energy and equity in kansas city - the green impact zone (giz) case presentation
TRANSCRIPT
Energy & Equity in Kansas City : The Green Impact Zone (GIZ)
NRE 537 Urban Sustainability
11/17/16
Calli, Prathmesh and Ryan
The Racialization of Space
1923: Racially Restrictive Covenants
Example of a racially restrictive covenant in Washington, DC 1958
(DC Public Records, courtesy of Prologue DC)
1934: Federal Housing Act
United States. Congress. Public Law 73-479, 73d Congress, H.R. 9620 , Box 54, Folder 1, William McChesney Martin, Jr.,
Papers.https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/scribd/?item_id=457156, accessed on November 16, 2016.
Housing Acts of 1949 and 1954
Washington : U.S. G.P.O., 1954.
Truman_initiating_Korean_involvement.jpg
1960s: Civil Rights Counter-Mobilization
http://i0.wp.com/www.ambrosekane.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Civil-Rights-8.jpg
1968-1970s: FHA's Section 235 Program
https://goo.gl/images/NouV8S
The Significance of Troost Avenue
“Built a wall” to divide whites/blacks
● Land use & marketing strategy which
leveraged Troost Ave. to divide white /
blacks
● Kansas City “served as a model” for post
World War II suburban growth
Troost Avenue Aftermath:
● ‘White-Flight’ to West Side of Kansas City
● Led to decades of GIZ disinvestment &
eventual energy poverty issues
1957 NAREB advertisement discouraging whites from living on the eastern
side Troost Ave. (i.e. present day GIZ neighborhoods). From Gotham
The GIZ Difference
The GIZ Difference
● Championed by Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II
● 5 target neighbourhoods
● Funding of around $170 million dollars
● Unique model of community involvement, participation, and engagement
● Multiple Stakeholders
Local StakeholdersCommunity Development Corps.
Neighborhood AssociationsResidents & Volunteers
FundersFederal (ARRA)
City of KCU.S. Dept of TransportationKansas City Power & Light
Administration MARC
US DOEGIZ
Missouri DNR
GIZOUTCOMES
Focus Areas
http://www.greenimpactzone.org/strategies
Strategy
● Information, Outreach and Education
● Understanding the Community
● Instilling belief
● Taking Action
● Delivery
● Change
http://www.greenimpactzone.org/images/infographic.pdf
Achievements
http://www.greenimpactzone.org/images/infographic.pdf
Political Ecology
The Political Ecology Components Surrounding GIZ Outcomes
FundersFederal (ARRA)
City of KCU.S. Dept of TransportationKansas City Power & Light
Administration MARC
US DOEGIZ
Missouri DNR
Local StakeholdersCommunity Development Corps.
Neighborhood AssociationsResidents & Volunteers
GIZOUTCOMES
Historical Land Use Policy & Real Estate PracticesRacialization of Space
Policy Barriers
Winners vs Losers
Market Barriers
Regulatory Requirements
Priorities of Allocated
Funds
Federal Priorities
Decades of Disinvestment
Up-Front Costs
Power Relations
(Landlord v. Renter)
Political Ecology
Power Relations Structural Barriers to
Entry
Winners & Losers of
allocated funds
● Politics as usual:
Reallocated Funds
● Landlord holds card in
‘Split Incentive’
Scenario
● Time required to train &
mobilize new workforce
● Up Front Cost to
Weatherize
● Regulatory
Requirements (ARRA)
● Bureaucratic Priorities
● Public Priorities
Activity Questions for Reference
● How can each of the following characteristics of political ecology be applied to the
KC case?
● What were the impacts of the capitalist market-system?
● How did the market-system result in uneven geographic distribution of goods/bad?
● Who are the winners and losers? Did they stay the same throughout the
implementation of the GIZ?
● What does the chain of explanation look like that lead to the establishment of the
GIZ?
● How can the GIZ be seen as a “seed”?
● What evidence is there of methodological pluralism throughout the GIZ process?
Questions?