Strategies for Environmental Outreach and Engagement
Project Managers
Stella Jordan
Judy Day
Project Principal
Sean Rourke
Graphics
Ken Dumas
Adriana Fratini
Editor
Maureen Kelly
Contributors
Jia Huang
Marnie Kopec
Sean Rourke
Sarah Philbrick
The preparation of this document was supported
by Boston Region MPO through
MPO Planning and §5303 Contract #14003.
Central Transportation Planning Staff is
directed by the Boston Region Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO). The MPO is composed of
state and regional agencies and authorities, and
local governments.
For general inquiries, contact
Central Transportation Planning Staff 857.702.3700
State Transportation Building ctps@ctps.org
Ten Park Plaza, Suite 2150 ctps.org
Boston, Massachusetts 02116
CIVIL RIGHTS NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC Welcome. Bem Vinda. Bienvenido. Akeyi. 欢迎. 歡迎
You are invited to participate in our transportation planning process, free from discrimination. The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is committed to nondiscrimination in all activities and complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin (including limited English proficiency). Related federal and state nondiscrimination laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of age, sex, disability, and additional protected characteristics.
For additional information or to file a civil rights complaint, visit www.bostonmpo.org/mpo_non_discrimination.
To request this information in a different language or format, please contact:
Boston Region MPO Title VI Specialist 10 Park Plaza, Suite 2150 Boston, MA 02116 Phone: 857.702.3700 Email: civilrights@ctps.org
For people with hearing or speaking difficulties, connect through the state MassRelay service, www.mass.gov/massrelay. Please allow at least five business days for your request to be fulfilled. |
Abstract
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is responsible for carrying out the federally required transportation planning process in the Boston area through long-range planning, investing in local projects, and studying transportation issues and needs. The MPO’s planning process is focused on reducing the environmental impacts of transportation infrastructure and increasing its resilience to climate hazards in response to changing environmental pressures. Recognizing the need for strong working relationships with the region’s many environmental organizations and stakeholders, the MPO staff undertook this study to guide initial outreach with environmental stakeholders who are unfamiliar with the MPO to create a foundation for meaningful interactions and trust.
Stakeholders engaged through this study included advocates and municipal staff focusing on climate resilience, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, open space preservation, and other environmental topics. Interviews with peer agencies and a literature review allowed staff to establish best practices in climate and environmental communication. A survey was sent to regional stakeholders to better understand local environmental priorities and gauge their initial interest in engaging with the MPO. The survey was followed by targeted one-on-one meetings and in-person events to learn more about stakeholder projects and priorities, and to make connections to the MPO and transportation planning.
This study taught us to change our approach to environmental engagement in the following ways: create new platforms for environmental engagement with the MPO; disseminate information specific to the MPO’s environmentally relevant planning activities; operationalize best practices in environmental communication; continue engaging in other environmental stakeholders’ work; and explore ways to use stakeholders feedback in the MPO’s long-range planning activities. Having stronger relationships with environmental advocates and municipal environmental staff will improve the efficacy and transparency of the MPO’s planning work as it relates to the environment, bring a wider variety of voices to the MPO’s transportation planning and capital investment processes, and enable the MPO to be more connected to regional environmental conversations and initiatives.
Chapter 2—Literature Review...................................................................... 11
2.1...... Best Practices in Environmental Communication.................................. 11
2.2...... Interviews with Peer Agencies.......................................................... 14
Chapter 3—Stakeholder Surveys.................................................................. 17
5.1...... Events Held by Stakeholders............................................................ 31
5.2...... MPO-Sponsored Event................................................................... 33
Chapter 7—Recommendations..................................................................... 37
Figure 1 Best Practices for Effective Communication on Environmental Topics
Figure 2 Relevant Strategies for Engaging Environmental Stakeholders
Figure 3 Municipalities and Advocacy Groups that Responded to the Survey
Figure 4 Survey Results: What environmental topics are priorities for your town/organization?
Figure 5 Survey Results: Advocate Groups’ Familiarity with the MPO
Figure 7 Survey Results: Which of the following themes are of interest to your town/organization?
Figure 8 Survey Results: What engagement strategies do you use?
Figure 10 Survey Results: How would you prefer to coordinate with MPO staff?
Figure 11 Survey Results: How do you feel MPO staff can support your work?
Figure 12 Timeline of External Events MPO Staff Attended during This Study
Figure 13 MPO Staff at External Events
Figure 14 Photos from MPO/NepRWA Neponset Greenway Walking Tour
Appendix A—Engagement Strategies Matrix
Appendix B—Survey Questions for Municipalities
Appendix C—Survey Questions for Advocates
Appendix D—Materials Shared
Appendix E—Literature Review References
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) has expanded its environmental and public engagement work over the past few years through dedicated programs, such as the Climate Resilience Program established in federal fiscal year (FFY) 2022 and an evolution and expansion of the Public Engagement Program beginning in FFY 2021. Through these programs, staff have identified a need for more intentional engagement and coordination with environmental stakeholders in the Boston region to better inform the development of MPO work.
