 So this panel with leading practitioners and activists in the region will grapple with questions about how climate justice is being defined by whom and the implications of this for urban planning. Professor Hugo Sarmiento, Assistant Professor of Columbia, Jesus will be moderating the session. So, if you're ready, I'll pass things over to you now. Okay, great. Thank you so much for that introduction Rajani. It's really great to be here with you all today. I'm very excited to meet Victoria, and I've met Ariella and Daniel before. This is a great panel and very much looking forward to this discussion. As Rajani explained in the introduction, part of the objective of putting together this panel specifically is to try to focus the discussion on how the climate crisis is being defined and by whom. We think this is important because, as you know, climate change and climate policy debate is now in the headlines almost every day. It is now part of the public discourse around the world. But typically, it is narrated and defined by the more powerful social political and economic elites in society. So, not too long ago we had the COP talks in Glasgow, where the most powerful and the richest nations in the world were debating what to do about climate change. But this leaves out and excludes really the most impacted and most vulnerable communities that have to deal with the consequences of climate change. And so we want to today focus a discussion on scholars, organizers, and professors like you all here on the panel to try to get a sense of how you think of the climate crisis, how you talk about it, how you define it, and how you understand it impacting the communities that you work with. So, I've prepared two sets of questions here, and the format is somewhat open, but the questions are meant to just guide the discussion so I'm going to pose the questions to the panel, and then give you an opportunity to respond to the questions. So we'll do that in two sections here. And then we will open it to the audience that's joining us today to ask their own questions and join the conversation that way. So, let's begin with the first set of questions. The first set of questions are pretty straightforward is we want to sort of share the kind of diverse range of communities that you all represent. And, and, and talk about this, this issue of the climate crisis with respect to those communities. So the first question is, how is the climate crisis impacting the community or communities that you represent. How is your work addressing this issue. So, let's start with Victoria that's okay. And then we'll turn over to Ariella, and then Daniel will follow up. Thanks. Can everyone hear me okay there are a few technical difficulties earlier. Yeah, okay. Well, thank you so much for inviting me to be part of this panel this morning and afternoon for everyone on the East Coast. Again, my name is Victoria caner and I'm actually speaking to you from Honolulu today, where I do most of my work in Hawaii and Pacific islands. So the question of how is the climate crisis impacting the communities I represent is actually a very complex one with a lot of layers. So, just to start with a little bit about the Pacific Islands region. So I work in Hawaii and particularly the US affiliated islands or the US API as I'll refer to them. The US API are comprised of Hawaii, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Palau and the territories of Guam and American Samoa. So issues of equity in that region really start with the vastness of our ocean region, the diverse geographies within there the very governance and socio economic conditions. In the presence of the US military in the history of the region, the climate data that's available which is not as much as a lot of mainland locations monitoring which is not as much at monitoring stations and the models that are available. So, so, so for example we have US, British and French colonial histories in the area. And again we have a state US territories, organized and unorganized Commonwealth in terms of governance and the freely associated states which are governed by the Compact of Free Association, or the COFA and a lot of this is history that just isn't very well known in the mainland United States. A lot of what you hear when you hear about Pacific Islands being impacted by climate change first is that a lot of the people who live here in the communities are being out disproportionately affected by climate impacts that they did not perpetuate. So, the other ways that that we're experiencing it include high temperatures, especially at highest elevation islands and so our highest elevation ecosystems are most at risk of high temperatures. Sea level rise of course, all of our communities of coastal and most of the infrastructure is located in a thin band of land right next to the coast. Precipitation changes. Those differ throughout the region but we're seeing generally more extreme rain and more extreme periods of drought, which is a big problem across the tropical Pacific although you might not first think of drought in the Pacific as being an issue. And of course ecological impacts that are cascading throughout the community such as coral bleaching and death and fishery populations changing both size and location throughout the region. And the larger kind of specter of climate and environmental security throughout the region so we have a large military US presence throughout the region because of the compact of free association. And we continue to be affected by the US military and its actions throughout the region. And how environmental security is plays out with them. There's a lot of attention on the region because of the future of China's impact in the region so it's all very complex but that's just a kind of kind of big backdrop and I'll pass it back to you. Thanks. And I, Victoria I just wanted to ask if you could respond to the second part of that question which is about your work and addressing. Yeah. Yep. Just how your work addresses this issue of climate crisis. Yep, sorry about that so my research group. Concentrate. We're an interdisciplinary group of research and resource managers. So, my background is in hydrology and climatology applied hydrology. Our research group has climatologists hydrologist social and physical geographers natural resource economist legal scholars decision scientists psychologists. So very interdisciplinary group of people that are working together on common problems within the region that are co developed with our stakeholder communities in Hawaii and the Pacific islands. So we work on specific questions of how to transform climate data climate models, climate research into on the ground management and policies so for example will we work with mostly agency and government level. Usually not directly with communities although we do some of that as well. But we work with water managers in American Samoa, for example, and energy groups in Guam and American Samoa, or, or public health officials in the Marshall Islands to to look at how to take climate data and make it more applicable