In an effort to address the lack of literature in on-campus active travel, this study aims to investigate the following primary questions:<br/>• What are the modes that students use to travel on campus?<br/>• What are the motivations that underlie the mode choice of students on campus?<br/>My first stage of research involved a series of qualitative investigations. I held one-on-one virtual interviews with students in which I asked them questions about the mode they use and why they feel that their chosen mode works best for them. These interviews served two functions. First, they provided me with insight into the various motivations underlying student mode choice. Second, they provided me with an indication of what explanatory variables should be included in a model of mode choice on campus.<br/>The first half of the research project informed a quantitative survey that was released via the Honors Digest to attract student respondents. Data was gathered on travel behavior as well as relevant explanatory variables.<br/>My analysis involved developing a logit model to predict student mode choice on campus and presenting the model estimation in conjunction with a discussion of student travel motivations based on the qualitative interviews. I use this information to make a recommendation on how campus infrastructure could be modified to better support the needs of the student population.

Modeling results incorporating several distinct urban expansion futures for the United States in 2100 show that, in the absence of any adaptive urban design, megapolitan expansion, alone and separate from greenhouse gas-induced forcing, can be expected to raise near-surface temperatures 1–2 °C not just at the scale of individual cities but over large regional swaths of the country. This warming is a significant fraction of the 21st century greenhouse gas-induced climate change simulated by global climate models. Using a suite of regional climate simulations, we assessed the efficacy of commonly proposed urban adaptation strategies, such as green, cool roof, and hybrid approaches, to ameliorate the warming. Our results quantify how judicious choices in urban planning and design cannot only counteract the climatological impacts of the urban expansion itself but also, can, in fact, even offset a significant percentage of future greenhouse warming over large scales. Our results also reveal tradeoffs among different adaptation options for some regions, showing the need for geographically appropriate strategies rather than one size fits all solutions.

Because of a projected surge of several billion urban inhabitants by mid-century, a rising urgency exists to advance local and strategically deployed measures intended to ameliorate negative consequences on urban climate (e.g., heat stress, poor air quality, energy/water availability). Here we highlight the importance of incorporating scale-dependent built environment induced solutions within the broader umbrella of urban sustainability outcomes, thereby accounting for fundamental physical principles. Contemporary and future design of settlements demands cooperative participation between planners, architects, and relevant stakeholders, with the urban and global climate community, which recognizes the complexity of the physical systems involved and is ideally fit to quantitatively examine the viability of proposed solutions. Such participatory efforts can aid the development of locally sensible approaches by integrating across the socioeconomic and climatic continuum, therefore providing opportunities facilitating comprehensive solutions that maximize benefits and limit unintended consequences.