Hydrological Simulation Program FORTRAN. It simulates watershed hydrology and water quality for both conventional and toxic organic pollutants. SWMM is the Stormwater Management Model (EPA model). It provides analysis of water quantity and quality performed on catchments having storm sewers or combined sewers and natural drainage, for prediction of flows, stages, and pollutant concentrations.

Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (1)

Baseline survey (winter 2012) of town staff, land-use board members, and stakeholders representing 12 different sectors indicated broad-based support for a public health perspective within the process– Public health messages about prevention and co-benefits

were effective (mean=4.58 (standard deviation (sd) 0.51))– New connections between climate variability, water quality,

land use, biodiversity, health, and economic impacts were identified (mean = 4.67 (sd 0.49))

– New community-academic partnerships were formed (mean=4.63 (sd 0.52))

*Based on a five-point Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)

Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (2)

Results from Community Conversations and CWG meetings:

• Identified local values– Historical character– Healthy environments– Water quality– Safety– Citizen engagement in town governance

• Identified perceived vulnerabilities to people, infrastructure, and natural resources

www.capenh.net

Vulnerability:Infrastructure-Areas of Concern

Exeter Senior Center

Court Street

Area

• Water Treatment Plant and Reservoir

• Waste Water Treatment Plant• Great Dam• String Bridge• Swasey Parkway• Great Bridget Transportation

Corridor• Bow Street• Larry Lane freshwater pump

station• Pickpocket Dam• Gas LineSource: Community Working Group

PEOPLE: AREAS OF CONCERN

Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (3)• Growing awareness among

stakeholders of how climate change will increase stresses:– Tidal wetlands are threatened by poor

water quality, bordering development and roads

– Sea level rise is occurring– Precipitation extremes have increased– Shift in river hydrographs – Access to important social services has

been disrupted– Damage to homes, businesses, and

valued public spaces

Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (4)

Ongoing discussions:– Impact of long range decisions that the town must

make • protecting tidal wetlands • removing dams

– Moral and ethical considerations• equity• holistic view of the relationship between nature,

health, and quality of life• stewardship and collective responsibility

Preliminary Results & Lessons Learned (5)

• Developmental evaluation process1 to assess our collaborative process in terms of:– Salience, Credibility, Legitimacy

• Did CAPE create a fair, inclusive process that helps to ensure that “science gets used?”

• Did CAPE create recommendations for a climate adaption plan that facilitate implementation?

Through continuous evaluation of our collaborativeprocess, we have learned that the knowledge of manystakeholders about cross-sectoral impacts of climatechange is increasing.

1Patton, M. Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use.Guilford, 2010. http://www.guilford.com/excerpts/patton.pdf

Conclusions

• CBPR can provide a successful template for local climate adaptation planning

• Collaborative relationships must continually be defined, nurtured, and refined

• A portfolio of different engagement approaches and research methods is needed

• Partnerships between scientists, planners, town leaders, natural resource managers, and citizens can integrate climate change considerations into local planning processes, highlighting opportunities to extend CBPR to support resilient, climate-ready communities.

Final Thoughts:Moving from Risk to Resilience

Resilience – The remarkable

capacity of communities to bounce back from adversity and thrive in a world of uncertainty and change.

Source: ASU Health Futures: Health in a New Key: http://slhi.org/pdfs/issue_briefs/ib-03fall.pdf

Moving from Risk to Resilience:Planning as Prevention

Land Use PlanningDecisions (e.g., open space, conservation, protect tidal wetlands)

Green Infrastructure

Low Impact Development

Primary Prevention

SecondaryPrevention

Tertiary Prevention

Emergency Response Strategies

Public Health Benefits Include:

•Lower exposure to environmental toxins and vector-borne diseases•Drinking water, sewage

•Increased physical activity levels•Protection of open space and recreational areas

•Fewer lives affected by the stress associated with floods, property damage, and disruption of the local economy.

…saving approximately $147 billion in U.S. medical expenditures

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to NOAA National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) Science Collaborative for funding this project.

We thank the Town of Exeter for their commitment to this project.

Special thanks to our students and interns (especially Hannah Coon and Keith Johnson) for their contributions to CAPE.

Questions?

Vital Signs of a Resilient Community: Healthy People , Healthy Ecosystems, Vibrant Economy