to the planning that they're doing currently so our data has been used to advance water project protection legislation in Guam it's been used in national adaptation plans for climate planning in the Marshall Islands it's it's been. So there are a wide variety of uses but basically so we're an interdisciplinary and applied research group that works throughout the region and we're very conscious of making sure all of our research questions are co developed with the people that we're working with. Great. Thank you. Okay, so my turn it over to Adela now. Hi everyone. Thank you for having me here today. I have an update on that bio that bio was from two years ago I've since the Green New Deal plan I've been teaching a course at G staff on equitable climate action. And that class, similar to my work so I'm actually answering question number two right now is really about helping students but helping local governments. To figure out how they can ensure equity and social justice is the center of the climate action work they're doing. And by climate action work, I mean both mitigation so things that reduce greenhouse gas emissions you know the energy electrification the renewable energy that again people out of their cars the waste reductions that's that's mitigation for for those who are not familiar with the language, but also on the enhancing the resilience the climate resilience of the communities. So I am currently most actively working on the resilience side in the city of Philadelphia and a few different projects, and on the mitigation side, Seattle, Los Angeles, a little bit in Denver, a lot in Philadelphia, and my work always seems to intersect with what's happening in New York City as well since I had looked here for over over a decade. It's almost in New York City. So the work we do is very much about the how we move forward and ensuring equitable approaches to climate action, you know it's very clear both on the mitigation and adaptation side, that it's not just about the what the sign, the shiny solution. It's not about, you know your electric vehicle over here or solar panels here. And on the other side is not specifically about a flood ball per se, not that those strategies aren't helpful and not that we don't have to have them in the ground. It's not about the how the process, you know, who's at the table, whose priorities are being prioritized are centered, who benefits, who will, who will be burdened and if there are expectations that they'll be burdened how are those burdens minimize. And also at the end of the day like how do we set the stage for real equitable outcomes from the beginning, you know, inclusive processes lead to more equitable outcomes so, but that's easy to say, to actually do it is really, really hard, because we're dealing with decades and decades, if not centuries of distrust. And so what I'm seeing in every city is how hard it is to do what you think is right, because you have to meet people where they are and right now for very good reason there's a lot of distrust. There's a distrust because of all the layers of inequalities that have been burdened on segments of the population, particularly black, brown and indigenous population and you can't just snap your fingers and say, Okay, but we want you to be in the center of our solar strategy it's like, excuse me, I had housing quality, I'm living in an area next to a toxic site, you ran your highways around me actually don't have family wealth and housing because you displaced us beforehand. My health isn't good my house is moldy, like there's a lot of real life urgent needs that need to be addressed and so helping planners or local government folks who realize and feel that urgency of climate action like we want to make things better and the impacts aren't worse. Also realize, you know, we have a lot of harm that we need to address, and we need to be inclusive we need to be transparent we need to be held accountable, and we need to build relationships from scratch and we're going to work hard to actually build those relationships and trust. That's what I work on. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, turn it over to Daniel. Thank you so much for having me go and thank everyone for having me here today it's very much a pleasure to be here and speak to all of you and and learn from all of you as well. So, as was mentioned in the intro, I work at rise the Rockway initiative for sustainability and equity out in far Rockway and Queens so for anyone who doesn't know the Rockways are a 13 mile long peninsula off the southern coast of Queens in New York City. It's about history. So if you were to look at the sort of geography and demographics of Rockway today. When you come over one of the main bridges into Rockway, at about beach 95th Street, you can either turn left and go to the east end of Rockway, or you can turn right to the west end of Rockway. The west end of Rockway is very much a wealthy community and very much mostly a white community, whereas the communities on the eastern end are communities of color. And they have been the communities that have faced the brunt of climate change on this coastal community. And as Ariela mentioned have a lot of distrust in the government and, and the the lawmakers in New York City because of decades of neglect, and, and just, you know, decades of neglect and a lack of resources that have been provided to them. So a little bit of history on the Rockways, it was a resort community throughout the late 19th century and into about the 1920s, but then it started to decline. And it became the area that as highways and and, and, you know, the automobile came into fruition that, and everyone was able to leave the city to go further out to take their vacations and go to the beach and resorts. It became sort of the place to put people that the city didn't want in Manhattan. So as the city got rid of housing and apartment buildings in Manhattan to build places like Lincoln Center, the people that were displaced because of that were sent to Rockway against their own will. There they tried to build, you know, generational wealth and homes, but did not were not provided the resources that they needed to to have that to their fullest potential. So we're working in a community that has just really not been the focus of New York for a long time. As a coastal community climate, the climate and a changing climate was always at the forefront of people's minds but less so before about 2012 2012 was really a turning point where the general public was brought into the conversation much more. And that's because that's when Hurricane Sandy happened. So that was one of the biggest devastations to the Rockways after sort of Renaissance started to begin in the early 2000s when new shops were opening and more economic opportunities were coming to the peninsula. But 2012 came along Hurricane Sandy happened, and communities were devastated the boardwalk was lost. Generally generational wealth that was, you know, starting to be built up people lost their homes and lost most of their belongings. And it became sort of a