Equity Report Sustainable Jersey 2-20-20...4. Integrate social equity across the Sustainable Jersey...

AdvancingSocialEquitythroughtheSustainableJerseyProgram:AnalysisandPotential

SustainableJersey

January2020

SustainableJerseySustainabilityInstituteatTheCollegeofNewJersey

ForcinaHall,3rdFloor2000PenningtonRd.Ewing,NJ08628-0718

SustainableJersey AdvancingSocialEquity

1

ExecutiveSummarySustainableJerseyisanetworkandmovementofover450municipalitiesworkingcollectivelytobuildamoresustainableworld,onecommunityatatime.Collaboratingwithstateagencies,non-profitorganizations,business,andacademia,SustainableJerseysetsstandardsandprovidesresourcesandguidanceonbestpracticesforwhatcommunitiescouldandshoulddotocontributetoasustainablefuture.SocialequityisintegraltotheholisticvisionofasustainablefutureguidingSustainableJersey’smission.NewJerseyanstodayfacewidedisparitiesinaccesstotheconditionsforhealthandwell-being,disparitieswhicharefurtherreflectedinenvironmentalandhumanhealthoutcomes.Creatingmoreequitableandsustainablecommunitiesmeanschangingthesystemsthathaveresultedinthosedisparities.SustainableJerseyismeetingthischallengebystrategicallysupportingtheroleofmunicipalgovernmentsinbringingabouttheneededchange.WithsupportfromtheSurdnaFoundation,SustainableJerseyembarkedin2017uponaninternalequityinitiative.Thisreportdocumentstheoutcomesofitsfirstthreestepsandtheongoingdirectionofthefourth:

1. co-developmentofasharedframeworkforunderstandingsocialequity;2. screeningtheentiresuiteofSustainableJerseyactionsforpotentialequity

impactsandrecommendingchangestoaddressequityimpacts;3. assessingmunicipalcertificationandgrantawardsforpatternsinrelationto

socialequity;4. integratingsocialequityacrosstheSustainableJerseyprogram,fillinggapsand

pursuingopportunitiestoremovebarriersandpromotesocialequity.EquityFrameworkThefirststepinlaunchingtheequityinitiativewastoworkwiththeSustainableJerseyDiversityandEquityTaskForcetoco-generateaframeworkforunderstandingandexplicitlydefiningsocialequity,assummarizedbelow.

EquityGoal:todevelopmunicipalcapacityandmobilizemunicipaleffortstoeliminatedisparitiesbasedonrace,povertyorotherformsofsocialadvantageordisadvantage.Aholisticconceptionofequityinvolvesfairnessineachofthreeelements:

1. DistributionThefirstdimensionofequityemphasizestheunevendispositiondistributionofbenefits(suchasaccesstogreenspaces)andburdens(suchaspollution)acrosssocialgroupsandneighborhoods.Anequitabledistributiondoesnotaddtotheburdensofmarginalizedorvulnerablegroupsnorexcludethemfrombenefits.

2. ParticipationMeaningfulparticipationindecision-makingbyaffectedindividualsandcommunitiesisguaranteedbyproceduralequity.


2

3. ScaleMunicipalitiesmustensurethattheir‘downstream’neighborsdonotfeelnegativeimpactsfrommunicipalactionandshouldcollaborateacrossboundariestoreduceregionaldisparities.

EquityScreenofActionsBasedontheseequityframeworkelements,ascreeningtoolwasdevelopedandappliedinasystematicauditofall139actionsintheSustainableJerseymunicipalprogramduring2019.Volunteersandstaffmemberswithexpertiseineachissueareareviewedandassignedeachactiontooneoffourcategoriesbasedontheaction’slikelyimpactonsocialequityineachofthethreedimensions.Elevenactionswereflaggedashavingpotentialinequitableimpacts;recommendationsweremadeonimproving52additionalactions.Overall,thequalitativefindingsofthisscreeningexerciseincludethefollowing:

• Theequityimpactofanactiondependsonhowitisimplemented.Manyactionscouldbeconsideredequitableornotdependingonthequalitativedetailsofimplementationunderdifferentcircumstances.

• Specificrequirementstomakeactionsmoreequitable,ortoconfirmthattheyareimplementedequitably,mayalsomakethemmoredifficultandincreasethedocumentationburden.

• Equitableparticipation(includingleadership)andtargetedoutreachareneededtoensureequitabledistributionofoutcomes.

• Recruitmentfromunderrepresentedgroupsbyusingappropriatemeansofcommunicationandbymakingmeetingsaccessibleenablesequitableparticipation.

QuantitativeAnalysisofCertificationandGrantPerformanceForthepurposesofthisstudy,theresearchfocusedoninequitybetweenmunicipalitiesinNewJersey,sincemunicipalitiesofdifferentsizes,levelsofwealth,andsocialcompositionarelikelytoexperiencedifferingadvantagesandbarrierstogainingbenefitsfromparticipationinSustainableJersey.Couldthecertificationprogramunintentionallyfavoronetypeofmunicipalityoveranother?Toinvestigatethisquestion,thisstudyanalysedperformanceintheSustainableJerseyprogramwithrespecttocensusandotherpubliclyavailabledatacharacterizingeachmunicipality.ThegeneralfindingssupporttheconclusionthatdistressedmunicipalitiesdonotappeartofaceanysystematicbiasinachievingSustainableJerseycertificationorobtainingSustainableJerseygrants.NoristhereanyapparentracialbiasinopportunitiestoparticipateinandbenefitfromtheSustainableJerseyprogram.Smallermunicipalities,withpresumedlessercapacity,experiencemoredifficultiesinadvancingintheprogram.Thespecificfindingsindicated:


3

• Certificationlevelsareeitherstatisticallyunrelated,oronlyweaklycorrelated,withalowerscoreonanindexofmunicipal‘distress’(acompositeofindicatorssuchaspoverty,unemployment,andhighschoolgraduationrates);

• Municipalitieswithlargerpopulationshaveastatisticallysignificant,butrelativelysmall,advantage;

• CommunitieswithdifferentracialcompositionsparticipateatequalratesinSustainableJersey.TheonlyanomalyisthatcommunitieswithlargepopulationsofAsiansparticipateatahigherrate.

• Intotal,populationanddistresstogetherexplainlessthan10%ofthevariationincertificationlevel.

Theresearchdemonstratesthatfactorsotherthanmunicipaldistress,racialcompositionorpopulationcontributetosuccessinachievingSustainableJerseycertification.Suchfactorsmayinclude,forexample,thepresenceoflocalchampionsorcollaborationwithexternalpartners.Furtherresearchisrequiredtoidentifyotherrelevantfactorsandassesstheirrespectiveimpactonoutcomes.AreviewofsuccessinobtaininggrantsofferedthroughtheSustainableJerseyprogramresultedinsimilarfindingsasreportedabove:populationisstatisticallysignificantlycorrelated,witharelativelysmallimpact,withsuccessfulgrantapplications,whilemunicipaldistressisnot.Atthesametime,thedatasuggestthatsmalldistressedmunicipalitiesaretheleastlikelytopursueorbenefitfromSustainableJerseygrantopportunities.NextStepsInthefirstdecadeofitsexistenceSustainableJerseyhasprovidedequitablesupport,inspiration,guidance,andresourcestoNewJerseymunicipalitiesintheireffortstopromoteenvironmental,economic,andsocialsustainability.ThechallengeforthedecadeaheadistounderstandhowSustainableJerseycanbecomeadriverforadvancingsocialequityasanintegralelementofsustainability?Wouldtargetedoutreachandsupportmakethedifferenceforsmaller,distressedmunicipalities?Wouldprovidingmoreactionsdirectlyaddresstheirbarriersandconcernsinspiremoreparticipationintheprogrambyunderrepresentedormarginalizedsocialgroupsandbythemunicipalitiesinwhichtheyformalargepartofthepopulation?TheresultsoftheequityscreeningprocessdescribedinthisreportwillinformongoingimprovementstoSustainableJerseyactionsandthedevelopmentofnewactionstodriveequitygainsatthelocallevel.Inanimportantstep,SustainableJerseyhasadoptedaformalequitypolicythatwillestablishproceduresandcriteriafordevelopingactions,awardinggrants,anddefiningcertificationstandardsinlinewiththeequityframework.Aspartofitssustainabilitymission,thepolicyarticulatesSustainableJersey’sprogrammaticcommitmenttoworkingwithlocalpartnerstodismantlebarrierstoopportunityandtoadvancesocialequitywithintheircommunitiesandacrossthestateofNewJersey.

______________________________________________


4

AcknowledgementsSustainableJerseywouldliketothanktheSurdnaFoundationforthegenerousgrantthatmadetheresearchandwritingofthisreportpossible.WewouldalsoliketoacknowledgewithgratitudethecontributionsofthemembersoftheDiversityandEquityTaskForce(listedinAppendixI).ThisreportwaswrittenbyMelanieMcDermott,Ph.D.,SeniorResearcher,SustainabilityInstitute,[email protected].