Staff undertook this study in FFY 2024 to build relationships with practitioners and advocates working on climate resilience and environmental issues in the region, and to develop recommendations for how the MPO can more effectively incorporate environmental perspectives into transportation planning work. This study involved a literature review of environmental engagement strategies and best practices; interviews with peer agencies; a survey of municipal staff, advocacy groups, and community-based organizations; one-on-one interviews to discuss survey results and build relationships; and an in-person public event. The information gathered through these activities informed the development of several recommendations for the MPO to continue meaningfully engaging environmental stakeholders and incorporating their perspectives into regional transportation planning and policymaking.
Much of the MPO’s planning and programming work has connections to the environment that necessitates engagement with regional advocates and local stakeholders focused on environmental issues. Transportation both impacts and is impacted by the environment in several ways:
The MPO should address these issues in collaboration with other stakeholders in the region to more effectively consider local needs and priorities, use local knowledge, and avoid duplicating efforts. More engagement with regional environmental stakeholders will improve the MPO’s ability to reduce harm to the environment and safeguard the transportation system through its planning and programming processes.
There are numerous community-based organizations and advocacy groups focused on environmental initiatives in the Boston region as well as existing platforms and forums for communication. Municipalities are increasingly hiring staff focused on climate change and sustainability or are having existing staff factor these topics into ongoing work. The MPO, with its unique perspective and regional position, could contribute by being more engaged in these conversations.
Staff conducted a literature review to understand how other MPOs and planning agencies have engaged with environmental advocacy groups and stakeholders. The literature review included research into peer agencies’ resilience work and environmental engagement practices, interviews with peer agencies, and research on effective strategies and tactics for climate change-related communication and engagement. As a result, staff identified best practices for communicating with stakeholders about climate resilience and adaptation, and meaningfully engaging environmental justice communities in planning and decision-making. References can be found in Appendix E.
Best practices and strategies for effective communication and engagement on environmental and climate issues highlighted the importance of centering personal connections, considering stakeholders’ environmental priorities and values, and developing processes that allow members of the public to take an active role in climate action on the issues that are most salient to them.
Figure 1
Best Practices for Effective Communication on Environmental Topics
/Figure1.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Findings from the literature review and interviews with peer agencies suggest linking communications about environmental issues and transportation planning to more tangible themes or frames.
Common communication frames include the following:
Public Health Frame:Prioritize connections between the environment and human health. For example, better access to green space improves mental and physical health.
Geographical Identity Frame:Emphasize concern for specific local issues and place value on individuals’ and communities’ relationships with the environment.
Economic Frame:Consider economic angles of environmental issues such as the costs and benefits of adaptation and mitigation, savings from energy efficiency, and green jobs.
Conservation and Preservation Frame:Consider impacts of human activities on wildlife and ecosystems.
Morality and Ethics Frame:Consider values such as stewardship and preservation of the environment for future generations.
Communicating the impacts of the MPO’s transportation planning work through such frames will help a wider range of stakeholders engage in the MPO’s work and better understand its connections to their own goals and initiatives. In the survey released for this study, participants were asked to select frames their organizations are interested in. The results are discussed further in Chapter 3.
Staff also used the communication frames to inform strategies for initiating contact and building new relationships with stakeholders. Internal guidance was developed to match specific communication and engagement activities to different engagement goals relevant to the context and timing of a project or process.
Figure 2 represents increasing levels of meaningful engagement with environmental stakeholders: inform, consult, involve, collaborate, and empower. These levels are based upon the International Association for Public Participation’s (IAP2) Spectrum of Public Participation . A more comprehensive matrix of engagement strategies, including descriptions of the strategies and recommendations for how and at what stage of a project lifecycle to deploy them, can be found in Appendix A.
Figure 2
Relevant Strategies for Engaging Environmental Stakeholders
/figure2.png)
Source: International Association for Public Participation’s (IAP2) Spectrum of Public Participation.
Conversations with peer agencies including the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC, the regional planning agency for the Boston region and a member of the Boston Region MPO) and other MPOs across the country provided insight into effective engagement strategies for environmental stakeholders. Peers recommended avoiding engagement that may appear transactional or extractive, and focusing instead on building meaningful, mutually beneficial relationships. For example, conducting general outreach on an ongoing basis can be more effective at building trusting relationships and encouraging participation with the MPO than project-specific, sporadic engagement. This way, stakeholders’ input can shape the foundation of a project or plan instead of being a reaction to material that has already been developed.
The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) convenes a Climate Committee which meets quarterly to advise on environmental issues related to planning work. To more intentionally and effectively engage environmental justice communities and groups, CMAP also convenes the Community Alliance for Regional Equity (CARE). The 14-member group is composed of community-based organizations whose members contribute their expertise and lived experiences to help develop and support CMAP’s work. This involvement focuses on addressing transportation equity and resilience issues, contributing to the decision-making process, collaborating on the development of new engagement and planning tools, and providing input into projects and focus groups, including work on specific climate issues. Each member organization receives a $10,000 honorarium as compensation for their time and expertise.
The Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization (Broward MPO) in the Fort Lauderdale, Florida region collaborated on a broad regional vulnerability assessment in 2022, which informed the development of a framework to holistically evaluate the impact of climate change on Hollywood Boulevard (a climate-vulnerable transportation priority corridor for the region) and its surrounding neighborhoods. The framework was developed in collaboration with state and local government and community-based stakeholders. It emphasizes the significance of public engagement in shaping resilience and adaptation planning and creating sustainable solutions to address ongoing and future climate change risks. Continuous stakeholder engagement supported Broward MPO staff in identifying vulnerable areas to prioritize for future infrastructure improvement projects, and more broadly incorporate resilience into project planning.
The North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) in the Fort Collins, Colorado region developed an Environmental Justice Plan to proactively address environmental justice concerns and incorporate them into the planning process. NFRMPO staff highlighted the importance of intentional communication, meeting people in their communities, and tailoring presentations to people’s level of understanding during the development of the Plan, which was adopted in April 2021. The Plan guides local engagement, project prioritization, and long-range planning activities. Air quality is a top environmental concern in the region, so NFRMPO staff collaborated with stakeholders including the Public Health Department, Regional Air Quality Council, and the Community Champions regional engagement group to develop materials for members of the public to stay engaged with NFRMPO’s work. For example, NFRMPO staff collaborated with the Community Champions group to go beyond simply translating material and to create culturally meaningful messages for the communities they serve.
Staff released two surveys to collect detailed data on the current priorities, perceptions, and preferences of environmental stakeholders in the Boston region regarding climate resilience planning and engagement with the MPO. One survey targeted municipalities (particularly municipal staff involved in environmental work), while the other targeted advocacy and community-based organizations.
Both surveys asked respondents about the top environmental concerns and priorities for their communities, the strategies they use to communicate and engage with stakeholders about environmental and climate resilience topics, how they currently connect and collaborate with peers on these topics, and their familiarity with the MPO and interest in engaging with the MPO on environmental topics related to transportation in the future. The full list of survey questions can be found in Appendices B and C.
The goal of these surveys was to better understand the existing environmental efforts stakeholders in the region are involved in and develop effective strategies and messaging to different communities. The survey also helped MPO staff understand the ideal role for the MPO to play in ongoing environmental and climate conversations and collaboration in the region.
The surveys were sent to 97 municipalities and 73 advocacy and community-based organizations. Thirty-eight municipalities (40 percent of all municipalities contacted) and 33 advocacy groups and community-based organizations (45 percent of all groups and organizations contacted) responded to their respective surveys. A variety of stakeholders from across the region and representing local, regional, and state interests participated in the survey.
Figure 3
Municipalities and Advocacy Groups that Responded to the Survey
/figure3.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Figures 4 through 11 summarize the results from the survey questions.
Figure 4
Survey Results: What environmental topics are priorities for your town/organization?
/figure4_NEW.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Advocates who responded to the survey were most interested in climate resilience and environmental justice, while municipal representatives who responded were most interested in greenhouse gas emissions, climate resilience, and stormwater management.
Figure 5
Survey Results: Advocate Groups’ Familiarity with the MPO
/Figure5.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Most advocates who responded to the survey had some familiarity with the MPO or had heard the name, but very few had engaged with the MPO in the past.
/Figure6.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Survey respondents indicated staff capacity or time and financial resources as the main challenges in being able to participate in regional environmental coordination.
Figure 7
Survey Results: Which of the following themes are of interest to your town/organization?
/Figure7.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Both municipalities and advocates indicated high interest in communications surrounding a specific local issue, which matches with the Geographical Identity frame. The other themes are of relatively equal interest, with Conservation and Preservation as the next highest of interest to stakeholders. This indicates the need to frame communications to more clearly connect transportation planning to specific local impacts and conservation.
Figure 8
Survey Results: What engagement strategies do you use?
/Figure8.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Respondents indicated the engagement strategies they use most are public meetings and events, social media, newsletters, and surveys. This gives MPO staff insight into which strategies stakeholders may be most receptive to, as well as which strategies have been successful for others.
/Figure91.png)
/Figure92.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Most survey respondents (approximately 80 percent of both municipalities and advocates) indicated an interest in being more involved in the MPO’s work as it relates to the environment, which is encouraging for future engagement opportunities.
Figure 10
Survey Results: How would you prefer to coordinate with MPO staff?
/Figure10.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Respondents indicated an interest in a variety of engagement platforms to continue coordinating with the MPO, including small focus groups, large group meetings, and attending events held by MAPC.
Figure 11
Survey Results: How do you feel MPO staff can support your work?
/Figure11.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Advocates indicated interest in all options for MPO staff support, while municipalities appeared especially interested in support for getting a project funded and collaborating on a study or project. The MPO can explore ways to provide this type of support by connecting advocates and municipalities early in the project design process to improve coordination on project initiation and environmental elements of projects, and by expanding the scope of the MPO’s technical assistance offerings to include climate and environmental topics.