wasteland for a while until it could get back on its feet. So Hurricane Sandy really showed people that we are a coastal community that needs to bring climate change to the forefront and educate as many people as possible as quickly as possible. And that's where rise comes in. So rise works in the Rockway communities in a number of different ways. We're based in Arvern, but we also do work in Edgemore and Far Rockway as well. We work across the peninsula but Arvern, Edgemore and Far Rockway are sort of, you know, that's our home. So we're working with the communities that are there. One of our biggest, you know, our bread and butter is youth programs. So we have a youth program called short core and that youth program engages local high high school students to work on climate issues as well as civic issues and youth leadership skills. So with the short core we have hosted a number of community events along the peninsula to enhance our shoreline. So, as a coastal beachfront community our beaches, always under the threat of erosion. So what we've done is planted about 10,000 sprigs of beach dune grass along along the shoreline, as well as over 1000 trees and shrubs in order to bring back our gene system. So you plant these these shrubs and grasses on the northern side of the boardwalk. So on the other roots build grow deep into the sand it creates a green infrastructure that can build up that dune which then protects communities from storm surge during, during events like like hurricanes and tropical and tropical storms. So on beach 25th Street we saw the result of this that was the block that was most built up with this green infrastructure before Sandy, and it was one of the blocks in Far Rockway that faced the least amount of flooding during that hurricane. So that's one of our big pushes with our shore core students as well as with the local community because we always invite the local community to come out to these plantings be a part of it and get their hands in the sand. After Hurricane Sandy we've also held a number of different talks with climate scientists and officials from all over the world from you know from from the Netherlands where they're dealing with flooding on a regular basis. We invited professors, scientists, and, and policymakers to come to Rockway and present to the local community to educate them on how they can prepare for a rising sea level and more severe storms, but also for everyday flooding, which is probably one of, which is probably the biggest threat and biggest challenge that people on the eastern end of Rockway face on a daily basis. So even if there's just a light rain, even sometimes when there's not rain just during a high tide, the streets will flood. And cars will have to weigh through two to three feet of water, people getting off the subway will have to find a different way to get to their location because they can't cross the street when they come off the subway. So we have been working with organizations such as the Science and Resiliency Institute at the Jamaican Bay Wildlife Conservancy to document this flooding and then figure out ways that we can work with the city to to change some of the infrastructure to help drain that water as it's coming in. We're also currently, this is probably our biggest push at the moment, working with a lot of developers but also the city on new development projects that are happening in Arvern, Edgemore and Far Rockaway. Arvern East is the, the largest undeveloped coastal plot of land in Queens that has not been developed. And that land after decades and decades of it being just a wasteland where people can throw garbage, the streets were not paved, the sidewalks were not paved. It's finally being developed by a number of different private developers, the biggest one being L&M development. We're also working with enterprises working with them to establish a, a, a plant, a, not a plant nursery, a sort of natural park system that can, that can absorb water when when the floods come in. We're also working in Edgemore, which is going to have a community land trust very soon. There are 55 vacant lots in Edgemore that the city is subsuming into a community land trust, and we've worked over the past six months to hold and design forums where the community has come to rise to sort of design how these lots that will be zoned for open space can be used to, for temporary uses that the community can enjoy, but that can then be taken away to again absorb those flood waters when they come in. We're also working in Arvern on one other lot to develop an open space site with that will focus on arts and lighting and a place for people to gather and talk to each other. We have more of these conversations and continue to educate people about the climate issues in their community and make sure that their voices are heard in all the work that's happening in Rockway now that it seems to have be another hot spot for development in the 2020s. So that's a little bit about rice and the work that we're doing. Thanks so much Daniel. Okay, and the next set of questions that I think you already started to address this in your comments. But it's very much about the nature of the current policy debate in your area. As I referenced at the beginning. The debate over the climate crisis and the response to the crisis is taking place globally. Again, we see it in events like the conference of the parties and Glasgow, taking place on a national scale dominated by the most powerful global It's also taking place at a national scale. You know recently there was a debate around the climate bill and the infrastructure bill that was eventually passed, which has some provisions designed to address the changing climate. I wanted to ask you on the panel. What is this policy debate look like in your area. What are the sort of priorities. In this policy debate in your area. And what do you think is missing from that conversation. So I'm going to turn it over now to Victoria. Thanks and thanks Daniel and Ariella for your comments to really good work and interesting. And thinking about this question. You know again it's going to be very specific to the Pacific Islands, but I think that's kind of, you know that the perspective that you're looking for how things are different and other places. But one of my other roles, besides all of the research work that I do and is, I'm appointed to the city and county of Honolulu climate change commission. And so I'm one of five, five experts that sits on this commission is appointed this commission to provide recommendations to the Honolulu mayor city council and departments, kind of about the localization of climate impacts on the island of Oahu, which also functions as a county. And so in that I've been appointed for seems like forever but maybe three years now. And one of those years, I chaired it so it's a five year term, and we've been asked to provide. We've been asked by the city to provide input on sea level rise planning on setbacks so the distance that you can build from the shore and the regulations gathering surrounding that we've been asked to provide