The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Vulnerability and Capacity: Explaining Local Commitment to Climate-Change Policy
Abstract
We examine the reasons why a US locality would voluntarily commit to the Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) campaign. Using geographic information systems analytic techniques, we map and measure a locality's vulnerability to climate-change impacts at the county level of spatial precision. We analyze multiple measures of climate-change vulnerability, including expected temperature change, extreme weather events, and coastal proximity, as well as economic variables, demographic variables, and civic-participation variables that constitute a locality's socioeconomic capacity to commit to costly climate-change policy initiatives. Bivariate and logistic regression results indicate that CCP-committed localities are quantitatively different to noncommitted localities on both climate-change risk and socioeconomic-capacity dimensions. On vulnerability measures, the odds of CCP-campaign participation increase significantly with the number of people killed and injured by extreme weather events, projected temperature change, and coastal proximity. On socioeconomic-capacity measures, the odds of CCP-campaign involvement increase with the percentage of citizens that vote Democrat and recycle, as well as the number of nonprofit organizations with an environment focus. The odds decrease in a county area as the percentage of the labor force employed in carbon-intensive industries increases.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Struggle to Govern the Commons
Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., & Stern, P. C. (2003) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1091015 · Cited by 4,209
The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Oreskes, N. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1103618 · Cited by 1,814
Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change
O'Connor, R. E., Bard, R. J., & Fisher, A. (1999) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb00421.x · Cited by 957
Cited by
A survey of urban climate change experiments in 100 cities
Castán Broto, V., & Bulkeley, H. (2013) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.005 · Cited by 1,079
Cities and the Governing of Climate Change
Bulkeley, H. (2010) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-072809-101747 · Cited by 908
Pataki, D. E., Carreiro, M. M., Cherrier, J., Grulke, N. E., Jennings, V., Pincetl, S., Pouyat, R. V., Whitlow, T. H., & Zipperer, W. C. (2011) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/090220 · Cited by 860
Gómez-Baggethun, E., Gren, Å., Barton, D. N., Langemeyer, J., McPhearson, T., O’Farrell, P., Andersson, E., Hamstead, Z., & Kremer, P. (2013) · Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Challenges and Opportunities · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7088-1_11 · Cited by 497
Overcoming Barriers to Climate Change Adaptation—A Question of Multilevel Governance?
Amundsen, H., Berglund, F., & Westskog, H. (2010) · Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy · doi:10.1068/c0941 · Cited by 450
Metadata
- Authors
- Zahran, S., Brody, S. D., Vedlitz, A., Grover, H., & Miller, C.
- Venue
- Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 544-562
- ISSN
- 0263-774X (ISSN-L)
- 1472-3425
- DOI
- 10.1068/c2g
- OpenAlex
- W2025648322
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 31.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.