5

Contents

Introduction………………………………………………….……………………….……………………….…….…….…5

EquityFramework…………….….…………………………………….…………………………………….….…....…6

TheEquityScreen…………..…………………………………….……………………………….….……....….…….9

Methods………………………..…………………………………………………………….………………………9

QualitativeSummaryofResults…………………………….…………….…………………….………10

QuantitativeSummaryofResults……….………………………………………………....….………13

Quantitativeanalysisofprogrammaticdata……………………….….…………………….………….….16

MunicipalParticipationandPerformanceinCertification…...….….………………..….16

MunicipalParticipationandPerformanceinObtainingGrants…………………..….…22

ConclusionandNextSteps………………………….………………………………….……………………………24

References………………………….……………………………………………….………………………...……………26

AppendixI:DiversityandEquityTaskForce(2018)...…...................................................27

AppendixII:SJEquityActionScreen(GoogleForm)andGuide……………………….……………28

AppendixIII:ResultsofEquityActionScreen.…………..….……………………………….….………….31

AppendixIV:StatisticalResults………………………………….……………………….…..……………………33


6

IntroductionSustainableJerseyMissionandEquityInitiativeThemissionofSustainableJerseyistobuildamoresustainableworldonecommunityatatime.Socialequityisintegraltothatmissionfortwomajorreasons:becauseitisfairandbecauseitiseffective.Itisonlyfairandjustthatallpeopleenjoythebenefitsoftheenvironmental,socialandeconomichealthandwell-beingweaimtosustain.Inordertobeeffectiveinachievingthatmission,itisnecessarytobuildandengagethecapacity,talentsandenergyofallcommunitiesandallcommunitymembers.Yet,NewJerseyansfacevastdisparities,notonlyintheconditionsforhealthandwell-being,butalsoinopportunitiestoleadandparticipateineffortstomeetcommunityneedsandpursuesustainabilitygoals.SustainableJerseyrecognizesthatcreatingmoreinclusive,equitableandsustainablecommunitiesmeanschangingthesystemsthathaveresultedinthosedisparities.Ourchallengeandmissionasanorganizationistoidentifyandsupporttheroleofmunicipalgovernmentsindoingtheirpartinbringingaboutthatneededchange.WithgeneroussupportfromtheSurdnaFoundation,SustainableJerseyembarkedin2017uponanequityinitiativetopursuethismission.Theinitiativehasfoursteps:

1. Co-developsharedframeworkforunderstandingsocialequity.2. ScreenallSustainableJerseyactionsfortheirpotentialequityimpact;sortactions

intocategories;collaterecommendationsforrevisionsandnewactionstopromotesocialequity.

3. Assesspatternsinmunicipalcertificationandgrantawardsinrelationtosocialequityfactors.

4. IntegratesocialequityacrosstheSustainableJerseyprogram:fillgapsandpursueopportunitiestoremovebarriersandpromotesocialequity.

Whileworkcontinuesonthefinalstepoftheequityinitiative,thisreportdocumentslearningfromthefirstthreesteps,completedbytheendofthegrantperiod,April2019.SustainableJerseyinaNutshellSustainableJerseyisanetworkandmovementofover450municipalities1workingcollectivelyatthelocalleveltoachieveasustainablefutureforNewJersey.Collaboratingwithstateagencies,foundationsandothernon-profitorganizations,businessandacademia,SustainableJerseysetsstandardsandsuppliesresourcesandguidanceonbestpracticesforwhatcommunitiescouldandshoulddotocontributetoasustainablefuture.Whenmunicipalitiesdocumentaccomplishmentoftheseprescribedbestpracticestothesatisfactionofexpertreviewers,theyaccruepointstowardsprogressivelevelsofsustainabilitycertification.Priortoattainingcertification,municipalitiesareeligibletoparticipateintheprogramandapply

1453municipalitieswereregisteredasofJanuary2020.Since2014,SustainableJerseyhasalsoruna


7

forgrantsoncetheyvoluntarilyform‘greenteams’thatarerecognizedbyresolutionasbodiesoflocalgovernmentandregisterintheprogram.Sinceitsinceptionin2009,SustainableJerseyhasbeencommittedtoaholisticvisionofsustainability,capturedinthethree-partmotto:Planet-Prosperity-People.SustainableJersey’scommitmenttotheseprinciplesisreflectedintheSustainableStateoftheStateReport,whichdefinesSustainableJersey’svisionofsustainabilityintermsof57goalsacross14broad-baseddimensionsofsustainability.Throughregularupdatessince2015,thereporttracksperformancemetrics–includingmeasuresofsocialdisparityinhealth,educationandaccesstohealthyenvironmentsandresources.

EquityFramework

Themunicipalbestpractices,knownasactions,thatformthecoreoftheSustainableJerseyprogramaredevelopedbyoneofnineteenissue-basedtaskforces,comprisedofvolunteerexpertsdrawnfromlocalgovernment,stateagencies,universitiesandnon-profitorganizations.Thelong-standingDiversityandEquityTaskForce(seeAppendixI)hasbeenakeypartnerinundertakingthisequityinitiative,ensuringthattheworkiscollaborative,informedbymultipledisciplines,professionsandperspectives,andgroundedinthepracticalrealitiesfacedinNewJerseycitiesandtowns.Thefirststepinlaunchingthenewequityinitiativewastoco-generateaframeworkforunderstandingandexplicitlydefiningwhat‘socialequity’meanstoSustainableJerseyasagoalandasanoperationalconcept.AfterSustainableJerseystaffpresentedtheinitialdraftframeworktotheTaskForce,itwassubjecttoin-depthdiscussionandmultipleroundsofrevisionbyasmallerworkinggroupbeforebeingratified.EquitygoalInthelongterm,SustainableJerseystrivestoeliminatetherootcausesofsocialinequityanddismantlebarrierstoopportunity.Intheshorterterm,thedirectgoaloftheSustainableJerseyprogramis:

todevelopmunicipalcapacityandmobilizemunicipaleffortstoreduceoreliminatedisparitiesthatarebasedonrace,povertyorotherformsofsocialdisadvantageordifference.

Fundamentaldisparitiesinopportunity,resourcesanddecision-makingpowerleadtofurtherdisparitiesinoutcomesacrosseveryarenaofsustainability,includingenvironmentalquality,health,publicsafety,housing,transportation,education,employment,income,andenjoymentofrecreationandthearts.Many,ifnotmost,oftheseinequitableoutcomesareco-locatedandgeographicallyconcentratedinthesamezipcodes,anationalpatternthatisparticularlystarkinthehighlysegregatedstateofNewJersey(Whytlaw,2019;UWPopulationHealthInstitute,2019).


8

DimensionsofequityDrawingfrommodelsfoundintheliterature(McDermottetal.,2013;Schlosberg,2013),theequityframeworkidentifiesthekeydimensionsthatformacompleteandrobustdefinitionofequity.Ratherthanspecifyauniversaldefinition,theframeworkleavesroomforuserstorefinethecontentofeachdimensionofequitytoreflectcommunity-definedvaluesandconstraintsspecifictothelocalcontext.Acrossvariationinlocalvalues,socialequityisfundamentallyaboutfairnessforallmembersofacommunityorsociety.Aholisticconceptionofequitymustexplicitlyinvolvefairnessineachofthreeelements:distribution,participationandscale(seefullframeworkinboxbelow).Thefirstdimension,distributionalequity,emphasizestheunevendispositionofbenefitsandburdensacrosssocialgroupsandneighborhoods.Writingandactivismonenvironmentaljusticehasbroughtattentiontoracialandethnicdisparitiesinthedistributionofpollutingfacilitiesandotherenvironmentalhazardsandthelackofenvironmentalamenitiessuchasgreenspaceswherelow-incomepeopleandpeopleofcolorlive(JenningsandGaither,2015;ColeandFoster,2001;U.S.EPA,1992).Historymatterswhendeterminingwhatisanequitabledistributiontoday.Providingfairopportunitytoallmayrequireremovingobstaclesandcompensatingforpasteffects.Contextalsomatters:pre-existingeconomic,social,andpoliticalinequalitiescreatean“unevenplayingfield.”Theframeworkcallsattentiontothefactthatforpeoplewhostartoutfromdifferentplaces,equaltreatmentisthereforenotequitable.Manydefinitionsofequityonlyconsiderhowthe‘piecesofthepie’ofsocialgoodsaredivviedup.Astrengthoftheequityframeworkisthatitguidestheusertogofurtherandconsiderwhyandhowandbywhomthepiewasdividedupinthefirstplace.Thisgoestotheseconddimensionofproceduralequity,whichisdefinedastherepresentationandmeaningfulparticipationofaffectedindividualsandcommunitiesindecision-making.Inotherwords,itconcernshowmuchpowerisinlocalhands.Beforepowercanbeshared,equitableparticipationpresupposesrecognition,orequalrespectforallsocialandculturalgroupsanddiversevoices(Fraser,2009).Astheliteratureonenvironmentaljusticeemphasizes,effortstoachieveproceduralequityrequireintentionaleffortandexplicitmechanismstoensureinclusioninpolicyandplanningdecisionsofaffectedactors,particularlydisadvantagedorvulnerablegroups(Schlosberg,2013;Fosteretal.,2019;Leichenkoetal.,2011).

