Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorJudith A. Layzer.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMadden, Sarah (Sarah Anne)en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.coverage.spatialn-us-paen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-10-29T18:30:33Z
dc.date.available2010-10-29T18:30:33Z
dc.date.copyright2010en_US
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/59750
dc.descriptionThesis (M.C.P.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 2010.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 44-49).en_US
dc.description.abstractAll modem cities-characterized by paved roads, rooftops, parking lots, and impacted soils-have serious problems with stormwater, and those problems are only growing as urbanization proceeds and climate change causes more severe weather events. Historically, cities have used gray infrastructure to manage stormwater; this is not only costly but causes an array of environmental problems. Proponents have long advocated using a green infrastructure approach, which has numerous advantages over traditional gray infrastructure systems. Nevertheless, very few U.S. cities have invested in green infrastructure on a significant scale. The question, then, is why have cities resisted adopting green infrastructure, and what would it take for them to choose a landscape-based approach to stormwater management over a conventional engineering solution? To answer this question, I studied a city that recently decided to embrace green infrastructure in a big way: Philadelphia. I argue that (i) new stormwater regulations and the 1990 withdrawal of federal funding changed the constraints and incentives for the city to make green infrastructure viable, particularly for a cash-strapped city; (2) a policy entrepreneur in the Philadelphia Water Department did two key things in preparation for a future policy window: he created an office organized around watersheds, and began redefining the problem; and (3) the policy entrepreneur capitalized on a regulatory policy window, the Combined Sewer Overflow Long Term Control Plan Update, that garnered momentum from the city's decision to "re-brand" itself as a green city and galvanized support for the $1.6 billion plan for green infrastructure across the city. These conclusions are supported by evidence from Philadelphia's decision to adopt a green infrastructure approach to manage runoff. Finally, I discuss the implications of these findings and make recommendations for the implementation of the plan.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Sarah Madden.en_US
dc.format.extent49 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectUrban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.titleChoosing green over gray : Philadelphia's innovative stormwater infrastructure planen_US
dc.title.alternativePhiladelphia's innovative stormwater infrastructure planen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeM.C.P.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning
dc.identifier.oclc670433292en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record