To better understand the barriers and challenges municipal staff and advocates face in engaging with the Boston Region MPO, staff asked respondents what information they needed to better engage in the MPO’s planning process. In general, respondents stated the need for more information about the MPO’s funding process and opportunities. Municipal staff were interested in learning more about available resources to support their climate resilience efforts and address vulnerability concerns. Advocates and community-based organizations were interested in how the MPO’s goals and efforts align with their work and ways to stay involved with the MPO’s planning processes. Both groups highlighted the need for coordination between local organizations, municipalities, and public and government agencies to address increasing resilience and transportation-related issues.
Staff conducted informal interviews with stakeholders who had responded to the surveys and indicated their interest in discussing their responses one-on-one. The interviews allowed staff and stakeholders to build a foundation for a more meaningful working relationship, dive deeper into survey responses, and begin addressing their communities’ needs and concerns.
Of the 40 municipalities that responded to the survey, 20 percent (eight municipal staff) participated in a post-survey interview. Of the 33 advocacy or community-based organizations that responded, 30 percent (10 people) engaged in an interview about the survey. Representatives of advocacy and community-based organizations were compensated for their expertise and time spent participating in interviews, which helped reduce burdens on smaller and less-resourced organizations as well as build trust and foster partnerships.
The interviews allowed staff to deepen relationships with municipal and advocacy stakeholders, identify concrete actions to advance projects or partnerships, and assess interest in follow-up engagement activities. Staff solicited input on the ideal role of the MPO in connecting climate resilience to transportation planning. Participants expressed strong support for the MPO acting as a convener for a broad range of environmental stakeholders and interests throughout the region, and facilitating communication, collaboration, and resource sharing.
Several themes emerged from the interviews. Participants expressed a need for
Many stakeholders interviewed connected resilience to mode shift, highlighting the need for more active transportation infrastructure, particularly bicycle accommodations, as well as for better first- and last-mile connections to public transit. Stakeholders in communities with commuter rail service also discussed the need for electrification and emissions reduction efforts. Several stakeholders noted the collaboration necessary to advance these conversations and efforts, including collaboration between municipalities, transit providers, and MassDOT to address resilience concerns related to local infrastructure that is owned and maintained by various entities.
Several interviews also focused on climate change adaptation strategies. Stakeholders (particularly those in coastal communities) emphasized the vulnerability of key infrastructure, including transportation infrastructure such as critical roadways and rails, to flooding and sea level rise. Discussions underscored the need for a collaborative, multi-sectoral approach (that intersects with public health, equity, and land use issues in particular) to address these risks.
In addition to collecting a broad range of input from the interviews regarding continued relationship-building and the MPO’s ongoing involvement in environmental conversations, staff identified concrete next steps and follow-up activities during the interviews:
Other outcomes included invitations to connect with existing, established coordination groups and forums that interviewees were involved in, and invitations to participate in upcoming events, workshops, and webinars to share more information about the MPO and expand visibility and relationships.
Attending events held by stakeholders in the region is an important way for MPO staff to stay engaged and maintain trust and relationships with advocates and community organizations. By attending stakeholder events and offering to speak about the MPO, staff can be more informed about regional environmental work and can build connections on an ongoing basis.
At events where staff hosted an MPO table, staff shared information about the MPO and its resilience work; conducted interactive engagement activities, including a street design game where staff asked participants how they would design a street to be resilient to flooding or extreme heat; and made new direct connections, including via an email sign-up sheet for those interested in resilience. Staff also participated in discussions about resilience and environmental topics in transportation planning at events such as river clean-ups and walking tours. Attending events hosted by advocacy and community-based organizations provided key opportunities for staff to deepen relationships and elevate the MPO’s resilience work, which often sparked follow-up discussions and post-event connections.
Figure 12
Timeline of External Events MPO Staff Attended during This Study
/figure12.png)
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.
Figure 13
MPO Staff at External Events
/Figure13.png)
Photos by Boston Region MPO staff.
MPO staff co-hosted an in-person event with the Neponset River Watershed Association to bring together stakeholders involved in the study and discuss themes related to the environment, transportation, and regional coordination. The event took place on the Neponset Greenway in Dorchester and included a short walk, discussion stops, and a ride on the Mattapan trolley (for which staff provided single-ride MBTA tickets to avoid a financial barrier for participants). Attendees represented a variety of organizations including advocacy groups, municipalities, and community groups. The event led to discussions highlighting the importance of connections between community paths, bikeshare, and quality transit; the need for better communication with state agencies to pursue greenway improvements; and a desire for more opportunities to connect with others involved in transportation and environmental work in the region.
Figure 14
Photos from MPO/NepRWA Neponset Greenway Walking Tour
/Figure14.png)
Photos by Boston Region MPO staff.
A central goal of this study was to build and strengthen relationships with environmental stakeholders in the Boston region. Engaging stakeholders on an ad-hoc basis regarding specific discrete projects and initiatives may be confusing or overburden stakeholders who are repeatedly engaged in seemingly disconnected and duplicative initiatives. However, developing meaningful relationships creates a foundation for ongoing and holistic engagement that is built around long-term shared goals. This facilitates better-informed and more impactful participation in specific initiatives. Relationships with advocacy and community-based organizations in particular help broaden the reach of engagement into new communities, highlight specific community needs and priorities, and build transparency for the MPO’s work.