Theframeworkhighlightsscaleasthethirddimensionofequity.Itisnecessarytoestablishtheboundariesoftheunit(areaorpopulation)underconsiderationinordertoassesstheequityofaconditionorimpact.ThishasimportantimplicationsforaprogramsuchasSustainableJersey.Whileitisfocusedatthemunicipalscaleasaunitofresponsibilityandaction,atthesametimeitseekstoadvancesustainabilityacrossthestateofNewJerseyandbeyond.Minimally,thismeansensuringthatmunicipalactionsdonothaveinequitableimpactsonneighboring,or‘downstream,’communities.SincemoresocialdisparityexistsamongthanwithinmunicipalitiesinNewJersey,theframeworkhighlightsthefactmunicipalitieswillneedtocollaboratetotakepositiveactionifregionaldisparitiesaretobereduced.Theveryideaofsustainabilitypointstotherealitythattherearenoenvironmentaloreconomicboundariesamongcommunities.Duetoflowsofenvironmentalservices,materialsandwaste,


9

citiessharethesamewatersheds,air-shedsandtrash-shedandassurroundingsuburbsandthetownsinruralperiphery.DuetoacomplexofhistoricalfactorsoperatinginNewJersey,theseunevenflowshaveresultedovertimeininequitabledistributionofenvironmentalgoods(e.g.,treesinleafysuburbs)andbads(e.g.,toxicwaste,dieselexhaust,andtrash)incertainurbanneighborhoodsandruralareasofteninhabitedpredominantlybylow-incomepeopleandcommunitiesofcolor(Whytlaw,etal.,2019).ThischallengesSustainableJerseytodrawtheattentionofparticipatingmunicipalitiestoconsiderthedownstreameffectsoftheiractionsandtocollaboratewiththeirneighborsoncommonproblemsandopportunities.

SustainableJerseyEquityFramework

Equitygoal:Todevelopmunicipalcapacityandmobilizemunicipaleffortstoreduceoreliminatedisparitiesbasedonrace,povertyorotherformsofsocialadvantageordisadvantage.

Aholisticconceptionofequityinvolvesfairnessineachofthreeelements:

1. Distributionconcernshowthetotal‘pie’isdividedupamongdifferentsocialgroups.The‘pie’referstobenefits(accesstogoodthings)andalsoburdens(costsandexposuretorisk).

• Anequitabledistributiondoesnotaddtotheburdensorrisksofmarginalizedorvulnerablepeople,norunfairlyburdenanysocialgroup.

• Anequitabledistributionofbenefitsmeetstheneedsofmarginalizedorvulnerablepeopleand,whereverfeasible,alsomeetstheinterestsofallsocialgroups.Providingfairopportunitymayrequireremovingobstaclesfacingparticulargroupsandcompensatingforpastdiscriminationtheyhaveexperienced.

2. Participationconcernstheroleandinfluenceindecision-makingprocesses(i.e.,power)exercisedbydifferentsocialgroups.

• Equitableparticipationmeansallsocialgroupshaveameaningfulopportunitytoparticipateindecision-makingandinfluenceitsoutcome.

• Equitableparticipationalsomeansthatallaffectedgroupsareafforded:o recognition,orequalrespectforallsocialandculturalgroupsanddiversevoices;o inclusion,whichresultsfromintentionaleffortstoenhanceeffective

participationbydiverseand,especially,marginalizedorvulnerablegroups.

3. Thescaleunderconsiderationmatterstothemeaningandpracticeofrealizingsocialequity.

• Equityconsiderationsextendpastmunicipalboundaries.Neighboring(“downstream”)municipalitiesdonotfeelnegativeimpactsofmunicipalaction.

• Municipalitiesshouldalsocollaboratetotakepositiveactiontoreduceregionaldisparities.


10

TheEquityScreen

Havingestablishedashareddefinitionofequity,thenextstepwastooperationalizeitasascreeningtoolforuseinasystematicauditofall139actionscurrentlyintheSustainableJerseymunicipalprogramforpotentialequityimpact.2TheprincipalpurposeofthescreeningexercisewastosorttheentiresuiteofSustainableJerseyactionsintocategoriesreflectingthepriorityoftheneed(ifany)torevisetheminordertomeettheprogram’sequitygoals.Inthiscontext,thegoalsaretwofold:first,protectsocialequity(donoharm)andthen,whereveritiswithinthepowerofmunicipalgovernment,improvesocialequity.Methods:ApplyingtheEquityScreenAworkinggroupoffourTaskForcememberstranslatedtheequityframeworkintoaseriesofquestionsembeddedinaGoogleFormwithaccompanyinginstructionsdesignedtoguidereviewers(screeners)throughassessingtheequityimpactofeachaction(seeAppendixIIfortheformandguidelines).Foreachofthethreedimensionsofequitydefinedintheframework,theequityscreendirectsthereviewerfirsttodetermineiftheactionis“NotApplicable,”thatis,ifithasnoforeseeableimpactonthatdimensionofequity.Otherwise,thereviewerscoresthelikelyimpactoftheactiononascaleoffour:inequitable,slightlyinequitable,slightlyequitable,orequitable(i.e.,significantlyimprovessocialequity).Therevieweristhenrequestedtorecordanyideason“howthisactioncoulddoabetterjob”withrespecttoeachdimensionofequity.Thelastquestionprovidesspaceforideasfornewactionsthatmightfillgapsintheexistingsetandcaptureanymissedopportunitiestoadvancesocialequityatthemunicipalscale.Theequityscreenwaspilot-testedbyseveralreviewersandvettedbytheTaskForce,SustainableJerseystaffandtheCertificationStandardsCommitteebeforebeingfinalized.Atrainingwebinar(AppendixIII)wasdevelopedandusedtoorientatotalofsixreviewers.Afterthefirstroundofreviews,theresultswereexportedasaspreadsheetandseriesofsummarycharts.Thespreadsheetwasthencirculatedtostaff,whore-reviewedandaddedtheircommentsunderactionsinthetopicalareastheycover.Byanalysingtheimpactsofagivenactionintermsofthreedistinctcomponents(distribution,procedureandscale),theequityscreenapproachachievesthorough,systematicand,hence,comparableresults.Althougheachreviewerbringsanelementofsubjectivitytothescreeningprocess,multipleperspectivesalsoaddvalue.Inthisapplicationofthemethod,asecondroundofreviewsinwhichthestaffcross-checkedinitialresultsprovidedacorrectivebalancetodifferencesofinterpretations.(Inonlythreecases,inwhichtheinitialreviewerappearedtohavemisunderstoodtheaction,didstaffchangeascore.)Itmustalsobekeptinmindthatthepurposeofthisexercisewastosorttheactionsintocategoriesbasedontheirperceivedneedforrevision.Thus,ifanyonereviewerhadaconcernaboutagivenactioninrelationtoequity,regardlessofanyconflictingopinions,itwasflaggedforfurtherscrutinybythestaffandtask

2Existing‘equitytoolkits’consultedincluded:Nelson,J.2015.RacialEquityToolkit:AnOpportunitytoOperationalizeEquity.GovernmentAllianceonRacialEquity;SustainableCTEquityToolkit,SustainableCT.(Availableonsustainablect.org).


11

forcewithrelevantexpertise.Finally,sincemajoractionrevisionsmustultimatelybeapprovedtheCertificationStandardsCommittee,theoutcomesofthescreeningexerciseshouldbeunderstoodasrecommendationsforfurtherattention,ratherthanfinaldeterminations.EquityActionScreen:QualitativeResults

CategorizationandreviewofactionsbypotentialequityimpactAppendixIVshowsthelistingofactionsassignedtothetoptwoprioritycategoriesbasedontheirneedforrevisiontocorrectforpossibleinequitableimpacts,namely:PriorityforRevision–Inequitableimpactlikely,basedon:

1)DistributionofBenefitsandCosts(3actions)2)Participation–Opportunitiestomakedecisions(8actions)3)[NeighboringMunicipalities–ImpactandCollaboration(0actionslisted)]

Potentialforimprovement–Slightlyinequitableimpact,basedon:1)DistributionofBenefitsandCosts(30actions)2)Participation–Opportunitiestomakedecisions(13actions)3)NeighboringMunicipalities–ImpactandCollaboration(9actions)

Afewexamplesillustratesomeoftheconcernsraisedbyreviewersabouttheequityimpactofparticularactions,aswellassomeofthejudgementcallsinvolved.

• Pay-As-You-ThrowThisactionwassortedintothecategory:PriorityforRevision–Inequitableimpactlikely,basedonDistributionofBenefitsandCosts.

o Screener1:Low-incomeresidentsaredisproportionatelyburdenedbyfeesformunicipalservices(whichposelittledisincentivetohighincomeresidentswhocaneasilyaffordthem).PAYTprogramscouldbedesignedtoamelioratethiseffect,e.g.,byproviding(a)exemptionsorsubsidiesforlow-incomehouseholds,or(b)basicserviceforfree,withchargesonlyfortrashexceedingthatbaselineweight.

o Screener2:Lowincomeresidentshaveopportunitytosavemoneywiththisaction.Whetheritispayasyouthroworimbeddedintheservices,taxesneedtobepaidfor.Reducingwastebenefitsall.

• EnvironmentalCommissionsThisactionwassortedintothecategoryPriorityforRevision–Inequitableimpactlikely,basedonParticipation.

o TheEnvironmentalCommissionshouldberequiredtoidentifythelocationofanyEnvironmentalJusticeneighborhoodswithinthemunicipalityandtoincluderepresentativesof…thelow-income,racialand/orethniccommunitiesthatliveinthoseareas(e.g.,neighborhoodassociations,faithgroupsorothernon-profitentitiesactiveinthoseneighborhoods).Ifnecessary,accommodationstothemeetingscheduleshouldbemadefortime,transportation,and/orlanguageconstraintsofthesegroups.


12

Inadditiontothesortingprocess,oneofthemostvaluableoutcomesoftheexercisehavebeenthereveiwers’recommendationsandideasforimprovingspecificactionssothattheynotonlyavoidharmingsocialequity,butrather,gobeyondmaintainingtheinequitablestatusquotoadvancesocialequityproactively.Forexample,theadvicegiveninresponsetotheEstablishaCreativeTeamactionwouldapplytonumerousactionsthatinvolvetheformationofateamtodriveandguideimplementation.

