Planning for economic and environmental resilience

Climate protection will require major reductions in GHG emissions from all sectors of the economy, including the transportation sector. Slowing growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will be necessary for reducing transportation GHG emissions, even with major breakthroughs in vehicle technologies and low-carbon fuels (Winkelman et al., 2009). The Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) supports market-based policy approaches that minimize costs and maximize benefits. Our research indicates that significant GHG reductions can be achieved through smart growth and travel efficiency measures that increase accessibility, improve travel choices and make optimum use of existing infrastructure. Moreover, we find such measures can deliver compelling economic benefits, including avoided infrastructure costs, leveraged private investment, increased local tax revenues and consumer vehicle ownership and operating cost savings (Winkelman et al., 2009).As a society, what we build – where and how – has a tremendous impact on our carbon footprint, from building design to transportation infrastructure and land-use patterns. The empirical and modeling evidence is clear – people drive less in locations with efficient land use patterns, high quality travel choices and reinforcing policies and incentives (Ewing et al., 2008). It is also clear that there is growing and unmet market demand for walkable communities, reinforced by demographic shifts and higher fuel prices (Leinberger, 2006, Nelson, 2007). Transportation policy in the United States must rise to meet this demand for more travel choices and more livable communities.The academic, ideological and political debates about the level of GHG reductions and penetration rates that can or should be achieved via smart growth and pricing on the one hand, or measures such as ‘eco-driving’ and signal optimization on the other, have served their purpose: we know which policies are ‘directionally correct’ – policies that reduce GHG emissions even though we may not know the scope of those reductions. Now is the time to implement directionally correct policies, assess what works best where, and refine policy based on the results. It is a framework that CCAP calls “Do. Measure. Learn.”The Federal government is poised to spend $500 billion on transportation (Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 2009). CCAP encourages Congress to “Ask the Climate Question” – will our transportation investments help reduce GHG emissions or exacerbate the problem? Will they help increase our resilience to climate change impacts or increase our vulnerability? And, while we’re at it, will our investment foster energy security, livable communities and a vibrant economy? Federal transportation and climate policies should empower communities to implement locally-determined travel efficiency solutions by providing appropriate funding, tools and technical support.     

Improving maritime English competence as the cornerstone of safety at sea: a focus on teaching practices to improve maritime communication

The International Maritime Industry (IMI) is a global web of shipping, connecting all Continents and bringing together mariners from a multitude of national, ethnic and linguistic backgrounds. Wherever humans interact, they communicate in some form or another and the ability to communicate competently is the cornerstone of safety at sea. This paper identifies the growth of English as the lingua franca of the sea, as a framework for the later discussion on current teaching practices. We consider that Maritime English (ME) fits into the category of a special-purpose form of English, in that it has generated, modified or adopted from other languages many terms and phrases that are only used in the IMI. This paper considers safety-to-practice as a factor in curriculum design, teaching and assessment as the basis for ME competence. Further, we propose opportunities to move industry focus forward, through collaboration with stakeholders and discussion about teaching practices. This paper identifies a gap in maritime teaching practices. This paper further explores the use of authentic teaching as a way forward to improve maritime communication.     

Factors Affecting Disaster Preparedness,Response, and Recovery Using the Community Capitals Framework

Abstract

Disaster research often focuses on how and why communities are affected by a discrete extreme event. We used the community capitals framework to understand how community characteristics influence their preparedness, response to, and recovery from successive or multiple disasters using the 1964 Good Friday Earthquake and the 1989 Exxon Valdez Oil Spill as case studies. This study assesses community response to these disasters by reviewing published literature on impacts to create profiles for six communities and by identifying community capitals before and during these disasters, and throughout the long-term recovery. While the presence of rich natural capitals commonly contributed resources to pre-disaster planning and long-term recovery, restriction of resource access immediately following the disasters was detrimental to many communities. Communities with strong political, social, and financial capitals tended to fare better immediately following disasters, enabling longer-term processes of transformation or recovery. However, in some communities the oil spill undermined these capitals more than the earthquake and resulting tsunami. In understanding how use and reliance on community capitals can lead to varied recovery success from different kinds of disasters, these findings can help coastal managers and planners prepare for future disasters.