Out of all fifty states, Arizona boasts the greatest number of sunny days, which comes as no surprise to its residents. According to a CDC data report, Arizona has an average of nearly 286 total days of sun exposure. This sheer amount of sunlight could lead to the assumption that Arizona is also leading the way in harvesting this solar energy, but that isn’t the case. According to the S.E.I.A (Solar Energies Industries Association), Arizona is the fifth largest solar producer, while California comes in first by a significant lead. What happened in the history of California that caused this disparity in solar production that we see today and should Arizona follow in its footsteps? In this video essay, I consider the historical impact that climate change has had on California that directly led them to adopt environmental policies, such as wildfires, droughts, smog, and sea-level rise. These events threaten California specifically, due to its uniquely high population, geography, and climate, and they will continue to get worse as climate change subsists. Due to the persistent threat that they face, California was forced to pass environmental regulations that ultimately ended up developing them into a leader in environmental protectionism. Arizona, while also facing droughts, high heat, and poor air quality, has had its environmental progress greatly hindered by a lack of cohesive action at the State level. Based on information from the U.S Energy Information Agency, over the past 30 years, Arizona has been one of, if not the highest, carbon-dioxide emitters in the West. For a time there was some political response to this fact, but eventually, its momentum was halted in favor of economic challenges and continually stunted by mixed agendas, which polarized Arizona parties even more and left city governments to deal with climate change on their own. With solar being the cheapest means of clean energy production, it seems unavoidable that it will develop eventually. Solar becoming a topic of such polarization in Arizona makes it much more challenging, as it can only progress with bipartisan support, but climate change is inevitable so discourse has to be the first step towards meaningful change.

Communicating climate risks is crucial when engaging the public to support climate action planning and addressing climate justice. How does evidence-based communication influence local residents’ risk perception and potential behavior change in support of climate planning? Built upon our previous study of Climate Justice maps illustrating high scores of both social and ecological vulnerability in Michigan’s Huron River watershed, USA, a quasi-experiment was conducted to examine the effects of Climate Justice mapping intervention on residents’ perceptions and preparedness for climate change associated hazards in Michigan. Two groups were compared: residents in Climate Justice areas with high social and ecological vulnerability scores in the watershed (n=76) and residents in comparison areas in Michigan (n=69). Measurements for risk perception include perceived exposure, sensitivity, and adaptability to hazards. Results indicate that risk information has a significant effect on perceived sensitivity and level of preparedness for future climate extremes among participants living in Climate Justice areas. Findings highlight the value of integrating scientific risk assessment information in risk communication to align calculated and perceived risks. This study suggests effective risk communication can influence local support of climate action plans and implementation of strategies that address climate justice and achieve social sustainability in local communities.

Green infrastructure serves as a critical no-regret strategy to address climate change mitigation and adaptation in climate action plans. Climate justice refers to the distribution of climate change-induced environmental hazards (e.g., increased frequency and intensity of floods) among socially vulnerable groups. Yet no index has addressed both climate justice and green infrastructure planning jointly in the USA. This paper proposes a spatial climate justice and green infrastructure assessment framework to understand social-ecological vulnerability under the impacts of climate change. The Climate Justice Index ranks places based on their exposure to climate change-induced flooding, and water contamination aggravated by floods, through hydrological modelling, GIS spatial analysis and statistical methodologies. The Green Infrastructure Index ranks access to biophysical adaptive capacity for climate change. A case study for the Huron River watershed in Michigan, USA, illustrates that climate justice hotspots are concentrated in large cities; yet these communities have the least access to green infrastructure. This study demonstrates the value of using GIS to assess the spatial distribution of climate justice in green infrastructure planning and thereby to prioritize infrastructure investment while addressing equity in climate change adaptation.