The MPO’s long-range transportation planning work must engage a variety of stakeholders and, considering the many ways transportation both impacts and is impacted by the environment, it is essential for environmental stakeholders to be informed and involved. This study demonstrates that meeting people in their communities and actively inviting them to participate in the MPO’s public planning process can reduce barriers that keep them from being more fully engaged, such as knowledge gaps or time constraints. Increased participation from environmental advocates will enable MPO plans and projects to be more connected to the regional network of environmental initiatives and conversations. This in turn will improve the way the MPO talks about and plans for its goals for a climate resilient, pollution-free transportation system in the Boston region. Increased participation from municipal staff focused specifically on environmental topics will help connect cities and towns to the MPO’s technical assistance programs and resources. Municipal participation may also help the MPO and state partners address barriers that cities and towns face to initiating projects and considering climate resilience and environmental improvements in project design and development.
Increasing the MPO’s involvement in regional initiatives and with other stakeholders will not only enhance the quality of its planning work but also enable the MPO to become a more integral part of the broader regional environmental network. This will strengthen the MPO’s ability to collaborate towards goals such as climate resilience, pollution reduction, green space protection, and other environmental improvements, including those specific to the transportation system. Advancing these initiatives will require a coordinated approach across sectors and jurisdictions. The MPO is well positioned to build on relationships developed through this study and continue exploring its role in regional environmental action and conversations.
In light of the stakeholder engagement and peer research conducted in this study, the MPO staff recommend updating the MPO’s approach to engaging with regional environmental stakeholders and addressing environmental topics. Continuing to explore and expand relationships and outreach in these areas beyond this discrete study will be important for ongoing trust-building and involvement of environmental stakeholders in the transportation planning process. Staff’s recommendations are as follows:
1. Create Spaces for Continued Environmental Engagement
Stakeholders expressed interest in being more engaged with the MPO and other regional stakeholders in a variety of ways. A few potential strategies for staff to create space for environmental stakeholders to stay engaged with the MPO, share knowledge, and provide more ongoing feedback are as follows:
2. Disseminate Information
Stakeholders mentioned it can be difficult to find information relevant to environmental topics or specific projects of interest, and they may not know when or how to engage with the MPO. A newsletter specific to environmental elements of the MPO’s planning and programming work can help stakeholders stay engaged and informed, and may include the following:
3. Operationalize Best Practices in Environmental Communication
This study included research into best practices for climate and environmental communication. Staff recommend incorporating these best practices into ongoing MPO engagement activities:
4. Continue Engaging in Others’ Work
Attending stakeholders’ events increases the MPO’s visibility and helps build strong relationships. MPO staff should continue to proactively seek out opportunities to attend other environmental groups’ events, offer to share more information about the MPO’s work, and make connections between stakeholders’ work and the MPO’s planning and programming work. Staff recommend developing a calendar of relevant environmental events, with rotating staff and board member attendance to ensure consistent MPO representation and participation. To complement this, staff would develop internal processes for MPO representatives who participate in external environmental engagement to report back on insights gained and identify collaboration opportunities.
It is also important to continue seeking out new engagement opportunities and connections to regional environmental stakeholders who were not as deeply engaged during this study, particularly environmental justice groups and communities. In addition to regularly planned and ongoing engagement activities, staff recommend setting aside dedicated time throughout the year (possibly each quarter) to connect with environmental justice groups.
5. Use Stakeholder Feedback in Planning
Finding ways to meaningfully incorporate stakeholder feedback into the MPO’s programs and planning work will improve the efficacy and quality of the MPO’s studies, plans, and investments, as well as the public perception and reach of our work. This also means that engagement strategies must be tailored to the intended audiences and the intended outcomes of engagement. As outlined in Figure 2 and Appendix A, very different approaches are required when informing stakeholders about the MPO’s work versus meaningfully collaborating with stakeholders to develop the work. Moving further along the spectrum towards collaboration and empowerment requires a deeper commitment to shaping decisions and outcomes based on stakeholder input. Making this commitment will help demonstrate to stakeholders that their time, expertise, and ideas are valued and that engaging with the MPO is worth their effort and leads to better outcomes for their communities. Staff recommend developing and implementing several processes to streamline and strengthen the incorporation of stakeholder input into planning and decision-making:
Continuing the engagement that this study laid the foundation for will ensure a strong environmental perspective is present in the MPO’s work products and planning process. It is strongly recommended that staff and MPO board members take feedback from environmental advocates and community-based organizations into account in all planning and decision-making surrounding the LRTP, TIP, and program work. Staff will continue to collect, analyze, and share stakeholder feedback to inform these connections through regular engagement updates to the board and staff. Staff will also continue to develop and expand projects and activities conducted through the Public Engagement and Climate Resilience programs to assess regional needs, vulnerabilities, priorities, and stakeholder perspectives that can be incorporated into long-range and capital investment planning.