on climate and financial risk planning for the city. And then we've also provided guidance that was not solicited from the city on equity and adaptation processes we've also provided input on the social cost of carbon at a city scale and how to implement that. I guess kind of what I see, you know, talking from the kind of science science to policy boundary space and how that, you know, science to management translation actually happened sitting on the commission has been definitely the most eye opening thing for me in terms of how this data actually gets used. And a lot of it is having somebody at the top who is open to incorporating that information into planning. And I, you know, you can be shocked when how quickly things can happen when you have someone at the top who is ready to go with a lot of these. And if you don't, it just will sit there no matter how many recommendations no matter how many official committees and commissions there are that are recommending these, these measures. So, I think that some of what is missing from the conversation is kind of a true sustained desire to kind of transform how society addresses climate adaptation how communities and organizations become more resilient by getting more resources both financial and human. We don't have as many people throughout the whole Hawaii and Pacific Islands region as a lot of other places so, you know, we can be short on human capital as well. All of the different agencies and departments that we work with are always short on people that have that, you know, they have 16 other jobs and they're being expected to integrate climate change adaptation and mitigation as well so there's always that that gap. But the other thing that I wanted to mention was the difference in access to funding throughout the Pacific Islands region so the US affiliated Pacific Islands do not have equal access to federal funds that can reduce risks at those community levels and make, for example, infrastructure more resilient to the impacts of climate change. And that's because of our different governance throughout the region so we have a state Hawaii, two territories in the Gulf and American Samoa, and then the freely associated states which are kind of on their own and in terms of being able to access different different monies. So in terms of FEMA, which is a big funder for infrastructure climate resilience project Hawaii in the territories can receive FEMA money, but the freely associated states cannot so that's already one type of inequity that we're seeing that's not being addressed adequately. The other one is within actual disbursement of FEMA money so some of you may be familiar with the BRIC program within FEMA which is building resilient infrastructure and communities, and it's how a lot of climate resilience and infrastructure money gets pushed out to doing specific projects and communities. And so it's a lot of mitigation projects and it's nationwide, but again not in the freely associated states. So, and the FY 2020 BRIC funds were distributed quite unequally, with I believe 94% of the total available funding being awarded to projects on the mostly urban east coast. The counties in Hawaii submitted 13 applications to the national competition for the funding in 2021 and none were funded. And so this was because when we dug into it, a lot of the without updated IBC and IRC codes so building and energy codes being up to date. And so the way Guam and American Samoa are really not competitive at that federal program which is intended to equalize communities access to resilient and safe infrastructure. So we were really seeing that without this, you know, I think it's minus 40 points automatically for not having your building codes up to date, your energy codes. And so we were not able to access any of this infrastructure money while the freely associated states in this case are excluded completely. So in terms of, you know, what what might be missing in terms of policy in this region. It's pretty, pretty universal across Hawaii in the Pacific Islands that climate adaptation and mitigation is, you know, the number one threat that that governments and communities are looking to deal with in the long term. And we're not able to get access to a lot of the, a lot of the resources out there that would help bring a lot of the communities and different islands up to up to par in terms of being able to prepare. Thank you. Okay, I wanted to turn it to Ariella. My share literally broke as soon as I started about that loud bang. We're cookies here. So I'm going to take just in a very different direction since Victoria and Daniel doing such a great job of focusing on resilience I'm going to focus on the mitigation piece. And the nature of the policy debates I mean there's, there are policy debates on different levels right there's at the philosophical level. There's that like urgency to act and to act quickly, especially with the latest IPCC report that came out over policy makers saying you know, forget about your 2050 goals like what are you doing by 2030 this urgency from the folks within governments or those who are you know the climate hawks of the world. It's just like, we got to go we got to move we got to transition like let's get rid of the gas like let's just go go go go. And then there's, then there's community, and then there's folks who are as I mentioned earlier are dealing with real life urgent issues related to having safe housing and affordable housing and mobility concerns and health concerns and they're like, excuse me, you're going to keep moving quickly, you're going to keep the existing economic systems in place that have continued to not only leave us out of the opportunities but also continue to burden us with the unintended consequences of you trying to move and so there's this push to move quickly and scale up and let's do the one policy that captures everything, and then there's this need for place based approaches that bring people along, have a real planning process that centers, not just the priorities of communities, but also actually takes the time to address the real concerns like don't talk to me about building electrification until we talk about the fact that there are tens of thousands I'm in Philadelphia right now. There are tens of thousands of households that are in need of home repairs like the homes are such low quality that even putting their heat on they're just throwing dollars out the window, or they're constantly breathing mold or other health issues. So, you know, I'm glad you want me to get a heat pump sounds great but you know what about the fact that I was holding my, my roof what are you going to do about that. So that is a huge part of the debate is how can you move quickly with everyone at the same time, you know the like you move faster alone you move further together well, we need to do both. So that's part of it, but then when you get actually like how that shows itself on the ground you see this both on the transportation side and the building side. There's a debate on really a debate but I think there's a bit of a racialization