PUBLIC POLICY UPDATES
Structural Changes: Funding Green Infrastructure and Natural Solutions By Matt Leahy
22 | FOREST NOTES Winter 2022
A mighty hemlock tree grows high into the forest’s canopy at the Heald Tract in Wilton.
• $300 million for the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Emergency Watershed Protection Program. • The bill also includes the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, which will improve energy efficiency in three key sectors: buildings, industry, and the federal government. Most of those initiatives fall into what is now being referred to as green infrastructure and natural solutions. By incorporating nature as well as engineered systems, public policy is evolving to incorporate actions that provide clean water, conserve ecosystem values and functions, and lessen the impacts of floods and other
disasters while meeting the daily needs of society. Often, these natural approaches are more affordable than relying solely on traditional gray infrastructure methods. As an example, studies have linked how maintaining (or increasing) forest cover in water supply watersheds results in improved water quality and lowered water treatment costs. The goal of investing is generally understood to be increasing the value of an asset over a period of time and involves the upfront expenditure of money, time, or effort. Natural solutions and green infrastructure meet this definition. Using public funds on such projects is an investment in the same way that constructing a new road results in a community-wide benefit. If a neighborhood, for example, becomes better able to withstand flood events because of the investments made to protect wetlands, that neighborhood is now a better place to live. If installing permeable pavement reduces stormwater runoff and promotes groundwater recharge, the improved water quality makes for a healthier community. Gray infrastructure will always be a part of our daily lives. However, nature can, and does, play an equally important function. The next step for policy makers is to further expand this role. Actions such as the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act are a good example of how to do that. By prioritizing the protection and conservation of the country’s natural assets, we will see a return on this investment in the form of more resilient, vital communities. That sounds like a pretty good deal. Matt Leahy is the public policy manager for the Forest Society.
EMILY LORD
T
he word “infrastructure” usually brings to mind images of roads, bridges, transmission lines, or the giant machines needed to construct them. That is understandable; for decades, policies governing transportation, energy, and economic development have prioritized those kinds of projects. True, these facilities are a necessity for our modern economy to function. However, this network of concrete, steel, and pavement—beyond the unsightly aesthetics— has also brought with it negative effects: air pollution, changes in water quality, fragmentation of wildlife habitats, and the conversion of forested areas. Fortunately, the expectations regarding what constitutes infrastructure are changing. For evidence, look at the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (also known as the bipartisan infrastructure bill). This enormous piece of legislation contains the following. • $1 billion for the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, which will support states, local communities, tribes, and territories as they undertake hazard mitigation projects, reducing the risks they face from disasters and natural hazards. • $7.5 billion to build out a national network of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations in the United States. Preliminary estimates indicate New Hampshire would expect to receive $17 million over five years to support the expansion of an EV charging network in the state. • $350 million for wildlife crossings across transportation corridors. • $350 million for solid waste and recycling grants to state governments.
