engaging chicago’s diverse communities in the chicago climate action plan · in the chicago...
TRANSCRIPT
ENGAGING CHICAGO’S DIVERSE COMMUNITIES
in the Chicago Climate Action Plan
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Research Team
Principle Investigators:Dr. Jennifer Hirsch, The Field MuseumCommissioner Suzanne Malec-McKenna, City of ChicagoDr. Alaka Wali, The Field MuseumDr. Lynn Westphal, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station
Project Managers:Dr. Lori Barcliff Baptista, The Field Museum (Roseland study)Dr. Janette Bulkan, The Field Museum (Forest Glen study)Dr. Rosa Cabrera, The Field Museum (Pilsen, West Ridge studies)Dr. Christine Dunford, The Field Museum (North Kenwood-Oakland/Bronzeville study)Mario Longoni, The Field Museum (Polish, Forest Glen studies)
Project Team: Dr. Ruth Gomberg-Muñoz, Chicago Cultural AllianceRyan Lugalia-Hollon, The Field MuseumLisa See Kim, The Field MuseumCherie LeBlanc Fisher, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research StationDr. Kate McClellan, The Field MuseumTroy Peters, Global Philanthropy PartnershipSarah Sommers, The Field MuseumMadeleine Tudor, The Field Museum
Interns:Kiona Baker-Mitchell Izabela GrobelnaCyrus Hester Hannah PorstJuliana WilhoitCurtis Witek
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Community PartnersSouth Chicago:Rosa Perea, Centro Comunitario Juan DiegoDinah Ramirez, Healthy Southeast Chicago
North Kenwood-Oakland/ Bronzeville:Danielle Walters, Stateway Community Partners
The Polish Community: Rich Kujawa, The Polish Museum of AmericaJan Lorys, The Polish Museum of America
Pilsen:Jose Luis Gutierrez, Casa MichoacánZorayda Avila, Casa Michoacán Gabriela Mendoza, Casa MichoacánRebeccah Sanders, Chicago Cultural AllianceMimosa Shah, Chicago Cultural Alliance
West Ridge:Modhurima Mukherjee, Indo-American Heritage MuseumNafisa Bandukwala, Indo-American Heritage MuseumMannan Bandukwala, Indo-American Heritage MuseumRebeccah Sanders, Chicago Cultural AllianceDorothie Shah, Indo-American Heritage Museum Mimosa Shah, Chicago Cultural AllianceRenuka Sharma, Indo-American Center
Roseland:Angela Pace-Moody, The Energy Action NetworkMettrice Davis, B.R.O.C.K. Social ServicesPhyllis Jones, B.R.O.C.K. Social ServicesWinona Stiff, B.R.O.C.K. Social ServicesBrenda Taylor, B.R.O.C.K. Social ServicesDorotha Tyler, B.R.O.C.K. Social ServicesBrenda Weil, B.R.O.C.K. Social ServicesCarolyn Thomas, God’s GangRuth Gardner-Woods, God’s GangDorothy Jenkins, Fernwood United Methodist ChurchBrenda Little, Fernwood United Methodist ChurchDerrick Red, Fernwood United Methodist ChurchRev. Al Sampson, Fernwood United Methodist Church
Forest Glen:Jennifer Herren Gatesman, Sauganash Chamber of Commerce Moira K. Pollard, Sauganash Community AssociationSue Williamson, Sauganash Community Association
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Research was commissioned by the Chicago Department of Environment
Research Support
©The Field Museum, ECCo
RESEARCH APPROACH
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Approach
Studies completed 2008 to present
1 SOUTH CHICAGO
WEST RIDGESOUTH ASIAN COMMUNITY
NORTH KENWOOD-
OAKLAND/BRONZEVILLE
POLISH
COMMUNITY
FOREST
GLEN
PILSENMEXICAN COMMUNITY
ROSELAND
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
1
2
4
5
6
7
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Studies to be completed 2011 to 2012
*Contract pending
Approach
AUSTIN
BEVERLY*IRISH COMMUNITY
CHINATOWN,
UPTOWN*CHINESE COMMUNITY
MIDWAY AREA*
NORTHEAST SIDE*
8
9
10
11
12
8
9
10
9
11
12
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Stateway Community Partners
PILSEN’S
MEXICAN
COMMUNITY
WEST RIDGE’S
SOUTH ASIAN
COMMUNITY
SOUTH
CHICAGO
FOREST GLEN
POLISH
COMMUNITY
NORTH
KENWOOD-
OAKLAND/
BRONZEVILLE
ROSELAND
INSTITUTIONAL PARTNERS
Approach
Participatory Action Research
©The Field Museum, ECCo
CCAP
CommunityConcerns
Eco-Friendly Values,
Practices
SocialInnovations
CommunicationNetworks
Leaders & Stakeholders
Approach
Identify Entryways to Climate Action
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Participant observation• Interviews• Focus groups• Visual activities• Storytelling• Social network surveys
Organizational Representatives
Cited Organizations
Organizational Representatives
Cited Organizations
(North Kenwood/Oakland-Bronzeville, South Chicago)
Approach
Research Methods
©The Field Museum, ECCo
FINDINGS
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Overall Findings
Five Key Takeaway Points1. While most residents are aware of and care about global climate
change, many do not connect it to their everyday lives in Chicago.