• EstablishaCreativeTeamo [Impact]dependsonimplementation.Withoutdeliberateintentionalsteps,

participationwillbeskewed.Giventheinherentchallengesofgainingdiverseparticipation,Ithinkthislikely,butofcoursenotinevitable.Ifthereisn'tdiverseparticipationthenitislikelythattheoutputoftheTeamwillatbestfailtoengageandatworstexcludecertaingroups.Thecompositionoftheidealteammaynotnecessarilybeproportionaltocommunitydemographics(astheactionguidancerecommends).Infact,itwouldoftenneedtobeskewedtowardstheotherwiseunderrepresentedgroups.Theactionshouldexplainthatwhatisneededisaffirmativeactiontoincluderepresentativesofminorityanddisadvantagedoroverlookedgroups.Inparticular,CreativeTeamswillbemissingoutiftheydon'tincluderepresentativesofyouthandanyimportantlocalethnolinguisticorculturalgroups.Ifrepresentativesofsuchgroupsdon’tvolunteertojointheTeam,thentheyneedtofindcreativewaysofengagingtheminotherwaystolearnwhattheywouldwantfromtheartsintown,aswellastogetfeedbackonhow[theaction]isworking.The[revised]actionshouldprobablystopshortofmandatinginclusionofunderrepresentedgroups,butshouldemphasizeitmore...Guidanceshouldalsospecificallyaddressstrategiesforgainingmorediverseinvolvement,suchastranslationandservicesforthehearingorvisionimpaired,transportationandaccessforseniorsandotherswithimpairedmobility,provisionofchildcareandschedulingatvariedmeetingtimesandlocales.Establishmultiplechannelsforreceivinginputbeyondpublicmeetings,includingsocialmedia,oralhistories,andfocusgroups.Workwithneighborhoodassociations,faithgroupsorothernon-profitentitiesactiveinaffectedneighborhoods.Themoreinclusivetheprocess,thericherandmorerepresentativetheresult.

Noactionswerejudgedtohavemorethan“slightly”negativeimpactsonneighboringmunicipalities,butreviewersidentifiedseveralwaysthatactionscouldbeimprovedbyencouragingregionalcollaboration.Reviewersalsoidentifieddilemmasassociatedwithscale–wheredowedrawtheboundariesofconcern?

• BicyclePedestrianPlano Coordinationwithneighboringmunicipalitiesandregionalentities(MPOs,

County)wouldbeespeciallyvaluableforthisaction!• EnvironmentalJusticeinPlanning&Zoning

o Itwashardtoselectthe"right"answerforthequestionofscale.Onceonemunicipality/communitycriesNIMBY,thepollutingfacilitywillinevitablybe


13

placedelsewhere(quitepossiblyinamunicipalitywithlesspoliticalpower/voice).Thatsaid,iftheneighboringmunicipalitieshavetheirownEJrecommendationsinplace,thenhavingthisadoptedbyaneighborshouldn'tbeaproblem...SustainableJerseycan'tbeinthepositiontosay"allyoucommunitieswithnolandfillsorwastefacilitiesneedtostartlettingthosepollutingindustriesintoyourborders."Thatwouldbebonkers!Sowheredowegofromhere?

Inseveralinstances,reviewersproposedthatratherthanlayerevenmorerequirementsontoexistingactions–therebydecreasingthenumberoftownsthatwouldbelikelytoundertakethem,itmightbemoreeffectivetocreateentirelynewactionswithanexplicitfocusonequity.Reviewerssuggestedseveralnewequityfocusedactions,including:

• Electricvehiclecar-sharing• Publicaccessplans• Anti-gentrificationpoliciesandbestpractices• Municipalpractices:hiring,contracting• Equityself-assessmentandcommunityprofile.

GeneralfindingsandrecommendationsReviewersnotedinseveralcasesthattheimpactofaSustainableJerseyactiononsocialequitywoulddependonhowitisimplementedbyaparticularmunicipalityunderlocalcircumstances,makingitdifficulttoscoretheaction’slikelyimpactinageneralizedway.Reviewersmadesuggestionsonhowadditionalspecificinstructionsorrequiredstepscouldimprovethelikelihoodthatresidentsfromunderserved,vulnerableandmarginalizedsocialgroupsorneighborhoodswouldbenefit.Oneofkeywaystoachieveafairdistributionofbenefitsandcostsisthroughinclusiveparticipationandtargetedoutreach.Diversegroupsofresidentswithspecialneedsorconcernscanmosteffectivelygetthemmetiftheyhaveaseatatthetable,includingaleadershiproleontheteamdoingtheimplementing.Participationgoesbeyondconsultationtoembracedecision-makingpower.However,thedifficultiesinattractingandenablinganylevelofparticipationbymarginalizedanddisadvantagedgroupsarereal.Informingmembersofunderrepresentedgroupsandmakingthemfeelcomfortablecomingforwardrequirestargeted,tailoredoutreachstrategies,suchasthosementionedaboveintheEstablishaCreativeTeamexample.Reviewersquestionedifandwhenactionsshouldmandatedemonstrationofaffirmativeefforts(a)torecruitdiverseleadershipormembershipinactionteamsand/or(b)toconductoutreachandeducationspecificallytargetedtoreachunderservedneighborhoodsandcommunitymembers.Additionalactionrequirementsmayimprovethelikelihoodthatagivenactionwillimprovesocialequity,buttheyrequiremoreeffortandcomeattheexpenseofaheavierburdenofdocumentation(e.g.,collectingandreportingdatadisaggregatedbyage,gender,race).


14

Thedisincentivesimposedbyheavieractionrequirementsforthepurposeofequitygainscanbecounteractedinafewdifferentways:addadditionalpointsfortheaction,addanoptional‘equitytier’foradditionalpoints,orcreateaseparatenewactionthatdirectlytargetsopportunitiestothepeoplethatmightbeleftoutofthebenefitsfromtheoriginalaction.

Actionsthatbenefittheenvironmenttosomedegreebenefiteveryone,evenifunequally.Ifwemaketheactionaneven“heavierlift,”wearelikelytodecreasethenumberofmunicipalitiesthatarewillingtoundertakeitandeveryonetherebylosesoutontheenvironmentalbenefits.Whentheconcernisthatactionsmaybemorebeneficialtocertainmembersofthecommunitythanothers(e.g.,duetogreateraccessordiscretionarytimeonthepartofbetter-offresidents),abalancingactisinorder.Someactionsmayhaveinequitableconsequencesundersomecircumstancesnotbecauseofanythingthatthemunicipalitydoes,butbecausetheyareimposedonasocietywithahistoryofprofounddiscriminationanddispossession.ThekeyissueforSustainableJerseyanditsconstituentsistounderstandandenacttheroleofmunicipalgovernmentinrightingthewrongsofthepastoratleastcounteractingtheirlegacy.However,actionsthatresultindisadvantagedorvulnerablegroupsbecomingsignificantlyworseoffwithoutcompensationarenotacceptabletoSustainableJersey.Directingopportunitiesforparticipationandbenefitstoreachthebroadestpossiblebasewithinthemunicipalityrequiresinthefirstplaceknowingwholivesandworksthere.ThisistheideabehindthenewactionproposedbytheDiversityandEquityTaskForce:themunicipalequityself-assessmentandcommunityprofile.Thisfoundationalactionwouldinformoutreachandparticipationeffortsofmanyotheractions.Theproposedactionwouldinvolve(a)acompletedemographicprofile,ideallyinaGIS(GeographicInformationSystem)witharesolutionattheneighborhood(censusblock)scale,and(b)morespecializedprofilesofneighborhoodsandsocialgroupsthathavebeenunderservedandunderrepresentedinlocalgovernment,thatbearhistoricallegaciesofdiscrimination,includingdisproportionateenvironmentalburdens,and/orthatmaybeparticularlyvulnerabletoenvironmentaloreconomicshocks.Theactionwouldalsoinvolveaparticipatoryprocesstoidentifythechiefequity-relatedissuesinthemunicipality,withaparticularfocusontheissuesandconcernsofthesegroups,includingtheirpreferredmodesofcommunication.EquityActionScreen:QuantitativeSummaryofResultsThefollowingchartspresentaquantitativesummaryofresultsoftheactionscreeningprocess.Theseresultsmustbeinterpretedwithanumberofprovisosinmind.First,thepurposeofthisexerciseisnottoevaluatetheequityimpactofSustainableJerseyactions,butrathertosortthemintocategoriesforfurtherattention.Asaresult,therewasmodestbutdeliberatebiasinfavoroffindingactionstoberelativelymorelikelytoproduceinequitableimpacts.Inordernottomissanyopportunitiesforimprovementandtoallowfordifferingvalues,ifanyonereviewerhadaconcernaboutagivenactioninrelationtoequity,thecategoryselectedreflectedthemorenegativeassessment.Thus,whilethenumbersinthechartshaveindicativevalue,theydonotrepresentobjectiveevaluationsoftheSustainableJerseyactionset.Moreover,theactionsarenotstatic:anyactionsscreenedas‘inequitable’willbefurtherinvestigatedbyissue-areaexperts,thenrevised,thensubjecttoapprovalbytheCertificationStandardsCommittee.


