All levels of government are pushing major agendas to support equitable climate adaptation and mitigation. However, agencies remain dependent on the same analytical tools for assessing and prioritizing projects and lack consensus on how to integrate equity in project evaluation methods.
This case study presents standard approaches to project prioritization and decision making, focusing on how benefit-cost analysis (BCA) can exacerbate existing inequities. Presenters illustrate how a slightly varied, equity-weighted BCA can lead to project-planning decisions that successfully link enhanced resilience with positive equity outcomes. They discuss the value of equity-weighted BCA, when it should be deployed, and how to develop and apply equity weights. A demonstration of this approach using real-world, sea-level-rise adaptation projects offers new, yet familiar, tools for approaching climate-adaptation planning.
NPC Peer Reviewers assigned this presentation a learning level of Intermediate. For more on learning-level descriptions, visit our General Information Page.
Learning Objectives:
Discuss project evaluation methodologies (e.g. BCA) used by federal funding agencies like HUD and FEMA, their exclusion of equity considerations, and impacts on equitable outcomes.
Identify a variety of tools commonly used today for including equity in climate-adaptation project planning and decision making.
Assess the purpose, benefits, limitations, and methodology for developing an alternative approach to the equity-weighted benefit-cost analysis.