of certain technologies are approaches, and it's not everywhere right like what I'm seeing in Philadelphia is not necessarily what I see in New York, but I think an example that's really hot right in Philadelphia is bike lanes. Here's a great example. Why does more bike lanes on a street, even if the intended purpose is actually to make the street safer and slower so people could cross it and reduce the amount of injuries and most of those injuries are happening to people of color who live nearby. The bike lane scenario the street will all of a sudden, there's going to be distrust in that in that policy. So I'm completely generalizing but this was a real life example on Washington Avenue here, where there was like two years of community outreach and processes and stakeholder engagement that came up with these different scenarios for a road and at the end of the day. The one that seemed to optimize the outcomes for the most folks, it had more bike lanes and right away. There was, there was, there was pushback and it was thrown out the actual like outcomes were not given equal weight because the idea of bike lanes themselves have become loaded. And we see that on the building side with heat pumps and use of fossil fuels, even if it's no longer it's not necessarily always about the outcome. It's about who's it for and even when there's good intentions, because of the amount of distrust. There's this, there's an assumption that what you're trying to do is the same old same old and it's not going to be good. Good for me. So those are some of the debates and I think they all honestly get back to that how at the beginning. I have to believe that if engagement was done correctly with the right people at the table, and the right communications that it would take out some of those, you know lack of trust, but it doesn't always seem to work so far. Daniel. Great. Thanks, Ariela. And just to, you know, sort of jump off of where you're coming from as well. There are some really just specific examples in Rockaway about how the people who live there have been left out of the conversation. I think I will I want to start off with one of the biggest sort of one of the biggest policy changes that is always happening in Rockway and that is a big sort of just thing that people will focus on is the flood maps because the flood maps is giving very sober outlook about Rockway's future, not just 50 years and 100 years down the line but 20 to 30 years down the line from now. And I see when people from outside of Rockaway come here to do work to do studies to to create projects that it says well let's look at the flood maps first. They ask us what do people in Rockway think about flood maps. We try our best to educate people about these flood maps, but they're put out with with no concern for what the lines are actually crossing. They're crossing people's homes that they've lived in for 40 to 50 years. And when the when organizations like FEMA put out these flood maps, they don't work with people to explain them. They just throw them out to people and expect people to understand them and what they mean and what that's going to mean down the line for people. But if a person isn't looking at maps as part of their daily job and interest every day, those maps are really hard to understand. And so that educational engagement component is lost, and then people do not care, and that's where distrust comes from. Another example is a few years ago, the Department of Environmental Protection held a community engagement meeting at one of the local one of the local school campuses in Rockaway. They scheduled it for at 430pm on a Wednesday. Most of the people who work in Far Rockaway are working outside the peninsula because there are not many jobs here. So they're taking the subway over an hour and a half into Manhattan and Brooklyn. If they're getting out of work at five o'clock, they're never going to make it to the 430 to six o'clock meeting that was scheduled about a pipeline off the coast, less than three miles from their home to have their voices heard. So this breeds more distrust in this community. Another very current example, the Arbor and East Development. Community members who came to RISE's community vision and edgware process these last six months have continually asked RISE, when are we going to be able to have our voices heard about what's happening in Arbor East. We have a lot of concern as homeowners, as nitro residents, and as climate activists ourselves. I'm not the only project manager for Arbor and East but my co-worker who is every meeting she goes to with the developments in the governmental agencies involved with Arbor and East. She says when is the community engagement process happening. They say we'll let you know next time, we'll let you know next time. People need to have their voices heard and learn about what you want to do in their community and without that, no real change is going to happen. The distrust is going to stay. And these issues of climate change and resiliency are not really going to be, are not going to matter to the people who live there because they didn't have a chance to speak about it and give their thoughts and tell people about their daily existence and the experiences they have every day just leaving their homes. So it's really weird to see that disconnect which has been talked about for so long and to work with a lot of agencies who don't want to make headway on that front when that is a really big core piece of all of this work. And I realize one of our main goals during all of our projects is just to give people the tools to advocate for themselves. So community vision and edge mirror. You know the main goal was let's figure out how we want to design these spaces with temporary structures so that they can still help us to run flood events whether that be a storm or everyday flooding. And the other main priority of our work within these three forums was just to help people see how they can push to have their voices heard their ideas their wants their needs. How they can stay involved in the process while dealing with an organization like the Department of Housing Preservation and Development in New York City. Let's talk about where you can find funding for specific ideas. Let's talk about what sort of groups you can go to to learn more. Let's talk about how to get your thoughts down on paper in the best way possible that government agencies are going to be able to respond to you. I'm sure that as the community land trust is coming to fruition that it's not given to someone who doesn't know or understand Rockaway, but that it's from someone within the community because there's been two to three groups that have submitted applications to be the nonprofit that's going to manage that community land trust. Our goal is always to make sure that people can advocate for themselves and their communities. There's even more so sometimes than the specific plans and ideas we're coming up with, because as long as people feel like they can be engaged, then they're more likely to be. There's lots of jargon that's thrown