Resources

Knowledge Repository

A Hub for online resources on NbS state-of-the-art practise.

Filters

NbS Resources View page

Climate resilience strategies of Beijing and Copenhagen and their links to sustainability

Source: https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2017.165
Citation: Liu, L., Jensen, M.B., 2017. Climate resilience strategies of Beijing and Copenhagen and their links to sustainability. Water Policy 19, 997–1013. doi:10.2166/wp.2017.165
Liu L., Jensen M.B., Water Policy, 2017
Like numerous other cities, Beijing and Copenhagen are experiencing more frequent urban flooding due to increased impervious cover and climate change. Consequently, huge investments are foreseen to maintain resilience. Analyses of planning documents and interviews with key stakeholders reveal that in their climate resilience strategies both cities do employ alternative approaches based on on-site retention-detention of stormwater runoff. However, when there is an emergency situation with heavy downpours, both cities rely heavily on conventional concepts involving deep tunnels for rapid discharge. The applied alternative solutions tend to be more engineering-based, like underground tanks in Beijing and detention-discharge plazas in Copenhagen. More nature-based solutions lag behind. Both cities are simultaneously targeting specific additional sustainability goals. Nevertheless, other potential goals seem to be neglected, like livability improvements in Beijing and biodiversity support and water footprint reduction in Copenhagen. The main barriers for implementing more nature-based solutions with greater sustainability potentials were a combination of time constraints caused by external political pressures for rapid problem solving, lack of routines for the innovation and documentation of solutions for dense urban areas, and insufficient multi-sectorial collaboration. These factors limit the propagation of alternative solutions and tip the balance of current investments towards a conventional approach. © IWA Publishing 2017.

Collaborative Governance for Climate Change Adaptation: Mapping citizen–municipality interactions

Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1795
Citation: Brink, E., Wamsler, C., 2018. Collaborative Governance for Climate Change Adaptation: Mapping citizen–municipality interactions. Environ. Policy Gov. 28, 82–97. doi:10.1002/eet.1795
Brink E., Wamsler C., Environmental Policy and Governance, 2018
Increasing climate change impacts are a major threat to sustainable urban development, and challenge current governance structures, including actors' responsibilities for dealing with climate variability and extremes. The need for distributed risk governance and citizen engagement is increasingly recognised; however, few empirical studies systematically assess interactions between citizens and municipalities in climate risk management and adaptation. Here, we develop an explorative framework, applied to three Swedish municipalities, to map existing ‘adaptation interactions’ and analyse how responsibilities for climate adaptation manifest and are (re)negotiated. The results show that adaptation planners rarely consider collaborations with citizens, despite positive adaptation outcomes from related local processes. Structures and mechanisms for systematic monitoring and learning are also lacking. We argue that fostering collaborations with citizens – to support long-term adaptation and reduce the adaptation burden of those most at risk – requires consideration of four strategic issues: proactive engagement; equity and ‘responsibilisation’; nature-based approaches; and systematic adaptation mainstreaming. Finally, we discuss how our analytical framework can contribute to further theorising municipalities' engagement with citizens on climate risk. © 2017 The Authors. Environmental Policy and Governance published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. © 2017 The Authors. Environmental Policy and Governance published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Comprehending the multiple ‘values’ of green infrastructure – Valuing nature-based solutions for urban water management from multiple perspectives

Source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.05.043
Citation: Wild, T.C., Henneberry, J., Gill, L., 2017. Comprehending the multiple “values” of green infrastructure – Valuing nature-based solutions for urban water management from multiple perspectives. Environ. Res. 158, 179–187. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2017.05.043
Wild T.C., Henneberry J., Gill L., Environmental Research, 2017
The valuation of urban water management practices and associated nature-based solutions (NBS) is highly contested, and is becoming increasingly important to cities seeking to increase their resilience to climate change whilst at the same time facing budgetary pressures. Different conceptions of ‘values’ exist, each being accompanied by a set of potential measures ranging from calculative practices (closely linked to established market valuation techniques) – through to holistic assessments that seek to address wider concerns of sustainability. Each has the potential to offer important insights that often go well beyond questions of balancing the costs and benefits of the schemes concerned. However, the need to address – and go beyond – economic considerations presents policy-makers, practitioners and researchers with difficult methodological, ethical and practical challenges, especially when considered without the benefit of a broader theoretical framework or in the absence of well-established tools (as might apply within more traditional infrastructural planning contexts, such as the analysis of transport interventions). Drawing on empirical studies undertaken in Sheffield over a period of 10 years, and delivered in partnership with several other European cities and regions, we compare and examine different attempts to evaluate the benefits of urban greening options and future development scenarios. Comparing these different approaches to the valuation of nature-based solutions alongside other, more conventional forms of infrastructure – and indeed integrating both ‘green and grey’ interventions within a broader framework of infrastructures – throws up some surprising results and conclusions, as well as providing important sign-posts for future research in this rapidly emerging field. © 2017 Elsevier Inc.

Corporate Clip Room for the River english

Corporate Clip Room for the River english


Video Source:

Ruimtevoorderivier "Dutch Room for the River Programme" (url/youtube channel)

The river will be given more room at more then 30 locations covered by the 'Room for the River' programme. The main objectives of this programme are to complete the flood protection measures by 2015 and to improve the overall environmental quality in the river region.

Cultivating nature-based solutions: The governance of communal urban gardens in the European Union

Source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.013
Citation: van der Jagt, A.P.N., Szaraz, L.R., Delshammar, T., Cvejić, R., Santos, A., Goodness, J., Buijs, A., 2017. Cultivating nature-based solutions: The governance of communal urban gardens in the European Union. Environ. Res. 159, 264–275. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.013
van der Jagt A.P.N., Szaraz L.R., Delshammar T., Cvejić R., Santos A., Goodness J., Buijs A., Environmental Research, 2017
In many countries in the European Union (EU), the popularity of communal urban gardening (CUG) on allotments and community gardens is on the rise. Given the role of this practice in increasing urban resilience, most notably social resilience, municipalities in the Global North are promoting CUG as a nature-based solution (NbS). However, the mechanisms by which institutional actors can best support and facilitate CUG are understudied, which could create a gap between aspiration and reality. The aim of this study is therefore to identify what governance arrangements contribute to CUG delivering social resilience. Through the EU GREEN SURGE project, we studied six CUG initiatives from five EU-countries, representing different planning regimes and traditions. We selected cases taking a locally unique or innovative approach to dealing with urban challenges. A variety of actors associated with each of the cases were interviewed to achieve as complete a picture as possible regarding important governance arrangements. A cross-case comparison revealed a range of success factors, varying from clearly formulated objectives and regulations, municipal support, financial resources and social capital through to the availability of local food champions and facilitators engaging in community building. Municipalities can support CUG initiatives by moving beyond a rigid focus on top-down control, while involved citizens can increase the impact of CUG by pursuing political, in addition to hands-on, activities. We conclude that CUG has clear potential to act as a nature-based solution if managed with sensitivity to local dynamics and context. © 2017 Elsevier Inc.

ThinkNature Message Tree