15

Figure1.EquityImpactofSustainableJerseyActions:Distribution

Figure2.EquityImpactofSustainableJerseyActions:Participation


16

Figure3.EquityImpactofActionsonNeighboringMunicipalitiesBasedontheseresults,afewactions(3)aresuspectedofproducinganinequitabledistributionofbenefitsand30coulduseimprovementinthisarea.Theanalysisfoundaslightlygreaterproportionofactions(8)withperceivedinequitableopportunitiestoparticipateinshapingtheirimplementationandmore(13)withroomforimprovement.Whilenoactionsarethoughttohavenegativedownstreameffectsonneighboringmunicipalities,therearemanythatarecurrentlymissingopportunitiestocollaborateregionally.Equityconcernsarenotapplicabletoapluralityofactions.Aminorityofactionsascurrentlywrittenareseentohaveahighandunambiguouslikelihoodofimprovingsocialequity.However,thereisplentyofscopeforimprovementofactionsthatmaybemissingopportunitiestodomoretoenhancesocialequity.


17

QuantitativeAnalysisofProgrammaticData

TheprevioussectionprimarilyfocusedonhowSustainableJerseyactionsaffectinequitywithinmunicipalboundaries.However,aswehaveseen,inequityinNewJerseyismuchgreaterbetweenmunicipalitiesthanitiswithinthem.Intermsofthenumbersaffected,povertyremainsconcentratedinurbancenters.Yet,atthesamepovertyisalsodeepeninginsmall,moreruralmunicipalities,particularlyinthesouthernpartofthestate.NewJersey’smunicipalitiesalsovarygreatlyinsocialcomposition.Whileimmigrantsandpeopleofcoloraregravitatingtocities,manysmalltownsremainnearlyraciallyhomogeneous(29%haveapopulationthatismorethan95%white).Municipalitiesofdifferentsizes,levelsofwealth,andsocialcompositionarelikelytoexperiencedifferingadvantagesorbarrierstogainingbenefitsfromparticipationinavoluntaryanddemandingprogramsuchasSustainableJersey.Couldtheprogramunintentionallybefavoringonetypeofmunicipalityoveranother?Doesonetypeofmunicipalitybenefitmorethanothers?ThissectionminestherichsetofprogrammaticdatamaintainedbySustainableJerseyforevidenceofanysystemicbiasinthelevelsofsuccessdifferentmunicipalitiesexperienceinprogressingincertificationandinobtaininggrants.MunicipalParticipationandPerformanceinCertificationInorderofaccomplishmentanddifficulty,thelevelsofparticipationintheSustainableJerseyprograminclude:notregistered(i.e.,notparticipating),notcertified(i.e.,registeredbutnotcertified),Bronze-certified,andSilver-certified.FormationofaGreenTeamandamunicipalresolutionofintenttoparticipatearetheonlyrequirementsforregistration.Bronze-certifiedmunicipalitieshavecompletedselectedpriorityactions,alongwithothersthatadduptoatleast150points;350pointsandmorepriorityactionsarerequiredtoattainSilvercertification.(ThereisnotyetacompleteGoldlevelofcertification.)AsofApril1,2019therewere245registered,149bronzeand55Silvermunicipalitiesoutof565inthestate.Forthisanalysis,thecurrentstatusofmunicipalitiesintheprogramwasderivedfromtheSustainableJerseywebsite.TheMunicipalRevitalizationIndex(MRI),asdefinedbytheNewJerseyDepartmentofCommunityAffairs,3providedasingle,summativemeasureofdisadvantage.Alsoknownasthe“municipaldistressscore,”theMRIranksNewJersey’smunicipalitiesaccordingtomultiple,weightedindicatorsoflocalconditions,includingpoverty,unemployment,householdincome,publicassistance,highschoolgraduationandpopulationchange.Thescorerangesfrom0to100,withCityofCamdenrepresentingthehighestlevelofdistress,ascoreof100.Whileindiceshavethedisadvantageofconflatingtheunderlyingfactors,theMRIisusefulasasinglevariablethatiswell-knownandconsequential(itisusedbystategovernmentasafactorindistributingcertainneed-basedfunds).

3NewJerseyDepartmentofCommunityAffairs.MeasuringDistressinNewJersey:The2017MunicipalRevitalizationIndex.


18

Figure4showstheaveragedistressscore(MRI)forallmunicipalitiescategorizedbytherisinglevelsofachievementintheprogram.Althoughthemeanvaluesarenotfarapart(differingby5outof100points),aclearpatternisevident.Lowermunicipaldistress(i.e.,higherMRI)isassociatedwithgreatersuccessinthecertificationprogram.Yet,applyingastatisticaltestforthecomparisonofmeanvalues(ANOVA)revealsthatthereisnostatisticallysignificantdifferenceamongthefourcertificationcategories(seeTest1a.insummarytableofstatisticalresultsfoundinAppendixIV).Notethatthisdoesnotmeanthatthereisnorelationship,justthatitcannotbeestablishedwithina95%confidencelevel(p>0.05).Infact,whenthecategoriesarecollapsedtotwo,certifiedvs.non-certified,therelationshipwithmunicipaldistressbecomessignificant(Test1b).Moreover,whenweapplyadifferentstatisticaltest(bivariatelogisticregression,Test1c),wefindthathighercertificationlevelsaresignificantly,thoughweakly,associatedwithalowerdistressscore.

Figure4.AverageDistressScore(2017)byCertificationLevel(2018)Aplotofthetotalnumberofpointsearnedbyeverymunicipality(Figure5)providesanotherwayofillustratingthelackofanobvious,strongpatternintherelationshipbetweenmunicipaldistressandperformanceintheprogram.Notethepresenceofoutliers,aswellastheclusteringofvaluesatalllevelsofdistressalongthebronze(150)and,toalesserextentsilver(350),thresholdpointlevels.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

NotRegistered NotCertified Bronze Silver


19

Figure5.TotalSustainableJerseyPointsbyDistressScore

WhenthecompositefactorsintheMRIaredecomposed,therelationshipstestedarenostronger.TheaveragepovertyrateappearstodeclinewithincreasedperformanceuptoBronzecertification,butthedifferencesarenotstatisticallysignificant(test15).Theaverageofthe‘meanhouseholdincome’riseswitheachlevelofinvolvementintheprogram,thoughthedifferencesareonlystatisticallysignificantforthenotregisteredandregisteredbutnotcertifiedmunicipalities.AselsewhereintheU.S.,BlackandLatinosinNewJerseyaremorelikelytoliveinpovertyandindistressedmunicipalities.Theroleofmunicipalgovernmentinthehistoryofracialdiscriminationinthiscountry(Rothstein,2017)makesitcriticallyimportanttoinvestigateanypotentialracialbiasintheSustainableJerseyprogram.Inadditiontorace,alegacyofdiscriminationisassociatedwiththecensuscategory“Hispanic,”aclusterofSpanish-speaking


20

ethnicitiesthatincludespeoplewhoidentifythemselvesonthecensusasbelongingtovariousraces.Onewaytodisentanglethemultivariaterelationshipsinvolvedistocomparetheaveragepercentagecompositionbyoneraceatatimeformunicipalitiesateachlevelofcertification(Test6a-11b).Whetherfourlevelsaredistinguishedoronlytwo,therearenosignificantdifferencesforanyraceorethnicityexceptAsian.AhigherpercentageofAsianresidentsispositivelyassociatedwithhigherlevelsofcertification.Anotherwaytoexaminethecomplexrelationshipsinvolvedistocomparethepercentagesofallpeopleofoneraceorethnicitywholiveinmunicipalitiesofparticularcertificationlevels.AsshowninFigure6,BlacksandWhitesareeachequallylikelytoliveinacertified(vs.non-certified)municipality.Hispanicsareslightlylesslikely,andAsiansdistinctlymorelikely,toliveinacertifiedmunicipality.

Figure6.CertificationStatusofdifferentracialgroupsinN.J.(U.S.Census,2010)Thefactthatimportantmunicipalcharacteristicssuchasrace,incomeandmunicipaldistress,arecorrelatedwitheachothermakesitdifficulttodeterminewhichcharacteristicsare


21

independentlyassociatedwithadvantagesinachievingcertification.Oneofthemostsignificantconflatingfactorsismunicipalpopulation.InNewJersey,whilethelargercitiesarethemostdistressed,withthehighestconcentrationofnon-whiteandlow-incomeresidents,theyalsohavelargerbudgets,moreprofessionalstaffandaccesstomorefederalandothersourcesofaidthandosmallmunicipalities.Someofthemostprosperousmunicipalitiesareverysmall,andconsequentlyhavelowcapacitytoparticipateinavoluntaryprogramsuchasSustainableJersey.Inparticular,asmallmunicipality,withonlypart-timestaffandmunicipalofficials,willhavedifficultyincomplyingwiththedocumentationburdenthatincreaseswitheachlevelofcertification.Populationisthusaproxyformunicipalcapacity.Thedatavalidatetheseobservations.AsshowninFigure7,largermunicipalpopulationisassociatedwithhighercertificationlevel(Test3a).However,furtheranalysisshowsthatthedifferenceinaveragepopulationsissignificantonlyforthenot-registeredandSilvercategories(Test3b).Thismeansthatwhilesmallertownsarelesslikelytoregister,largercitieshaveanadvantageinreachingSilver,andpopulationisnotafactoringettingcertifiedattheentry(Bronze)level.