Appendix A—Engagement Strategies Matrix
Techniques |
Description |
Considerations |
Participation Size |
Effort Needed |
When to Use |
Inform |
|||||
Website |
- General information |
- Website address should be visible on all project materials |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to provide project updates |
General information channels |
- Email |
- Set up a dedicated phone line for projects |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to provide project updates |
Videos |
Digital video |
- Convey messages quickly and succinctly |
No limit |
Low |
Beginning of project lifecycle; use in combination with other engagement strategies |
Infographics |
- Visual images |
- Visually engaging and containing subject matter and data |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle, especially during beginning and end to share information and findings |
Social media |
- Facebook |
- Great way to communicate with a large audience |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to provide project updates |
Media coverage |
- Advertisements on radio, newspapers, television, or online |
- Engaging visuals of project |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle, especially during the end to share findings |
Printed material |
- Newsletters |
- Key stages include drafting content, graphic design, printing, and distribution |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to share information |
Presentations |
Informational presentations |
- Effective way to disseminate information to a large group of people |
No limit |
Low |
Before or at the start of the project lifecycle to share details about the project |
Expert panel |
Variety of experts are engaged to debate and discuss various courses of action and recommendations |
- Allow community to hear a variety of informed viewpoints |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to share information on topics related to the project |
Displays and exhibits |
Community event to provide project information and spread awareness of specific topics or issues |
- Bring project to public spaces to involve groups that would not normally engage |
No limit |
Low |
Early in the process and as a part of a larger outreach program |
Site Visits |
Open project site for public to visit |
- Good for large infrastructure projects |
Medium (4-8) |
Low |
All phases of decision-making; especially useful as a first step of engagement |
Public meetings |
- Coming together of people for a specific purpose |
- Provides the opportunity to relay information and gather feedback |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to provide project updates |
Consult |
|||||
Polling and voting |
- Allows anonymous visitors to choose from a list of options and track responses |
- Fast and easy way to gauge public opinion about topics of interest or support for an initiative, or to get to know an audience - Provide backgrounder with key facts, resources, and project timeline |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Surveys |
- Structured form or questionnaire distributed to a relevant population group within the community |
- Gauge the level of public information about an issue and provide a “snapshot” of attitudes and ideas |
No limit |
Medium |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Interviews |
- A conversation with an intended goal |
- One of the best ways to have an accurate and thorough communication of ideas |
Small (1-3) |
Medium |
At the start of the process and before decision-making of the project lifecycle |
Focus groups |
- Involves a small group of people to learn about their opinions on a topic that can help plan future actions |
- Good technique to find out what issues are of the most concern for a community or group |
Medium (4-8) |
Medium |
As a part of an outreach effort for evaluation and to understand community perception |
Online forums |
- A part of a website where expression of viewpoints and discussion can take place |
- Useful for generating interest and feedback from the public during a period of time with relatively little physical investment |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Online commenting |
- Opportunity to comment on online platforms |
- Ensure you have the ability to approve comments before they are published |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Social Media Listening/ Monitoring |
- The process of identifying and assessing what is being said about a particular organization, individual, topic, or project on the internet |
- Find out where potential and current audiences carry out conversations or share their opinions |
No limit |
Medium |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Town halls |
Convening a group to engage in discussing questions, ideas, and solutions related to a particular issue |
- Unique form of regular messaging and posting since issues and topics are addressed by the main parties involved |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Workshops |
- Involves a group of people who meet to work through an issue and/or develop solutions |
- Generate discussion and broader thinking regarding an issue or topic |
Large (8+) |
High |
Before and throughout project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Door-to-door |
In-person outreach where individuals are engaged at their doorstep |
- Can be used as a “check-in” with residents to better understand their needs, priorities, or thoughts |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Kitchen table talks |
- Small informal meeting that takes place at someone’s home or a café |
- Participants can discuss issues related to a broader project or topic |
Small (1-3) |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Open houses/ pop-ups |
- Organizers are present at a busy public location and offer simple and fun ways for people to learn about a project |
- Involves people who would not normally engage or attend a public meeting |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Comment boxes |
Boxes placed in strategic locations within a community or posted online for community members to voice their opinions around particular topic or provide feedback |
- Use clear, concise, and simple language to outline what types of comments you are hoping to receive - If seeking comments specific to a project, place the comment box on the project page |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle to understand community perception |
Involve |
|||||
Crowdsourcing ideas |
Participants engage in an online activity with varying skills, experiences, and perspectives to contribute information |
- Obtain ideas from a large group of people quickly |
No limit |
Low |
During project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Community mapping |
- A participatory process that enables the public to map elements that can help project development - Can be useful in the visioning process |
- Can be used to document certain aspects of a project: strengths, weaknesses, locations of services, etc. |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
Before and during project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Digital storytelling |
- Practice of using digital tools to tell stories |
- Empowers community members and educates stakeholders and the public |
No limit |
Medium |
Before and during project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Design charrette |
-Intensive planning sessions where participants collaborate on a vision for development |
- Organized to encourage the participation of all |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
During project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Mind mapping |
- Diagram used to visually organize information hierarchically and show relationships among pieces of the whole |