around and people get scared and worried that they're not going to understand it or that people aren't going to take them seriously. So we want to make sure that they know that they will be taken seriously because we're helping to cure them up. And that's one way that rise is trying to tackle this sort of policy disconnect between the people making the plans and the people being affected by the plans. Great, thank you, Daniel. And I have one last question here. And, you know, this conversation so far has been really interesting. I think of some of the themes that are emerging from the conversation here. Exclusion of certain communities from the policy debates. In the case of Victoria, I think of the context of this colonial relationship between the US and Hawaii and some of the Pacific islands you work in. And the kind of lasting effect of that relationship present in the interaction between Hawaii and institutions like FEMA and HUD that provide resources for responding to the effects of climate change. Not too differently, actually. I think of the work of Daniel and the Rockaways and communities like Edgemere that are still dealing with the legacy of racial segregation in the United States of racial exclusion, which has a lot of parallels with these sort of colonial processes of exclusion and oppression. There's a lot of similarities there. And it's interesting that we are still dealing with those problems and now very much within the context of climate change and responding to the climate crisis. The other thing that sends out to me is the comments made by Ariella about how we define the crisis itself, right. We can continue to think of it as this physical and natural phenomenon that's an external force acting on our communities. And therefore the response has to be more investment in infrastructure or some sort of technological fix. But as what Ariella is pointing to is that in fact, some of the main drivers of risk in these communities are things like low quality housing are things like lack of access to transportation, basic planning problems that we've been dealing with for a long time. These are the main drivers of risk in these communities. And so it really does force us to rethink how we design or put together policies and planning strategies to address the climate crisis. Within that context, I want to pose this last question to the panelists. Looking forward, how would you define climate justice? What does climate justice look like in this context? And for this I'll open it to the panel, whoever wants to take the first stab at this question, please feel free to do so. I think someone else should go first this time. Sure, I can jump in. I'll keep it brief and short. For me, climate justice is having the most open and sincere conversation you can between policymakers and the communities that are being affected by those policies. You can be open and honest with people about what the data means, about what you're trying to get done, and really give them the chance just to talk. That's all people want to do is talk and have their voices heard. You know, when we came back for our first in person meeting, you could hear the decibel levels rise when we did an icebreaker activity just because people were so excited to talk to each other and see each other again. Afterwards, people don't even sometimes talk about the specific activities that we did. They're just said, thank you for bringing us here and letting us speak to each other. So if you can open up that conversation and have it be more intimate and human and personal. I think that that's going to remedy a lot of the issues, our communities of color, especially have faced her solo. Thank you, Daniel. I don't think I should ever be defining environmental justice for any community. I think even defining what justice looks like and what it is is something that is place specific and should be defined so I don't mean to question. There are a few key principles, you know you see it when you see the climate marches that sign that says systems change not climate change. I mean that's a big part of it. It's, there's a lot of underlying systems that that need to be completely rethought for us to actually be able to address the climate crisis. Another big theme is the theme of power, and it's seeding power. It's eating power to folks we've made powerless for the last, you know, few centuries. If not longer if you look outside that the United States, and that's really hard shift to make in the way our institutions work and the way decisions are work but it's part of that systems change. I like Daniel and I was definitions and comments a lot. And I guess I agree that that I guess climate justice is linked to recognizing the different factors that have caused different communities to experience climate impacts on equally. So whether that's, you know, historical inequities colonial inequities, nuclear histories in our region, for example. And then how to center and empower the voices that have not been heard, and give them the resources that they need to be in the conversation and respond to climate impacts whether those are financial resources, human resources, educational resources, cultural resources, figuring out with the community what is needed. Great. Thank you, Victoria. And with that, we have a few minutes left here to turn it over to the audience want to give the audience an opportunity to post some questions to the panelists. Thank you all for your insightful comments. I can read out the questions that are in the chat. And meanwhile I just want to remind the audience that on zoom, you can also use the raise your hand feature and, you know, I can call on you to unmute and you can ask But meanwhile, I'll read out the questions in chat. So I think we can start with Johanna's question. So she writes area you mentioned two years of engagement for the bike lanes that were ultimately not successful in delivering bike lanes is a takeaway that engagement wasn't the wasn't with the right people, or the engagement format wasn't right. Or maybe engagement could have taken a step back and listen first before assuming my plans for the solutions. What could have been done differently. Thanks I answered in the chat but I'll discuss it again here and then apologies that I need to go pick up my son. You know, at the time of this design project. COVID happened and the consulting firm that was leading this had to shift their outreach tactics to ones that were more virtual. They really were looking to create an inclusive process with different ways of communicating so if you couldn't make it on the internet for virtual meeting they did look to other things and actually many were looking at it as a model of civic engagement in this era like wow look at that pivot what can we learn from it, which is why a lot of folks were shocked when in the end it all fell apart. But if you really peel back the onion, it was never about the thing was never about bike lanes and who wants bike lanes and who who doesn't. This was it's a really unsafe street Washington Avenue it's this major quarter that cuts