22

Figure7.AverageMunicipalPopulation(2015)byCertificationLevelWhenbothfactorsarecombined,wefindthatevenwhenholdingpopulationconstant,lessdistressedmunicipalitiesaresignificantlymorelikelytoberegisteredandarealsomorelikelytobecertified(Test4and5).However,whiletherelationshipsaresignificant,theyareweak:populationanddistresstogetherexplainlessthan10%ofthevariationincertificationlevel(r2,Test5).Therefore,thequantitativeanalysisofprogrammaticdatademonstratesthatfactorsotherthanmunicipaldistress,racialcompositionorpopulationmustexplainsuccessinattainingSustainableJerseycertification.Inotherwords,distressedmunicipalitiesdonotappeartofaceanysystematicbiasinachievingSustainableJerseycertification.Thisresultpointstothelimitationsofquantitativeanalysisinthiscontext.Itcaneliminateorsupportcertaintypesofhypotheses,butitcannotaccountfortheparticularconstellationofinteractingfactorsandcausalmechanismsatplay.Inordertoinvestigatetheinterplaywithalternativepredictorsofprogramperformance,suchasthepresenceoflocalchampionsoradvocacygroups,qualitativeapproaches,suchasfocusgroups,interviewsandin-depthcasestudies,wouldberequired.

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

NotRegistered NotCertified Bronze Silver


23

MunicipalParticipationandPerformanceinObtainingGrantsGrantsofmoneyandtechnicalassistanceareoneformoftangiblebenefitmunicipalitiesreceivefromparticipatingintheSustainableJerseyprogram.Thissectionexamineshowthedistributionofgrantassistanceamongmunicipalitiesdifferwithrespecttofactorsinsocialequity.Fromitsinceptionthrough2018,SustainableJerseyhasawarded3.9milliondollarsingrantstomunicipalities,ranginginsizefromnumerous$2,000capacity-buildinggrantstofewer,morecompetitivegrantsforprojectsupto$30,000.SustainableJerseystaffprovideoutreachandsupportmunicipalitiesinthepreparationofgrantapplications,butdecisionsongrantawardsaremadeindependentlybyvolunteerexpertjuries.Whilethestrengthoftheapplicationisalwaystheprimarycriterioninmakinggrantawards,juriesareencouragedtoapplyaffirmativeactionconsiderationsinweighingtheirdecisions,specificallyintermsofgeographicaldistributionandmunicipaldistressscore.ThisanalysiswasbasedontheSustainableJerseydatabaseforgrantsawardedsince2014.Municipalbenefitfromthegrantsprogramwasassessedintermsofthreevariables:(1)totalnumbersofgrantsreceivedbymunicipality,(2)totaldollarsreceivedbymunicipality,and(3)rateofsuccessingrantapplications.Afewfactsaboutparticipationinthegrantsprogramprovidesomeperspectiveininterpretingthedata.Since2014,only46%ofregisteredmunicipalitieshaveeverappliedforaSustainableJerseygrantofanytypeandonly39%haveeverobtainedone.Atthesametime,othermunicipalitieshavewonmultiplegrantawards,includingtenwhohavereceivedfourorfive.Clearly,self-selectionplaysafactor.Municipalitieswithlow-capacitygreenteamsduetosmallsize,distressfactorsorbotharepresumablylesslikelytoapplyforgrantsinthefirstplace.Figure8illustratesthedistributionofthenumberofallgrantsawardedpermunicipalitysince2014plottedagainstdistressscore.Thelackofapatternvisuallyapparentinthisdiagramisborneoutbystatisticaltests.Nostatisticallysignificantcorrelationwasfoundbetweenmunicipaldistressscoreandanyofthethreevariablesreflectingmunicipalbenefitfromthegrantsprogram(Test17).


24

Figure8.NumberofGrantsReceived(2018)byDistressScoreAswehaveobservedaboveforcertificationlevel,anycorrelationthatmightexistbetweenhigherdistressscoresandlowergrantsuccessmaybeobscuredbythetendencyformoredistressedmunicipalitiestohavelargerpopulations,whichareassociatedgreatermunicipalcapacity.Infact,populationisfoundtobesignificantlycorrelatedwithallthreemeasuresofgrantperformance.However,populationexplainsonly4.3%ofthevariation(Test16)evenforthestrongestoftheserelationships,namely,withtotalgrantamount.ThesefindingsprovidesupportforthepremisethataffirmativeactiononthepartoftheSustainableJerseygrantselectioncommitteeshasbeeneffectiveincounterbalancinganybarrierstosuccessfulgrantapplicationsthatmaybefacedbydistressedmunicipalitiesasaclass.ThegreaterconcernshouldthenbethatsomanymunicipalitiesfailinthefirstplacetoapplyforSustainableJerseygrants,includingeventheeasy-to-win$2,000grantsspecificallydesignedtohelpbuildmunicipalcapacity.Althoughfurtherresearchwouldbeneededtoconfirmthishypothesis,thedatasuggestthatsmall,distressedmunicipalitiesaretheleastlikelytopursueorbenefitfromSustainableJerseygrantopportunities.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

MunicipalDistressLevel

Numberofgrants


25

ConclusionsandNextSteps

ThegeneralfindingsofthequantitativeanalysissupporttheconclusionthatdistressedmunicipalitiesdonotappeartofaceanysystematicbiasinachievingSustainableJerseycertificationorobtainingSustainableJerseygrants.NoristhereanyapparentracialbiasinopportunitiestoparticipateinandbenefitfromtheSustainableJerseyprogram.Smallermunicipalities,withpresumedlessercapacity,experiencemoredifficultiesinadvancingintheprogram.Furtherresearchisnecessarytodiscoverthenatureofthesuccessfactorsandobstaclesthataccountforthevariationinmunicipalperformanceincertificationandcompetitionforgrants.Sincepopulationwasfoundtobeasignificant(ifweak)successfactorinbothareas,attentionfocusedonthechallengesandneedsofsmallerdistressedmunicipalitiescouldexpandthereachoftheprogram.InthefirstdecadeofitsexistenceSustainableJerseyhasprovidedequitablesupportinspiration,guidanceandresourcestoNewJerseymunicipalitiesintheireffortstopromoteenvironmental,economicandsocialsustainability.ThisisatleastinpartduetotheexplicitfocusonequityinSustainableJersey’smission,andvariousformsofformalandinformalaffirmativeactionintegratedintoprogramoperations.Inthenextdecadethechallengethenbecomes:canSustainableJerseygoastepfurtherandbecomeadriverforadvancingsocialequityasanintegralelementofsustainability?Thischallengeraisesfurtherquestionstoconsider.Wouldbecomingmorerelevantandeffectiveinaddressingequityissuesdrivemoreparticipationinprogram?Mightashiftinthisdirectionhelpandinspireunregisteredmunicipalitiestojointheprogram?Woulditmotivateregisteredbutuncertifiedmunicipalitiestotakeactionandbecomecertified?Woulditassistthemunicipalitiesstuckforyearsat150points(theminimumfor‘bronze’)tomoveforwardandtakeonnewactions?WouldeffectivelytargetedoutreachandextraaffirmativesupportmakethedifferenceforsmallerdistressedcommunitiesinSouthJersey,aswellaslargerdistressedcities(e.g.,Newark)thathaverecentlydroppedoutofcertification?Theresultsoftheequityactionscreenindicatethatthereisagreatdealofpotentialforrevisingexistingactionsaswellascreatingnewactionstomoreproactivelyadvancesocialequity.SomeofthesestepshavealreadybeentakenbySustainableJerseyasofthetimeofthiswriting,andsomewillunfoldoverthenextseveralyears.Thusfar,theresultsoftheequityactionscreeningprocessandthequantitativeprogrammaticanalysishavebeenpresentedatmeetingsofstaff(4/1/19),theDiversityandEquityTaskForce(3/7/19,4/9/19)andtheCertificationStandardsCommittee(4/26/19).Thosefruitfuldiscussionshaveinformedthisreportandhavecontinuedatsubsequentmeetings.ThefindingsofthisresearchhavealsobeenpresentedanddiscussedatSustainableJersey’sannualJuneSustainabilitySummit,attendedbyover600membersofGreenTeams,partneragencies,non-profits,exhibitorsandpresenters.Aspreparationfortheworkahead,theDiversityandEquityTaskForcehasprioritizedforattentionthelistofactionsidentifiedaslikelytohaveaninequitableimpactandassigning


26

responsibilityforrevisions.Thelistsofactionsascategorizedbytheequityscreeningprocesswillbedistributedforrevisiontoeachoftherelevantsubjectmattertaskforces.Eachtaskforcewillreviewandprioritizeamongtheactionsintheirareathathavebeenflaggedforequityconcerns.Inordertooptimizescarceresources,indecidingwhichexistingactionstorevise,taskforceswillalsoconsidertheirpopularityandeffectiveimpactonsustainability.DiscussionswithSustainableJerseystaffandtheDiversityandEquityTaskForcecametotheconclusionthatthedevelopmentofnewactionstofillgapsmayyieldgreaterdividendsthanrevisingexistingactions.WorkhasalreadybegunontheproposedEquityself-assessmentandcommunityprofileaction.Completingthisfoundationalactionwillgivemunicipalitiesthekeytotargetingmoreeffectiveinclusionofmarginalizedandunderrepresentedmembersoftheircommunityintheprocessofimplementing(andbenefittingfrom)manyotheractions.TheconcurrentlaunchofamajornewSustainableJerseyinitiative,aRobertWoodJohnsonfundedprojectentitledLeveragingtheSustainableJerseyCertificationtoBuildaCultureofHealth,promisestoprovidenumeroussynergieswiththeequityinitiative.Advancinghealthequityisafundamentalobjectiveofthisproject,whichisbackedbygrantresourcesandanewHealthTaskForcewithbroad-basedexpertiseinthefield.Earlydiscussionshavegeneratedalistofpotentialnewactionswithmajorpotentialequityimpact,includingseveralinanewarenaforSustainableJersey,safeandaffordablehousing:addressingcodeenforcement,addressingleadpaintandleadservicelines.InorderforthelearningfromtheequityscreeningexercisetohaveasignificantandtransformativeimpactthatmaximizesthepotentialofSustainableJerseytopromotesocialequity,itmustbeinstitutionalizedintheprogram.TheCertificationStandardsCommitteehasrecentlyapprovedapolicythatadoptstheequityscreenasastandardfortheapprovalofallfutureactions.Theequitypolicywillprovideguidancetotaskforcemembersandstaffinthedevelopmentfutureactions.Thefindingsofthisequityanalysis,therecommendationsitmakes,andthequestionsitraises,havealsoprovidedrichmaterialforthewide-rangingcollective‘re-think’oftheentireprogramwhichSustainableJerseyhasundertakeninrecognitionoftheten-yearanniversaryofitsfounding.ThismomentprovidesajunctureforSustainableJerseytoenactanexplicitcommitmenttoadvancingsocialequityasacorevalueandfundamentaldimensionofsustainability.


