3 minute read
2.4 Policy Option Areas Recommended by Others
moving service to lower-risk areas. For instance, the increasing vulnerability of some coastal areas may make their continued operation infeasible. In some ways, this is the most radical option; transportation corridors have historically rarely been completely abandoned in the United States. Of course, as communities and businesses themselves relocate, infrastructure needs also will shift.
The previous sections highlight the need for adaptation planning at the national, state, and local levels to address the potential impacts of climate change on the nation’s transportation infrastructure. A wide range of policy options have been presented in the literature regarding adaptation approaches to deal with the impacts of climate change, as shown in Table 2.1 (see page 28). For our purposes, these policy options can be thought of as addressing one of five different areas:
Advertisement
Research. A summary of the policy options underscores the need for further research to develop successful approaches to adaptation. Research needs span both the climate science and transportation arenas and include: applied studies — such as the development of methods for transportation practitioners to inventory transportation assets, the development of a climate data clearinghouse for use by transportation agencies, and more advanced climate research to develop more accurate “downscaled” regional models that can provide outputs for the diverse range of geographies across the nation. Another critical research need cited is for improved monitoring technologies to provide transportation officials with advance warning of potential structural failures due to climate change impacts.
Planning. Climate risks and adaptation options need to be integrated into the transportation planning process. Because of the important role of state and local governments in the operations and maintenance of the transportation system in the nation, there is an increased need to encourage cross-disciplinary coordination and collaboration among the various government agencies, as well as with the private sector (for example, the private sector railroad operators who own and maintain the majority of the nation’s rail network). Another key policy option is the expansion of planning timeframes that agencies would need for incorporating the impacts of climate change into their long-range vision plans. The timeframes generally used for the federal transportation planning process — 20 to 30 years — are short compared to the multi-decadal period over which climate changes occur. While the current timeframe is realistic for investment planning, agencies need to consider incorporating longer-term climate change effects into their visioning and scenario planning processes that inform their long-range plans. The literature also identified a need for decision support tools to support the planning process, such as risk assessment tools and adaptive management approaches.
Design standards. Development of new design standards also is identified as a need to incorporate the impacts of climate change into design and operations. This includes both infrastructure design standards as well as revision of flood frequency standards to reflect climate projections rather than only historic trend data (e.g., the 100-year flood may now be a 25-year flood). Along with new design standards there is a need to develop ways to share best practices for adaptation design strategies which state and local governments can easily access.
Project delivery and the NEPA process. The fourth category of policy options is the project delivery and the NEPA process. For example, by updating federal agency regulations and procedures pertaining to climate impacts and adaptation strategies, state, and local agencies can better ensure efficiency in adaptation planning and implementation. A collaborative