all across the city. And this was all about about safety, but some community leaders who represent marginalized communities were often left out of discussion and therefore are bringing a lot of past harms and grievances with them. There wasn't that extra level of outreach and bringing folks in and doing the political work that happened, you know, not just the engagement work but that extra political work, like take the time to bring these folks in more have special meetings get you know city council line get everyone aligned. I think that would have made a process and that's hard to do you know one thing that philanthropy doesn't fund and city government doesn't fund and other, we don't fund the space to have those conversations, it takes a lot of resources and a lot of time and a lot of people to be able to engage appropriately and it's usually the least funded things it's easier to fund you know, a piece of something, then it is to actually fund a person whose job it is to be a connector and do that extra bit of outreach. And again, apologies that I have to tell you but I'll follow up with you go to hear all of the great comments that I'm sure you all have. Thank you, Ariella. Thank you. Would you like to add anything to that. Should I go on to the next question. I think we should go on I want to give others an opportunity to join the conversation. Let me go to the next question which is actually my question. So, I guess I sort of framed this question for Daniel but Victoria I think you might be able to shed some light on this, but this is basically related to Daniels. So the legibility of FEMA maps to communities is a need for like further community engagement. So I was wondering, I'm not familiar with the US context but I was wondering about the processes that go into the production of these maps. Is there a mismatch between the way this is defined by institutions, vis-a-vis the way communities identify risk. Is there a timeline that sort of institutional definitions, whole versus community definitions. So if you could just comment on that. Sure thing. Yeah, so I can't speak too much about the physical production and what goes into making that too much on that side specifically, but I do think there is somewhat of a mismatch between how it's defined by the two different groups. We talked about how there, there's these projections years down the line not so far 20, 30 years but still years down the line, whereas people are dealing with daily problems and experiences that aren't being addressed every day, just as they're trying to get to work or to school etc. So, you know, always referring to the maps, even though everyone in the community knows about the risks and understands that 20, 30 years down the line, you know, we're going to be having a completely different kind of conversation to just say well this is what we're worried about and not what's happening today is really hard for people to hear because it just compounds that distrust and the neglect that they felt for so long. And then a lot of these maps, the organizations that are putting them out are not really just you know having a workshop where they can explain people exactly what they mean. Talk about where the data came from it and what this means in terms of a flood insurance you know people just see the number the prices for their flood insurance going up and are wondering like, Hey, why wasn't I told about this like why is my bill so much more. And you know the worry is, is my only option 20 to 30 years down the line to move. But when you tell people you've got to pack up your whole life and move. It's like, Wow, like we were moved my family was moved here 4050 years ago against their will. We've been trying to live here trying to get resources. Now you're saying we have to pack up and move again. Like, there's no empathetic conversation that's happening there it's just sort of like the data says this so do this. And people don't get a chance to just say like well this is how I feel about that and is there something else that can be done like maybe if you hear from us. You, we have ideas ourselves listen to these, and also if we talk to each other. Maybe there's something else that we're not thinking of that can happen. So I just think these maps that are thrown at people is really hard for people to grasp and understand when there's so much more room for an intimate empathetic conversation that's not yet happening. And a little bit to that and more on the data sides. So again, I don't know exactly how the maps are always produced with the flood maps by FEMA but I know that it's always a contentious conversation and the maps are not forward to anything in terms of projected climate impacts and sea level rise impacts. They're based on historical data and historical flood maps which are already, you know, in many cases outdated so I think there's actually. I think that FEMA did an experimental sea level rise projection map for areas impacted by Hurricane Sandy after the event. But those are experimental. And although they exist they're not incorporated into flood map, you know, pricing and insurance risk and things like that they're really for just, you know, people's own use. But I think there is a mismatch, you know, both between the risk ways risk is defined by institutions versus communities, and the way it's defined between the institutions that have financial stakes in those maps like flood insurance overall, reinsurance, and, and the institutions that are making those maps and what they're able to put in them. And then again there's another conversation about the use of different kinds of social vulnerability indices. So there's, you know, I'm not an expert on this at all but I know there are a lot of, there's a lot of debate over the appropriateness of different kinds of social vulnerability layers and how they're overlaid on different communities and used in terms of determining risk. I think it's always interesting to sort of gain a, you know, bottom up and top down perspective at the same time about how these systems sort of interact on the ground. Lincoln's question. So, the question for the panelists. How do you facilitate discussion on the trade offs of mitigation versus adaptation investments with stakeholders, the short term rewards versus thinking long term. And then he says thanks for the great tacit knowledge, knowledge examples of engagement for climate justice. I guess we don't have to start on that. Yeah, Lincoln you can see we're not jumping in because of course that's a very difficult question. How do you facilitate that discussion I mean I think a lot of what Daniel was saying earlier, kind of addresses that you know that true empathetic engagement sustained engagement, finding resources to I guess are yellow was was mentioning it mentioning it to you know what is a way to really fund sustained interaction with stakeholders and work with them. You know so that they, they are part of the conversation and are making decisions in terms of mitigation and adaptation investments. And I think, you know, besides the fact that that's not