27

ReferencesCole,L.W.andS.R.Foster.2001.FromtheGroundUp:EnvironmentalRacismandtheRiseofthe

EnvironmentalJusticeMovement.NewYork:NYUPress.Foster,S.etal.2019.NewYorkCityPanelonClimateChange2019Report,Chapter6:

Community-BasedAssessmentsofAdaptationandEquity.In,SpecialIssue:AdvancingToolsandMethodsforFlexibleAdaptationPathwaysandSciencePolicyIntegration.Ann.N.Y.Acad.Sci.1439(2019)126–173.

Fraser,N.2009.ScalesofJustice:ReimaginingPoliticalSpaceinaGlobalizingWord.NewYork:

ColumbiaUniversityPress.Jennings,V.andGaither,C.J.2015.ApproachingEnvironmentalHealthDisparitiesandGreen

Spaces:AnEcosystemServicesPerspective.Int.J.Environ.Res.PublicHealth12:1952-1968.

Leichenko,R.,Y.Klein,M.Panero,D.Major,andP.Vancura.2011.EquityandEconomics.Annals

oftheNewYorkAcademyofSciences,RespondingtoClimateChangeinNewYorkState:TheClimAIDIntegratedAssessmentforEffectiveClimateChangeAdaptationFinalReport1244:62–78.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06331.x

McDermott,M.,S.Mahanty&K.Schreckenberg.2013.ExaminingEquity:aMultidimensional

FrameworkforAssessingEquityinPaymentsforEcosystemServices.Environ.Sci.Policy33:416-427.

Nelson,J.2015.RacialEquityToolkit:AnOpportunitytoOperationalizeEquity.Government

AllianceonRacialEquity.NewJerseyDepartmentofCommunityAffairs.[Nodate].MeasuringDistressinNewJersey:The

2017MunicipalRevitalizationIndex.Rothstein,Richard.2017.TheColorofLaw:AForgottenHistoryofHowOurGovernment

SegregatedAmerica.NewYork;London:LiverightPublishing.Schlosberg,D.2013.TheorisingEnvironmentalJustice:TheExpandingSphereofaDiscourse.

Environ.Polit.22:37-55.SustainableCT.2019.SustainableCTEquityToolkit.(Availableonsustainablect.org).U.S.EPA(EnvironmentalProtectionAgency).1992.EnvironmentalEquity:ReducingRisksforAll

Communities.Washington,DC:U.S.EPA.Whytlaw,Jennifer,J.Herb,andM.Greenberg.July2019.IntersectionofRace,Incomeand

EnvironmentalFactorsinNewJersey:AScreeningAnalysis,EnvironmentalAnalysis&CommunicationsGroup,RutgersUniversityBlousteinSchoolofPlanningandPublicPolicy.


28

AppendixI–DiversityandEquityTaskForce(2018)Nathaly Agosto-Filion CityofNewark

Diane Bates TheCollegeofNewJersey

Staci Berger Housing&CommunityDevelopmentNetworkofNJ

Irene BolandNielson USEPA–Region2

Laureen Boles NewJerseyEnvironmentalJusticeAlliance

Kelly Boyd NewJerseyOEM

Caroline Ehrlich Woodbridge,SustainableJerseyBoard

Dan Fatton WorkEnvironmentCouncil

Charnett Frederic Irvington

Olivia GlennNewJerseyConservationFoundation-CamdenProgram

Molly Greenberg IronboundCommunityCorp.,NJEAJ

Jennifer Godoski NJNaturalResources

Fletcher Harper Greenfaith

Renee Koubiadis NationalAssociationofSocialWorkers(NASW)

Toni Lewis,MPH,HO NewJerseyHealthInitiatives

Melanie McDermott SustainabilityInstituteatTCNJ

Cynthia Mellon NewarkEnvironmentalCommission

Riche Outlaw NewJerseyDEP

Crystal Owensby NewJerseyDeptofHealth

Nicky SheatsNewJerseyEnvironmentalJusticeAlliance,CentralNewJersey

Randy Solomon SustainabilityInstituteatTCNJ

Jay Watson D&RGreenway,formerAsst.Commissioner,NJDEP


29

AppendixII.SJEquityActionScreen(GoogleForm)andGuide

SJEquityActionScreenThisformtakesyouthroughtheprocessofscreeningSustainableJerseyactionsfortheirpotentialimpactsonsocialequity.Thepurposeis(a)tosorttheminto'buckets'basedontheneedtorevisethem(ornot)inordertohavea(more)positiveimpactonequity,and(b)tocaptureyourideason*how*theymightberevisedtodoso.(Pleaseseeguidancedocumentfordefinitionsandmoreinformation.)

1. NameofSustainableJerseyActionreviewed

2. Distribution:Arethebenefitsandburdensofimplementingthisactionlikelytobeequitablydistributed?Ifitwillhavelittledirectordifferentialimpactonindividuals,select5(notapplicable).Otherwise,ratelikelyimpactonascoreof1(inequitable)to4(equitable).

Markonlyoneoval.

ActionhasinequitableimpactActionmayhaveslightlyinequitableimpact

Actionmayslightlyimprovesocialequity

Actionimprovessocialequity

NotApplicable

3. Howcouldthisactiondoabetterjobofdistributingcostsandbenefitsinawaythatimprovessocialequity?4. Participation:Doallsocialgroupshaveameaningfulopportunitytoparticipateindecisionsinvolvedintheimplementationofthisaction?Iftherearenodecisionsinvolvedandtheactioncannotreasonablyinvolveaparticipatoryelement,select5(notapplicable).Otherwise,ratelikelyimpactonascoreof1(inequitableopportunitiestoparticipate)to4(equitableopportunitiestoparticipate).

Markonlyoneoval.OpportunitiestoparticipateareinequitableOpportunitiestoparticipateareslightlyinequitableOpportunitiestoparticipatecouldbemoreequitable


30

OpportunitiestoparticipateareequitableNotApplicable

5. Howcouldthisactiondoabetterjobofinvolvingparticipationbyallsocialgroupsinthecommunity?6. Scale:Areneighboring(“downstream”)municipalitieslikelytofeelnegativeimpactsfromthisaction?Wherepossible,doestheactionimproveconditionsforneighboringmunicipalities?Ifithasnoforeseeableimpactonneighboringmunicipalities,select5(notapplicable).Otherwise,ratetheimpactonneighboringmunicipalitiesonascoreof1(inequitable)to4(equitable).

Markonlyoneoval.ActionhasnegativeimpactonneighboringmunicipalitiesActionmayhaveslightlyinequitableimpactonneighboringmunicipalitiesActionleadstoslightimprovementsinneighboringmunicipalitiesActionsleadstosignificantimprovementinneighboringmunicipalitiesNotApplicable

7. Howcouldthisactionhavelessnegativeand/ormorepositiveimpactsonneighboringmunicipalities?Howcoulditpromotemunicipalcollaborationtoreduceregionaldisparities?8. Helpusinnovate!Pleaserecordanyideasfor*new*actionsforadvancingsocialequitythatmightsupplementtheactionyouarereviewing.


31

GuidetoEquityScreenofSJActionsThisguideprovidesmoredetailedexplanation,contextanddefinitionsforusingtheSJActionEquityScreenGoogleform.TheformtakesyouthroughtheprocessofscreeningSustainableJerseyactionsfortheirpotentialimpactsonsocialequity.Thepurposeis(a)tosorttheminto'buckets'basedontheneedtorevisethem(ornot)inordertohaveamorepositiveimpactonequityand(b)tocaptureyourideasonhowtheymightberevisedtodoso.