2. The cultural and social backgrounds of residents play large roles in determining their attitudes and beliefs about climate change,nature, and the environment.
3. Most residents already engage in a range of green practices in their daily lives, from the mainstream to the creative and community-specific.
4. Climate action programs will likely be most successful if they are designed and implemented with networks of trusted community organizations and leaders, build on cultural values, and identify and scale up existing positive behaviors.
5. Most communities are interested in adopting climate action programs that provide recognizable, community-level co-benefits, including but going beyond cost savings.
©The Field Museum, ECCo
FINDINGS IAWARENESS & UNDERSTANDING OF CLIMATE CHANGE
©The Field Museum, ECCo
PERCEPTIONS & AWARENESS
• Study participants expressed a sense of global responsibility toward the environment.
• Participants most often associated climate change with weather- and nature-related consequences.
• Connections to salient environmental/social catastrophes like the BP Oil Spill or Hurricane Katrina were commonly made.
• Many also pointed to iconic symbols of climate change, such as polar bears or melting ice caps.
Attitudes and Awareness
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
©The Field Museum, ECCo
PERCEPTIONS & AWARENESS
Many Chicagoans – especially those with recent immigrant backgrounds – gain awareness of the impacts of climate change through their global (e.g., Mexico, India) and transregional (e.g., U.S. South) connections.
Global / Transregional Connections
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
©The Field Museum, ECCo
PERCEPTIONS & AWARENESS
Though residents recognize the seriousness of global climatechange and the importance of caring for the natural environment,they generally do not connect it to their lives in Chicago.
Climate Change in Chicago
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
lack of urgencyinvisibility of problems
someone else’s agendafault of big business/government
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Many residents’ perceptions of climate change are informed by climate action campaigns and green practices in their home countries.
Memory and Experience
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Heritage and Culture
Broader cultural frameworks inform residents’ understandings of nature, the environment, and climate change.
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
religionnatural resourceshome/garden aesthetics
global/local responsibilitykinship, family & communityoutdoor space
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Connections to Other Concerns
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Nationally discussed co-benefits
Economicdevelopment
and green jobs
Jobs: trades and domestic
cleaning services
TransportationHealth
Cultural heritage(not raised as issue)
Polish community concerns in the Chicago area
Example of Concerns: Polish Community
Healthy livingHome
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
Cost savings
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Make climate change feel local, personal, and actionable, in part by linking it to issues that residents care about.
• Identify and support culturally diverse environmentally-friendly traditions and values.
• Present climate change as a transnational issue, addressing ethnic communities’connections to their homeland cultures.
Recommendations
Findings I: Awareness & Understanding
©The Field Museum, ECCo
FINDINGS IIGREEN PRACTICES
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Even if they are skeptical about climate change, residents already engage in green practices for a variety of reasons:
Findings II: Green Practices
Beyond Environmental Action
cost savingssense of communal
responsibilitycultural traditions/heritage
community beautificationhealthyouth developmentsocial pressure
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Many residents take pride in DIY: finding their own creative solutions to environmental problems.
