Building healthy communities: establishing health and wellness metrics for use within the real estate industry.

It is increasingly well recognized that the design and operation of the communities in which people live, work, learn, and play significantly influence their health. However, within the real estate industry, the health impacts of transportation, community development, and other construction projects, both positive and negative, continue to operate largely as economic externalities: unmeasured, unregulated, and for the most part unconsidered. This lack of transparency limits communities' ability to efficiently advocate for real estate investment that best promotes their health and well-being. It also limits market incentives for innovation within the real estate industry by making it more difficult for developers that successfully target health behaviors and outcomes in their projects to differentiate themselves competitively. In this article we outline the need for actionable, community-relevant, practical, and valuable metrics jointly developed by the health care and real estate sectors to better evaluate and optimize the "performance" of real estate development projects from a population health perspective. Potential templates for implementation, including the successful introduction of sustainability metrics by the green building movement, and preliminary data from selected case-study projects are also discussed.

Breaking barriers to interoperability: assigning spatially and temporally unique identifiers to spaces and buildings.

The real estate industry routinely uses specialized information systems for functions, including design, construction, facilities management, brokerage, tax assessment, and utilities. These systems are mature and effective within vertically integrated market segments. However, new questions are reaching across these traditional information silos. For example, buyers may be interested in evaluating the design, energy efficiency characteristics, and operational performance of a commercial building. This requires the integration of information across multiple databases held by different institutions. Today, this type of data integration is difficult to automate and propone to errors due, in part, to the lack of generally accepted building and spaces identifiers. Moving forward, the real estate industry needs a new mechanism to assign identifiers for whole buildings and interior spaces for the purpose of interoperability, data exchange, and integration. This paper describes a systematic process to identify activities occurring at building or within interior spaces to provide a foundation for exchange and interoperability. We demonstrate the application of the approach with a prototype Web application. This concept and demonstration illustrate the elements of a practical interoperability framework that can increase productivity, create new business opportunities, and reduce errors, waste, and redundancy.

National housing and impervious surface scenarios for integrated climate impact assessments.

Understanding the impacts of climate change on people and the environment requires an understanding of the dynamics of both climate and land use/land cover changes. A range of future climate scenarios is available for the conterminous United States that have been developed based on widely used international greenhouse gas emissions storylines. Climate scenarios derived from these emissions storylines have not been matched with logically consistent land use/cover maps for the United States. This gap is a critical barrier to conducting effective integrated assessments. This study develops novel national scenarios of housing density and impervious surface cover that are logically consistent with emissions storylines. Analysis of these scenarios suggests that combinations of climate and land use/cover can be important in determining environmental conditions regulated under the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. We found significant differences in patterns of habitat loss and the distribution of potentially impaired watersheds among scenarios, indicating that compact development patterns can reduce habitat loss and the number of impaired watersheds. These scenarios are also associated with lower global greenhouse gas emissions and, consequently, the potential to reduce both the drivers of anthropogenic climate change and the impacts of changing conditions. The residential housing and impervious surface datasets provide a substantial first step toward comprehensive national land use/land cover scenarios, which have broad applicability for integrated assessments as these data and tools are publicly available.

Current practices and future opportunities for policy on climate change and invasive species.

Climate change and invasive species are often treated as important, but independent, issues. Nevertheless, they have strong connections: changes in climate and societal responses to climate change may exacerbate the impacts of invasive species, whereas invasive species may affect the magnitude, rate, and impact of climate change. We argue that the design and implementation of climate-change policy in the United States should specifically consider the implications for invasive species; conversely, invasive-species policy should address consequences for climate change. The development of such policies should be based on (1) characterization of interactions between invasive species and climate change, (2) identification of areas where climate-change policies could negatively affect invasive-species management, and (3) identification of areas where policies could benefit from synergies between climate change and invasive-species management.

Gaps and mismatches between global conservation priorities and spending.

Several international conservation organizations have recently produced global priority maps to guide conservation activities and spending in their own and other conservation organizations. Surprisingly, it is not possible to directly evaluate the relationship between priorities and spending within a given organization because none of the organizations with global priority models tracks how they spend their money relative to their priorities. We were able, however to evaluate the spending patterns of five other large biodiversity conservation organizations without their own published global priority models and investigate the potential influence of priority models on this spending. On average, countries with priority areas received greater conservation investment; global prioritization systems, however explained between only 2 and 32% of the U.S. dollars 1.5 billion spent in 2002, depending on whether the United States was removed from analyses and whether conservation spending was adjusted by the per capita gross domestic product within each country. We also found little overlap in the spending patterns of the five conservation organizations evaluated, suggesting that informal coordination or segregation of effort may be occurring. Our results also highlight a number of potential gaps and mismatches in how limited conservation funds are spent and provide the first audit of global conservation spending patterns. More explicit presentation of conservation priorities by organizations currently withoutpriority models and better tracking of spending by those with published priorities are clearly needed to help make future conservation activities as efficient as possible.