Sustainable Urban Planning Students Showcase Capstone Projects

Native plants are uniquely adapted to local conditions and provide numerous ecological, social, and economic benefits compared to non-native species.  This work examines the advantages of using native plants in landscape design through the lens of the triple bottom-line framework: planet, people, and profit. Native plant landscapes support biodiversity, provide habitat for wildlife, improve soil health, reduce water consumption, and require less maintenance than traditional lawns and gardens.  Native plants also offer psychological and physical health benefits to people by reducing stress, improving air and water quality, and limiting exposure to harmful pesticides and fertilizers that lead to acute and chronic diseases. From an economic perspective, case studies demonstrate that the public has a high willingness to pay for native landscapes, and the reduced maintenance costs for water, fertilizer, and general upkeep make native plants an attractive alternative and cost-saving approach.  The insurance and financial sectors are beginning to recognize the risks of biodiversity loss and the value of ecological resilience that native plants provide. This work concludes that the evidence clearly shows native plant landscaping is beneficial for the environment, human well-being, and the economy. Policymakers, developers, and property owners should leverage these multifaceted benefits to accelerate the transition to more biodiverse, sustainable, and economically advantageous landscapes.

As the effects of climate change intensify and the global population becomes increasingly urbanized, extreme heat is becoming a growing threat for cities worldwide. This paper explores the extent to which two cities–Singapore and Freetown, Sierra Leone–have taken an equity-informed approach to their extreme heat adaptation planning. To answer this question, I examined publicly available documents detailing each city’s approach to heat adaptation. Based on a review of each city’s context, I identified vulnerable groups based on exposure and adaptive capacity, and then analyzed the extent to which equity was considered, using the four dimensions of distributive, procedural, recognitional, and reparative equity. My analysis found that neither city has a comprehensive heat adaptation plan or a stated approach to equity. Singapore’s response is largely technocratic, and does little to acknowledge the existence or work to target any vulnerable groups.  Freetown’s response reflects a more intentional approach to understanding and addressing the experience of heat for vulnerable populations, including the large proportion of residents who live in informal settlements. The findings of this analysis show that while cities have taken steps to address equity in extreme heat adaptation, more intentional efforts are needed to ensure that the unique experiences of vulnerable populations are adequately addressed.