Advertisement

Environment Systems and Decisions

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 295–306 | Cite as

Investigating adoption patterns of residential low impact development (LID) using classification trees

  • Domenico C. AmodeoEmail author
  • Royce A. Francis
Article
  • 55 Downloads

Abstract

Local governments are under pressure to improve storm water management and often times must comply with consent decrees with the Federal Government. Decentralizing a portion of the storm water management by integrating private landowners into localized retention and infiltration efforts, that is, low impact development (LID) or green infrastructure projects, is becoming increasingly popular. Some wastewater systems have considered incentivizing private land owners to make improvements aimed at retaining storm water or slowing the conveyance to grey infrastructure. This study examines potential opportunities for incentivizing private residential land owners in Washington DC to install LID projects. This study maps LID configurations to a set of adoption strategies and categories. The C4.5 algorithm is then applied to identify a high performance decision tree for classifying parcels by adoption strategy or adoption categories based on property-level attributes.

Keywords

Low impact development Storm water retention Environmental policy Landscaping Decision trees Machine learning Best management practices Green roofs Combined sewage overflow Urban planning Water quality Storm water management Impervious Permeable LID Rain barrels Infiltration Run-off CSO Adopters, green city C4.5 algorithm 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the United States National Science Foundation (NSF RIPS Project No. 1441226) for financial support of this research.

References

  1. Amodeo D, Francis R (2017a) “Predicting residential low impact development adoption at the homeowner level.” Technical presentation presented at the 2017 National Capital Region water resources symposium, University of The District of Columbia, Washington DC, April 7Google Scholar
  2. Amodeo D, Francis R (2017b) “Understanding Residential Low Impact Development at the Home Owner Level.” Technical Presentation presented at the INFORMS Annual Meeting 2017, Houston, Texas, October 22. Retrieved from http://meetings2.informs.org/wordpress/houston2017/schedule/
  3. Ando AW, Freitas L (2011) Consumer demand for green stormwater management technology in an urban setting: the case of chicago rain barrels: household demand for stormwater management technology. Water Resour Res.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011070 Google Scholar
  4. Bean EZ, William F, Hunt, Bidelspach DA (2007) “Field survey of permeable pavement surface infiltration rates.” J Irrig Drain Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)07339437(2007)133%3A3(249) Google Scholar
  5. Brown RR (2005) Impediments to integrated urban stormwater management: the need for institutional reform. Environ Manag 36(3):455–468.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0217-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Center for Watershed Protection (2013) 2013 stormwater management guidebook. Center for Watershed Protection, Washington, DC. https://doee.dc.gov/node/610622
  7. Chandra A, Gulati S, Kandlikar M (2010) Green drivers or free riders? an analysis of tax rebates for hybrid vehicles. J Environ Econ Manag 60(2):78–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2010.04.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Department of Energy and Enviornment (2018) RiverSmart. Government of Washington DC. https://doee.dc.gov/service/get-riversmart
  9. District of Washington, DC, Department of Enviornment (2011) DCGIS.BMPt. Government of Washington DC. http://opendata.dc.gov/datasets/best-management-practices
  10. Francis R, Kanikicharla S, Reyes-Jones C (2012) Integrated Water Use Impact Assessment For DC Urban Infrastructure Final Report. August 2012. Retrieved from https://www.udc.edu/docs/wrri/Francis_FY2011_Final_Report.pdf
  11. Gallagher KS, Muehlegger E (2011) Giving green to get green? incentives and consumer adoption of hybrid vehicle technology. J Environ Econ Manag 61(1):1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2010.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guo Y, Zhang S, Liu S (2014) Runoff reduction capabilities and irrigation requirements of green roofs. Water Resour Manage 28(5):1363–1378.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-014-0555-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kahn ME (2007) Do greens drive hummers or hybrids? environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer choice. J Environ Econ Manag 54(2):129–145.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2007.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kotchen MJ, Moore MR (2008) Conservation: from voluntary restraint to a voluntary price premium. Environ Resour Econ 40(2):195–215.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9148-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lawson S, Joksimovic D, Laval U, Li J, Ryerson University, Walters M, Lake Simcoe Region Cons. Auth. (2011) The perceptions of stakeholders in low impact development planning. J Water Manag Model.  https://doi.org/10.14796/JWMM.R241-19.Google Scholar
  16. Loáiciga HA, Majid Sadeghi K, Shivers S, Kharaghani S (2015) Stormwater control measures: optimization methods for sizing and selection. J Water Resour Plan Manag 141:04015006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McCuen R (2004) Hydrologic analysis and design, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  18. Meder A, Kouma E (2009) Low impact development for the empowered homeowner; incentive programs for single family residences. 2010, December. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/gwu/detail.action?docID=3115469
  19. Montalto F, Behr C, Alfredo K, Wolf M, Arye M, Walsh M (2007) Rapid assessment of the cost-effectiveness of low impact development for CSO control. Landsc Urban Plan 82(3):117–131.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Porse E (2013) Stormwater governance and future cities. Water 5(1):29–52.  https://doi.org/10.3390/w5010029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Quinlan JR (1993) C4.5: programs for machine learning. In The Morgan Kaufmann series in machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CalifGoogle Scholar
  22. Sample D, Heaney J, Wright L, Koustas R (2001) Geographic information systems, decision support systems, and urban storm-water management. J Water Resour Plan Manag 127(3):155–161.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2001)127:3(155) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Werff E van der, Steg L, Keizer K (2013) It is a moral issue: the relationship between environmental self-identity, obligation-based intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour. Glob Environ Change 23(5):1258–1265.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhang S, Guo Y (2015) Analytical equation for estimating the stormwater capture efficiency of permeable pavement systems. J Irrig Drain Eng 141(4):06014004.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000810 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Engineering Management and Systems EngineeringThe George Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations