Elsie Woerner_Flood Final SDM Steps and Review

Name: Elsie Woerner Team: Zoo Crew SCIL 101 Flood Mitigation in Roslyn City SDM Steps Due: Oct 31 st by midnight uploaded to Canvas (26 points) STUDENT WORK GOES HERE (IN COLORED BOXES): Define the issue: How do we prepare ourselves better for future flood scenarios? Remember the “decision” you are making is an individual decision that directly impacts Roslyn, and thus has a societal impact on the communities within the city. Consider this issue from the perspective of a resident in Roslyn City, as if you are making a decision such as: 1) if you were to give money to support a cause related to flood mitigation in Roslyn, or 2) if you were to vote on a policy regarding flood mitigation in Roslyn, or 3) if you were to write a letter to a legislator about flood mitigation in Roslyn. In the table below you will replace the text in the colored boxes with your objective weights ( #2, in red ), performance scores and explanations, ( #4, in purple ) weighted performance scores ( #5, in blue ), and total weighted performance scores ( #5, in green ) (see the Rubrics and Instructions file). Alternati ves Objectiv es Education, no policy action (Do not take any policy level mitigative action; only undertake different educative and awareness generation initiatives) Acquire properties/ buyouts (Acquiring or buying out properties at flood- risk zone by the government and relocating the population at safer place. Using the acquired space as open space/park so that the space can act as barrier against flooding) Adopting structural mitigation measures (constructing levees, dikes, dams and different flood control structures) Enhancing natural system protection (Using natural areas, rooftop gardens, rain barrels, green landscaping techniques, and creating a green infrastructure system as part of the overall stormwater management plan. Use of protected wetlands. Performan ce score: *** Performanc e score x objective weight: Performance score: ** Performanc e score x objective weight: Performanc e score: * Performan ce score x objective weight: Performance score: **** Performan ce score x objective weight: Impact of flooding is reduced ** Will not enforce a change but will help educate people on where they should choose to live. 1.2 **** Will eliminate any houses or infrastructu res in flood zones and prevents future damage. 2.4 * Can supply a false sense of security and do not protect against large floods. .6 *** Great way to absorb water run off and save houses but take too much space up. 1.8 .6 Equity/fairn ess is ensured *** Forces house prices down in flood .6 * Forces people to move out of their homes and .2 ** Costs to build are too great and forces people to .4 **** Good way to help out low income neighborho ods by .8 .2 ALTERNATIVES OBJECTIVES

zones and makes them too appealing to low income househol ds, minoritie s, and renters. targets mainly minorities, low income households , and renters pay for them who might not benefit from them or forces all prices onto certain people. cleaning up air quality, lowering temperatur es, and efficiently helping with floods in a low- cost way. The cost of implementi ng flood mitigation activities is reduced *** Costs money to pay people an amount of money to educate people .6 * Need large funds to help buy out different properties .2 ** Takes a lot of funding to build different infastructu res .4 **** Will have to spend small amounts money to rent out and designate land to natural flood absorbant spaces .8 .2 Total weighted performance score: 2.4 2.8 1.4 3.4 2. Choice: Alternative D A) Choose an “alternative” based on the analysis undertaken. Why do you think this is the best alternative? I think that this is the best alternative because it has the most right going with it. It is the second best at minimizing the damage caused by flooding and then the best in the other two areas. I think that it will have a good impact on flood mitigation and cause the least amount of troubles for everyone involved. 3. Review (Please write a brief reflection on each of these four components of the course using one or more of the prompts): A) How do we take the perspective of others in complex controversial socioscientific situations? -What tradeoffs exist in the decision-making that make this issue complex? -Can you identify with all the stakeholders involved? Were there some viewpoints that were easier to understand than others? -How do ours and others’ values play a role in the situation? What are examples of values, ethics, culture, economics or worldview that may influence or impact decision-ma king related to this issue? Values are considered our moral compasses when it comes to making decisions, especially decisions regarding multifaceted problems. We are more or less likely to agree on something depending on our own personal belief system. A good example of values playing a role in decision making on socioscientific issues is deciding what objective is most important. When it comes to flood mitigation, some people may value the economy over assurance of fairness and equity. This may sway their decision when choosing which alternative to implement because each alternative varies in how they affect the objective. This is just one way that decision making is affected by personal values and beliefs regarding the complex, socioscientific issue of water mitigation.

4. Assigning Resources – Let’s say you have $10 million dollars to allocate towards any of these alternatives for solving the problem. How would you allocate the money? How likely is it that you would support the following alternatives regarding Flood mitigation? Describe how you would allocate the money in this box. I would allocate the $10 million dollars to supporting alternative D. I think that this alternative was by far the strongest one that had the least number of negatives. In a way, everyone would win with this alternative, compared to the rest where someone would experience negatives. I think that the idea of developing natural infrastructures to help reduce flood damage would meet the objectives the best and have the least negatives, which is why I would allocate all of my funding to this alternative. Please place an “X” in the box you agree with: Very likely to support Somewha t likely to support Neutr al Somewha t unlikely to support Very unlikely to support I don’ t kno w Education, no policy action (Do not take any policy level mitigative action; only undertake different educative and awareness generation initiatives) X Acquire properties/ buyouts (Acquiring or buying out properties at flood-risk zone by the government and relocating the population at safer place. Using the acquired space as open space/park so that the space can act as barrier against flooding) X Adopting structural mitigation measures (constructing levees, dikes, dams and different flood control structures) X

Enhancing natural system protection (Using natural areas, rooftop gardens, rain barrels, green landscaping techniques, and creating a green infrastructure system as part of the overall stormwater management plan. Use of protected wetlands. X After you have filled everything out according to the instructions, save this as a Word document with your first and last name in the file name, then upload this document to Canvas.