Creative Solutions
Findings II: Green Practices
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Mainstream Practices
Communities are also actively participating in climate action strategies encouraged by the City, often working with community organizations.
Findings II: Green Practices
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Barriers
Findings II: Green Practices
Practical barriers include:- concerns about mercury in CFLs- perceived cost of green living- personal safety concerns (e.g.,
riding public transportation)
Some green practices also carry sociocultural stigmas in some neighborhoods; they are seen as symbolizing rural life, lack of education, and low social class:- raising chickens- hanging clothes - gardening
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Start where people are at: showcase and reward the practical and creative ways communities are already engaged in climate-friendly practices.
• Create campaigns that address particular fears & concerns and that frame stigmatized practices in a positive light.
• Link DIY practices to larger, structural green solutions (e.g. retrofits).
Recommendations
Findings II: Green Practices
©The Field Museum, ECCo
FINDINGS IIIENERGY EFFICIENT BUILDINGS/
CLEAN AND RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Ranking Energy Practices
Findings III: Energy
High Rankingusing CFLs
turning off lights & appliancesopening windows & using drapes
using energy-efficient devices
Low Rankingretrofitting
using renewable energybuilding green
installing green roofs
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Practical barriers to making larger energy-related changes include upfront cost and renter-landlord arrangements.
• Many residents feel they lack the expertise to deal with contractors/inspectors and are wary of contractor scams and home energy ‘inspections’.
• Aging or deteriorating housing stock precludes some residents from getting retrofits.
• Co-delivery programs become problematic when remediation resources have not been identified.
Barriers to Structural Change
Findings III: Energy
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Barriers to Structural Change• Some residents are taking actions based on marketing
(e.g. windows) and on their own perceptions of their homes’ needs instead of pursuing energy audits.
• A lack of centralized, actionable information on energy efficiency beyond mainstream measures leaves residents unsure of how to proceed.
• Many communities are beginning to organize around green building jobs but are concerned that they will be left out of the larger movement.
• Many residents express concern that “going green” is only for the wealthy and that large-scale green efforts, such as retrofitting programs, are run by powerful institutions and government agencies with ulterior motives.
Findings III: Energy
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Residents who retrofit their homes do so for a variety of reasons:
Retrofitting
Findings III: Energy
comfortbeautificationnoise abatement
cost savingsmaintaining property valueenvironmental impact
©The Field Museum, ECCo
A handful of home and business owners in each community have turned to clean and renewable energy sources, such as solar panels, wind turbines, and alternative fuels. However, most residents remain deterred by high up-front costs.
Clean and Renewable Energy
Findings III: Energy
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Develop retrofit programs that use trusted local contractors andliaisons from recognized local organizations during energy audits and construction.
• Enlist influential and trusted homeowners to get energy audits and share their experiences with their communities.
• Provide comparative informational tools that allow residents to prioritize energy efficiency steps, locate qualified providers, and easily utilize rebate and credit programs.
• Create retrofit programs that connect energy efficiency to the other benefits people see in retrofitting.
• Make retrofitting a visible & talked about status symbol.• Support and reward those who are turning to clean and
renewable energy sources.
Recommendations
Findings III: Energy
©The Field Museum, ECCo
FINDINGS IVSTAKEHOLDERS
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Community-Based Organizations (CBOs): social service agencies, community and business associations, local art centers, advocacy groups, CDCs, etc.
• Property managers• Religious institutions• Local media• Local businesses• Schools/universities• Neighborhood government• Women’s organizations
Findings IV: Stakeholders
Stakeholder Groups
©The Field Museum, ECCo
North Kenwood-Oakland/Bronzeville: Brokers
Polish Community: Support from Suburbs & Poland
Community Network Models
Findings IV: Stakeholders
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• CBOs serve as trusted alternatives to City/outside organizations.
• Some CBOs are highly trusted but are not seen as potential sources for climate change information.
Community -Based Organizations (CBOs )
Findings IV: Stakeholders
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Social Justice and Environmentalism
Some stakeholder groups connect environmental issues to local social justice movements:
• Food• Health• Pollution• Green space• Education• Safety• Immigration• Quality of life
Findings IV: Stakeholders
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Engage local organizations as community experts and provide them with the tools to connect their work with climate action.
