Abstract:Introduction: In 2006, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and local air quality management districts implemented an Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement program (referred to hereinafter as GM policy actions) (CARB 2006). The GM policy actions comprise approximately 200 actions with an estimated investment value of $6 to $10 billion. These actions targeted the major sources and polluters related to goods movements, such as highways; ports and railyard trucks; ship fuel and shore power; cargo equipment; and locomotives. These actions aimed to reduce total statewide domestic GM emissions to 2001 levels or lower by the year 2010; to reduce the statewide diesel particulate matter (DPM) health risk from GM by 85% by the year 2020; and to reduce the nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from international GM in the South Coast Air Basin by 30% from projected 2015 levels and 50% from projected 2020 levels. The years 2006 and 2007 marked an important milestone in starting to regulate GM polluters and adopting stricter standards for traffic-related air pollution. This project aimed to examine the impact of the GM policy actions on reductions in ambient air pollution and subsequent improvements in health outcomes of Medi-Cal fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries with chronic conditions in 10 counties in California. Specifically, we examined whether the GM policy actions reduced air pollution near GMC corridors more than in control areas. We subsequently assessed whether there were greater decreases in emergency room (ER) visits and hospitalizations for enrollees with chronic conditions who lived in the GM corridors (GMCs) than for those who lived in other areas. Methods: The study used a quasi-experimental design. We defined areas within 500 m of truck-permitted freeways and ports as GMCs. We further defined non-goods movement corridors (NGMCs) as locations within 500 m of truck-prohibited freeways or 300 m of a connecting roadway, and areas out of GMCs and NGMCs as controls (CTRLs). We defined years 2004-2007 as the pre-policy period and years 2008-2010 as the post-policy period. We developed linear mixed-effects land use regression models and created annual air pollution surfaces for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and ozone (O3) across California for years 2004-2010 at a spatial resolution of 30 m, then assigned them to enrollees' home addresses. We used a retrospective cohort of 23,000 California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) FFS adult beneficiaries living in 10 California counties with six years of data (September 1, 2004, to August 31, 2010). Cohort beneficiaries had at least one of four chronic conditions, including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, and heart disease. We used a difference-in-differences (DiD) model to assess whether air pollutant concentration and health care utilization (ER visits and hospitalizations) for cohort beneficiaries declined more for those living in intervention corridors (GMCs, NGMCs) than those living in CTRLs. All the models controlled for age, sex, language spoken, race/ethnicity, number of comorbidities in baseline years, county, time-varying health indicator variables, and several neighborhood variables. To facilitate interpretation, we calculated the DiD estimates in each of the three years after the policy intervention. The DiD was used to assess the causal impact of regulatory policy on reductions of air pollution, as well as for the improvements in health outcomes. We explored whether improvements in health outcomes were due to the air pollution reduction by using a multi- level mediation model, in which the effect of GM actions on health outcomes was mediated through the effect of actual air pollution reductions in the post-policy years. We used the Generalized Structural Equation Models for the estimation and combined the effects of NO2 and PM2.5 in the model. To further verify the causal inferences of the GM actions on reductions of exposures and improvements in health outcomes, we performed sensitivity analyses with propensity score weighting. Results: We observed statistically significant reductions in pollutant NO2 and PM2.5 concentrations for enrollees in all 10 counties. The enrollees in GMCs experienced greater reductions in NO2 and PM2.5 from the pre- to the post-policy periods than those in CTRLs. Greater reductions were also observed among beneficiaries living in NGMCs versus those in CTRLs, but those reductions were smaller than among beneficiaries living in GMCs. For O3 concentrations, an opposite trend was observed. Furthermore, we observed significantly greater reductions in ER visits for patients with asthma and COPD living in GMCs than those in CTRLS in the post-policy years. For example, we saw in the DiD modeling results there were 170 fewer ER visits for 1,000 beneficiaries with asthma per year in GMCs if the regionwide trend in the CTRL group was considered not related to the GM policy. Similarly, among the beneficiaries with COPD, there were 180 fewer ER visits per 1,000 patients estimated in the GMCs for the third year after the implementation of the policy. We also observed greater reductions in ER visits among those with asthma, when comparing NGMCs with CTRLs, but reductions were smaller than comparisons between GMCs and CTRLs. The ER visits for those with COPD, diabetes, and the total sample in NGMCs also had downward trends in the post-policy year in comparison with those in CTRLs but the differences were not statistically significant; similar phenomena were also observed for the ER visits among those with diabetes and heart diseases and in the total sample when GMCs versus CTRLs and GMCs versus NGMCs were compared. Although hospitalizations also decreased more in GMCs than in NGMCs and more in NGMCs than in CTRLs in the post-policy period, results were not statistically significant. Using the mediation models, we observed 0.129 more reductions in the expected number of ER visits among individuals with asthma for a composite reduction in one unit NO2 and one unit PM2.5 (DiD = -0.129, P < 0.05) from the pre-policy years to the post-policy years. The reductions in NO2 and PM2.5 due to policy change estimated by the mediation model are essentially the same as shown in the respective DiD models. Mediation analyses suggested that the effects of GM policy interventions on health improvements were largely due to exposure reductions. Finally, sensitivity analyses with propensity scores produced similar DiD results. Conclusions: This project has produced empirical evidence that air pollution control actions reduced pollution exposures among disadvantaged and susceptible populations. More importantly, our findings suggest that the reductions in air pollution led to health outcome improvements among low-income people with chronic conditions. Our investigation also contributed to scientific methods for assessing the health effects of long-term, large-scale, and complex regulatory actions with routinely collected pollutants and medical claims data. Therefore, the results strongly support both short-term and long-term efforts to improve air quality for all members of society and future studies on the impact of air pollution control policies.