• Thefirststepistoreadthroughtheentireaction,foundontheSJwebsite.• Then,openanewGoogleformandlabelitwiththecompletenameoftheaction.• Thescreenerisaskedtoratetheactiononeachofthreedifferentelementsofsocial

equity:distribution,participationandscale.Foreachofthethreeelements,insteadofratingtheaction,thescreenerhastheoptionofclassifyingtheactionas‘NotApplicable’.Thismeansthattheactionhasnoforeseeablesignificantimpactonanydimensionofsocialequity.Inotherwords,(a)theactionisunlikelytoaffectdifferentsocialgroupsdifferentlyinsuchawaythatonegroupmightbeleftoutofreceivingbenefits,bearmorecost,ortakeonmorerisk,or(b)theactionisnotmissinganopportunitytobecomeavehicleforimprovingequity.Thescreenerwouldthenmoveontothenextelementofequity.Inmanycases,whenanactionisreallyirrelevanttosocialequityitwouldgeta‘notapplicable’forallthreeelements.However,thiswillnotalwaysbetrue,sotheformshouldbefilledoutinfull.Forexample,someactionsmightberankedfordistributionas“inequitableimpact”basedonhowfairlythebenefitsandburdensaredistributed,butmightbemarked“N.A.”forparticipationifthereisnofeasibleorrelevantopportunityforpublicparticipation(beyondwhatisalreadymandatedbylaw).

• Inaseparateentryundereachelement,thescreenerisinvitedtoenterwrittencommentonhowtheactioncouldberevisedtobetteradvancethataspectofsocialequity.

• ThelastquestionprovidesaplacewherethescreenerisinvitedtowritedownideasfornewactionsthatwouldfillingapsinhowexistingSustainableJerseyadvancesocialequity.Sometimes,ratherthanlayeronanequityelementtotheactionbeingreviewed,itmightseembettertocreateanewactionthatisfocusedonequity.

• YourwritteninputwillbeextremelyvaluabletostrengtheningtheSJprogram!

Takingthetimetorecordyourideasandsuggestionsongapsandimprovementswillbedeeplyappreciated.


32

AppendixIII.ResultsofEquityActionScreenCategoriesofSustainableJerseyactionsbasedonpriorityforrevisiontoimprovesocialequityimpactPriorityforrevision-Inequitableimpactlikely,basedon:1)DistributionofBenefitsandCosts

• Pay-As-You-Throw• PublicElectricVehicleChargingInfrastructure• BuyFreshBuyLocalPrograms

2)Participation–Opportunitiestomakedecisions

• BrownfieldsInventoryandPrioritization• BrownfieldsMarketing• EnvironmentalCommission• EnvironmentalCommissionSitePlanReview• MunicipalCommitmentstoSupportArts&CreativeCulture• UtilizingYourCreativeAssets• WildfireSafetyCouncil• Community-LedSolarInitiatives• [HealthinAllPolicies–reviewbasedonversionofactionnowsuperseded]

3)[NeighboringMunicipalities–ImpactandCollaboration(0actionslisted)]

Potentialforimprovement–Slightlyinequitableimpact,basedon:4)DistributionofBenefitsandCosts

• BackyardComposting• EnhancedLicensingCompliance• RecyclingandWasteReductionEducationandCompliance• RecyclingDepot• SmartWorkplaces• WaterConservationOrdinance• EasementInventoryandOutreach• CreateGreenTeam• HistoricPreservationElement• MunicipalCommitmentstoSupporttheArts• WildfireSafetyCouncil• UtilizingYourCreativeAssets• CoastalVulnerabilitiesAssessment• HouseholdHazardousWaste• WindOrdinance


33

• CreativePlacemakingPlan• EstablishaCreativeTeam• FarmlandPreservationPlans• Tree-plantingPrograms• CommunityGardens• FarmersMarkets• BuildingHealthyCommunities• ClimateActionPlan• GreenChallenges• HoldaGreenFair• CommunityWildfireProtectionPlans• OpenSpacePlans• BrownfieldsMarketing• ReusableBagEducationProgram• MakeYourTownSolarFriendly

5)Participation–Opportunitiestomakedecisions• CoastalVulnerabilityAssessment• WindOrdinance• CreativePlacemakingPlan• FarmlandPreservationPlans• EstablishaCreativeTeam• TreePlantingPrograms• CommunityGardens• FarmersMarkets• BuildingHealthyCommunities• CreativeAssetsInventory• GreenBuildingEducation• NaturalResourcesInventory• LeadEducationandOutreachProgram

6)NeighboringMunicipalities–ImpactandCollaboration

• Smoke-FreeandTobacco-FreePublicPlaces• EnvironmentalJusticeinPlanningandZoning• MakingFarmersMarketsAccessible• WindOrdinance• BrownfieldsMarketing• BuyLocalCampaign• PublicElectricVehicleChargingInfrastructure• FarmersMarkets• MakeYourTownElectricVehicleFriendly


34

AppendixIV–StatisticalResults

Test# Variable1 Variable2 DependentVariable TestDone Significance

Level R2Range

1a MRI CF4 ANOVA 0.093

1b MRI CF2 ANOVA 0.018

1c MRI CF2 BinaryLogisticRegression

0.019 0.01–0.014

2 MRI Population NotRegvsReg

BinaryLogisticRegression

0.023,0.00 0.079–0.124

3a Population CF4 ANOVA 0.00

3b Population CF4 TUKEYTest NotRegvNotCert–0.024NotRegvBronzeandSilver–0.00SilvervBronze–0.024

4 Population CF2 ANOVA 0.00

5 Population MRI CF2 BinaryLogisticRegression

0.00,0.00 0.063–0.086

6a RaceWhite%

CF2 ANOVA 0.074

6b RaceWhite%

CF4 ANOVA 0.062

7a RaceWhite%Alone

CF2 ANOVA 0.196

7b RaceWhite%Alone

CF4 ANOVA 0.232

8a RaceHispanic%

CF2 ANOVA 0.508


35

8b RaceHispanic%

CF4 ANOVA 0.896

9a RaceBlack% CL2 ANOVA 0.249

9b RaceBlack% CL4 ANOVA 0.156

10a RaceAsian% CL4 ANOVA 0.008

10b RaceAsian% CL4 TUKEYTest NotRegv.Bronze–0.01NotRegv.Silver–0.032

11a RaceAsian% CL2 ANOVA 0.001

11b RaceAsian% CL2 BinaryLogisticRegression

0.002 0.018–0.024

12a MedianHHIncome

CL4 ANOVA 0.012

12b MedianHHIncome

CL4 TUKEYtest NotCertv.Silver–0.05

13a MedianHHIncome

CL2 ANOVA 0.001

13b MedianHHIncome

CL2 BinaryLogisticRegression

0.002 0.018–0.024

15 PovertyRate CL4 ANOVA 0.808

16 Grants Population BivariateCorrelation

Significantat0.05

.044

17 Grants MRI BivariateCorrelation

NotSignificant


36

TheFollowingaretheoutputtablesfromtheSPSS25analysis:

Test1a.MRIANOVASignificanceof0.093–NotSignificant0=NR,1=NC,2=B,3=S

Test1b.MRIANOVASignificant1=Silver,Bronze


37

MRIBoxPlotDistribution

Test1c.MRIBinaryLogisticRegression0=Silver,Bronze

Also,Test1c.MRIBinaryRegressionR-square

Test2.MRIBinaryLogisticRegressionControllingforPopulationNotRegisteredvsRegisteredVariablesenteredonstep1:DistressScore,Population


38

Also,Test2.MRIBinaryLogisticRegressionControllingforPopulation1=Registered0=NotRegistered

Test3a.PopulationANOVAwith0=NR,1=NC,2=B,3=SCL(4)

Test3b.PopulationANOVAwithTUKEYTest


39


40

PopulationBoxPlotDistribution

Test4.PopulationANOVA1=Silver,Bronze0=NotRegistered,NotCertified

Test5.PopulationandMRIregressionwith1=Silver,Bronze(Page25,26)


41

Also,Test5.PopulationandMRIregressionwith1=Silver,BronzeR-squared

Test6a.RaceWhiteANOVA--NotSignificantCL(2)

Test6b.RaceWhiteANOVA–NotSignificantCL(4)

Test7a.RaceWhite%AloneCL(2)ANOVA–NotSignificant


42

Test7b.RaceWhiteAlone%ANOVA–NotSignificantCL(4)

Test8a.RaceHispanic%CL(2)ANOVA–NotSignificant

Test8b.RaceHispanic%CL(4)ANOVA–NotSignificant


43

Test9a.RaceBlack%CL(2)ANOVA–NotSignificant

Test9bRaceBlack%CL(4)ANOVA–NotSignificant

Test10a.RaceAsian%CL(4)ANOVA–Significant

Test10b.RaceAsian%TUKEY


44

Test11a.RaceAsian%1=Silver,BronzeANOVATest11b.RaceAsian%1=Silver,BronzeRegression

Test11b.RaceAsian%RegressionR-Squared

Test12a.MedianHouseholdIncomeANOVACL4


45

Test12b.MedianHouseholdIncomeTUKEYtest


46

Test13a.MedianHouseholdIncomeANOVA1=Silver,Bronze

Test13b.MedianHouseholdIncomeBinaryLogisticRegression


47

Test13b.MedianHouseholdIncomeBinaryLogisticRegressionR-squared

Test14.PovertyRateANOVA–NotSignificant

GrantsReceivedBoxPlotDistribution

Test15.GrantsPopulationBivariateCorrelationwithPopulation


48

Test16a.GrantsMRIBivariateCorrelationwithMRI(AllGrants)

Test16b.GrantsMRIBivariateCorrelationwithMRI(OnlyStatewideGrants)

Equity Report Sustainable Jersey 2-20-20...4. Integrate social equity across the Sustainable Jersey...

Documents

Transcript of Equity Report Sustainable Jersey 2-20-20...4. Integrate social equity across the Sustainable Jersey...