- Can be useful for creating and devising approaches for handling issues, capturing information that is relevant and compressing large amounts of information |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
During project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Visioning |
- Participatory tool that brings the public together to develop a shared vision of the future |
- Can be used for activity planning, organizational change, and formulating a development vision or strategy |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
Before and during project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Scenario testing |
- A way of developing alternative future scenarios based on different combinations of assumptions, facts and trends, and areas where more understanding is needed |
- Useful for developing an understanding of a situation, rather than predicting the future |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
Before and during project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Hackathons |
- Originated in the tech industry as a design sprint event |
- Consider bringing in speakers to guide thought leadership throughout the event |
Large (8+) |
High |
During project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Collaborate |
|||||
Large group meetings |
Convening a large group focused on a particular issue with an intended goal |
- Consider inviting diverse groups of people who can offer different perspectives - Ensure that all participants have a chance to be heard - Consider ways to break up the group into smaller groups for discussions and activities, and to allow for more opportunities for people to share their perspectives |
Large (8+) |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle; especially before the start of decision-making processes |
Document co-creation |
Ability to co-own a document where a number of people can view and/or have to ability to edit and contribute |
- Allows individuals to collaborate on a project in real time from different locations |
No limit |
Low |
During project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Online communities |
Group of people with common interests communicate, work together, and pursue their interests over time |
- Encourage users to interact with one another using comments in forums |
No limit |
Low |
Throughout the project lifecycle; especially during public comment periods |
Open space |
- Participants create and manage their own agenda of parallel working sessions around a central theme |
- The theory behind this strategy is to encourage people to take ownership of the issues they wish to address |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
Throughout the project lifecycle; especially during public comment periods |
Working groups |
- Committee of 10-15 people who meet regularly during a period of time to address critical public issues in a democratic and collaborative way to make recommendations based on their findings |
- Groups should be formed to maximize diversity, balance, and complementary skills |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
Throughout the project lifecycle; especially before and during project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Advisory committees |
- Consists of a group of representatives from a particular community or set of interests appointed to provide comments and advice on an issue |
- Should be formed based on diverse representation of the community, expertise or interest in an issue, or topic area |
Large (8+) |
Medium |
Throughout the project lifecycle; especially before and during project development to collect ideas and engage community on project |
Empower |
|||||
Public juries |
- Comprised of a group who are representative of the general public and who are briefed in detail on the background and current thinking related to a project |
- Requires both time and a high level of skills as participants are required to analyze complex issues |
Large (8+) |
High |
Throughout project lifecycle; especially before key decision-making periods |
Community indicator projects |
- Projects where communities have a vision for a sustainable future and have established ways of tracking their progress through the use of indicators |
- Offers the opportunity to discuss what is important, systematically review outcomes, and establish priorities for policy response |
No limit |
High |
Throughout project lifecycle; especially before key decision-making periods |
Asset-based community development (ABCD) |
- A methodology for sustainable development of communities based on strengths and potentials |
Key principles include: |
No limit |
High |
Throughout project lifecycle; especially before key decision-making periods |
Appendix B—Survey Questions for Municipalities
What is your name?
What municipality do you represent?
What is your position/title?
Does your municipality have a staff position(s) dedicated to resilience or environmental planning?
What environmental issues and/or concerns are top priorities for your municipality?
Has your municipality engaged with the MPO and its transportation planning process in the past?
What information about the MPO and its processes do you want/need in order to engage with our transportation planning work?
In what ways has your municipality engaged with the MPO?
How do you currently receive news or collaborate with peers on regional environmental issues?
What platforms or strategies does your municipality use to engage with the public and other stakeholders on environmental issues and/or concerns? (Select all that apply)
What themes or topics are members of your community most interested in when you engage with them about environmental topics? (Select the level of interest for each topic from low, moderate, or high).
Are there any other themes that your community is interested in engaging in?
What are the challenges your municipality is facing in regional environmental coordination? (Select all that apply)
Would you like to be more involved in the MPO’s planning work as it relates to the environment?
How would you prefer to coordinate with MPO staff? (Select all that apply)
How do you feel MPO staff can support your work and help you achieve your municipality’s environmental/resilience goals? (Select all that apply)
What would make you feel like your feedback is being heard and utilized?
Are there other environmental organizations, initiatives, or topics in your municipality or the region that you think the MPO should be engaged with?
Would you be interested in participating in a follow-up discussion about this survey and your responses with MPO staff?
Demographic Questions: The following questions help us to understand whether our surveys are reaching a diverse audience.
How do you self-identify by race and/or ethnicity? (Check all that apply)
How many people are in your household? Include yourself.
What is your annual household income?
Do you have a disability?
What is your age?
How do you identify by gender?
What is your home zipcode?
Appendix C—Survey Questions for Advocates
What organization do you represent?
What is your name?
What is your position/title?
What approximate geography are you most interested in?
Does your organization represent environmental justice communities or other disadvantaged populations? (Please describe)
What environmental issues and/or concerns are top priorities for your organization? (Check all that apply)
How familiar are you with the Boston Region MPO and its transportation planning process?
What information about the MPO and its processes do you want/need in order to more fully engage with our transportation planning work?
How have you engaged with the MPO and its work in the past?
How do you currently receive news or collaborate with peers on regional environmental issues?