Abstract:In our rapidly urbanizing world, sustainable transportation presents a major challenge. Transportation decisions have considerable direct impacts on urban society, both positive and negative, for example through changes in transit times and economic productivity, urban connectivity, tailpipe emissions and attendant air quality concerns, traffic accidents, and noise pollution. Much research has been dedicated to quantifying these direct impacts for various transportation modes. Transportation planning decisions also result in a variety of indirect environmental and human health impacts, a portion of which can accrue outside of the transit service area and so outside of the local decision-making process. Integrated modeling of direct and indirect impacts over the life cycle of different transportation modes provides decision support that is more comprehensive and less prone to triggering unintended consequences than a sole focus on direct tailpipe emissions. The recent work of Chester et al (2013) in this journal makes important contributions to this research by examining the environmental implications of introducing bus rapid transit and light rail in Los Angeles using life cycle assessment (LCA). Transport in the LA region is dominated by automobile trips, and the authors show that potential shifts to either bus or train modes would reduce energy use and emissions of criteria air pollutants, on an average passenger mile travelled basis. This work compares not just the use of each vehicle, but also upstream impacts from its manufacturing and maintenance, as well as the construction and maintenance of the entire infrastructure required for each mode. Previous work by the lead author (Chester and Horvath 2009), has shown that these non-operational sources and largely non-local can dominate life cycle impacts from transportation, again on an average (or attributional) basis, for example increasing rail-related GHG emissions by >150% over just operational emissions. While average results are valuable in comparing transport modes generally, they are less representative of local planning decisions, where the focus is on understanding the consequences of new infrastructure and how it might affect traffic, community impacts, and environmental aspects going forward. Chester et al (2013) also present their results using consequential LCA, which provides more detailed insights about the marginal effects of the specific rapid bus and light rail lines under study. The trade-offs between the additional resources required to install the public transit infrastructure (the 'resource debt') and the environmental advantages during the operation of these modes can be considered explicitly in terms of environmental impact payback periods, which vary with the type of environmental impact being considered. For example, bus rapid transit incurs a relatively small carbon debt associated with the GHG emissions of manufacturing new buses and installing transit infrastructure and pays this debt off almost immediately, while it takes half a century for the light rail line to pay off the 'smog debt' of its required infrastructure. This payback period approach, ubiquitous in life cycle costing, has been useful for communicating the magnitude of unintended environmental consequences from other resource and land management decisions, e.g., the release of soil carbon from land conversion to bioenergy crops (Fargione et al 2008), and will likely grow in prevalence as consequential LCA is used for decision support. The locations of projected emissions is just as important to decision-making as their magnitudes, as policy-making bodies seek to understand effects in their jurisdictions; however, life cycle impact assessment methods typically aggregate results by impact category rather than by source or sink location. Chester et al (2013) address this issue by providing both local (within Los Angeles) and total emissions results, with accompanying local-only payback periods. Much more challenging is the geographic mapping of impacts that these emissions will cause, given the many point and mobile sources of air pollutants over the entire transportation life cycle. Integration of LCA with high-resolution data sets is an active area of model development (Mutel and Hellweg 2009) and will provide site- and population-specific information for impacts ranging from water quality to biodiversity to human respiratory health. Another complex challenge in modeling environmental impacts of transportation (and cities in general) is the long run, interdependent relationship between transportation technologies and urban form. LCA modeling has tended to assume a fixed pattern of settlements and demand for mobility and then examined changes to a particular technology or practice within the transportation system, such as electric or hybrid vehicles or improved pavement materials. New transit options or other travel demand management strategies might induce mode switching or reduced trips, but the overall pattern of where people live and work is generally assumed in these models to be constant in the short run. In contrast, the automobile has been influencing land-use patterns for a century, and it is the resulting geographic structure that determines the baseline need for transportation, and thus drives the use of material and energy resources used in transportation systems (Kunstler 1994). We have seen that cities with high population densities tend to have lower tailpipe emissions from transportation (Kennedy et al 2009). Recent studies have modeled how changes in urban land-use or zoning changes the geographic structure of transportation demand and then used LCA to determine the environmental benefits of such policies. For example, Mashayekh et al (2012) summarized travel demand reductions projected from several studies of compact, smart growth, and brownfield in-fill development strategies to find benefits ranging up to 75% reductions in life cycle GHG and air pollutant emissions. A related study in Toronto on life cycle energy use and GHG emissions for high- and low-density development strategies found a ~60% difference in GHG emissions, largely due to transportation (Norman et al 2006). System dynamics and agent-based models may complement LCA in capturing long-term effects of transportation strategies as they are inherently dynamic (Stepp et al 2009), and can internalize spatially resolved decisions about where to settle and work (Waddell 2002). Transportation planning decisions have both direct and indirect, spatially distributed, often long-term effects on our health and our environment. The accompanying work by Chester et al (2013) provides a well-documented case study that highlights the potential of LCA as a rich source of decision support. References Chester M, Pincetl S, Elizabeth Z, Eisenstein W and Matute J 2013 Infrastructure and automobile shifts: positioning transit to reduce life-cycle environmental impacts for urban sustainability goals Environ. Res. Lett. 8 015041 Chester M V and Horvath A 2009 Environmental assessment of passenger transportation should include infrastructure and supply chains Environ. Res. Lett. 4 024008 Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S and Hawthorne P 2008 Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt Science 319 1235–8 Kennedy C, Steinberger J, Gasson B, Hansen Y, Hillman T, Havránek M, Pataki D, Phdungsilp A, Ramaswami A and Mendez G V 2009 Greenhouse gas emissions from global cities Environ. Sci. Technol. 43 7297–302 Kunstler J H 1994 Geography of Nowhere: The Rise and Decline of America's Man-Made Landscape (New York: Free Press) Mashayekh Y, Jaramillo P, Samaras C, Hendrickson C T, Blackhurst M, MacLean H L and Matthews H S 2012 Potentials for sustainable transportation in cities to alleviate climate change impacts Environ. Sci. Technol. 46 2529–37 Mutel C L and Hellweg S 2009 Regionalized life cycle assessment: computational methodology and application to inventory databases Environ. Sci. Technol. 43 5797–803 Norman J, MacLean H L and Kennedy C A 2006 Comparing high and low residential density: life-cycle analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions J. Urban Plann. Dev. 132 10–21 Stepp M D, Winebrake J J, Hawker J S and Skerlos S J 2009 Greenhouse gas mitigation policies and the transportation sector: the role of feedback effects on policy effectiveness Energy Policy 37 2774–87 Waddell P 2002 UrbanSim: modeling urban development for land use, transportation, and environmental planning J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 68 297–314