• Identify and work with a variety of stakeholders, including those that serve as cultural brokers for harder-to-reach communities.
• Identify and work with:– CBOs with a broad geographic sphere of influence – Umbrella organizations – Organizations that work with CBOs city-wide
• Incentivize participation in climate action programs through reciprocal marketing with CBOs and businesses.
• Offer and incentivize regular networking opportunities to share climate action ideas and best practices.
• Foster connections between climate action and social justice.
Recommendations
Findings IV: Stakeholders
©The Field Museum, ECCo
FINDINGS VCOMMUNICATIONS
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Word-of-mouth is an essential source of community information and provides credence to information that residents receive through other channels.
Word -of-Mouth
Findings V: Communications
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Many communities have long-held traditions of celebrating culture and heritage in key public spaces.
Public Art
Findings V: Communications
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Demonstrating rather than merely communicating green strategies is key to engaging residents.
Green Demonstration Sites
Findings V: Communications
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Create word-of-mouth campaigns through informal communications networks.
• Educate local opinion leaders on climate change and deploy them as climate action ambassadors.
• Provide support for communities to develop green demonstration sites, including through public arts programming.
Recommendations
Findings V: Communications
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Residents turn to a range of community/ethnic newspapers, radio shows, and local and international television programs for information and news.
• Local media provides Chicago’s communities with extensive coverage of salient international and local events, whereas national media is a source of more generalized information.
• Topics covered in local media outlets can serve as potential links to climate action topics.
Established Media Outlets
Findings V: Communications
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Though most participants reported using the Internet, the majority do not actively seek general climate change information, in part because they are unsure where to look.
• Some residents consult the Internet for green DIY projects.
• Many CBOs expressed a desire to increase their online presence.
• Older residents (40+) prefer to receive information by email, word-of-mouth, and mailings than by social networking sites or texting.
Digital Media
Findings V: Communications
©The Field Museum, ECCo
• Link climate action to topics that already receive significant coverage in local media, and pitch media stories about Chicago’s climate action work to international media outlets.
• Work with CBOs to drive website usage and to provide community-specific information about climate action resources.
Recommendations
Findings V: Communications
©The Field Museum, ECCo
FINDINGS VIMODELS FOR ENGAGEMENT
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Green DemonstrationCommunities
Findings VI: Models for Engagement
Art & HeritageGardening/
Urban Agriculture
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Recycling/Repurposing
Findings VI: Models for Engagement
Youth Development/Education
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Community Engagement Strategies
ADDITIONAL STRATEGIES FROM FIELD MUSEUM RESEARCH
Findings VI: Models for Engagement
Enlisting community leadersCollaborating with CBOsLocal media campaignsMulti-language translationWeb-based toolsYouth programming/educationCompetition/games
Engaging local contractors/businessesMobilizing through ‘crisis’Community brandingStorytellingIncentives (monetary & other)Emotion-based campaignsOne-on-one home visits
Rewarding creative green practicesBuilding on green heritage traditions/valuesRecognizing community heterogeneityLinking climate action to an expanded list of co-benefits
Tapping into broad geographic networksWord-of-mouth campaignsAddressing green social stigmaCreating/supporting green demo sites
OVERLAPPING STRATEGIES: LITERATURE* & FIELD MUSEUM RESEARCH
*From Driving Demand and other academic literature on environmental behavior change
©The Field Museum, ECCo
South Chicago Retrofit Project
From Research to Action
Findings VI: Models for Engagement
©The Field Museum, ECCo
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
©The Field Museum, ECCo
For More Information, Visit Us on the Web
Additional Resources
fieldmuseum.org/explore/climate-action
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Community Asset Maps Available Online
Additional Resources
©The Field Museum, ECCo
Additional Resources
For questions or additional information, please contact JenniferHirsch, Urban Anthropology Director at The Field Museum: 312-665-7480 or [email protected].
©The Field Museum, ECCo, All Rights Reserved. For more information, visit http://fieldmuseum.org/explore/department/ecco