Growing Returns

A plan for the largest transformation of New York City’s and northern New Jersey’s waterfront since the Robert Moses era has been proposed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). It’s called the New York-New Jersey Harbor and Tributaries Study and it was introduced to the public to address flooding and storms like Hurricane Sandy. At stake is the future of more than 84 miles of waterfront and waterways in the metropolitan region and an area that supports 16 million people.  

New York and New Jersey residents must determine if this $52 billion dollar plan aligns with the future they want. Addressing flood risks is a step in the right direction, but as it stands today, the current proposal does not reflect the priorities of many communities and environmental organizations. With the impacts of climate change already in motion, we simply cannot afford to get this wrong.  Read More »

When making any decision, we often find ourselves weighing the pros and cons of an action – the benefits versus the cost. The official practice, referred to as “benefit-cost analysis,” is not only used by individuals and businesses, but also by the federal government when determining funding for a program or initiative. In simple terms, when the benefits exceed the cost of an investment, federal funding may be made available.

But oftentimes benefit-cost analysis doesn’t look at the full picture, neglecting to consider who benefits from an investment and who bears the brunt of its cost. This is true when examining the nation’s flood risk management strategy. Historically, the annual loss from flood damage disproportionately impacts low-income communities and communities of color, leaving those with fewer resources less protected.

Read More »