What platforms or strategies does your organization use to engage with the public on environmental issues and/or concerns? (Select all that apply)
What themes or topics is your community most interested in when you engage with them about environmental topics? (Select the level of interest for each topic from low, medium, or high)
Are there any other environmental topics that your community is interested in engaging in?
What are the challenges your organization is facing in regional environmental coordination? (Select all that apply)
Would you like to be more involved in the MPO’s planning work as it relates to the environment?
How would you prefer to coordinate with MPO staff? (Select all that apply)
How do you feel MPO staff can support your work and help you achieve the goals of your organization? (Select all that apply)
Are there other environmental organizations, initiatives, or topics you think we should be engaged with?
Would you be interested in participating in a follow-up discussion about this survey and your responses with MPO staff? You will be compensated for your time.
Demographic Questions: The following questions help us to understand whether our surveys are reaching a diverse audience.
How do you self-identify by race and/or ethnicity? (Check all that apply)
How many people are in your household? Include yourself.
What is your annual household income?
Do you have a disability?
What is your age?
How do you identify by gender?
What is your home zipcode?
The following materials were shared during one-on-one conversations with study participants and are documented here for future reference:
Appendix E—Literature Review References
The following materials were reviewed during this study’s literature review:
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (website), Environmental Justice Community of Practice Resources, accessed November 15, 2023. https://environment.transportation.org/state-of-the-practice/communities-of-practice/past-communities-of-practice/environmental-justice-community-of-practice.
Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization, Broward MPO Resilience Framework Pilot Study: Hollywood Boulevard Project Development (prepared by WSP, June 2024), accessed November 20, 2023. https://browardmpo.org/current-studies/hollywood-framework.
Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization, Public Participation Plan (February 2023), accessed November 20, 2023. https://browardmpo.org/images/WhatWeDo/PPP/BMPO_PPP_Report_2022_Feb13.pdf.
Cape Cod Commission (website), Managed Retreat: an Education and Communication Tool, accessed November 28, 2023. https://www.capecodcommission.org/our-work/managed-retreat.
Cape Cod Commission, Public Participation Plan (September 19, 2022), accessed December 4, 2023. https://capecodcommission.org/our-work/ppp.
Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, Climate and Natural Resources Overview, accessed November 27, 2023. https://cmap.illinois.gov/focus-areas/climate.
Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, Public Participation Plan: Draft for Public Review (2023), accessed November 21, 2023. https://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/1539681/DRAFT+Public+Participation+Plan+2023.pdf/ec89655f-8ce9-97f4-d1f7-071c91e2b597?t=1692377858284.
Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization, Environmental Justice Report (2020), accessed November 29, 2023. https://www.dchcmpo.org/home/showpublisheddocument/1034/637489636755200000.
Jarreau, Paige Brown, Zeynep Altinay, and Amy Reynolds, “Best Practices in Environmental Communication: A Case Study of Louisiana’s Coastal Crisis,” Environmental Communication 11:2 (October 30, 2015): 143–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2015.1094103.
Moser, Susanne C, “Communicating Climate Change: History, Challenges, Process and Future Directions,” WIREs Climate Change 1:1 (December 22, 2009): 31–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.11.
New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, Public Involvement Plan (September 22, 2022), accessed November 20, 2023. https://www.nymtc.org/Portals/0/Pdf/PIP/PIP%202022/NYMTC_PIP2022_ADOPTED.pdf?ver=tWIMhbhhyWO4TXXucSaG5A%3d%3d.
North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, Environmental Justice (EJ) Plan (April 1, 2021), accessed December 4, 2023. https://nfrmpo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021-environmental-justice-plan.pdf.
Sippel, Maike, Chris Shaw, and George Marshall, “Ten Key Principles: How to Communicate Climate Change for Effective Public Engagement,” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2022. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4151465.
Spivak, Jeffrey, “6 Tips for Inclusive Public Meetings.” Planning March 2019 (March 2019). https://www.planning.org/planning/2019/mar/6tipspublicmeetings.
United Nations Climate Action (website), Communicating on Climate Change, accessed November 6, 2023. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/communicating-climate-change.
United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Post Hurricane Sandy Transportation Resilience Study in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut (October 2017), accessed November 29, 2023. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sustainability/resilience/publications/hurricane_sandy/fhwahep17097.pdf.
United States Department of Transportation, Promising Practices for Meaningful Public Involvement in Transportation Decision-Making (November 8, 2023), accessed November 13, 2023. https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/promising-practices-meaningful-public-involvement-transportation-decision-making.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (website), Public Participation Guide, accessed November 14, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/international-cooperation/public-participation-guide.
Wibeck, Victoria, “Enhancing Learning, Communication and Public Engagement about Climate Change – Some Lessons from Recent Literature,” Environmental Education Research 20:3 (July 22, 2013): 387–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.812720.
Nan Li and Leona Yi-Fan Su, “Message Framing and Climate Change Communication: A Meta-Analytical Review,” Journal of Applied Communications, Association for Communication Excellence (Volume 102, Issue 3, 2018). https://newprairiepress.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2189&context=jac#:~:text=Based%20on%20the%20literature%20review,%2C%20public%20health%2C%20and%20economy.