easily funded in a lot of cases. It's also extremely difficult to do you know it's not. It's not an easy job, you know there are people and some like in Honolulu. We have people at the city office of climate change resiliency and sustainability that were funded through the hundred resilient cities initiative to, with a with a very explicit process go out and engage with different stakeholders different communities. I think they engage with over you know 6000 people on the island and all of these different communities really bringing a lot of these questions of you know shorter which is longer term thinking into a series of 42 adaptation and mitigation and resiliency actions that were then folded into a climate resiliency plan for the island. And that's one example of you know, a very well funded and well thought out way of of getting buy in but I definitely would open it up to Daniel for for more comments as well. I guess Victoria as I was trying to gather my thoughts there because it's it's so hard to really fully answer that question and, you know, I think part of it is I don't fully know, but I do know from our experience that the grass roots part of it needs to be maintained and you know, we were doing our best for our last visioning project just to go door to door, hand out flyers talk to people. Because, you know, a lot of people in edge mirror and Rockaway and Arbor and just don't even get the opportunity to do meetings like this so just letting them know that is happening and that we'd love to hear from them no matter what their contribution might be is important. And then, you know, on the other side of it trying to engage with the city and private development firms. It's, it's really hard because as Victoria mentioned sometimes that that funding isn't there for them to always send someone and have someone be the face of what is going on so we're trying our best just to be the sort of middle of a conversation that can sort of, you know, bring the discussion and questions that are happening over here with the community, through and over to the other side as best as possible. Because if there can't be that direct link right now, at least that can be some sort of link where we're working as a community organization that's based there, and has been there for so long to help guide the conversation back and forth. Yeah, again, you just do your best. As Ariela was saying before, it's just really hard. So you work with what you got, and you try to bring as many people to the table, as you can as much as possible to have as frank and open a discussion as you can. I think that that's right now where where I fall in the spectrum of trying to, you know, facilitate those discussions of trade off versus adaptation and short term versus long term. And we have to see how those conversations continue to develop and how that can change our thinking forward. Are there any more questions? I think we are almost out of time, but somebody has one question we could squeeze it in. That's all. If you want to speak a little more to that. I think it's just my comment that, you know, it's, we're talking again and again about being inclusive and getting the right people at the table but we are all so overtapped, you know, everyone from academia to organizations to communities to parents to public health like everybody is dealing with so many balls in the air that asking them to come to another meeting or make time to engage on a new problem that they hadn't thought about before. There's a lot to ask. So, you know, being conscious of people's times and overtapping stakeholders who have so many things on their plate I think is something that we're all conscious of and need to be conscious of. I think it's 100% Victoria and I'll say all this coven and virtual things has been helpful a little bit because sometimes people can't make it physically to a building so at least if they have the virtual option they can sit in type in the chat if they don't want to speak out loud. That's some way to help people get more involved. And just as another example like we had a core group of organizational leaders that we engaged with for our last visioning process and they said, we originally had it scheduled for Saturday afternoon the meetings and they were like, No, no, no. Move it to 10am, get people before they go out and do their shopping and chores for the day, because they're much more likely to come earlier than later and we're like, Okay, we're going to move it earlier you have the knowledge about that. That's what we have before you so remember just adapt to what the feedback that you're getting. It was interesting when we started having our climate commission meetings virtually during the pandemic. And if you've, I mean I'm pretty sure everyone in this room has been to local or city government meetings before and there's, you know, a recurring cast of characters. I see pretty regularly and suddenly we were you know the zoom squares or all these people and voices that we hadn't seen before. So in that, you know, in that case, I definitely saw the conversation space opening up from the commission's perspective but at the same time. There are some some groups that we still haven't been able to get in contact with and we need to do direct outreach and go out there. That's very insightful. And I also wonder whether people see the COVID crisis as a sort of continuation of, you know, the climate problem, and how these things are sort of intertwined also at some level. Yeah, but I think we are almost out of time so you go if you have any. Yeah. Yeah, well we're at time here and so I just wanted to thank. First of all, I wanted to thank the panelists for joining us today for making a time on that note recognizing how busy everyone is and how you're pulled in all these different directions we very much appreciate your time and your presence with us here today to have this really important conversation. This is as was explained earlier part of a series of talks where we're really trying to kind of engage the discussion around the climate crisis from different angles. And this one being a really important one sort of trying to center some of the communities that are often overlooked in this discussion. And so thank you so much Victoria thank you so much Daniel. I look forward to staying in touch and learning more about your work as it develops. And the last, I want to say thank you to the organizers of the event to run Johnny, Carolyn and Elena are incredible doctoral students at GSAP who are organizing this series of events. It was a great one, and I look forward to the next one. Thank you all for having me and see you next time. Thank you so much. And yeah, thank you to the panelists on the behalf of GSAP and the planning program. We really appreciate you taking time to come and speak with us. Thank you again to everyone else make sure to join us next week. So next week is the spring break but after the spring break for our next laptop by Dr. Innis Sanchez the Magriana, who stopped to be on gender and planning from research to implementation. Thank you everyone.