IMPLEMENTING THE TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY REGULATIONS

The New National Ambient Air Quality Standards in Transportation Planning

Regulating Transportation in New Nonattainment Areas under the 8-Hour Ozone Standard

CONFORMING TO THE NEW AIR QUALITY STANDARDS: TIPS FOR TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES

The MCMA Transportation System: Mobility and Air Pollution

INSTITUTIONAL AND POLITICAL CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING CONGESTION PRICING: CASE STUDY OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA

Transport solutions for cleaner air

Achieving Goals of San Francisco, California, for Greenhouse Gas Reductions in Transportation Sector

Analysis of MOVES and CMEM for Evaluating the Emissions Impact of an Intersection Control Change

Improvements in Air Quality and Health Outcomes Among California Medicaid Enrollees Due to Goods Movement Actions

Integrated strategies for road transportation-related multi-pollutant control: A cross-departmental policy mix

An integrated framework for managing the complex interdependence between infrastructures and the socioeconomic environment: An application in metropolitan Atlanta

Regulating Intercity Bus Stops in New York City

The Use of Road Infrastructure Data for Urban Transportation Planning: Issues and Opportunities

INDIVIDUAL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. EMISSIONS AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION MODELS

Intercity Transportation Planning In China Case Of The Guangzhou-Foshan Metropolitan Area

Municipal progress in conformity to Greenbelt legislation : challenges in implementation and to Greenbelt integrity

Advancing Urban Multimodal Transportation System Performance Management

Implementation of CIM-related Technologies Within Transportation Projects

Life cycle assessment in support of sustainable transportation

Evolution and Effect of Transportation Policy on Public Transit