Open-access publication addresses need for environmental justice and equity in stormwater engineering
As a graduate student of the St. Anthony Falls Laboratory (SAFL) and the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geo- Engineering (CEGE), Vinicius Taguchi is a pretty motivated person. Aside from his research, which focuses on understanding how effectively stormwater treatment ponds remove nutrients through time, Vini also has a passion for education, outreach, and environmental justice. Specifically, he is continually driven to do the ‘good work’ of the engineer while also looking to better understand how that work is integrated in a wider community context – who benefits, who loses, and what is just.
Vini serves as lead author on a recently published paper in Water that calls out the discrepancies in how engineers more generally ‘focus on the science’ when implementing green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) without also including voices and perspectives about how that infrastructure can impact existing communities. For example, the development of combined sewers (sewage and stormwater in the same pipes) in the 19th century addressed large flooding concerns at the time, but led to outbreaks of disease in the communities of color that received those waters downstream. Decisions regarding money allocation for green infrastructure generally are made by those with an unequitable distribution of power and influence, meaning projects may be getting placed in areas that have negative impacts on other, less influential communities. Furthermore, investment of green infrastructure in poorer communities can also lead to ‘green gentrification,’ where the benefits of the infrastructure lead to rising property values and rents that can disrupt a community’s identity or even cause significant displacements of people from that community.
The paper, which includes input of researchers from the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs, CEGE, the Department for Biosystems and Bioproducts Engineering (BBE), the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior (EEB), and Valparaiso University, outlines the need for revamping the decision-making process so it not only incorporates biophysical science but also social science to improve outcomes in GSI projects so they are both effective and just to the communities they impact. The framework relies heavily on community partnerships and engagement where decision makers and scientists work with community members to set and prioritize goals, address concerns, and make sure the benefits of the project work to improve/enhance existing communities. It also identifies the need for continued investment in implemented GSI projects to make sure they continue to serve the community as originally intended.
The study walks through several of the most widely implemented GSI practices and speaks to how they can have unintended consequences on communities. Urban trees, stormwater ponds, filtration practices, and rain gardens and green roofs on the whole can greatly improve water quality and quantity concerns, but placement and impacts need to be evaluated carefully to make sure they meet the goals outlined by the community. With proper planning, many potential negative impacts can be minimized or avoided altogether.
“It is the first duty of a civil engineer “to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public,” as canonized by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Code of Ethics. I take this responsibility extremely seriously,” says Vini, who is advised by professor John Gulliver of SAFL and CEGE and Jacques Finlay of SAFL and EEB. “I also recognize that policy plays a vital role in my being able to provide effective and equitable solutions. Engineers and scientists need to talk with and collaborate with affordable housing organizations and governing bodies to build better projects that will serve all communities they impact. We can do more, and we can do better.”